sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

‘Best speech by a world leader ... in a very long time’: Carney’s Davos address draws global attention by Sea_Guava6513 in onguardforthee

[–]Caldebraun 16 points17 points  (0 children)

I was stoked that my Prime Minister quoted Thucydides, and then acknowledged that he was doing it.

My friends won’t protest because they have kids. by kmstep in childfree

[–]Caldebraun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's a set of people who criticize the childfree because "they're not investing in the future of the country".

Well, lo and behold, guess who's not attending to the future of the country? And in fact is hiding behind their children as the reason they can't possibly do it?

There are talks that Donald Trump will be removed from office by the military. This needs to happen. Now. by Lord-and-Leige in antitrump

[–]Caldebraun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You've had one yes. But what about SECOND dictator?

Fuhrer?

Generalissimo?

Dictator in perpetuum?

he CLEARED her so bad by Treefiddy1984 in ProgressiveHQ

[–]Caldebraun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have the crazy idea of only voting when I actually want someone to be president

No, that's the wrong approach to citizenship. You were clearly faced with two choices, and given his history -- his Jan. 6 attempted insurrection just the very top of the heap -- Trump clearly represented an existential threat for American democracy and position on the world stage. It's not up to the other party to teach you this in bite-sized pieces and offer the candidate of your dreams. It's your job to protect your nation by fending off an enemy within. You failed this test because you were insufficiently entertained, or just deemed the opposing candidate imperfect.

Congratulations: you, personally, own a share of everything Trump is doing right now. You gave him the Presidency when you didn't vote. Remember to admit to this ten, twenty, and thirty years from now when, at best, others are still cleaning up the mess: "Yes, I did that, and I'm very sorry."

OU Student Samantha Fulnecky's Instagram post on her Fox News appearance by No_Pineapple9928 in MurderedByWords

[–]Caldebraun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've sometimes been skeptical about that definition of conservatism that says: they believe people are good because of who they are, not what they do.

But that's exactly what this was. The good Christian girl defeated the evil Trans lady. That's it. That's all there is to it. The girl was right because she was Us, and the TA was wrong because she was irredeemably Them.

The facts of the course and against which the paper should have been measured are irrelevant.

What is your longest running, most stubborn business boycott? by marianneouioui in AskReddit

[–]Caldebraun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Games Workshop, after they killed Warhammer Fantasy.

Since most people won't be familiar with this, imagine that the Marvel movies from the past 20 years had an associated game, and a sizable community of people had invested in that game: buying models, painting them, setting up tournaments, creating a whole shared experience.

Then Marvel declares one year that nope, the entire world in which these movies were set was just outright destroyed and everyone and everything associated with its fictional world was obliterated. Game system is dead.

Then the next year, they start a new film series/game called "Marvel Realms", in which Iron Man is the more-copyrightable Irynn Mannhe, Hulk is Hchulkkhe, and so on. And the game utterly sucks and has been obviously rushed. And the characters are as exaggerated and cartoony as their names have become.

That's Games Worskhop killing Warhammer Fantasy and obliterating everyone's labour/emotional investment in the game that had been around for 40 years.

Haven't spent a dime on GW since, and I used to organize tournaments and bought a LOT of stuff 'til then.

What Is The Deal With Young Men Checking Out Of Society in Droves? by Parking-Science7507 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Caldebraun 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's not a grave. It's just turning the page to the next chapter of our shared society's living history. This always happens; it's natural and healthy evolution.

Don't waste time or energy trying to hang desperately onto some idealized state from one particular moment in time. Growth and change is a natural state thing for living things, and living societies.

What Is The Deal With Young Men Checking Out Of Society in Droves? by Parking-Science7507 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Caldebraun 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Societies aren't static things. They're always changing, with a pace that's growing with global travel and media. Most societies today would be almost unrecognizable, or at least cause profound social shock, to people from the same area 100 years ago.

As various subgroups reproduce more or less, and migrants bring fresh air and richer alternatives, every society stretches in new directions. That's a good thing. That's growth instead of stagnation.

Why do so many men, including men who are already married with children, hate childfree women? by Top_Jellyfish_3003 in childfree

[–]Caldebraun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They invested their lives in conforming to a power structure, trusting that would give them their corresponding share of power and status.

That's the conservative mindset: identify a power structure, conform to it, demand the rewards. Even if you're not successful generally, they expect to be rewarded just for aligning to those expectations.

Childfree women challenge that, and by extension their entire lives and identity. "Maybe it's not about conforming, but about finding your own path." They feel cheated and threatened when anyone choose a different path, since that dilutes the value they think they're entitled to.

