Lurker > Horith

Antifar posted...

Update:
https://www.nytco.com/press/a-statement-from-the-new-york-times-on-presidential-news-coverage/

So their statement is Waaaaaah, Biden wont let us interview him! Just because were overcorrecting our reporting by making a huge fuss out of his age and his son, and completely ignoring Trump literally being a traitor! How dare Biden do this!

Maybe stop printing articles questioning whether Biden is too old and harping on some verbal stumbles while glossing over the verbal diahhrea that is Trumps speeches, and the NY Times can regain a little respect.

Who gets to define what civil disobedience is and isnt? Who makes the judgment call on whether a protest had crossed that line? If the answer is law enforcement, I sure as shit wont trust their definiton or their judgment call. Especially considering there are plenty of examples of cops manipulating protestors with techniques like herding them into areas to make the protest qualify as disruptive, or slowing protestors from leaving an area until a curfew time passed to justify making arrests.

And perhaps most importantly, if first amemndment rights are found to have been violated, will we be able to actually hold the people responsible accountable? If we cannot hold them accountable for violating constitutional rights, then they have no business enforcing laws that they would be allowed to violate with impunity.

Hikewne posted...

It really was hard to follow Idahos legal argument here. It seemed to be far reaching to the point that they want to invalidate EMTALA, but then it somehow became Idahos law is compliant with EMTALA.

Since when did bad legal arguments get in the way of the SC gutting both legal protections for people and enforcement tools for the federal government? Kav asking about the intent of the law is a pretty strong signal hell twist himself into knots to support Idaho. Thomas and Alito dont give a fuck so long as they can screw the liberals over (and anyone else along with them is acceptable collateral damage). Roberts and Gorsuch dont have any need for maintaining the pretense that theyre fair-minded. And I believe ACB is leaning against Idaho as much as I believed she was being honest about respecting Roe as settled law.

TheGoldenEel posted...

lol at the optimism

the article says the chamber of commerce is planning to sue immediately

this will certainly be blocked by a trump appointed judge before it even goes into effect

Oh yeah, I forgot that injunctions to block any sort of enforcement is a thing. So yeah, this rule is, like so many things that might actually help workers, worth less than the paper it was printed on.

But hey, at least the FTC tried, as opposed to actively working to undermine labor rights. Although the logic of the conservative members about how noncompete clauses encourage investment in training and worker retention is fucking laughable. Im not sure what would be sadder, them knowing its an outright lie or actually believing the bullshit they spewed.

sfcalimari posted...

Sadly it fails the important legal test of "what would a late 18th century white slave owner do"

Oh for sure. Give it a year, maaaaaybe two and itll be on the Supreme Courts chopping block. They need to remind us were nothing but disposable wage slaves.

May this be the first in a long string of victories for worker unions.

LonelyStoner posted...

Holy shit, my copies of Soul Silver and Heart Gold without the cases goes for $150 a piece

Yeah, a lot of the older Pokemon games go for super crazy amounts for some reason. Collectors man, they'll pay out the nose for a lot of things.

If you can't get Platinum, then it's hard to justify the original D/P over the remakes on the Switch. It at least solves the problem of the agonizingly slow speed of the game, addresses some of the Pokedex availability via the Underground (which is absolutely amazing in the remakes), and whatever jankiness the games introduced I honestly didn't notice.

But then, I'm a weirdo who goes against the grain by disliking Gen II, really enjoying Gen III, and for my hipster moment I loved Gen V before it was cool to do so. So I probably have super rose-tinted glasses.

It's a lot of pretty words, but what's the actions Japan can even take in this instance? As far as military defense, their constitution literally prohibits them from even having a military or using war as a means to solve international disputes, and while they do have the Japanese Self-Defense Force it's not exactly controversy-free. And considering it was Shinzo Abe who wanted to amend Article 9 to legitimize JSDF's existence, that's not exactly an endorsement you want to have.

Economically Japan is currently ranked 4th, having fallen just behind Germany last year, and to say that Germany is an exceedingly distant 3rd is an understatement. China's economy is nearly 4 times that of Japan's, and the US' is nearly 8 times larger. And while Europe is at least somewhat backed by being somewhat unified under the EU, Japan doesn't have nearly that kind of political leverage.

Like, I love the sentiment. It's fantastic to try and reassure the US that we don't have to follow the foreign policy we had in the 70's and 80's where we were one of two dominant superpowers, and someone had to take on the role defending against the USSR's aggressive expansion of their 'dictatorship under the cloak of communism.' But man, just from a sheer military and economic standpoint, it's hard to justify feeling like anyone else could even contribute meaningfully.

