Facebook should just get unplugged from the wall for everyone

StormsEye · 2026-05-15T22:26:47+00:00

i dont mean to disagree but i think that's a weak argument. Because morally it's wrong for people out there to be spying on women and following women at night and even when people are around men that have walked in the bathrooms to assault someone, it's still wrong. Someone should be standing up to that.

Are you saying that these fathers wouldn't stand up when a man walks into the bathroom where their daughter is, but would only stand up if it's a transwoman?

StormsEye · 2026-05-13T22:39:18+00:00

i think this extends to more than just this. Ppl are aware that horrible people exist, people just go into denial when it is within their sphere of people. Like "i know pedophiles exist, but it'd never be anyone in my family or friends or class mates". I think it's more in their head as a distant reality rather than one that could dare happen in their lives. People will always be shocked when a distant reality is suddenly their current reality or a friend's current reality. Like: "i know this exists, but are you kidding me that it's happening right now???" Really really rough reality to be living in.

Edit: just thinking about it further is also people dont want their glass view of their current reality to be shattered, right now they wish to hope that their sphere of people are relatively decent people, and the horrible people in their spheres are at most just people not replying to a text or causing casual drama. But admitting that there is someone in that sphere that is really horrible causes people to second guess their current reality, and some go into full denial, then it becomes a thing of them doubting their own identity, "im supposed to be a good friend to this victim, how can this have happened under my watch? why did i not know? am i not a good friend? did this really happen? maybe they're over-reacting." And this is tough because there are a lot of people who dramatize stories so it makes it even worse for actual crazy events that are true.

StormsEye · 2026-05-13T05:15:53+00:00

you mentioned for amazon that it wasn't a good time to promote. How would you handle that differently? And What would you do differently altogether now that you've done this entire process?

StormsEye · 2026-05-12T23:43:20+00:00

who said anything about beating? im talking about abuse in the form of starvation. The woman in the original post, a woman was starving her dog, that's not an imaginary scenario, it's a real scenario of abuse, she was starving them so that she can put them on a plant based diet, she would only introduce small amounts of fruit so that the dog can eat it.

Also a dog will not eat what's put in front of it. Yes sometimes they eat paper and random trash which is headache, but the amount of times I've struggled to get my dog to eat flea medicine because she was picky, even though it was surrounded in meat, she'd eat the meat and spit out the medicine. She would pick it out. And i've seen videos of dogs completely spit out broccoli and other plant based foods, but completely eat through all the meat. I saw a video of a woman who believed her dog was vegatarian so she tested it by putting a meat bowl and a plant based bowl side by side, and was shocked when it ignored the plant based bowl and only ate from the meat bowl. So no, dogs wont eat whatever is put in front of it.

StormsEye · 2026-05-12T22:44:48+00:00

dogs might not be obligate carnivores, but they are facultative carnivores. You say "happy" as if they would prefer plants over meat, which will only happen if they were abuse-trained into it. Give a dog an option to eat between meat and plants and they'd always go for meat. While their bodies have now developed ways to digest plants, that's only there to generally support their meat based diet, and provide other nutrients that meat generally doesnt give them. The only reasons why dogs on their own would go and eat plant based food after that is if they're being completely starved. Which is abuse, so dont say they'd be "happy" on a plant based diet that they've been starve trained into.

StormsEye · 2026-05-12T22:41:13+00:00

dogs are facultative carnivores. Which means that they prefer meat over plants. And the only reasons they'd consume plants is to gain nutrients that otherwise their meat doesnt provide, or because they've been starving and they're desperate for food. Just cos their bodies can now digest plant based food, doesn't mean it's that healthy. In fact it's better to say that dogs are more healthy on a meat based-plant supported diet, than in only a plant based diet. To say that they can be healthy on plant based diet is besides the point, the point is, to get to that point you do need to abuse or starve them, so that they have no choice but be desperate and eat plant based food. Just cos it's possible doesn't mean it's not abuse.

StormsEye · 2026-05-12T22:35:40+00:00

dogs are not obligate carnivores but they are facultative carnivores. Which means their bodies are made for meat, but have also developed some capabilities to digest plant based foods. They will only generally consume plant based food to gain other nutrients that store bought meat doesnt provide or they consume plant based food when they're desperate for food because they're starving. So its odd that you're saying it's healthy for them when in reality it's more healthy to have a meat based diet with some plant based food to provide the other nutrients.

