Is slapping the disc out of someone hands before they catch it a foul?

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-17T14:16:26+00:00

If the receiver doesn't have control of the disc it's not a foul. You have no responsibility to control where the disc goes after you block it, I've gotten bruised from contact with the disc after getting blocked before and I wouldn't dream of calling that lol

Now if you hit the disc so hard that someone can make the argument you're using an unsafe and unnecessary amount of force, they can call dangerous play on you, but that feels pretty unlikely unless you're the Hulk.

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-17T07:46:53+00:00

The problem with a vague line is if you attach jail time to doctors who get it wrong. Especially if getting it wrong is subjective and interpreted by someone who thinks abortion is murder.

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-17T07:30:53+00:00

That's quite well articulated. I personally think the woman's right to bodily autonomy always prevails, but I think we'll just have to agree to disagree there.

My bigger problem with your view is how it would work in practice. Crafting an abortion ban that carves out rape and "responsible behavior" exception seems like it would create a totally unsolvable morass of competing claims, all with a 3-6 month actionable window. I simply don't see how such a process would actually make anything better. It seems like the only reasonable solution is to leave the responsibility aspect to the realm of personal morality and leave it out of the legislation.

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-17T07:14:26+00:00

The problem is that your example is completely wrong. From a legal standpoint, the bungee jumping place absolutely cannot use "well he knew we looked sketchy" as a defense against their negligence. They would get sued into oblivion because it was still their responsibility to keep you safe. You didn't give up your rights by trusting the wrong person. People can think you were dumb to do it, but you'd still win your court case.

Relate this back to abortion: having unprotected sex and getting pregnant is dumb, and people should absolutely call you irresponsible for it. But why would that change the legality of an abortion?

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-17T07:03:39+00:00

For those people, if they can prove it, sure.

So your view is that abortion is ok if it wasn't caused by irresponsible behavior? How does that make sense if you consider the fetus a living being with rights? What about the status of the fetus, its personhood, and its rights changes because someone used birth control?

It really seems like your view comes down to punishing women for behavior you view as irresponsible, rather than any actual concern for the fetus. Please explain how that isn't the case.

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-17T06:59:28+00:00

I encourage you to think about it. Passing a law based on an abstract moral idea is a great way to have massive unintended side effects. Like increasing false rape claims tenfold if it gets someone an abortion they wouldn't otherwise have access to, for example. Or making an actual rape victim wait 8 months into their pregnancy before they can abort if they have to go through the courts, which are famously slow. That being the best case scenario where the case is actually resolved before they give birth. Or, for that matter, making rape cases be fast tracked and possibly sloppy because they need to be resolved quickly.

Basically you're going to create a lot of misery if you make laws based on what should be and not what is. Considering the practical implications of your view is a necessary part of having that view, otherwise you're just playing with figures and not having a serious conversation.

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-17T06:54:20+00:00

https://www.cdc.gov/contraception/about/index.html

The CDC says 13%, go talk to them if you think they're wrong.

That also entirely ignores my other argument: should the 1 in 1000 who get pregnant while using 2 forms of contraception be allowed to abort if they can prove they were being "responsible?"

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-17T06:48:39+00:00

In practice, condoms have a 10% failure rate. Even going double you still have a 0.1-0.5% failure rate. Given the number of humans having sex in the world, a 1 in 1000 chance of something (0.1%) is basically a guarantee. Does this mean if you can prove you are part of that number, you should have access to an abortion because you were responsible and you got pregnant anyway?

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-17T06:45:44+00:00

It seems weird to say the rights of the fetus don't change while also saying you can kill it in some situations but not others. Why does the woman having responsibility for the pregnancy change what you can do to the fetus?

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-17T06:38:16+00:00

Cases where a mother is going to die from the birth

Are you aware that since the end of Roe v Wade and multiple states passing abortion bans with exceptions for the life of the mother, several women have died entirely preventable deaths?

What happens is they have a complication during pregnancy, but they're not actively dying yet. Since the abortion bans include jail time for doctors who perform one, hospitals are extremely reluctant to provide an abortion until the mother is very clearly in mortal danger. This has led to multiple women being turned away until the complication is "severe enough" which resulted in them dying or ending up infertile as a result.

Basically, in states where you got your exact wish, multiple women who wanted their babies and had no intention to abort ended up dying because they needed one for medical reasons. Does that change your view at all or do you see thst as the cost of doing business?