DiScOrDtHeLuNaTiC posted...

I liked how the show demonstrated the difference between benders who work with physical matter (water/ice/blood, earth/stone/metal) and insubstantial substances (air, fire/lightning): an Airbender, for all practical purposes, always has access to their element; likewise, Firebenders can generate flame with their breath. But if you put Waterbenders or Earthbenders in places where they have no access to their element (plopping Toph on a boat in the middle of a lake, or Katara in a desert) they're almost useless.

The show did work to show ways around those as well. Airbenders always have access to air of course, but without sufficient area to build up pressure a solid enough cell is still reasonably impervious (especially if made a sphere to disperse any strong force). That firebreathing you mentioned was really only something Iroh and Zuko displayed, and even then sustained cold probably keeps them tamped down.

The real problem is waterbenders, because their treatment had to be inhumane to keep them contained. Constant dry air, exceedingly limited water to drink to make dehydration perpetual, etc. Katara even demonstrated that a small amount of sweat gave her enough water to break out of a prison. And of course Hama made it clear how powerful bloodbending is, and thats not even going into how not-child-friendly it would be to literally rip the water inside a person out instead of turning them into a puppet.

And I think that kind of helps highlight why Team Avatar is so strong. These kids are *creative*, and rapidly expand their knowledge by either incorporating new techniques and understanding from others, or adapting to new situations in ways more rigidly-minded benders wouldnt think of. Theres several instances of Team Avatar using stances and movements more akin to the other elements own techniques for their bending, and Iroh even states how he developed lightning redirection based on watching waterbending.

Prismsblade posted...

Im not sure why it matters that her talent is unique. But Her earth bending right out the gate was likely second only to the earth bending king. And that was before she learned to bend metal.

This is somewhat addressed with her small backstory on learning earthbending from the badgermoled, but its re-emphasized during Aang and Zukos fieldtrip, albeit indirectly. Bending in all of its forms predated human benders, and Toph learning it directly from the species that developed it instinctually seems to have given her an edge over people who learned it based on techniques passed down over hundreds of years. Zuko and Aangs firebending techniques coming from the dragons also gave them an edge I think. Avatar as a series is very much a be in tune with spirits and nature philosophy, so the closer to the natural techniques a persons bending is, the stronger it will be.

And most times the team was in trouble she usually either wasnt around or preoccupied. Like for your aforementioned event. That and at least in the show I dont think she ever had a serious fight that pushed her to her limit.

Her limitations stem more from the direct contact her bending requires. Any fight or situation where she literally cant feel the earth puts her at an immense disadvantage, with the airship fights, and Combustion Man in particular where he was far enough away she couldnt sense him, completely neutering her ability to do anything. Toph is either insanely strong, or completely vulnerable, no real in-between.

Shes a blind person with absolutely none of the usual weaknesses they have. Shes immune to deceit, sneak atks, and due to how rare her ability is most opponents have no clue how to even counter it. Which gives her a significant and inherit advantage over most foes.

A technique she likely never would have learned without being blind in the first place. Even if she had been super sheltered and tried to run out without being blind, the disability gave her the need to learn earthbending the way she did. Id say its a well-earned advantage, especially because she also had to learn to use her seismic sense to make up for her shortcomings of not otherwise being able to see or adapt to her opponents. Aang in particular caused her problems in their first fight specifically because of how light on his feet he is, and having never fought an Airbender and not being able to know how to react to his movements. His blow that knocks her out of the ring was executed while he was in the air; she literally has no way to fight that kind of bending at that moment.

Shes still a great character but idk why they even bother making her blind.

It presents unique storytelling opportunities, was used to great effect, and allowed demonstrations of earthbending beyond what was standard at the time in the world. You might as well ask why Geordi was blind in Star Trek TNG when is VISOR made up for most of the shortcomings there and was only relevant a handful of times.

Shamino posted...

So the party that constantly whines about the economy doesn't want to help the economy by fixing the bridge so trade can resume faster?

Considering a number of GOP traitors are on record saying they would rather let any number of initiatives they approve of fail rather than risk them being touted as wins for Biden? Absolutely. We are literally livestock to them, animals to breed and raise as cheaply as possible so we can spend our lives working for their benefit.

Hell, Id argue they view people as less than livestock, because no one actually has much in the way of contempt for a cow or chicken.

FunWithAFryPan posted...