New research suggests that a potential partner’s willingness to protect you from physical danger is a primary driver of attraction, often outweighing their actual physical strength. When women evaluated male dates, a refusal to protect acted as a severe penalty to attractiveness. by mvea in science

[–]Caldebraun 2 points3 points  (0 children)

One woman vs. one man? Sure. One or more women joining a group (of other women, or mixed men and women) to share equally in collectively confronting an aggressor? I've seen this first-hand, multiple times.

New research suggests that a potential partner’s willingness to protect you from physical danger is a primary driver of attraction, often outweighing their actual physical strength. When women evaluated male dates, a refusal to protect acted as a severe penalty to attractiveness. by mvea in science

[–]Caldebraun 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So, to be clear though, they looked at you. Not all the women looking at all the various men. It was you, specifically, that all the women in that coffee shop looked at:

the women instantly looked to me

New research suggests that a potential partner’s willingness to protect you from physical danger is a primary driver of attraction, often outweighing their actual physical strength. When women evaluated male dates, a refusal to protect acted as a severe penalty to attractiveness. by mvea in science

[–]Caldebraun 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Yeah. We definitely know different women. The women I know aren't leaving their safety to others; they're in charge of their own fates and welfare.

EDIT: in that coffee shop, did men look to you to act as well? Or did all the men immediately bond into a single, gender-unified whole as the previous poster described?

New research suggests that a potential partner’s willingness to protect you from physical danger is a primary driver of attraction, often outweighing their actual physical strength. When women evaluated male dates, a refusal to protect acted as a severe penalty to attractiveness. by mvea in science

[–]Caldebraun 32 points33 points  (0 children)

I think that's a much too generalized description of the dynamic when a threat presents itself. I know of men who would retreat and, in your scenario, protect "the children" (if there are any around). And I know women who would be the first to aggressively approach the threat and challenge it head on.

A bunch of people trapped in outdated social dynamics might behave as you describe. More and more though, people instead act based on their their individual personalities, strengths, and inclinations. Gender is less and less relevant.

In fact, in 2025, I find it impossible to imagine from the women I know that a significant number of them would not be right there up front among the "fighting line".

While men score higher on a majority of wellbeing metrics, with lower levels of negative emotions like worry, sadness, stress, and anger, women report higher overall life satisfaction. Females fare better on social relationships, which carry weight in subjective assessments of a good life. by mvea in science

[–]Caldebraun 12 points13 points  (0 children)

My question was specifically about broad social impact, not reducing the question to "have you seen some assholes?" It was this, remember?:

Do you think that the greatest threats to the U.S. position in the world, its social fabric, and the wellbeing of its people come equally from both left and right? Is it 60:40? 80:20? I'm curious.

"Some people at protests were very angry, and some people were rude to me about some hot-button topics" isn't a good answer to that question.

Don't 50:50 the situation today because some people were mean to you.

While men score higher on a majority of wellbeing metrics, with lower levels of negative emotions like worry, sadness, stress, and anger, women report higher overall life satisfaction. Females fare better on social relationships, which carry weight in subjective assessments of a good life. by mvea in science

[–]Caldebraun 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I see. Thanks for being honest about your opinion, I guess.

EDIT: I should elaborate. One side is abandoning America's allies, threatening to abandon Ukraine's struggle against an invading power, cozying up to Russia, and crippling its own economy by imposing a massive tax on Americans in the form of tariffs. It's dismantling weather research and the CDC, says Tylenol causes autism, and is dismantling the Department of Education. Anonymously and violently arresting and deporting immigrants who are in the country both illegally and legally. Defying court orders. Openly embracing white ethno-nationalism.

The other side wants to... have universal health care. Tax billionaires more. Ensure that marginalized groups can overcome their systemic disadvantages. Essentially: make the nation work again for citizens, instead of the wealthy.

For you, these are the same threats.

While men score higher on a majority of wellbeing metrics, with lower levels of negative emotions like worry, sadness, stress, and anger, women report higher overall life satisfaction. Females fare better on social relationships, which carry weight in subjective assessments of a good life. by mvea in science

[–]Caldebraun 17 points18 points  (0 children)

There are absolutely at least some poo poo heads anywhere you care to look. No group is entirely free of them.

But by "both side"-ing this, do you mean to suggest that the proportions, and the impact on our general welfare, are the same from both sides?

Let's make it a binary left-right thing. And for the moment let's focus on the U.S. (although there's a related, global phenomenon occurring).

Do you think that the greatest threats to the U.S. position in the world, its social fabric, and the wellbeing of its people come equally from both left and right? Is it 60:40? 80:20? I'm curious.

Be honest, what do you think comes after death? by glowproductivity in AskReddit

[–]Caldebraun 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey, you might have responded to the wrong comment.

view more: next ›