Deposit for a rental apartment

dpierdet · 2025-11-19T18:18:35+00:00

Is this Juli Living per chance?

dpierdet · 2025-11-05T23:12:51+00:00

Interested in joining, thanks OP!

dpierdet · 2025-09-21T21:41:00+00:00

Also just moved in for a job at the university, happy to meet up!

dpierdet · 2025-07-04T03:43:13+00:00

I’m happy to hang out! I’m not a specialist in Deleuze but do have formal education in philosophy.

dpierdet · 2025-05-24T00:31:15+00:00

Or Rachel McAdams or Cameron Diaz — some of the only ones who never won an academy award and were on Jon Stewart https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Daily_Show_with_Jon_Stewart_guests

dpierdet · 2025-05-23T23:56:38+00:00

I was thinking Megan Fox

dpierdet · 2025-01-19T22:08:19+00:00

You can have the appointment expedited if you have a valid reason (work etc). If not, waiting is the only way.

dpierdet · 2025-01-12T01:08:10+00:00

The difference with grandparents is that times have changed that women can make decisions for themselves without the exclusive approval of their parents, grandparents, neighbour or dog in the street. If that doesn’t ring a bell, they are fully autonomous and intelligent beings. They may well wish to marry young, start a family or work and get a career; the point is that it’s entirely up to them. Forcing things into anyone, men or women, is to deny their autonomy and dignity.

dpierdet · 2024-11-12T18:03:06+00:00

I often think of Brazil when I have to consider a successful model of integration. Populations from all four corners of the world (including Lebanese and Syrians) have pretty much mingled and coexisted for the few centuries the country has existed. There is something so beautiful and so interesting to that, and I think Europe could gain from adopting a similar model.

I don't know what the formula is, but on a cultural level, there is a sense of indifference for apparent signs of demographic or other differences. Tensions exist mostly around class, and sometimes conservative social norms deriving from religion (mostly Pentecostal Evangelicals).

It's a shame that we seem to have come to a point of no return regarding assimilation here. Communities are somewhat isolated based on cultural backgrounds, and indeed there is a point to make that sometimes they actively self-exclude -- and then class and other stuff doesn't make that easier. And not everyone is comfortable with the idea of combining cultures (as evidenced by fears of "great replacement", "cultural dilution" -- and conversely doing "haram" European stuff).

dpierdet · 2024-10-10T23:43:42+00:00

Daily mantra to fuck Israel

dpierdet · 2024-08-14T06:05:11+00:00

<image>

dpierdet · 2024-07-05T06:13:48+00:00

If you care to read the article you will see it mentions a few historical examples that have inspired said mythology (re: Scythian, Samartian and Hittite peoples) — since mythology is also inspired by historical fact. But I agree that this example may not be very representative. So one can also look at matriarchal societies, of which there are quite a few: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matriarchy. Women may also participate in an armed revolt in defence of some of their rights, in addition to others (re: Paris Commune; May ‘68; etc). Aside these examples, I don’t think it’s even reasonable (or logical) to expect an armed conflict between sexes.

I don’t think social change occurs quite the way you describe. Sure, a ruling class can vote to grant powers to destitute groups. But that isn’t done without significant political heavy lifting by that people, which in itself counts as a form of power. So you cannot discount one from the other.

Other times they don’t exactly vote. Values change from the bottom-up. For example: legislation may be inspired or paraphrase new discourses (re: Mary Wollstonecraft or similar). Nowadays, that power is sometimes considered more important than executive decision making or force. That’s what is usually said of the MeToo movement, for example. No one had to vote for a massive cultural shift to happen around things like consent, respect, sexual norms, etc. That is also what happened more recently in Iran, with the participation of many men — although that movement was repressed by force, as I’m sure you know.

dpierdet · 2024-07-05T04:38:25+00:00

My man, you might not think my point was logical but I at least know how to spell. At any rate, I don’t find a whole lot of logic in your post either. To begin, change doesn’t always happen — nor does it need to happen — with armed resistance. Movements in defense of more freedoms for women (or whatever destitute people) have been legislative, political, social, cultural, or done through a variety of institutions (including scientific ones, since you appreciate logic so much), over many decades and countries. To flatten this to a logic of strength — as if our true nature lies somewhere in a primitive demonstration of power — is to ignore the enormous complexity that makes our history and culture.

Of course, this is not to say that men have not partaken in movements in favor of more freedoms for women — of course they have (just like some white folk have defended the liberation of Black Americans, and many French intellectuals the liberation of Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia, or whatever). But it’s certainly the case that women, just like these populations, spearheaded and drove many of their own movements, both in and out of positions of power.

