jackpot

i assume thats conky?

type neofetch into your terminal

but did you make the script agpl3?

this is it tjank you

etymologically speaking im not even sure if thats right. i heard somethibg like this and they either said woman doesnt derive from man or that man used to mean woman and man but woman became its own thing, cant recall

Oh it was awfully worded, for the Care Amendment they changed 'endeavour to ensure' to 'strive to support' when it came to the government offering child welfare and the disabled. Yeah, sexist language was removed but at what cost.

For the Family Amendment, families based on 'marriage' became '...marriage or durable relationships'. What the fuck is a durable relationship? Am I now in a relationship with my mate cause we rent an apartment together? If they leave, will there be a divorce? (Hyperbolic but you get the gist). Weirdly enough, we would've inadvertently became the first Western nation to legally recognise polyamory.

Both of the amendments set out to solve real issues: *Sexism (Care) and not recognising single parent households (Family).

*The Care one only used sexism as a trojan horse to gut welfare. You could have easily worded it to get rid of the sexist langauge without slyly trying to screw over disabled people (there's a case in SCOTI (Supreme Court of Ireland) that is deciding this soon). (However, weirdly this only protects women carers, read it yourself).

The amendments were shite and every party besides one small left-wing one rejected them before the vote shockingly.

Now, ultra-right wing nuts are trying to frame it as Ireland 'protecting traditional values' by saying women are in fact homemakers and all of that implied 'they belong in the kicthen' crap, and how 'marriage is sacred'. It's a real shame, cause the ideas were sound themself but written so badly we had to shoot them down and now the everyone in the government is playing the blame game.

ahh survivorship bias thats it thanks

no i mean, by the people 'who consider it'. i think the speaksr didnt understand that theyre saying it's mankind others are talkint abkut

i think they mean 'man' as in 'mankind'. also any ideas why would they carve it into bone and not bark or something more flat?

no, it should be burnt to the ground