“cis” I feel like it’s an extra term for “straight”. The “default” for lack of a better term (and one that isn’t othering) is near the not trans & not gay part of the gender / sexuality spectra. To me everyone in that zone is “straight” (boring/default/whatever).
“begs the question” because people exclusively use it wrong. Just say “leads to the question” or “poses the question.”
And I’m still really salty about everyone giving up on the term “literally” to allow it to mean its exact opposite.
And an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope!
https://www.childstats.gov/AMERICASCHILDREN/tables/pop1.asp
70-something million children. Let’s make them eligible to vote, and let parents vote on their behalf if they’re too young. As another poster said, the parents who abuse that on “both sides” would more or less come out in the wash. The parents who took it seriously would probably adjust both their vote and their child’s vote to benefit the child.
(One interesting thing is that would mean citizen children of non-citizen immigrants would get to vote.)
So your contention is that Nation A considering joining an alliance that Nation B doesn’t like - not actually joining, just considering - is a provocation worthy of military invasion?
Jesus what a world that would be.
I think we’re gonna have to agree to disagree as I see a fundamental difference between a multi national joint military operation targeting international terrorists and a unilateral military operation aimed at reconstituting the USSR.
Updated
What on earth are you talking about occupying Syria?
Edit: they’re misconstruing the 32-country military coalition that’s been trying to degrade Da’esh since 2014 as the US military by itself occupying sovereign territory.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_against_the_Islamic_State
Some may remember the breathless daily & weekly map updates on the news showing areas controlled by Da’esh changing. Might remember the coalition partnering with various groups of differing militancy & reliability. I think including us (the coalition) fucking over Iraqi Kurds…? I believe because Syria hated them? Or loved them?
So, y’know, absolutely nothing like Russia’s completely unprovoked, unilateral decision to invade Ukraine because Putin was afraid of Ukraine getting too chummy with NATO countries, possibility even considering joining NATO.
If the point of supporting Ukraine is to support the international order of respecting borders, then an absolutist interpretation would mean you stop at your border when repelling invaders.
On the other hand, that would certainly result in invaders loading up on personnel and materiel on their side of the border until they reached some critical mass for a re invasion.
A lot of people might not remember the first Gulf War where the international community defending Kuwait stopped at the Iraq border. I think it could be argued that was a mistake on multiple levels, even ignoring everything we know that came after.
Violence must be organized and accountable to be just. Non-violence is always preferred, and is always the initial approach.
But if there is a credible threat, defensive violence is OK as long as whoever is being violent accepts whatever accountability may come.
I’m conflicted about it, but the fact is one reason the US has been so successful in leading the world in relative peace (as compared to WWII and before, not compared to the ideal) is because we have so much capacity for violence in our back pocket.
“Talk softly and carry a big stick.”
I agree that they shouldn’t have to make excuses.
There are people out there who are persuadable but currently buy the Republican anti union bullshit, though. For better or worse, one way to crack through that wall is to point out the ways that unions and collective action like strikes leads to better outcomes for every worker (not only union members), and every worker’s child.
I’m aware there’s some pseudo science danger, but if the membership is informed and can vote their conscience individually, I’m sure they’d do better than not most every time. Obviously if there’s a pressure campaign or film flam man at the top lying or misleading it can all go to shit.
If a whole union votes to strike, it’s for a good reason and with a reasonable expectation from the whole union membership that the outcome of the strike is worth the interruption to everyone’s lives.
Given the Wisdom of Crowds is an actual thing that really works, it shouldn’t be surprising.
What should really be called into question is letting one CEO or a C-Suite or a Board of Directors make drastic decisions that will change the lives of thousands of people without any input from the greater community. Those people are only human.
What was the name that one media company had their board come up with that was so stupid?
If "disagree with* can be interpreted as “irritates me”
“Not gonna lie” “If I’m being honest” “To tell the truth” (older)
Ugh.
They’re such idiomatic crutches. Just fucking talk. Say what you’re gonna say. If you need an “um” just say that. Don’t waste my brain’s clock cycles interpreting those phrases only to realize they’re meaningless…
Soundproofed Faraday Cage box.
Ok sure but if Person U from a large city comes to the city council meeting and asks for help because their neighbor, Person R, is building a new garage on Person U’s property, it’s understandable that people from around the city - no matter how far afield - might express support for Person U.
At the same time, if Person T or Person I or Person M from far across the city don’t express support, so what? What does it matter? Maybe they’re afraid of Person R. Maybe they truly don’t care. Maybe they hate person U.
Saudi Arabia, India, South Africa, Thailand, Indonesia, Mexico and the United Arab Emirates,
None of these “attenders” are in the same region as Ukraine.
The question was “what term annoys you” not “what term annoys you that you’re sure Lemmy will approve of” (or that a malignant narcissist billionaire isn’t also annoyed by).
I’m open to an explanation of a commonplace situation where it’s necessary to have a separate word for “is of the gender that matches that assigned at birth.”
To me it’s like if I say I enjoyed the sunrise" and someone says, “you mean the Earth sunrise?”
I mean yeah, sunrises happen all over the solar system, there are different kinds of sunrises, probably all beautiful in their own ways, but in general the default “sunrise” a human is likely to be talking about is the one we experience on Earth.