Barry has standing in that destruction of natural habitats in the area surrounding his hive has impacted his colony's ability to thrive. His colony is a victim of colonialism. If he can prove that his colony is descended from an earlier colony which cultivated plant life in the New York area that was deforested by humans, then he may be able to argue that his colony is owed a certain amount of land. Charging rent from the human businesses on that land so he can buy honey, Barry would be able to supply his colony with enough honey to get us to the end of the movie's plot.
It's a little more complicated than what we actually saw, but the logic is sound.
8 didn't do any retcons. A retcon would be "actually Snoke isn't the main villain, he's just a clone created by Palpatine." 8 was perfectly happy to play nice with all the facts established in 7, and then have Ben kill Snoke as the first dramatic climax of the movie. 8 gets to have two dramatic climaxes because Rian Johnson is a brilliant filmmaker.
When I first got into D&D I didn't know what edition I was playing. I knew there were multiple editions, but I couldn't find the edition number. The box just said Dungeons and Dragons.
It was 4E, and I played multiple other systems before I finally got into 5E.
Snoke wasn't set up to serve as villain for three films. He was set up to serve for two films, same as the emperor. You're just salty that your fantheory didn't come true.
That's the long term plan they won't admit. And that's why it's important to fight these kinds of changes. They want to take enough inches that they'll have a mile.
Alright, so I'm on team "alone in the woods with a bear", but since you want to talk statistics, let's talk statistics and the heteronormativity embedded in your statistics.
The figure I'm familiar with is that 1/4 of women have been sexually assaulted. Maybe you have a figure that says 1/3, that's fine. But crucially, these figures do not say who did it. What you've made is an assumption that women only get sexually assaulted by men. Personally, I think that the vast, vast majority of sexual assaults on women are done by men. But not all. I don't believe you can transfer those two statistics - women sexually assaulted and women sexually assaulted by a man - 1:1.
Let me explain where I'm coming from. Half of transgender and nonbinary people have been sexually assaulted. That's double the number of women! This factor, double, is consistent across sources I've seen that investigate both figures with the same methodology. You might have a source that says 1/3 of women are sexually assaulted, that's fine, but the ones that investigate rates for both women and trans people say it's twice as many trans people.
I could go ahead and assume, if I wanted, that half of all trans people have been sexually assaulted by a cis person. That's the same assumption you made that 1/3 or 1/4 of women have been sexually assaulted by a man. But it's a bad assumption. I know lots of trans people who've been sexually assaulted, and most of the time it was by a fellow trans person. You see, trans people have our own community that's isolated from the cisgender dating scene as a matter of safety, and that means isolated, lonely people let their guard down around fellow transes and the victims can't get away from their abusers, nor are trans friends of trans abusers willing to give up a social network in which the abuser is embedded. It's messy and disgusting and it wouldn't be a problem if cis people just accepted us, but it's where we are. I would be wrong to assume all rapists of trans people are cis people.
And I read way too deep into your comment and got a vibe that you were making the assumption that all sexual abusers of women are men. You probably don't actually think that and didn't mean to make any kind of implication along those lines. So I'm just leaving this comment as a general reminder not to use heteronormativity to inform our statistical analyses.
Problem is once the government has the power to disarm criminals, they can make revolution illegal, call revolutionaries criminals, and prevent the population from rising up against the oligarchy. The only two good things America did is kill Nazis, and kill monarchists. And it looks like the second amendment is going to protect their right to do both after Project 2025. In my country we have very strict gun control laws, which is why I own a bow for self defence and Nazi killing.
Sun bears are shy and reclusive animals, and usually do not attack humans unless provoked to do so, or if they are injured or with their cubs; their timid nature led these bears to be often tamed and kept as pets in the past
Definitely would rather be in the woods with a strange sun bear than a strange man. What if he tries to get me into Magic The Gathering?
Okay so what you're getting at is that this kind of speech is violent. It acknowledges a conflict and seeks to further a particular side through the adoption of defensive behaviours and attitudes. And you're taking a position that all violence is bad. But you're wrong. Violence, as you and I are defining it here, is a necessary part of self defence. Violence in self defence can put a stop to violence in aggression. A pacifist who is concerned with all violence, rather than just their own, has a moral obligation to defend the weak, using violence if necessary.
Your racist grandparents were members of the oppressor class, seeking to do violence against the oppressed, and were therefore contributing to the cycle of violence. But the woman who wrote this article, is trying to stop the cycle of violence by engaging in a defensive form of violence against an oppressor class in response to violence by that class. That's not the same thing.
The missile would start having thoughts about becoming the dark lord of mordor and would refuse to go off or land in the volcano. It would land nearby and seek to take over the orc armies.
Hey, 8 tried to tell a different story. It's a story about how the legend of "Luke Skywalker" is overblown and doesn't do justice to the man himself or to anyone around him. It's a story about how war has a big negative effect on the rest of the world, even places far away from the war. It's a story about how sometimes the world doesn't work the way myths do, with awesome magic powers and heroic sacrifices. It's a story about how everyone is important, and the "great man" idea of history is false. Those are stories that Star Wars hasn't told before.
This is soulism