Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)A
Posts
7
Comments
1126
Joined
3 yr. ago

Migrating here (or maybe keeping both) from @ArcaneSlime@lemmy.ml

Will put an eternal curse on your enemies for a Cinemageddon invite.

  • Tbf, this paints the picture that the issue isn't "the guns." If we also have more knife attacks, "guns" can't be "the reason" Americans are more violent than their oft compared counterparts. I'd wager it's something in the absolutely well known cocktail of economic disparity, general hopelessness, social isolation, instability abound, the pollution from chemical plants that led to our past serial killer problem (no really), and all the other factors that we know can contribute to more violence in a region.

    It's also more helpful to compare a country to itself, it's possible factors other than "guns" can be the real reason. For instance, Japan may be less violent because they don't have guns, or they may be less violent because they're quietly an authoritarian police state that has police in your district inspect your house once a year "just in case" and they can hold you indefinitely if you're simply suspected and can force confessions leading to a suspiciously high conviction rate (spoiler: false convictions). Without being able to force people to confess to crimes they didn't do (legally, it does happen but it isn't allowed), who knows how that'd work here.

    So with that in mind, comparing America now to America then, violent crime in the US has dropped steadily since 1993; and gun ownership has only gone up in that same time, in 2004 our "assault weapons ban" expired and violent crime is still falling, despite public perceptions fueled by 24/7 news media and their "if it bleeds it leads" scaremongering for ad revenue, of course.

  • Tbf, he was on his way to South America (iirc) and they cancelled his passport stranding him in a Russian airport until Russia eventually did give him amnesty.

  • Just adding for you since you forgot it:

    And that is a problem.

  • And look at how many people think men can't get raped.

    Well yes, but also no. Those people will still acknowledge men can be raped..by men. It isn't "men can't be raped" but "women cannot rape," and "only men can rape."

    Many places, by law, agree with this. They say rape requires penetration specifically with a penis, else; sexual assault at best. That means women cannot rape men or other women, technically, legally speaking, in those areas.

    Even women who do recognize men can be raped most often don't actually care, they just tell you how it doesn't matter because it "happens to women more." I can't deny that it does, but minimizing men's experiences like a frat bro because of "muh ratio" probably isn't the best look and they should take a long look within themselves.

    Even if you can "legally" defend yourself. Ok, you try that. See who goes to jail tonight. Protip, it's you.

    Even if you do just lay back and take it, then call the cops and try to press sexual assault charges, good luck! First of all, they'll probably tell you without proof they can't even charge her with the "max," sexual assault, there's no rape kits for men, and you're gay for not enjoying it.

    You try and tell your friends and "cancel" her socially from the friend group? They'll call you gay too, don't worry.

    So fuck me I guess, and if you're a woman you don't legally need my permission to do it, so that's something.

  • Used to have one, literally never.

  • That's not being neurotypical. That's just having poor communication skills.

    I won't even bother replying to him, that's what I'd have said, thank you.

    Based on the actual women in my life, "blame partner for own communication failures" is the divergence rather than the norm.

    YMMV. In mine it's about a 50/50 split, probably edging on the "blame others" side. I do also know guys that expect you to read their minds too though, mostly middle managers, and plenty men and women who can't take responsibility for any of their faults/actions (which is in essence the same issue, just broadened), it's not really a gendered issue, it seems like there's a general accountability problem these days.

  • Nope.

  • That's what "nope" means? I thought it just meant "nope."

    I figure something like "No I just want to cuddle with you and have a nice chat" would be a more descriptive way to say "nope," maybe we should look into that.

    If "she wants to talk to me" then she should use more than one word.

  • Doesn't matter how often it happens, the fear can be there.

    Take violence for an example. Violent crime has steadily fallen since 1993, yet people seem more scared of it than ever with the 24/7 news doom and gloom cycle's "if it bleeds it leads" paradigm. Moreover most violent crime by strangers is male on male, most often when women are attacked it's someone they know, friends, family, partner, yet still women seem more scared and distrusting than ever of an unknown man (while often still assuming the ones more likely to actually do something are "one of the good ones" no less).

