Board 8 > leftist politics topic

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4
metroid composite 09/13/18 11:15:33 PM #52:	FL81 posted... capitalism is pretty great There's definitely a lot that I like about capitalism, there's a lot of videogames that I'm not sure would exist without capitalism as a structure. On the other hand, there's a lot that's wrong with capitalism, like advertising. Fuck ads in general. Also microtransactions in videogames, and specifically lootboxes in videogames which basically copied models from gambling and slot machines. Fuck those. So I'm open to replacing captialism maybe. But on the other hand, I reeeealy haven't seen a good proposal for what to replace capitalism with. But there is plenty of good criticism of capitalism going around lately though. ContraPoints for instance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJW4-cOZt8A" data-time=" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AR7ryg1w_IQ" data-time=" --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:908712712] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>FL81 posted...</cite> <quote>capitalism is pretty great</quote> There's definitely a lot that I like about capitalism, there's a lot of videogames that I'm not sure would exist without capitalism as a structure. On the other hand, there's a lot that's wrong with capitalism, like advertising. Fuck ads in general. Also microtransactions in videogames, and specifically lootboxes in videogames which basically copied models from gambling and slot machines. Fuck those. So I'm open to replacing captialism maybe. But on the other hand, I reeeealy haven't seen a good proposal for what to replace capitalism with. But there is plenty of good criticism of capitalism going around lately though. ContraPoints for instance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJW4-cOZt8A" data-time=" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AR7ryg1w_IQ" data-time="</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 09/14/18 12:36:54 AM #53:	we are totally doomed lol there is just no way that any capitalist nation ever stops its growth in the name of profits, and it would take ALL of them agreeing to do so to actually address climate change. we could have a bunch of AVALANCHE style environmental terrorists groups trying to save the planet and the typical american would just be like "oh yeah who is the one trying to destroy the planet the JOB CREATORS or the TERRORISTS", like how everyone is convinced the real threat is antifa and not the facist nazis running the government. holy s, f* Tony Blair and all, but he was pretty much just complicit. so many Bush administration officials would have a lot to answer to if this ever happened stateside.* it would never happen stateside though. powerful politicians are never held accountable for anything because they are all afraid that they will then get held accountable themselves. too many people with too much blood on their hands. i don't know anyone in US politics who would even consider such a thing. not even ocasio-cortez would. <cite>Nrrr posted [p:908717510] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>we are totally doomed lol there is just no way that any capitalist nation ever stops its growth in the name of profits, and it would take ALL of them agreeing to do so to actually address climate change. we could have a bunch of AVALANCHE style environmental terrorists groups trying to save the planet and the typical american would just be like "oh yeah who is the one trying to destroy the planet the JOB CREATORS or the TERRORISTS", like how everyone is convinced the real threat is antifa and not the facist nazis running the government. holy s*, f* Tony Blair and all, but he was pretty much just complicit. so many Bush administration officials would have a lot to answer to if this ever happened stateside. it would never happen stateside though. powerful politicians are never held accountable for anything because they are all afraid that they will then get held accountable themselves. too many people with too much blood on their hands. i don't know anyone in US politics who would even consider such a thing. not even ocasio-cortez would.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 09/14/18 12:46:24 AM #54:	and I love ContraPoints, but how are you seriously going to have a post talking about how you love capitalism except for the bad parts like...advertising. I mean, ads are terrible and I hate them too...but its pretty far down my list of 'unfortunate effects of capitalism' <cite>Nrrr posted [p:908718050] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>and I love ContraPoints, but how are you seriously going to have a post talking about how you love capitalism except for the bad parts like...advertising. I mean, ads are terrible and I hate them too...but its pretty far down my list of 'unfortunate effects of capitalism'</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/14/18 2:17:37 AM #55:	Nrrr posted... and I love ContraPoints, but how are you seriously going to have a post talking about how you love capitalism except for the bad parts like...advertising. I mean, ads are terrible and I hate them too...but its pretty far down my list of 'unfortunate effects of capitalism' I mean...I was putting things into personal relateable terms as opposed to grand economic terms. Income inequality is currently probably the biggest issue with the current system, but massive wealth gaps have been a big issue at lots of points for lots of political systems. The French Revolution was basically a bunch of peasants killing a bunch of nobles and installing capitalism so that they would not be ridiculously poor, and for this purpose capitalism worked. Massive income inequality gaps is mostly a sign that the system is failing and needs to be replaced (historically this often meant violence, although 1930s America under Roosevelt was a pretty significant economic overhaul and happened in a non-violent way). So like...outside of the massive wealth gaps, which I see more as just a sign of a system in decline, the stuff that stands out as uniquely bad about capitalism compared to older economic systems that came before (feudalism etc) is...among other things advertising (selling people things they do not need; encouraging people to buy more than they need), and the requirement to maximize profits (incentivizing addictive aspects to products like adding gambling aspects to games. Incentivizing increasing prices on life saving drugs to squeeze dying patients for as much money as possible. Incentivizing cheating and bypassing environmental regulations if it will squeeze out more profit). These latter issues conflicting with hard requirements on climate change is why the UN report is saying that a capitalism replacement is probably needed (as opposed to a capitalism overhaul like what happened under Roosevelt). But yes, I do think advertising as a mechanism is one of the flaws with capitalism that may well make it incompatible with a sustainable future (the purpose of advertising is to make people buy things they don't need or want, which is not really compatible with massively reducing our energy consumption). --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:908722255] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>Nrrr posted...</cite> <quote>and I love ContraPoints, but how are you seriously going to have a post talking about how you love capitalism except for the bad parts like...advertising. I mean, ads are terrible and I hate them too...but its pretty far down my list of 'unfortunate effects of capitalism'</quote> I mean...I was putting things into personal relateable terms as opposed to grand economic terms. Income inequality is currently probably the biggest issue with the current system, but massive wealth gaps have been a big issue at lots of points for lots of political systems. The French Revolution was basically a bunch of peasants killing a bunch of nobles and installing capitalism so that they would not be ridiculously poor, and for this purpose capitalism worked. Massive income inequality gaps is mostly a sign that the system is failing and needs to be replaced (historically this often meant violence, although 1930s America under Roosevelt was a pretty significant economic overhaul and happened in a non-violent way). So like...outside of the massive wealth gaps, which I see more as just a sign of a system in decline, the stuff that stands out as uniquely bad about capitalism compared to older economic systems that came before (feudalism etc) is...among other things advertising (selling people things they do not need; encouraging people to buy more than they need), and the requirement to maximize profits (incentivizing addictive aspects to products like adding gambling aspects to games. Incentivizing increasing prices on life saving drugs to squeeze dying patients for as much money as possible. Incentivizing cheating and bypassing environmental regulations if it will squeeze out more profit). These latter issues conflicting with hard requirements on climate change is why the UN report is saying that a capitalism replacement is probably needed (as opposed to a capitalism overhaul like what happened under Roosevelt). But yes, I do think advertising as a mechanism is one of the flaws with capitalism that may well make it incompatible with a sustainable future (the purpose of advertising is to make people buy things they don't need or want, which is not really compatible with massively reducing our energy consumption).</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 09/14/18 2:57:38 AM #56:	Capitalism just recognizes the incentives that naturally exist and uses them to its advantage. Its in a companys best interest to maximize profit. When doing that would lead to behavior with extreme externalities, you can regulate that behavior directly without throwing out all of the benefits that capitalism brings. --- Congrats to BKSheikah for winning the BYIG Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:908723527] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>Capitalism just recognizes the incentives that naturally exist and uses them to its advantage. Its in a companys best interest to maximize profit. When doing that would lead to behavior with extreme externalities, you can regulate that behavior directly without throwing out all of the benefits that capitalism brings.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 09/14/18 4:15:07 AM #57:	metroid composite posted... Nrrr posted... and I love ContraPoints, but how are you seriously going to have a post talking about how you love capitalism except for the bad parts like...advertising. I mean, ads are terrible and I hate them too...but its pretty far down my list of 'unfortunate effects of capitalism' I mean...I was putting things into personal relateable terms as opposed to grand economic terms. Income inequality is currently probably the biggest issue with the current system, but massive wealth gaps have been a big issue at lots of points for lots of political systems. The French Revolution was basically a bunch of peasants killing a bunch of nobles and installing capitalism so that they would not be ridiculously poor, and for this purpose capitalism worked. Massive income inequality gaps is mostly a sign that the system is failing and needs to be replaced (historically this often meant violence, although 1930s America under Roosevelt was a pretty significant economic overhaul and happened in a non-violent way). So like...outside of the massive wealth gaps, which I see more as just a sign of a system in decline, the stuff that stands out as uniquely bad about capitalism compared to older economic systems that came before (feudalism etc) is...among other things advertising (selling people things they do not need; encouraging people to buy more than they need), and the requirement to maximize profits (incentivizing addictive aspects to products like adding gambling aspects to games. Incentivizing increasing prices on life saving drugs to squeeze dying patients for as much money as possible. Incentivizing cheating and bypassing environmental regulations if it will squeeze out more profit). These latter issues conflicting with hard requirements on climate change is why the UN report is saying that a capitalism replacement is probably needed (as opposed to a capitalism overhaul like what happened under Roosevelt). But yes, I do think advertising as a mechanism is one of the flaws with capitalism that may well make it incompatible with a sustainable future (the purpose of advertising is to make people buy things they don't need or want, which is not really compatible with massively reducing our energy consumption). Ahh I see, you meant more that it is a negative feature unique to capitalism that was not present in other economic systems through history. That's certainly the case. I definitely take issue with the idea of massive wealth gaps under capitalism being an issue, that is it working exactly as intended. The problem isn't just "how do we bandaid the poors getting uppity before they kill the rich again", it is "how do we reduce power and incentives to exploit?" But capitalism is a system that encouges and requires the powerful to use that power to exploit as much as they possibly can. It just isn't equipped to deal with climate change. If we had a robust democracy with an engaged, informed, and well organized workers, maybe...but capitalisms natural instinct is to discourage a robust democracy with an engaged, informed, and organized workforce so as to better exploit profit from their labor (and don't forget their leisure). And the corrective method of killing all the rich like in the old days isn't viable when everyone feels out for themselves and has no solidarity or class consciousness and the powerful have nukes and drones and modern surveillance toos. It's socialism or barbarism and we already made our choice, comrades. <cite>Nrrr posted [p:908725468] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>metroid composite posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Nrrr posted...</cite> <quote>and I love ContraPoints, but how are you seriously going to have a post talking about how you love capitalism except for the bad parts like...advertising. I mean, ads are terrible and I hate them too...but its pretty far down my list of 'unfortunate effects of capitalism'</quote> I mean...I was putting things into personal relateable terms as opposed to grand economic terms. Income inequality is currently probably the biggest issue with the current system, but massive wealth gaps have been a big issue at lots of points for lots of political systems. The French Revolution was basically a bunch of peasants killing a bunch of nobles and installing capitalism so that they would not be ridiculously poor, and for this purpose capitalism worked. Massive income inequality gaps is mostly a sign that the system is failing and needs to be replaced (historically this often meant violence, although 1930s America under Roosevelt was a pretty significant economic overhaul and happened in a non-violent way). So like...outside of the massive wealth gaps, which I see more as just a sign of a system in decline, the stuff that stands out as uniquely bad about capitalism compared to older economic systems that came before (feudalism etc) is...among other things advertising (selling people things they do not need; encouraging people to buy more than they need), and the requirement to maximize profits (incentivizing addictive aspects to products like adding gambling aspects to games. Incentivizing increasing prices on life saving drugs to squeeze dying patients for as much money as possible. Incentivizing cheating and bypassing environmental regulations if it will squeeze out more profit). These latter issues conflicting with hard requirements on climate change is why the UN report is saying that a capitalism replacement is probably needed (as opposed to a capitalism overhaul like what happened under Roosevelt). But yes, I do think advertising as a mechanism is one of the flaws with capitalism that may well make it incompatible with a sustainable future (the purpose of advertising is to make people buy things they don't need or want, which is not really compatible with massively reducing our energy consumption).</quote> Ahh I see, you meant more that it is a negative feature unique to capitalism that was not present in other economic systems through history. That's certainly the case. I definitely take issue with the idea of massive wealth gaps under capitalism being an issue, that is it working exactly as intended. The problem isn't just "how do we bandaid the poors getting uppity before they kill the rich again", it is "how do we reduce power and incentives to exploit?" But capitalism is a system that encouges and requires the powerful to use that power to exploit as much as they possibly can. It just isn't equipped to deal with climate change. If we had a robust democracy with an engaged, informed, and well organized workers, maybe...but capitalisms natural instinct is to discourage a robust democracy with an engaged, informed, and organized workforce so as to better exploit profit from their labor (and don't forget their leisure). And the corrective method of killing all the rich like in the old days isn't viable when everyone feels out for themselves and has no solidarity or class consciousness and the powerful have nukes and drones and modern surveillance toos. It's socialism or barbarism and we already made our choice, comrades.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 09/14/18 4:28:15 AM #58:	And I'd like to add that the impending climate doom caused by capitalisms necessary imperialism and growth actually benefits capitalists and disincentivizes stopping it. Right wing fascism is on the rise thanks to things like scary immigrants created, in fact, by the conditions in their country caused by imperial aspirations and climate change. <cite>Nrrr posted [p:908725778] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>And I'd like to add that the impending climate doom caused by capitalisms necessary imperialism and growth actually benefits capitalists and disincentivizes stopping it. Right wing fascism is on the rise thanks to things like scary immigrants created, in fact, by the conditions in their country caused by imperial aspirations and climate change.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mr Lasastryke 09/14/18 10:33:07 AM #59:	what's wrong with advertising? --- Geothermal terpsichorean ejectamenta <cite>Mr Lasastryke posted [p:908736914] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>what's wrong with advertising?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/14/18 10:56:22 AM #60:	LordoftheMorons posted... Capitalism just recognizes the incentives that naturally exist and uses them to its advantage. Its in a companys best interest to maximize profit. When doing that would lead to behavior with extreme externalities, you can regulate that behavior directly without throwing out all of the benefits that capitalism brings. Mmm...the law specifically that companies must maximize profits every quarter or be sued by their shareholders seems particularly troubling. It's not just that they choose things that are bad for the human race, they choose things that are bad for themselves a few years down the line. Did you know that Blockbuster video was working on a streaming video service like Netflix? Yeah, the shareholders voted it down because at the time they were making so much money off of late return fees. Guess what? Now Blockbuster is bankrupt. But this law is actually pretty central to the current capitalist system. It's basically the main anti-internal corruption thermometer that we have right now. I will give credit where credit is due, actually: apparently the current administration is looking to move earnings reports to be every 6 months instead of every 3 months, which is a small step in the right direction (pushes companies to think slightly more long term, slightly). Doesn't really fix the problem, though. I will note that companies can make money just fine without this legal mandate to increase profits every quarter. Private companies have no such mandate, plenty of those do fine. And there are plenty of enormously successful companies in China where again no such mandate exists. --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:908738078] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>LordoftheMorons posted...</cite> <quote>Capitalism just recognizes the incentives that naturally exist and uses them to its advantage. Its in a companys best interest to maximize profit. When doing that would lead to behavior with extreme externalities, you can regulate that behavior directly without throwing out all of the benefits that capitalism brings.</quote> Mmm...the law specifically that companies must maximize profits every quarter or be sued by their shareholders seems particularly troubling. It's not just that they choose things that are bad for the human race, they choose things that are bad for themselves a few years down the line. Did you know that Blockbuster video was working on a streaming video service like Netflix? Yeah, the shareholders voted it down because at the time they were making so much money off of late return fees. Guess what? Now Blockbuster is bankrupt. But this law is actually pretty central to the current capitalist system. It's basically the main anti-internal corruption thermometer that we have right now. I will give credit where credit is due, actually: apparently the current administration is looking to move earnings reports to be every 6 months instead of every 3 months, which is a small step in the right direction (pushes companies to think slightly more long term, slightly). Doesn't really fix the problem, though. I will note that companies can make money just fine without this legal mandate to increase profits every quarter. Private companies have no such mandate, plenty of those do fine. And there are plenty of enormously successful companies in China where again no such mandate exists.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/15/18 12:23:46 AM #61:	https://twitter.com/designmom/status/1040363431893725184 Im a mother of six, and a Mormon. I have a good understanding of arguments surrounding abortion, religious and otherwise. I've been listening to men grandstand about women's reproductive rights, and I'm convinced men actually have zero interest in stopping abortion. Here's why If you want to stop abortion, you need to prevent unwanted pregnancies. And men are 100% responsible for unwanted pregnancies. No for real, they are. Perhaps you are thinking: IT TAKES TWO! And yes, it does take two for _intentional_ pregnancies. But ALL unwanted pregnancies are caused by the irresponsible ejaculations of men. Period. Dont believe me? Let me walk you through it. Lets start with this: women can only get pregnant about 2 days each month. And thats for a limited number of years. That makes 24 days a year a women might get pregnant. But men can _cause_ pregnancy 365 days a year. In fact, if youre a man who ejaculates multiple times a day, you could cause multiple pregnancies daily. In theory a man could cause 1000+ unwanted pregnancies in just one year. And though their sperm gets crappier as they age, men can cause unwanted pregnancies from puberty till death. So just starting with basic biology + the calendar its easy to see men are the issue here. But what about birth control? If a woman doesnt want to risk an unwanted pregnancy, why wouldnt she just use birth control? If a women can manage to figure out how to get an abortion, surely she can get birth control, right? Great questions. Modern birth control is possibly the greatest invention of the last century, and I am very grateful for it. Its also brutal. The side effects for many women are ridiculously harmful. So ridiculous, that when an oral contraception for men was created, it wasnt approved because of the side effects. And the list of side effects was about 1/3 as long as the known side effects for women's oral contraception. https://tinyurl.com/y8zapds5 Theres a lot to be unpacked just in that story, but Ill simply point out (in case you didnt know) that as a society, we really dont mind if women suffer, physically or mentally, as long as it makes things easier for men. But good news, Men: Even with the horrible side effects, women are still very willing to use birth control. Unfortunately its harder to get than it should be. Birth control options for women require a doctors appointment and a prescription. Its not free, and often not cheap. In fact there are many people trying to make it more expensive by fighting to make sure insurance companies refuse to cover it. Oral contraceptives for women cant be acquired easily, or at the last minute. And they don't work instantly. If were talking about the pill, it requires consistent daily use and doesnt leave much room for mistakes, forgetfulness, or unexpected disruptions to daily schedules. And again, the side effects can be brutal. IM STILL GRATEFUL FOR IT PLEASE DONT TAKE IT AWAY. Im just saying women's birth control isnt simple or easy. In contrast, lets look at birth control for men, meaning condoms. Condoms are readily available at all hours, inexpensive, convenient, and dont require a prescription. Theyre effective, and work on demand, instantly. Men can keep them stocked up just in case, so theyre always prepared. Amazing! They are so much easier than birth control options for women. As a bonus, in general, women love when men use condoms. They keep us from getting STDs, they dont lessen our pleasure during sex (Out of characters, but the twitter thread keeps going). --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:908783738] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>https://twitter.com/designmom/status/1040363431893725184 <quote>Im a mother of six, and a Mormon. I have a good understanding of arguments surrounding abortion, religious and otherwise. I've been listening to men grandstand about women's reproductive rights, and I'm convinced men actually have zero interest in stopping abortion. Here's why If you want to stop abortion, you need to prevent unwanted pregnancies. And men are 100% responsible for unwanted pregnancies. No for real, they are. Perhaps you are thinking: IT TAKES TWO! And yes, it does take two for _intentional_ pregnancies. But ALL unwanted pregnancies are caused by the irresponsible ejaculations of men. Period. Dont believe me? Let me walk you through it. Lets start with this: women can only get pregnant about 2 days each month. And thats for a limited number of years. That makes 24 days a year a women might get pregnant. But men can _cause_ pregnancy 365 days a year. In fact, if youre a man who ejaculates multiple times a day, you could cause multiple pregnancies daily. In theory a man could cause 1000+ unwanted pregnancies in just one year. And though their sperm gets crappier as they age, men can cause unwanted pregnancies from puberty till death. So just starting with basic biology + the calendar its easy to see men are the issue here. But what about birth control? If a woman doesnt want to risk an unwanted pregnancy, why wouldnt she just use birth control? If a women can manage to figure out how to get an abortion, surely she can get birth control, right? Great questions. Modern birth control is possibly the greatest invention of the last century, and I am very grateful for it. Its also brutal. The side effects for many women are ridiculously harmful. So ridiculous, that when an oral contraception for men was created, it wasnt approved because of the side effects. And the list of side effects was about 1/3 as long as the known side effects for women's oral contraception. https://tinyurl.com/y8zapds5 Theres a lot to be unpacked just in that story, but Ill simply point out (in case you didnt know) that as a society, we really dont mind if women suffer, physically or mentally, as long as it makes things easier for men. But good news, Men: Even with the horrible side effects, women are still very willing to use birth control. Unfortunately its harder to get than it should be. Birth control options for women require a doctors appointment and a prescription. Its not free, and often not cheap. In fact there are many people trying to make it more expensive by fighting to make sure insurance companies refuse to cover it. Oral contraceptives for women cant be acquired easily, or at the last minute. And they don't work instantly. If were talking about the pill, it requires consistent daily use and doesnt leave much room for mistakes, forgetfulness, or unexpected disruptions to daily schedules. And again, the side effects can be brutal. IM STILL GRATEFUL FOR IT PLEASE DONT TAKE IT AWAY. Im just saying women's birth control isnt simple or easy. In contrast, lets look at birth control for men, meaning condoms. Condoms are readily available at all hours, inexpensive, convenient, and dont require a prescription. Theyre effective, and work on demand, instantly. Men can keep them stocked up just in case, so theyre always prepared. Amazing! They are so much easier than birth control options for women. As a bonus, in general, women love when men use condoms. They keep us from getting STDs, they dont lessen our pleasure during sex</quote> (Out of characters, but the twitter thread keeps going).</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pxlated 09/15/18 8:18:00 AM #62:	metroid composite posted... https://twitter.com/designmom/status/1040363431893725184 Im a mother of six, and a Mormon. I have a good understanding of arguments surrounding abortion, religious and otherwise. I've been listening to men grandstand about women's reproductive rights, and I'm convinced men actually have zero interest in stopping abortion. Here's why If you want to stop abortion, you need to prevent unwanted pregnancies. And men are 100% responsible for unwanted pregnancies. No for real, they are. Perhaps you are thinking: IT TAKES TWO! And yes, it does take two for _intentional_ pregnancies. But ALL unwanted pregnancies are caused by the irresponsible ejaculations of men. Period. Dont believe me? Let me walk you through it. Lets start with this: women can only get pregnant about 2 days each month. And thats for a limited number of years. That makes 24 days a year a women might get pregnant. But men can _cause_ pregnancy 365 days a year. In fact, if youre a man who ejaculates multiple times a day, you could cause multiple pregnancies daily. In theory a man could cause 1000+ unwanted pregnancies in just one year. And though their sperm gets crappier as they age, men can cause unwanted pregnancies from puberty till death. So just starting with basic biology + the calendar its easy to see men are the issue here. But what about birth control? If a woman doesnt want to risk an unwanted pregnancy, why wouldnt she just use birth control? If a women can manage to figure out how to get an abortion, surely she can get birth control, right? Great questions. Modern birth control is possibly the greatest invention of the last century, and I am very grateful for it. Its also brutal. The side effects for many women are ridiculously harmful. So ridiculous, that when an oral contraception for men was created, it wasnt approved because of the side effects. And the list of side effects was about 1/3 as long as the known side effects for women's oral contraception. https://tinyurl.com/y8zapds5 Theres a lot to be unpacked just in that story, but Ill simply point out (in case you didnt know) that as a society, we really dont mind if women suffer, physically or mentally, as long as it makes things easier for men. But good news, Men: Even with the horrible side effects, women are still very willing to use birth control. Unfortunately its harder to get than it should be. Birth control options for women require a doctors appointment and a prescription. Its not free, and often not cheap. In fact there are many people trying to make it more expensive by fighting to make sure insurance companies refuse to cover it. Oral contraceptives for women cant be acquired easily, or at the last minute. And they don't work instantly. If were talking about the pill, it requires consistent daily use and doesnt leave much room for mistakes, forgetfulness, or unexpected disruptions to daily schedules. And again, the side effects can be brutal. IM STILL GRATEFUL FOR IT PLEASE DONT TAKE IT AWAY. Im just saying women's birth control isnt simple or easy. In contrast, lets look at birth control for men, meaning condoms. Condoms are readily available at all hours, inexpensive, convenient, and dont require a prescription. Theyre effective, and work on demand, instantly. Men can keep them stocked up just in case, so theyre always prepared. Amazing! They are so much easier than birth control options for women. As a bonus, in general, women love when men use condoms. They keep us from getting STDs, they dont lessen our pleasure during sex (Out of characters, but the twitter thread keeps going). Good thread. Shame it will change precisely 0 minds --- [various robot sounds] <cite>pxlated posted [p:908795207] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>metroid composite posted...</cite> <quote>https://twitter.com/designmom/status/1040363431893725184 <quote>Im a mother of six, and a Mormon. I have a good understanding of arguments surrounding abortion, religious and otherwise. I've been listening to men grandstand about women's reproductive rights, and I'm convinced men actually have zero interest in stopping abortion. Here's why If you want to stop abortion, you need to prevent unwanted pregnancies. And men are 100% responsible for unwanted pregnancies. No for real, they are. Perhaps you are thinking: IT TAKES TWO! And yes, it does take two for _intentional_ pregnancies. But ALL unwanted pregnancies are caused by the irresponsible ejaculations of men. Period. Dont believe me? Let me walk you through it. Lets start with this: women can only get pregnant about 2 days each month. And thats for a limited number of years. That makes 24 days a year a women might get pregnant. But men can _cause_ pregnancy 365 days a year. In fact, if youre a man who ejaculates multiple times a day, you could cause multiple pregnancies daily. In theory a man could cause 1000+ unwanted pregnancies in just one year. And though their sperm gets crappier as they age, men can cause unwanted pregnancies from puberty till death. So just starting with basic biology + the calendar its easy to see men are the issue here. But what about birth control? If a woman doesnt want to risk an unwanted pregnancy, why wouldnt she just use birth control? If a women can manage to figure out how to get an abortion, surely she can get birth control, right? Great questions. Modern birth control is possibly the greatest invention of the last century, and I am very grateful for it. Its also brutal. The side effects for many women are ridiculously harmful. So ridiculous, that when an oral contraception for men was created, it wasnt approved because of the side effects. And the list of side effects was about 1/3 as long as the known side effects for women's oral contraception. https://tinyurl.com/y8zapds5 Theres a lot to be unpacked just in that story, but Ill simply point out (in case you didnt know) that as a society, we really dont mind if women suffer, physically or mentally, as long as it makes things easier for men. But good news, Men: Even with the horrible side effects, women are still very willing to use birth control. Unfortunately its harder to get than it should be. Birth control options for women require a doctors appointment and a prescription. Its not free, and often not cheap. In fact there are many people trying to make it more expensive by fighting to make sure insurance companies refuse to cover it. Oral contraceptives for women cant be acquired easily, or at the last minute. And they don't work instantly. If were talking about the pill, it requires consistent daily use and doesnt leave much room for mistakes, forgetfulness, or unexpected disruptions to daily schedules. And again, the side effects can be brutal. IM STILL GRATEFUL FOR IT PLEASE DONT TAKE IT AWAY. Im just saying women's birth control isnt simple or easy. In contrast, lets look at birth control for men, meaning condoms. Condoms are readily available at all hours, inexpensive, convenient, and dont require a prescription. Theyre effective, and work on demand, instantly. Men can keep them stocked up just in case, so theyre always prepared. Amazing! They are so much easier than birth control options for women. As a bonus, in general, women love when men use condoms. They keep us from getting STDs, they dont lessen our pleasure during sex</quote> (Out of characters, but the twitter thread keeps going).</quote> Good thread. Shame it will change precisely 0 minds</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheRock1525 09/15/18 10:51:19 PM #63:	I was reading it and she lost me at castration for unwanted pregnancies or federally required vasectomies. --- TheRock ~ I had a name, my father called me Blues. <cite>TheRock1525 posted [p:908833905] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>I was reading it and she lost me at castration for unwanted pregnancies or federally required vasectomies.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 09/16/18 1:46:02 AM #64:	It is incredible that they wouldn't approve the male birth control because of side effects that are actually less bad than the current birth control that women take. I just cannot fathom how that is a reasoning anyone can give with a straight face to deny it and actually be considered anything but a laughingstock amongst their profession. <cite>Nrrr posted [p:908841972] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>It is incredible that they wouldn't approve the male birth control because of side effects that are actually less bad than the current birth control that women take. I just cannot fathom how that is a reasoning anyone can give with a straight face to deny it and actually be considered anything but a laughingstock amongst their profession.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChaosTonyV4 09/16/18 3:21:21 AM #65:	Nrrr posted... It is incredible that they wouldn't approve the male birth control because of side effects that are actually less bad than the current birth control that women take. I just cannot fathom how that is a reasoning anyone can give with a straight face to deny it and actually be considered anything but a laughingstock amongst their profession. Surely theres more to it than that. A lot of the worst side effects from birth control are just extreme versions of what can already happen during a regular menses cycle, and for a lot of women, birth control has good side effects like completely stopping it. Men dont really have a cycle, so what exactly does it do to us? Because if its like...spotting out of the dick, I think anyone can agree thats a dealbreaker. --- Phantom Dust. "I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted [p:908845034] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>Nrrr posted...</cite> <quote>It is incredible that they wouldn't approve the male birth control because of side effects that are actually less bad than the current birth control that women take. I just cannot fathom how that is a reasoning anyone can give with a straight face to deny it and actually be considered anything but a laughingstock amongst their profession.</quote> Surely theres more to it than that. A lot of the worst side effects from birth control are just extreme versions of what can already happen during a regular menses cycle, and for a lot of women, birth control has good side effects like completely stopping it. Men dont really have a cycle, so what exactly does it do to us? Because if its like...spotting out of the dick, I think anyone can agree thats a dealbreaker.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pxlated 09/16/18 5:11:44 AM #66:	TheRock1525 posted... I was reading it and she lost me at castration for unwanted pregnancies or federally required vasectomies. she wasn't seriously suggesting that as a solution. but i agree that because of how that bit was phrased, most people will tune out at that point and write her off as a "crazy man-hating feminazi" or whatever --- [various robot sounds] <cite>pxlated posted [p:908847263] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>TheRock1525 posted...</cite> <quote>I was reading it and she lost me at castration for unwanted pregnancies or federally required vasectomies.</quote> she wasn't seriously suggesting that as a solution. but i agree that because of how that bit was phrased, most people will tune out at that point and write her off as a "crazy man-hating feminazi" or whatever</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/16/18 7:27:49 AM #67:	I think part of the point of those proposals, which I agree seem unreasonable, was that people don't accept laws governing the male body. I don't think she was really seriously proposing them as real solutions. (Those proposals seem invasive and harsh...but then there's a lot of laws currently on the books governing women's bodies that ARE invasive and harsh). It's also...the point she was driving home was that people don't really care about stopping abortions. Take the option of "vasectomy when they come of age, and undo the vasectomy when they are ready for planned kids" proposal. Yeah, this would prevent basically every abortion. Assuming conservatives decided to be equal opportunity in terms of their invasive laws, would they be happy with the outcome of such a law? I doubt it, because under that system women could have as much sex as they wanted without punishment. And conservatives WANT to punish promiscuous women. (Much the same reason restricting access to birth control pills and teaching kids abstinence only education makes zero sense if you want to prevent abortion; both these policies obviously increase abortions). ChaosTonyV4 posted... A lot of the worst side effects from birth control are just extreme versions of what can already happen during a regular menses cycle, and for a lot of women, birth control has good side effects like completely stopping it. Mmm...I never took birth control myself, but it really messed with my mom when she took it, and really messed with my one sister who took it. My general experience with the pill within my family is that it fucked people up bad. (I haven't heard complaints about IUDs mind you, although the one person I knew IRL who used an IUD and talked about it was a trans man who literally wanted to stop his period so...). --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:908849741] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>I think part of the point of those proposals, which I agree seem unreasonable, was that people don't accept laws governing the male body. I don't think she was really seriously proposing them as real solutions. (Those proposals seem invasive and harsh...but then there's a lot of laws currently on the books governing women's bodies that ARE invasive and harsh). It's also...the point she was driving home was that people don't really care about stopping abortions. Take the option of "vasectomy when they come of age, and undo the vasectomy when they are ready for planned kids" proposal. Yeah, this would prevent basically every abortion. Assuming conservatives decided to be equal opportunity in terms of their invasive laws, would they be happy with the outcome of such a law? I doubt it, because under that system women could have as much sex as they wanted without punishment. And conservatives WANT to punish promiscuous women. (Much the same reason restricting access to birth control pills and teaching kids abstinence only education makes zero sense if you want to prevent abortion; both these policies obviously increase abortions). <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted...</cite> <quote>A lot of the worst side effects from birth control are just extreme versions of what can already happen during a regular menses cycle, and for a lot of women, birth control has good side effects like completely stopping it.</quote> Mmm...I never took birth control myself, but it really messed with my mom when she took it, and really messed with my one sister who took it. My general experience with the pill within my family is that it fucked people up bad. (I haven't heard complaints about IUDs mind you, although the one person I knew IRL who used an IUD and talked about it was a trans man who literally wanted to stop his period so...).