Kanopy (video only) and Hoopla (multimedia) are two papers widely used in Canada and the US. There are other and international providers, but I don't remember them off the top of my head.
Ofcourse, they don't have the same content as the big streaming companies, licenses and all, but there's plenty to be enjoyed if you're not keeping up with the latest streaming shows anyway. (I watch TV shows on the broadcaster website the day after they air on TV.)
Not all trans people are transitioned on hormones, so I guess a relevant question is Are trans athletes required to have been on HRT +testosterone blockers for a minimum time in order to compete in sports? At what level of competition would that be required? How and by whom is that monitored? Is it even possible to monitor if, say, an athlete reduces their T blockers?
"Speaking out" has now basically lost its meaning and only means making a statement publicly.
The other day I heard on the radio a survivor of the Jazz plane crash "speaks out" about it. He just described the experience.
And even in an exaggerated/lightened for cheesy humour kind of way, it highlights real issues that northern communities face, as well as some parts of Inuit culture.
I truly cannot understand why Israel make people lose their minds. Replace "Israel" with "China", for example, and no one would beat an eye.
Personally, I'm in favour of "mamsir", which is the obvious compounding of "ma'am" and "sir". The Internet tells me it's used in the Philippines, but I could have sworn I first heard of it being used in India 🤷♀️
The first episode was just set up. The entire rest of the season is the actual show.
If I know someone is a terrible person, I can't enjoy their work. Besides not wanting to financially support them, I like to put myself in an author's, actor's, writer's shoes when I watch/read stuff.
That said, I don't purposefully look into people's lives; I'm not into celebrity gossip. But sometimes a person is such an outlier or just so vocal about it that it's unavoidable.
It seems a probable case is she misunderstood or misheard what was being said to her as "she needs to finish the drink" and complied with the request she thought was being given to her.
Heck, even as a hearing person, if someone told me I can't have an open beverage in a space (alcoholic or not), finishing it seems like a reasonable way to be rid of it.
Good God, of all the ways one could gamble, this sounds like playing Russian roulette with five bullets loaded in the revolver.
Thanks for articulating it this way for me. It's the hypocrisy that gets me, at least in my situation. I reported my boss to the directors. He was (still is) planning to cut a guy from our team, claiming he costs too much. But when I did the math, I found that my boss' personal expenses on food, gas, phone, vehicle, etc. (with increasingly unaccounted-for amounts) are more than that guy's pay.
My boss isn't worried about the financial health of the organization, he's worried he won't be able to keep spending it on himself if he has to pay the workers.
I understand where you're coming from, and it wouldn't apply in this specific context (where locals had rejected the poor boy), but in a general sense, the idea is to partner or invest in such a way to enable locals to lead the change efforts, or at least have a significant stake and voice.
In the business world, there are often silent investors who back entrepreneurs. Their financial input make a business possible, but leave the operations to the entrepreneur. The investor backs the entrepreneur, and they both profit.
It's a different model and it takes more time and effort to find local partners to build up their capacity over time, but enabling locals will get stronger long-term results for the recipients of charity. It's the difference between providing food packages to people and giving people agricultural tools to provide food for themselves in the long run. Obviously, in a situation of dire need, providing food is an immediate need, but only providing food instead of also providing tools keeps the recipients in a dependent situation. If they're dependent on foreign charity forever, it's just another form of control and colonialism.
What this woman had done, by caring for this poor boy, was long-term investing in him. Now he has an education and will be able to work and care for himself.