If its true that the future of this country hinges on this election, and its true that his inaction on Israel-Palestine may cost him votes, shouldnt he want to take a stronger stance on Israel, for the good of the nation, even if he was completely indifferent about innocent Palestinian lives?

Its not clear whether that actually will gain him votes. As many people as there are unhappy with is handling of Israel, theres likely to be just as much if not more backlash from more centeist Dem voters if he were to take a harder stance against Israel. All were seeing is 10% of voters in a primary, that was pretty much already decided before it began, who if theyre smart will still vote Biden anyway in the general because the alternative is losing our democracy to a known criminal with aspirations of being a dictator.

cjsdowg posted...

Biden doing that now. So what s the difference.

The rest of their policies?

If both choices are going to result in the same outcome for the Israel/Palestine conflict, then its not a meaningful factor right now. Retracting support for Biden, as one of only two people with a chance of winning the White House this November, will not change that outcome. Hell, I dont think Biden retracting all of his support from Israel, taking back all our weapons, and blasting Kumbaya in the Middle East will stop Israel at this point.

So if the choice of president, which I remind you is only meaningfully between Biden and Trump, doesnt affect the outcome in Israel then its a meaningless factor in who you vote for. The other policy positions are where you have to make your decision, and I and hopefully most voters are not willing to throw our democracy away by letting an insurrectionist and criminal back into the White House.

Focus on the change you can make, and dont let perfect be the enemy of the good. Especially when Trump is actively campaigning on the premise that he will be a dictator and that as president he is above the law.

Cemith posted...

It will.

Remember rich people are just south of impervious to consequences.

He's lost a LOT in Civil Court which means, cosmically, that he's going to be fine criminally.

Don't ask me how I know. I just do.

On top of this, re: wins in civil court? Winning the case is easy. Actually collecting on the judgement is tantamount to impossible. Its the same reason why despite Alex Jones being ordered to pay up in the Sandy Hook defamation trial, he hasnt and probably never will have to give up a damn cent to the families.

Really, civil trials are just there to make it look like the rich will be held accountable. Its all the same dog and pony show that the federal trials are, just with the lip service of them being found liable. No one actually pays the full amount, if they pay at all.

Izuka and Lekain from Fire Emblem Path of Radiance/Radiant Dawn

Absolute scumbags, the both of them. Different reasons entirely of course, but I greatly enjoy using different characters to kill both of them because so many people have reasons to be the ones to do them in.

IdiotMachine posted...

Theres no winning or losing, this is an opinion of mine, and my opinion is my version of reality for me, based on my experiences.

Considering you seem to be unwilling to accept external inputs that conflict with your opinion, and arent basing yours on anything other than your experience which is a drop in the ocean compared to the actual real data we have, its no wonder you think Im unpleasant to be around. I have no fucks to give with people like you, your intentional ignorance shouldnt be tolerated, and your opinions that would actively hurt society if they were implemented (and we have proof of that since your proposal is literall what the US healthcare system is) should be scorned and rejected.

You dont get the benefit of polite conversation when your stance is one based off of ignorance and baseless assumption rather than actual real facts.

Itachi157 posted...

Dude I thought we were discussing whether or not its generally socially acceptable for a teacher (male or female) to do porn or have an OnlyFans (its not btw).

I dont know how this jumped to me condoning and excusing rape. But congrats I guess, your post is the most unhinged, manic and crazy response Ive ever gotten from someone on CE.

You claimed a man would be fired for having an OnlyFans. I provided evidence that men have had literal worse crimes covered. Actual, real evidence that men havent been fired for doing worse than having an OnlyFans.

So one of two things are true:
1) A man will be fired for having an OnlyFans, but not sexually assaulting a student
2) A man will not be fired for having an OnlyFans as a logical conclusion based on him not being fired for commiting actual crimes

So yes, I believe your assumption of the first case makes you someone who excuses sexual assault and rape. If you honestly believe a man would be fired for having an OnlyFans, something that is not a crime, while at the same time not acknowledging that men have and continue to get away with far worse, you are at best ignorant of how the world works. And that ignorance, which at this point I have to assume is intentional because thats the only way to maintain that level of cognitive dissonance, is tantamount to excusing far worse crimes that have actually happened because you believe a lesser offense would be punished.

Edit: Oh hey look, and I got moderated for trolling. The post that actually provided evidence that criminals have gotten away with far worse than an OnlyFans account by our institutions to prove that no, a man would not likely be fired for the same reason this female teacher was. Apparently providing actual evidence that men get away with crimes and women get punished for violating bullshit puritanical standards is trolling.

