• 0 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 8th, 2023

help-circle












  • In this case, when she had ample time to abort the pregnancy before it became viable, and didn’t choose to do so until in inconvenienced her fashion, my reasoning is that the baby (and yes, this was a baby) did not deserve to die for vanity’s sake. She should’ve given birth and put the baby up for adoption if she didn’t want it. There’s a reason third trimester pregnancies were illegal even before Roe was overturned. In the third trimester you’re no longer dealing with an amorphous clump of cells, which anti-women fanatics ridiculously argue should overrule a woman’s bodily autonomy. You’re dealing with a person.



  • The issue isn’t the number of seasons, it’s the abrupt cancellation of unresolved stories. 3 seasons is plenty. 2 seasons is fine. Hell, Chernobyl is one of the greatest pieces of media ever produced and that’s a mini-series. Just commit to giving the creators a chance to resolve their story. If that means a truncated final season, so be it. It builds consumer trust, and it increases the value of the back catalog. When I subscribe to a streaming service, a show that was cancelled on a cliffhanger offers me literally zero value. I’m not interested in starting a show that I know will never provide a satisfying conclusion.



  • In regards to Facebook, and why you should never trust it, no. But given the headline, which is intentionally vague and seems constructed to imply this was related to the Supreme Court’s reprehensible ruling on Roe, it adds much needed context, such as the fact that this would have been illegal even before Roe was overturned, and the heinous and sociopathic comments she made. As a rule, I support a childbearing person’s bodily autonomy, but in this case? When the fetus was almost certainly viable and her reasoning for the abortion was because she wanted to wear jeans again? Fuck that.




  • Your point is well-made, but I worry you’re applying literal interpretation to rhetorical generalizing that require slightly deeper reading. For better or worse, humans like to make sweeping generalizations, and only in the most extreme instances do they legitimately believe they apply to everyone in that given population.

    For example: The women tweeting about how “men suck” isn’t thinking of every man that has ever existed; she knows men aren’t a monolith; she has a picture in her mind of a particular type of man, one that has been a source of trauma for her and countless other women. If you know you aren’t that type of man, then you know that her words aren’t directed at you; the same principle, imo, applies to churches and religion.

    Yes, there are exceptions to the rule, but on the whole religion is used as a tool of exclusion and oppression much more than it is used to promote compassion and progress. When people make generalizations about churches and religion, they’re envisioning the regressive, bigoted zealot that has been the source of trauma for so many. The church you describe would not fall into that category, so try not to take such comments to heart.