@abyssofapathy / abyssofapathy.tumblr.com
The sith took such an L. Imagine spending 1000 years in the most complex plot ever to overthrow your enemies, starting a galactic civil war, initiating a coup, and all just to end up with a government that lasts like 25 years.
The moment I realized you were talking about Star Wars I went
I don’t give the square root of jack shit about SW man.
The DSA scared all the olds away when they talked about wanting to kill all the Jews.
That would also mean the DSA would have to give a shit about women.
What, you didn't think their "Thots and Trots" speed dating event at a Jewish-owned club that was subsequently denounced as genocidal and pro zionist because it was based on "Tel Aviv Nightlife" was respectful of women?
Target saw foot traffic fall for the eighth consecutive week, extending a losing streak that began just a few days after the company announced it would end its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) program in late January.
For the week that began March 17, foot traffic fell 5.7% YoY for Target, according to data from Placer.ai. That’s compared to the 7.1% it fell last week, and an average weekly decline over the last eight weeks of 6.2%.
In a March 4 earnings call, when it reported a 3.1% Q4 loss and a non-specified sales decline in February, Target executives were bullish about its Easter assortment boosting business. But if it has so far, it’s not reflected in the foot-traffic data. What may have taken the spring out of the Easter Bunny’s hop for Target is a 40-plus day boycott coinciding with Lent (so ending on Easter) spearheaded by Black clergy for which more than 150,000 have signed up, exceeding organizers’ stated goal of 100,000.
Target did not respond to a request for comment from Retail Brew about the traffic slump.
At Costco, which unlike Target resisted demands from the Trump administration for private companies to dump their DEI programs, foot traffic has continued to grow. For the same week beginning March 17, traffic rose 5.2% YoY, and marked its 13th straight week of gains over last year.
Donald J. slump: While Target is just one of many companies to capitulate to Trump and get rid of DEI, it may be seeing more of a backlash because of how much it championed racial justice and social justice by name in recent years—before eschewing the terms.
In fact, like Target, Walmart had been on a seven-week traffic decline and McDonald’s on an eight-week decline, but both broke the slump in the week beginning March 17, with Walmart inching into positive territory with a 0.3% YoY traffic gain and Mickey D’s with a 2% gain.
Compared to Target’s average YoY loss of 6.2% over the last eight weeks, Walmart’s average weekly traffic was down 1.6% and McDonald’s was down 3.6%.
Circle back: As consistent as Target’s foot-traffic losses have become, we’re in the midst of Target Circle Week, a mammoth sale and marketing push that began on March 23 and lasts through March 29. It does not coincide with a Circle Week last year, but rather a week which in 2024 was itself down 0.8% compared to 2023.
It’s hard to fathom Target not improving over that when we revisit foot traffic in a week, but we’ll try to suss out an apples-and-apples comparison of how this Circle Week compares to prior ones traffic-wise.
Considering I’m in a tiny west Michigan town, I assumed we’d have like 50 people and I’d get a nice group picture….there ended up being over 700 people! In a town with less than 6000 residents! Even the organizers were flummoxed because there were too many for the indoor venue they wanted to end at.
Predictably, "leftists" are getting butthurt over Kamala Harris saying "I told you so" and calling her a spineless loser for not peeping during Ukraine, deportation, and abandoning people, failing to realize all of this could've been avoided if they chose pragmatism instead of doubling down on their moral purity.
finally misogyny for men 😻
This is a video of a doctor describing the craziest ectopic pregnancy he’s ever seen. The woman came in 49 days (7 weeks) late on her period.
The fetus was attached to her liver. An abdominal pregnancy.
Reminder that this is what abortion access looks like in the United States.
Reminder that conservative states sued the federal government because they don’t want to be “forced” by EMTLA to provide emergency abortions even when the pregnancy would kill the mother.
Hope this woman didn’t die!
I hate the way we as a culture have decided that nursing homes are a failure of family. The insistence that any old relative would do a better job with elder care than a trained professional is so insulting. Most nursing home employees are caring professionals who chose the field. It's a hard job that takes dedication. We should talk about nursing home care as underfunded and under supported, not as a shameful abandonment. It's an important skill set!
The last few weeks I keep coming back to one of the big points Richard Reeves and Hawley and anyone else arguing that we really need to help these poor men likes to trot out: that fewer men are going college. They just hold it up as both a reason things are bad for men and proof that things are bad for men and never really bother supporting either point. All that statistic really tells us is exactly what it is- fewer men than women are attending college- but it doesn’t on its own tell us anything about the state of things for men. Is it bad? How is it bad? Why is it happening? There’s lots of implying that boys are so disadvantaged that they can’t or aren’t going to college and also that men are so disadvantaged because they didn’t go to college but we don’t actually know that’s true because they don’t actually make a strong case for that (or, usually, any case at all). Maybe it is true; maybe if boys had more support, then more of them would go to college and if more of them went to college then more men would be successful (whatever that means) but they don’t do the work to support that thesis. Instead, they rely on an underlying belief that college is a net good for all- or at least men- and a) the only reason you wouldn’t go to college is because you couldn’t for some reason and b) not going to college is inherently a negative. It’s a thought that underlies a lot of arguments but what if it’s not true? I mean, it might be and I guess it feels true but, again, they don’t bother to make solid arguments in support of that thesis either.
A lot of these arguments they’re making feel true and feel connected but that doesn’t make it true. You can’t just put two facts near each other and make it true that they’re connected to one another and certainly not connected in the way you want people to believe they are. Maybe “boys aren’t getting the support they need” and “young men aren’t going to college” and “men aren’t as ‘successful’ as they were in the past” isn’t a cause and effect string but a list of symptoms of the same problem of a flailing economy, poor support for education and a warped sense of what it means to be manly. Or maybe it goes the other direction- men aren’t achieving the same success in adulthood as their fathers so their sons aren’t going to college because they see it didn’t help their dads and boys aren’t getting support in grade school because they’re not pursuing a college track? Neither of those theses are supported here either but they’re at least as solid as putting three facts in a row and saying “see?! see how hard it is for us?! see how we suffer?”
My point is, they hold up these statistics that sound bad but never explain why they’re bad and then hold up other statistics like they’re intrinsically related and folks just lap it up.
