I’m back on my bullshit.
All I can say is there’s typically an implicit negative connotation when using the form “those people” regardless of intent. Usually it’s used that way when stereotyping or otherwise making a blanket statement about a group, so even benign uses of the phrase tend to sound hostile.
ohhhHHHHHhhhhh! That’s what was happening. Me and my ghetto butt had picked that term up from childhood and never realized it was considered hostile. Thanks for letting me know.
What’s up with July 29, 2024?
Found it! It’s almost 3 hrs long, so you know what that means: a glass of wine, your favorite easy chair, and of course, this YouTube video streaming on your home system. So, go on, and indulge yourself. That’s right, kick off your shoes, put your feet up, lean back and just enjoy the rational documentary. After all, knowledge soothes even the savage lemming.
Remembering from my social psychology classes in undergrad, I believe number is 150. But yes, that’s a good point. It’s one of the reasons people in major urban areas like NYC are capable of moving on with their lives when terrible things happen to those around them. We biologically can’t care about people once we reach our 150 limit. Btw, I think the authors of that theory argued that that number is one of the major differences between us and other social species.
that’s fine because i don’t download copyrighted material. everything on furries.com is freely available.
I’m a straight guy. I don’t think I like boobs like most other straight guys.
From what I can tell, et al. is not about socio-political power*. It’s just a necessity for ease and efficiency. In-text citations need to be short to limit wasted space. Otherwise, we’d have lots of text dedicated to unnecessary names. An in-text citation that reads (Perez et al., 2023) is much more efficient than (Perez, Washington, Smith, Iwukuni, Johnson, Patel, Boofy, Yamirez, Tate, Hendrix, Apple, Man, & Gargamel, 2023).
Using 7th ed. APA, the citation entries in the bibliography/references include upto the first 20 authors, so contributors are rarely omitted.
I’m no STEM major, so I may be way off, but this is how I see it.
V = IR isn’t math. It’s a way of defining the relationship and outcome of two specific physical qualities. It says that we combine the resistance of a medium ( R) with the current flowing through it (I) into another joint emergent quality we call voltage (V). We do this because it makes our understanding of the physical world easier to manage since this relationship has helpful applications.
Math is simply patterns in the relationships of quantities. It excludes any physical units or qualities. In other words, math is the art of counting.
In social science, theory requires application. Otherwise, it’s just a cool story, bro.
The test to know if anything is an absolute truth is if it is called an absolute truth. If it is called an absolute truth, then it isn’t an absolute truth. If it isn’t called an absolute truth, then it isn’t an absolute truth. Absolute truths don’t exist. If someone tells you something is an absolute truth, stop listening to them.
Every single corporation is doing what they’re legally bound to do: increase profits for shareholders. Companies don’t and never have cared about the customer. They care about a customer as much as you care about an NPC. What’s with people thinking that they ever cared??
Of course MS is using that data. Why wouldn’t they?? Would they lose customers if people found out? Nope. If you were in charge of making that decision, you would use that data too. And if you’re too held to your privacy morals, you’ll never be in that position at MS because they only place people that will decide to maximize profits.
Here’s how you know a company is doing something: Would it make them more money? Then theyre doing it. That’s it.
Also, it’s MICROSOFT!! lol Not Mozilla, RedHat, Canonical, or the Linux Foundation. Remember when someone shoved a pie in Bill Gates face?
The federal government didn’t make prostitution illegal, so technically, a woman can be a prostitute in the US. Each state except for Nevada made it illegal, which is why anyone can’t legally be a prostitute outside of the very specific places where it’s allowed in Nevada.
Additionally, Roe v. Wade wasn’t about bodily control. It was about a woman’s right to privacy v. society’s duty to protect life. The right to privacy argument was that government could not shove themselves in the affairs between a woman and medical staff. The duty to protect life argument was that society was ethically obligated to protect the life of vulnerable people. They found that life was more important than privacy, so it became a matter of when life began. The thing is that the beginning of a life isn’t so clear.
According to science, life begins at conception. That’s when the new DNA mix is created and a new being is created. Yet, that zygote cannot live on its own and is 100% dependent on the mother to exist, so is it really alive? That was the debate. The Supreme Court divided pregnancy into trimesters representing the incremental development of an individual human life.
Since a fetus was viable starting in the 3rd trimester, states could pass laws banning abortions then. Since a fetus had a heartbeat but was iffy on being viable in the 2nd trimester, states could regulate but not ban abortions in then. States couldn’t do anything about abortion in the first trimester. That was what Roe v. Wade was about, and why many people were upset with the ruling. It never really addressed the fundamental issues of body autonomy from the government on one side. When it came to protecting life, it didn’t really decide to do that either since they established periods in the life of the fetus during which it was legal to allow it to die. No one was happy with the decision because it was a negotiation that was hypocritical on both ends, which I guess is how you know it was a proper negotiation 😄
My personal opinion was that the judges were buying time to allow the legislative process to address the matter in a more democratic manner rather than allowing the court to decide. However, the topic was so politically costly that no one did anything to definitely address it, making the country depend on the ruling of 9 unelected officials.
put me in the screenshot!
You’re welcome! I also experience that, so I noticed it intuitively. Lately, I’ve been trying to navigate it myself by realizing that sometimes I say lies just to prove it right. Like, I will confess to intentions I didn’t have or even behaviors I didn’t commit just so people can think that. Like, I might go somewhere with a friend and accidentally forget my wallet. When it comes time to pay for something sporadic, I admit that I left my wallet at home to not have to pay. Or, I might admit to stealing something I payed for. I don’t know why I do it, but I think it’s related to the belief that I’m a bad person and want others to think that because it would be validating. It also gives the impression that I’m sneaky, so it serves as a warning for people to not try shady crap with me. I know it’s not healthy and don’t like that I do that, so I’m trying to work on it. I think the root cause is the core belief that I’m bad and don’t deserve love. I’m freaking crazy lol…aww 🙁
This strikes me the same as saying, “No matter what I do or say to myself, I feel deeply in my soul that I am a bad/flawed person.”
https://www.liberationhealingseattle.com/blog-trauma-therapist/ptsd-core-beliefs-trauma-survivors
Yeah, that’s what I’m realizing from the responses to this question. Thanks for pointing that out. Btw, it wasn’t my sister laughing. It was my supervisor at work that was laughing when I referred to my sister and her group as those people. Oopsies!