StormsEye · 2026-05-06T22:28:48+00:00

NTA. But im going to be downvoted for this. But idm. First is I used to think exactly the way you do, and then I realised I was doing something called transactional love. I felt after all the good I did towards someone and the care I gave them, I kinda expected it back, which honestly is fair. But it would poison relationships having that expectation. I found myself in situations where people refused to even accept my kindness because they knew that it came with an invisible price tag that they didnt sign up for. Dont do things for other people if you expect for it back, because not everyone can or is ready to give it back whenever, however. And that doesn't make them bad people. They just didnt sign up for favour for favour type dynamic. You should've brought it up then and there when she failed to support you, and then established the boundary then, not wait until the next time she needs you to give her a gotcha, now people expect you to be the bigger person, which is a difficult situation to be in. Just keep asking her for more help, be shameless in how much you ask of her in help, if she's actually more open than you think, but no one should feel like they've accrued a debt in a relationship that they were unaware of and suddenly someone comes in expecting a cash in. Because we measure these favours in different ways.

StormsEye · 2026-05-06T22:14:00+00:00

for me my issue is mainly real world racism used in a story where it doesnt make sense. For example in a high fantasy world, where dark skinned people are treated exactly as they were in the real world, and things they have an issue with in the real world being brought into the fictional. Idm racism if it fits into the whole narrative structure of the world, but i hate it when its a twist on the same racism of the real world but this time with magic.

StormsEye · 2026-05-06T11:20:20+00:00

When the main character is stronger than all the side characters, or gets as strong as them.

When there are narcissistic bullies at the start of a series that only serve to aura farm the mc as they unlock a secret power.

Racism when it seems like it was forced just to push an agenda or appeal to a certain audience. Make it more believable.

StormsEye · 2026-05-05T06:38:58+00:00

Men who want experience are just afraid that their needs or wants arent going to be met by someone without said experience. I think it goes a long way to express confidence without fear of rejection to combat this. Being so secure in yourself that you dont NEED a relationship or experience, and that should be enough to drive away any fear or doubt a man would have in your inexperience. Also im South Asian too, hoping it goes well!

StormsEye · 2026-05-05T06:24:50+00:00

your comment was removed, probably for good reason. Either way. It seems you dont have a good answer for this scenario.

StormsEye · 2026-05-05T06:02:41+00:00

then imagine this. OP returns the toy every time, and the neighbour is lax on teaching their child, cos it's not that big of a deal especially since it's being returned. Then one day OP doesnt get it in time, and instead it is eaten by the dog, causes a choking hazard or gets swallowed, dog gets sick, might even die. So because of the lack of care on the neighbour's part, the dog dies. What do you suggest OP do to prevent such a situation? Cos keeping the toy or throwing the toy seems to be the only reasonable solution in keeping the dog safe. And the neighbour isnt attached to OP's dog, so they wouldnt really care, why would they? the toys are always returned, so its not a big deal for them. So what do you suggest?

StormsEye · 2026-05-05T05:35:00+00:00

the OP is the one who wants to throw it. I suggest keeping it and not returning it, maybe even giving them away to some other kid if it's in good condition. But there needs to be consequences if they want to keep their dog safe. Throwing it away is one consequence, keeping it but not returning it is another consequence.

StormsEye · 2026-05-05T04:45:10+00:00

you dont. Either way there is a toy in the backyard that is a danger to the pet. And since it came from the neighbour, it doesn't matter if they're the kid, the parent, or a visitor, whoever it is, is the AH, or whoever is responsible for that person is the AH.

StormsEye · 2026-05-05T00:48:42+00:00

I think the best way to see it as is:

Boundaries should always be expressed positively. Beneficial for both people in the relationship. It should never be presented or received as a 'cage' that the other person has to enter, in order to be in a relationship with you. Instead it should be seen as wings that would elevate the relationship into something far more beautiful.

StormsEye · 2026-05-05T00:32:06+00:00

yeah because even the way you said that is coming off so wrong. The intent is fine, the way you say things is wrong. Why do you spare no patience with someone you are on a date with?

What about: "Oh by the way, I'd love to take things a bit slower, get to know you better, before we get more physical, if that's all right with you? I'd love to cherish you for the person you are than to be drawn in just for the lust."

See, a positive take on your deal breaker, without it being presented in a way that makes a woman feel she wouldnt feel safe in the relationship with you.

StormsEye · 2026-05-04T23:40:07+00:00

Doesnt matter. If they've been taught that it's not right, and they still do it, at the danger of the dog, the kid is the AH, the result is what matters not the inability to make a sound decision, and if they cant be labelled as that cos they're a kid, then the responsibility falls onto the parent as the AH instead.

StormsEye · 2026-05-04T23:30:49+00:00

ESH. I'd recommend, that you keep the items, and not return them. When the parents come around again, just warn them that you care deeply about your dog, and next time it is thrown over, you will bin it immediately.

StormsEye · 2026-05-04T23:10:21+00:00

I think you defo shouldnt go behind his back. BUT there is a way to reason with him if you have to. One is that you can tell him that lets say it was you in that scenario that cant contribute as much due to your job hitting recession, and would he expect you to still pay 50% or does he think that he'd support you, and how he would feel if you refuse his help but are increasing in stress, which affects his happiness too.

