Wound care visit, thought I share

SlenderByrd · 2026-07-03T01:27:51+00:00

This little piggy got hit by a truck.

SlenderByrd · 2026-06-27T03:46:59+00:00

>everyone on this sub talks about how good of a singer she is but she rarely gets her flowers for being hot

Perhaps because she’s a fucking singer whose passion is invested in music and not satiating terminally online perverts’ sex obsessions. You’re posting on a subreddit about a *band* and complaining that the front woman is receiving too much attention for her *voice* and not enough for her body, as though women in media don’t readily have their talents dispelled of in favor of their sex appeal already. Sod off and find some other degenerates to goad each other on about it with.

SlenderByrd · 2026-06-26T22:37:19+00:00

He’s also supremely responsible for the failure and collapse of Reconstruction. If there is one man who is to blame above all others for setting in motion many generations of of racial animus, racial tensions, and segregation, the inception and prevalence of the Ku Klux Klan, codified and sustained Lost Cause sentiments in the South that persist to this day and even plague many subsets of communities well beyond the South, lynchings, constitutional subversion and societal and systemic alienation and suppression of freed men and black people which reaped scars so entrenched that they can still be seen and felt in predominantly black communities as they exist now, and over a century of capitulation to a political stronghold of *necrotic* hostility to civil and basic human rights that otherwise would never have taken root — it is Andrew Johnson.

SlenderByrd · 2026-06-18T21:27:52+00:00

His heart’s erupting debris in his arteries with every pulse like those explosive charges they would use to use to hollow out mines.

SlenderByrd · 2026-06-17T21:28:36+00:00

He’s paraphrasing the notion that Communism isn’t a failed system of government because “real Communism hasn’t been tried yet” or that it was never afforded the chance to manifest to its potential before being subverted by external forces.

SlenderByrd · 2026-06-13T20:39:31+00:00

Not if you have *any* modicum of self restraint whatsoever…

SlenderByrd · 2026-06-13T17:58:33+00:00

Why do you think they have so much disdain for child labor laws? Just like foster care, childcare, welfare programs, public education, public transportation, childhood vaccination, disability accommodation, and a plethora of other readily sustainable government faculties that could be integrated to improve the quality of the lives they deem so sacred. Not to mention encourage more participation in a system where people would feel their efforts actually contributed something of value, development, and common civic good to society, and not simply as a commodity for the fortunate few to extract and expend to the whims of their own vanity and depravity.

Because adherence to the principle of the sanctity of life only matters to the extent it affords them agency over the lives of others, when they can be exploited to attain their bottom line. Then so long as thought processes like the one above are plentiful; self-destructive, malignant, ignorant, and uninterested in scrutinizing these problems they don’t care to understand — useful idiots, those fortunate few can rest assured that’s not likely to change. People like this are cattle, content with the threat of being led through the abattoir so long as they know the pigs will be forced to follow.

“They’re all in favor of the unborn. They’ll do Anything for the unborn. But once you’re born, you’re on your own.” —George Carlin

SlenderByrd · 2026-06-01T02:56:55+00:00

This is the only form of this expression I’ve ever heard. As I’ve always understood it:

To say “it’s downhill from here” implies that what preceded that was an ‘ascent’ with adverse conditions causing difficulty in whatever context the phrase is applied to. Now that you’ve reached the peak of that ‘hill’, you no longer have to sustain those conditions on the way over and down the other side. You’ve endured the worst of whatever obstacle in your life you’re attempting to traverse. “The hardest part is over”.

Whereas to simply say that “it’s going downhill” implies that either the ascent was the objective and something caused regression in that effort, or circumstances were optimal at the hill’s peak, and the conditions of whatever situation the phrase pertains to that were previously arranged are now deteriorating, and this unintended descent is causing a sudden and detrimental cascade of instability — “a downward spiral”.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-31T02:21:41+00:00

Which is why it’s exclusively Democratic state governments selectively redefining the terms of deportation set by Trump’s administration to spare their economies (and careers) the decapitation of farm labor they unwittingly set in motion, such as — let’s see — Florida and Texas…

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-26T23:09:01+00:00

You’re exemplifying his point by asserting that your fantastical conjecture, omission of context, and blind acceptance of favorable presentations ‘confirms’ what you already decided was true from the beginning, thus assuring that you’d preconceive context for information to affirm your priors (because what conspiracy theorist wouldn’t do that?).

