Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)C

chuckleslord

@ chuckleslord @lemmy.world

Posts
3
Comments
1384
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • What team would you put and why?

    Jump

  • Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers. Rita Repulsa and Lord Zedd

  • YSK a US passport card costs $30 and is definitive proof of citizenship. It fits in your wallet like a credit card.

    Jump

  • Thank you. Papers, Please isn't the ending we need to run to. They can't treat us like criminals cause they feel like it

  • Union leaders accuse Trump administration of ‘shift toward white supremacy’ with online posts

    Jump

  • I didn't see it before so it wasn't happening! /s

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • Yes, it is. It's why they moderated that they did it as "very intentionally, just trying to get through". Moving someone or their stuff without permission is an act of physical aggression. I'm not saying they punched them or anything, but there were aggressive in a physical manner.

  • What's yours?

    Jump

  • ... is there a member of one who isn't a member of the other? (This is joke)

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • Yes, that's what I mean. I'm unintentionally aggressive, but attempting to moderate that causes me to shutdown and not say anything instead. I'm making the conscious effort to speak instead of give into the obsession of over-moderating what I say to the point where I stop talking. So by making the choice to talk regardless, I'm intentionally being aggressive rather than quiet.

    Dude was twisting my words and using fallacies to protect his paper thin "argument". I did my best without directly insulting him. Well, until that last comment. Shouldn't have done that.

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • So, you attempted regular social cues to communicate what you wanted, and when that failed you escalated to physical aggression and then got upset that the other person got upset?

    Like, not trying to throw you under the bus or anything, you both miscommunicated in that situation but you were the one to escalate. If the other person didn't know what they were doing wrong, couldn't you have just told them "I'm so sorry, but I can't get my cart around yours" when they didn't get why you couldn't get past?

    It really sounds like you were both tired and didn't have the grace in that moment for each other, rather than some failing on either of your parts.

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • I feel like you don't understand the position because there is nothing in what you're saying that implies that you do.

    I'm going to play this conversation as it occurred from my perspective to see if you see what I mean.

    Your first response is "you're taking an absurdist position, so I'll take the opposite absurdist position to demonstrate the problem. Could we eliminate all racist rules, of course not. Car rules can be racist, but we can't just not have car rules"

    I reply "yeah, but we can not have cars. Cars aren't a requirement for society"

    You reply "but rules would still apply to those who do the not-car transport"

    I reply "yes, but that wouldn't exclude them from society. They would still be able to participate, unlike those kicked out of the hypothetical store"

    To which you reply "but the grocery store wouldn't apply to everywhere"

    And I retort "no, but if they had any popularity, they would expand in order to deny disadvantaged people groceries at these 'better' stores"

    And then your latest reply, which I can't summarize without it becoming a straw man (my failing, not necessarily yours).

    This grocery store isn't "people extending basic decency" it's "people not inconveniencing others on threat of permanent removal". One is a social contract extended by and agreed to by others (basic decency) and the other is a threat enforced by the system, in this case the grocery store. You're arguing that systems need rules. I'm arguing that using systems when it could just be standard human interaction is insane. Do you see the disconnect now?

    Systems should be built to accommodate humans, not replace human interaction. Jane paying with a checkbook isn't a reason she be barred from a public service. Christ on bikes, man.

  • Learning Japanese

    Jump

  • Yeah, just like it was an Italian man that first called them Indians. Wouldn't make it Italy's fault if Americans called it Indialand, though.

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • Agreed. Fuck cars and accept that other people aren't going to be perfect and that that's okay for them to be.

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • Separate but equal, eh? Gonna introspect on that, or nah?

    Someone in this thread went the extra mile and even called them "the shitty" stores. Which is nice. Brings the warm and cozies, that /s

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • People walking towards each other on the sidewalk usually subconsciously move out of each other's ways. But there's a hierarchy to these interactions that you're probably only aware of if you're at the bottom of it. White people tend to resist deferring to people of color. White women will rarely defer to anyone, expecting everyone to get it of their way. People of color will defer to white people, etc, etc.

    If you break this subconscious hierarchy, people notice and assume you're being rude or weird. Like if you move enough out of a white women's way so that she, too, can move a little out of your way so that you both avoid each other (like equals would do), she might just walk into you. Or cuss you out for being rude. Or when I, a white man, defer to a person of color, it trips them up for a second.

    Since this hypothetical grocery store is nothing but "don't break unspoken rules about rudeness or you get kicked out" it means that a black person would need to act meek and submissive in order to avoid scrutiny and thus be able to stay. Meaning the rules would be more stringent against people of color, thus less people of color would be accepted, thus justifying their usual exclusion.

    Ableism is super easy. Since this hypothetical prioritizes convenience over people, if you're slow at something or need more accommodation, you'd get kicked out.

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • Lol, you think Karens would be kept out of Karen heaven. Lmao, even.

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • Yes. I made the choice to be like that rather be perceived as polite. Apologies that that wasn't clear. I'd rather spend my time thinking through things rather than making my words nice for others. I'm neurodivergent, I've spent a lifetime trying to mold myself into the box of etiquette and it drove me mad and made me quiet. I'm choosing now to say what needs to be said in how I need to say it.

    Like saying that something would be used to further racism and ableism and then checking the people who don't like to be confronted with that idea.

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • If this idea was implemented and had any amount of popularity it would spread everywhere like wild fire cause it'd be one more thing to crush the poor with cater to white people who can't be fucked to talk to people don't want to be inconvenienced. People usually don't have much choice in what stores they have access to (see food deserts)

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • Yeah, I tend to be perceived that way. I'd rather be seen as aggressive than be a polite asshole

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • Yes, because that would be their job and they wouldn't be excluded from society if they fail to live up to that. They'd just take public transit like anyone else.

    I'm saying "systems need to be oriented towards people and how they act, rather than punishing people for being unable to act in a way that they're not wired for". This hypothetical grocery store punishes people for being minorly thoughtless to spare other people the indignity of having to say something or silently suffer with the minor inconvenience.

    It takes a human interaction with low stakes and turns it into a systemic interaction where harm to people becomes an abstract thing, so harm tends to become more prolific.

  • What a great idea

    Jump

  • Yeah, the solution is to orient society in such a way where the operation of a deadly, several ton method of conveyance isn't a requirement to participate in the world. Public transit, biking, and people-oriented spaces. Fuck cars

  • News @lemmy.world
    chuckleslord @lemmy.world

    US Olympic and Paralympic officials bar transgender women from competing in Olympic women’s sports

    apnews.com /article/team-usa-transgender-athletes-338c43225fdfad936d4b85c1a67ced36
  • Unpopular Opinion @lemmy.world
    chuckleslord @lemmy.world

    If AI slop isn't labeled, it should be removed

  • politics @lemmy.world
    chuckleslord @lemmy.world

    Elon Musk’s super PAC awards $1 million prizes to 2 registered voters, despite DOJ warning

    www.cnn.com /2024/10/25/politics/elon-musk-super-pac-winners-doj-warning/index.html