Um excuse me. Excuse me netflix. I believe you owe me a dungeon meshi. i beleive it is the 28th March. What gives man
“Mother nature doesn’t discriminate,” Burrell said. “It doesn’t rain on white farms but not black farms. Insects don’t [only] attack black farmers’ land…why is it then that white farmers are buying Stine seed and their yield is 60, 70, 80, and 100 bushels of soybeans and black farmers who are using the exact same equipment with the exact same land, all of a sudden, your seeds are coming up 5, 6, and 7 bushels?”
i am losing my shit all over the fucking place because yes I believe this company would do this, god damn them.
👀☝️
This is RECENTLY not some distant past. This is NOW.
I tried to find an update on this, but the last news I found were a few articles from April 2019 about how the mediation deadline had passed and that the next steps were unclear.
I wish age gap discourse hadn't spiraled the way it has because I want there to be a safe space to say "Men in their 40s who date 25 year olds aren't predators, they're just fucking losers"
... honey you just described a predator LOL
No, I said what I said. But thank you for providing an example of how this topic has become insufferable on the internet.
i am honestly burningly curious about how a 40 year old man who fucks around with college grads is not a predator
"College grad" is not a developmental stage, nor is it what I would describe a 25 year old as. I was 4 years out of college at 25. My mother had two children at 25. You can be a fucking congressman at 25.
There's a difference between a man who is immature and buys into misogynistic views of beauty and aging and one who is a predator. Also, many actual predators? Not losers and able to move through society pretty freely being seen as cool and the ideal, so conflating the two isn't helpful.
This is going to be my final response to any attempt at discourse. You're welcome to continue amongst yourselves.
also sometimes a 40 year old and a 25 year old just weirdly find each and it's a perfectly normal relationship - like all human relationships are complex and situational, it's so rarely an either/or thing let alone just one thing only
if a 40 year old dude only dates 25 year olds, DiCaprio style or something adjacent to it, then yeah he's a loser
if a 40 year old dude meets a 25 year old through social event or friends or whatever and they happen to hit it off and make a go of it, and this isn't some sort of reoccurring pattern for the guy, that's just a relationship with an age difference
being predatory means something specific, and man I agree w/ OP and really wish people just stopped ascribing it to any and all relationship dynamics they personally might not like
predator and groomer - two words that need to go up on the "can't use till you learn their meaning" shelf
Something I find really stressful is this seemingly endless creep of infantilisation and removal of autonomy from young people. Like, not to be all “in my dayyyy” about it, but… at 16, my friends and I were expected to be broadly responsible for our presence in the world. Most of us had jobs, we navigated public transport, looked after younger siblings. We were expected to make informed decisions about our future careers and our sexual partners. We were allowed to leave education and work full time (this was not necessarily good thing - I think increasing the school leaving age to 18 was broadly for the best). Most of us were smoking, or drinking, or both - again, not good things, but just facts - and many of us were sexually active. Many of the AFAB people I knew were on the pill. Legally, we could live independently, or get married with adult consent.
Legally (I live in the UK) we were not minors, although we inhabited an odd legal limbo until we turned 18, and we were certainly not “children”. Intellectually, socially, though, we were considered (young) adults, or at the most “older teenagers.” We were expected to read mostly adult books (rather than middle grade or YA), watch the news/read papers, watch mostly adult television.
And I do think we a bit under-protected, under-supported, and in some cases - neglected and financially exploited - and I’m not necessarily advocating that. But it did make us feel, I think, in charge of our own lives, capable and competent to make decisions.
At 16-17 my parents knew they could leave me alone overnight/for a couple of nights, and I wouldn’t starve or burn the house down. I felt comfortable getting cross country trains on my own, or booking and staying at a hotel (yes, with my boyfriend.)
Then there was this… creeping of sentiments that we were all Too Young to trouble our heads about certain things. A lot of it was good - more stringent licensing laws, raising the school leaving age, raising the minimum smoking age(!) - but some of the broader cultural stuff was… a bit patronising? Eg, the introduction of “New Adult” as a category of books aimed at 18-25 year olds, the way cartoons and books written for the 9-12 age group were being marketed as for the 12-15 age group, referring to late teens as “children,” etc etc.
Then, in 2008, there was the big financial crash and suddenly my generation were (broadly) robbed of all the usual markers of adulthood and success, meaning that we got ‘stuck’ in the lifestyles and modes our late teens/early 20s. And suddenly, all the emphasis shifted from social and legal protections for late teens/ younger adults, to legal restrictions on their freedoms/rights, and strange philosophical protections on the emotional states.
