i mean, most people use bathrooms. Considering that human waste is literally a biohazard, i feel like doing anything else would be quite rude at best, and arguably a crime at worst.
i literally didn't claim that, scroll up to one of my previous comments.
the quality or fact of belonging to a population group or subgroup made up of people who share a common cultural background or descent.
so technically this more closely matches the definition of ethnic, rather than ethnicity, but ethnicity is just the specific designation of an ethnic group, so meh.
from my understanding around the local area to Palestine and Israel, is that Palestine (and Israel as well) are more legally and specifically defined, than ethnically defined. You could argue that Palestinian would be an ethnicity, but like i said, is the entire state of Wyoming also an ethnicity? Indiana locals are Hoosiers, yet they don't ascribe to a certain ethnicity. Like i said i just don't know enough about the local area to be able to classify it more properly.
In fact, the basic internet resources seem to affirm this, googling Palestine brings up two primary results (for me at least) Palestine: the geographical area (unrelated to ethnicity) and the state of Palestine: the country (presumably also unrelated to ethnicity)
"Half of the Palestinian population are diaspora and refugees." also pulled from the same resource, uses Palestinian to refer to the people who "are a member of Palestine" rather than an ethnicity. Historically this is what ethnicity means, but i don't believe that Palestine, over the last 50 years of it's literally global timeline, has remained to be Palestinian, i'm almost certain it's floated away over time, as things tend to do in systems of entropy.
this is from wikipedia, so not a guaranteed source of truth but it seems that Palestine is Arab, which would make Palestine ethnically Arab, ignoring the minority communities. From what i can tell, and from what i expect, Palestine seems to be a cultural melting pot of sorts, so i'm really not sure the term genocide applies here at all.
The mental fucking gymnastics you genocides defenders come up with.
it's really not, is an individual state in the US considered to be it's own ethnicity? Genuine question.
We live in a global, interconnected society. Yes, it is your fucking problem, no matter how indirectly.
and yet, i only speak English, how many languages do you speak? I only live in the US, where do you live? I only have experience with western US society because i haven't been anywhere else. Where have you been?
With all due sincerity, i do not fucking know shit out most of the world outside of the US, it's literally not my place to make governmental decisions for the UK, or Ireland for example. Do i want Israel and Palestine to be at war? No, same as i don't want Ukraine and Russia to be at war, am i going to tell them what to do? No, it's not my fucking land, and it's not my fucking government. This is literally not my problem to answer.
The western society, the US in particular has issues with over projecting power and influence into eastern society and expecting it to work, it doesn't time after time. Why are we expecting this to be any different?
genocides defenders
also to be clear, you are quite literally pulling this out of your ass, because i'm not even sure this would be classified as a genocide, it might be. And here you are arguing that i am quite literally defending it, even though the only thing i contest is what these actions are constituted as. Whether or not i think it's genocide or not doesn't magically make all the people dying go away. You're the one doing that conflation here, not me.
also, cool reference to the nazis, once Israel turns to Egypt and starts bombing them indiscriminately or something, i'll believe you.
You show me an example of anyone suffering PTSD because their parents showed their partner baby pictures.
i literally provided myself as an example in this, i quite literally said that i would consider it a violation of privacy, and no that's not PTSD, but PTSD is the extreme end of things here. We aren't just talking about PTSD.
Based on that reasoning, I should not show anyone any photo of my child until they were old enough to consent to them being taken.
based on that reasoning i shouldnt expose my child to the visual perception of other people who exist outside in the chance that one of them non consensually perceives my child.
You wouldn't expose your child naked in public, why would you expose them naked on picture?
I’m not embarrassed by my body and if that’s what her partner really wants to see, I don’t care.
that's great, the implication there is that you're still showing it to other people, and if we're talking family and friends, i don't know many people that would want that.
I'd fuck with atomic time, but at that point i want a perfect calendar system also.
i think this would probably explain the phrase "silly goose"
I imagine the whole point is to say that someone is "sillier than a goose" famously known for, not being silly at all. Arguing that you are so silly, that you look like a goose being silly.
yea no it definitely did.
if i can't have anything nice, you can't have anything nice, and only the people who can't have anything nice will have something nice >:)
i didn't take them and i didn't consent to them existing either. Neither did i consent to them being shown to anybody.
Naked humans are also normal, yet we still wear clothes. babies included, weirdly enough.
At what point does "naked baby photos" turn to "naked children photos" is my question.
how about this. You can have your naked baby photos, you just also have to be in the photo and naked as well.
Trauma and ptsd can be used interchangeably
the sky, and blue jeans can also be used interchangeably.
You wouldnt though.
we arrive at this conclusion immediately and without hesitation thanks to all the hard work of men thorought history.
you say this like women have ever had rights to the point that being ogled at "would be bad" the one argument here would be the "daughter is her fathers property" and that's not really a gender thing, that's a social custom about gender more than anything.
Unfortunately, circumcision is a particular form of mutilation that transcends cultures.
a lot of mutilation goes back centuries for human history. You can pick up any variety of mutiliation and it's been done, scarrification, penile subincisions, foot binding, skull stretching, i can keep going.
Just because it's historically common and pervasive doesn't mean we should consider it to be normal. The aztecs commited human sacrifice, and we think capital punishment is bad enough that we need to hide it away from the general public and make it "sterile" which in reality means using a completely botched medical injection process.
also what culture "should be" does not determine what it is now, i'm not sure the legality of naked baby photos to begin with tbh, i'm pretty sure they're still considered to be CP, unless legally stated otherwise somewhere. They wouldn't count as CSAM i think, since there's not abuse going on, but arguably it might count as CP still.
it's still weird (source, i have parents), at least ask your daughter for consent first.
I'd consider it to be a breach of my privacy otherwise.