• 0 Posts
  • 63 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 14th, 2023

help-circle





  • Being self righteous about doing nothing is worse.

    Despite your own brand of defeatism in insisting the outcome is the same no matter what, one side actually is better. Even if the metric of “better” pales on the grand scheme of what we deserve or should be doing.

    I’m not trying to project self-righteousness by recognizing that there are only two real choices. I’m asserting that advocating non-action or pointless action is such a tired trope that what you’re doing is circlejerking for dopamine instead of applying what little influence you have as an individual to work toward the avoiding the actual worst outcome.


  • When the American populace as a whole is brainwashed into believing the only choices are red and blue, you have to accept that whining about it and voting green (or not voting) is going to accomplish nothing.

    So make your colorful allegory and feel good about yourself on the internet. In the end, you are accomplishing less than the people you look down on who recognize the shitty reality of our situation.


  • Problem is that requires good faith from both sides. If only one side adheres to that then the other side uses it as ammunition and inputs their politically appointed judges anyway.

    Case in point, Senator Mitch McConnell crying out in 2015 about Obama wanting to appoint someone at the end of his term, saying that he would be robbing the next president of that legacy and it would be a political appointment. And then Mitch McConnell said nothing as they appointed and Trump approved three blatantly political nominees.

    Both sides have to agree that those positions be apolitical or one side just ends up getting screwed. And of course we are not going to see that because Republicans don’t have a shred of decency left and the whole party.






  • I start almost every comment I make on those instances with

    I know this will net me a ban

    to play a bit of reverse psychology with the mods there, who don’t touch my comments when the denizens there inevitablely say

    Oh yeah you think you’re so smart well we don’t ban opposing opinions unlike some places

    And the mods there have their hands tied because banning me would prove their own guys wrong.

    It’s worked pretty well so far.



  • “Give me all of your money and god will cure your cancer!” obvious scam and a lie.

    “Give me all of your money and god will make your credit card debt vanish” is another thing I’ve seen mega-church types say.

    Incidentally, there’s a conjecture around Christian circles I’ve seen that says these kinds of actions are what the phrase “thou shalt not take the lord’s name in vain” actually warns against.

    Not cursing, as it has become commonly associated with, but the literal act of using the lord for vain purposes. Like saying “Give me your money and god will cure your cancer”



  • Unpopular opinion incoming:

    I don’t think we should ignore AI diagnosis just because they are wrong sometimes. The whole point of AI diagnosis is to catch things physicians don’t. No AI diagnosis comes without a physician double checking anyway.

    For that reason, I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing that an AI got it wrong. Suspicion was still there and physicians double checked. To me, that means this tool is working as intended.

    If the patient was insistent enough that something was wrong, they would have had them double check or would have gotten a second opinion anyway.

    Flaming the AI for not being correct is missing the point of using it in the first place.




  • While I agree with you that the teacher in this post is wrong about what this is, I don’t think labeling “gender bigotry” indiscriminately as something both sexes do under one umbrella is accomplishing anything but minimizing the struggle women have endured for basically all of human existence up until the last few decades.

    Personally, I wouldn’t fault this woman for thinking what she does if she’s willing to accept a broader explanation later, given that women have literally been sold as property up until a couple hundred years ago.

    Women have the right to at least posit the ways they as a group have been held down, and that includes accepting their indignation and allowing them grace for when they’re wrong, because without those things they won’t actually learn the truth.

    Further than that, I think it’s necessary for women learning now to have the same realization this one did that women throughout all of history save for this recent tiny sliver have been oppressed. Even if it’s built on an incidentally faulty premise, that doesn’t mean the realization itself is wrong.

    Covering up the discourse by labeling the process of realization as “gender bigotry” is itself an attempt at erasure, and very much puts you on the side of the oppressors, just because you think it’s distasteful to have this realization yourself.

    I’m sure gender bigotry exists in the direction of women towards men. This ain’t it.