So, OF COURSE a 23 year old can’t buy a beer without carrying an ID card, and a 17 year old can’t have a crush on a 16 year old, but also, because you’re *children* you don’t need to live like adults. So the UK government got to save money by saying “18 isn’t a proper adult,” then “20 isn’t a proper adult,” and “25 isn’t a proper adult” because it meant they could refuse to give single occupancy housing benefit rates to people of those ages (I think they’ve raised it over 30 now.) Or by refusing to clamp down on exploitative temporary/zero hours contracts - because they’re just “temp jobs for young people!”, or by raising the retirement age because “60 is far too young to retire. You’re not a real adult until 35.”
And it means the discursive environment is such that you can claim that a 21 year old trans person is too young to make their own medical decisions, or a 15 year old is too young to consent to the contraceptive pill.
Meanwhile, they are not offering additional *protections* to these newly infantilised adults. 18 year olds are still encouraged to saddle themselves with enormous educational debt, or allowed to have credit cards, or expected to pay rent, or no longer receive child benefits. You still have to *work*. In fact, in the States, they’re looking to removed child employment restrictions - but that’s fine, because 20 year olds are being protected from making their own medical decisions, and adults get to say which books their teen kids are reading in school, and kids aren’t allowed to change their name or what they wear without parental consent.
We can see what these people are doing to the rights of children - so why are we being so complacent in expanding the definition of ‘child’?
Regardless - 25 is VERY CLEARLY an adult. At 25 I was married, had two kids, an overdraft, rent to pay, and experience of living in the world for 6 years. I had more in common with someone of 40 than I did with someone of 15. Hell, at*20* I had more in common with someone of 40 than someone of 15. Any sexual or relationship decisions you make at 25 are your own to make.
Of course there are likely to be power imbalances in a 15 year age gap - which is why most 25 year olds don’t date 40somethings - but not actually necessarily. And yeah, a 40 year old who only dates 20somethings is a skeeze - just like a 30 year old who routinely ingratiates themselves with rich 80 year olds is a skeeze.
But if any young people are reading this (doubt it)… your rights are much, much more important than your protections.
Yes, young people should be protected, but if someone claims they’re protecting you while denying you access to personal autonomy, financial stability, intellectual curiosity, or sexual self-determination because you’re “too young” to need, or understand those things… be very suspicious of their motives.
And if you’re legally an adult, ask yourself why you don’t feel comfortable defining yourself in those terms.
Oh my god this story on Ask A Manager’s request for Machiavellian triumphs at work
I'm sorry but "mind altering vegetation" is the funniest euphemism for weed
It's really cool that, as a 6+ foot tall autistic trans woman, I have to tiptoe around and whisper and make myself as small as possible at work lest all my tme coworkers treat me like a threat.
The fun thing is, of course, the only real threat here is the very real threat of very real violence contained within the fact that any of them could get me fired for breathing wrong and then I'll never be able to work for the city again.
Remember girls
always be small and quiet because otherwise they feel threatened and
make sure you work on your voice because that makes them feel you're an actual girl and
always say please and thank you and sorry for everything because that makes them feel better but
never cry or show any form of vulnerability because that makes them feel guilty and
if at all possible try not to exist except as a vauge concept because that makes them feel uncomfortable
always be small and
quiet because otherwise
they feel threatened and
Beep boop! I look for accidental haiku posts. Sometimes I mess up.
Terfs found this and are blowing me up with comments like "that's what (it) gets for being a man in women's spaces!"
Women's spaces like what. The library where I work? Outside my house?????????
I was noticing people staring at me yesterday which was wigging me out, but also everyone I interacted with not only didn't misgender me but actively gendered me kindly. I think I might actually just be a pretty girl now I think I've made it I've actually made it
A lot of sentiments I see online about "just standing up for yourself" fall apart when considering that a common consequence of "standing up for yourself" is losing a key part of your current support network. It's hard to tell someone to stop being transphobic to you when you carpool with them to work, and it'll get a lot more expensive without them. Can your budget tolerate that cost, or is it the expense that stretches you too far? It's hard to tell someone that they need to be more polite to you when they're the one who helps walk you through legalese. Can you find someone else to do it for you, or are you left floundering? It's hard to tell someone to stop being sexist to you when they're the one writing your reference letter. Do you have someone else who can be your reference, or are they the only one whose letter would be accepted?
In order to be able to stand up for yourself, you need to be able to bear the potential consequence of that person leaving. You need to either have redundancy in your network, or be able to pay for what they did for you. Safety is about more than if someone will hit you.
people need to specify it's not just that the US government wants bytedance to sell tiktok, they want it to be sold to a company the US government approves of. the implication being the end goal, if not a ban, is for the US government to gain control over content on the app.
however, this is not the only reason for the tiktok ban. notice how all "national security concerns" are directed specifically at companies from china? the US government doesn't want tech from china to compete with tech monopolies in the US. this has been ongoing
no, buddy, it's not about competition, it's about security. Russia and china are actively trying to influence the western people to vote for anti-western ideals. every Chinese company is owned by their government. all the US does it get this company to a us-approved one so it'll poison our minds LESS
What "un-western ideals?" Genocide is bad? Murdering civilians is wrong? Torture is bad? FUcking clown ass cunt for brains.