Itachi157 posted...

I just find it funny how many people are incredulous at the fact that people raise eyebrows at a teacher having an OnlyFans or doing porn because well how else is she supposed to make money?! What happened to bootstraps!?!?

The vast majority of people get by, and the vast majority of them are not on OF. This is not something that most people take or consider as an option. If youre a teacher, you should know that by societys standards this is not an option for you. And if you go through with it anyway, make DAMN sure youre foolproof anonymous. Because otherwise youre playing with fire, big time. Male or female.

Itachi157 posted...

Im not sure what the nope is in response to, but if you think a male teacher would get away with having a known OnlyFans and that all the staff and parents would be fine with it because hes a man, then you live on a different planet. His ass would be gone.

What must it be like to live with this kind of cognitive dissonance? To be this blind and ignorant to the fact that men in education get away with actual documented sexual harrassment, abuse, and rape, and instead claim theyd be fired for nude pictures that dont hurt anyone?

Itachi157 posted...

No, this isnt about chud Christians trying to restrict womens bodies because of the Bible or whatever. If a male teacher had an OnlyFans, the same thing would happen to him. Being a teacher who works with kids and also doing porn is just a taboo/breaking a huge professional and social norm. I can guarantee the same rule stands in many countries without Christianity.

Oh you can fuck all the way off with this!

Larry Nasser was able to molest girls for years becuase his ass was covered. Jim Jordan did nothing about the sexual abuse perpetrated by a coach he was in charge of.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_Gymnastics_sex_abuse_scandal

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_State_University_abuse_scandal

We have judges throwing out sexual abuse and rape lawsuits against men all the damn time because they accuse the victim of encouraging the assault based on clothing or behavior. We have men constantly getting no or zero sentences because the judge doesnt want to ruin their future, giving no justice to the actual victim.

I cannot emphasize enough how shitty of a human being you and your ilk are. I dont believe in hell, but I want to just so that I can believe that people like you who downplay or outright deny that our insitutions are complicit in actual sexual assault and rape can suffer along with the actual child molestors and rapists. You and your kind make it possible for those actual criminals to get away with their crimes because you refuse to believe the system isnt rigged in their favor, and refuse to allow the people who actually give a shit about protecting children from doing what would actually help.

So Ill just settle with a Go fuck yourself and pray like hell youre never responsible for children in any capacity, because I dont think youd actually be capable of keeping them safe.

Jerry_Hellyeah posted...

I imagine it's quite a bit more difficult to find naked pictures of Shel Silverstein.

Deflecting from the obvious comparison that its alright for one person to be directlu linked to sexual content and still be acceptable, but another is not.

Apparrently the type of media defines whats acceptable at what isnt? For the people thinking it was okay to fire her, what if she also just wrote erotica? What if she did commissions of artwork instead, would it have been fine if she only drew human porn, or could she have made furry porn too?

Maybe we should designate specific genres of porn she could have done. Would there have been issues if she made her videos as a submissive to a man, to better fit your conservative worldview of her rightful place as a woman? Or maybe lesbian porn would have been fine, since so many conservatives are fine with watching lesbian porn while actively working to undermine their rights.

Or, and hear me out, maybe you all should mind your goddamn fucking business.

NoMeLx22x posted...

I love when pressed about what policy they would implement if they had power people like TC just don't answer at all and instead whine about how the online left are meanie weenies.

Meanwhile, they ignore actual people in power that are enacting extremely harmful legislation and pretending they don't understand how thats infinitely more dangerous then the mean people online they're so scared of.

Its literally the only card conservatives have. They blamed so many groups for having a victim mentality holding them back just to distract from the fact that all they have is playing the victim. They just got bitchy because people recognized that the groups they were demonizing actually were victims of their conservative racist and homophobic policies, and ramped up the victimhood because by their twisted logic that should have made people that have empathy sympathetic to them. They dont actually care about whether people are being harmed, they just think they need to whine the loudest to get peoples sympathy.

IdiotMachine posted...

Not that Ive seen ever since I got out of NYC. I come to my doctors appointment at 4pm, Im seen at 4pm. Its amazing. I needed an ultrasound with some specialty elastic measuring or something that had to be done at the hospital and not at an outpatient center, and I got an appointment offered the same day (though I wanted one later). My daughter needed tongue tie surgery, and she got one scheduled the day of discharge from the hospital after birth (day 3 of her life).

Well that just proves everything! Your anecdotal evidence absolutely trumps everything every single study, even those sponsored by conservative political groups, that moving to universal health care will save money and not be a detriment to our medical services.