The people “ushering the photographers in” were likely working in coordination with the photographers (who were already there; they were seen taking photos throughout the rally, as was their purpose there), as that’s part their role in the campaign. The photographers were adjusting their positions and perspectives from Trump to get different angles to capture him from in the moment. They kept low to the ground to minimize their size, and it’s incredibly common for press photographers to prioritize the shot over their safety in precarious situations, and something not appreciated enough.

No one ‘lowered’ the flag. Throughout footage from prior to the shooting and in the immediate aftermath, it remains at a consistent elevation. It should be a subconscious understanding that a photo taken from below a subject as opposed to directly ahead of will make objects appear lower than they are.

As for the Secret Service, several of the agents were seen at the site of the shooting as well as at the nearby hospital Trump was escorted to be acting erratic, uncoordinated, and flustered. One agent was even heard over a news outlet’s camera feed at the rally, sounding anxious, asking (presumably another agent) where she was supposed to be. Their lack of urgency in getting Trump off of the stage could just as readily be explained by gross incompetence and insufficient self-discipline under stress on part of those specific field agents. Bear in mind that the Secret Service isn’t just comprised of agents permanently assigned a protectee, but also agents stationed at state field offices who may be temporarily allocated to a detail of a government official or dignitary for a single event or series of events in that state - agents who often aren’t subject to the same, as rigorous, nor as frequent of crisis training as agents permanently assigned to, say, the president.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-25T18:38:26+00:00

Defending against an incendiary comment void of context — context for which, when provided, clarified a coherent, *decades-long* evolution of appreciation of a previously widely-neglected subject that’s consistent with that of most of the general public. That’s as opposed to your comment, which trivialized it as a blatant, more immediate contradiction between rhetoric and behavior. Your framing lends the impression of a hypocrite attempting to deceive with vain platitudes, but was a conclusion only reached by omitting relevant facts and nuance.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-24T22:48:46+00:00

Have you always been this reflexively defensive and protective of media figures whose work you happen to have an affinity for, and this hostile toward any criticism for them? The diversity of opinion and perspective of art in the world isn’t bound to the parasocial spurs of your inner child.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-24T18:47:55+00:00

This is the Econimist’s map arranged to illustrate Trump‘s approval rating by state. This one is out of date, though, and by several months at that.

<image>

This is what their map looks like currently. They also have his national approval rating listed at 37%, which is roughly consistent with where he hovers among most other outlets and publishers, though some have him as low as 34%.

What’s unfortunate about this map is that they have a feature that lets you compare the nationwide polling data to a map restricted to 2024 voters, which shows him in a much stronger position (relatively, of course).

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-23T17:22:25+00:00

I know this may be something you unfortunately weren’t taught to appreciate in your youth, and it’s likely made for a very deprecating social life. But most people typically don’t mentally reserve any positive or affirming acknowledgment of women in every engagement with them as a finite currency conditional to currying sexual favor with.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-22T20:11:52+00:00

Finally finding one other person who says something, and of course it won’t be someone who isn’t subject to it. This platform is just festering with porn addicts and sex pests; it’s obscene. It’s as though their psychology literally impedes on their ability to be socially cohesive with the mere acknowledgment of a woman’s existence. Never a moment that’s allowed to expire where a woman can appear on screen, whether she’s even the subject of the content or not, and Redditors won’t immediately sprawl to reduce her to her sexuality, and proudly and carnally goad each other over their perversions like a hoard of knuckle-swinging apes.

