based on this recipe: https://old.reddit.com/r/veganrecipes/comments/1mvh84g/100g_protein_pasta_salad/

I don't see a way to upload multiple pictures 🤔

Writing on his blog, Mr. Linehan said he was taken into police custody, searched and interviewed in relation to three posts he made on X in April, including one that read: “If a trans-identified male is in a female-only space, he is committing a violent, abusive act. Make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails, punch him in the balls.”

...

Mr. Rowley defended the arrest in his statement, saying that the law “dictates that a threat to punch someone from a protected group could be an offense” and that “most reasonable people would agree that genuine threats of physical violence against an identified person or group should be acted upon by officers.”

In the 12 months that ended in March 2024, almost 4,800 hate crimes were recorded against transgender people, British police data shows, up from 2,800 hate crimes in the 12 months that ended in March 2021.

...

Mr. Linehan, 57, is set to go on trial on Thursday on separate charges of harassing an 18-year-old campaigner for transgender rights, accusations he denies.

What do you think, this is the first time I've used pink nail polish. I was borrowing the colors and wanted something between the mauve color on the left and the light-pink color on the right, so I did a base coat of the mauve and covered it up with two lighter coats of the light-pink color.

And of course the next day the polish was chipped and a few fingers actually sloughed off 🙃 I need to invest in the equipment so I can do gel polish.

The case raised foundational constitutional questions: whether transgender people constitute a class triggering higher constitutional scrutiny, whether laws targeting them violate equal protection, and whether the Constitution guarantees their right to access medically necessary treatment. The Court sidestepped nearly all of those questions, instead issuing a narrower opinion that carves out an exception permitting medical discrimination based on “gender dysphoria”—a distinction it bizarrely treats as separate from discrimination against transgender people. The ruling effectively greenlights medical care bans across the country and may pave the way for broader restrictions, including for adults, while leaving lower court rulings on bathrooms, schools, sports, and employment remain intact—for now.

One of the more strained justifications in the majority opinion mirrors arguments once used to deny rights to same-sex and interracial couples: that the law does not discriminate against transgender people, but instead bars both cisgender and transgender people from receiving medication to treat gender dysphoria. It's a tortured rationale—functionally absurd given that transgender people will need the medical treatment for gender dysphoria, not cisgender people.

Sotomayor compares this rationale to that used in Loving v. Virginia, a ruling which struck down laws against interracial marriage:

“But nearly every discriminatory law is susceptible to a similarly race- or sex-neutral characterization. A prohibition on interracial marriage, for example, allows no person to marry someone outside of her race, while allowing persons of any race to marry within their race….

In a passage that sounds hauntingly familiar to readers of Tennessee’s brief, Virginia argued in Loving that, should this Court intervene, it would find itself in a “bog of conflicting scientific opinion upon the effects of interracial marriage, and the desirability of preventing such alliances, from the physical, biological, genetic, anthropological, cultural, psychological, and sociological point of view.” … “In such a situation,” Virginia continued, “it is the exclusive province of the Legislature of each State to make the determination for its citizens as to the desirability of a policy of permitting or preventing such [interracial] alliances—a province which the judiciary may not constitutionally invade.” Id., at 7–8.