Let me guess, your logic was NYC is filled with Democrats, so my healthcare problems are their fault! as opposed to Our national system of insurance is screwing over everyone because of chasing shareholder profits, just be because you moved to someplace that wasnt as strained.

Jeff_AKA_Snoopy posted...

There are usually provisions about how you are a professional 24/7 and conduct in public that is not "teacher-like" can lead to termination.

Which lets be fair, we have used to our advantage to get conservative chuds fired from all sorts of jobs for taking part in white supremacist rallies or Jan 6th. So those kinds of clauses certainly do serve a purpose, and I wouldnt suggest getting rid of them.

I do think that this application of them is utter bullshit of course, but thats what I fault the administration for, not for having such a clause in the first place.

IdiotMachine posted...

Prove to me it doesnt.

As I figured, youre a coward and a liar. You made the claim, put up or shut up.

Actually, just do the latter. The world will be a better place if you kept the soggy wad of bacon you call a brain from spilling its thoughts out.

BlueBoy675 posted...

As someone who works in an ER I can assure there are plenty of people who treat it like a clinic. They will come in for the most mundane, non emergent issues

I mean, its not as if in 2012 the GOP presidential canditate literally told poor people that couldnt afford insurance to go to the ER if they couldnt pay, tying up our critical resources instead of championing a plan that would allow them to get cheaper preventative treatment.

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/129937-team-obama-jumps-on-romney-for-saying-ers-a-care-plan-for-uninsured/

And if this is their baseline assumption, that ERs cover the gap, then of course thats going to be the only option available. Because the GOP have deliberately designed it that way.

super_felicia posted...

It could have photos and videos of her though? Kids will make fun of it possibly and idk its just a bit of an area thats off for a teacher teaching young children I cant explain it well

Then teach the children not to be assholes. If they make fun of the teacher for it, educate them on not doing that. Dont punish the teacher because parents dont want to tell little Billy to not be a bully.

And give me a break, should elementary school teachers not be allowed to have sex with their significant others? Would you want them fired if they were caught wearing something risque while on a date?

Or what about other social taboos? What if it was a male teacher working as a bartender serving alcohol? Say he properly cards all his patrons, and trusts the door staff to keep underaged people out. Should he be fired from the school for working in an environment not appropriate for his students to be in?

Icky feelings are not the basis for policy. No children are harmed because their teacher shows themselves naked on a camera online. Parents need to teach their children to not harrass people if something like this is discovered. And parents sure as fuck need to make sure the correct controls are in place so their kids shouldnt be able to visit adult websites anyway.

Basically, its not the responsibility of the teacher to avoid making you feel squicked out by what she does in her own private time. You are responsible for your own feelings and tempering them against the reality of the situation, you cant foist that on others just because you cant work through it yourself.

IdiotMachine posted...

This is exactly my point. The US healthcare system sucks right now. However, I dont want everything to be free, because itll be ripe for abuse.

As I said above, prove to me that it will be abused to such an extent that it will be a significant detriment to society. None of this half-baked assumptions, not anecdotes. Actual, real, reputably sourced studies that show that universal health care, when properly funded via taxes and used for the benefit of all members of the population, will be abused to the point of non-function. Not with the Tories or other conservative parties deliberately sabotaging it to prove that it doesnt work, not based on studies funded by think-tanks in the pockets of the insurance companies deliberately skewing the data. Actual, real proof.

And Ill bet you cant provide that proof, because it doesnt exist.

Your opinion that all people are shitty and looking to take advantage of a system does not justify robbing the majority of good, hardworking people a service that will benefit everyone. Yes, some people absolutely will abuse the system. But you are doing more harm by championing a system that has and continues to fail us than those people ever will bilking the system.

Heres a hint: Life is a lot better when youre not a corporate bootlicker.

UAZaqwert posted...

Anything provided for "free" is usually abused. You want some sort of incentive for people to use resources wisely and not be calling an ambulance because they stubbed their toe.

Just because youre a sociopath who thinks everyone would abuse the system because you would (that is the conservative mindset after all, everyone is trying to screw other people over) doesnt mean its actually true.

Go on, prove to me it would happen. Show me all the countries with universal health care where people abuse the system in such record numbers that it costs their country more money than we pay right now to fund the shareholders and CEOs of our for-profit insurance industries. Show me how many cities are bogged down by people calling ambulances for every minor inconvenience. If youre going to make these claims, show us all the fucking proof!

