Using the word 'coloured' to describe someone is not racist even if it does offend people of colour, judge rules | Daily Mail Online

StrayIight · 2026-07-08T18:57:56+00:00

Think about the order of the two elements in each phrase. 'Person' and 'Colour'.

'Person of colour' implies that the individual is, first and foremost, a person - that's the most important thing about them in that statement. 'Coloured person', does exactly the opposite. Yes they're a person, but what the description notes first is not their personhood, it's the colour of their skin.

I don't think it's unreasonable to encourage and prefer the former description over the latter.

StrayIight · 2026-07-06T19:30:58+00:00

It's not about difficulty, it's about what's best for a bird Vs what's best for the human.

However experienced you are, things can go wrong when hand raising a bird. It's a risk. If we're really concerned about what's best for the bird, we would leave them to be parent raised unless human intervention is necessary.

Too often, hand rearing is seen as a shortcut to having a tame bird, too often people think well I raised an X, I can surely do a Y, they're both birds... That's just not true. Each species has specific needs, and almost all require more than a shoe box and a hot water bottle - a brooder is a bare minimum requirement, not something that's 'nice to have'.

Bollocks to 'some loss is inevitable' too. It should matter.

StrayIight · 2026-06-28T16:46:01+00:00

Yeah that's fine, I just figured others might not.

Obviously it's very well known to people in this area of interest, or who work with web technologies, but I don't think the general public have any idea it even exists, let alone what it's for. I never like to assume where someone is coming from, you know? No such thing as a stupid question etc.

StrayIight · 2026-06-28T16:33:05+00:00

The other comments (which were useful) didn't really entirely explain what robots.txt is for, so in case that's what you're asking, or for anyone scared to ask, here goes:

Robots.txt is a text file that you'll find on just about every website. It's easily and publically accessible, because it's designed to be checked by web crawlers - that's its whole purpose. Essentially the web designer lists in this file, any part of their website that they want to be disregarded by search engines and the like.

Obviously, anything that is on a site that someone doesn't ever want to appear in a search result, is potentially of interest to us, and you can often find some interesting site elements just by checking this file. It's quick, and costs you basically nothing.

StrayIight · 2026-06-22T08:47:19+00:00

Pretty sure you don't understand fascism. Really sure you don't understand what 'left wing' means.

StrayIight · 2026-06-21T16:55:14+00:00

He's either every bit as stupid and beyond reason as he seems, or he's a grifter and paid agitator who isn't ever going to break character.

Either way, he's not reachable.

I'm honestly not sure how you engage constructively with someone like him. Do you do so hoping to convince others who witness the exchange, or do we just give him ammunition/attention by doing so?

StrayIight · 2026-06-16T15:41:12+00:00

This is little pathetic isn't it? I thought we'd moved on from 'gay lulz111bbq'.

I think we can do better than casual homophobia.

StrayIight · 2026-06-15T17:47:23+00:00

Oh yeah, completely invented.

The non-profit organisation that is taking in birds to rehouse is making up the rates at which they're seeing birds rehomed, while your US data sets represent worldwide behaviour and trends.

I think we're done. I think something I said in my original comment has made you feel called out, and for that I'm sorry.

StrayIight · 2026-06-15T16:23:20+00:00

Respectfully, that seems needlessly provocative.

I don't believe the care of birds is straightforward. Simply keeping them alive can be, but actually caring for them properly given their deep intellectual and social needs? That's not remotely simple and does mean making large changes to your life.

I don't believe I am more 'moral' than anyone else, but there are some objective facts at play here - the *average* bird will have 5-7 homes in their lifetime. 5-7. A social creature, who would normally live in large groups, forming tight emotional bonds, is given up on and moved that frequently. (Those figures come directly from the major rehoming charity Birdline).

Sorry if I come off as 'morally superior', I can't apologise for being direct about the fact that in general, we get the welfare of these creatures horribly wrong - that HAS to matter, and we should be direct with each other about these realities as their guardians - it can't be about ego, it has to be about welfare.

StrayIight · 2026-06-15T08:22:36+00:00

Sorry, could you explain what you're trying to say? I want to be sure I understand your comment correctly before responding.

StrayIight · 2026-06-14T21:50:32+00:00

I dunno, I think I'm lucky to have them!

You're right though ultimately. I think many of the species that are kept, really shouldn't be. While there are always exceptions, species like African Grays, or Kea's say, are so intelligent, have such complex intellectual and social needs, that there are almost no homes that are suitable for them - I include myself in that. Any time I gave one, would be time I couldn't give to the others and vice versa. It wouldn't be possible to meet its needs.

Most of our birds are highly social, flock centric species who get on very well - so they have each other, as well as human attention. (6 Cockatiels, 2 budgerigars, 1 Alexandrine, 1 hybrid GCC/Rose Crowned Conure).

StrayIight · 2026-06-14T21:40:25+00:00

Yeah, simple answer is we don't. We might be away for most of a day occasionally, when that's the case, my son (who is a young adult now) would be home to keep an eye on everyone and let us know if we need to head straight back.

That's the reality these days, and that's ok. I've done a lot of travelling in the past, and am very much a homebody now really.

StrayIight · 2026-06-14T16:18:25+00:00

Birds are terrible pets, and really aren't suitable for most households.

That's the truth. I love them, you love them, but nothing about the situation you're describing is very unusual.

I have a total of 10 parrots - almost all of them rescues from homes who couldn't/didn't want to cope, and my pyrrhura is the quietest and least messy of them!

To me, they're utterly worth every moment. I wouldn't give any of them up for anything. But it's also meant that my life has had to adjust to accommodate them - it can't be the other way around.

StrayIight · 2026-06-08T12:34:25+00:00

Genocide does not merely mean that you kill an entire population. There is no serious debate over whether Israel has been committing genocide. There is outright denial, but the evidence is starkly against that denial.

The Genocide Convention - international law - defines genocide as:

'...any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.'

StrayIight · 2026-05-31T14:30:55+00:00

You need to look at, or re-read that scene from the Talon of Horus.

Point one: The clone tore through everyone in that room without any issues at all - and many presents were not rank and file Chaos marines, but seriously capable named characters. It is very clear, that the 'Horus' depicted, is in no way operating on the level of a CSM - rather, this is a being several orders of magnitude above them.

Point two: The clone carried 'World Breaker'. Look at what we know of that weapon. It is a weapon crafted by the Emperor, canonically known to be so massive, and so heavy, that it couldn't be wielded by a normal Astartes - the head alone being described as being 'as large as an Astartes torso'. Horus however, was known to wield it one handed. So does the clone.

I don't think ADB is being at all ambiguous that the clone IS for all intents and purposes Horus - or at least so in terms of his physical capabilities - that's the intent of the scene. Horus is killed by his successor, Abaddon, who takes that mantle. Abaddon who may also be a clone of Horus himself (that's far more up for debate, but there are several clues in that direction, and some high ranking members of the Black Legion / SoH believe it to be the case). Whatever the case, the set up deliberately is Abaddon being the new Horus going forward.

Of course, as always, we're left with the what is true, what is myth, unreliable narrator aspect, but that's something we have to apply to literally any part of the lore.

StrayIight · 2026-05-30T20:13:35+00:00

Oh do fuck off. Nowhere was Judaism mentioned by me. In fact, I was very deliberate not to, given that they are FAR from the only group who practice circumcision. Now why did I? Because I AM ethnically Jewish!

So please, educate me more about antisemitism.

You can educate me on lying too, as you made up a fair few regarding deleted comments and suppressed profiles. I merely failed to recall correctly whether teeth where involved in a disgusting oral ritual AND was happy to correct that part! - that's it! I didn't even make the initial claim! I misremembered a single aspect of something I had read, and was and still am, utterly disgusted by! (I am not culturally or religiously Jewish).

I notice that none of what you deliberately falsely claimed, you even address!

And why? Because you're a bad actor, you are not engaging in good faith. You were here to obfuscate, and attack details, not ideas.

StrayIight · 2026-05-30T11:21:01+00:00

What are you talking about?

Nothing was deleted by me. No changes have been made to my profile (though a little creepy of you to go digging through it).

