Slashdot Mirror

You can't have a gov't that looks out for your interests but not your neighbors (well, not unless you're very, very rich). Elections have consequences. Here's one right now.

The Republican-appointed FCC chairman did this, yes. And the Democrats rather heavily supported SOPA and have been trying to get it past under our noses ever since, except worse (think TPP's many nasty provisions that have nothing to do with trade).

I'd do a lot more research to refute this, but to be honest, I doubt you'll read it. Your blind adherence to the narrative is to your own detriment. Neither party is innocent or good here, and we'd "merely" have draconian Internet regulation and probable censorship in the name of copyright enforcement if Hillary was elected. This kind of rigid, party-centric thinking is what's going to be our undoing.

Neither are the Nordic "socialist states".

socialistworker

Additionally, the Slashdot story is disingenuous (shocking!) when it brings up Microsoft's opposition to Washington proposition I-1098 a couple years back. Yes, Ballmer was a big contributor against the initiative but it was widely unpopular across the entire state, failing at the polls by a 2-to-1 margin.

Quick recap on what that was for non-Washington residents: WA is one of seven US states with no personal income tax. Sales taxes vary by locality, but in general they are higher than average in WA in order to make up for the lack of a sales tax (in Seattle, for example, sales tax is nearly 10%).

I-1098 proposed that individuals making more than $200K/year or families making $400K/year pay a state income tax, with a higher rate applying to those above $500K/$1M. Given WA's economically skewed demographics, the tax would hit many in the greater Seattle area (around the top 3% including Microsoft, Boeing, Amazon, Google, Nintendo etc. employees), while outside Seattle it would be more like the top .01%.

Interestingly, Bill Gates was a visible I-1098 supporter, while Steve Ballmer was a major opponent. But keep in mind the above: the demographics of Washington State are such that had this been an issue of just Microsoft and other big corps fighting it, or "rich Seattle" against the rest of the state which is not so full of rich techies, it would have won handily. Instead, it lost by a 64-36 ratio because voters across the entire state, including a majority of Democrats, thought it was a backdoor way to introduce a state income tax whose threshold would conveniently be lowered by the state legislature whenever it found itself in a money crunch.

So long story short - it may very well be true that Microsoft is dodging state taxes that it should be paying. If so, it should definitely be held to account. However, the fact that Ballmer or Microsoft supported a widely popular anti-state income tax initiative is not related to whether the company is shirking its tax duties.

Young black workers were affected by many factors. An "anti acting white culture", poverty left over from slavery, systemic racism in hiring, promotion, and housing.. and most significantly for the last two generations has been the "drug war".

In some states, almost ALL people incarcerated for drug crimes are black- yet the majority of people committing drug crimes are white. Blacks are more likely to be stopped-- then to be searched when stopped- then to be a arrested if something is found- then to be convicted when tried- and finally to be sentenced to much longer sentences when convicted.

Quote:
According to the Sentencing Project's website, the rate of incarceration for white Connecticut residents in 2005 was 211 per 100,000 people; for black residents it was 2,532 per 100,000. The Sentencing Project reports that the national incarceration rate for whites in 2005 was 412 per 100,000, and the rate for blacks was 2,290 per 100,000 people.

Also according to the Sentencing Project's web site, in seven states (Iowa, Vermont, New Jersey, Connecticut, Wisconsin, North Dakota, and South Dakota) the black to white incarceration ratio is greater than 10 to one.

1. about one in every 33 black men was a sentenced prisoner and the rate for white men was about one in every 205, for Hispanic men about one in every 79; and

2. black men represented the largest proportion of sentenced male inmates at yearend 2006 (38%); white men made up 34%; and Hispanic men, 21%.

More reading here...
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt...

http://www.americanprogress.or...

http://socialistworker.org/blo...

I'm well aware of the whisky rebellion, the people involved were really concerned about being able to make and market whisky, their resistance was little more than illegal brigandage. So yeah, they weren't concerned about "singers or actors," they were too busy beating people up for trying to enforce a law. The average whisky rebel's motivations would be easily recognizable to the average confederate soldier.

Is the Whisky Rebellion really your sine qua non of an enlightened citizenry defending its rights? Sit-Down Strike much? Or Nat Turner's Slave Rebellion? These are people that were fighting for real rights, their livelihoods, their liberty and their lives, as opposed to mouthing empty-headed platitudes in order to get out of paying a tariff.

that oil spill was competently handled after the fact

Oh, you mean like this?? Or this?

How about this:

In July 2013, the discovery of a 40,000 pound tar mat near East Grand Terre, Louisiana prompted the closure of waters to commercial fishing

Sorry, but if you believe what BP has been telling you, you are gravely mistaken.

If by 'completely handled' you mean done badly, incompletely, and we get lied about it sure .. if you mean actually remediating the damage from it, well, you're either delusional or on the payroll.