Your half-baked assumptions on the shittiness of other people is not proof. Your vague feelings on how much money it would waste is not proof. Your contempt for anyone who gets more of a direct benefit from the system than you is not proof. Its all you being a petulant child who refuses to acknowledge that, while universal healthcare systems are not perfect, they are a hell of a lot better than our system where our insurance companies have actually demonstrated that they do not put your well-being and health above their bottom line.

So many slut-shamers in this topic. People like Itachi and Leo have the same mindset of those in the 1800s; only unmarried women are allowed to be schoolteachers because of some idiotic puritans a few centuries back decided that oppressing people over doing something our bodies are literally designed to do was a good idea.

Meanwhile, if it was a sports coach that got caught molesting their students, the administration would cover that shit up in a heartbeat. Its never been about protecting children with these people, all they care about is trying to convince the world that women should only have sex to make babies, and that it should be as miserable for them as possible.

Im starting to become convinced that conservative men have a pathalogical fear of their own erections, and are lashing out at everyone else because of it.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


But on the other hand, I'll bet he felt like he was a complete badass hero when he made the shot. And isn't that what's most important? /sarcasm

Mistere_Man posted...

Please dont get me wrong, I am in no way defending this, I just want a explanation on what the hell happened. Nobody shot, but somehow she was shot doesnt cut it imo.

Its not confusing if you actually read the entire article. Half of it is dedicated to every single action the sniper took leading up to the shot that killed the child, including detailing that he wasnt using equipment that gave him clear visibility into the trailer and shot at a silhouette of the man without being able to identify whether anyone was in front of or behind him.

It took two hours between when the mother was killed until the sniper killed the girl, after which the man took his own life.

Yes, I read those first couple paragraphs and I see where the message was slightly garbled leading to your question. But had you actually taken the time to read the whole article, it would have explained it clearly.

https://www.kcur.org/news/2024-03-25/a-missouri-police-sniper-killed-a-2-year-old-girl-why-did-he-take-the-shot

This likely made the rounds back when it happened, but this is yet another fantastic example of how much more dangerous our law enforcement is by virtue of them being able to get away with anything. 100% failure from start to finish, an entire 800-page report detailing those failures, and yet the cop not only isnt punished but is still fucking employed by the department.

The only thing more sickening is the description of how, when he was told what he did, that all he could think of was how it was going to screw him over. And all his law enforcement buddies made sure it didnt. I dont believe for a second he feels an ounce of remorse over killing a 2-year-old. All of us, men, women, and children, are just target dummies for wanna-be heroes itching to pull the trigger.

Xatrion posted...

Mind, I've been modded for suggesting the same thing.

Yup, just saw the moderation. Can I try and use the excuse that it was in jest or just wanting a discussion? Seems to work for all the right-wing trolls and sealions around here.

Scardude posted...

He's really pointing out how the justice system can be rigged. Will this change anything?

Not a chance, because its always been rigged from the start. People like Trump are just no longer bothering to keep the curtain up because they no longer have to. All of his trials, each and every one of them, are seeming more and more like theyre intended to tell the public The system is, has been, and always will be rigged against you no matter what. Theyre basically taking the naive notion that all people are equal under the law and bitch slapping us across the face with it to put us in our place.

I mean, look at how brazen CEOs, investors, etc. have been about publicly venting how frustrated they are with calls for living wages and work-life balance. Theyre outright admitting they dont give two shits about anyone and would gladly throw us all under the bus, and half our population is actively cheering them on to do so. They can do this because they know there wont be any repurcussions; they have all the power, theyve bought and paid for our legislative, executive, and judicial systems to their advantage and know we cant fight back.

Hell, I may get modded for my call to lop their heads off in a remake of the French Revolution, but do you see me actually pulling out the blade sharpener? No you dont, and no one else is either. Well grumble our discontent about how our lives are being made worse, lose some karma if we get too aggressive, and then just go back to our daily lives. None of us, whether here or anywhere in the country, actually have the guts to fight back in a way that would actually be effective.

Seriously, can we just get out the damn guillotines already?

Community service? Fucking community service?! Oh yeah, hell definitely be doing that. /s

Why the hell did anyone even bothering bringing charges in the first place if this is the best they can do? This is just an embarrassment, and at this point theres not even a pretense that we have a functioning justice system anymore.

AlCalavicci posted...

Lmao. For those who don't want to click the link, this is the summary:

Student : Charlie Kirk has said a bunch of racist things

Rittenhouse : What has Charlie Kirk said that is racist? *crowd erupts* Wait, we're going to have a dialogue about this. What has he said?

