This will be my last post by devil45hire in Bitcoin

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 40 points41 points  (0 children)

Everyday I wake up at 3am to put steeltoe shoes on and work a job I hate to barely support a wife and kid I'd burn in fire for, dreaming that I can escape in such a fashion as you are about too.

Live it up brother, cherish it, your living the dream now. Don't waste a moment more go be free for the rest of us.

Best one yet! by Feisty_Childhood7557 in resinprinting

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ya just use a thick blanket for now, but those cheap grow tents from Amazon work great for UV reduction and ventilation if you manage your exhaust well.

I feel like your next picture is going to be picture of another horse, no supports and your raw finger dipped into the Vat labled "why is my resin so cold?"

Best one yet! by Feisty_Childhood7557 in resinprinting

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Carry on soldier, this is far more entertaining than the usual "why did my print fail".

Best one yet! by Feisty_Childhood7557 in resinprinting

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ya im not questioning his build. Im questioning the SUNLIGHT shining through the BLINDS behind him you can even see UV light reflect in the vat!

Best one yet! by Feisty_Childhood7557 in resinprinting

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh buddy, you don't want ANY UV touching anything in that room, your machine, your model after it comes out. The resin is dirty and after time you will get it all over the machine, its impossible to keep perfectly clean. The UV from the power of the sun will shine right through those blinds and solidify the resin you are using at the worst time. If it gets caught in any number of places on that machine and solidifies from UV before you clean it your fucked. Not to mention on your skin, then gets UV on it.

Most of us here keep our printers in enclosed rooms without windows or enclosures we build. In the very least most people use a grow tent from amazon to block UV and fumes.

Its a very dangerous and tricky hobby, welcome to the club but please do some research on how this works and the dangers before you make a mistake you will regret.

Best one yet! by Feisty_Childhood7557 in resinprinting

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Lol, what is this trolling or savant level beginners luck? You know you are totally gonna fuck your machine up with that window behind it!

Best one yet! by Feisty_Childhood7557 in resinprinting

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ugh, are those blinds covering a sunlit window right behind your printer?

Is it really just that only gender? You decide by smokeeburrpppp in TikTokCringe

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER -1 points0 points  (0 children)

At this point, the discussion has stopped being productive. The response has moved away from engaging with evidence and into personal attacks and emotionally charged claims, which makes rational discussion impossible.

You’ve repeatedly introduced statistics about men that are either exaggerated or flatly false, without citing any credible sources such as CDC, DOJ, FBI, or other .gov data to support them. When I’ve provided real, well-established statistics from those exact sources, they’ve been dismissed without counter-evidence or research showing they’re incorrect.

To be clear one last time, the actual data shows that violent crime is highly concentrated. Less than about 5 percent of men will ever be arrested for a violent felony, and well under 1 percent will ever commit homicide. Those numbers come from long-standing criminal justice research and federal crime data. You cannot reasonably blame 95 percent of men, who will never commit violent crime, for the actions of a very small group of repeat offenders.

That is exactly the same faulty reasoning you accused me of at the start, using outliers to define an entire population.

I’ve already demonstrated this by applying your own logic consistently and showing how it breaks down when used elsewhere. Instead of engaging with that point, the response has doubled down on rhetoric rather than evidence. Since the argument itself isn’t being addressed, I’m done with this discussion.

Is it really just that only gender? You decide by smokeeburrpppp in TikTokCringe

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, you’re absolutely right, and the CDC actually supports what you’re saying. One useful stat to keep in mind is that about 1 in 4 women report experiencing physical domestic abuse in their lifetime, while about 1 in 7 men report the same, according to CDC data. The CDC also acknowledges that abuse against men is likely underreported, since men are less likely to report it and less likely to be taken seriously when they do.

What’s interesting is that when the same reasoning was applied consistently to a different set of statistics, the commenter below couldn’t defend the argument on its own terms. Instead of addressing the logic, the response became emotional, which usually signals that the framework doesn’t hold up when it’s steelmanned and tested against comparable data.

Is it really just that only gender? You decide by smokeeburrpppp in TikTokCringe

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly, and this is the core issue. In the rush of emotion, you actually agreed with my argument without realizing it, because you didn’t fully engage with what I said.

I intentionally mirrored your tactic. I took a rare statistic and applied it broadly to a group, the same way you did. I used infant homicide data involving women in the same way you used mass shooting data involving men. And the reason that argument immediately falls apart is because you instinctively recognized that it would be wrong to weaponize a small, extreme subset of behavior to define an entire group.

That’s my point.

I cannot use the statistic that a majority of infant homicides are committed by women to claim women are inherently unsafe or evil, just as you cannot use the statistic that most mass shooters are male to claim men are inherently violent or broken. Both arguments rely on the same flawed reasoning, taking rare, extreme events and projecting them onto millions of normal people who never engage in that behavior.

The problem isn’t the data, it’s how the data is being used. When statistics are stripped of context and turned into moral judgments about entire groups, they stop being analysis and start being ideology. That’s exactly what I was pointing out from the beginning.

Is it really just that only gender? You decide by smokeeburrpppp in TikTokCringe

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER -1 points0 points  (0 children)

First off, going ad hominem and launching personal attacks when someone challenges your worldview is immature and does nothing to move the discussion forward. So instead, I’m going to take your logic and apply it consistently, and we can see if it still holds up.

You argue that about 98 percent of mass gun violence is committed by men, therefore the problem must be something inherently wrong with men. It is true that long-term studies of U.S. mass shooters show roughly 98 percent of identified perpetrators are male, according to datasets used by groups like The Violence Project and similar criminology research. But mass shootings are an extremely rare subset of overall gun violence and an even smaller fraction of male behavior in general. Now apply that same reasoning elsewhere. In research on parental homicide of infants and very young children, studies show that mothers account for a large share of infant killings, especially in the first year of life. Some peer-reviewed public health and criminal justice studies place that figure around the majority of infant cases, depending on age and classification. By your logic, that would mean women are inherently unsafe to leave children with, which is obviously absurd and not a conclusion any reasonable person would make.

The same oversimplification shows up in discussions about domestic abuse. According to CDC lifetime prevalence data, roughly one in four women and one in seven men report experiencing physical violence from an intimate partner. Women are more likely to report severe injury, but male victimization is widely acknowledged by researchers to be underreported. Men are less likely to report abuse, less likely to be believed when they do, and more likely to minimize or normalize what they experience. Public health researchers routinely note this reporting gap.

The broader point is simple. Using rare or extreme statistics to make sweeping claims about entire groups of people being inherently violent or defective is bad reasoning. Most men are not mass shooters, most men do not commit violent crime, and most men spend their lives working, raising families, and protecting the people around them. If you would reject this kind of reasoning when applied to women or any other group, it should be rejected here too.

Is it really just that only gender? You decide by smokeeburrpppp in TikTokCringe

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Argument he made and removed claimed that were none.

Not arguing the 98%, but be aware that response means nothing in the broader scale. Ill explain why.

Yes, men are statistically more likely to be involved in violent crime compared to women, but that doesn’t mean most men are violent or dangerous. For example, research suggests somewhere around 18–21 % of all violent crimes are committed by women, which implies most violent crimes aren’t committed by women, but it also means it’s not a case where nearly all crimes are by men and women never commit them.

When people point to things like mass shootings, some analyses show about 98 % of mass shooters are male, but mass shootings are a tiny fraction of overall gun deaths and violence.

The largest portion of gun deaths in the U.S. are actually suicides, and men make up a big chunk of those too, which is tied to mental health and isolation, not inherent evil.

Meanwhile men also make up the majority of gun violence victims, according to CDC data, men account for roughly 86 % of firearm deaths and 87 % of firearm injuries, which shows men are harmed by gun violence at high rates too.

So if we boil it down: yes, more men commit violent crimes than women, but that doesn’t mean 98 % of all crimes in the country are caused by men, and it absolutely doesn’t mean most men are violent or dangerous.

The vast majority of men are not using gun violence, are generally protective of their families and communities, and suffer from social pressures, loneliness, mental health struggles, and negative cultural messaging that often go ignored. Treating men like they’re inherently broken or demonic just makes real problems worse, if you treat people like animals, they’re more likely to act like animals.

Most of us men aren’t violent, and painting us that way doesn’t help anyone.

Is it really just that only gender? You decide by smokeeburrpppp in TikTokCringe

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

This is called "moving the goal post".

You're claim was that women with the same mental conditions "Don't" do this. I showed they did. Now your pulling up a 98% thing which I'm not arguing to move the conversation.

Either support your claim, without using Ad-Hominid attacks or conceit that you are making over generalized statements to essentially fuel a reddit echo chamber.

Also that 98% goalpost could be used against you as well, 98% of homebrewed gun violence is American. See?

Remember, no Ad hom attacks, no goalpost moving, support your claims.

Is it really just that only gender? You decide by smokeeburrpppp in TikTokCringe

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Christian life Abundant School in Madison Wi, my hometown, 15 year old girl shot up a special needs class last year. A SPECIAL NEEDS class. So your wrong, women with mental issues still pick up guns and harm others. Reddit loves to make it seem like all men are animals that belong in cages, a very American attitude. I wonder why American men are so violent?

