Jiggle_Physics @ Jiggle_Physics @sh.itjust.works

Posts

21

Comments

791

Joined

8 mo. ago

yup, no problem, good bit of trivia to know, especially here

The term tankie came to be after instances of the USSR suppressing protests by driving tanks into the protestors. Like the Prague Spring in Czechoslovakia in 1968. This resulted in people, in the west, who are leftists, defending these actions, as some sort of necessity, in order to maintain communism. The defense of the extreme authoritarianism used here, IE using tanks to kill people, is where the term "Tankie" comes from.

Not delusional, the people who matter to them are generally doing quite well, so the economy is doing well. Just like the gilded age, where the "economic boom" funneled truck loads of money into the coffers of the vanderbilts, carnegies, clarks, melons, etc., while the average person was struggling under terrible life conditions.

Or add hot sauce to the mayo

i didnt say they could, I said not all biological women can, this is the assumption made by people that causes issues. The other are transmen who find themselves without proper sanitary supplies due to assumptions based on being see as the gender they transitioned to.

That is a whole different issue than what was said by the previous person, who said the idea behind believe women is for authority figures to take their allegations seriously and do their jobs properly, and investigate the claims. It was not mocking as, in the context of what the previous poster said, and not the expanded issues of the system beyond the scope of this, it would take something like psychic knowledge, or some impractical expectation of humanity. They said doing their job impartially, and impartially is the important word here, as everything you brought up is a result of not doing their job impartially, and thus, not correctly.

Yeah, I was interested in giving it a try, and then a friend sent me a couple links discussing her culty stuff, and weird claims like Hitler wasn't evil, and shit.

Yeah it sucks, I wanted to get some incense and oils for the same reason, everywhere was like a laundry list of impossible claims about this stuff, some of the oils even claimed ingesting them had medicinal properties, then, when I looked it up, it said you definitely do not ingest that shit.

What way is better than investigating allegations impartially? Do you know of something better that wouldn't require someone to be psychic, or require everyone coming to some nigh impossible position where no one lies?

I mean those are on a person by person basis as well. I know women who are physically stronger than most of the men I know, and would be more fit for harder labor than most of them. Women who don't have the ability to have children, or periods, etc. It is best we assess things based on individual capacity, or merit, or whatever, rather than write rules that are completely exclusive to an entire group of people based on broad statistics.

I haven't met a single person who's morals are concrete. Everyone's morals have flexibility, and change over time. Morals are fluid concepts that change in response to a myriad of factors. I doubt you know anyone who hasn't changed moral stances on things throughout their lives, or doesn't believe there are contextual exceptions to morals.

I guess my point is, the idea of roles based on gender, in and of its self, is BS

If you had just said gender norms are cooked, I would have responded differently. You narrowed this to gender in western society is cooked. There is no other society where there aren't bullshit gender roles, and when gender is brought up in a west vs non-west context it is almost always done by people who conclude that gender is bad in the west, but not in other places where more "traditional" ideals about gender are still more highly enforced, like asia, russia, eastern europe, africa, etc.

I’m asking people here that are comfortable using a sexist term why that is, no paper is going to tell me that.

This wasn't what you asked, initially, you are moving the goalposts, because a slur is a pejorative doesn't mean a pejorative has to be a slur, slurs are also considered swear words, are all swear words slurs, and no I didn't say something has to have a history of bigotry to simply be offensive, I said that in order for mansplaining to be comparable to the n word it has to carry that weight.

Goalpost shifting, lying about what you originally asked, false equivalence, and so on. You asked why people thought mansplaining wasn't sexist originally, pointed you to papers on that, you insisted random people instead tell you why, then you moved course to saying that there being negative connotations in a term, it is bigoted, now you claim the question was why people are comfortable using the phrase, which it wasn't.

Have fun being determined to not seek professional information on the use of mansplaining and why, while it may be a mean things to say, it isn't misandry.

Welcome

Scentbird's CEO/founder is pretty crazy. Claims all sorts of magical medical cures on her social media account. Saying you cure cancer by "aligning your life's purpose" is one of the least crazy claims she has made. If you are concerned about the ethics of companies you buy from, especially when they are easily avoided like a perfume company, I suggest looking into her, and deciding if you still want to give them your business.

One of the first things he got rid of was a specialized intelligence unit that was dedicated to studying, and strategizing opposition to, Chinese cyber warfare. This has stood out to me since it happened. We have these for pretty much every country that is an active threat source, but he chops the one for China, and it is like at, or near, the top of his hit list. Seemed weird to me. I looked into who ran it, to see if they had openly clashed with Trump, but it didn't seem so, though there was little information on the people involved in it, as I expected.

Asking you why you are asking me, when provided with professional sources is "literally crying about you doing this to me"? See, now you are doing exactly what I expressed in my first post on this. You are taking context clues and interpreting them to make a judgement call on me. This is what women who are being condescendingly explained things to them by men. Like some, you are misreading the person you are speaking to. I also notice the word slur isn't in that definition. Highlighting that stuff isn't the correction you might think it is, if I express a term to display my disapproval, it is demonstrating negative connotations, and belittling someone does not have inherent bigotry to it. If you are being condescending, you are belittling someone, so turn about is fair play. This is calling out your choice of actions. If I call a man, acting immaturely, a man-baby that is a statement about physical development, being grown, a man, vs a child, but they are acting in a way a child would. Same thing for woman-babies, or as they are more commonly known now, Karens, with Karen butting into other terms such as man-baby too. Mansplaining doesn't have centuries of intense persecution, torture, slavery, and many other awful things, things happening to this day, behind it. You are putting mansplaining on that level. Even if I agreed it was misandry, this would be a serious miss-equivocation.

"Yeah, effort… who needs that shit huh? The easy way is always the best way huh?"

Yes clearly, I provided the way to get professional answers about the subject you are asking for, that is the best way to get information, in this case. I can lead you to water, but can't make you drink. You seem to be thinking I should also scoop up the water, and pour it down your throat for you. I am asking why you think being given a means of answering your questions, from the best possible sources, is dodging your question, or why you would desire random assholes' takes on the subject, rather than professional ones. This makes no sense, unless you have some ulterior motive. You ask for answers, I provide a means to get the best ones that can be achieved in this context, you then insist randos on a forum answer instead.

Score!

Pejorative means it shows disapproval, if I say a term that means anything negative about something, or someone it is a pejorative. If someone throw a fit about something, and I call them childish, that is a pejorative, it is not being used as a slur, it means I disapprove of your choice of action. If that person is a man and I call them a man-baby, that is not me being sexist, it means you are a man, who is acting like a baby. Saying something that means I disapprove of your behavior is absolutely not the same as saying something that means I disapprove of how someone was born. That is the difference between the term mansplaining, and the n word. One is a judgement of actions, one is a judgment of inherent qualities.

I am not saying you are victimizing me by doing this, that is a stupid conclusion to come to. I am asking why you are insisting on asking random people online for answers, when the expert opinions on the subject are right there for you? Why must you get this from people online when you can get high quality answers with a search. If you think asking you why you insist on getting answers from non-experts, when the expert answers are at your finger tips, is being a crybaby (a pejorative BTW, so did you just call me a slur?), or calling myself a victim, I guess that makes you the same for insisting others answer your questions. I refer to myself because, when I pointed you towards the better source for answers, you insisted on an answer from me instead.

Why do you want random people online to give you answers when much higher quality information is available with little extra work?