[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

Matrix is awful, sorry. I tried using it for like a year, but it kept randomly encrypting things and not letting ppl see messages, or worse, kicking them out of the chat

1
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

2
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

with leftover rice

1
noochy salad (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
1
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Made with fresh soymilk, rainbow wheat noodles, cucumber, seeds, seaweed, gochujang, kimchi, and ice 😋

1
veggie pasta (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
1
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Made with soy curls, carrots, kale, onion, and that leftover stir fry I posted three days ago. For the sauce, I used chick'n powder, peanut butter, soy sauce, garlic, and spicy chiltepin pepper

1
in my salad days (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

I made a dressing from tahini, balsamic, mustard, date syrup, herbs and spices

1
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

I made the teriyaki sauce with apple cider 😋

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Again, the strange practice the writers chose for this planet was eugenics. It's like writing nazis as a minority. I'm a Jewish person and my family's entire town was slaughtered by nazis. Romani people were also slaughtered in the Holocaust. I'm sure they would not appreciate their murderers being framed as the victims.

The writers didn't have to depict eugenicists this way, as if their practice was a benign cultural tradition. Eugenics is an awful practice that's killed tens of millions in the real world. It doesn't need apologetics that make people question "but what if we're being mean to the nazis by not letting them do their tradition of genetic modification for the betterment of their race?"

It's illegal to practice eugenics in the star trek world because the eugenicists literally took over as despots and oppressed everyone during the eugenics wars. Do you think that it would be appropriate to have people who are proud eugenicists come into your society flexing their supposed genetic superiority (another piece of writing I protest btw) and teaching people by their presence that eugenics is actually benign and actually does make one genetically superior to others?

When I think of the situation with Una, it makes me think of cultural practices like genital mutilation, a backwards practice that parents make for their children, as individuals, that is traditional but hurts their child. It would indeed be fucked up to hurt someone in that way, and it's illegal for good reason. It's not benign, but it also would be cruel to blame the child for something their parents did to them and make it illegal for them to participate in society.

But genital mutilation isn't genetic modification for the betterment of the race. There's no such thing as genetic superiority, eugenics is a pseudoscience and it's messed up and irresponsible to depict it as an effective benign thing that works at actually making a race superior. The writers should have chosen a different practice than this instead of worrying an episode that does apologia for a terrible practice that is illegal (in universe, not irl unfortunately) for a good reason

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

Can't believe I have to tell you that deliberate genetic modification for the enhancement of individuals and species is the definition of eugenics, and that eugenics is not "so obviously acceptable that it’s impossible to even come up with an argument against it that stands up to scrutiny".

[-] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago

I really hated this episode for this reason. I hate the thought experiment of "what if we found a planet where everyone practices eugenics and so therefore it's racist to be against eugenics".

Like if the rest of the world had found an isolated Nazi Germany, would it have been discriminatory and prejudiced to be against their practices? To not let them into the military? Of course not

Like why even write that plotline? Why are the writers choosing to legitimize eugenics like this, like it ever could be neutral or good and not horrific? I'm unwilling to entertain the idea that there's a good way to do it, just as I'd be unwilling to entertain a fictional society that showed slavery in a positive light

[-] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago

You can turn off the ability to see NSFW posts in your profile. It's not ideal since some NSFW isn't porn, but I'd rather miss a handful of things than spend all day blocking porn and fetish subs

1
Veggie mac (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
1
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/194038

Tone cops always come out of the woodwork to disparage vegans who ask carnists not to hurt animals, no matter how nicely they ask. But they'd never speak up on behalf of animals, bc they benefit from being the "good vegan" and are beloved by human supremacists for enforcing the status quo. Fighting for animal liberation is incredibly stigmatized, and pick-me's try to escape that stigma by throwing activists under the bus. This is common in all spheres of social justice.

Respectability politics have been criticized for being "used to rationalize racism, sexism, bigotry, hate, and violence." For example, Bill Cosby "never gave voice to issues of racism, sexism, the failed public school system, health and economic disparities, mass incarceration or police brutality. Instead, he spent over a decade disparaging Black folk to the delight of white conservatives." which made him controversial in the Black community.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respectability_politics

Any challenge to the status quo will be deemed "mean" by those who benefit from it. Misogynists paint those who challenge patriarchy as mean man haters, femin*zis, uppity, unreasonable. Same thing for activists who fight against racism. Human supremacists will always paint vegans as mean bullies for asking them to stop supporting the rape and murder of nonhumans. That doesn't make their framing fair or true. They're just protecting their status quo, which causes the torture and death of over a trillion sentient beings every year. Carnists love when pick-me's favor their feelings (about being told to give up their victims' literal corpses) over the feelings of their victims (terror, grief, pain, horror) and the lives of their victims.

But change doesn't happen when you flatter power and enforce the status quo. Animals will not be liberated by throwing the people who speak out for them under the bus while protecting the people that harm them. Leftists know this already, but they like to forget when it comes to animal liberation

[-] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago

My Eastern European family had to flee Ukraine when the Nazis decided to slaughter their entire town during the Holocaust. I'm sure it was just terrible for the Nazis left behind to have Communists come in, so sad

[-] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago

As an extreme example, do you think the US military and Nazi Germany had the same amount of Nazis?

I'm on your side for the rest of the post, but this example isn't great imo. The US is absolutely a Nazi country, they were just more successful in their settler genocide. They literally have the largest prison pop in the whole world, full of impoverished people of color who are literally enslaved. Many in prison are sterilized against their will. They have for generations killed millions and millions of people abroad to stop communism and immiserate and expropriate those populations. Like I could go on, but Nazi Germany was inspired by the US. They even said the US went a little too far. The US won the war and is the most powerful country on the planet, so they wrote the history and they control the media narrative, so we can pretend like the Germans were worse

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

Yeah, but not by any NATO country

[-] [email protected] 20 points 2 years ago

idgi aren't there already like a bunch of fash reddit alternatives? Why don't they just go to one of those?