</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pxlated 09/16/18 7:38:58 AM #68:	yeah, that was my take on it too. and not only are people uninterested in enacting laws against male bodies, but the proposed "solutions" aren't any worse than laws restricting abortions or access to birth control. forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term is cruel on so many levels. so much so that castration isn't really any worse, and is arguably less destructive. not only will an unwanted pregnancy be psychologically and physically traumatic for the mother, but the chances of the child having a fucked up life as a result are pretty big. 2 lives vs 1 life. not that this policy should be enacted, but the scenario gives a lot of perspective. i looked into the male birth control side effects. the one study she linked to seemed to have rare, but severe cases of depression and suicidality. the other side effects were like...acne and mood swings. basically everything was similar or less than female birth control side effects, except for the rare instances of severe depression. honestly, that seems like a good enough reason to not immediately approve the medication, and maybe the twitter thread missed the mark on that one. to my knowledge, female birth control doesn't do that. i would hope though that it would prompt further study, and not just cancel the medication outright. and i would also hope that other forms of male birth control medication are being researched (i believe there are, but it's been a little while since i've heard of it) --- [various robot sounds] <cite>pxlated posted [p:908849942] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>yeah, that was my take on it too. and not only are people uninterested in enacting laws against male bodies, but the proposed "solutions" aren't any worse than laws restricting abortions or access to birth control. forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term is cruel on so many levels. so much so that castration isn't really any worse, and is arguably less destructive. not only will an unwanted pregnancy be psychologically and physically traumatic for the mother, but the chances of the child having a fucked up life as a result are pretty big. 2 lives vs 1 life. not that this policy should be enacted, but the scenario gives a lot of perspective. i looked into the male birth control side effects. the one study she linked to seemed to have rare, but severe cases of depression and suicidality. the other side effects were like...acne and mood swings. basically everything was similar or less than female birth control side effects, except for the rare instances of severe depression. honestly, that seems like a good enough reason to not immediately approve the medication, and maybe the twitter thread missed the mark on that one. to my knowledge, female birth control doesn't do that. i would hope though that it would prompt further study, and not just cancel the medication outright. and i would also hope that other forms of male birth control medication are being researched (i believe there are, but it's been a little while since i've heard of it)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ZeldaTPLink 09/16/18 7:48:10 AM #69:	pxlated posted... Good thread. Shame it will change precisely 0 minds The point of this kind of argument is not to convince the radicals from the other side, but the neutrals who haven't stopped to think about it much. <cite>ZeldaTPLink posted [p:908850105] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>pxlated posted...</cite> <quote> Good thread. Shame it will change precisely 0 minds</quote> The point of this kind of argument is not to convince the radicals from the other side, but the neutrals who haven't stopped to think about it much.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pxlated 09/16/18 7:55:02 AM #70:	ZeldaTPLink posted... pxlated posted... Good thread. Shame it will change precisely 0 minds The point of this kind of argument is not to convince the radicals from the other side, but the neutrals who haven't stopped to think about it much. sure, and hopefully it reaches people like that. i don't think there are many people that are left neutral on this issue though also, IUDs can have bad side effects too, but they do seem to be less severe/common. like, they can cause sepsis or even perforate the uterus, but they're very rare occurrences. also i remember seeing recently someone countering the argument that legislators aren't interested in legislating male bodies like they are female with the fact that men have to register for the selective service at 18. but like...when was the last time that that ever even mattered? --- [various robot sounds] <cite>pxlated posted [p:908850242] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>ZeldaTPLink posted...</cite> <quote><cite>pxlated posted...</cite> <quote> Good thread. Shame it will change precisely 0 minds</quote> The point of this kind of argument is not to convince the radicals from the other side, but the neutrals who haven't stopped to think about it much.</quote> sure, and hopefully it reaches people like that. i don't think there are many people that are left neutral on this issue though also, IUDs can have bad side effects too, but they do seem to be less severe/common. like, they can cause sepsis or even perforate the uterus, but they're very rare occurrences. also i remember seeing recently someone countering the argument that legislators aren't interested in legislating male bodies like they are female with the fact that men have to register for the selective service at 18. but like...when was the last time that that ever even mattered?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/16/18 12:44:40 PM #71:	pxlated posted... also i remember seeing recently someone countering the argument that legislators aren't interested in legislating male bodies like they are female with the fact that men have to register for the selective service at 18. but like...when was the last time that that ever even mattered? I believe there was a push recently for both men and women to sign up for selective service. (From the anti-war types. The reason being that people in congress are less likely to vote for conscription if it might mean sending their daughters to war). I don't think it passed, though. --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:908860548] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>pxlated posted...</cite> <quote>also i remember seeing recently someone countering the argument that legislators aren't interested in legislating male bodies like they are female with the fact that men have to register for the selective service at 18. but like...when was the last time that that ever even mattered?</quote> I believe there was a push recently for both men and women to sign up for selective service. (From the anti-war types. The reason being that people in congress are less likely to vote for conscription if it might mean sending their daughters to war). I don't think it passed, though.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pxlated 09/16/18 2:55:34 PM #72:	Thats interesting, i hadn't heard that. I have a hard time picturing a realistic scenario where a draft would be necessary again though. What with drone warfare and all that --- [various robot sounds] <cite>pxlated posted [p:908868147] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>Thats interesting, i hadn't heard that. I have a hard time picturing a realistic scenario where a draft would be necessary again though. What with drone warfare and all that</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 09/16/18 8:13:44 PM #73:	https://theintercept.com/2018/09/16/border-patrol-no-more-deaths-prosecution-arizona-immigrants/ absolutely disgusting. not really surprising to also hear that serial killer suspect is a border patrol agent. in other news, in France, it looks like Macrons approval has fallen to 19%. always a good thing to hear. <cite>Nrrr posted [p:908888403] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>https://theintercept.com/2018/09/16/border-patrol-no-more-deaths-prosecution-arizona-immigrants/ absolutely disgusting. not really surprising to also hear that serial killer suspect is a border patrol agent. in other news, in France, it looks like Macrons approval has fallen to 19%. always a good thing to hear.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/17/18 11:22:47 PM #74:	A video about every single mass shooting over a 9 month period in the US: https://np.reddit.com/r/GunsAreCool/comments/9e5std/its_finally_done_every_single_mass_shooting_for/ --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:908962251] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>A video about every single mass shooting over a 9 month period in the US: https://np.reddit.com/r/GunsAreCool/comments/9e5std/its_finally_done_every_single_mass_shooting_for/</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 09/18/18 8:52:01 PM #76:	https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/09/their-war-criminal-problem-and-ours great article about how the US news media treats our own politicians war crimes with kid gloves - if they are ever acknowledged or mentioned at all, while sure to portray foreign leaders and politicians much more harsh. <cite>Nrrr posted [p:909018236] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/09/their-war-criminal-problem-and-ours great article about how the US news media treats our own politicians war crimes with kid gloves - if they are ever acknowledged or mentioned at all, while sure to portray foreign leaders and politicians much more harsh.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StartTheMachine 09/18/18 10:22:21 PM #77:	https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/financial-crisis-10-years-later-ben-bernanke-hank-paulson-timothy-geithner_us_5b9d7dc8e4b04d32ebf92396 you guys ready for the next crash? --- - Blur - Welcome to your Divinity. <cite>StartTheMachine posted [p:909023727] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/financial-crisis-10-years-later-ben-bernanke-hank-paulson-timothy-geithner_us_5b9d7dc8e4b04d32ebf92396 you guys ready for the next crash?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 09/19/18 3:45:55 AM #78:	Every time I think back on the Obama administration I just cannot believe anyone still likes him and wants to go back to milquetoast neoliberal centrism. It will always be so shameful to have had all that excitement, all that support for change, and to have had almost nothing positive come from it, and in many ways things actually got worse because of it. I have an even harder time understanding the revisionism re: George W Bush and his administration. If Bernie gets the nomination it will be so infuriating to hear liberals trying to rehabilitate Trump. <cite>Nrrr posted [p:909036807] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>Every time I think back on the Obama administration I just cannot believe anyone still likes him and wants to go back to milquetoast neoliberal centrism. It will always be so shameful to have had all that excitement, all that support for change, and to have had almost nothing positive come from it, and in many ways things actually got worse because of it. I have an even harder time understanding the revisionism re: George W Bush and his administration. If Bernie gets the nomination it will be so infuriating to hear liberals trying to rehabilitate Trump.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mr Lasastryke 09/19/18 6:51:21 AM #79:	Nrrr posted... I have an even harder time understanding the revisionism re: George W Bush and his administration. i don't get the "man, thanks to trump i finally realize GWB wasn't so bad after all!" thing either. just because trump is the worst president ever doesn't mean we have to suddenly act like W wasn't an atrocious president. --- Geothermal terpsichorean ejectamenta <cite>Mr Lasastryke posted [p:909040458] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>Nrrr posted...</cite> <quote>I have an even harder time understanding the revisionism re: George W Bush and his administration.</quote> i don't get the "man, thanks to trump i finally realize GWB wasn't so bad after all!" thing either. just because trump is the worst president ever doesn't mean we have to suddenly act like W wasn't an atrocious president.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
