this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2025
845 points (96.4% liked)

memes

15502 readers
4568 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Zink@programming.dev 42 points 6 days ago (2 children)

The last panel reminded me of almost 20 years ago when the HPV vaccine first came available. Here in the US I remember the conservative backlash over it.

It wasn't the same as today where conservatives reject the COVID vaccine because that's how they prove to themselves that their freedom and bodily autonomy are intact or some shit. It was much more along the lines of how they like to see people suffer as long as they can tell themselves it was justified.

So it was basically "my daughter isn't getting it because she doesn't need it and isn't a slut," and of course they meant it in the way that anybody who IS a slut deserves to be punished with cervical cancer. Back then they didn't always say the quiet part out loud.

[–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

Republicans / religious always treat women like shit. I have no idea why any woman votes R or goes to church. These people literarily think you're less than them.

[–] garbagebagel@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

Interesting, in Canada the only backlash I really heard (and from my own mother) was that it was too new and we weren't sure of the longer term effects. I got it anyway since it was being offered for free to people my age (I remember jokes about being guinea pigs). I don't have HPV and the vaccine doesn't seem to have killed me yet so win-win I guess.

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 33 points 6 days ago (1 children)

If you believe that laws forbidding gambling, sale of liquor, sale of contraceptives, requiring definite closing hours, enforcing the Sabbath, or any such, are necessary to the welfare of your community, that is your right and I do not ask you to surrender your beliefs or give up your efforts to put over such laws. But remember that such laws are, at most, a preliminary step in doing away with the evils they indict. Moral evils can never be solved by anything as easy as passing laws alone. If you aid in passing such laws without bothering to follow through by digging in to the involved questions of sociology, economics, and psychology which underlie the causes of the evils you are gunning for, you will not only fail to correct the evils you sought to prohibit but will create a dozen new evils as well.

—Robert A. Heinlein, Take Back Your Government

[–] VerbFlow@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That sounds like something Heinlein would write during his earlier days. I completely agree with both the argument and reasoning, even tho he turned anti-Communist and insane before he wrote that.

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Funny thing! Here's a quote from the same book:

Of what use, then, are the American Communists?

They serve one function extremely useful to you and to the country, so useful that, if there were no Communists, we would almost be forced to create some. They are a reliable litmus paper for detecting real sources of danger to the Republic.

Communism is so repugnant to almost all Americans, when they are getting along even tolerably well, that one may predict with certainty that any social field or group in which the Communists make real strides in gaining members or acceptance of their doctrines, any such spot is in such bad shape from real and not imaginary social ills that the rest of us should take emergency, drastic action to investigate and correct the trouble.

Unfortunately we are more prone to ignore the sick spot thus disclosed and content ourselves with calling out more cops.

[–] blarghly@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Honestly a great point. No one wants to create a glorious revolution when their lives are going well.

[–] VerbFlow@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

I mean, Lemmy itself was created by Communists if I'm correct

[–] Chev@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days ago
[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Ladies and gents and everything in-between. The drugs are going to get used no matter what.

Just give them somewhere to do them.

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

The problem is, and I'm sure you don't need to hear this from me, is that if you give them a place to do drugs they will congregate there and without correct support and supervision (and that is never provided because money) the addicts and community end up at odds with each other.

[–] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Got it; Unsupervised Homeless + Safe Space = Thunderdome.

This is a problem?

(/s, but the unethical part of me...)

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

Well no. These would be centers where people can go do drugs. They would be supervised. There would be staff monitoring them.

Look. You have someone addicted to meth or heroin they can't just stop... They need to keep using or they can die in the case of h and meth is extremely hard to stop cold turkey.

Centers that allow people to use can address many issues these people have.

[–] bufalo1973 5 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Then the problem is not having people to supervise nothing bad happens.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Kekzkrieger@feddit.org 12 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Drug use room work, ive recently seen a documentary about one in Switzerland and they give people the possibility to consume safely.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 14 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

... with a panic button and much greater access to addiction resources.

If there are 10 steps to turning a homeless person into a housed, working taxpayer, this is like step 2.

Canada has failed to move to step 3 because "just arrest those leeches" is the position of half our society.

[–] Zenith@lemm.ee 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

We had some in my state and they were all closed down to to crimes like fighting and people setting up camp basically at or around the place

[–] breecher@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 days ago

As mentioned before in this thread, that is because the rooms themselves aren't sufficient, investment in social care involved with the operation of them is as important.

[–] marx2k@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago
[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Switzerland cleaned up their drug problem.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days ago (3 children)

They built government run facilities for drug addicts and the dosages are controlled by medical staff. The result, decreases in crime, over doses, emergency medical care, and garbage left by junkies. The USA and their pointless War on Drugs is a fucking scam because the problem is the demand for illegal drugs.

[–] spooky2092@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The USA and their pointless War on Drugs is a fucking scam because the problem is the demand for illegal drugs.

The other problem/scam is also the demand for slave labor via prisoners, so there's not much demand for resolving the issue. It also helps that it's a good weapon to weld against marginalized communities, just sprinkle a little crack on them or bring up old marijuana charges and boom, "justified shooting".

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 6 days ago

MYYYYYYYYYYYY promoting drug use??!! :D

load more comments
view more: next ›