My experience from my teens and early 20s was that I simply did not understand that the unhealthy aspects of my life were making me feel bad. It was only once I corrected them for a long period of time, and felt better, that I realized how problematic the irresponsible behaviors were.

If you get to a point where you start experiencing depression, burnout, really have no motivation for your studies and want to drop out… it’s because you’re not taking care of yourself. You’ll need to learn to balance life with work.

Everyone who is saying “I’d agree with it in theory” is not thinking about the practical reality of what that’d mean. If you actually want to enforce that, the only way to do it is with violence. Dragging kids away from their parents, physically beating the parents away, parents shooting law enforcement officers to try to keep them away from their kids, forcible sterilizations, children born who are never allowed to go to schools or hospitals out of fear that they’ll be found, etc. It’s just needlessly cruel. It’s a lot worse than accepting that human beings are not perfect.

I think the idea is to appeal to both women and men, since men are less likely to purchase vegan products. Upton’s in particular is designed to appeal to the male eye.

There’s a reason that the answer to any problem is never “Go on facebook more”. I don’t think there’s a controversy at all. Some people can manage a healthy balance and some people can’t.

I’ve been struggling to open the jar of sauerkraut for the past 10 minutes. These things are not designed for women. That’s all.

BLM. That’s why. It’s a racial suppression movement.

When you punch a wall, you may not be intending for a whole to form, but you still have to pay to fix it. When you have sex, you may not be intending to have a child, but you still have the responsibility to care for it. Because nobody else made the kid, you did. Reality is not victim blaming.

I don’t think this site is for everyone. You need your own internal reason to use this site (anti-enshittification, banned from other places, or whatever). On a regular social media site, you log in, and you immediately are shown a feed of fun and interesting content. Unless you’re like really into programming, Lemmy doesn’t have fun and interesting content. Of the content that is here, people don’t engage with it much, and it’s poorly moderated (actual calls for death and abuse, weird sexual anime stuff, etc). Lemmy is also not easy to use or understand. Most people don’t understand what an instance is, and why do I need to read paragraphs on federation just to use the site? The only way this place could compete with polished, plug-and-play social media is if the US continues getting so authoritarian that regular social sites become exorbitantly censored to a regular person’s perspective.

That’s literally reality. The baby is the result of a man and a woman having sex, not just the woman. The baby is both parents’ child, not just one’s parent. There isn’t a “solution”, because that’s not a problem. It WOULD be a problem if one could abandon their child with no consequences, which is why they can’t.

Genuinely curious, how is it not equal that when abortion is available, the male has no way of saying “I don’t want a child”

Because in that case, only one parent can abandon the child. That’s not equal. It’s saying men have no real responsibility for their children, only women do.

The entire reason we want abortions to be legal is for the edge cases exactly like this

No, the reason we have abortions is that pregnancy is harmful for women. It cripples you for weeks. It makes you unable to work for months. Women die every year from pregnancy complications. Abortion is about the woman’s right to healthcare, not the insentient clump of cells. Parental rights are about the live baby.

In the US, in some states, even if you try to simply run away the gal is forced to put down any name as the father, and he will be held accountable for the child whether he agreed or not.

Which he should be, because it’s his baby. He made it just as much as the woman did. The man’s time to opt out is different from the woman’s because of biology, but he still had the opportunity to opt out.

I only have a bottle opener, and I only have it because my beer distributor didn’t sell any other kind of bottle opener.

Not a great idea for lawyers to do that. Your boss gets the fees whether your client wins or loses, but your client could lose their entire case. Law is kind of messed up that way.

deleted by creator

Yeah, doesn’t make a difference.

No, this is just a legal question about the degree to which companies are allowed to restrict their competitors’ marketing.

Trademark inherently can’t be generic. It has to refer to something distinct.

For example, apples have nothing to do with computers, so the name makes you think of the exact brand Apple computers. But if you tried to trademark your apple company Apple, that would be taking away the ability of competitors to describe the product they’re selling. Which is not ok.

So, when your brand name becomes the common word to describe a product, you have to stop your competitors from using your name to advertise their products in the first place. Otherwise, your brand name doesn’t just refer to your products, so it’s not distinct. You’ve become Apple apples.

That doesn’t change anything. If the child is born, it’s yours, and you can’t abandon it. The child has a right to a parent, and you are the parent.

The White Lotus. Great vacation show. Short, funny, watched it on vacation, helped the vibe was a good time.

That’s not equal. Women can’t abandon the baby after it’s born either. It takes two to make a baby. Men have the final say over their own bodies just as women do.

Medjool date and a coffee. Perfect dessert.