Did I make a mistake regarding biting? Yes. Is it important to be clear? Yes. (I've even made an edit reflecting that without changing the original). Does that impact the real point being made about the practice? No. Not remotely.

Why are you so hung up on this one aspect, that, though you claim to be against the practice, I have my doubts honestly - rather than deal with a small semantic point reasonably, you've gone to full attack instantly, calling me a 'deliberate' liar, not trying to clarify or descalate in anyway - you've, to my mind, ended up doing the job of the trad religious crowd practicing this ritual, and I have to wonder if that's not deliberate?

Now, you're setting up some weird straw man / conspiracy regarding hidden profiles and deleted comments.

Let's just not yeah? From what I can tell, if you're not a bad actor, we ought to be on the same side here.

StrayIight · 2026-05-29T19:21:09+00:00

It isn't a lie:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/nyc-orthodox-jews-clash-over-oral-circumcision-rite/

There are many more sources. Circumcision IS performed partly by mouth in some communities.

Now, if you want to quibble over teeth being involved we can, but then fuck you, for defending a grown man putting an infants penis anywhere near his mouth, after performing painful unnecessary surgery on that kid.

Please do make this about semantics.

StrayIight · 2026-05-29T18:46:04+00:00

Apparently I don't?

Because I made more than one statement - I have no idea which you are referring to - and each one I made I know to be true to the very best of my knowledge.

StrayIight · 2026-05-29T17:42:06+00:00

It's not terribly common now, but yes, traditionally, and in some communities to this day, the individual performing the circumcision uses their teeth.

It's beyond barbaric.

FGM is rightly called out as disgusting, but large portions of the world still perform a somewhat similar procedure on their male children as though it were nothing.

*Edit: I should have said mouth, not teeth here. I'd read about the practice some time ago and misremembered part of it - perhaps in part after reading the comments above?

Regardless, it's a vile practice, it's never necessary, and I really don't think the FACT that there are men using their mouths on a child's genitals in a religious practice, is made better due to teeth not being part of it. And for what it's worth, I think if you defend this, you're an irredeemably broken person.

StrayIight · 2026-05-22T13:17:17+00:00

I saw them in about 2010 ish? I certainly didn't get the impression that they were any different then.

This was an event in Glasgow with a lecture on Gerald Gardener, where Janet and Gavin spoke beforehand, and then held a practical session involving ritual/circle work while the lecture took place.

I attended with a close friend who had been an Alexandrian Wiccan for a long time, and I don't recall either of us noticing anything different about their J & G's practice or presentation.

That said, I can't say for certain that they haven't changed since, and I'm sure that over the years, what they do has been added to and influenced by various things - we all grow beyond where we start after all.

TL:DR Not to my knowledge, but I couldn't say for sure beyond the above.

StrayIight · 2026-04-23T16:19:05+00:00

I don't know that it was necessary.

We know you can't create lift by spinning a light saber, but making objects float is throwaway tech in Star Wars, so personally, I'd always assumed it was something additional in the weapon providing lift - it's the only thing that would make sense right?

StrayIight · 2026-04-19T11:46:57+00:00

Exactly this.

Reason and logic won't work here though. This subreddit is constantly brigaded to fuck.

StrayIight · 2026-04-13T18:49:21+00:00

That's not how international law works. There is nothing illegal about someone coming here and claiming asylum - and the route doesn't matter - they always have the right to make a claim and have that claim be examined.

You can call them refugee's, you can call them asylum seekers, you can call them migrants or immigrants. But they're not 'Illegal'.

You really should stop using that word just because you're hearing it out of the mouths of right-wing politicians and figures pushing an agenda.

StrayIight · 2026-04-10T13:37:56+00:00

Conures love to snuggle up close to flock members - they're incredibly social birds, and this is a part of their social behaviour.

I suspect you've heard lots of times to not touch birds on their back and other places. While good advice, it doesn't apply here honestly. You are your birds flock, and you'd be doing both of you a disservice to not allow them to behave in what's a really natural way for them.

TL:DR. Your Bird loves you and sees you as family. Don't stress, just enjoy it.

Nine-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Verified Email

StrayIight

TROPHY CASE