keepcarrot [she/her] @ keepcarrot @hexbear.net

Posts

0

Comments

455

Joined

4 yr. ago

Clearly it would skew the electorate to the hitherto disenfranchised pro-murder caucus /s

Nah, it makes me gag. I'll eat it out of politeness, but not because I'm hungry

Damn, I wish this was mine

Seeing the ocean on my regular commute.

It used to be 50c chicken wings night at my local pub, but I moved away

Huh, I thought it was a choice between eating nothing and eating what was put in front of you. Which for me meant no dinner on pasta nights.

I'm all for banning lie detectors because they are a piece of theatre used to extract confessions (themselves a tool with far too much weight levied against people with no legal support and/or neurodivergence), but I'd probably grapple with your definition of political a bit. (tbh you may have heard this before, I'm not super willing to have the argument today, but that was my first thought walking in)

I know its been a common thing in libertarian circles to say "human nature is to find stuff, determine its value, and then try to hock it off", which is such a pessimistic view of humanity, let alone an inaccurate one (which it also is)

In Australia our conservatives run on the promise of nuclear power, but they've been in power for 20 of the last 26 years and haven't ever attempted to implement it, they just use the promise to stymie the development of renewables.

Imo the time to try to use nuclear to suppress oil and gas was 50 years ago.

The natural state of man is to observe advertising, or else how could people know where animals to hunt were or which berries to eat?

(I wonder if this has been said seriously by an ad think tank at some point)

I like their one train that everyone has to push towards their one station in Pyongyang.

Not too bad on this side yet, but I am dreading it

I don't think there's a universe where this guy had a shot doing this, but each attempt at irony and self-effacing deprication makes it worse

I have a STEM and am unemployable, which is/was also expensive:/

Aw, I like playing designer, except with no actual constraints if I think something looks cool.

Yeah, that'd be my read.

I personally avoid argument threads for the most part unless I have a dire social need, but not every conversation is necessarily about the Holodomor and Xinjiang (the two points of contention it seems).

I'd hope that everyone I talk to and take seriously is a denier of "White Genocide", the theory that white people are under threat of being bred out and marginalised in their own lands by the deliberate machinations of refugees and immigrants. In this rather gross example, we wouldn't refer to each other as genocide deniers.

After which point it becomes a discussion about what actually happened, what constitutes a genocide, whether that fits this legal definition or that etc. But the conversation never gets that far.

Personally I'm not super interested in relitigating this conversation every time a Chinese cop does something or a member of Azov sneezes. But if other people get something out of it, idk. Whatever. But it is a point of friction between our communities.

I try to engage everyone in good faith, but I'm also out of step with the majority of time zones on lemmy.

I'm not that scrappy. We don't have downvotes (which don't have notifications), so generally people reply instead (which do have notifications). The sincerity of any response is going to vary wildly. If I personally am going to respond to a post about Tiananmen Square or whatever, the initial poster is going to have to wade through a bunch of answers I will charitably call "tedious".

That said, if a certain sort of poster who trips some wire responds, or we get called something that implies you won't take us seriously (e.g. genocide denier is a more common one among others we'd consider on the left), why bother with civility or politeness? Even if you started to hear a doorknocker out, how quickly will your patience dry up when they start calling you a liar and a paid shill for inscrutable foreign agents?

Assuming they are similar levels of drunk, one party didn't get them into that situation specifically do that without the other one's knowledge, and they're both sloppily initiating drunken horny on each other, then sure. But really it would be worthwhile assessing the situation afterwards to see what actual harm/trauma has happened. I say this as someone who has drunkenly initiated things and its either violated a boundary or I've regretted it later.

I think the idea of having consent as this hard line, unforgiveable sin thing is probably not a good way of viewing consent. It's kinda puritanical. (e.g. most jobs are non-consensual in a puritanical sense, I would not be doing most jobs I've had unless I needed cash for rent/food, but we also learn to forgive people who help us get jobs we wind up hating. Also consent isn't just for sex)

The latest episode of the podcast Multiamory, which is focused on polyamory stuff but this episode was more general, actually has a broad discussion on this if you want to check it out. I disagree with a couple of points here and there, but whatever.

Do you have fairly hard water at home? That can make clothes stiffer.

Powders and detergent can leave a bit on at the end of a cycle, so if you have sensitive skin that can make everything feel scratchier

Someone suggested Zim on the FOSS thread for an internal personal wiki