RIP to the thrill and joy of not knowing whether someone believes in reproductive autonomy when you're contemplating having sex with them?
I get feeling like it's unfair to be rejected because you don't check someone's boxes, but nobody has an obligation to like, or to consider liking, anyone for any reason. That's not how liking people works.
And that's before we even get to the straightforwardly practical relationship between having sex with someone and wanting their sexual ethics and values to be compatible with yours.
"As a libertarian, I feel like I'm missing out on friendships and relationships with people who'd like me if they gave me a chance" is a frustration I totally get, and even sympathize with. But "the people who are rejecting me are wrong to do so" is where I get off the bus.
(And yes, that's an MTA bus. Yay public transit!)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Angus Johnston

Angus Johnston Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @studentactivism

21 Sep
Teachers are supposed to get federal student loan forgiveness. But they have to apply to get it, and when they do, @usedgov frequently turns them down with no justification.…
"The disclosure suggests further bureaucratic problems with the management of the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, which has come under fire from Democrats in recent years for rejecting more than 98 percent of all borrowers who applied."
"[The Department of Education has] blocked thousands of people who clearly work in public service—including educators—from pursuing [student debt forgiveness via] PSLF, often due to paperwork hurdles and other trivial administrative errors."…
Read 17 tweets
18 Sep
Overturning Obergefell would allow de-recognition of same-sex marriages. Overturning Lawrence would open the door to the return of sodomy laws.
For a long time I thought some of these victories were pretty much safe, just because their outcomes are now broadly popular. But an antidemocratic political movement doesn't have to care about popularity in the same way that a party that has to win free and fair elections does.
Sodomy laws were almost entirely unenforced for quite a while before the Lawrence decision. But if we've learned one thing from the last five years, it's that norms, precedent, and tradition mean nothing to the modern Republican Party.
Read 11 tweets
15 Sep
I know several people in their twenties and thirties who have decided not to have kids because the future looks so bleak. It breaks my heart.
Since some folks are misinterpreting, I want to be clear: The people I'm talking about aren't making an ethical decision to reduce their impact on the planet through population reduction. They're foregoing having kids because they're scared of what the world is turning into.
We could debate whether population restriction is going to solve the planet's problems (it mostly wouldn't, and would cause all sorts of other trouble, is my answer), but this isn't that.
Read 5 tweets
15 Sep
I'd say tonight's results indicate pretty powerfully that "No On One, Leave Two Blank" was good, simple, effective messaging strategy.
Like Silver, I was made nervous by "No One One, Leave Two Blank." Unlike Silver, (1) I understood the argument in its favor, and (2) nobody's paying me gazillions of dollars a year to be smart about politics and elections.
This is the crux of where Silver (I'd argue) whiffed it on the "Leave 2 Blank" issue—an overconfidence in his own gut instincts, dressed up as spurious statistical precision. (I know, you're shocked.)
Read 17 tweets
14 Sep
I had to read four different articles on the Dems' new voting rights bill to find one that clearly answered the question of whether it imposes a national Voter ID requirement. (It doesn't.)…
The Dems' old bill banned state-level Voter ID laws. The new bill dramatically restricts them. That's the difference. Either bill would limit Voter ID laws on the state level, neither would impose new Voter ID requirements.
So if you see people this morning asking why the Democrats are supporting Voter ID, the answer is that they aren't, but that sloppy reporting is leaving the impression that they are.
Read 7 tweets
13 Sep
Minnesota’s two senate seats are held by popular Democratic women in their early sixties.
Having investigated further this morning, I see that Franken's interview was conducted as promotion for a new comedy tour, and feel mildly regretful for assisting with his viral marketing.
And just to close the circle, there really isn't anywhere other than Wisconsin for Franken to run. Schumer is running in 2022, and Franken will be nearly eighty in 2028. As much as I'm sure he'd love to, he's not going to primary Gillibrand.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!