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/)J

Jerkface (any/all)

@ jerkface @lemmy.ca

Posts
0
Comments
331
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Except, not that.

  • I was looking at Depp's wikipedia page recently and I noticed a Polanski film. I never really looked into all that but I knew that was kind of sketchy. Turns out Polanski plead guilty to raping a child in the 70s and has been a fugitive from the State of California ever since. It's not like it's a secret, everyone knows, and they still keep working in his fucking movies. Depp just wanted to work with him so bad, he didn't give a fuck. Likewise a bunch of other A-list stars, producers, publishers... and then every one of them acts like they give such a big fuck about Weinstein. It's so performative, it's sickening.

  • Like there's something wrong with shitting on Chappelle?

  • "When?" I think you mean, "If."

  • Do you even understand why you are entertaining such ridiculous ideas? It's because you don't want to face the truth and acknowledge the consequences of your choices.

    But okay, let's say a dairy could somehow operate without killing. They DON'T. You know for a fact that vulnerable individuals got murdered every time you buy dairy. So what the fuck?? What's this fantasy about murderless dairy (as if that was the only problem) of yours got to do with anything? It's a distraction from your victims.

  • As in, choose not to be a dairy farmer or consume dairy products?

  • Do you think dairy farmers eat their 100lbs wheels of cheese? It's the same thing.

    In either case, you're talking about harm reduction when it is so trivial to eliminate harm. It is in fact EASIER. But your attachment to the fruits of abuse won't let you see it that way, and you're looking for ways to make your abuse more emotionally palatable.

    Treating a vulnerable individual as a means instead of as an end is fundamentally wrong. No amount of benefit to you short of saving your life can make it morally acceptable. In a famine we have to make hard choices and sometimes we have to sacrifice others. That's not the situation right now. We grow more food each year than humanity could eat in two years without harvesting any vulnerable individuals.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • ahh see now you have retreated to "original" meaning. So by that metric, everyone who's heart is light (ie "gay") is attracted to everyone who is their gender.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Two genders, eh. Everyone who isn't gay is attracted to every gender they don't belong to, eh.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • "Bi-" doesn't exclude them, but "pan-" exists to explicitly include them. Those aren't the same thing.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Ditto.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Nah, I miss the 8 and 16 bit eras

  • "I don’t owe anyone jack shit, not even Mommy Dearest," is a decidedly edgelord thing to say. Other parts of what you were saying are not trying to be edgy, and I think I get that you were trying to create some kind of rhetorical contrast, but that's just objectively an edgelord comment. I edited my comment to tone it down, but not before you saw it, so I guess I have to stand by that.

  • I guess you're not going to bait stickly into examining the consequences their choices have on others who are powerless to protect themselves from those consequences. He's too clever for that kind of bait.