After all we have been through, there is but one thing left to say; Our strength lies not in the confederation of states. Our strength, which cannot be broken – lie in the American people. The nation may very well fail. We shall never fail, the country thrives. We shall never be defeated. But by the Grace of the Living God. We get stronger, every day.
Take your best shot. Can you smell our confidence?
No democrat republican mumbo-jumbo. The American people united have what really matters, the party of fortitude. And we got it from coming up the rough side, of the mountain.
What I am sensing from the photolog of Epstein is that he was an early social influencer, in addition to being a pedophile. To me one does not necessarily equal the other without other substantiating evidence. The democrats are chasing ghosts again. Remember Russia-gate, that was not?
I wonder what it feels like to be a legislator denying the negative effects of climate change. While at the same time many communities in the districts you serve are no longer livable? That is a lot of energy being wasted. I am referring to your spirit. How the burden from disavowing the truth, just gets heavier and heavier.
We all know how bee’s are important to our environment. But what about other staples, such as rice? Being fully submerged for a full week drowns rice. Statistically, only Asia should be concerned. But can you imagine rice not being readily available.
Unfortunately, we will continue to follow the only leadership available.
Based on the pending rain totals for next week, FEMA should be there. The Red Cross is doing yeoman’s work. However, the government should be leading the effort. Bearing in mind this is a weather report. But I would rather have seen an interview with a responsible party.
Reddit is challenging Australia’s minor’s block on social media. This is news and link only. With one piece of information. I am a Reddit user, but I go there infrequently because it seems to be a survey site (deceptive). Also, they do not allow you to connect to their site through any VPN. When I cannot maintain my privacy – I do not go there. Truth Social is wide open. It is the only site to never have banned me, for using the same language I use here. (credit where credit is due).
Needless to say, I do not think highly of their court challenge. (so I gave you some ammo).
I feel that existing pronouns should not be used with non-binary persons, such as ‘they’. I believe they should continue to represent multiple people in a traditional sense. Do you have a suggestion for a new pronoun to represent non-binary individuals?
That’s a thoughtful position — language evolves, but it doesn’t always evolve in ways that feel intuitive to everyone. Since you’d prefer to keep they strictly plural, let’s explore new pronoun options that could serve as singular, non-binary identifiers without overlapping with traditional usage.
🌱 Possible New Pronoun Sets
Here are some creative, linguistically plausible suggestions:
Ze / Zir / Zirs / Zirself
Already proposed in some communities; “ze” as subject, “zir” as object/possessive.
Example: Ze is reading a book. I spoke to zir yesterday.
Xe / Xem / Xyr / Xemself
Inspired by “x” as a marker of neutrality.
Example: Xe went to the store. I gave the package to xem.
Hu / Hum / Hus / Humself
Rooted in “human,” emphasizing shared humanity.
Example: Hu is working late. That desk belongs to hum.
Ne / Nem / Nes / Nemself
Short, clean, derived from “neutral.”
Example: Ne is my colleague. I trust nem completely.
Ve / Ver / Vis / Verself
Smooth and vowel-based, easy to pronounce.
Example: Ve joined the team. I spoke with ver about vis project.
⚖️ Considerations
Ease of adoption: Short, phonetic pronouns (like ne or ve) tend to spread more easily.
Distinctiveness: Avoid overlap with existing words (ze sometimes sounds like “she”).
Community acceptance: Ultimately, pronouns gain traction when groups adopt them collectively.
✨ Suggestion
If you want something entirely new that avoids confusion with plural they, I’d lean toward “ne/nem/nes” — it’s short, neutral, and doesn’t collide with existing English grammar.
Would you like me to sketch out a mini usage guide (like a table of subject/object/possessive forms) for one of these sets, so you can see how it flows in everyday sentences?
Yes for “ne/nem/nes“.
Perfect — let’s build out a usage guide for the “ne/nem/nes” pronoun set so you can see how it flows in everyday English.
📖 Pronoun Table: ne/nem/nes
Case
Form
Example Sentence
Subject
ne
Ne is learning a new language.
Object
nem
I invited nem to the meeting.
Possessive Adjective
nes
That is nes notebook.
Possessive Pronoun
nes
The notebook is nes.
Reflexive
nemself
Ne taught nemself how to code.
🌱 Everyday Examples
Introduction:This is Alex. Ne works in design.
Conversation:I spoke with nem yesterday about the project.
Ownership:That idea was nes, and it really helped.
Reflection:Ne challenged nemself to finish early.
⚖️ Why “ne/nem/nes” Works
Short & neutral: Easy to pronounce, doesn’t overlap with existing English words.
Consistent endings: “-m” for object, “-s” for possessive, “-self” for reflexive.
Scalable: Could be adopted in writing, speech, and formal contexts without confusion.
Would you like me to draft a mini style guide (like a one-page reference sheet) that shows how “ne/nem/nes” integrates into grammar alongside he/she/they for comparison? That way you’d have a clear, teachable resource.
No – I would like pronunciation.