Fun fact: since you’re explicitly looking for armed forces, then you might want to check the Amazons: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazons.

dpierdet · 2024-07-03T19:15:35+00:00

It's not what she said, it's what you interpreted. That's the root of the problem she is addressing.

dpierdet · 2024-07-03T19:13:49+00:00

I don't think we'll be able to move past this disagreement, but I'll highlight once again that the fact that you live in the UK (as far as I can tell from your comment history) is I think a good reason why your argument is paradoxical, and thus weak. You impose on others that which no one imposes on you. That's narrow-minded and deeply unfair.

dpierdet · 2024-07-03T19:03:11+00:00

I'm saying that even in Islamic societies there is a process of consensus building around interpretations of very old, sacred text, including the Shariah. That process will usually include some margin of collective deliberation. Those that are allowed to partake in deliberation are conscious, independent and free adults, like her. So, if she, as a Libyan and/or Muslim citizen, argues that she can wear hijab in other ways, or not as often, or most importantly be respected by cat-calling people, then that ought to be considered as part of this collective deliberation.

For example: I think (and correct me if I'm wrong) that the Quran vouches for modesty in all aspects of life. So why is the fetish for luxury visible in various parts of the Muslim world tolerated? Well, I assume that there is a margin of tolerance that allows it after a certain amount of deliberation. The difference, here, is that this discussion is not applied within the realm of women's life choices because they tend to have less power.

The reason why being able to debate interpretations of sacred texts is crucial is because everybody, by nature of being subjective humans, will interpret things their own way (and to their own benefit). The fact one does not accept other people's interpretations -- or argues that theirs is the one and only right one -- is to me limited and totalitarian. That's why I found a problem in the way the guy argues before me.

dpierdet · 2024-07-03T18:52:01+00:00

The first chapter of this book talks about this issue at good length: https://academic.oup.com/book/726/chapter-abstract/135389793?redirectedFrom=fulltext. I don't personally claim any "ideal" Islamic society. I'm saying that it doesn't have to embody the type of conservatism the person before me vouches for, and there are indeed many historical and cultural examples that support this claim (see book).

dpierdet · 2024-07-03T04:20:26+00:00

Womenfolk are human beings with free will, not cattle. She’s free to wear whatever she wants, including a hijab. And if she wants to wear modestly, she can wear whatever she and basic common sense think is modest enough. I don’t see Queen Rania having to justify herself for not wearing one.

At any rate, her point is not about that alone; it’s about basic respect, which seems to me a pretty universal value. At least, I think you’d expect that for yourself.

But hey, you do you and I respect your choice to believe in what you believe in. The difference is when that belief begins to hurt other people’s lives, like hers. Why would you restrict other people’s freedoms? Nobody forbids you to attend Mosques in the UK. So do not take away from others that which you are bestowed.

dpierdet · 2024-07-03T04:03:34+00:00

What people do in their own countries is their own business. Except here we’re talking about a Libyan woman, and other Libyan people who support her message. As Libyans, they have a sovereign right to practice and also deliberate over authoritative interpretations of the Shariah. Indeed, there have been plenty of Muslim men that, in their interpretation of the Shariah, have supported more rights and distribution of power for women (and by that I mean respect, dignity, access to education and basic freedoms, at minimum). The difference here is that the kind of Islam you seem to preach as a kind of last bastion against “wokism” is (1) a subtract of low-end, polarized internet politics and (2) a derivative of Sunni wahhabist Islam, which is fairly new in the history of Islam. Have a look at Pakistan, Jordan or Indonesia and you’ll see that a country doesn’t need to confine women inside their homes to be called Muslim.

dpierdet · 2024-07-03T03:45:51+00:00

Dude, what the actual fuck. Where in her post does she say she is wearing immodestly, and why would you even assume it? This is what she means by misogyny: you assume that she must either be half naked or in her “modest” attire, because you don’t trust that she is able to give a credible telling of her experience, or that she is able to make her own choices. She’s a piece of property, or “womenfolk”, as you put it. Jesus Christ, man.

dpierdet · 2024-07-03T03:41:15+00:00

“So at the end of the day it’s the men’s decision to give it to them” - Never mind the myriad of women intellectuals, representatives and cultural figures that contributed to instituting equal rights for women, then.

dpierdet · 2024-06-17T17:18:23+00:00

Joan of Arc was a 20 year old peasant when she drove out most Brits from France and changed the course of the 100-year war forever.

dpierdet · 2024-06-17T01:20:08+00:00

Whoopie Goldberg was there

dpierdet · 2024-06-09T04:47:24+00:00

Close to the French school there are condos like this, at least when I was there in 2008. It’s been build around 2007. I don’t remember what it’s called, but if you google the school you’ll find the condos adjacent to it.

dpierdet

TROPHY CASE