• 18 Posts
  • 64 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 29th, 2024

help-circle

  • GrymEdm@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.world*click*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    27 days ago

    Generalizations like “All X are Y” should be used VERY sparingly if ever, and are almost never correct or helpful when talking about large groups of people - i.e. an entire ethnicity. Jews are people like any other ethnicity, and as such span the whole range of ethics and personalities. I personally know a very ethical and kind Jew who does not deserve to be labelled as an asshole or anything similar, and I know of many more who also prove that claim wrong.

    Moreover, being abused is not a valid excuse to be an abuser. A lawyer tells a story about his client who tried to justify his domestic violence by saying he was abused as a child. The judge responded to the effect of, “then you should know even more than most people how very destructive and wrong it is”.




  • Worked through my obsessions a bit and let go of them. In the following weeks I asked three women out and got shot down each time instead of thinking about doing so for a month and being a creep.

    Unironically, good on you. That’s character progress and it takes a lot of courage and self-confidence to accept rejection in a mature way and keep trying regardless. For what it’s worth I as an Internet stranger think we should help more people do the same sort of things.



  • I’d say it’s sometimes ok, sometimes necessary for brevity, and sometimes accurate. Accurate = “All people need oxygen, water, and calories to survive.” Brevity = “Generally speaking, people enjoy good food and good company so those situations work well for forming relationships.”

    Consequences of generalizations have a lot to do with how tolerable they are. If I say, “most people like pizza” there’s not much harm if several million people don’t. If I say, “all or most people of this gender/ethnicity/religion/whatever have X problem” that’s a lot more problematic because it can easily lead to a consequence of harmful prejudice. When it comes to matters of ethics, beliefs, accusations etc. it becomes very important to handle cases individually as much as humanly possible.



  • GrymEdm@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldWon't someone think of the yachters.
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Orcas have been such bros to humanity (no wild orcas have ever been recorded intentionally attacking humans) that if they’re hitting boats I’m starting with the assumption that it’s the humans fucking up. There’s a lot more history of humans being cruel/stupid to wildlife than there is of orcas doing the same to us.

    Orcas have rarely injured and in one case killed their trainers when held captive, but that’s essentially them fighting being held hostage. “No one is sure what causes the animals to react in this way, but boredom, frustration and ill health, both physical and mental, have all been implicated,” says Rob. “These incidents have resulted in serious injuries to trainers and, in one case at least, proved to be fatal.”





  • I’ve talked once or twice about Reddit being negative and being happier here on Lemmy. Part of the reason I like Lemmy is it’s a smaller userbase, which means fewer vocally negative people to drag things down. I also feel like the conversations are more “genuine” in that I feel like I’m talking to single people as opposed to crowds.

    Speaking of crowds, I did very well on Reddit in terms of karma but to me it always felt like a dogpile - if my post/comment got those first 5 upvotes it would keep on doing well. If it dropped into negatives it was basically a lost attempt and the thread would fill with insults/criticism. Here there’s seems to be less “inertia” and more chance to win people on merit. I’ve had people respond aggressively, but rarely and not actually cruel. I’ve only been here for about 2 months, but so far that’s my take.