It would be useful if the cheerleaders of 21st-Century Socialism made note of those differences.

...and more to... you know... facts.
Like that thing about North Korea not being a socialist country.

North Korea is for all intents and purposes a dictatorship ruled by Nazis.

It's much more than just "a cut"

The contract Hostess wants to impose on BCTGM workers includes:

        -- An immediate 8 percent wage cut.

        -- Shifting 20 percent more of health care costs onto the workers (for some workers, this would mean an increased cost of $240 a month for medical insurance).

        -- Eliminating retiree Medigap insurance, which covers gaps in Medicare.

        -- Eliminating Pension Supplement to pay health and funeral costs.

        -- Closing an undisclosed 10 to 12 plants.

        -- Eliminating the eight-hour day, which would mean no time-and-a-half pay after eight hours per day.

In addition, the company illegally froze pension contributions mandated under the contract for all of 2012, in violation of federal law. This is still being contested before the National Labor Relations Board.

http://socialistworker.org/2012/11/15/hostess-workers-draw-a-line

Not at all. It is maybe center or center right. Only compared to Fox news and other so far right they might as well be fascist news outlets is NYT lefty. If you want to see an actual leftist/lefty newspaper check out http://socialistworker.org/.

No matter what the social ill, it's always America's fault. Those evil foreigners are never responsible for their own actions. It's always, all about America. Middle east problems would go away if America would just fall in line.

Let's imagine the opposite situation: what if Websense refused to sell to Arabs? Would this headline be plausible? United Nations Human Rights Council condemns American companies after refusing to sell software on basis of race. Don't believe me? There is always a way...remember, it's all about America. Try another ripped-from-the-headlines sample: The U.S. intervention in Libya has nothing to do with meeting humanitarian goals, and everything to do with reasserting Western domination in a region that has long suffered the effects of colonialism and imperialism.

maybe it didn't happen because the US was a rich enough already? At the beginning of the 20th century the US was a first world country and an economic powerhouse and its strength only rose since the WW2.

wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labor

Children as young as three were put to work. A high number of children also worked as prostitutes.[11] Many children (and adults) worked 16 hour days. As early as 1802 and 1819 Factory Acts were passed to regulate the working hours of workhouse children in factories and cotton mills to 12 hours per day. These acts were largely ineffective and after radical agitation, by for example the "Short Time Committees" in 1831, a Royal Commission recommended in 1833 that children aged 11–18 should work a maximum of 12 hours per day, children aged 9–11 a maximum of eight hours, and children under the age of nine were no longer permitted to work. This act however only applied to the textile industry, and further agitation led to another act in 1847 limiting both adults and children to 10 hour working days.[11] Enforcement was difficult due to the small number of inspectors.[8]

By 1900, there were 1.7 million child laborers reported in American industry under the age of fifteen.[12] The number of children under the age of 15 who worked in industrial jobs for wages climbed to 2 million in 1910.[13]

http://socialistworker.org/2004-2/500Supp/500S_20000707_ChildLabor.shtml
oh look, child labor happens to this day in the US.

also care to explain how you want to distribute that 4k calories a day without a profit motive, so we can all feel good about it? Communism tried non-profit ways to provide stuff to the people and failed miserably. Redistribution kills incentives to do work, without work there is no force pushing the whole thing forward.

You can't discount good intentions by the mere mention of unintended consequences.

yes i can.
sorry, the problem with good intentions is that there always are the unintended consequences, and they are often worse than the problem you are trying to fix. Anyone who acts like 'Fuck yeah, that's a great idea, let's do this and everybody will be happy!' should be shot. People full of beautiful ideas lack the foresight too often if not always. Why they don't ask the question 'why our brilliant idea was never put into practice?'. The truth is most probably it was tested somewhere, but the results were not pretty and now they simply repeat the same mistake.

Examples of good ideas gone bad:
Famine in Africa (especially in the east part). Oh noes, children are dying so we must send them tons of food!
problems:
- local population grows to accomodate the greater supply of food but life model doesn't change so they get 10 children and soon starve again. Back to square 1, only you have more people to feed now. Ethiopia has 2x more people than in the 80s, how is that possible in the state of permanent famine?
- native agriculture is wiped out by the subsidized free food from 1st world so they can't ever be selfsufficient - they get to consume the free fish, but they can't learn how to use a fishing pole.
- humanitarian organizations fund well drilling to provide water to villages but that changes the supply and more water is sucked out - people use more than the source can refill, so deeper wells are required plus everybody else who is tapped to the same reservoir of water is now screwed because they need a deeper well too.

no child left behind in schools
- how is the overall quality of education looking lately? Again, it's a questionable gain for the mediocre at the expense of the brilliant ones.