banananor 09/19/18 10:20:03 AM #80:	people are just having their minds blown that good <--> bad isn't a one-dimensional axis trump is way worse than bush in terms of taking down our institutions, but at least he hasn't started a terrible war --- You did indeed stab me in the back. However, you are only level one, whilst I am level 50. That means I should remain uninjured. <cite>banananor posted [p:909047961] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>people are just having their minds blown that good <--> bad isn't a one-dimensional axis trump is way worse than bush in terms of taking down our institutions, but at least he hasn't started a terrible war</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/19/18 11:22:11 AM #81:	Nrrr posted... Every time I think back on the Obama administration I just cannot believe anyone still likes him and wants to go back to milquetoast neoliberal centrism. It will always be so shameful to have had all that excitement, all that support for change, and to have had almost nothing positive come from it, and in many ways things actually got worse because of it. I dunno, I did see through Obama almost immediately (like literally during the election I was like "wait, this guy's political positions deviate from the consensus among Democratic politicians literally on zero issues, including obvious stuff like gay marriage"). I'm not as down on him as a lot of left wingers are though. Yeah, in any normal country those positions would be more at home in the Conservative pro-business party. But he was competent, and competence matters. He also had a decent degree of humility, and that matters too. Let me explain what I mean. I think of left wing vs right wing on an economic scale as kind of like adjusting spending bars in Sim City. Left wingers want certain bars high, like education and health care and welfare. Right wingers want to pump more of the city coffers into stuff like business initiatives, like police, like lowering taxes, like paying off debt (well...normal right wingers). So that's how things look in an idea world, how do things look in reality? Kind of like that, but with lots of really stupid shit--giving government contracts to friends, corruption where politicians fill their own pocket, or direct lots of spending to their own neighborhood. Starting up giant multi-million dollar government projects, and then scrapping them before the projects get off the ground (my sister works in the Canadian government, and talks about the projects that get scrapped before they go public; massive waste). So...back to Obama...would his policies come across as basically right wing in most first world countries? Yeah, for sure. But I can respect him for running a relatively tight ship. He was right wing but at least he was competent right wing. This was not the same with Bush, who got tied up in the Enron scandal, for example. And...setting aside whether or not wars are good (obviously I think they are bad) started a second ground war when his generals made it clear that we would not have enough resources for Afghanistan if he did this. This was also not the same with Clinton's husband, who ramped up the "war on drugs" more than any other president before or after him (prison populations ballooned under Bill, and stabilized under W Bush). (I was too young to remember much about Bush Sr. or Reagan, although I do know they instituted trickle down economics, and then admitted after they left that these policies had been a failed experiment) Which...as mediocre right-wing leaning as he is, probably leaves Obama as the best president of my lifetime. (Kind-of depressing really. Means most Americans don't know what an actually good political leader feels like). Nrrr posted... If Bernie gets the nomination it will be so infuriating to hear liberals trying to rehabilitate Trump. I doubt they would. They're rehabilitating Bush just because Trump is worse in ways they didn't think a politician could manage to be worse than Bush. Bernie would shit all over Trump, though. --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:909051137] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>Nrrr posted...</cite> <quote>Every time I think back on the Obama administration I just cannot believe anyone still likes him and wants to go back to milquetoast neoliberal centrism. It will always be so shameful to have had all that excitement, all that support for change, and to have had almost nothing positive come from it, and in many ways things actually got worse because of it.</quote> I dunno, I did see through Obama almost immediately (like literally during the election I was like "wait, this guy's political positions deviate from the consensus among Democratic politicians literally on zero issues, including obvious stuff like gay marriage"). I'm not as down on him as a lot of left wingers are though. Yeah, in any normal country those positions would be more at home in the Conservative pro-business party. But he was competent, and competence matters. He also had a decent degree of humility, and that matters too. Let me explain what I mean. I think of left wing vs right wing on an economic scale as kind of like adjusting spending bars in Sim City. Left wingers want certain bars high, like education and health care and welfare. Right wingers want to pump more of the city coffers into stuff like business initiatives, like police, like lowering taxes, like paying off debt (well...normal right wingers). So that's how things look in an idea world, how do things look in reality? Kind of like that, but with lots of really stupid shit--giving government contracts to friends, corruption where politicians fill their own pocket, or direct lots of spending to their own neighborhood. Starting up giant multi-million dollar government projects, and then scrapping them before the projects get off the ground (my sister works in the Canadian government, and talks about the projects that get scrapped before they go public; massive waste). So...back to Obama...would his policies come across as basically right wing in most first world countries? Yeah, for sure. But I can respect him for running a relatively tight ship. He was right wing but at least he was competent right wing. This was not the same with Bush, who got tied up in the Enron scandal, for example. And...setting aside whether or not wars are good (obviously I think they are bad) started a second ground war when his generals made it clear that we would not have enough resources for Afghanistan if he did this. This was also not the same with Clinton's husband, who ramped up the "war on drugs" more than any other president before or after him (prison populations ballooned under Bill, and stabilized under W Bush). (I was too young to remember much about Bush Sr. or Reagan, although I do know they instituted trickle down economics, and then admitted after they left that these policies had been a failed experiment) Which...as mediocre right-wing leaning as he is, probably leaves Obama as the best president of my lifetime. (Kind-of depressing really. Means most Americans don't know what an actually good political leader feels like). <cite>Nrrr posted...</cite> <quote>If Bernie gets the nomination it will be so infuriating to hear liberals trying to rehabilitate Trump.</quote> I doubt they would. They're rehabilitating Bush just because Trump is worse in ways they didn't think a politician could manage to be worse than Bush. Bernie would shit all over Trump, though.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/19/18 10:40:54 PM #82:	New Contrapoints: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1afqR5QkDM" data-time=" --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:909089547] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>New Contrapoints: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1afqR5QkDM" data-time="</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pxlated 09/20/18 10:27:41 AM #83:	Interesting video. I'm not entirely sure what the takeaway point she was trying to make is, though. --- [various robot sounds] <cite>pxlated posted [p:909112712] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>Interesting video. I'm not entirely sure what the takeaway point she was trying to make is, though.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/21/18 1:30:20 AM #84:	pxlated posted... Interesting video. I'm not entirely sure what the takeaway point she was trying to make is, though. I mean, Contrapoints was a Philosophy PhD. Often her videos are not "here's what to think" but simply presenting two major conflicting schools of philosophical thought. In this case at least some of it is gender as performative by Judith Butler https://twitter.com/Amandycat/status/1042550841163558912 Based on the comments it seems there's a decent number of people who just struggle with how much to conform to optics/how much to be themselves, where this really voiced their internal monologue. Some examples: https://twitter.com/LatwPIAT/status/1042509024879624192 https://twitter.com/OreoTheWolf/status/1042908708907491328 https://twitter.com/VioletteVoid/status/1042542734832164864 (But there's also quite a bit of criticism too, from people who view this video as a call towards gender conformity, and adherence to the gender binary. Which...only really makes sense as a criticism if you feel that one of the debaters is supposed to be more right than the other, as opposed to presenting a kind of Yin-Yang of the argument). --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:909162330] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>pxlated posted...</cite> <quote>Interesting video. I'm not entirely sure what the takeaway point she was trying to make is, though.