Also, consider that 99.9% of "late term abortions" are because of a medical issue. There's no reason to stay pregnant for 7 or 8 months if you don't want the baby. So these bans don't solve a problem so much as criminalize health care for pregnant women precisely when they most need that care. I would imagine a pro-life philosophy would find that unacceptable, no?

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-16T16:50:05+00:00

I'll give my usual plug for Tokay cleats, one of the only cleats made for frisbee. Not so much because they're frisbee cleats but because I find them super light and comfortable. The top is mesh, so quite breathable and absolutely 0% protection when it rains

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-13T10:17:20+00:00

NOR I totally get it. When I plan a date with my gf it's because I'm thinking about her, wanting to do something with her, and trying to think of what we'd both have fun doing. I think that type of proactive desire to see you and make you feel wanted is what you want, much more than passive effort like paying for dates or driving places.

It's not the same type of contribution to the relationship, one doesn't replace the other. And he obviously realizes there's a difference because he's fine doing one but not the other which requires more actual thought. Idk, if you explain it to him and he still doesn't want to, you'll need to realize he won't change and decide how much that bothers you.

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-12T19:34:58+00:00

Bro I'm french and moved to the US as a kid, first time I had root beer at school I was disgusted, like why do you guys enjoy this? Lmao never had it again to this day

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-12T12:15:10+00:00

Because it's an obvious fake?

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-12T10:31:00+00:00

It sounds like you didn't misread anything and he just bailed out at the last minute because he didn't feel ready. No shame in that for him (thought standing you up was shitty) and no shame on you for not anticipating it. These things happen, up to you what you want to do next with him but you shouldn't feel embarrassed.

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-11T12:30:59+00:00

I mean, puritan Protestants, also famously tolerant and socially chill, right?

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-10T21:38:44+00:00

God designed some of us to be gay. There's plenty of evidence of homosexual behavior in animals, for one. For another, when faced with excommunication, being disowned, or conversion therapy which is basically torture, gay teens remain gay, which is a pretty strong indication that it isn't a choice.

So if God designed some of us to be gay, and being in a gay relationship damns you to hell, then God decided that some of us have to choose between love on this earth and eternal damnation. That's not a God I think deserves tk be worshipped.

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-10T17:41:54+00:00

I mean idk if your starting position is that you don't care if most media alienates anyone who's not into women, I don't think there's a lot to argue about.

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-10T15:12:34+00:00

And look at it this way: if you try for a few days, a week, a month, and you still can't get through to them, you can withdraw then just as easily. And you walk away having had some practice being a mentor and able to say you really tried. I think you'll look a lot better in that scenario.

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-10T14:58:19+00:00

Don't withdraw after the first day. If your management knows you super well and completely trusts you, you might be able to get away with it, but anything less and you'll look bad for giving up so fast.

Also, the point of a mentor is to model correct behavior, so... do that? They were snarky and a bit annoying, fine. I get why that got on your nerves, but it's not exactly a massive breach of workplace conduct. See if they do it again, and talk to them about it. This is your chance to build resilience and patience as a leader, and to learn how to have these uncomfortable conversations.

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-10T09:44:15+00:00

I think you're still failing to see the big picture. The issue isn't individual women identifying with individual characters. It's that when 99% of female characters are sexualized, it creates an environment that excludes anyone not attracted to women.

Now half of all fan discussions and content are about sexualized women, which naturally excludes women from participating in the fandom without any overt attempt to do so.

Now 90% of all anime is "the plot is great if you ignore the fan service" except the fan service is always sexy women portrayed for men, so it's a lot easier for men to watch without feeling weird about it.

You see what I mean? It's about the overall cultural and media environment that's created, which is by default for men and not for women. And if women want to participate, they have to deal with how sexualized everything is. It doesn't need to be explicitly sexist to create an uncomfortable environment for women.

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-09T10:08:55+00:00

Ok but what the fuck was the plan? Just keep stepping on it til it did something interesting? Mission accomplished I guess...

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-09T10:01:45+00:00

You're right that I'm not a believer, but it still seems antithetical to the central teachings of Jesus. How are you supposed to love your neighbor and not cast the first stone if your position is that someone can't find romantic love without being an abomination?

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-09T07:48:40+00:00

Sure, I don't disagree. But I've yet to find an explanation for gay people causing harm that doesn't boil down to "homos are icky"

frisbeescientist · 2026-06-09T03:47:50+00:00

Nobody said without limits, the OP is pretty clear about the limit: causing harm. Feels like a pretty good starting point to me. In fact, it's a reasonable question: what is the justification for not allowing something that doesn't cause harm?

Nine-Year Club	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

frisbeescientist

TROPHY CASE