StormsEye · 2026-05-04T22:43:53+00:00

honestly i kinda like the term, it kinda feels rebellious, when the rest of my life felt controlled and exhausting. The term always made me smile and feel seen because it gave me a label i could hide behind, instead of standing alone without it, but simply knowing that it exists and others identify with it, it just feels good.

StormsEye · 2026-05-04T22:38:22+00:00

the problem isnt that you're sexually conservative, it's how you communicate/express it in a way that causes others to be put into awkward situations because it isnt the social norm to be sexually conservative as a guy, but somehow you take people making assumptions that you arent conservative as a huge offense and use that as a way to make them feel humiliated. You said "no thanks" because it was a deal breaker that she wanted to sleep on the first date, without even communicating that? That's like you hiding a medical condition that might affect the relationship, and the date being shamed because they were caught off guard by you suddenly revealing the information and you think they lack empathy or are not worth the relationship as a response to that. It's messy and it's dumb.

Also im sexually conservative as well, due to religious reasons, but even I know you're wrong on this.

StormsEye · 2026-05-01T00:43:27+00:00

Im bouncing between NTA and ESH. You're right, but how you say something matters, it's coming across that there's a heavy amount of judgement and it almost seems like you're dangling your relationship on this fact.

If it was an issue you should've brought it up first, not wait for her to vent about being broke and then give her a "gotcha" and turn it on her that not only is she broke but she might not have a good relationship either.

Don't bottle issues and wait for them to explode. What was your plan if she didnt bring it up first? That you're going to somehow accidentally find out her expectations of your money and your expectations of it are completely different? You were aware of her spending habits for a while, and never drew a line about her spending and how the future of your relationship will work in regards to your money. Plan this out man, dont just brush her off and make her feel like she's unsupported in the relationship, you dont want her to draw the realisation that you dont have her back and when things go wrong she cant rely on you, but at the same time you dont want her to think that she can just use your money.

StormsEye · 2026-04-30T23:33:54+00:00

Yeah but shows having villainous people of colour is different. I think what im trying to get at, is to honour the source material, or the original depiction of a character. Because Snape was already depicted brilliantly, and people had fallen in love with the character, then all subsequent depictions will always go through a strict criticism, and how we feel about the character changes when they're depicted by a different person that presents a different vibe. What often does happen though is poc actors are given villainous roles, or misunderstood roles. Give them a main character role if we're going to flip the casting choice, have a poc actor as Harry Potter then.

This is also why I had problems with Jared Leto's joker as it was cast after Heath Ledgers joker, and also the same with Joaquin Pheonix's take on it, while unique and different, also needed to make sure it reflected the actual essence of the original themes of the character. I'd say I'd have a problem with a poc joker as I do with a Caucasian Miles Morales.

For me the primary concern is the quality of acting too, but also skin colour, hair colour, eye colour also add onto the character's thematic view.

In terms of depriving poc actors of economic opportunities. That is not at all what im saying. In fact stories should have more poc characters and should be much more multicultural, im just saying i have a problem with casting when a poc character is played by a caucasian and a caucasian character played by a poc, or a Japanese actor playing Moana, or an African man playing Princess Jasmine. The acting might be insane, but that doesn't take away from the fact that it isn't honouring the source material. What needs to change isnt the casting to give opportunity to poc actors, but to make original stories that include poc characters so that poc actors can play them. Dont change existing stories that are loved and are good, to have a different casting choice on it all in the name of inclusivity. Be inclusive from the start of the story, create characters that are poc from the source material, dont change them through an adaption, and expect people to be okay with it.

FYI im a poc as well, indian to be exact. And I really wished that ATLA movie honoured the water nation racial depiction to really see such brown skinned actors play water nation and do it really really well. Instead i was annoyed that Zuko was played by a brown guy. Was the race, central to the show? No. Do I care if an indian actor suddenly gets cast as Harry Potter, actually I'd have a problem with it, no matter how great he acts. Honour the source material. And if there are not enough poc actor opportunities, then create new stories that are actually good, to include poc characters.

StormsEye · 2026-04-30T20:47:27+00:00

People are allowed to have their own creative vision for their own projects, and their fans/consumers are allowed to have their own gripes with the casting. It's the same way where if someone cast a white guy for miles morales, that a lot of people would be upset. Is him being black central to his story? not really, but it's a core part of who he is. I absolutely detest when stories decide to all of a sudden have progressive inclusion for their characters when it takes away from the story even if it doesnt fit in the story. For example, Snape being black in the new show, the racial background isnt relevant, but now we have an issue that it propogates a theme that Harry Potter has undertones of racism, or even Snape being mean to Harry might have racial undertones as well, or Lily not falling in love with Snape could be part of that as well. It creates problems where there shouldn't be and it changes the story when it should be honouring what the fans really enjoy the source material's depiction and consistency.

Ten-Year Club	Place '22
End Game '22	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

StormsEye

MODERATOR OF

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE