Recent comments in /f/nottheonion

JugglingRick t1_j9i53oc wrote

He asked to take a photo with my dog, he's a shy/aggressive great Pyrenees, so I said no I'm good. I got an immediate weird fuckin vibe from him.

A week later people started spreading the word that he's a pedo. My girlfriend told him to get the fuck out of town when she saw him last week. You can see him here melting down after someone threatened him.

video here

8

mycatistakingover t1_j9i0qaf wrote

Frame it as a public health issue if you want, I really don't care. There is an argument to call affirmative action racist, but pregnancy and breast cancer are biological processes, not rules/systems created by society. No one is calling them sexist. There are plenty of issues in society that disproportionately hurt men that need to be resolved too and until there is an alternative term that is well known, I will happily call the draft and handling of men's mental health sexist too. Why can't we say that gender affects people's quality of life in different ways and try to address that? You don't need malicious people to make a certain demographic's lives worse.

1

thzmand t1_j9hwyol wrote

You people....never stop....like evangelical Christians that think Monster Energy has satanic messaging. This can arguably be a public safety issue for pedestrians, but it is certainly not a gender issue. And even if it is a gender issue that doesn't make it sexist in any way shape or form. Unless of course anything that disproportionately impacts women is sexist. In which case, affirmative action is sexist, and pregnancy is sexist, and breast cancer is sexist. Of course that term isn't helpful to describe patterns that affect genders differently, which is why nobody uses it that way.

0

thzmand t1_j9hwab4 wrote

>Unfortunately, the reality is that in some sectors, in order to feed your family, some people may find themselves required to put up with illegal abuses of power in order to be allowed to keep their jobs, or face other barriers that limit them unfairly.

That's the reason behind my sentiment.

1

Trap_Cubicle5000 t1_j9hvvxp wrote

Absolutely, just as soon as I can induce you to read the article.

There you might learn that the council of Cambridgeshire is going to spend money on a review of the current gritting network to ensure that it is up-to-date and cost effective, as slip-and-fall claims that occur on the roads and sidewalks that go unsalted in favor of more major thouroughfares against the city cost money that might otherwise be saved if these sidewalks and residential roads took more of a precedence and potentially save money in the long run by implementing a more equitable and efficient system.

No where does it state that the service to major roads will be cut. Intentional, scientifically executed oversight of government services are necessary and if it takes a bit of a kick in the ass to make it happen, so be it.

0