barsoap @ barsoap @lemm.ee

Posts

32

Comments

4,490

Joined

2 yr. ago

Either can describe a bar that throws out Nazis or a Nazi bar, depending on perspective.

There was a brief moment where "all lives matter" had no clear meaning, where the slogan still was up for grabs, where the fascists were still starting to rally while BLM was already in full swing. If, at that juncture, BLM had had the wherewithal to, as I already said, switch to chanting "all lives matter" without skipping a beat the few fascists already using it would have looked like actually supporting BLM. They would've backed off.

Are neurodivergent folks treated equally, with equal consideration? "Existing while not being able to respond to BS demands" is a crime that exists in the US. There's a bodycount to back that up, covering the whole spectrum of spectrum disorders.

That out of the way: Why give the enemy a slogan and exclude your allies? What possible gain would that bring about?

All Lives Matter’ is a slogan to avoid acknowledging that black lives also matter.

Because it was claimed by fascists. That's the only reason it has that meaning. Because it was given up, not claimed by woke folks. Words, slogans, don't have meaning in themselves the meaning only exists in context. "All lives matter" is a fascist slogan because it got chanted by fascists, not because it's fascist in itself. If fascists shout "chocolate pudding is tasty", what does that mean? I have no idea but it surely doesn't bode well for black folks.

You don't have to fucking explain to me that "All lives matter" got appropriated by fascists. I fucking know. I'm complaining about how BLM let it be appropriated, how the wider platform let victory be snatched away from under their fingertips by semiotic illiteracy that made MLK spin in his grave. Man was way ahead of

<currentyear>

I don’t believe there is no difference at all between men and women. I simply believe that a lot of the things we say are inherent differences are actually not as inherent as people tend to believe.

Depending on who you mean with "we" I definitely agree.

For example, I’ve seen no evidence that women are inherently more kind/caring/empathetic than men in any biological way, only that society socializes them to be so,

...and fails at doing so, if I may add. Male-pattern aggression is simply more obvious because it's in your face physical while female-pattern is psychological, always ensuring plausible deniability.

Yet if you ask most people, they’ll assume there’s something biological that makes women more like that emotionally.

Women favour low-risk engagement, passive aggressiveness over overt aggressiveness. Thus you see emotional manipulation used way more often, one approach being self-victim-framing, and for that the narrative of "oh women are so delicate and emotional they have to be protected no matter what they do" fits the bill. Female viciousness is beautiful but I very much prefer it in the "never start a fight, but always finish it" version. Relevant symphonic metal. Also if you're trying it with me you're getting tickled into submission.

TBH, Silverbacks are actually good role models: Big, bulky, sit around grooming the troupe, know everyone, emotionally support everyone, when someone wants to start a fight, intervenes, "You wanna fight? Yeah, fight me! Both of you at once, if need be!" -- and then suddenly the others lost interest in fighting.

Proverbial gymbro speaking softly and carrying a big stick, far from a tyrant, you know the type. Chimpanzees are the closest to us, with warfare and everything. Bonobos are... well, they are what biologists start talking about when they want to get into your pants. Let's just say there's a reason you don't see them in zoos, parents don't want to hear kids asking those kinds of questions.

Isn't it weird that for humans, sex is a private matter? Completely singular among all the animals. And that's independent of social status, like a smaller sea lion seducing a female one while the big hunk de jure leading the pack isn't looking, it's universal. Even if sex is a group activity, then that group itself is putting up layers of privateness and propriety. Swinger clubs with fancy dress codes, doesn't matter if you end up naked but you have to start out in suit and tie.

If a scientist would, today, discover humanity and describe their behaviour they'd be laughed out of any conference, "did you get your notes mixed up". "Next thing you want to tell us camelopards are real".

