this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
234 points (81.6% liked)

Not The Onion

12271 readers
1636 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BlanK0@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 day ago

This timeline is cooked fr 💀💀💀

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

What a solid way to destroy whatever remains of their birth rate.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 22 points 1 day ago

Man, this sure is a fun timeline

Next up: women should be sex slaves.

Seriously, I've seen shit like this in weirdo porn stories, never thought this would be real life.

[–] shoulderoforion@fedia.io 247 points 3 days ago (18 children)

For all those confused, it's to make younger women into brood mares, and framing this as a "call", when it was one tweet from some deranged jerkoff, is disingenuous clickbait

[–] Stalinwolf@lemmy.ca 36 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I hate the frequent use of "call(s)" in journalism to paint this dishonest picture that there is a large group or important figures actively motioning to do shit, when it's almost always just as you've said here. One or two inconsequential dicks with a stupid opinion.

[–] TheSambassador@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Welcome to most modern journalism! Remember when every news org started spending time going to Twitter to get the general population's reactions (instead of actually interviewing real people and figuring out how actually widespread a viewpoint is)? It's been downhill from there.

Combined with most people only reading headlines, news organizations almost never providing context for most actual facts, and wealth concentration like we've never seen, the current state of news media is pretty dire.

You can get people to assume almost any cynical worldview you want when you can chip away at their belief in humanity by repeatedly showing only the worst examples of it. This is what conservative news media has been so good at - getting them to believe a specific image of "liberal" and allowing that image to represent ALL liberals instead of just the most extreme side. Honestly, it feels like most people on the left are similarly starting to use dehumanizing language to describe conservatives. All this leads to people avoiding communication because they assume that everyone on "the other side" believes insane nonsense. Sometimes they do. A lot of times, they don't.

[–] Stalinwolf@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

You're not wrong. I tend to think the worst of people when I learn they're conservative. I find it difficult to rationalize how they can observe the actions and behavior of conservative leadership and actually cheer them on. But, like my own mother has proven to me, many of them are just ignorant victims of propoganda who are oblivious to the whole picture.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

I came in here ready to ask why someone's hot take gets to be legislation while my carefully thought out stuff is just thrown in the garbage. Turns out nobody's hot take is going anywhere.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] can@sh.itjust.works 126 points 3 days ago (6 children)

TOKYO: The leader of a Japanese conservative party has apologised for saying the solution to the nation’s population crisis would be to ban women from getting married after the age of 25 and have their uteruses removed at 30.

Feels like kinda burying the lede here.

[–] MissJinx@lemmy.world 56 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (8 children)

oh I would LOVE to have my uterus removed! I tryied but.the doctor keep saying that "you may still want to have kids". IM 40! and I never wanted them until now, really doubt I'll change my mind radically

edit: why don't I have autonomy.over.my own body?

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Your doctor is saying that … are they also refusing to help you get it done?

[–] Fosheze@lemmy.world 33 points 2 days ago

Try talking directly with a surgeon. Doctors can be hesitant about fairly invasive surgeries like that, but surgeons almost always want to cut.

It's a vastly different situation but I had to do something similar for a carpal tunnel release. Doctors danced around the issue for years giving me braces, stretches, and work notes. But one call with an orthopedic surgeon and I was in for a consult within the week and surgery a couple months later.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 16 points 2 days ago

That's really fucked up, I'm sorry. Especially because it's an informed decision.

[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 6 points 2 days ago

I don't know if it's changed here, but even as a guy trying to get sterilized without being married nor having kids was work. I found someone to do it and paid out-of-pocket to get it done. I've heard similar stories from women living here.

[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 days ago

Idk about nowadays but I think childfree (or related sub) on the other site had a list of known good doctors who'd do vasectomies and tubal ligations without the whole bs about but you might want kids (or more kids) later/let's ask your husband bullshittery.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What in the cinnamon toast fuck

[–] Harvey656@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

That means the men are free to marry each other right? Right?

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 11 points 2 days ago

That's quite confusing actually, don't they want people having more children, not less?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] GrymEdm@lemmy.world 59 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

That headline is crazy, but then I read the article. Thank goodness it's not a mainstream idea and even other politicians are vocally telling this guy to pump the brakes. I don't think it ever even made it to a formal policy proposal. I suppose that one politician wants to speedrun the decline of Japan or something.

[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 9 points 2 days ago

This guy is known for spouting all kinds of bullshit, apparently. I've lived here for a decade and it's the first I've heard of this level of insanity (though there certainly is no short of misogyny from the fossils and those wont to blame anyone else for their problems).

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 37 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Don't they... have... a... population shortage?

I'm so confused

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 71 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Naoki Hyakuta, a writer and founder of the Conservative Party of Japan, also said that women should not be permitted to attend university from the age of 18, apparently so they could focus their efforts on producing more babies.

The conservative party's solution to declining birthrates is to make it illegal for women to do anything besides have children. What are you confused about?

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

WOW that's fucked up.

Naah, I was referring more to the headline, as I believe there would be a positive correlation between married women and kids. Banning women to marry = less kids.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

It is similar to other countries getting rid of "no fault divorce" or abortion access.

By making the strict cutoff early, you have women who genuinely do want kids much more likely to do it with the nearest guy they can find and while their careers aren't stable enough to really recover from a pregnancy. Which then traps them in the marriage and means they continue to be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen for the rest of their lives.

I saw it play out in grad school far too many times. Women who wanted families would start early (and there are actually very strong health reasons to not wait until your mid-late 30s). And even with our advisor being very understanding... it is a massive derailment at a time where even a two month delay can be the difference between being cited for a foundational concept going forward and having to start over because someone else published. Same for getting internships that can lead to jobs and so forth. Which leads to "oh it is just too hectic right now. I'll go back to school when my kids are old enough to not need me all day"

But even five or six years later? Both partners have a solid salary. So it is still a big hit to have diminished capacity for the third trimester and then maternity leave but that kid goes into preschool and things get back on track pretty quickly.

But... then you have one or two kids. Rather than the person who gave up on a career and is a stay at home mom (and no shade to people who DO want to do that) where it is "easier" to have more.

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 6 points 2 days ago

Them removing womens ability to procreate. Not only is it counter productive this costs money.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] nichtburningturtle@feddit.org 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

But why? Don't they have a problem with low birthrates?

[–] PrincessKadath@ani.social 21 points 3 days ago

Insanity and the need to control everything, that's why.

[–] BonerMan@ani.social 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›