Dark Gidget retweeted
Health care? "You're on your own."
Housing? "Nothing we can do."
Grocery prices? "You're out of luck."
$200 billion for another war? "No problem!"
AmericansâDemocrats, Republicans, independentsâare SICK AND TIRED of endless wars.
We need to invest here at home.
Dark Gidget retweeted
Dear #MAGA,
If Democrats were cheating in elections, how the fuck do you explain Donald Trump getting elected to the highest office TWICE?
You can't be this stupid.
Dark Gidget retweeted
Happy Presidentâs Day to the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama!
Elon and his white supremacist a-h0les can post whatever they want here. But my post is gonna get flagged? Be so for real rn.
My ancestors came from Scotland to the colonies in the 1600s and fought in the Revolutionary War creating this country. And Iâm JUST FINE with living in a multicultural society. My culture is Californian and Angeleno.
(And itâs Scots with one T, Elon. You fucking moron.)
Dark Gidget retweeted
Regardless of which team wins today, California already won. Thank you, Bad Bunny and Green Day. #CASuperBowl đđ
Dark Gidget retweeted
Seven years after the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, the world is being asked to forget what happens when governments decide reporters are disposableâand to turn away from what that precedent means for all of us.
Dark Gidget retweeted
Here's the text of Sharyn Alfonsi's memo about "corporate censorship" and a "betrayal of the most basic tenet of journalism:"
News Team,
Thank you for the notes and texts. I apologize for not reaching out earlier.
I learned on Saturday that Bari Weiss spiked our story, INSIDE CECOT, which was supposed to air tonight. We (Ori and I) asked for a call to discuss her decision. She did not afford us that courtesy/opportunity.
Our story was screened five times and cleared by both CBS attorneys and Standards and Practices. It is factually correct.  In my view, pulling it nowâafter every rigorous internal check has been met is not an editorial decision, it is a political one.
We requested responses to questions and/or interviews with DHS, the White House, and the State Department. Â Government silence is a statement, not a VETO. Their refusal to be interviewed is a tactical maneuver designed to kill the story.
If the administrationâs refusal to participate becomes a valid reason to spike a story, we have effectively handed them a "kill switch" for any reporting they find inconvenient.
If the standard for airing a story becomes "the government must agree to be interviewed," then the government effectively gains control over the 60 Minutes broadcast. We go from an investigative powerhouse to a stenographer for the state.
These men risked their lives to speak with us. We have a moral and professional obligation to the sources who entrusted us with their stories. Abandoning them now is a betrayal of the most basic tenet of journalism: giving voice to the voiceless.
CBS spiked the Jeffrey Wigand interview due to legal concerns, nearly destroying the credibility of this broadcast. It took years to recover from that "low point." By pulling this story to shield an administration, we are repeating that history, but for political optics rather than legal ones.
We have been promoting this story on social media for days. Our viewers are expecting it. When it fails to air without a credible explanation, the public will correctly identify this as corporate censorship. We are trading 50 years of "Gold Standard" reputation for a single week of political quiet.
I care too much about this broadcast to watch it be dismantled without a fight.
Sharyn
Hahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahaha
đđđđđđđđđ
âââââââââ
Suck it haters.
LA + California =
We DGAF
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS ⊠BACK TO BACK.
#DODGERS
đđ»
The W in NWSL
When I joined the National Womenâs Soccer League 11 years ago, our games were live-streamed to fans on YouTube. Today, our league is halfway through a four-year, $240 million television contract. Our teams are among the most valuable franchises in womenâs sports. Yet with this remarkable growth comes an urgent challenge: How do we preserve womenâs rights and competitive fairness while fostering meaningful inclusion?
Â
Iâm proud to have played a small role in our leagueâs transformation from struggling startup to supercharged celebrity-maker. Iâve been a part of winning seven titles: three NWSL Championships, three regular-season titles and one International Champions Cup. But Iâm concerned that without clarity about who the league is for, it will lose its identity and its momentum.