1
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Weekly readings and chill vibes

1
submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Has anyone ever told you that it's ethical to shoot someone because otherwise, that person might suffer? Hunters are always telling us that they're actually helping deer by murdering them, because there's just so many deer, some of them might starve. It's not very convincing logic. It certainly wouldn't fly if we proposed solving human "overpopulation" through murder. But let's set aside the blatant speciesism for a moment and see whether it's even true that deer are overpopulated and if murder is the best solution if they are.

Hunters materially profit off the bodies of deer. Whether or not it's in the deers' best interest to get murdered, it's definitely in the hunter's best interest to be able to exploit and murder deer year after year.

To that end, deer populations are artificially inflated by deer breeding programs which are paid for by hunting licenses. They breed the deer and "manage" the land (like clearcutting forests, planting deer-preferred plants and requiring tenant farmers to leave a certain amount of their crops unharvested in order to feed the deer, creating the edge habitat that is preferred by deer and also outright feeding the deer) so that the populations increase so that there's always enough stock to hunt.

The reality is that there are thousands of “state game farms” across the country artificially breeding animals like deer and pheasants, quail and partridges in the hundreds of thousands and releasing them into hunting ranges. In Wisconsin alone, the state currently registers 372 “deer farms,” according to the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection. And when a disease outbreak occurs on these farms, entire herds are “depopulated.”

Some even claim that a substantial chunk of their funding comes directly from hunting licenses:

https://www.wildlife.state.nh.us/funding/charts.html

http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/budget/bottom_line/budget.pdf

And the amount of federal funding they get is based off of license sales, too:

The Secretary determines how much to give to each state based on a formula that takes into account both the area of the state and its number of licensed hunters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pittman%E2%80%93Robertson_Federal_Aid_in_Wildlife_Restoration_Act

Matt Hogan, executive vice president of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, pointed out, “Public support for hunting and fishing is crucial for conservation efforts. State fish and wildlife agencies have been and continue to be funded in large part by the contributions of sportsmen and women through license sales and excise tax payments on hunting and fishing equipment. To put it simply, without hunters and anglers, state fish and wildlife agencies would not be able to do their job conserving and managing wildlife for all Americans to enjoy.”

https://web.archive.org/web/20070615231714/http://www.responsivemanagement.com/download/news/newsrls_09_06.pdf

The whole point of our agencies is to conserve enough deer to hunt. They don't hide that they maintain a high population on purpose so that there can always be hunting seasons in perpetuity. They're conserving hunting stock. They're "managing" non-human populations so we don't run out of stock. We're certainly not doing this for the benefit of the deer as sentient individuals who deserve not to suffer; we're doing this because they are completely objectified as resources for our consumption.

An optimum population of deer balances positive demands (e.g., recreational hunting and viewing) with negative demands (e.g., agricultural and ornamental plant damage, vehicle collisions, ecosystem impacts). Despite damage caused by deer, Virginia’s white-tailed deer represent a beneficial economic and social resource.

https://dwr.virginia.gov/wildlife/deer/deer-management-program

In fact, "conservation" in North American is centered entirely on exploitation of resources, not consideration for sentient individuals nor even preservation of species, which is why game animals are bred and bolstered yet predators and other non-useful animals are murdered and driven out.

https://www.fws.gov/hunting/north-american-model-of-wildlife-conservation.html

"Professor Thomas Serfass, Frostburg State University, Maryland, chairman of their department of natural resources and biology, told Thuermer: “I would describe the North American Model as incomplete.”

Hunter control depends on it being incomplete. One of the huge elements missing is contributions of federal land management agencies. “Setting land aside in the public domain in perpetuity is probably the most substantive thing we do for wildlife conservation," says the professor.

Thuermer quotes study co-author Molde as saying, “What about this public lands argument. Holy Toledo, that’s a huge subsidy to hunters.”

We, the 94 percent non-hunter public, pay for the lands and services, but are told that hunters have all the rights to destroy our wildlife. We pay — they have the only say. Seems fair to them.

The study's authors begin: “With increased awareness and interest of the general (non-consumptive) public in controversial wildlife management issues such as fur trapping, predator control, trophy hunting, coyote killing contests and wolf reintroduction, a debate is before us as to whether the general public is or should be afforded a proper voice in wildlife management decisions.

“Sportsmen favor the current system, which places a heavy emphasis on their interests through favorable composition of wildlife commissions and a continued emphasis on ungulate management. Non-human predators (wolves, mountain lions, coyotes, ravens and others) are disfavored by wildlife managers at all levels as competition for sportsmen and are treated as second-class citizens of the animal kingdom. Sportsmen suggest this bias is justified because ‘sportsmen pay for wildlife,’ a refrain heard repeatedly when these matters are discussed. Agency personnel and policy foster this belief as well.”

https://madison.com/ct/columnist/patricia-randolph-s-madravenspeak-non-hunters-should-claim-rights-to/article_1eeaf0bf-8c11-5c5f-835b-30e73edc8890.html

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

My view is that you shouldn't shit on the devs while at the same time demanding they do more free labor for you. Lemmy is free, the ppl working on it don't get paid, like it's not a faceless corporation that exploits workers and runs ads. That's the whole point. Maybe contribute in some way instead?

[-] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago

No one is forcing you to apologize for pedophiles on reddit

view more: next ›

bulbasaur

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF