It should not be legal to hand out life sentences to minors, period.
In Germany the maximum sentence for minors is 10 years and depending on your developmental state you can count as a minor until you are 21 (You are always treated as one if you are under 18). And that is how it should be. Locking people up for life helps nobody.
Okay, this really seems more like a case of sexual harassment, rather than harassment of Waymo customers, which was my first suspicion. Had it been the latter as part of a politically motivated action against the company I might have had a lot more sympathy, but this is disgusting…
That “m” should be a “b”. For a company that size, there is truly no excuse!
As much as I despise Musk and Twitter and hope that both die a painful death, what is actually proposed here is honestly a change for the better: It’s not about preventing people from blocking users, it’s about blocked users being able to see public posts, which they could also see by just logging out. This is being honest about what a block does and avoids giving people a wrong sense of privacy that they simply don’t have on the platform. From what I’ve heard there is a possibility to post for followers-only which in combination with requiring approval to follow and that isn’t going away here either…
There was an article a while a go where someone looked into how the bible describes the anti-christ and while they initially did it just for fun, it became a bit more eerie, when Trump started hitting checkbox after checkbox after checkbox, leaving out pretty much none of them…
If they have a practical concern with this they can say something like (use name) (unsure) (any) after their username. Just to verify, are you trans yourself? This is common practice in basically every trans space.
Yes, and that is WHY I’m so vocal about it, because I have experience with environments where the choice really was to misgender myself or to risk looking like a biggot. It sucked and that
Requiring people to state their pronouns is unironically a transphobic policy!No, it’s not.
It forces trans people who are early in their transition and eggs to pick between two really bad options. That makes it functionally (not intentionally) transphobic.
closeted trans people who have an identifiable account and similar groups now have to misgender themselves, which is a much more horrific thing than getting misgendered by someone else.I would suggest they create a new account for exploring these feelings in trans spaces, then. Its more secure to do that anyways.
A big point of something like Lemmy is that you don’t need separate accounts in all the communities that you are in and trans communities should put the bar low for people who are looking to explore things. It may not always be the safest thing to do, but reality is messy and people who are just kinda uncomfortable with what they have may still be far away from understanding.
He/him is the assumed choice in most internet spaces which misgenders a wide swathe of trans people, of course I would prefer it to be they/them, as its better if you don’t know the person’s pronouns. The reality though is we need to implement these things in steps so people can properly understand why its important to use they/them when you don’t know someone’s gender. I still get regularly misgendered with she/her in my name, these people that purposefully misgender must be removed from this space to make it safer, and by having more people with pronouns in username, it will make that job easier.
Nobody says you can’t have your pronouns in your username if you want them too, but forcing other people to do the same is really reaching into other people’s personal zone to an extend that I do consider inappropriate.
So in other words, people who are still eggs, closeted trans people who have an identifiable account and similar groups now have to misgender themselves, which is a much more horrific thing than getting misgendered by someone else.
Requiring people to state their pronouns is unironically a transphobic policy! Creating an environment in which not stating pronouns can be taken as not supporting trans people is likewise transphobic. The practical consequences of these decisions are extremely bad and I strongly request that you undo it!
Selbst hochgeladen? WTF?
Das ist SO absurd, dass ich ihm ja ohne zu kennen tendenziell sogar ein Dementi von wegen “Account gehackt + deepfake” abgekauft hätte. Wie kommt man als Politiker auf so eine bescheuerte Idee?
Die Folgen waren KOMPLETT vorhergesehen. Das war JEDEM klar der sich auch nur zwei Minuten mit dem Thema beschäftigt hat und ALLE Experten waren sich einig, dass genau das passieren würde, was eingetreten ist.
Ja, die Änderung ist richtig und wichtig, aber jetzt die alter Regierung die den Schund eingeführt hat frei zu sprechen ist völlig unangemessen!
Those were the first earbuds they offered, which were just OEM-ones where they main point of attention was on getting the workers a living wage (which is fair enough, they are called “fairphone”, not “repairablephone”), just like the Fairphone 1 where they apparently wanted to collect some experience in the space first.
I have them because I bought my fairphone 4 like one week before they had a free pair with every purchase on offer and wrote to their support, who graciously gave me a voucher as well. I don’t use them a lot, because I do have pretty good over-ear headphones, but they do come in handy on occasion, as they fit into my handbag, which means I am more likely to actually have them with me.
Das eigentliche Problem bei der Diskussion ist, dass die meisten Menschen die Grundform als maskuline Form interpretieren. Die Ursache dafür ist wiederum, dass es keine echte maskuline Form gibt und die Wortgrundform daher als schlechte Notlösung herangezogen wird. Insofern: Ich bin kein Fan davon jetzt überall nicht-Grundformen zu verwenden (ob feminine Formen oder Partizipialkonstruktionen) und würde mir dafür lieber die Schaffung einer explizit männlichen Form im Deutschen wünschen. Dann würde man auch wunderbar sehen, dass die meisten Verwendungen gegenderder Formen eigentlich nur dazu dienen um eine als fehlend wahrgenommene Geschlechtsneutralität herzustellen und sie sonst meist unnötig sind.
Der Postillon hat da mal einen ganz unironisch guten Vorschlag gemacht.
Sorry, das sehe ich hier echt nicht:
Sprich: Verlust der Zeugungsfähigkeit begründet für alle nur im „jüngeren“ Alter bei Kinderwunsch einen GdS>0.
Verlust des Penis: 50
Verlust der Brust (Mastektomie, nur bei Frauen)
Vollständige Entfernung der Vulva: 40
Senkung der Scheidenwand, Vorfall der Scheide und/oder der Gebärmutter
Isolierte Senkung der Scheidenhinterwand mit leichten Defäkationsstörungen: 0-10
Scheiden-Gebärmutteraplasie, ohne Plastik, nach Vollendung des 14. Lebensjahres (einschließlich Sterilität): 40
Vor dem Hintergrund, dass Männer halt tatsächlich wenig andere Sexualorgane haben, und der Totalverlust von Vulva und Scheide hier nicht gelistet ist, wirkt dass auf mich jetzt nicht absurd.
Im übrigen wird in dieser Tabelle so viel mit medizinischen Fachbegriffen um sich geworfen, dass ich da auch ganz generell zur Zurückhaltung mit solchen Beurteilungen neigen und raten würde, weil da halt dann doch offensichtlich Menschen mit einem gewissen Maß an Ahnung beteiligt waren und ich vorsichtig wäre da ohne eine solche Pauschalurteile zu fällen.