Via the comments, and from the land of unfinished thoughts:

Housing is a human right and evictions are an act of policy violence.

My HELP Act would give a lifeline to families facing eviction and vital resources during this time of crisis. pic.twitter.com/RyU1dkBe05

— Ayanna Pressley (@AyannaPressley) April 3, 2026

Ms Ayanna Pressley, a congresswoman with gratuitous pronouns, and mouther of the words above, acknowledges that the most common cause of eviction, by far, is the repeated and habitual non-payment of rent. Efforts at eviction generally being a last resort, a desperate and costly attempt to limit further loss or damage. To limit further theft and trespass.

Ms Pressley then complains that this behaviour – behaviour warranting eviction – has “stigma” attached to it. Which, of course, it should.

As Egino adds in the comments,

Adding further costs and complications to the process of evicting problem tenants seems likely to result in higher rents and a contraction of supply. And then there’s the claim – baldly asserted and seemingly unchallenged – that “housing is a human right.” A claim that, if enacted, would entail the compelled labour of others. For which, I believe we have a word.

When claims of this kind are made, there’s a recurring reluctance to complete the train of thought, to acknowledge certain, fairly basic, practical and moral details. Instead, we often get something not unlike a child’s shopping list, in which little thought is given to what costs might be involved.

And so, we arrive at the very modern impulse to frame almost any kind of personal shortcoming, including moral shortcomings, as some state of blessed victimhood. In which, normal consequences for delinquent behaviour become violence, something to denounce and inhibit. With the result that the functional and law-abiding are faced with ever more obligations to indulge that dysfunction, and ever more difficulty defending their own interests.

Inevitably, in the subsequent replies, we learn that Ms Pressley has an extensive property portfolio of her own, including several residential rental properties, from which she earns around a quarter of a million dollars a year. Readers may wonder how Ms Pressley might feel if her tenants decided that “housing is a human right” and that “eviction is violence” and therefore abusive and illegitimate, and so, hey, screw paying the rent, despite our promises.

And that $250,000 a year is only outstanding rent and so, by Ms Pressley’s moral calculus, of no importance.

Via Pst314.

Devil Himself to pass within mere miles of council staff workplace, sandbags deployed, weeping ensues:

Although Mr Farage’s brief presence in the city will have “no direct impact” on Council staff, Leeds City Council human resources chief, Mr John Ebo, has assured pre-emptively traumatised employees that they will be comforted with “wellbeing network chats.” “Safe space conversations” will, of course, be “enabled.”

Council employees are urged to “be vigilant.”

I’m just going to leave this here, for no reason whatsoever.

Readers may detect an implicit gulf, both political and psychological, between much of the electorate and the people who spend their money.

And in questionable circumstances news:

Today’s word is ballsy.

Apparently, the house cleaner was scoring the pills.

Consider this an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

Three snippets on a theme.

First up, because we’ve been starved of irony, some news from Brazil:

Because when you think of the dignity of women, you immediately picture drag queens.

Mr Hilton, a member of the Socialism and Liberty Party, has responded to his critics – people suggesting that perhaps the president of a Women’s Rights Committee might be an actual, you know, woman – by denouncing them as “LGBTphobes” and “defenders of paedophilia.” Which may strike readers as a little rich, given statistical realities.

On which, more shortly.

Mr Hilton has filed a criminal complaint against one of his critics, via the Public Prosecutor’s Office of São Paulo – and demands for the equivalent of $1.9 million dollars – on grounds that said critic failed to perceive Mr Hilton as a woman. A failure to affirm, or indeed to hallucinate, that Mr Hilton has seen fit to construe as “violence.”

And because a cake needs icing,

Meanwhile, in the laugh-a-minute world of transgender Reddit moderators:

And from Rhode Island’s educational bureaucracy:

But remember, dear citizen, these are Things That Never Happen.

Via pst314 in the comments, more wonders from the world of education:

You’re intrigued, I can tell.

The specific purpose, lest there be doubt, being classroom urination. Which is apparently a niche activity, a buzz of sorts. Among grown men who are entrusted to shape young minds.

Finding pleasure in the small things.

Perhaps a little too much pleasure.

A close call. Which I’m assuming was the point.

As so often, action was taken, belatedly, only after footage was provided by a concerned parent. Mr Champ’s colleagues and employers being, it seems, oblivious to the rumours of similar incidents – one might say school legends – by which a great many pupils had been entertained, before searching out confirmation and circulating said evidence via Snapchat.

Mr Champ is currently “on leave.”