I've been on HRT for ~4 years now. You need to give it more time. Whoever told you it took a couple weeks was pretty off. Personally, it was at the 3-6 month mark that my emotions began to "widen" I guess, and the quality of my attraction change. It took around a year (so, after the feminizing hormones had been affecting my body for a while) for me to begin feeling different about myself, to feel happier about my body.
It takes time, I know that sucks, but the changes will come.
C'mon, that's what PR's, RCs, and betas are for
It's important to note that this is them moving in-development branches/features "behind closed doors", not making Android closed source. Whenever a feature is ready they then merge it publicly. I know this community tends to be filled with purists, many of whom are well informed and reasoned, but I'm actually totally fine with this change. This kind of structure isn't crazy uncommon, and I imagine it's mainly an effort to stop tech journalists analysing random in-progress features for an article. Personally, I wouldn't want to develop code with that kind of pressure.
Ada does an excellent job cultivating this space and supakaity somehow keeps the whole thing running. I don't know if I could deal with half the shit they do
Transition at a younger age. Would have saved me a lot of hurt in the years between
It's such a cesspool over there
It's weird you think China is some kind of gotcha, because if the best the Canadian government could do in the unlikely future where "China is parked on [Australia's] coastline" is a symbolic gesture that hurts its own citizens, I would rather you wouldn't. So again, why do you expect us to damage our own economy for the sake of a symbolic gesture?
Trump does not understand or respect symbolic gestures in trade/deals, and you're complaining that we won't make one at our significant detriment. Considering you and Mexico are the biggest importers from the United States, well targeted retaliatory tariffs have a real chance of hurting the US and enacting change. We import 10 times fewer goods (20 times if you include Mexico) and have a 2:1 trade deficit, so we don't have the power to significantly affect the US in the same way you do, and our treasury has made it pretty clear we'd probably be the only ones hurt by such a policy.
We have better, actually effective ways to enact change (i.e. threatening Pine Gap, AUKUS, etc). So why do you expect us to damage our own economy for the sake of a symbolic gesture?
It's not our responsibility to damage our own economy for an empty symbolic gesture
We're not retaliating with tariffs because nearly every mainstream economist has advised against it, including our own Treasury. Here's the quote from Steven Kennedy, treasury head, at a Senate estimates hearing on 26 February:
For a medium-sized economy such as Australia, there is overwhelming evidence that the use of trade restrictions imposes costs on our consumers and businesses... If Australia were to impose tariffs, we would bear nearly all the cost, given our size and inability to affect the world prices of the goods we import.
We would be shooting ourselves in the foot for the sake of what would essentially amount to little more than a symbolic gesture. We have other, more effective cards beyond tariffs.
Again, it was a Washington Times article, not Post. The Washington Post was not linked because neither Trump nor Snopes cited them. Likewise, whether or not the "stuff on yahoo" that "seems like ai slop" to you doesn't change whether it is AI authored (it isn't, it was written by a human working at Snopes and posted to Snopes) nor whether it is accurate (it is). Trump did post the article with the image in question to his Truth Social account on March 9, 2025.
The discussion raised by people in this thread is not about the content of the linked Washington Times article, it is about the fact that the president of the United States is using iconography developed by the Nazis in the same manner as the Nazis. That said, to take the obvious bait you've set up, we've seen how ineffective both Russia and North Korea's army are. They are clearly a poor model for a well run and organised army, regardless of their supposedly "masculine strength". I also reject your claim that strength is a purely masculine trait. The US has had a (if begrudgingly) diverse military for as long as it has been a global superpower. Gay people, trans people, people of color, and more recently women have been contributing successfully to that strength for longer than you or I have been alive. Many of those groups are typically cast as non masculine, yet clearly display great strength.
I'm not going to be responding to you any further, I don't really feel like you're engaging in good faith.
You have to be fucking kidding me.