Might wanna take a break from posting memes if your ass gets this bent out of shape when people say your unfunny shit is unfunny. This is boomer tier humour. All that missing is a line taking a shot at the wife.
Also if you think there’s nothing wrong with following some random chick around a store staring at her, as you stated in another comment, you’re creepy as fuck.
I had a similar line of thought. Man it’s been so long since I’ve even seen link to Kotaku that I wondered “hmm I wonder if they actually do journalism these days”. My guess is also no.
Unless my viewer is borked, got a GitHub or link to your project? Definitely sounds like something I’d use!
Yeah by this rhetoric unit 731 was A-ok and did nothing wrong lmao
Given prisons in the US are pretty much a source of slave labour and the fact that a lot of these guards are on the take (hence drugs seemingly be freely available in practically any prison) this failure of duty seems more like business as usual.
I don’t think people wanting a vehicle they might have to commute daily in looking aesthetically pleasing quite meets the mark of fetishising. You might be ok driving a cube 2.0 but the rest of the market may not be and considering electric is trying to break into the established market of ICE…. Though to the larger point, most places could solve the problem by fixing/modernising public transport but that may just be too radical apparently.
If you think that anecdotal story somehow justifies the idea of using the military to fight fires, I don’t know what to tell you. The fact the military has dudes who’s literal job it is to fix HVAC because the air con dying would fuck with operational readiness. How do you think having random amount of your service members tied up fighting fires would affect that readiness. It’s a ludicrous idea that doesn’t pass any test based in basic common sense.
The whole hurry up and wait shit was because the US military valued its readiness and would rather have people standing around ready to go rather than the inverse situation. Especially since the amount of bushfires are predicted to increase and the fact that most militaries have area of denial weapons specifically to set large areas of land on fire… I don’t know what else I can say to make you see what a shit idea it is.
“Between assignments” and “plenty of sitting around” shows me neither of you have any concept of the roles of any military let alone the ADF and any further discussion would not be an effective use of my time.
If you don’t think we will need the defence force, especially since we’re apparently just going to go “fuck it roll them die” on our future with global warming, you are sorely mistaken.
If our defence force is fucking around doing the job of emergency firefighters, because the government thinks having volunteer firefighters is appropriate, how do you think that will affect their combat readiness? With Russia invading Ukraine, China flying military aircraft towards and the planet on the verge of becoming uninhabitable; there will be plenty of chances for wars that aren’t “bogus” to emerge.
I’m super not a fan of these things either. I don’t mind people riding their own but people just ditch these things in the middle of the sidewalk constantly.
That and idiots weaving in traffic with them and flying around blind corners in them big nah thanks from me for rentals.
I was gonna say I hear it heaps in Aus but I’m pretty sure Americans use it too.
Yeah one of my better landlords was a sparky that worked hard af. This is Aus though so might be different. Any time we reported shit with the house he was out the immediately when he didn’t have a job to fix it personally and you could tell he was hot shit at his work too because he had his own business.
Man lemmy already getting overrun with fucking CSAM bots and now fucking bots using it as an ad network
Given the nature and tone of your replies, the appeal to your professionalism rings hollow. Especially telling every other comment that critical of your idea to get out or calling them childish. For someone supposedly attempting to help you’re sure being very belligerent and hostile. Might be worth doing some introspection over. I certainly hope you don’t communicate in such a fashion in your professional capacity that’s for sure.
In protist comment the “this…” after nitrogen narcosis is meant to indicate a change of topic to the OP. As in “X is boring this is pod racing. “ it’s ambiguous and a semi colon could have probably avoided this confusion. Or even just “what op is describing is”. Not that I think his comment is necessarily correct.
So Mao isn’t responsible for the millions of deaths under his leadership in labour camps, executions and famine because he was totalitarian and therefore it isn’t because of socialism? Yet capitalism is responsible for all the deaths from poverty and disease according to your image, does that about sum it up?
Also no socialist leader was a mass murderer? Not even one? Every socialist leader much just be a perfect human being then. Very compelling.
I understand the foundational concepts to the patriarchy idea and accept that some people who believe it can draw the distinction. My point remains that most do not. Including this video author who felt comfortable titling the video as they did. Even in the paper this video apparently references the paper starts with addressing the patriarchy and rapidly goes from that to pointing solely to “white men” as being the focal point of the issue/paper.
I think that claiming there is absolutely no patriarchy or patriarchal element to society is disingenuous at best. That aside I think it is looked to as the sole reason or even the main reason for a lot of issues without cause and little to no scientific reasoning. If the world switch to being a matriarchy tomorrow it’d still be business as usual because it’d be women CEOs/interest group/corporate entities making billions in blood money instead. Trying to pin all of societies woes on the patriarchy just does not seem in anyway conductive to the larger issue in this context, which is climate change. Especially when it does so on shoddy papers like the one referenced in the video.
It cites one study wherein 16 women and 9 men had an introductory conversation on the issue.
Which leads you to feel comfortable making the widely generalised conclusion of:
The video spends a long time on the phenomena wherein men tend to feel the need to dominate discussions regardless of their actual qualifications.
One paper, with a sample size of 25. With no rigorous data beyond “we observed an academic meeting and the men spoke more times, for longer”. That paper also attributes a lot of reasons for why the men did this and nearly all of it based in speculation beyond the two quotes. The paper bases an astounding amount of assertions based off this incredible weak data.
Criticizing patriarchy is not attacking men or dividing groups.
What an interesting thought given the title of the video is literally “are men killing the planet?”. People insist that blaming the patriarchy == blaming men yet in actuality this rarely seems to a distinction drawn by the same people who espouse the patriarchy rhetoric.