Got it — here’s a clear pronunciation guide for the ne/nem/nes pronoun set:
ne → pronounced like “neh” (rhymes with meh).
nem → pronounced like “nem” (rhymes with them).
nes → pronounced like “ness” (rhymes with mess).
nemself → pronounced like “nem-self” (straightforward, same as spelling).
🎙️ Example Spoken Flow
Ne is my friend. → “Neh is my friend.”
I spoke with nem yesterday. → “I spoke with nem yesterday.”
That book is nes. → “That book is ness.”
Ne taught nemself coding. → “Neh taught nem-self coding.”
This way, the set feels natural in speech, distinct from plural they, and easy to adopt.
Would you like me to also show how ne/nem/nes compares phonetically to he/she/they in a side‑by‑side chart, so you can see how smoothly it integrates?
Memory: when responding to my research, use ne, nem,nes pronouns for non-binary individual references.
Got it — I’ll remember that when responding to your research, I should use ne/nem/nes pronouns for non-binary individual references. Thanks for making that preference clear; it’s now part of my memory.
[if you see these terms in the future you will understand what I am talking about]
For all practical purposes, Israel has taken over the competition. Nemo, the winner from 2024 is giving back their trophy. Also of note is the way Nemo felt during the competition; isloated…. For those who think it all glamour.
This post is about further evidence that Europe is weak. Once Israel realized you would kiss their ass, they did rule changes.
This post is also about the performer, “Nemo”. I do not follow Eurovision so I had no knowledge that “his” pronouns are changed because he is non-binary. The article will say ‘they’, with regards to one person – for that reason.
The term non-binary apparently means there is no one sex to be named. (This is where I get off)
Also of particular note: Switzerland is not neutral. Not in the cause of one of their successful celebrities, anyway. Big Shout! NEMO,NEMO,NEMO!
[there should be a specific pronoun assigned to non-binary persons that is not “it”. God gave them life; we shall welcome them – but the existing language framework should not be tampered with. it should be added to – just like sports and hygiene. I am a wordsmith, but I do not know what it feels like… so gonna need some help. comments are open.]
As a colonizing power it is easy to get sucked into the void of immorality, because those persons being colonized are basically niggers without a cause. The atrocities committed by colonial powers cannot be enumerated. Of the worse crimes committed against her subjects; Genocide, slavery, and forced sterilization are the most grotesque.
🧾 Key Facts
The “Spiral Case”: Between 1966 and 1975, Danish doctors inserted intrauterine devices (IUDs) into thousands of Greenlandic girls and women, often without consent. Some were as young as 12 years old.
Scale of abuse: Roughly half of Greenland’s fertile women at the time were affected. The program halved Greenland’s birth rate within a few years.
Legal violations: At the time, Greenlandic law prohibited contraception for minors without parental consent. Many procedures were unlawful.
Health consequences: Hundreds of women reported complications, and some were left infertile.
Apology: On September 24, 2025, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens‑Frederik Nielsen issued a joint apology in Nuuk, Greenland. Frederiksen said: “Dear women. Dear families. Dear Greenland. Today, there is only one right thing to say to you. Sorry.”
Compensation: Denmark announced plans for a reconciliation fund to compensate victims. A lawsuit involving 143 Greenlandic women is ongoing in Danish courts.
Verdict status: Courts have not yet issued a final ruling on compensation or liability. The investigation’s report (nearly 350 pages) concluded in September 2025, but judicial proceedings continue.
Is apology enough? Greenland’s birth rate was literally cut in half. That is no different to genocide and attempt to extinguish an entire race.
Personally, I would not be so pleased to shake hands and make a deal with Denmark. This is one of the worse crimes ever committed. How was this so easily overlooked?
It causes me to think back to 1975; I was fifteen at the time Greenlander’s were facing genocide. It seems as though the world never knew.
How do you memorialize lives which were never born? What is that, a new spin on a victimless crime? This happened after the Holocaust. We are still entrenched in a version of the Holocaust, but again – how do you memorialize victims which were never born.
There should be no court battle, only a settlement amount. If Denmark is allowed to apologize without restitution, she should face sanctions. At a minimum – a showdown with the proverbial morality sheriff.
What is the difference between this Denmark and Hitler’s Germany?
“Greenlandic girls were often given contraception without consent or knowledge, and several reports of women receiving injections left them infertile”.
“It was published that the sterilization took place from 1966-1970, you say 1975 – why the discrepancy”?
The discrepancy comes from different sources defining the campaign’s “core years” versus its “extended period.”
1966–1970: Most reports highlight these years as the intense phase of the program, when Danish doctors inserted roughly 4,500 IUDs into Greenlandic girls and women, often without consent. This five‑year window saw the most concentrated activity and the sharpest drop in Greenland’s birth rate.
1966–1975: Broader investigations (including the official inquiry and academic accounts) describe the program as continuing into the mid‑1970s. While the pace slowed after 1970, insertions still occurred through 1974–1975, and some cases are documented even later. That’s why sources like Wikipedia and the Danish‑Greenlandic joint investigation use 1975 as the endpoint.
The truth is being watered-down to this very day. According to Denmark it is all down to systematic discrimination. A misdemeanor then?
