TheDoozer

Still better than not voting to not go off the cliff.

Yeah, that's dumber than magic underwear. That might be the dumbest religious thing (with the exception of, you know, wars) that I've seen. Calling all of Manhattan your (and specifically your) domicile doesn't stretch the meaning of domicile, it completely ignores it.

I don't think it adds any more confusion than the pre-existing pronoun confusion you already described as part of the language (your she and her example) and there is already an established answer for it (you don't use a pronoun for one of them, you use their actual name or what you are referring to).

Pretending that it adds some grand new confusion that makes it difficult to keep up with because in very rare circumstances someone who is already really bad at communicating with pronouns (because one would have to have problems with your "she slapped her" reference to have problems with singular they/them) might have difficulty communicating what they mean by "them."

Try reading a novel where one charter is "they/them". It's needlessly confusing, and bring the hate, it's a stupid fad.

It's literally been used in the singular for hundreds of years for any individual where the gender is not known, and has never in my life been confusing. For example:

"The suspect entered the store, then they exited through the back."

English is my first and nearly only language and has been for 42 years, and there has never been a time that a singular "they" was not used. It is not a fad, the fad is taking issue with it. And hopefully in 20 years we won't have to deal with this fake "all of a sudden" bullshit, whether it's "they/them," vaccines, or any other nonsense that people suddenly take issue with because some talking head told them to and acted like it was new.

I've heard "what if there's an emergency or fire," and I feel like the answer is "take three seconds to put on pants."

So funny enough, as an American, I have the majority of that while being in the military. We even currently have three months of maternity and paternity leave, which can be used as the member sees fit through the first year after birth.

All except the privacy laws and employee protection laws, though it can often be exceptionally difficult to fire people for reasons that don't involve the politics of the people in charge. And even then, lawsuits usually get those people backpay.

I'd be advocating for the US Coast Guard with this right now, but the current administration is shifting our focus from being a life-saving/preserving service to another border control agency, so... not a great time to be joining if it's for moral reasons. sigh

I like how it says "defensive and will bite if provoked," and apparently, according to this thread, opening their cage is sufficient provocation.

Yeah, you're missing the point.

They (the mod who deleted it) mentioned "both sides." I said that two groups, for that one particular thing, both arrived at the "J.K. Rowling is bad" conclusion, and those two groups are fairly diametrically opposed. Not two sides, two separate groups.

My commentary on their "both sides" was that it was a weird take, since it's clear (if there were two sides) which "side" I was on.

The why, though, wasn't the issue, and I was attaching no commentary on their motivations (with the exception of calling the Fundeamentalists crazy, because, like... "magic is real and evil and a made-up story about a magical school promotes magic" is preeettttty crazy). It was purely the irony of seeing that post and realizing crazy Fundamentalists also hate Rowling. It's like that "two strong arms clasping together" meme, with two groups that have nothing (or worse) to do with each other having one particular thing in common.

And look, I get it. It is a touchy subject, and trans people have been getting shit on for too long (especially now) and assuming the worst intentions of comments made is probably correct way more often than it should be. But even the slightest read into anything I've said shows no ill-will against trans people and their allies (and lots against crazy Fundamentalists who believe in magic).

I got threatened with a ban on Blahaj because I pointed out basically this when somebody posted a picture of a burning Harry Potter book. It wasn't even a criticism, it was just pointing out how funny life is that, for completely opposing reasons, trans people (and allies) and crazy Fundamentalists would both support what was happening in the picture.

The author (who was apparently a mod) made some comment about "hurr durr, mah both sides" and deleted my comment. It was very confusing, as my comment showed I clearly supported one of those sides (since I even referred to the Fundamentalists as crazy).

I'm on Voyager. How do I do that?

What is this supposed to mean? Is the implication that for the past ten thousand years, everyone should have lived in constant misery, thinking of nothing but the suffering of innocents, without a moment to spare for joy or silliness?

Or are you trying to twist their words to suggest that the suffering of innocents now isn't important because it's been happening for 10k years? Because that was clearly not the message being made. The closest I could imagine is they may be pointing out that some treat pointing out innocents suffering as a fad, where people all of a sudden care and can't believe that anyone else can do or care about anything else (and will burn out and stop caring once the fad is done, whether the issue has been resolved or not).

Either way, if you spend your whole time doomscrolling and never leave yourself a space for moth memes (or whatever), you will be no help to anyone and live in impotent misery.

Basically, moth memes are self care.

My son has been very difficult the past hour (lead up to nap time), so I'll go with 7.