I really liked that Ed Helms asked a lot of very straightforward questions about Yarvin’s ideology, which just went to show that it completely falls apart if you think about it critically for even a moment. It’s not something you come to believe after listening to the best arguments from a bunch of different positions. It’s something you come to believe because it justifies your own elitism.
FUN FACT: Five Justices of the Supreme Court were appointed by presidents who were inaugurated despite losing the popular vote! That’s a full majority! And purely by coincidence, all of them are Republicans! :D
…alright, obviously it’s not fun. I can’t believe the audacity some people have to act surprised and offended when people say the Court is illegitimate.
This is a bit off topic, but it made me nostalgic. My first argument on reddit over a decade ago was with someone, either a scalper or a contrarian, trying to argue that scalpers provided a useful service that made things more fair, rather than assholes creating scarcity so they could profit selling a solution to a problem they themselves create.
So yeah, I hope they all get fucked on this one, too.
It was the response from a lot of people to COVID precautions that made me realize that a disturbing number of people are completely lacking in empathy, and don’t even understand it as a concept. They’re the people who truly did not understand why a person who isn’t at personal risk of complications would still do thinks like distance, wear a mask, or get vaccinated, because most of the benefits involve stopping the spread to others.
This is exactly the same thing. Not only do they not care about other people, they genuinely do not understand the others do.
I hate how relevant this question is in so many situations.
Yet again.
Somewhat off topic, but the names of both the publisher and the developer are also used by unrelated tabletop game companies. Hero Games makes the Hero System tabletop RPG, and GameScience (no space, so there’s a difference) make dice. It threw me for a loop.
That user is basing their position on a Daily Mail article citing LePoint, a french right-wing magazine, that quotes one of her trainers, who said (with context) “There was a problem with her hormones and chromosomes, but she’s a woman. That’s all that mattered to us.”
Nowhere does that even suggest she has XY chromosomes, and, to state the obvious, he’s not a doctor. He’s responding to an unsubstantiated allegation, and probably giving it too much credit. He even says that she underwent a testosterone test that came back within female norms.
It really is simple. The burden of proof is on people making these claims, and we’re not taking the word of a blatantly corrupt organization, that had a vested interest in disqualifying Khelif, who would not say what test was administered or what the results were. If they had more specific information, they wouldn’t shut up about it, because won’t even shut up now with less to go on.
Fair point. I just don’t like the move, and don’t want to support a company doing it. Even putting that aside, it really makes me worried that they’re at the point that they’re trying to ride on their reputation while increasing profit margins. It makes me think that, if I buy their newer models, they’re more likely to cheap out but charge more.
It’s about PROTECTING WOMEN! And if I have to hurt a bunch of women to protect them from hypothetical scenarios I made up to demonize trans people, so be it!
Same. I’ve been thinking of replacing the cheap immersion circulator we have, and was going to go with Anova. This blatant enshittification is enough to make me look elsewhere.
deleted by creator
From the same folks who were just calling Kamala Harris a “DEI pick.”
As an Innuendo Studios video put it, it’s “last hired, first fired.”
The fascinating thing about this is that, in context… it’s still fucking weird, but for different reasons.
He’s technically joking about how it makes you transition, saying it’s a claim he heard from “scientists.” So he wants to call men women as a misogynistic insult, but also to poke fun at the concept of scientific study. It’s wrong to distinguish between gender and sex as part of evidence-based medicine and basic conscientiousness. It’s cool and good if you’re doing it to be a dick, though. He’s got to police gender roles, but also insist that they are completely immutable based on your sex.
What a creepy weirdo.
My favorite part was that Vance, supposedly, wrote about it in Hillbilly Elegy. Reading the book would easily solve the issue once and for all, but no one wanted to.
It’s also why the AP article was retracted. They could obviously prove that it’s not in the book, but like you said, it would be impossible to prove that he never, at any point in his life, when no one was around, fucked a couch.
…but also, the AP article didn’t even involve reading the book. They just used Ctrl+F on key terms because, again, no one wants to actually read that book.
For sure, and it is absolutely true.
I just like “weird” because it only works one way. For people who value individuality and diversity, it doesn’t necessarily have a negative connotation. For people who value conformity, it’s a devastating insult. Apparently Ben Shapiro went on Megyn Kelly’s show to cry about it, which is great.
Yeah, that’s true.
It’s just that based on prior arguments I’ve had, they’re just so agitated by thinking things through. even if you put aside the overt heinousness, they just wave away the collateral damage, dismissing them as trivial details as though the whole fucking point of policy is the effect those policies will have. It’s partly that they’re advocating for awful things, but also frustrating that they are too willfully ignorant to realize how bad their own arguments are.
If only the people who supported regressive, dumbass positions like JD Vance’s could be swayed by thinking about things for even a few fucking seconds.
My favorite was death panels.
“The government is going to decide who lives and dies by gatekeeping access to healthcare!” Motherfucker, that’s what insurance does now. The potential failures of a collectivized system are treated with more scrutiny than capitalism working as intended.