“War on Terror” sounded pretty righteous too. I’m glad you noted you haven’t read much on Iran. Please do at least catch up on the last 50 years or so. It’s a fascinating tale involving western meddling, a dynamic and multifaceted people/culture, and a genuinely oppressive regime that funds many regional militant groups.

So… is it that you think the US was born male or that anyone with tiddies is trans?

Yes, people forget Canada can still diplomatically oppose the war and push for internationally backed de-escalation without condoning the Iranian regime.

While I feel a lot of contempt and opposition to US imperialism, they’ve pulled the trigger and there’s no going back to how things were. Between expanding Iran-backed militias, international sanctions, and the conflicting goals on nuclear weapons, the status quo before the war was also becoming less tenable long term. And now there’s the question of how to stop this war without leaving a wounded and even more dangerous regime unchecked.

Men set the craziest standards for other men, no wonder men’s mental health is in decline. Who tf can realistically achieve that look, those arms, that jaw. It’s giving me a crisis of masculinity just looking at it.

Sure, that happens and the two aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s kinda like the difference between a close family member shitting on your bed and some random tourist flying halfway around the world only to shit on your bed–it hits different.

Welcome participation in your culture is not appropriation. Appropriation happens when a tradition is taken and decontextualized from its original culture, adopted by mainstream culture, and changed to mean something else without buy-in from the originating culture.

You know your culture has been appropriated when some rando who isn’t even part of your culture explains to you how you’re wrong about your tradition because it doesn’t look like their mainstream version. For example, explaining to an Indian person that yoga is a physical exercise program where you continuously shift between isometric stretches.

Yes, the supreme leader of Iran stated he was opposed to developing nuclear weapons in 2003. The supreme leader then did not proceed to authorize two decades of an Iranian nuclear weapons program, a nuclear weapons program the West has not been negotiating about with Iran under his supreme leadership, a nuclear weapons program which was not bombed out last year, because of course it didn’t exist. /Sarcasm

It’s sad only because the tone is dismissive/condescending. Otherwise it’s just describing someone who figured out how their gf likes to receive affection. My head canon says they’ve only been dating for a couple months and they’ve had their dog for years.

People who cannot discern context or degrees of wrong are no better than ICE agents. Love you

You bet there were. There were many that also just said shot/shooting. Many non-US western outlets are using killed/killing in the headline. US outlets use a mixture of language even within the same outlet, or won’t have it in the outline but will have it in the text. Here’s a title from CBS https://youtu.be/HSKaceREFlQ

I’m not saying there isn’t an overall bias towards distancing law enforcement from killings from words that carry negative connotations–there is. I was adding context to how “murder” is used in media and now I’m suggesting that some major outlets see what’s going on and are calling it what it is directly within the bounds of good journalism.

We say murder and it’s understood as people talking about what happened. When a news outlet says murder it’s considered reporting a legal conviction. There are good reasons why these conventions exist. And it’s the same as why headlines weren’t saying Luigi Mangionr murdered Brian Thompson.

The how does matter. You can appreciate the removal of a despot and still oppose unilateral regime change by force–especially one so explicitly motivated by resource exploitation. This is very different from the UN-sanctioned and NATO-led intervention that deposed Gaddafi.

Would you describe China attacking North Korea or Cambodia or another SE Asian dictatorship to depose their leadership as “accidentally doing something right”?

What do you mean when you say “political”?

It’s not a strawman. Just because the proportions aren’t as extreme as you expected doesn’t mean it’s not an issue. Just because we’re talking about the gap here doesn’t dismiss the overall problem of isolation. There are many many threads talking about the problem of social isolation overall. Go engage in those threads that are addressing the problem you’re newly woke to and are holding so urgently now instead of bickering in here about who should be talking about what where.

That’s giving some all lives matter energy. We can talk about why everyone is so closed off in general, but this thread clearly focuses on a particular men’s issue under that umbrella issue. So no, we should talk about the topic, not hijack it for “a larger issue”.

I’m a thread about the wage gap between men and women (10-15%), you don’t say “We should be talking about why the economy is struggling instead”

In a thread about the incarceration gap between blacks and whites, you don’t say “We should be talking about why crime is up overall instead”

You make a great point about society needing to change, and a particular men’s issue doesn’t mean only men need to change, it actually does speak to how broader society considers what it is to be a man. How men decide that for themselves, are socialized by their environment into it, and how they’re treated by other genders. Just as women’s issues are human issues, men’s issues are human issues too.

I’m bracing myself for the Steam Frame to be around $700-800. The monochrome pass through might seem like a downgrade, but mixed reality is also not part of what valve wants to do with the headset, i.e. focus on VR. Everything else seems like they might be pricey upgrades, especially with the eye tracking and streaming tech. They also shifted manufacturing to the US due to tariffs.

That’s a historical text interpretation of the Bible, which is legit to me. However I’d say only a minority of practicing Christians regard it that way. With the rest, you have more fundamentalist views of the Bible as the literal word of God and the flexible view of it as metaogorical teachings inspired by God. Therefore these views treat the Bible specifically as authoritative, timeless, and divine, elevating it above a mere human document and transcendent of historical context. Timothy 3:17 seems to reflect the common idea that “the Bible is the only book you need”.

I do agree that one can make a historical argument for an interpretation of scripture, and maybe even do so in a way that reifies one’s personal relationship with God. However it doesn’t engage with the Bible the way most Christians do and therefore is not likely to be all that persuasive.

Exactly. People need to take in the full context. Here is the full chapter, with the quote in the final paragraph, which… Makes the quote even worse?

Instructions on Worship

2 I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time. 7 And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a true and faithful teacher of the Gentiles.

8 Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing. 9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.

11 A woman[a] should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[b] she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women[c] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Are trying to say Timothy 2:12 is old testament?