You're right after that comes the patriarchal, or just gendered, double-whammy: Women culturally do have more of a support network, even just in the "friends hanging out" way, as the male "do things together, chop wood, go fishing" is regarded as work, not leisure, and thus co-opted by capitalism: "What do you need to chop food and fish for, go buy fuel and food are you poor or something". Thus all the productive time men have is spent in a hierarchical worker-boss environment, never "pals doing stuff", cue loss of connection, alienation from broader society, loneliness. Going bowling? Time not spent hustling, you're a loser. That's your mind on patriarchal capitalism.

Thus, even if the starting conditions inflicted by capitalism are, for the sake of argument, completely even, it still hits men harder when it comes to loneliness. Women are more affected in other ways. This isn't an olympics, it's analysis of the material conditions we live under.

Alienation. Exploitation. Heard of it?

Capitalism has bereft men even of the patriarchal provider role as there's no fucking time in the day to earn both rent and have any type of social interaction, much less time to reflect on your approach to life. Your position as a gear churning out profit for the bosses has been meticulously designed and drilled into you while you were a kid, blind obedience instilled by teachers and BS "zero tolerance punish the victim" rules. There is no use for you aside from that assigned role, happiness, connection, community, work//life balance? Don't make a profit. Get out of here with that commie nonsense we have quarterly figures to hit.

Or, maybe, yes, you do have a point: I should have said late-stage capitalism. The internal contradictions are actively eroding it by now.

hooks suggests that men need to develop a more nuanced and inclusive understanding of masculinity, one that values emotions, relationships, and mutual respect.

Yep, written by a woman. Replace that with "value traversing rivers on couches strapped to floats and having a blast with the pals" and you'll get somewhere.

Valuing something already is an emotion so you're being emotional about being emotional about something so, yeah, no. Go climb a tree, create a tasty recipe, fix a shoe. Shave the soap.

Boys develop coarse motor skills first, then fine motor skills, for girls it's the other way around. Which also means that girls are quite good at sitting still in primary school, boys, without getting tired out in recess, very much aren't. Cue "behavioural issues".

Lego did control for everything that could be controlled. They're the OG "our toys are for everyone" company. They thought that their stuff was gender neutral, that stores and parents, society, were the problem, but had to admit that, no, kids actually do have, statistically speaking, different play preferences. Their female set designers didn't catch it because they were not kids, any more.

And "no hormones to speak of" MF if there were no hormones involved male karyotypes would develop female.

Andrea Dworkin.

"Equivalence' of does not mean "same-same", here, female aggression patterns are quite different than male ones. Bold "accept me as dominant, I'm telling you don't show up or else" vs. plausible-deniability "oh someone must have forgotten to invite you", "We didn't think you want to come". Apologies to any gals out there reliving high-school trauma right now.

To breach a broader topic: The very fact that a sentence like "all masculinity is toxic" can even be defended. When it's defended, then generally as "Well we define "masculine" not as what men do but as whatever is toxic in society" -- and then conveniently sweeping under the rug that that is not how "masculinity" is understood in any other context. As said: Plausible deniability. Motte and bailey: You can say a misandrist thing, have it understood as misandrist by your fellow misandrists, then, when called out, say "no you don't actually understand do you even feminism read theory you're a misogynist for misconstruing me".

The worst thing one can do? Explain it openly. That does not just attack the concrete thing itself, but the very tactic of plausible deniability. It's, admittedly, the nuclear option but sometimes plain necessary.

Cue "No this isn't happening".

"Leads to" is way too strong. Hierarchy, capitalism, provider expectations all those play a huge role that on their own would be sufficient to cause the issue, if those were gone then the misandrists could just be ignored. What misandrists do have a rather large part in though is hindering that the problem gets addressed by people who otherwise do oppose hierarchy, capitalism, and normative gender expectations.

