A video chat cannot accomplish meaningful change in a system where the ones in power are heavily entrenched in their attitude. On top of iy just being more convincing to see in person, the article mentions surprise at small things like officers closing doors softly, which would never even get mentioned in a vifeo call because it is completely natural to the norwegians who would never consider doing anything else.

27, slept wrong once and couldn’t get up without supporting my head with my hand. Didn’t fully go away for 4 days. I’m scared of this happening again lol

Gatekeeping really is not either of these things, but people can wear whatever they like. I can’t say I get why someone would do it at all, but not my problem.

There’s a huge difference between using it as a conversation starter and asking about their favorite songs or whatever, since it’s reasonable to assume they know and like the band, and going “name 3 songs” because you assume they don’t listen to the band and also somehow care about that.

I do this, I hate it, but I can’t get rid of it so I’ve started to accept it.

Youtube has forced it onto their creators for a while. Censor swears or risk upsetting the almighty algorithm and getting demonetized, because apparently american companies don’t like being associated with swearing.

It’s easy to say everyone should have human rights. But what if one person goes against anothers human rights? What is a just punishment?

And that’s before even getting into what rights people should have. You can very easily have everyone be theoretically equal while still effectively disadvantaging some people (and getting rid of that entirely is not even possible, we can just minimize it). There’s a lot to debate.

What I don’t get is why there would ever be a debate about excluding some people from human rights without them first violating others’. The only argument for that is “if we oppress this group, this other group will have better lives”. Which is often true, sure, but that’s just being a selfish asshole.

I once failed a test in politics class because after examining both sides I stated this issue does not affect me and I can see merit in both positions, therefore I do not have an opinion on the correct course of action.

Not like the grade mattered in the slightest but that was actual bullshit.

Boxen, presumably. Punching. So it’s saying punch nazis

We are, because people want luxury goods too. Post-scarcity is about being able to produce most goods with barely any human labor (would absolutely be true for food if every person on earth only worked in food production or to produce machinery needed for it), which we aren’t even close to. AI and automation might get us there (though it’s questionable when the cycle of just investing the newfound labor capacity into more luxuries will stop, if ever), but people are actively resisting that (reasonably so) because the current economic system basically everywhere is horribly rigged towards funnelling the excess wealth to rich individuals rather than improving the living standards of society as a whole.

Would it be evil to genetically engineer a cow that can produce milk without having to get pregnant? Seems much less evil to me than the current state of things.

As I stated, it is not incorrect to use the term racism for religious discrimination, especially not when it involves a religion you can’t just join at will. What matters is moreso whether they see themselves as a seperate people from whoever they discriminate against.

“Race” for humans is a made up concept and “racism” has been used to refer to any kind of hating a group for their ethnicity. “Ethnicity” is a very ambiguously defined concept notably including shared attributes like nationality, language, history, religion, etc.

I, too, am not a fan of words being used incorrectly, but this is not an incorrect use of “racism”.

I mean as a german I would read “fuck germany” and if the context is international politics I’d assume they mean the government.

But from what I know it’s also true that both the US and China have some pretty strong propaganda going to make people think that criticism of their country = criticism of them personally, so specifying never hurts to avoid antagonizing people. Still doesn’t seem like something to instantly ban someone over, but context kind of matters, if it’s out of the blue needlessly inflammatory it’s kinda worse than say a top level comment on a post about china doing something bad.

Tfw i always make 250g for myself

No, because they cause plenty of lasting damage.

Given that apparently only very few kids that get puberty blockers bc of gender dysphoria actually decide to not transition, we should probably lower the time that even trans kids get them for by a lot and just let them go through the puberty they want already.

Asshole has to be censored when it’s being penetrated afaik, though sometimes they just censor it along with the rest for whatever reason, probably less effort to draw.