Promethiel

Fuck was your plan to stop the genocide in Palestine asshole, go kill Net with the brassy swinging of your massive balls? Go fuck yourself, you ain’t helping anyone, Palestinian or otherwise.

So you feel whataboutism/dismissive responses are only used against men? Or do you agree that that is not a good way to respond to legitimate issues regardless of gender?

They’re agreeing with you it seems to me, and sharing their anecdotes that despite that reality which they agree with, let me re-emphasize that, despite that reality (that using one gender’s struggles to whatabout another’s is considered both ineffective and borders on conflict-seeking, inherently), that in their experience, they have seen the same the same whatabout tactics used to dismantle discussion when a “male centric” issue is the discussion catalyst, as when it’s a “female centric” issue originating the discourse.

I can’t speak for that other commenter to your follow up question though, so I’ll answer it for myself: I do not feel that whataboutism/dismissive responses are only used against men, no.

As a matter of fact, I feel that they’re employed more often to stiffle discussions on “woman centric” concerns precisely because of how little Men’s issues are discussed, and the reason for both is the same. That this is a side effect of the patriarchal systems in place doesn’t absolve either side from the requirement to be genuine if genuine discourse is sought, though.

I have seen what the commenter is mentioning and right here on Lemmy to boot. Because whether male or female, a whatabout is an easy rhetorical blanket to reach for, and many do.

I believe that both genders (including and specially men, who must own up to the fact that collectively we’re the gender with the greater frequency of offense against other genders if we’re ever going to get to addressing why it’s the same systemic patriarchal roots binding women’s rights that choke out the existence of men’s rights issues) have to be willing to communicate.

Women in aggregate are crying to be heard, but “TooManyMen” aren’t listening that they’re (women) speaking for them both too, and I feel those men who are able to hear some of that message need to help out in stopping the whataboutism wall in their brothers before they get going…

The same way that I believe there’s women who need to do the same for many of their sisters in the public square.

Divided is how we’ve gotten to this, unapologetically more viscerally dangerous for womanhood world that pretty much always has been, but I feel that it is united that we’ll reach any dreams of equity or widespread understanding between the genders, if we ever will.

In short, I agree “that that [whataboutism tainting discourse] is not a good way to respond to legitimate issues regardless of gender”, but the mere axiomatic observation falls short of the next step:

Both sides need to acknowledge and give each other the room to voice out their feelings, views, ideas, etc, genuinely (trolls and agitators need not be entertained) while still keeping an eye for the possibility that unity lies not in knowing the correct answer but in the shared questioning.

Fellas let’s do (and encourage our brothers to) better whether we think it’s fair or not, and ladies, understand (and share with the sisters who it’s safe to) that a hypocrite and someone whose barriers are breaking will appear briefly as the same before change is undergone.

Same, but (at least in my case) you can’t ever listen to that bastard brain and do more than a small amount. The margin is thin and the prize of folly is being up at 3AM, yawning sleepily, but awake.

Holy fuck. That is beyond the pale, and I’m sorry you had to go through that. Chills thinking how wrong that could go.

“Hey this sounds like–”

Notices community

“–Oh. Wait, was I on Lemmy relaxing or avoiding work?”

Part of Fiction writing 101. The more things you need to 'effing name, the stupider the wordplay gets.

Lots of visual references to make those puns work on Pokemon designs usually.

Kanghaskhan (Garura in Japanese), is a giant Kangaroo thing with built-in laminar armor reminiscent of Mongolian make.

At least Kanghaskhan made it to the list of B-tier sound puns to go with the visuals (and Genghis was a ruler, keeping the pun from the Japanese name that is “Kangaroo Ruler”).

Not all Pokemon get the same wit applied to their puns, some get really groan worthy if examined haha.

The dictionary is…literally (hello self-evidence) full of words for which there has long existed an ‘Objective Definition’ but which usage has brought a consensus based ‘Subjective Definition’. Etymology is the study of a shifting process, and both you and them are correct:

Them in the expected usage a publication should use to apply it to a discreet entity, and you in the fact that the subjective shift in meaning gives us words that map anecdotally to our lives.

Truly…language is awe-some.

