… yes, she was a real monster. However, using sexism as a weapon against her would still be using sexism as a weapon against her. Do you see how it being a reference to Thatcher doesn’t really change my point?

Ah yes, Thatcher. Famously not a woman and famously not the subject of any kind of sexism /s

The Doctor using sexism to control the government

And by implication pointed out the difficulty in finding one. Unless you literally made a statement about just the types of images they chose with no further intellectual depth, which I mean is possible (I do that shit all the time), it comes with the assumed next statement about there not being violent atheists, or at least there are less violent atheists. So I was talking to that point.

That being said, I’m autistic so I might just missing the point, but I figured that my statement should still be made in case others thought like I did initially. There have been atrocities committed by atheists and there are violent atheists.

CCP and USSR stamped out religious practice, but go off.

As an Atheist myself, don’t delude yourself into thinking religion is unique in its capacity for horrors. Humans have that capacity, any group we make would also have that capacity.

Who said anything about getting them to change? Getting mad at people because the word changed instead of getting mad at the people who changed the word is my point. There’s a reason why that word was targeted as a dog whistle, but it is still a dog whistle now and acknowledging that it is isn’t some moral wrong.

“Hey, bigots say this and it makes people sound like bigots when they say it”

“I used that word correctly and was told that it made me sound like a bigot. Maybe think about that?”

Cool, maybe get mad at the bigots who ruined the word for people rather than the people saying the word was ruined by bigots.

It’s like when people get mad at the r-slur being a slur now. Like, no, it was always intended as an insult based on medical language. It was always going to become a slur.

Now people are using the word female to both alienate and other women in their language and to “sound smarter” when showing bigotry. Also, you were probably told to not say it because they knew you were better than the assholes who say it in a demeaning way. Maybe… think about that?

Cool definition. Still not a majority.

Define words however you want, that doesn’t make it true. A majority is 50%+1. Anything less is a plurality. More people voted for someone other than Trump than those who voted for him.

Beside the point, the original claim was a majority of Americans, and that isn’t even close to a majority anyways. Even with your funny definitions.

49.9% isn’t a majority. It’s a plurality.

Not even a majority of voters, let alone a majority of Americans. Just about 30% of adults in the US voted for trump. We still outnumber them.

Spoiler: it’s a quid pro quo, like they’ve been telling anyone willing to listen.

… lemmy has misinformation, just like everywhere else. Especially saw it in the lead up to the US Elections

Most people already have and filling would only get them their refunds. Unless you mean 2025 taxes

“Sneezing isn’t normal”

It’s established what happens should a state decide to secede. There was a war fought over it. It’s not worth speculating about unless it’s happening.

AI slop should be labeled as such

Jokes on you, I liked this

The point is to cause confusion and potential harm. Yep yep yep

There is evidence that it shortens attention spans. Can’t cause ADHD, however, because one of the diagnostic criteria is that it’s lifelong (must have symptoms present before age 12) and it’s something inherent to who you are.

Also, entirely a special interest rant here, but ADD is no longer the term. ADHD is the term for the disorder and those who were diagnosed with ADD before now are considered ADHD Inattentive Type. Reason for the change is we don’t typically differentiate diagnoses based on symptom presentation. You don’t get the flu or the chilly flu, you just get the flu with chills as a symptom.