Â
Recent controversies across womenâs sports â from swimming to track and field â have highlighted the absence of clear eligibility policies in professional soccer, unlike a growing number of other competitions. This uncertainty serves no one, as questions and controversy abound over intersex and transgender athletes. Players have been excluded and then unexcluded, administrators have blamed and criticized each other, and fans have used the uncertainty to harass players.Â
Leaders from across the political spectrum, including progressives like California Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Vice President Kamala Harris, have expressed support for stronger protections for the integrity of womenâs sports. Ensuring fairness prompted numerous international leagues to tighten eligibility. World Athletics did so in 2023 for international track and field competitions. Other countriesâ domestic organizations did the same, including the UK Athletics Federation. World Aquatics (formerly FINA), international swimmingâs governing body, adopted clear rules about sex and gender eligibility in 2022. Englandâs Football Association now requires ovaries at birth.
Â
Addressing this challenge entails remembering why womenâs sports categories exist in the first place: not to exclude but to create a space where female athletes can physically compete on equal footing. Studies show measurable differences between men and women in muscle mass, bone density and cardiovascular capacity, which directly affect competitive outcomes. Further research has found male muscular advantage is only âminimally reducedâ â by about 5% over 12 months â by testosterone suppression.
Â
Fairness and inclusion are core American values. Reasonable people can disagree about where to draw lines, but avoiding the conversation altogether by shutting out diverse views does not serve us. In fact, we owe it to current and future female athletes to solve this.
Â
The NWSL must adopt a clear standard. One option is all players must be born with ovaries, as the FA requires. Another option is an SRY gene test, like those World Athletics and World Boxing implemented.
Â
This SRY genetic marker indicates male-developmental pathways during fetal growth, providing objective scientific criteria for competitive categorization. Critics say genetic-testing policies can cause psychological harm. This concern must be taken seriously. Testing could easily integrate into medical evaluations through existing blood draws or noninvasive cheek swabs, conducted once per career under strict confidentiality protocols. Athletes testing positive for the SRY gene could receive comprehensive support, including counseling, privacy protections and inclusion in professional networks. World Athletics has successfully used similar protocols since 2018, with legal challenges ultimately supporting such policiesâ scientific basis.
Â
Creating pathways for athletes traditionally excluded from competing at the highest level would demonstrate inclusion and competitive integrity can coexist.
Â
I know from experience the NWSL is more than just a sports league. For many, dreams are coming true in real life â dreams that were impossible before my generation. I also understand that for many athletes and fans, seeing intersex and transgender athletes compete and dominate on sportsâ biggest stages also realizes a dream. How can we make an open arena reality for small and tragically marginalized minorities with nowhere else that may feel safe and inclusive to compete?
Â
The answer is in the NWSLâs own history. Just as we built a new space for women to compete in the largest arenas, now we must honor that commitment and make the National Womenâs Soccer League for women. I welcome leaders including the aforementioned American politicians to come together with the NWSLâs blueprint and build solutions.
Â
Some pathway ideas: an open division within the NWSL, small-sided opportunities like the Soccer Tournament and World Sevens Football, pathways to stay in the game and free counseling. I donât have all the answers, but I do know weâre all in this together. It will take time, space and creativity to cooperate as we move forward.
Â
Decisions the NWSL makes â or shirks its responsibility to make â will shape opportunities for young athletes of all backgrounds for decades to come. We must get them right by finding the most ethical and innovative path ahead.
Â
Womenâs sports showcase the full range of human ability as we reach and exceed what is physically possible. Everybody needs a chance to break records and achieve the previously impossible. That is why we love to celebrate women competing against each other and why we need creative solutions to ensure everybody can compete on a level playing field.Â
It would be nice to have no need for clear eligibility criteria. Unfortunately, when money, power and fame are at stake, which inevitably happens in professional sports, competitors may try to push on what is right or fair. Especially when the goal of winning requires using every available advantage.



















