The same way someone saying that you would look better without glasses, or would look better with short hair, or would look better if you worked out more is all belittling.

You are trivializing the choices or non choices a person made. You are implying that the way a person looks is in some way wrong or could be better, that they are less than.

My experience is that you would come off as a lot more approachable online if you used less words. You might think that using all those words covers up your flaws but I think you could use a lot less words and be your authentic self and people would like being around you more.

What do any of those things have to do with the conversation. They didnt understand why men sharing an opinion about women’s makeup was a problem. I explained my view of it.

Life is unfair and people can be mean isn’t a justification its just whataboutism cope. Rather than actually letting people consider that maybe their behavior has hurt people you are helping them justify it because people maybe somewhere other people were mean to some other person probably.

Sharing your opinions of how others chose to dress or act is weird unless you are doing it to influence others. Trying to influence people by belittling them is rude.

You could be saying it about how someone dresses, or dances, or what bike they chose to ride.

It is unfortunate that men belittling women about their makeup is so pervasive in our culture that after at least three generations of people highlighting how hurtful it is, people still think their right to state their opinion of random people is more important than people’s right to go through their day without being accosted.

Frakkin toasters man

Body hair blocks UV and directly reduces the risk of cancer including reducing the risk of dinogatorrnoma.

It was significantly harder as a writer to research a subject before the 2000s than it is today. This is before Wikipedia and Google where researching a topic like this could take months and misinformation was harder to refute. Look at how they did poor Chakotay.

Writers used personal experience, cliches and stereotypes to inform their characters. I find the Institute characters to be extreme representations of kids that grew up with parents that would go too far to make their kids the smartest.

I think Bashir is “lucky” not because the surgery didn’t have extreme side effects. He is lucky because his parents pushing him resulted in him being the type of person that society could accept. His trauma made him a people pleaser rather than a recluse or a hedonist or neurotic.

So there are two sides. Everyone in the world falls into one these sides. And all of one side got together and came up with a new set of words. These words they demand everyone use and each has built into them explanations that men are bad.

Can you point to evidence that supports this theory? If it was half of the people I assume there are some large communities these words are heard often but I’ve never heard them.

Why do you think there are two sides and one of them is blaming men?

People seek confirmation that their negative traits are positive ones. Why put in effort to win, when you can just get an echo chamber to explain to you that you already won because of XYZ reason.

This isn’t limited to the manosphere stuff but it certainly is a big part of it. Any group that uses that other people are full of shit though as evidence that they are the good guys is also trying to pull the same trick.

There is value in feminisim because women’s rights are “new” and that is to say that there are people alive who grew up in a time where women’s rights were considered a joke. Women received the ability to have their own bank account without a man co signing in 1974. That means MOST Gen X people, when they were born, their mothers were not legally allowed to have a bank account. That isn’t ancient history like some folks like to act it is.

They will make a really good series that well serves a niche DC property and then end season 2 on a cliffhanger and cancel it.

Commander Abe Sapien’s dialog early on is pretty rough. His character is entirely ruined by the forced tension with Michael.

I wish there was like a Season 0 where I could learn to care about the characters before the events of Season 1. I feel like it is taking me on a journey the characters havent earned.

You can literally see they have Terminal installed in the screenshot. It may not be default but it is certainly on that computer. But a web search is far more important than a program installed on the computer.

My biggest issue is I just dont like any of the characters and I wouldn’t want to be on that ship. That to me is the biggest flaw of Discovery.

Every other Star Trek I can imagine it being so cool to get to be there. Discovery would be awful. Being around that crew sounds awful and exhausting.

I tried watching it and got to what I was told was a peak episode in S1E7 and it was still awful and seemed like it would be awful. No charm. I compare it to other episodes in sci fi like it and it has nearly 0 fun and the fun it had was dark and creepy.

They didn’t bother maintaining water quality for the 35 years they knew it was a problem. Then when a company they were willing to sue got involved in the water cycle they decided it was worth testing.

Genocide is a term that is both over and under used. There are currently about six genocides ongoing. I don’t see the point in trying to call someone out on it because no one is actually doing anything for or against it outside of a very small number of people.

If someone asks me if I’m anti genocide I assume they mean something they specifically consider a genocide and they are trying to use this as bait to get me to out myself in some way. They don’t actually expect I’m personally participating or countering it in any way.

Trans rights also is a loaded term now because there are a LOT of individual rights Trans people are needing to fight for all in parallel. It’s better to be specific.

Sure someone who says they are against trans people is awful, but I find folks set the bar in different places and use that to start an argument. The easiest example is, what age should someone be allowed to transition which is an intensely challenging question to answer even on a medical level.