Yeah, I actually think about this. People recognize that time is a dimension of our reality, but ask: why does it only move forward? But wat if it doesn’t? What if we go backwards and forwards often? But our memories are “unmade” when moving backwards and “remade” when moving forwards. We simply can only perceive the forward direction.

Microsoft is declared a monopoly (again). Firefox has to find new funding (again)

The best one I’ve used for coding is the InelliJ AI. Idk how they trained that sucker but it’s pretty good at ripping through boiler plate code and structuring new files / methods based off how your project is already setup. It still has those little hallucinations especially when you ask it to figure out more niche tasks. But It’s really increased my productivity. Especially when getting a new repo setup. (I work with micro services)

The only person in this thread who seems intent on pepe being about hate speech is you. I’ve been asked in some formal settings to avoid using the OK hand sign in case it sends the wrong message. I’ve been advised by tattoo artists to avoid Nordic symbols despite the fact that I’m of Scandinavian descent. You’re enabling the worst kind of people to decide what symbols mean in our culture. Why?

That’s your position. Not mine. They can’t have shit, because I won’t let them

• Ok symbol
• Runes and Nordic symbols
• Raised fist
• Many songs
• Coors Beer

Just off the top of my head those are a few. And that’s with people holding the line and continuing to use these symbols without hate. We don’t need more people defending their claims.

If you let them dictate what is theirs, they’ll take everything.

People are nostalgic the world over, not just in America. So all of the undertones of political issues that you’re layering on here isn’t inherent to the human feeling of nostalgia. Now The Dukes of Hazzard is problematic for a great many reasons as this post highlights. So it’s totally fair to call that out. But it’s also totally fair to remember being a kid and liking a show where guys break the rules with fast cars. It doesn’t mean that he’s a bigot that wants to drag us all back to the '70s.

I say, as long as you’re self aware and this feeling in nostalgia doesn’t push you in the direction of Trump or Andrew Tate, then go for it.

Exactly. Horror writers are tasked with making the next person who reads the page feel horrified. But what horrifies a person is very individual. But showing that the thing creates fear in whoever experiences it, actually succeeds in conveying what’s intended: fear itself.

Not defending religion, but part of religion is philosophy. It seems to be a pretty fundamental part of psychology that people need to experience hardships and overcome them. This is the path to reach a peaceful feeling that you have some control in this world and the ability to carve out a life worth living.

You seem incredibly well adjusted for what you’ve been through and clearly you’ve learned a lot from your life experience. Thanks for laying all that out. It was very insightful. I think we agree on 99% of this. So at the risk of splitting hairs, I’m going to put a magnifying glass on that last 1%.

I think fear absolutely victimizes people. I’ve seen xenophobia and homophobia do plenty of damage. Men are far from a disenfranchised minority and I think the issue of women’s safety is much more pressing than men being treated unfairly in some situations. But it still shouldn’t happen.

You’re right that in a way it’s the fault of the dangerous men who abuse women. But in a way, hypothetically, it’s really the fault of their parents who sexually assaulted them. But in a way it’s the fault of their parents genetics that made them mentally unstable, etc, etc all the way back to the first multicellular organism. This thinking, however true, isn’t very useful. People need to take responsibility for their own actions.

We agree fear is not an excuse for misandry. I don’t think it’s unreasonable for women to fear men after having a traumatic experience. However I can still point out the problem here. I think a good example is the trolley problem. If you pull the lever to only kill one person instead of six, I can both: agree with your decision but also point out that you killed someone. You can argue that’s insensitive to your difficult dilemma, but I think it’s worse to pretend like someone isn’t getting hurt. That one person who died still was a life with people who will mourn them.

I think what’s irking men about this whole bear thing is not that the result is not what they want or even what they expect. It’s that a huge chunk of people seem to not even see it as a problem that most men are being judged for something they have nothing to do with.

This is a great look into the mindset of someone who’s been through SA. Thanks for sharing.

The point I think a lot of men are trying to make is that: In the same way that somebody who commits SA may have been abused themselves, women who are prejudiced against men create a new victim. Treating a harmless man as worse than a dangerous animal is an experience that most every man goes through and that sucks.

I can understand and sympathize with your position. But it doesn’t absolve you of your behavior. Just like someone who commits SA isn’t off the hook because they were beaten as a child and that screwed them up. I feel for someone who was abused growing up, but they don’t get to throw up their hands and say it’s not their fault they victimize others. Compassion is crucial, but at the end of the day, everyone is responsible for their own actions.

Best take in this thread by a long shot. I’d like to add that there’s nothing wrong with a little thought experiment to illicit a point. But the internet has become such an inhospitable place to any kind of discussion requiring nuance and patience.

“Hey, would you rather be alone with a bear or a man?”
“A bear. And you should think about what you’ve done.” "… Huh? "

Yeah I was thinking… would a Fallout show be goofy and colorful, or dark and horrific? Amazon said, yes. And it’s great.

The irony that this statement is flawed by its absolutionist position. Yes people can use relativism to justify awful shit. But that’s not the outcome when used sensibly with the right intention.

Gamers: Where’s my game? Why do you subject your developers to crunch? Why is it so expensive? Why don’t you pay your developers more?

Consumers these days have so much entitlement. I understand not wanting to be tricked with advertising or wanting a safe product, without toxic chemicals or whatnot.

But at the end of the day, assuming that’s the case, someone should be able to make whatever they want and charge whatever they want. If no one buys it, they’re a bad business person. The end. But lately I’ve seen so many people doing things like starting witch hunts to go after makers of something they don’t like. Or trying to strongarm a company into changing a product by holding their reputation for ransom. Or deciding as a community on an idealized business model and punishing companies that don’t use it.

And the gaming community is the worst of them. Like if you don’t like multiplayer games, fine. Don’t shit on a game for like 5 paragraphs just to finally say, “See? RDR2 did just fine, we should be making single player games. Anyway I didn’t actually play this and neither should you. 0/5 stars.”

Like bro, this team worked really hard to make a game they believed in. They didn’t have to run it by you. If you don’t like it play something else. But people will claim you have no right to have created what you did, the audacity that you thought you could is appalling, and frankly… You’re an immoral person to work for money. Like damn guys, chill. Nobody has to make you games. I don’t go see Starry Night and write a letter to Van Gogh’s estate like, “I’m not a fan of blue”

Although it’s hard to imagine something worse than the events of WWII, I often wonder what the world would look like without it. A lot of people around that time were exploring eugenics, as you mentioned there were plenty of anti-Semitic movements, and Hitler proved in no uncertain terms that these along with fascism were very problematic. I wonder if we would be in a worse position now, with more collective suffering just spread across centuries.

Agreed. But I wonder if this is butting up against a limitation of the human brain. Every person across the globe experiences stereotypes. It seems to be a natural way the human brain forms initial judgements. Hell, I don’t think the comic artist realized they were making a stereotype when they made all the questions askers white.

Being aware of it helps but the best fix is to have a significant amount of personal time with the group in question. This is why it’s so frustrating for someone of a particular race to hear questions like this, because they have plenty of first hand experience with members of their race. Themselves, their family, etc…

But realistically a person can’t spend significant amounts of time with members of every discreet group of people they might see on a daily basis.