In an ideal world, BLM would have switched to chanting "All lives matter" without skipping a beat: Deny the assclowns their slogan, simultaneously say "yep we're people, too, part of 'all', get used to it", simultaneously, ally with other groups the US police walks all over, like neurodivergent folks.

they generally just go with what they prefer in the moment along lines that don’t match the gender binary

Nope. Lego did a large behavioural study on this because this was their assumption, they thought they were doing completely gender-neutral stuff, but even controlling for parents's biases their stuff wasn't gender-neutral when it came to actually be interesting to kids. I'm talking about stuff like the city series, here: A street, bunch of houses, bunch of minifigs. Figures that the girls by and large where looking at the inside of the buildings, finding them empty, and lost interest while boys where seeing the streets, found ample of detail and also a car to drive around, and created stories. There are, of course, as always exceptions to the binary but the overall trend was undeniable.

That (and the insistence of US stores on not having gender-neutral isles and putting Lego in the boy's section) made them create the Friends series: Detailed house interiors, larger, more detailed minifigs. The pink is for the stores and parents, the interiors for the girls, the build-what-you-want flexibility for the humans.

Generally speaking, I think that difference feminism has been discarded prematurely. Sure, none of the normative BS that many of its proponents espoused should ever see the light of day, but denying difference is harmful in its own way, and the reason is the inevitability of essentialising: If you say "there is no difference at all between men and women" you're bound to essentialise everyone towards your own gender. And it's way better to be essentialised as an apple when you're an apple than it is to be essentialised as a pear.

capitalism
self-inflicted

Sure, bud.

Support for re-joining increased form 40% to 60% from 2021 to 2024.

Main stumbling block has always been the fisheries policy, same with Norway, Iceland and the Faroer, and while truth be told the CFP really needs reform it also has lost much economical importance for the countries. Well maybe except the Faroer.

Greenlanders and Faroese are still EU citizens, btw, by virtue of being Danish citizens, with all the privileges that entails. That kind of special status won't be possible upon independence, it's going to be all-in or all-out. Ask Brits how losing EU citizenship feels like.

The Nobel prize went to AlphaFold, in case anybody is curious. Protein structure prediction, ML (not LLMs in particular much less a chatbot) is useful for that kind of stuff just as it's useful in things like physical simulations: Accuracy isn't as good as the full physical model, but it runs so much faster that you can go through tons more data and actually get somewhere with your research. Better to have a million 99% reliable answers than two 100% reliable ones.

It's not the money as such but Greenland not being ready for full independence. They don't want independence to leave them worse off, poorer, as a playing ball of larger powers, etc.

Basically Greenland is a 30yold guy living with their parents figuring out how to get their own place. They aren't thrilled about the situation, but the parents are tolerable and it definitely beats being homeless.

Denmark gets a friend out of this, and a good conscience. Also, business opportunities. Applies to Europe in general, I very much doubt Greenland will go for independence without joining the EU. Not only would it provide safety, but it also means sovereignty while still being able to draw on cohesion funds.

According to gamedevs, 1-player pong (that is, vs computer) involves AI. It's a description of role within the game world, not implementation, or indeed degree of intelligence, or amount of power. Could be a rabbit doing little more than running away scared, a general strategising, or a right-out god toying with the world, a story-telling AI. Key aspect though is reacting to and influence on the game itself or at least some sense of internal goals, agency, that set it apart from mere physics, it can't just follow a blind script. The computer paddle in pong fits the bill: It reacts dynamically to the ball position, it wants to score points against the player, thus, AI. The ball is also simulated, possibly even using more complex maths than the paddle, but it doesn't have that role of independent agent.

EU offers Trump removal of all industrial tariffs

terms and conditions apply

Last time around the Yanks wanted the EU to accept chlorinated chickens I don't think anything has changed in that regard. They're just playing the headlines.

Not Germany, but Berlin, as in the state. And so far they only tried to, or at least I haven't yet anything to the contrary. It's up to the courts, the Berlin state government will have to demonstrate that those people are a danger to public safety, push come to shove not just before Berlin's administrative courts (which are saner than its administration) but also federal and then European ones.