drewaustin

joined 9 months ago
[–] drewaustin@piefed.ca 4 points 2 days ago

I’m a vegetarian, but I do make cultural exceptions.

[–] drewaustin@piefed.ca 6 points 5 days ago

Yeah, Democrats deserve your vote, as long as the republicans are slightly worse!

 

I don’t know who needs to hear this, but it’s not your fault that the modern world is so fucking hard for us.

And it’s not just us, even neurotypical folks are really struggling, but it’s hitting us like a freight train.

We love you being here and we need you to keep being here so badly. We are told from all directions of the modern world that we are the problem - and we need more of us who know how hard it is and can have a little bit of compassion for us.

We can force this world to cut us a break. We can be the ones that stand up for the kids who get yelled at all day because they can’t sit in a chair all day and can’t instantly recall what was told to them 2 minutes ago. We can be the ones who stand up to those who think the only measure of a persons worth is the ability to work in paid employment for 40-80 hours a week.

I love you guys. Just because conformity isn’t our forte and that is the what is valued most in the modern world doesn’t mean you don’t have worth.

[–] drewaustin@piefed.ca 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Hate speech is not narrowly defined. It is barely defined. C-9 doesn't even need hate speech.

The proposed amendments in the Bill would create four new criminal offences: (1) an intimidation offence that prohibits conduct that is intended to provoke a state of fear in another person to impede them from accessing religious or cultural institutions and other specified places

Those of us old enough to remember the satanic panic will remember a lot of pearl clutching christians who can easily be provoked to a state of fear that would impede them from accessing religious or cultural institutions and other specified places.

Whether someone intended to provoke such pearl clutching is a matter of interpretation. And pearl clutters have a proven track record of getting interpretations in their favour - no matter how much evidence indicates otherwise.

[–] drewaustin@piefed.ca 6 points 2 weeks ago
[–] drewaustin@piefed.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago

Become the conductor of the choir.

[–] drewaustin@piefed.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago

You could also call it logic.

Or empathy.

Or heck just contrarianism.

Lots of room on the anti-capitalism bus.

[–] drewaustin@piefed.ca 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Sorry, this is a failure of compassion on my part. But it’s like a real life reenactment of Niemöller‘s “First they came”

[–] drewaustin@piefed.ca 10 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

They are detaining white people? NOW THEY’VE GONE TOO FAR!

[–] drewaustin@piefed.ca -2 points 2 weeks ago

This lady is a shill for Israel.

[–] drewaustin@piefed.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago

That is much more succinct.

[–] drewaustin@piefed.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

I’m trying to work out the logic in the meme. It seems like it argues against itself somewhat.

A requires B to function

Divided C lowers difficulty of exploitation C. The two lines seems to imply the that exploiting C is required for the functioning of B.

Having something easier does not normally indicate it is a requirement. Typically tha is especially so if there are multiple ways to make something easier.

This meme seems lazy in its argument. But then I’m very very far from a logician.

view more: next ›