</quote> I mean, Contrapoints was a Philosophy PhD. Often her videos are not "here's what to think" but simply presenting two major conflicting schools of philosophical thought. In this case at least some of it is gender as performative by Judith Butler https://twitter.com/Amandycat/status/1042550841163558912 Based on the comments it seems there's a decent number of people who just struggle with how much to conform to optics/how much to be themselves, where this really voiced their internal monologue. Some examples: https://twitter.com/LatwPIAT/status/1042509024879624192 https://twitter.com/OreoTheWolf/status/1042908708907491328 https://twitter.com/VioletteVoid/status/1042542734832164864 (But there's also quite a bit of criticism too, from people who view this video as a call towards gender conformity, and adherence to the gender binary. Which...only really makes sense as a criticism if you feel that one of the debaters is supposed to be more right than the other, as opposed to presenting a kind of Yin-Yang of the argument).</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kenri 09/21/18 2:06:10 AM #85:	metroid composite posted... (But there's also quite a bit of criticism too, from people who view this video as a call towards gender conformity, and adherence to the gender binary. Which...only really makes sense as a criticism if you feel that one of the debaters is supposed to be more right than the other, as opposed to presenting a kind of Yin-Yang of the argument). they must value aesthetics a lot more than they think they do lol Thanks for sharing, that was interesting and relatable in a lot of ways. --- Congrats to BKSheikah, who knows more about years than anyone else. <cite>Kenri posted [p:909163429] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>metroid composite posted...</cite> <quote>(But there's also quite a bit of criticism too, from people who view this video as a call towards gender conformity, and adherence to the gender binary. Which...only really makes sense as a criticism if you feel that one of the debaters is supposed to be more right than the other, as opposed to presenting a kind of Yin-Yang of the argument).</quote> they must value aesthetics a lot more than they think they do lol Thanks for sharing, that was interesting and relatable in a lot of ways.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pxlated 09/21/18 3:54:46 AM #86:	Wasn't really looking for "here's what to think" so much as "here's what i think" and for the majority of the videoo she seems to be pushing the aesthetics/performance above alll bit, and shutting down the other side. Only briefly does the other gain any traction. And...well, she isn't entirely wrong. Society just doesn't accept trans women who can't perform the act as well as or better than cis women. And unfortunately that isnt always enough, because sometimes your genetics just say fuck you. I do wish though she spent more time deconstructing why that's fucked up though. I would rather the conversation try to push for societal progress rather than simply state the reality that most people that would watch that whole video already know. --- [various robot sounds] <cite>pxlated posted [p:909166290] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>Wasn't really looking for "here's what to think" so much as "here's what i think" and for the majority of the videoo she seems to be pushing the aesthetics/performance above alll bit, and shutting down the other side. Only briefly does the other gain any traction. And...well, she isn't entirely wrong. Society just doesn't accept trans women who can't perform the act as well as or better than cis women. And unfortunately that isnt always enough, because sometimes your genetics just say fuck you. I do wish though she spent more time deconstructing why that's fucked up though. I would rather the conversation try to push for societal progress rather than simply state the reality that most people that would watch that whole video already know.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kenri 09/21/18 10:09:08 AM #87:	pxlated posted... Wasn't really looking for "here's what to think" so much as "here's what i think" and for the majority of the videoo she seems to be pushing the aesthetics/performance above alll bit, and shutting down the other side. Only briefly does the other gain any traction. Interesting, that's not the impression I got at all. The aesthetics side "looks" better, sure, but that's the whole point. I assume the "here's what I think" is actually both sides since it seems like it's meant to represent an internal dialogue. --- Congrats to BKSheikah, who knows more about years than anyone else. <cite>Kenri posted [p:909175898] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>pxlated posted...</cite> <quote>Wasn't really looking for "here's what to think" so much as "here's what i think" and for the majority of the videoo she seems to be pushing the aesthetics/performance above alll bit, and shutting down the other side. Only briefly does the other gain any traction.</quote> Interesting, that's not the impression I got at all. The aesthetics side "looks" better, sure, but that's the whole point. I assume the "here's what I think" is actually both sides since it seems like it's meant to represent an internal dialogue.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pxlated 09/21/18 10:32:54 AM #88:	i guess i'd have to watch it again, but basically until the last couple minutes or so of the dialogue i was pretty angry because it felt like she was having the aesthetics argument just shut down the other side (too tired to come up with a better wording for that). which like, again...she isn't wrong. the best way to have as little resistance as possible living as a trans woman is to do all of that. but there's so many reasons why that just isn't an option for some people and i feel like this video didn't convey any of that. i get that it's just an inner dialogue and there's no "winner" or "right side" or anything. and she does do a pretty good job of nailing the surface level aspects of that dialogue. but it doesn't even once mention things like the cost of doing all of that or the time to perfect all the techniques necessary to look that certain way, things that, when you're poor and struggling just to not be homeless and have food to eat (god forbid you have children to support and raise), just aren't feasible. i guess i'm probably just expecting too much from this one video. and her intentions are clearly different than my hopes for videos like this, but ultimately i was left feeling like the non-conforming viewpoint was more or less shat on until the end where it got a brief moment of "well sure if that's your thing that's ok too I GUESS" and honestly a pretty unsatisfying conclusion of a rather insincere feeling "we're all in it together, right?" i will admit to being pretty sensitive to this topic, given my lived experience of having these debates in my head and with others (friendly and unfriendly) all the damn time. i'm probably not the intended audience but i don't really get much from a less dynamic version of the shit that's in my head basically all the time. --- [various robot sounds] <cite>pxlated posted [p:909177001] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>i guess i'd have to watch it again, but basically until the last couple minutes or so of the dialogue i was pretty angry because it felt like she was having the aesthetics argument just shut down the other side (too tired to come up with a better wording for that). which like, again...she isn't wrong. the best way to have as little resistance as possible living as a trans woman is to do all of that. but there's so many reasons why that just isn't an option for some people and i feel like this video didn't convey any of that. i get that it's just an inner dialogue and there's no "winner" or "right side" or anything. and she does do a pretty good job of nailing the surface level aspects of that dialogue. but it doesn't even once mention things like the cost of doing all of that or the time to perfect all the techniques necessary to look that certain way, things that, when you're poor and struggling just to not be homeless and have food to eat (god forbid you have children to support and raise), just aren't feasible. i guess i'm probably just expecting too much from this one video. and her intentions are clearly different than my hopes for videos like this, but ultimately i was left feeling like the non-conforming viewpoint was more or less shat on until the end where it got a brief moment of "well sure if that's your thing that's ok too I GUESS" and honestly a pretty unsatisfying conclusion of a rather insincere feeling "we're all in it together, right?" i will admit to being pretty sensitive to this topic, given my lived experience of having these debates in my head and with others (friendly and unfriendly) all the damn time. i'm probably not the intended audience but i don't really get much from a less dynamic version of the shit that's in my head basically all the time.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pxlated 09/21/18 10:34:40 AM #89:	maybe a more concise way to make the point i'm getting at is that the counter argument to "aesthetics are everything" was "but i don't want to do that" not "i'm not actually capable of doing any of that", which is the reality for a large number of trans people. --- [various robot sounds] <cite>pxlated posted [p:909177088] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>maybe a more concise way to make the point i'm getting at is that the counter argument to "aesthetics are everything" was "but i don't want to do that" not "i'm not actually capable of doing any of that", which is the reality for a large number of trans people.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kenri 09/21/18 10:49:17 AM #90:	pxlated posted... maybe a more concise way to make the point i'm getting at is that the counter argument to "aesthetics are everything" was "but i don't want to do that" not "i'm not actually capable of doing any of that", which is the reality for a large number of trans people. The aesthetic world doesn't make a distinction. That's why people on disability, for instance, get told so frequently that they're just too lazy to work or whatever. Essentially the answer to "I'm not capable of doing any of that" is "then the world will shit on you just like it shits on cis women who aren't capable of the same", which I think could have been covered in a more nuanced way but it definitely did come up. I see where you're coming from because I had the same sort of reaction at first, but ultimately I don't think it would really change the course of the debate that much. --- Congrats to BKSheikah, who knows more about years than anyone else. <cite>Kenri posted [p:909177808] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>pxlated posted...</cite> <quote>maybe a more concise way to make the point i'm getting at is that the counter argument to "aesthetics are everything" was "but i don't want to do that" not "i'm not actually capable of doing any of that", which is the reality for a large number of trans people.</quote> The aesthetic world doesn't make a distinction. That's why people on disability, for instance, get told so frequently that they're just too lazy to work or whatever. Essentially the answer to "I'm not capable of doing any of that" is "then the world will shit on you just like it shits on cis women who aren't capable of the same", which I think could have been covered in a more nuanced way but it definitely did come up. I see where you're coming from because I had the same sort of reaction at first, but ultimately I don't think it would really change the course of the debate that much.