Laticauda @ Laticauda @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

164

Joined

2 yr. ago

I'm just saying, people keep saying things won't happen to him, and then they do. The government kinda has a vested interest in making an example out of him. At least the Biden administration does. And Trump isn't exactly popular in most other countries either.

Tf does him being a pilot have to do with anything?

I mean I remember a tin of people saying there was no way he'd go to court for anything he did, or indighted, or arrested. So, I wouldn't completely dismiss the possibility. He's not exactly the GOP's golden boy anymore.

Do you think people use coin or bottle cap collections for anything functional? The point of collecting stuff is to have your own personal little museum to look at and enjoy based on your interests. If you don't enjoy keeping them, then don't, but if you do enjoy keeping them, because of nostalgia or sentimentality or because you just like having physical copies, then keep them, and don't worry about whether they serve a function or not. In that case their function is that they make you happy.

Nah I like it, I always hated tight clothes. I am all for a fashion era of comfort and room to breath.

The ability to cure any disease/illness or unwanted mental disorder/illness in anyone nearby within a certain radius. Might as well focus on it helping others if it's completely random.

This sort of question is better meant for the support community I think.

You are not obligated, no, it is entirely up to you. Of course there will be consequences of not giving money, just as their will be consequences of giving money. You have to weigh one against the other to determine which will have the outcome you want most. Less cost but angry mother, or happy mother but higher cost. Helping uncle's family but stressing your own finances, vs not helping your uncle's family but not stressing your own finances.

I think there are also some other factors you could consider. Is your uncle's financial situation something that he got himself into and could have avoided or could get himself out of by making better decisions, or is it an unfortunate situation outside of his control that he is struggling with through no fault of his own? Is there a way you can help him become more financially stable in the future so he no longer needs help, or would it be an endless cycle that ultimately wouldn't do either party any good and would just allow the problem to persist indefinitely? Does your uncle need an intervention of sorts, or does he just need enough support to get back on his feet? Are there financial institutions or other forms of official aid that can offer him support and options so that you don't need to step in? Can you possibly help him find a higher income job so he can support himself, instead of just offering money? If your uncle is just bad with money, can he be taught how to better save? Could he benefit from a financial advisor? Etc, etc.

I mean, to be fair, bucket traps are a tried and true rodent trapping method, when done right at least lol.

I think with the "walk the plank" style bucket trap he'll need a pivot point further into the bucket so the rat has to get partway across before it'll fall, which prevents it from jumping back before it falls in. Can do this with a thin rod that goes across attached to the bottom of whatever is used for the plank part.

One method that also sometimes works is putting a ramp on the side of the bucket to let the rat up, smearing peanut butter a few inches below the rim on the inside, and then greasing the edges a bit, so the rat has to try and reach in to get the peanut butter and then slips into the bucket because they can't keep a grip on the sides.

Or he can go the Mouse Hunt route and just befriend the rat. I'm sure that couldn't possibly go wrong.

More importantly, make sure to ask questions so that you can make an informed choice.

Hmm, I have a calendar somewhere that includes holidays and events from around the world. There are actually quite a few days with no events or holidays, so it's not unheard of. My guess is that a good candidate is likely somewhat distanced from seasonal constants like the equinox.

You're right, it is an entertaining read lmao

That should absolutely constitute a stalking charge at the very least. But I recommend talking to a lawyer to be sure about what you can or can't do legally.

As racist and stupid this statement is, it's not reason enough for prison. Putting people in prison for saying something mean or dumb is the exact kind of thing the GOP would want to be able to do to anyone they deem "too woke". Let's not lower ourselves to their way of thinking.

"coloured people" has never been a preferred term, it's always been viewed as racist, on account of how popular it is with racists.

And many black people use the n word all the time, doesn't mean it isn't ever a racist word or that anyone can just blurt out whenever they like in any context.

The English language does not exist in a vacuum.

There's a difference between "I helped my uncle, Jack, off his horse" and "I helped my uncle jack off his horse". Retard used to just be a synonym for slow, but you won't be bleeped if you call someone slow on national television. Things like context, usage, and history matter.

I think a better example is "I'm beat" vs "beats me". Both actually mean something ("I'm tired/exhausted" vs "I don't know") and both mean completely different things, despite using the exact same words in a different configuration. And they mean different things because they're used in different ways. Just because they use the same words that doesn't mean they're automatically the same. And even if they referred to roughly the same thing, again, how they're used and in what context makes a big difference. One is historically used almost exclusively by racists in a derogatory manner, the other is the one the people being referred to have said they prefer between the two.

Yes, that is the nature of language. We don't speak like Shakespeare anymore either, imagine that. Queer people was offensive 20 years ago because it was mostly used as a slur then by bigots. It's not as offensive now because queer people reclaimed it and it is mostly used by them to refer to themselves. They have generally expressed that they are more comfortable with it because of that. "Coloured people" is still used mostly by racists, while "people of colour" is commonly used by non-white people to refer to themselves. In each example an important factor is how the group being referred to feels about a particular term. Most black people have made it pretty clear that they don't like being called "coloured people", especially not by white conservatives, but they generally don't mind the term "people of colour". So if you have to use one or the other, the one that you know they don't like is probably not the safe bet.

The difference is the history of the terms and which demographics use them. "coloured people" has historically been used in a derogatory way by racists. "people of colour" has historically been used by English speaking non-white people or allies of non-white people and is generally preferred by non-white people. Just because they're grammatically the same that doesn't mean they were used the same. At one point the word retarded was just a synonym for slow. But it doesn't matter what the word meant, what matters is how the word was used.

To be fair, when talking about issues involving more than one group vs systemic racism that uniquely benefits white people above all other groups, then it's pointless to try and specify every group that isn't white and is harmed in some way by systemic racism separately. If you want to discuss a common issue shared by various other groups, then using shorthand to refer to those groups as a collective isn't inherently bigoted. What matters is the history of the term you use and whether said collective generally prefers it or not. A lot of non-white folks use poc/woc/etc and like that it's a unifying term that implies solidarity with other non-white groups. Some non-white folks don't like the term, and that's fine, but it's still considered better than "coloured people" because "coloured people" actually has a history of bigoted use, hence why it's viewed as offensive.