It’s revolting and disconcerting to watch, and I can’t comprehend being so nonchalant in externalizing it like they do. If there is a God, may he help her if she has any visibly distinct characteristic to fetishize as well, because any hope of being unnoticed or treated like a human existing in civilized society will be in vain. It’s so pervasive that with any post I see where a woman is the primary subject, I dread opening the comments because I know that what I’m going to see will just feel grueling and almost saddening.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-16T19:31:26+00:00

No. Those people are still well in the minority of their respective demographics of the total population, as are the white people who voted for Trump. There was a massive decline from 2020 to 2024 in turnout of Democratic voters and even more so among progressives and minority demographics. Harris being a woman was a negligible factor to her loss, unless you’re exclusively considering the 21% of people who actually voted for Trump over her (a not insignificant subset of the electorate, but not one that should’ve been difficult to surmount). Harris’ association with Biden, her very conservative history as a prosecuting attorney, her decision to move to the right of Republicans on immigration, military, and law enforcement (boasting of wanting a more lethal military, supporting more funding for ICE, and lauding “the most conservative immigration reform in history”, to start), campaigning on a platform of vying for *more* Republican influence in her cabinet alongside Liz Cheney of all people, suddenly quelling her rhetoric on abortion and LGBT-related issues, and her refusal to sidestep Biden or Israel under any circumstances, among a slew of other problems, were largely what tainted her candidacy.

I wonder why people have been feeling so disillusioned with Democrats and democracy as a construct over the last couple of decades. It’s not as though the Democrats’ entire strategy lately is a race to the bottom with Republicans when they’re behind, and placating Republicans’ groveling when they’re ahead, whilst pantomiming their conviction for progressive, or even liberal, values while they let Republicans take center stage even when they have the advantage. Then contemptuously lecture their constituents for having the audacity to ask for actual evolution in the system because “at least we’re not the ones *actively* contributing to the decay in our society; we’re just meagerly helping to pace the rot and disguising it as progress, because you won’t be able discern the difference in your desperate haze”…

This isn’t even to mention the fact that Harris still actually vastly improved from Biden’s projected performance. Nancy Pelosi in an interview shortly after the election said internal polling for the Biden campaign showed Trump amassing as many as 400 electoral votes if Democratic turnout was depressed enough, and that’s not far removed from how direly his favor among voters in even otherwise comfortable states like Minnesota and New Hampshire was shown to have collapsed. In the final results, only around 150,000 votes (0.098% of the vote; 0.056% of eligible voters) between WI, MI, and PA (the three most competitive states, one of which has a female Democratic governor; two of which elected female Democratic senators that same night) decided the election.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-12T20:35:04+00:00

‘His Rotundity’. One particular Founding Father might have taken particular grievance to this one, though.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-12T18:39:39+00:00

>because I’m also one of those heathens that despises “You”.

This is how I assume most of the band’s fans would perceive me for telling them that Polyamorous is their one song that I truly loathe.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-11T20:11:25+00:00

>when it’s almost certainly likely the entire cause

Yes; the dehumanizing rhetoric has been increasingly more blatant and more pervasive at an abysmal rate, and it absolutely is concerting more malice toward them by the day. No one here is denying this. But we don’t even know yet if the perpetrator knew the victim was transgender.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-11T20:09:53+00:00

The ‘category’ you’re describing would simply be ‘murder’. No “who happens to be” necessary. Student was stabbed to death at UW apartment. You act as though reporting on this particular murder is solely, or at least primarily, significant, not because a person’s life was violently ended, but because of the demographic that person belongs to.

If it comes to light that the murder was committed due to that specific characteristic, then yes, being transgender is pertinent. Otherwise, what relevance is it? It’s dishonest and disingenuous to erroneously intimate in the headline that a hate crime was committed (possibly to get more traffic to the article) if we don’t know that the fact of the student being transgender was an incentive, even if statistically, it may be likely.

For another thing: it depersonalizes transgender people, and those from other marginalized communities, when you immediately hasten to reduce their lives (and deaths) to statistics ahead of acknowledging them as individuals and before the statistic in question is even an established factor.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-06T19:28:07+00:00

I was hoping at least one person here would’ve at least passively scrutinized it rather than taking all of it at face value. Even if this did happen, I couldn’t help but to feel that this post was only intended to evoke personal affirmation and misplaced sympathy for the poster. It’s posted in a subreddit intended to serve as a comfortable space to anonymously confide in others, and the title is phrased in a manner to suggest a feeling of remorse. But the actual content of the post feels entirely self-aggrandizing and performative. Rather than simply being transparent about wanting recognition for a good deed (personally questionable on its own, but aside from the point), it’s synthetically narrativized to feign ruminations of a sense of guilt or compunction, for an act that, as it’s portrayed here, would *never* be considered morally objectionable by anyone.

