The song you play to summon that statue is called, “The Elegy of Emptiness.” Make of that what you will.

Sounds like you’re killing it on the litter boxes. So, does this open floor plan allow for a cat to traverse the space without touching the ground? Having vertical pathways where your cats can make an exit without getting blocked on the ground is important for side-stepping conflict. I have a very patient cat and a surprisingly gentle toddler, and they get along very well, but he’s often too excitable and loud for her. When he’s in the dining room, blocking her path and getting rambunctious, she can avoid him by jumping on the dining room table, then to an island bar counter, then down to the kitchen counter and from there exit into one of the bedrooms. Similarly, in the living room, she makes use of the back of our L shaped couch to reach the two exits if she doesn’t feel like engaging with the toddler playing on the floor. Some cat shelving, or even just some strategically placed furniture, can give them an exit route (doorways are tough, but maybe a small end table they can jump up on or something? Difficult to say without walking through your house).

It sounds like you’ve got a lot of enrichment for the younger guy. The only thing I could possibly suggest would be adding more structure. You could try playing until he gets exhausted in the morning, then do his morning feeding, which would probably get him to burn some energy and do a big morning nap. Then do the same thing at night to get him to calm down for bed. For all I know you’re already doing this, but it’s all I can think to suggest. It definitely sounds like the younger guy is instigating out of boredom and the older guy is just is not having it.

So, first, drop the squirt bottle. It’ll break up the fights in the moment, but negative reinforcement won’t change the cats behavior long term; it will just make him see you as a threat.

Second, how many litter boxes do you have? Litter boxes are an important part of staking out their territory, and having to share one litter box can make them think they’re encroaching on each other’s territory. Experts recommend one more litter box than cats in the house, but one litter box for each, in different parts of house, should be the minimum.

Next, how much are you playing with the younger cat? If he’s stalking and instigating most the fights, he might just have play aggression that he’s trying to get out on the older cat, who might not have the patience for it. Try playing with the younger guy until he gets tired, at least once a day.

Finally, look around your house and try to eliminate the areas where the older guy might get trapped. Give him escape routes, make sure he has a shelf or a piece of furniture he can not only jump to, but make an escape from. If there isn’t enough vertical space, the younger guy is just going to run him down until he gets him cornered.

That’s one perspective. I would argue that, given the ways in which the two parties have created election laws to protect their duopoly, third-party and independent candidates will rarely be viable. Instead of spending finite resources attempting to compete with the massive Democratic party machine in the general election, where a splitting of the liberal/leftist coalition could very possible (if not probably) result in a win for thr far-right, seizing the levers of power of said machine through primaries is not only safer, but more likely to succeed.

I think he’s just being pragmatic. He endorses progressive challengers in the primaries, and then he urges his supporters to support Democrats in the general instead of splitting the liberal/leftist vote and handing the Republicans a win. He often gets blamed for losses anyway (Hillary supporters are still mad) and he’s made some bad picks (Fetterman and Platner come to mind), but the growing success of progressive and DSA candidates this year might be vindicating this as long-term strategy.

Anecdotally, I’m seeing a lot of normie liberals get radicalized by watching Democrats approve Trump’s nominees, pass his legislation, and cave on their own government shutdowns. Turns out, if you pitch yourselves as the only opposition to fascism, people expect you to actually oppose fascism.

This is what is really dangerous about the right-wing right now. The savvier fascists have figured out that support for Israel is a bipartisan loser, so they’re staking an anti-Israel position, and some of them (Tucker Carlson, for example) are starting to integrate their antisemitic dog whistles into it.

The left-wing should counter with any anti-zionist, anti-colonial position that explicitly rejects antisemitism, but unfortunately, the defacto left-wing party is the Democrats, who have essentially staked out the same pro-Israel middle east policy as the neocons. Right now, Trump’s support for Israel is keeping the right pro-Israel for now, but when he’s gone (and his health makes that appear imminent), the right may outflank the Democrats on Israel, leaving us to choose between antisemitism and genocide. I would guess that’s what Vance is doing here.

The Politico reporting is extremely damning, and these accusations really can’t be described as anything other than rape. He’s gotta go.

Yeah, well, maybe we shouldn’t have our government ban athletes from competitions because you don’t understand something.

I’m not qualified to answer that, and neither are you, but I don’t give a shit because it’s a goalpost shift… IOC is looking at one study, while studies that analyze multiple studies indicate there isn’t enough data, but what data there is points to there not being an advantage. I’m also curious as to whether they mean trans women or trans women and cis men when they say, “biological men,” have an advantage, but it’s neither here nor there because A) you’re still cherry picking the data that conforms to your worldview and B) you’ve very clearly conceded the initial argument that the government should be in charge of this. Anyway, you done yet, or do you still want to be wrong at ne a little longer?

Note that other studies, including meta studies that analyze multiple studies, have concluded that there trans athletes don’t appear to be at an advantage, and that their results are, “low confidence,” meaning their isn’t enough scientific data to make a determination either way. I actually shared the most recent of those studies earlier in this thread, but you ignored it because it didn’t conform to your beliefs. Which isn’t very scientific.

Well, this is an excellent example of an independent sports organization using scientific data to make their own determination on what the rules should be around trans athletes. Thank you for admitting I was right, I’m sure that wasn’t easy for you.

Yeah, where did you think the, “data that proves trans athletes have a competitive advantage,” was going to come feom? Or it’s just up to science? Like, the abstract concept of science is going to set the rules for sports leagues? Or is there gonna need to be some authority on sports and athletics to enforce those rules? Some sort of athletic association? Anyway, if ypu think you parse words until I get frustrated and drop this, you are deeply underestimating how petty I am.

(Also, as I pointed out earlier in this thread, what little science there is on trans athletes has determined that transs athletes don’t have a competitive advantage,.so I guess you support including them!)

Then they can say, “If there is data that proves trans athletes have a competitive advantage, then having them play in the same league as cis athletes would be unfair, but I trust athletic leagues and school districts to make that determination, and not politicians with ideological agendas.”

Like, seriously, this is your argument? The Democrats need to support trans athlete bans, even though a plurality of Americans don’t want them to do that, because a Republican might ask a difficult question? Are tou serious?

Yeah, and a plurality of the people in that study said they don’t want the federal government making the rules for trans athletes:

In January, a New York Times/Ipsos poll found that 79% of U.S. adults, including 67% of Democrats, think that transgender female athletes should not be allowed to compete in women’s sports. However, Americans are much more closely divided when forced to choose who should be in charge of setting the rules for fair sports participation.

In this survey, a slim plurality of adults (45%) say that “local school districts and sports associations should set the rules for fair sports participation, not the federal government,” while 42% say “the federal government should ban transgender girls from playing girls’ sports and force them to play on the boys’ team.” (Data for Progress)

Next time, find an actual analysis of the study instead of letting a right-wing rag like the post tell you the parts you want to hear.

Right, but if the plan is for her to convince the Democrats to clear the senate primary field gor her, then run for president anyway…well, they’re probably figure out she lied when she announces her presidential run, and i bet they’ll find some centrists to run for Schumer’s seat. If she wrre taking Schumer’s seat this cycle, she could then lie about not seeking the presidency and run in two years, but that’s not the timeline.

Schumer has appeared so weak and ineffectual these last two years that I don’t think he has a shot against any challenger, progressive or otherwise. Seriously, I’m pretty sure Cuomo or Adams could knock him out of that seat. Any honest advisor would probably tell him to not seek leadership again and retire at the end of his term so he can spare himself an embarrassing defeat.

Schumer isn’t up for reelection until 2028, so that wouldn’t really work. She would need to pick one or the other, she can’t run for both simultaneously.

Anybody who believes it makes a lick of fucking sense to keep pretending the U.S. is the greatest country in the world and social safety nets are unnecessary…has already switched teams.

YUP. And the most infuriating part is that, since about Reagan, the left bave been the ones that been told we must acquiesce to centrists, that we couldn’t win elections without, “moderates,” that we had to accommodate Clinton and the third-way crowd.

Now, after a decade of slow declined followed by a decade of rapid collapse, it’s clear that the centrists can’t win in this political landscape. Do the party leaders see where the wind is blowing, listen to the voters, follow the progressives’ victories, and tack to the left? Nope! They act as though pushing for social spending and welfare programs, AKA what the Democratic party stood for since FDR, is some sort of betrayal.

Moving to the right? “Look, we need a big tent, but we’re all on the same team!” Moving back to the left in the slightest? “Fuck you, I’m quitting the team.”

Democrats want to adopt positions that they can win on.

What evidence do you have, beyond your personal biases, that, “we are going supersede the judgement of independent organizations in order to dictate policies on trans athletes to them,” is a winning position?

It’s better to have uniform laws since teams from different schools compete against each other.

Athletic leagues don’t operate on a school-by-school basis. There are county, state, and national leagues that are already setting the rules by which schools compete. The NFHS and NCAA, for example, already made the, “uniform laws,” you want. Both organizations have already been forced to change their rules on trans athletes in certain states to accommodate anti-trans legislation, and the NCAA changed their national rules to comply with a (probably unlawful) executive order.

This is what’s so infuriating about your position. You act as though you’re just asking for the government to make rules for everyone to follow, but you’re actually asking for the government to overrule the rules you don’t like.