JayDee

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Ah yes, biblical genders: the penetrator and the penetrated.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The outrage is more that a label is being applied to them. They want it to be 'women' and 'trans women', where only 'non-normal' identities get a label.

The application of 'cis' bothers conservatives because it changes the narrative, from people who identify as their assigned sex being 'the default', into cis people just another state of identity with no more significance than the others.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I've seen others saying it's legit.

Also would be pretty hard to substantiate or debunk definitively.

Concrete evidence would be, say, the tiktoker in question being caught out or admitting it was fabricated.

I'll show you my source if you show me yours.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

It might taste alittle different at this point.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Sure you can.

  • Look under the water.
  • oh shit a shark.
  • shark don't give a fuck bout no human, keeps on swimmin.
  • you survived.

You could also survive a serial killer in a similar way.

"Here's your latte, Sir."

But also, you could take a small shark.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can't tell if this is sarcasm. Not a proponent of AI, but this is actually somewhat correct.

A well-documented phenomena regarding salmon are the salmon runs, where salmon migrate up rivers in order to mate.

They are quite often shown leaping out of the water to fight currents, to the point that grizzly bears have made it a hunting practice to wait at the top of rapids and grab the salmon out of the air.

It got the fish wrong. Though. I think that coloration is more like a trout, but in reality it's a whateverthefucktheaifeelslike fish

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
  • Mars
  • Mars
  • Mars

TERRAFORMING!!!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

This guy watched that TechnologyConnections video trilogy on lanterns, 100%.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Hierarchy, being a chain of command in which an individual above, privvy to more information, gives you instructions to follow. This includes military organizations, but is just as applicable to a doctor-patient relationship.

Coercion, meaning the threat of retaliation, through physical force, revoking of freedoms or privileges, or denial of resources.

Voluntary, meaning of one's own means, with no coercion or realization of coercion, with the clear option to opt out being present whenever possible.

This does not leave things in question, I believe. Currently, we all operate within hierarchies at work with explicit threats of destitution being held over our heads, through the denial of currency. Meanwhile, there is no coercion from your physician despite it still being hierarchical in nature, because the hierarchy is entirely based on trust and is voluntary.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

At that point, we're just doing it to be petty. Not like we're gonna reform him and make him see the error in his ways in there. It's just punishment for punishment's sake.

An assassination attempt was logical at face value, at least. Trump poses a threat, so you eliminate that threat, just as you would an animal stalking you. Of course, killing trump isn't actually going to end this craziness.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think that is a misreading of why moral codes come into being, and I am not trying to preach moralism.

Moral codes are not universal truths, but instead rules of engagement for maintaining order within a system, and they exist within every social social scope, though their level of detail tends to decay as the scope becomes more interpersonal. They're not really a tool of the state, but instead just a human tool. The state just codifies its own and disseminates it into the social collectives it rules.

My statement above is a moral observation about political morality within the US, and which I view is generally a useful rule within any democratic political system (I am referring to systems which have a structure and voting system associated with democratic processes, not necessarily ideal or actual democracies).

I am also not saying that this moral code is necessarily good for us or the system itself at any given moment, but stating why this moral code exists in the first place, and why anyone who is apart of our system and wants that system to survive (whether that be for avoiding personal turmoil or political ideology) will continue to condemn assassination attempts from any side.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

By weighing all violence as immoral you are not ruling it out completely. You make it a last-resort, where you avoid one great injustice with a lesser injustice - a lesser injustice which you still face consequences for.

The alternative is morally sanctifying some murders, which leads to 'morally justified' murders being done by all political sides (since they each view themselves as 'the moral ones'), and which eventually gets twisted into the party in power murdering their opponents with impunity because it's 'morally justified'.

view more: ‹ prev next ›