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pxlated 09/21/18 11:02:27 AM #91:	maybe i'm biased but i don't think society shits on cis women who can't/don't perform the act in the same way that they do trans women (not to say that society doesn't shit on cis women for this at all, but i feel like it's not the same) and it probably wouldn't change the course of the debate but i think it might change the reaction to the debate. the way it is basically leaves it open to "okay so you could have an easier time if you want, you just choose not to, that's on you" i dunno. i get what she's trying to do with this video and i guess i just don't really see it as helpful or necessary. i've never really watched many of her videos and i guess i was expecting more after hearing her talked up a lot. i guess it would be more interesting to people that don't deal with that shit every day but i feel like "interesting" is the most anyone would get out of this and i was expecting more than interesting. --- [various robot sounds] <cite>pxlated posted [p:909178508] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>maybe i'm biased but i don't think society shits on cis women who can't/don't perform the act in the same way that they do trans women (not to say that society doesn't shit on cis women for this at all, but i feel like it's not the same) and it probably wouldn't change the course of the debate but i think it might change the reaction to the debate. the way it is basically leaves it open to "okay so you could have an easier time if you want, you just choose not to, that's on you" i dunno. i get what she's trying to do with this video and i guess i just don't really see it as helpful or necessary. i've never really watched many of her videos and i guess i was expecting more after hearing her talked up a lot. i guess it would be more interesting to people that don't deal with that shit every day but i feel like "interesting" is the most anyone would get out of this and i was expecting more than interesting.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pxlated 09/21/18 11:09:34 AM #92:	to be clear i'm not saying cis women have an easier time than trans women. the experiences are just different. both groups have/have had certain privileges that the other doesn't, just as they each have certain hardships that the other doesn't. --- [various robot sounds] <cite>pxlated posted [p:909178856] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>to be clear i'm not saying cis women have an easier time than trans women. the experiences are just different. both groups have/have had certain privileges that the other doesn't, just as they each have certain hardships that the other doesn't.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kenri 09/21/18 1:29:51 PM #93:	pxlated posted... and it probably wouldn't change the course of the debate but i think it might change the reaction to the debate. the way it is basically leaves it open to "okay so you could have an easier time if you want, you just choose not to, that's on you" In terms of aesthetics I'm not sure there's a distinction. Look at all the people who say those on disability are just lazy or whatever. Even being poor is kinda thought of as a choice. And yeah, cis women have a different time but there's shared experiences there. "Ugly" or "mannish" or "unfashionable" women face extreme backlash from society whether they're trans or cis. The experience is different because that backlash is codified into law for trans women, among other reasons, but it still happens to all women. Anyway I might be giving this too much credit. It's completely possible it was just a lopsided argument and that I'm seeing intention where there was actually just sloppiness. To me it seems intentional though, to highlight how influential good aesthetics are. --- Congrats to BKSheikah, who knows more about years than anyone else. <cite>Kenri posted [p:909186587] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>pxlated posted...</cite> <quote>and it probably wouldn't change the course of the debate but i think it might change the reaction to the debate. the way it is basically leaves it open to "okay so you could have an easier time if you want, you just choose not to, that's on you"</quote> In terms of aesthetics I'm not sure there's a distinction. Look at all the people who say those on disability are just lazy or whatever. Even being poor is kinda thought of as a choice. And yeah, cis women have a different time but there's shared experiences there. "Ugly" or "mannish" or "unfashionable" women face extreme backlash from society whether they're trans or cis. The experience is different because that backlash is codified into law for trans women, among other reasons, but it still happens to all women. Anyway I might be giving this too much credit. It's completely possible it was just a lopsided argument and that I'm seeing intention where there was actually just sloppiness. To me it seems intentional though, to highlight how influential good aesthetics are.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/22/18 10:19:47 AM #94:	In today's episode of capitalism gone wrong: https://www.wired.com/story/john-deere-farmers-right-to-repair/ --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:909235142] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>In today's episode of capitalism gone wrong: https://www.wired.com/story/john-deere-farmers-right-to-repair/</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Zyxyz0 09/22/18 5:04:29 PM #95:	pxlated posted... to be clear i'm not saying cis women have an easier time than trans women. we literally do though? cis women are more of an oppressor group than an oppressed these days, and trans women are literally the most oppressed/disadvantaged/unfairly hated group there is. it's not comparable at all --- Archive of my and others' playthrough/ranking topics, fanfiction recs, etc: http://zyxyzarchive.x10host.com/ <cite>Zyxyz0 posted [p:909253300] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>pxlated posted...</cite> <quote>to be clear i'm not saying cis women have an easier time than trans women.</quote> we literally do though? cis women are more of an oppressor group than an oppressed these days, and trans women are literally the most oppressed/disadvantaged/unfairly hated group there is. it's not comparable at all</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/23/18 3:23:15 PM #96:	https://imgur.com/gFuOUPQ --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:909305437] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>https://imgur.com/gFuOUPQ</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 09/24/18 5:46:26 AM #97:	metroid composite posted... In today's episode of capitalism gone wrong: https://www.wired.com/story/john-deere-farmers-right-to-repair/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2016/07/26/is-this-the-scary-world-our-tech-revolution-will-create/#57f4e7952b96 here is an article about similar things, a bit old, but still. <cite>Nrrr posted [p:909344230] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote><cite>metroid composite posted...</cite> <quote>In today's episode of capitalism gone wrong: https://www.wired.com/story/john-deere-farmers-right-to-repair/</quote> https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2016/07/26/is-this-the-scary-world-our-tech-revolution-will-create/#57f4e7952b96 here is an article about similar things, a bit old, but still.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/25/18 2:31:55 AM #98:	I'm in more of a meme/humor mood today. https://i.redd.it/uqj9g9r4v9o11.jpg --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:909402488] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>I'm in more of a meme/humor mood today. https://i.redd.it/uqj9g9r4v9o11.jpg</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/26/18 1:42:59 AM #99:	Melinda Gates on how Africa is at kind of a turning point, where 60% of the population is under 25, which has a lot of potential to go different ways: https://twitter.com/CNBC/status/1044606702304153600 Investing in their education and economic development has a lot of potential to pull the continent out of poverty, but if resources are spent the wrong way, a young population could end up resulting in a lot more HIV as well. --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:909461903] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>Melinda Gates on how Africa is at kind of a turning point, where 60% of the population is under 25, which has a lot of potential to go different ways: https://twitter.com/CNBC/status/1044606702304153600 Investing in their education and economic development has a lot of potential to pull the continent out of poverty, but if resources are spent the wrong way, a young population could end up resulting in a lot more HIV as well.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 09/26/18 3:31:23 AM #100:	https://jacobinmag.com/2018/09/elizabeth-warren-accountable-capitalism-stakeholder a good article. <cite>Nrrr posted [p:909464866] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>https://jacobinmag.com/2018/09/elizabeth-warren-accountable-capitalism-stakeholder a good article.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
metroid composite 09/27/18 2:53:23 AM #101:	Deep fakes are pretty concerning, but I am amused by this video. https://twitter.com/TAPolicy/status/1045027726514475011 "stay woke bitches". --- Cats land on their feet. Toast lands peanut butter side down. A cat with toast strapped to its back will hover above the ground in a state of quantum indecision <cite>metroid composite posted [p:909526614] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>Deep fakes are pretty concerning, but I am amused by this video. https://twitter.com/TAPolicy/status/1045027726514475011 "stay woke bitches".</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 09/27/18 3:47:03 AM #102:	People were so wrong about the idea that Trump winning would be good for comedy - Obama as a comedy tool is just so much more funny. I don't think Trump has resulted in anything truly funny off the top of my head. As for banning frats, I am all in on that proposal. All they do besides result in sexual assault and rape is provide networking to give those very same assholes the foot in the door to lucrative career paths, eventually becoming the sex creep bosses at work instead. <cite>Nrrr posted [p:909527818] in leftist po... [t:76976711]...</cite> <quote>People were so wrong about the idea that Trump winning would be good for comedy - Obama as a comedy tool is just so much more funny. I don't think Trump has resulted in anything truly funny off the top of my head. As for banning frats, I am all in on that proposal. All they do besides result in sexual assault and rape is provide networking to give those very same assholes the foot in the door to lucrative career paths, eventually becoming the sex creep bosses at work instead.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4

Board 8 > leftist politics topic (+) Yeah! (+)

Board 8 > leftist politics topic