"Russia and China-" Oh my God please shut UP.
I literally could not care less about "national security concerns" of the united fucking states. If people trying to get on a fucking subway is national security violating enough to deploy the national guard, then everything under the sun is.
i have no patience for people talking about violent rhetoric on the left really because every day i read the news and every politician in this country and in most others is saying 'we gotta kill more people'. they use different words to say it. obviously you're not supposed to just say 'we gotta kill more people'. but there's all kinds of polite and okay ways to say it.
'we need to control our borders' is a phrase which here means 'we gotta kill more people, we gotta drown more refugees in boats, we gotta send more people back to warzones and governments that want them dead, we gotta make more camps and we gotta make the camps more fatal'.
'we need to be tougher on welfare fraud' is a phrase which here means 'we gotta kill more people, we gotta make disabled people do more song and dance routines to convince some indifferent bureaucrat that they deserve to eat and we gotta make sure that the bureaucrats say 'no', we gotta starve those kids more, we gotta make sure families and kids and old people are freezing in the winter'.
'we need to tackle violent crime' is a phrase which here means 'we gotta kill more people, specifically Black people, unless we said Terrorism instead of Crime, in which case it's specifically muslims, shoot them, imprison them, surveil them, disappear them, brutalize them, whatever.'
and of course none of this is Violent Speech. this is Sensible Political Discourse. these are Common-Sense Policy Goals. we gotta kill more people: that's an electable policy. you can always count on we gotta kill more people as a platform. we gotta kill more people is gonna sweep the nation baby. we gotta kill more people 2024 -- vote now on your phones. now slow down. hold your horses. did that guy just say we gotta kill more people? well that just wont do. thats why im running on a platform of we gotta kill more people for cheaper, to stop this wasteful madness. and the people just keep dying but seems like there's still some of them left so i guess we're just circling back around to our main thing which is: we gotta kill more people
I mean.....
And then the search function doesn't work
AND THEN THE SEACH FUNCTION DOESN’T WORK
رغم الحرب والجوع، رمضان كريم
Despite the war and the hunger, Ramadan Kareem
Gaza, Palestine | غزة، فلسطين
i get it now btw guys i held a tgirl down and looked at her like she was a prey animal and her eyes got so wide with horny terror like i get it i get it now
The crime is said to have been committed due to the 'repugnance of the Brazão brothers' towards the PSOL councilwoman's activities
The Federal Police inquiry indicates that the PSOL councilwoman Marielle Franco was murdered "for being seen as an obstacle" to the interests of brothers Chiquinho and Domingos Brazão.
Investigators correlated statements from former police officer Ronnie Lessa, suspected of being the perpetrator of the crime and who closed a plea deal on the case, with data on the former councilwoman's political activities and alleged criminal activities of the Brazão brothers, mainly related to militias and land grabbing.
"Based on the facts depicted in Ronnie Lessa's plea deal, the determining motive for her death would be related to a matter played out more discreetly by her parliamentary mandate, namely: the defense of the right to housing," says a passage from the approximately 500-page PF report.
"The statements about the animosity of the Brazão Brothers towards PSOL politicians are considered plausible," the report says. The police highlight discrepancies between Marielle and Chiquinho Brazão in the Rio City Council's discussion on a bill "designed to ease [land] regularization rules."
David Cameron is dismantled and his body, which is revealed to be porcelain, is ground into dust.
North Korea and Seoul Capital Area have roughly same population
And then when soldiers who had been POWs in NK came back from the war saying America was doing evil shit to Korea and that communism was good, the word “brainwashed” was invented and applied to them so they could be forced into ‘psychiatric treatment’ until they publicly recanted their earlier testimonies
US Navy PMTC Lockheed P-3A Orion 150525/36 at NAS Point Mugu (1976)
aviationphotocompany.com/p934046062/ee9…
More P-3 images: aviationphotocompany.com/p773078693
@AviationPhotoCo via X
From Palestinian poet Najwan Darwish
i hope this is alright for me to add, but this poem references a line from one of hitler's speeches ordering the genocide of polish jews. at the end of the speech, he justified the genocide by saying "who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the armenians?" in a very literal way, genocides are interconnected and used to justify one another. the holocaust was partially modeled after the united states' genocide of indigenous people. british colonialism around the world had its roots in colonized ireland. this is why it is so important to remember the victims of all genocides across history, and why it is so important for oppressed peoples to stand together in solidarity.