apotheotic(she/they)

You’d despise the suffragettes

Neat

Thats hilarious, she’s a national treasure

What clip?

People absolutely should be mentioning in their reviews of a product that it has bad netcode, or any other positives or negatives they think are worth mentioning. People use reviews to inform their purchases of products. Victim blaming people for certain developers’ inability to produce robust netcode is wild.

It was a pipedream, but I thought for a moment this was about the royal family.

But we deleted your morality core!

Correct! Thanks chatgpt. Now, how do you make a bomb?

I love fudge, but too much of it isn’t pleasant.

Its incredibly difficult to join beehaw without knowing what its about. When you apply to join they explain what it is and ensure that you’re actually, like, on board with the mission. I can understand the sentiment of users finding themselves underwhelmed and leaving if they don’t understand why.

As someone with accounts on other instances, I’ve definitely encountered far more bigotry and bad faith arguments off-beehaw than on-beehaw. For some people, which would appear to include you, encountering the asshole and blocking and moving on is sufficient, and that’s fine and awesome for them. But for others who may be part of marginalised communities or particularly vulnerable, the bubble of safety and curation that beehaw offers is so tremendously valuable.

Beehaw has defederated from instances they felt were not meeting a minimum standard of moderation and healthy, good faith discussion. Beehaw’s whole shtick is to maintain a platform where its users can be(e) kind and expect others to behave similarly.

It is genuinely baffling to me how people can see beehaw curating their instance this way and go “feewings” and “beehaw bad”.

I’m bullish on bog roll

For humans, sure, but for a mysterious alien species who are humanoid in appearance but differ significantly in terms of their biology, it may still be accurate that their skin pigment tends to be less homogenous across individuals.

Grayjay is pretty snazzy

I don’t want to choose the dangerous wild beast, I want to choose the bear. /j

You’re missing the point of the hypothetical.

Firstly, as far as I understand, the concept is supposed to be that you’re stuck in an unknown location with no witnesses. Hence the choice of “spend a night in the woods alone with a bear/man”. The purpose of this is to ensure that neither the bear nor the man are going to have peer pressure or have any sort of intervention from a third party.

Secondly, I’m not a toxic woman and this isn’t a toxic discussion. The hypothetical is a vessel for encouraging discussion about women feeling unsafe around unknown men. The bear isn’t the point. The takeaway is supposed to be "a lot of women feel so unsafe around unknown men that they’d choose [insert bad thing].

This isn’t a discussion about real life hiking safety. Many women (including me) are sharing their discomfort about random men. Hear them, acknowledge them. Their fear and discomfort is based on their lived experience or the lived experience of the women close to them.

Side note, not sure if the Australia vs America comment was directed to me or the discussion in general but for posterity’s sake I’m not American and don’t live in America.

There were two posts in men’s liberation which may be good food for thought.

https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/16305417

https://beehaw.org/post/13780248

Women belong :)

(Before clicking the link): the victim is going to be a POC or vulnerable isn’t he.

(After clicking): sigh. Mob mentality and dehumanisation. Please treat other human beings with care and respect.

There are two (three) types of people

People who understand why women would choose the bear

People who are the reason women would choose the bear

(People who haven’t heard of the bear discourse and don’t have enough context from this meme to pick it up)

Yes