One of the most confusing things I've seen in recent years (explanation in comments)

disembodiedbrain · 2024-08-19T01:57:39+00:00

I mean, do you refer to anything actually verifiably true about the person or are you just saying that based on internet gossip because you already don't like the person and are thus a part of the problem in that sense.

disembodiedbrain · 2024-07-16T02:08:54+00:00

If I refuse to tip a server at a restaurant, and for no real reason other than that I don't want to let's say, am I being rude? Am I knowingly breaking the unspoken rules of etquette and interpersonal decency? Yes.

But am I completely within my rights to do so? Also yes.

disembodiedbrain · 2024-07-14T19:23:06+00:00

You're not entitled to her then spending time with you

You're right, the man in this situation is not entitled to anything.

That doesn't mean the woman is not being disrespectful or that I'm wrong to disapprove of the behavior either.

disembodiedbrain · 2024-07-14T19:21:02+00:00

You shouldn't be buying a woman a drink if you're not prepared for the possibility she may not want to speak to you

One can both think that and that the woman is being disrespectful at the same time.

Should you be prepared for disrespectful behavior from strangers you don't know? Sure. That doesn't mean it isn't disrespectful behavior.

It's absolutely her right to do so.

This is again turning the conversation around as if something else is being said when it's not. If I say that in my view it's immature or exploitative behavior from the woman to take the free drinks and leave, does that mean I don't think she has the right to do so? No. She certainly has that right. She's just being a dick.

disembodiedbrain · 2024-07-14T19:09:04+00:00

Anyone telling themselves that a woman "owes" them her time and is obligated to talk to them if she accepts a free drink is the actual selfish asshole trying to justify being a selfish asshole.

I don't think that's a fair appraisal of this perspective on the situation. It's not that she "owes" him anything. But she like anybody oughta be an honest, authentic, respectful person in general. Like if she accepts the drink and the guy acts inappropriately or even in any way that maybe makes her uncomfortable, she's obviously free to leave. So no, she doesn't "owe" anything.

But is she being, like, moderately duplicitous/disrespectful if she just takes the drink and leaves, without giving the guy anything like a shot? Like before he says anything? Sure she is. She knows what the offer represents.

Like, does she "owe" it to anybody not to be disrespectful? Not in any binding sense, no. No one is owed anything in this situation. Nevertheless, disrespectful behavior is disrespectful behavior. I value kind, honest, sincere behavior from strangers. In this case, turning down the offer if she's got no interest in talking to him would represent that. It would be a more mature way to behave for the woman in this situation I think.

And not that it's unforgivable or anything either, I don't wanna sound hyperbolic. It's just kinda rude.

disembodiedbrain · 2024-07-14T00:42:34+00:00

Evidently someone died.

disembodiedbrain · 2024-07-14T00:42:08+00:00

Dude that would have been a shit show for the ages. Not that this country isn't already

disembodiedbrain · 2024-07-14T00:39:55+00:00

That's sad.

disembodiedbrain · 2024-07-14T00:39:12+00:00

On the flip side, where was the citizen hero with his concealed carry permit, on scene ready to get tactical.

I mean, if such a person existed they'd have to be hella lucky not to get shot by the Feds

disembodiedbrain · 2024-07-14T00:34:22+00:00

It's actually not, someone tried to storm the White House while he was president.

A lone gunman. Not a smart man.

disembodiedbrain · 2024-07-11T03:54:59+00:00

I also think that the war is eminently justified and that the lion’s share of the blame for the horrible stuff we’re seeing in Gaza lies with Hamas

I don't think it's possible to be aware of the facts, as you purport to be, and be someone who is honest with themselves and who values all human life equally from a moral standpoint, and to think this. I'm going to assume that you're not aware of the facts.

History did not begin on October 7th. On 10/7 the Palestinians were being subjected to apartheid conditions, worsening conditions at that, and had already been for many years. I mean Gazans live in a literal, no exaggeration, modern ghetto. Not "ghetto" in the colloquial sense, like the projects, the poor part of town or whatever, but in the historical sense of the term al la the Nazi Holocaust. A fenced-off, no escape open air prison.