In 1998, Baker, Ruoff, and Madoff that the organism is most likely a species of Mycoplasma called Mycoplasma phocacerebrale.[7] This Mycoplasma was isolated in an epidemic of seal disease occurring in the Baltic Sea.[8]

It’s not that we don’t know what causes it, and it can be cultured from seals and has been. It’s that in order to empirically and categorically say in any way that matters that the organism is definitely the cause of seal finger…

You would need to be culturing a person infected with the disease from whom treatment is being withheld. Either against their will or with their “consent” wouldn’t matter. As we know what the disease can lead to, the ethical course of treatment is clear: a bunch of culture ruining antibiotics injected into you. Right away, without delay.

Because asking or even taking advantage of someone declining treatment to assess and write the confirmation study that says “Mycoplasma phocacerebrale definite cause of seal finger” goes against a lot of ethical science limitations.

This is what makes the donating the affected limb of someone who never got care for science post-mortem also work as both a neat joke and ethical loophole. Researchers could accept that gift, ethically.

If you both let it, it’s assumptions all the way down. If you look closely, you’ll even spot the communication problem in microcosm.

That…that’s the point of the anger at the corporate greed.

Believe what you want to believe and may it chase you as you deserve every night.

But keep your goalpost moving grubby mitts from the idea you know words or are any good with them.

Being disingenuous is piss easy and transparent, cool the back patting.

Learn to read what others comment, so that at least you can keep consistency if you’re gonna clutter public forums with your drivel.

You can use every language in the world to define any other word in any other language and it still does not save you from semantic pitfalls and poor rhetoric.

Fuck. I cleaned everything on tax day and forgot to file!

Are we sure OP isn’t being meta? The message and demographics change if the punch is coming from other community posters.

But neither of you know that. That’s just the most anecdotally likely. You’re doing the same thing as the presumably real friend is doing: discounting the reality OP is saying they’re experiencing (they don’t feel like celebrating currently because ofcurrent affairs) and replacing it with head in the sand “touch grass” disguised with the words it takes for you to feel like you’re correct.

Maybe that friend always has their head in the sand. Maybe that friend is maliciously giddy about the possibilities espoused by shit like Project 2025 and deflecting.

I, am hoping you can both understand I’m saying you look like hypocrites. No inference needed.

What is the problem they’re so pragmatically a part of? And how do you pin both the content creators needing to eat and the reasonable take of that commenter on the poor Marketing executives who care about neither but just want–actually what do they (end goal of marketing, literally, semantically) want, in your eyes while you’re at it? It is their (the marketing execs) side I take it you’re on, since the commenter you replied to is part of the problem and the creators do “an ad is an ad” things?

Challenge; remember capitalism exists in the world as it must as the beginning of your answer (but if you can make it vanish and it all works out by the end of the answer, that’s cool too as lots of us are looking for that one).

How is that other commenter part of the problem, actually part of the problem suspect?

Beware the (only) highly empathetic too, while you’re at it.

Get the right (wrong) combination and you have:

Someone who can understand and read the changes they are engendering in others, adjust manipulation in real time, feel terrible about it, but be able to justify it to themselves as improving the lot of others if they genuinely lack the intelligence to comprehend the whole “you can lead a horse to water but not make it drink” adage.

Self-awareness is tragically never a guarantee; much less using it to take responsibility for shortcomings.

Thank you for stating the obvious. I fucking hate this future where even the basics of the past are starting to seem unreal. Little gray cubes with a wide bar you push and out comes cold water from a spout at the top; used to be everywhere outdoors growing up.

Yeah caffeine is a siren song for a select few. It’s not necessarily an ‘everyone and every form of ADHD thing’, but it seems to present together often enough.

In my case it’s tricksy because the line between “this much coffee will help sleep” and “this much coffee will make you feel like it re-activated the magic conversion machine the actual ADHD meds just shut down” is about 1 oz one way or another from a 5oz cup (a real small amount in sane units, I didn’t convert).

Sensible. One taught you the consensus on what is perceived as the benchmark mind so to speak and a subset of how it ‘may go wrong’.

ADHD memes demonstrates just how much more ‘hold my beer’ that hole of ‘may go wrong’ gets.

Which is to say a lot. Hearing about the human condition vs seeing it echo in all the clucking time blind chickens.