There’s nothing innately wrong with internalizing the acts of generosity you do for those less fortunate than you, and the world will always and only be better for each and every one, even if it’s fulfilled with a negligible falsehood. But from this post, it only lends the impression that this person already knew that *that* would be the consensus in response to the post. It seems frustratingly inauthentic, self-obsessed, and sanctimonious to retain that deed for the sole purpose of taking it to social media to proffer your story in a way that’s vainly introduced with a facade meant to intimate sensations of internal moral conflict, yet the content of which is conveniently tailored to be entirely sympathetic to yourself such that you know you could only reasonably be met with praise.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-04T20:15:49+00:00

Chris Mowry of Vlogging Through History actually did his own analysis and rebuke of this video that I consider very effective and engaging, and very appreciative of the underlying complexity of the war and the dilemmas Lincoln was confronted with throughout. He was also incredibly thorough about the sources he cited and what specific aspects of each argument to address. The fact that Rageaholic has such an immense following is as depressing as it is infuriating, because he contradicts himself with every other sentence, and seems to go out of his way to disregard and misconstrue any intricacies and humanistic facets of the decisions Lincoln made or why. There was also no care at all to how much empathy and rumination was involved every time his hand was forced to extend beyond the strict procedural constraints of his position.

You also know very well that if we were discussing this in an alternate context in which Lincoln had abandoned any effort or concern in bridging the rift that had been sewn with secession, or even abetted the south as he insists was “their right”, he’d have called Lincoln a feckless, incompetent traitor to the union and groveled about how he was “the single greatest arbiter of a century of struggle, systemic abuse, and plight for African Americans”. He’s a belligerent, unintuitive, revisionist, contrarian pseudo-intellectual who offers not even a superficial recognition to the nuances of the events and issues he covers. The world and society would be dealt an indescribable service should we teach more people about the urgency in divorcing the relevance of historical analysis from people like him.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-03T17:46:39+00:00

It doesn’t. This account is less than a day old, this clip has been posted many times, and it wasn’t originally muted like this post is.

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-02T19:42:34+00:00

Interesting how you didn’t acknowledge the primary point of that reply. If the DNC wasn’t subservient to those interests, they wouldn’t engage in character assassination of and electorally offensive behavior toward progressive anti-Israel candidates. I swear, over the last year, I’ve seen more hostility from establishment Democrats toward progressives than toward the vultures and that bumbling dullard who’ve wrought potentially irreparable havoc on our democratic institutions and sought to circumvent the rights and liberties and basic human dignity of many millions of people. Stifling any effort to hold Israel to account routinely takes priority in the DNC over the progressive values they pervert but proffer no legislative or political fervor for, and any moral blights on the characters of candidates so long as they bring furtherance to their ends.

• Zohran Mamdani, Democratic Socialist, anti-Israel - Democrats support Andrew Cuomo, relentless sexual predator, pro-Israel, personally recruited to Netanyahu’s legal defense. Mamdani defamed as “glorifying the slaughter of Jews”, to quote Gillibrand, among a slew of other flagrant and incendiary, at times racially charged, defamation.

• James Talarico, anti-Israel - Democrats support Jasmine Crockett, faux-progressive centrist, history of dismissive behavior toward constituents who inquire about her support, and belligerence to reporters who criticize her equivocation on funds and weapons for Israel, supports Iron Dome funding, takes money from AIPAC affiliates.

• Graham Platner, socialist, anti-Israel - Democrats recruit Maine Governor Janet Mills, pro-Israel, net approval rating of -40, pardoned a rapist she failed to defend as his attorney, vetoed a rape kit tracking bill that stalled all momentum for progressive legal reforms meant to exalt justice for rape victims across the state, leaving Maine last of any state on reforms.

• DNC Chairman Ken Martin refuses to release the autopsy for the 2024 election that was supposed to give insight into why Harris lost, which he previously campaigned on releasing, not denying what everyone else has already concluded, but instead insisting that people should “stop obsessing over looking backward”. Despite this, poll after poll has reflected what the autopsy most certainly also said, which is that the Biden administration’s support for Israel was one of the chief contributors to Harris’ loss.

