ArtemisimetrA

joined 2 weeks ago
[–] ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago

OK I'm actually a noob at formatting and i have no idea how i even did that giant text

[–] ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago

This is crazy in the context of having just finished the Native Tongue trilogy by Suzette Haden Elgin. Great read or listen, describes the world this person imagines.

[–] ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago

This feels like a poor response to the "would you rather be alone in the woods with a man or a bear" social profiler. "Yeah but that bear is fat, would you really want to be mauled by a fat bear instead of violated and gaslit by an aLpHa MaLe?!"

[–] ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee 5 points 18 hours ago (5 children)

Trade =/= capitalism. Capitalism is maximum enrichment for a few at the cost of the many. "Capitalizing on an opportunity" doesn't usually seem to get interpreted as "get what I need and hopefully what I want in an exchange that is equitable, just, fair, and negotiable to all parties"; instead, the common meaning seems to be "get all that I can as quick as I can in exchange for the least possible expense on my part", which is not even a full step away from 'The Tragedy of the Commons, ' or, "if there's not enough for everyone to have as much as they want or need, then everyone who takes as much as they need is evil, and if someone is going to be evil AND ALSO have enough than that person is damn well going to be me." THAT'S capitalism.

[–] ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee 4 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (2 children)

Such has been the present interpretation of the course of recorded history. Recorded most often by conquerors, looking favorably upon the the ends of their conquest to justify their means, and if you boil just about every single conquering ideology down for long enough, you will see two things, in this order: greed for what the conquered populace had, and fear of not having enough.


That's not "human nature," that's a response to human nature. Most of us would probably generally prefer to go on living. For many people, that looks like "i just need my necessities covered and I'll figure out the rest." Historically this happened by banding together and looking out for one another, not by hoarding resources and making people do extra work just to fucking exist with a modicum of comfort in a society forever dangling a golden carrot to keep you distracted from the meat grinder. (Edit for formatting)

[–] ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee 4 points 19 hours ago

Thank you for bringing Rid Kock to my attention.

[–] ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee 1 points 19 hours ago

Oof yeah real. Especially in the US, mass and social media have most people focused on their own personal problems such that people don't see this happening in the background. "Fascists in the Whitehouse, sure, but my car needs new tires and there's that leak in the roof of the house that I'm living in even though it's owned by someone else who owns multiple properties... Hey maybe I actually hate that more than politics, so I'll just devote all my energy to that instead"

[–] ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee -4 points 19 hours ago

She's probably not even married, among others, but is still playing into the prescribed gender role to troll the masc even harder. OR, she is married, but probably her relationship has some elements that are still considered "niche" or "deviant" by society at large. Or, maybe NONE of that is true, either, which is yet another layer relating to assumptions people make based on the behavior and self-expression of others

[–] ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee 23 points 23 hours ago (7 children)

Damn this comic has L A Y E R S

[–] ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee 3 points 23 hours ago

Ope. There goes the Pope.

[–] ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago

It is me. I am that pokemon.

[–] ArtemisimetrA@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Well, yes. And many leaders have proven they either don't care or are willing to make people disappear if they become inconvenient 😓

view more: next ›