Economy is about as complex as ecosystems. Ever heard of successful meddling in any ecosystem? So called smart people thought they know enough, but just look at Australia and it

Yes, certainly that's precisely what one would think if one made no attempt whatsoever to research the event or the movement beyond asking a third party for a hearsay opinion on slashdot. And why would you? it's not like there's any information available on the internet or anything.

I consider capitalists, even the "less correct ones" like, say Bill Gates and his monopoly, infinitely more moral (even if perhaps not 100% intentional) than even what you'd call "center" socialists.

I don't know who or what I'd call "center" socialists, I don't think I've ever used the term.

I find it pretty remarkable -- nonsensical, even, bordering on insane -- to claim that Bill Gates is infinitely more moral than socialists like Peter Kropotkin, Eugene Debs, Carl Sandburg, Noam Chomsky, Kurt Vonnegut, or George Orwell, or the anarchists at your local "Foot Not Bombs" chapter.

CNN trended left in the early 90's

...Yet remains right wing to those outside the US. Like all of your popular media, CNN falls far short, in questioning government and policy, of what ordinary attention to public interest, and common ethics, would require.

FOX, as we all know, is Murdoch, who murdered mainstream journalistic discourse in Australia and the UK long before he started attacking it in the USA.

None of this is new. Real journalism doesn't get air time in the conglomerates. You still have NPR... for now.

"MONOPOLY IS a terrible thing--until you have it." Those were the words of right-wing media tycoon Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox TV, Fox News, Century Fox studios and the New York Post, among many others media outlets.

... Murdoch sounded as innocent as a lamb when he told the Senate Commerce Committee that relaxing regulations would be a great thing for consumers--and swore that he wasn't about to add to his empire. "I have no plans for anything other than the what I have before you today," said Murdoch--prompting several senators to burst out laughing.

... FCC Chair Reed Hundt warned that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 would allow "a few companies to buy all the radio licenses in the country."

Hundt was right. Since the law passed, Clear Channel Communications has expanded from owning about 40 radio stations in 1995 to approximately 1,200 outlets today--almost 1,000 more than its closest competitor. All told, Clear Channel controls the audience share in 100 of 112 radio markets in the U.S.

I get the feeling that a darpa under Obama will grow and prosper.

It is possible that DARPA will grow and prosper under Obama. After all, he wants to increase military spending, increase the size of the military by up to 80,000 troops and send even more cannon fodder to Afghanistan. Possibly to Iran as well. Maybe he'll decide to increase funding for DARPA too. After all, regardless of what their PR department claims, the purpose of DARPA is to help the US military. Destroying countries and killing people is what the military does best.

Frankly, I think most people give Obama too much credit. He's a hawk and he's pro-empire. Electing him isn't going to change anything except the rhetoric used to justify the US's imperial ambitions.

Sure we voted for the wrong guy, but his administration's gross mismanagement of this country showed very clearly that the two parties are not by any means identical, and that your vote for a president can have a very real impact on the policies that are put into place.

Regardless of which party is in power, the goal of dominating the Middle East is the same.

"Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force."

That might sound like Bush but those words were uttered by alleged humanitarian Jimmy Carter. The history of both corporate parties shows they have enthusiastically pursued the nation's imperial ambitions abroad.

Conventional liberal wisdom dictates that Al Gore wouldn't have invaded Iraq, but we'll never know for sure what might have been. We do know that Gore didn't oppose the crippling sanctions the Clinton administration enforced on Iraq, resulting in over one million innocent Iraqi deaths. To them the price was worth it. We know that Gore also supported the "Iraq Liberation Act" and accused Saddam Hussein of supporting terrorism.

Currently Barack Obama is pulling the wool over everyone's eyes with his talk of withdrawal. But examining his policy proposals shows a much different picture. He wants to increase the size of the military. He wants to keep a number of troops in Iraq and has no plans to withdraw any of the so-called contractors. He wants more troops in Afghanistan and he is arguing the same discredited lies about Iran as Bush. He's not anti-war, he's anti-losing-Iraq and he's trying to find a way to salvage the US empire.

Voting Democrat is not necessarily going to lead to a hastier exit from the occupations. They promised that in 2006 when they took over Congress and they have abrogated that promise. They won't even impeach Bush. Why would they do anything different after Obama is elected? Besides, it was under the Republican Dick Nixon that the Vietnam war was ended (this time started with lies by a Democrat).

The Vietnam war was finally ended when large sections of the military refused to fight the war. Mutiny, killing of officers and widespread breakdown of command meant that the US government could no longer count on the military to fight the war. They had no choice but to end the war. The GI resistance was made possible by a large, vibrant and supportive civilian antiwar movement at home.