    Basically, often fears don't line up with reality. Like, I'm scared of flying, apparently I'm dumb for that, but idgaf, "flying still scary."

  • Then she should tell me that, ironically, because I'm neurodivergent and can't read my own mind sometimes, let alone hers.

  • I don't want an attack dog, I'll protect the cats just fine.

    The cats won't run down range and get in my way.

  • I have to be in, but I'm not gonna take the time to find out.

    Just in case,

    HEY TESSERACT GUY:

    YOU A WHOLE ASS BITCH FR

  • The Adventures of Tom Bombadil

  •  
        
    Look, there is Fastitocalon!
    An island good to land upon,
    Although ’tis rather bare.
    Come, leave the sea! And let us run,
    Or dance, or lie down in the sun!
    See, gulls are sitting there!
    Beware!
    Gulls do not sink.
    There they may sit, or strut and prink:
    Their part it is to tip the wink,
    If anyone should dare
    Upon that isle to settle,
    Or only for a while to get
    Relief from sickness or the wet,
    Or maybe boil a kettle.
    
    Ah! foolish folk, who land on HIM,
    And little fires proceed to trim
    And hope perhaps for tea!
    It may be that His shell is thick,
    He seems to sleep; but He is quick,
    And floats now in the sea
    With guile;
    And when He hears their tapping feet,
    Or faintly feels the sudden heat,
    With smile
    HE dives,
    And promptly turning upside-down
    He tips them off, and deep they drown,
    And lose their silly lives
    To their surprise.
    Be wise!
    
    There are many monsters in the Sea,
    But none so perilous as HE,
    Old horny Fastitocalon,
    Whose mighty kindred all have gone,
    The last of the old Turtle-fish.
    So if to save your life you wish
    Then I advise:
    Pay heed to sailors’ ancient lore,
    Set foot on no uncharted shore!
    Or better still,
    Your days at peace on Middle-earth
    In mirth
    Fulfil!
    
      

    J. R. R. Tolkien.

  • Good.

    That's legal, fuck you. It's my data, and I want it (gone) now!

  • That isn't a hallucination, that's Scribbles! He's chill.

  • Praise "Bob" and Hail Eris!

  • Idk, I don't use any of them, but I've definitely heard people say facebook is for the olds. I thought the kids had all moved to TikTok tbh.

  • Good to know.

    Second question,

    Which one is more likely to spend demographic money to try to court younger white men from a low to middle income bracket?

    Are young people still on Facebook? I thought it was just "for boomers" now.

  • I may be wrong (I left the algorithmic social medias when they abandoned linear timelines [kept reddit until about a year before the exodus, since only fedi]) but:

    Is that not because that is the content you interact with (argumentatively, likely, but still) or hover over longer with their eye movement sensors, or all the other ways they track you, and so they think "ahh he 'likes' (hate engages with) this content so send more!" in a loop to keep you engaged and keep making money for them through advertisements?

    Like, if you ignored that shit (and iirc there's often a way to "reset" your algorithm in some settings, after all, they want the data they sell to be accurate, it's more valuable to sell...) and started only liking/lingering on family shit and cats (how can you ignore the kitties after all), they'd send primarily that, yes?

    I could be wrong about that, this is my understanding as an outsider, but I'm curious. At the end of the day I'll forever advocate for the end of such algorithmic practices entirely long term, and the end of one's individual involvement with it in the present moment: "Bruh get off that shit it is rotting your brain. Like actually, by design, and it wants to keep you locked in. Don't look at the Basilisk."

  • Fediverse @lemmy.world

    Best Mastodon App?

  • Linux @programming.dev

    Help! Edited fstab and broke my system!

  • cats @lemmy.world

    Update on Warehouse kitty, day 7.

  • cats @lemmy.world

    Rescue from my warehouse

  • cats @lemmy.world

    Introducing cats, sanity check me.

  • Meshtastic @mander.xyz

    Weird bug?

  • Fediverse @lemmy.world

    Current best lemmy clients