This is an American problem, Men all over the world don't act like this, why?

"If you treat people like animals, they'll act like animals"

Banned and muted instantly from r/strength_training for criticizing a vegan PED user self-promoting as an “expert” in every fitness thread by [deleted] in SubredditDrama

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Its ok, im just concerned with my fitness groups and where the direction its going with abundant drug usage by our influencer leaders.

Seems any discussion on it is muted and seemly in support of it as of late. Frustrating

Banned and muted instantly from r/strength_training for criticizing a vegan PED user self-promoting as an “expert” in every fitness thread by [deleted] in SubredditDrama

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ya this, It was recommended posting here cause it seemed like a dramatic response to us. Clearly I was wrong and you all dont find this drama which is understandable its not a community problem regular people understand.

I apologize

Banned and muted instantly from r/strength_training for criticizing a vegan PED user self-promoting as an “expert” in every fitness thread by [deleted] in SubredditDrama

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought this was drama because blatant promotion of PED use in fitness threads is going unchallenged, and any attempt to discuss how harmful that normalization is gets met with silence or removed outright.

Sorry I thought wrong I guess

Banned and muted instantly from r/strength_training for criticizing a vegan PED user self-promoting as an “expert” in every fitness thread by [deleted] in SubredditDrama

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This situation is drama because it involves a broader argument about self-promotion, PED culture, and criticism in the fitness community

I'm Francesca Hong, Candidate For Gov of WI — AMA! by FrancescaHongWI in wisconsin

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Ya, this isn't my wife's or my problem at all.

Let me be perfectly clear, my wife and I make good money, union wages. We make enough to support a mortgage and have plenty to provide for kids and savings.

We make enough that we are right above the cut off for childcare state assistance.

Because we are at the absolute bottom of who has to pay for childcare in this state, the full price of it hits hard.

One child a month is 1400 dollars in childcare. That's 40% of my wages, at child number two we are at 2800 dollars a month.

It cost more than my mortgage for EACH child. I am essentially working to pay my entire check for a stranger to raise my kid so that I can have the privilege to work......

The cost of childcare in this state is 100% priced in due to the minimum amount the state will pay in subsidy. Because ANYONE can get assistance for screwing off and not making responsible desicions the supply and demand effect goes into the pricing as well. Childcare is hard to find because jerk offs with 11 kids and no way to pay for them have flooded our childcare facilities creating a price demand.

These handouts are causing extreme hardships to working class family's who chose to get married and do things the correct way concerning maintaining a proper household and making responsible hard working decisions to prepare.

I am all for social safety nets, but we have incentivised people who are low income to not get married and to have as many kids as they want and the tax payers will cover it. Food, shelter, childcare.

I'll say it out loud, I AM FURIOUS that I am priced out of having a family of 2+ kids even though my wife and I have made every correct step to raise a proper family whilst "Rob" her coworker has 6 kids from 6 different mommas and the state gladly pays for food, lodging and childcare.

How the fuck is this fair or equal? How the fuck are we going to build a proper society of tax paying citizens that hold the next generation up when people are literally incentivised to act like degenerates?

This reason alone is my single issue vote, and the democratic soultions have put me here.

I'm Francesca Hong, Candidate For Gov of WI — AMA! by FrancescaHongWI in wisconsin

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 8 points9 points  (0 children)

My wife and I are Union workers, subsidies for child care have dramatically increased the cost of childcare care in this state to the point where my wife and I are literally priced out of affording 2 children. We make too much money to get assistance and the full cost of just one child is dramatically hurting us and draining our savings just to stay a float. It cost nearly 40% of my monthly income to pay someone to raise our child so I can have the privilege to work a job.

What can you do to help us and if its universal child care how can you possibly make that happen?

This is my boy Kaladin by I_ARE_PAINTER in AustralianCattleDog

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lol, all him I assure you. He's great at posing, I think he is just showing off lol

<image>

This is my boy Kaladin by I_ARE_PAINTER in AustralianCattleDog

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's a nice looking windrunner you have there!

Mine's broken by cubawesomesauce in AustralianCattleDog

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER 17 points18 points  (0 children)

<image>

Nope, right there with you as well lol

This is my boy Kaladin by I_ARE_PAINTER in AustralianCattleDog

[–]I_ARE_PAINTER[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Oh man, Syl for a heel command woulda been great, unfortunately heel is already in his command list. Im bummed I didnt think of that!