In Vietnam the stakes were "credibility" in the face of the US's chief imperial competitor, the USSR. Today the stakes are far higher for the US ruling class. They need to control the flow of oil in the Middle East for leverage over their emerging competitors around the globe. They are not going to just walk away from what the US State Department once called "one of the greatest material prizes in world history." We're going to have to force them to leave.

Would things have turned out differently had Gore become President? I concede the point: had things been different then they would be different. But would the US still be attempting to dominate the Middle East and use every means at its disposal to do so? It would be naive to believe that Gore is somehow different in this respect.

The best predictor of who will win the election is to see where the corporate money is going.

Traditionally the Republicans have been corporate America's favorite party—they unabashedly push right-wing policies favorable to corporations and the wealthy. However, when the Republicans overreach and become discredited (as now) then they're all too happy to switch to the "B" team, the Democrats. They know that the Democrats can be counted on to push the same pro-corporate agenda, only they're better at packaging it in a way that workers are willing to swallow it (eg: NAFTA).

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have raised nearly half a billion dollars combined, while poor li'l McCain hasn't even raised $100 million. Oh sure, Obama has received lots of little contributions, but he's swimming in money from Wall Street, lobbyists and other fat cats.

The US ruling class recognizes that the Republican party has blown it and they're switching to the Democrats (for now), which is the safe bet. The money doesn't lie. Another indicator is that nearly one in seven Republican incumbents are retiring.

And Sen. Obama is offering exactly what as an alternative to more war? Certainly not immediate withdrawal from Iraq, despite how many Americans want that (it'll be a bloodbath if we leave now, we're told, as if Iraqi are so busy laying roses at our soldiers and mercenaries' feet). His Iran threat to the Chicago Tribune ("[T]he big question is going to be, if Iran is resistant to these pressures [to stop its nuclear program], including economic sanctions, which I hope will be imposed if they do not cooperate, at what point ... if any, are we going to take military action? ... [L]aunching some missile strikes into Iran is not the optimal position for us to be in" given the ongoing war in Iraq. "On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse.") and his recent vote for allocating $165 billion for the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan (including $51 billion dollars for veterans' education) tell me that he, like any other corporate-funded Democrat, have no principled objection to war or to these wars in particular.

As Cindy Sheehan recently reminded us, the Democrats have a strong history of war making and a lot to apologize for:

Democrats are responsible for every war in the last 108 years, excluding the two Bush wars and the Reagan Grenada farce. Democrats are responsible for dropping, not one, but two atomic bombs on the innocent citizens of Japan. Democrats deserve no slack, and should be given none.

China and Cuba, like the former Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc, have nothing to do with socialism. They are state capitalist regimes. We support the struggles of workers in these countries against the bureaucratic ruling class.

I never expected to live in a world where librarians and encyclopedists are the guardians of civil liberties.

I'm okay with extradition, because surely Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Kissinger can now be extradited to East Timor for what they did there in the '70's.
Or is this secretly the sort of setup where people only get extradited *to* the US, for looking for UFO's, rather than *from* the US, for being complicit in the gruesome killings of hundreds of thousands of people?

Not a Freedom of Speech issue.

I may not agree with your politics, but you are correct. This is not a freedom of speech issue. Much like the left whines about freedom of speech anytime something doesn't go their way, the right has the same type of people.

The proper conservative response is to inform people, and use a different search engine. Google's bias is clear, they've donated hand over foot to democratic candidates and submit to the whims of communist China. In the end, it's obvious their employees lean twards socalist viewpoints. That is fine, just use another search engine.

1) They're still saying it.

yep.

2) Google search engine is still linking to them.

Yep, just not through the 'news' section.

3) They've been kicked from a news site because they're not news sites, but hate sites.

Well, the front page of their website looks like a news website to me. Are they biased? Sure. So is the New York Times. The articles Google complained about were opinion articles.

So Google won't link to the newmediajournal.us as a news website, but they will link to socialist worker.org?

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.

This is TealMicrodot again, still filling in for my friend, the original Microdot, who is having some trouble with an IP-Ban at the moment. He was right about the rampant censorship happening here. Deleted accounts, IP bans, comments being entirely deleted rather than just hidden, weird stuff going on so that certain comments are visible when not logged in but invisible to logged in users -- this is Democracy? We have proof of all of this, and we're compiling all the evidence we get.

Anyway, here's the hyena information you requested:

Female hyenas are virtually indistinguishable from males. Their clitoris is enlarged and extended to form an organ of the same size, shape, and position as the male penis. It can also be erected. Their labia have folded up and fused to form a false scrotum that is not discernibly different in external form or location from the true scrotum of males.

It even contains fatty tissue forming two swellings easily mistaken for testicles. Authors of the most recent paper on spotted hyenas found the appearance of males and females so close that sex could only be determined with certainty by palpation of the scrotum. Testes could be located in the scrotum of the male compared with soft adipose tissue in the false scrotum of the female.