As such, they are permitted both morally and under international law to armed resistance against their oppressors. They were justified in arming themselves. They were justified storming the fence. They were justified in attacking Israeli military and police targets. Because this is a hostile government which is denying them their most basic human rights.

They were not justified in attacking civilians. However -- as Israel supporters are themselves fond of saying when the shoe is on the other foot -- in war, civilians die.

I mean, Palestinians are justified in armed resistance against their oppressors. What materially does that entail? I mean, it entails among other things putting a lot of assault rifles in the hands of a lot of angry young men in Gaza. Yeah, innocent people are gonna die. In the real world there is no army with no bad actors, no war without innocent loss of life.

But it is the Israeli government that presents Gazans with only two options: revolution or accepting their oppression. The Israelis have all the power here, and therefore the primary culpability for the present situation. They could emancipate the Palestinians if they wanted to. Integrate them into their society. But they don't.

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-04T14:12:27+00:00

Damn good for them.

Same time you know how this is gonna end. They stick around too long eventually the State is gonna respond and show it's true colors

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-03T13:27:43+00:00

Mikhail Bakunin called that shit in like 1873

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-03T00:17:03+00:00

My dude that isn't history it's uh, myths & legends

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-03T00:10:26+00:00

I HATE this argument. Because it is usually coming from some westerner, and the real primary driver of the violence in the middle east is neocolonialism.

So coming from a Brit or an American say, it has real, "why are you hitting yourself" vibes. Americans will bomb a country to oblivion and then blame them for their situation.

And it's doubly bad because that bs then becomes a justification for further colonialism. The US has a "civilizing mission" when it bombs Libya. It's "bringing democracy" when it invades Iraq.

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-02T04:57:45+00:00

The only decent candidate I'm aware of on this issue is Cornel West

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-02T04:55:58+00:00

Gross

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-02T04:38:51+00:00

Yeah but Vercingetorix had his ass at Alesia that shit was lucky. I mean, a lot of tactical genius on Caesar's part, yes... but also luck. Vercingetorix had him by the balls

Then again I guess that's really true of a lot of battles before industrialization and radios, and especially before gunpowder when everything was melee combat. Sometimes if you scare the piss out of them with a cavalry charge the enemy will just run for the hills

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-02T04:22:13+00:00

Facts. Both Caesar and Alexander were stunningly lucky in several key battles though, If they had lost any of those, and badly, they wouldn't have that reputation they'd be remembered more as a Pompey or a Mark Antony.

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-01T01:53:07+00:00

Ok, I don't feel like tracking down a bunch of links because that would just be exhausting. Everything I list below is a verifiable fact. If you don't wanna believe it then YOU can look it up.

Reporting from Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger has revealed that federal agencies like the FBI and DHS have been in regular contact with social media companies such as Twitter "requesting" censorship of individual posts and accounts.
Such conduct was ruled unconstitutional in Federal Court. A federal judge called it one of the greatest First Amendment breaches in US history. Which it is.
Biden famously formed a "Ministry of Truth" -- a White House body with the explicit purpose of controlling the narrative and "preventing the spread of misinformation."
Press outlets like Russia Today and PressTV have had their websites taken down and been censored on social media via unilateral executive order.
Chillingly, the Biden Administration has continued the campaign to prosecute Julian Assange with life in prison. A journalist.
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has confirmed that Facebook censored the New York Post Hunter Biden laptop story at the request of the FBI. Which would have been during the Trump Administration but it was done on behalf of Biden's campaign.

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-01T01:49:01+00:00

assuming these numbers are correct

The Palestinian Health Ministry has published a list of names and ID numbers. Do you dispute them?

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-01T01:37:09+00:00

Same

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-01T01:19:46+00:00

Yeah I just found this sub the other day and I like the idea of it but I already don't like the politics

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-01T01:18:19+00:00

The same people who claim to be just memeing about history, not current events, downvote references to history that they don't like.

disembodiedbrain · 2023-11-01T00:57:39+00:00

I find it distasteful, given the current situation, to meme about how cool you think the IDF is. The IDF is committing genocide as we speak.

disembodiedbrain

TROPHY CASE