snooggums

I’m not saying apple will do anything about it, just that they will let the cops know what is causing the reboots if asked.

The police could just ask Apple, it isn’t like they are going to have some secret reboot process that they would hide from the police.

K

It is important that when we are addressing issues of sexism, that we try to make sure that the ideas are easily understood by women, men, girls, and boys so that everyone understands how to support equality. If we only focus our effort on men and boys, without recognizing the influence also has on women and girls, then it will not be as successful. For example, the social expectations of women and girls to dress in certain ways is commonly enforced by men, women, girls, and boys even if the influence is only targeted at women and girls. Not to mention the toxic masculinity that is applied to men and boys by men, women, boys, and girls that are commonly reinforced by telling men and boys to ‘man up’ in stressful situations.

You are right, that is smooth as butter.

Can’t those both be true at the same time?

Yes, but actually no.

If a system exists to serve a purpose but does something else it is broken. People may consider completely changing the system into something new to be fixing it, but those who think it needs to be destroyed don’t want the chance of problematic parts of the existing system to be carried over or may even think it doesn’t need to exist in the first place.

Let’s take the FBI. It fucking sucks for minorities because it has always been a shitty, racist, and bigoted organization. Sure, it occasionally enforces civil rights and handles federal crimes, but it is absolutely rotten to the core. Some people might think that firing everyone but keeping the structure could fix it by replacing the horrible people, but it is likely any reform will retain some level of shittyness because continuing to exist means the underlying structure and culture is likely to hang around because it is the same literal agency. Others might want to destroy it by eliminating it by name and replacing it with a new agency that enforces federal laws or maybe they don’t want it at all and want other agencies to handle enforcement on their own. The latter will most likely result in some of the old shitty FBI staff to be hired into either of those outcomes due to having experience, but the idea is that destroying is significant enough that there is a chance that the next time around we might avoid the same mistakes.

A more relatable example might be an old bike. Is it worth trying to repair when the underlying structure is worn out or is a replacement that achieves the same things more likely to have a better outcome. Or maybe you don’t even need a bike because you moved somewhere you can easily walk everywhere and you have other options for exercise.

The Yes box is the white one.

Wabi-sabi is about being close to perfection, but not reaching it. Basically the same concept as hand made things having small imperfections instead of being cookie cutter.

It isn’t about apathy and filth.

Paper trail.

Hacking the machines would be useful for complaints that the counts weren’t accurate, but wouldn’t affect turnout. Republicans got the numbers they were expected to get, the lack of turnout hurt the Dems like it always does.

Doing something woth your brain leeps it working better, just like how physical exercise works. If you traded gaming for doing nothing, that would make the occasional time you do something feel like a lot of work.

It is also possible that you have some level of depression or your brain adjusted to all the stimulation and other things aren’t triggering the same feeling. It could lots of things.

The first step to try any of those for things is to find an activity that is mentally stimulating in some way. Not like a full dive into calculus, but maybe learning something new like a different hobby or maybe games that aren’t as engaging for long periods of time. I would recommend games with a short completion time and no grinding or rewards if that is what you found to be addicting.

Note: I didn’t stop computer gaming but I did drop another time consuming hobby and it took some adjustment to find something else.

The dog on the barbie is a saterical website by a vegan, so it is neither ‘the rage’ nor a reason for anything to get spicy.

The are you racist one is just sublime.

Obama had a winning message and he failed to follow through on a lot of it. It was about hope and more importantly CHANGE.

Dems failed spectacularly by not getting rid of the filibuster when their supermajority had a couple dissenters. If they had actually followed through instead of letting Republicans obstruct when they had two houses and the oval office they could have shown that change and kept the momentum going. Well, if they actually sold their success, which they are also terrible at.

Instead they held onto their safety blanket that the Republicans neutered to stack the courts, and will absolutely throw out if they get the House too so they can pass all the terrible laws they want.

Dems screwed themselves.

Because Dem voters have always needed something to vote for, voting against works for Republicans.

Technically Republicans are voting for something when when they are voting to destroy the government. Their goal just happens to be destructive.

I kinda thought they would learn from Obama’s success in promoting hope and change, but no, they are right back to trying to peel off Republican voters instead of motivating the unengaged voters like he did.

I was excited when Harris first announced and started calling out Trump on his bullshit. Then she was non-committal in actually withholding arms from Israel due to their constantly violating the conditions of being sent those weapons. Then she said that burning a flag was unAmerican or something close enough. Then it went to the step of trying to appeal to Republican voters instead of trying to motivate undecided and apathetic voters, who are the people that helped Obama win with his campaign of hope and change.

I can completely understand someone who has given up because the Dems are just slow walking the decline, not actually improving anything. It is so fucking demoralizing that the Dems can’t learn anything.

Because single poop bags tend to slide down and get mashed to the bottom so the can always smells life dog shit.

“Don’t forget about gendered violence against boys!” would be a likely response to a statement about men.

It is absolutely a case of a term being poisoned, which does mean it needs to be treated more carefully but sucks when there isn’t an alternative.

I absolutely would use males in that context. “Toxic masculinity has a detrimental affect on males of all ages” sounds perfectly fine to me because I don’t know of a different label for the group and males doesn’t have the same dehumanizing usage as females.

If ‘females’ wasn’t used by online sexists to treat women as objects would it sound that way?

I’m mainly asking when ages span from birth to old age and the goup would basically be “female persons” or “male persons” which is clunky.

Sometimes it can be rephrased, but it often requires multiple words to mean the same thing. Plus “women of all ages” will be read as not including children.

I’m mostly pissed that sexists ruined the only single word term we have for half of the population.