Student : *brings receipts, lists things he has said that are racist*

Rittenhouse : I don't know about any of those things.

Student: Well I just told you what they are. Does it sound racist?

Rittenhouse: No comment.

*crowd erupts*

*Rittenhouse runs away*

Holy fucking shit, he cant even sealion correctly. This is so childish I actually think we could actually placate him with a pacifier and blankie.

ai123 posted...

Being discouraged from seeing family and friends.

Being verbally undermined/criticised.

Being sidelined when it comes to decision making, especially financial.

These are some pretty big ones. Id also like to add that an abuser can also use expressions of not knowing what to do if their partner left them, including the possibility of harming themselves, as leverage to make their partner feel guilty over considering leaving.

TC, highly recommend this resource (assuming you are US based, if you are not there are hopefully similar services where you are).

https://www.thehotline.org/identify-abuse/understand-relationship-abuse/

This should help explain some of the signs that are harder to immediately see, and there are resources for contacting someone to talk through these concerns you have.

Smallville posted...

Have you ever read anything about, that through most of human history pair bonding and monogamy was the norm......

Aggressively social was not meant to imply romantic or mating connections, just that socialization is a huge part of how our brains function, allowing us to survive as a species. We form large communities and families for instance, and its part of why we have such strong impulses with regards to in-groups and out-groups. Those in-group are aggressively protected and defended from any out-groups seen as a threat, even if that out-group is another set of humans. Its also part of why those who are socially isolated gravitate towards any group that will accept them, because our need to be a part of a social group is that big of a driving force in how we live.

As far as monogamy vs polyamory goes, that comes down to as much our created social constructs as anything else, and how we culturally make those connections. I know there have been cultures that recognized varying levels of relationships a lot better than we do in the modern era (especially in the US, where we have such a puritanical view on relationships that even having friends of the opposite gender can be viewed as a threat to a partner).

UT1999 posted...

really? maybe , like most other great apes chimps , gorillas also very social....many humans are not though

Individual humans may not be, but as a species we are aggressively social. I believe theres some thoughts Ive seen floated around that this contributed to us being able to domesticate dogs, another highly social predator species, but theres no way to know for certain.

UT1999 posted...

you guys in bad relationship why didn't you just very quickly break it off?

So different degrees of bad can make it easier or harder to break off. And ironically the worst relationships, the ones where a partner is abusive physically or emotionally, are usually the hardest to break off of.

Like, a bad relationship can be as simple as the two people not really connecting. Some people may try to stick it out to see if that connection forms, but the relationship I had where this happened I just flat out said This isnt working and that was more or less the end of it. I wasnt really in a spot where I felt like I could bridge the gap, and so breaking it off wasnt particularly difficult on my end. Cant speak for her of course, nor would I presume to.

On the opposite side, I was in a long-distance relationship for just under two years that was abusive. You would think being an LDR would make it easier, but no, not when your phone is constantly exploding with messages from your partner freaking out because youre not spending every minute of your free time with her. I was isolated from my friends because she was paranoid they were going to set me up with someone else, and at the time it was easier to give in to her demands than deal with the fallout of her being upset I wasnt talking to her. I was even told the relationship didnt look healthy by friends and family, but I was young and dumb and figured they were overreacting. It only ended because at one point I lost my temper, and she broke it off with me as a result. Thank the gods.

The fact that HOAs literally have the ability to put a lien on your property for no reason other than to be able to leverage literally taking your home away in order to conform to their standards is asinine. Whatever good they may do, and I live in one that isnt tyrannical thank god, is very much not worth having that threat in their back pocket.

2010 The Year We Make Contact

Yes, I actually like this over 2001.

Im copying over a post I made on the Star Trek board a few years back specifically talking about Dukat post-Waltz.

Alright, so this is coming from probably the only person in existence who actually liked the post-Waltz Dukat, and saw it as both a natural evolution of his character and a very good way to loop him into Sisko's plot with the Prophets and the Pah-Wraiths.

Dukat's rationalization for The Occupation wasn't limited to just Waltz. Bits and pieces of it were shown throughout the run of DS9 beforehand, especially with regards to how he thought he was a much more benevolent overseer than he was being given credit for. He thought he deserved the love of the Bajoran people for cutting back on the harsh punishments, providing more food, etc. Hell, he had a whole conversation about it with Weyoun during their stint on the station, where he asked with all sincerity why the Bajorans didn't have a statue erected in his honor. He'd always been delusional about his role in The Occupation, Waltz was just Sisko finally confronting him about it in a far more blunt manner than he'd been able to for the past five years. So as far as whether I liked Dukat's rationalization? Yeah, it fits perfectly with the character we'd seen for the previous five years, no question.