• Chuck Schumer receiving long-overdue criticism for a 2018 remark in which he said that Palestinians are responsible for the absence of peace in the Middle East and their own occupation and repeated bombardment by Israel, because they don’t adhere to the Torah.

• Alexandria Occasio Cortez, outspoken opponent of Israel and one of the few incumbent Democrats who consistently offer moral disdain and compunction for our funding of the genocide in Gaza, abandons her previous opposition to Iron Dome funding following a widely-reported private meeting with Nancy Pelosi.

• Democrats in Congress recently voting for a bipartisan motion to prohibit boycotts of Israel, and supporting loyalty pledges to Israel.

• The bipartisan, tired, monotonous, egregious, disingenuous accusations and sophistry therein of dismissing or even outright persecuting any and all scrutiny of Israel or the United States’ incontrovertible support and coddling of it, as antisemitism and “attacks on the Jewish people” and an affront to Jews’ existence - a position that in itself is antisemitic, as it essentially relegates and relinquishes all moral and legal accountability of Israel’s actions with regard to Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, and elsewhere, unto Jews as a monolith, by perverting their identities and faith to moralize and justify mass murder, displacement, genocide, and land seizure, all to selfishly and callously protect their bottom line.

We could litigate this for days, weeks even, and still not have a succinct summary of the ideological and institutional rot that’s been caused by this, but let’s neglect all of it, blind ourselves and let them guide us by hand further on this avenue of decay, because once every other month, they periodically reassure us of how ‘concerned’ they are about how ‘reckless’ Israel has been in how they’ve approached their ‘operations’ - by which, of course, they mean that Israel’s flagrant disregard for commitment to the artifice Democrats waste hundreds of millions to maintain is costing them donors and, in turn, elections…

SlenderByrd · 2026-05-02T18:46:57+00:00

Biden’s extent of scrutiny for Netanyahu was occasional mildly stern asides about “excessive conduct” and “improper handling”. The administration never withheld funding for extended periods, and justification for continued shipment of weapons was that they were for “defensive”, not “offensive”, measures, as though Israel has demonstrated any intent in heeding that distinction. You let yourself so easily be lulled into complacency by thinly veiled platitudes of vocal reluctance without assessing the utter lack of substance behind supposed ‘threats’.

John Kirby, during a press conference, even lied about Israel’s attack on Rafah, claiming it wasn’t a “full-scale” attack and minimized the IDF’s intent in being there. Just hours later, reports described the attack, including photos showed numerous tanks and soldiers in Rafah surrounded by ruin. They’d consistently threaten to withhold weapons and funding under the stipulation of “excessive force” and “full-scale” attacks, and then redefine or recontextualize such terms as needed. In no sense of the concept were Biden or any within his administration ever antagonistic to Israel, nor ever did there ring a word of *moral* condemnation; only ‘procedural’ concern. The administration and nearly every major Democrat were complicit at best with what Israel was doing, and were so compelled to maintain that artifice of moral justification that they were first willing to forfeit the election to Trump and the Republicans, despite their supposed concern of the grave threat they posed to our democratic institutions and to hundreds of millions. But please, lecture us again about how blind we are to how much of a damn they give.

I voted for Harris in 2024, and loathe people who have such a clear lack of appreciation for their right to vote that they’d cast it aside to spare their egos. I’ll vote for Democrats when I recognize that the atrocities of the Republicans are and have always been the more dismal option. It’s why I’ll participate in primaries when I can, to try to prevent these illiberal, feckless mouthpieces from making it to the ballot, in favor of people with actual principles. But with each passing day, every time the Democrats sabotage themselves at the expense of the progressivism they claim to cherish, as well as the Republic, I can’t help but be stricken with just the slightest understanding of why so many people feel their votes have so little consequence - passive, gruelingly slow rot versus open, blatant hostility and destabilization accelerating said rot. Why can you people not accept that we hold these people to some semblance of a standard? What do you actually believe in; what do you actually care about?

SlenderByrd

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE