xor

It’s difficult to quantify, but I think there is a compelling argument to be made - just off of my head, WW2 led to:

• the fall of German autocracy/restoration of German democracy (though Hitler did kinda break that one in the first place)
• Italian and Japanese democracy
• redistribution of wealth/power in Britain
• the 4th french republic
• alignment of the European democracies
• establishment of the UN

Non-profit doesn’t mean you don’t make money, just that the money you do make doesn’t go to shareholders but instead back into the company

It’s crazy that this isn’t even the first comment I’ve seen this week arguing that the Ukraine war is somehow a conspiracy by the West to sell more weapons, as if Russia didn’t just roll up and invade them, illegally and unprovoked

That’s literally the joke though? That the expectation is a simple problem, but is actually a deeply complex system

The response to the dilemma doesn’t get to create the constraints though? Only the dilemma itself gets to set the rules.

Or - get this - it’s because I’m from a country where having more guns than citizens isn’t considered normal.

Children aren’t old enough to vote, why the fuck would you think it’s a good idea to give them easy access to ranged, deadly weapons?

“Gunphobic” is an absurd term, because a phobia implies an irrational fear, so fearing misuse of objects explicitly created for killing things isn’t exactly a “phobia” so much as it is a legitimate concern for the country with the 2nd highest rate of firearm homicides per capita on the planet.

In my country, we don’t do “school shooting drills”. We don’t need to.

Of course, the solution to children using deadly weapons is to give them to more children. Genius!

Did apple maps really not support walking until now?!

Bold to go with the pro-auth-left take

I’m just going to ignore the long responses to stuff I didn’t claim in the first place

Okay but this isn’t “oh no, there are tankies around”, it’s the admin of one of the largest Lemmy instances systematically suppressing information about massacres and genocide.

There’s quite a big gap between banning “opinions you don’t like” and defederating from a systemically auth-left instance, in the same way that defederating from an auth-right instance would be a no-brainer.

I think the lemmy software itself isn’t so much the problem (in that it isn’t politically moderated), but the way he moderated his own instances make a fairly compelling reason for defederation

There’s a big distinction between being republican and capital-R Republican, and between being pro-democracy and a capital-D Democrat

You had me for a moment there

One could even go as far as to argue that doing either effectively implies also doing the other effectively at the same time

It’s worth noting, though, that this doesn’t take into account the levels of inequality beyond comparing numbers of billionaires/non-billionaires.

The Gini coefficient is a popular method of measuring economic inequality, on a scale from 0 (total equality) to 1 (one person owns the entire nation’s wealth).

As of 2019, the US and China had Gini coefficients of 0.481 and 0.465 respectively, making them extremely similar in overall wealth inequality, which is extremely high for both nations.

I would add though, that (a) those statistics do exclude non-violent sexual harassment (which is more likely from strangers), and (b) that sexual violence is massively underreported, especially when the perpetrator is unknown, since the chances of anything being able to be done about it are extremely low

I clearly said: it’s not targeted at you specifically, but at that fact that women are disproportionately more likely to be harassed or assaulted, and when that happens, the aggressor is almost exclusively men.

They’re not scared of you because you’re personally scary, they’re scared of you because there’s an ingrained culture of sexual harassment of women by men. So when you say “that’s a nice dress” to a woman you don’t know, she’s not thinking “aww cute”, she’s thinking “is this guy being nice, or will they threaten me if I turn them down?”

Seriously, ask literally any woman you know if they’ve ever been sexually harassed, and the answer is almost guaranteed to be yes.

I would 100% pick a Catholic priest

Yes, I know that, that’s how hyperbole works. My point is that such a statement shouldn’t be interpreted as “every priest is a child molester” but as “there’s a concerningly high rate of them, and they’re probably not a good option for childcare.”

You are accusing everyone

When did I say “all men are <whatever you’re saying I’m accusing all men of>?” Stop making this about you, and actually try to understand why interactions with men can be terrifying for women.

But it doesn’t say you personally are unsafe, it says that the odds that a man chosen at random is unsafe is high enough that women - understandably - fear being left alone with a random stranger to a level at least comparable with being left alone with a bear.

An enormous number of men fail to understand just how common and how terrifying it is for women to be harassed, assaulted and raped by men. And that is exactly what the bear/man hyperbole is pointing out.

And the reason people with takes like yours get chewed out for it is because you could do some reflection and consider

what is this systemic issue, what behaviours might make women around me scared, what can we as a society do to change this, and what can I do to avoid women around me fearing I may be unsafe?

But instead, they take it as a personal attack, and so respond

why am I being attacked for someone else’s behaviour?

Edit: here’s another example in a similar format to demonstrate how the meme is being misinterpreted, note how your first response wouldn’t be “why are you accusing all priests?!”

“Who would you rather babysit your child, a bear or a Catholic priest?”

Well sure, but I don’t think anyone is seriously proposing matriarchy as the reasonable alternative to patriarchy

Gender equality, however, does imply a fairer society

Sir this is a meme