As for the aftermath, Dukat essentially gave in, and decided that if everyone was going to see him as the villain no matter what, then he might as well finally do something (in his mind) to deserve it. If he can't get the respect of Sisko as a friendly rival, he'll get that respect by achieving, to paraphrase a comment he made to Weyoun before they lost DS9, "A true victory by making Sisko realize it was wrong to oppose him in the first place. To force him to acknowledge his greatness." If he can't get the love of the Bajoran people by treating them marginally better than a brutish dictator would, he'll make them love him through the power of the Pah-Wraith. It may have been madness that drove him to that point, but everything after Waltz, to me, seems just as intelligent and cunning as ever. And that shows far more than his madness in future episodes after Waltz.

I don't think it was just the loss of Ziyal that drove him to that point either, it was more the straw that broke the camel's back. He was already losing it when he went looking for her during the evacuation of the station, ignoring Damar's pleas to leave as soon as possible. He had victory within his grasp, and it slipped through his fingers in mere seconds; the Cardassian people would almost certainly not back him after such a defeat, and the Dominion likely wouldn't allow him to keep his position as head of the Cardassian government for much longer either, if not outright execute him. Literally all he has at this point is Ziyal, there's nothing left. Hell, he even forgave her as soon as she admitted to playing a part in his defeat, and clung to her even after Damar shot her despite his insistence earlier that any traitor would deserve no mercy. Losing the battle nearly broke him, and losing Ziyal finally pushed him over the edge.

This is also why I like his involvement with the Pah-Wraiths. Up until now, the Bajoran religion was nothing but superstition, or at best primitive Bajoran culture trying to make sense of what are nothing but aliens dwelling in a wormhole. He paid them little mind until they handed him his greatest military defeat, at the behest of their Emissary Sisko. In this case, it was he that was forced to acknowledge the greatness of the Prophets, and see that they truly were a source of power. But, with at least a passing knowledge of Bajoran culture, he was able to find the Pah-Wraiths. And if they were as powerful as the Prophets and something that the Prophets themselves seemed to fear, then of course it makes sense to ally with them. If the Prophets were more powerful than even the Dominion military might, and the Pah-Wraiths as their opposition were equally powerful, then of course Dukat is going to pursue that power. Especially if it lets him deal a blow against both Kira, who he interacts with more than any Bajoran and is a deeply religious person that he wants to hurt for all the times she spurned him, and Sisko, the Emissary of the Prophets and probably the person who he wants to respect him more than anyone.

Something to keep in mind is that, from my understanding at least, this would ban the app if the company operations in the US wasnt sold to a US buyer. So TikTok could still be a thing if someone were willing to buy it up (and the owner wanted to sell it), which seems likely given that its still a powerful social media tool.

But make no mistake, none of this actually gives a shit about our privacy. If Congress cared about that TikTok would be a drop in the bucket compared to the privacy violations businesses make every single day in this country. This is just xenophobia and racism wrapped up to look like privacy protection.

Karovorak posted...

I'm 100% convinced that there was some guy high up in Boeing who said "Wait, why has QA such a high budget? We never had any quality issues, I'm sure we can reduce the cost there."

Ive worked in aerospace for about 7 1/2 years now, I can almost guarantee that not only is this correct, but additional comments were along the lines of not a value added department and we cant let them find more things wrong. I have heard the former first-hand from the manager at my previous company about why QA isnt important, and the latter second-hand where I currently work allegedly from our own Quality Assurance System lead when we were exploring getting more advanced inspection equipment. Trust me, management across aerospace is actively hostile towards QA as a function and literally only tolerates it because AS9100 required rigorous documentation. But as Boeing has demonstrated, clearly you can get away with actively undermining QA and face zero meaningful consequences.

thronedfire2 posted...

car manufacturing requires that exact same paper trail. the airlines problem is just not wanting to pay the people to handle it because they haven't been sued enough yet

Im pretty sure airlines have made the same calculation that Ford made with the Pinto: Lawsuit payouts are less expensive than actually implemeting the correct processes and procedures. And given our joke of a justice system, theyre right.

mybbqrules posted...

This.

Undecided voters are people who have a modicum of humility so they can't just outright say "I support christofascist dictatorships".

Enough humility to suffer embarassment, not nearly enough to actually reflect on why they feel that embarassment and consider changing their viewpoints.