[–] -2 points 10 hours ago

Ok, I'll bite.

in what world is a comment making a joke about how this sweater would make a good gift for someone who's nursing objectification/sexist/misogynistic...?

I never said making a joke like that is any of those things. In fact, I explicitly said I didn't think they had malicious intent. I said I'm sick of reading people talk about women's bodies. I said it adds to an undercurrent of those things. If there was no underlying misogyny maybe it wouldn't be so bothersome to see talk about random women's bodies, but we are where we are. If you're going to bother commenting instead of just downvoting and moving on, please at least read my comment.

Getting a friend a nursing bra is a normal thing to do

Maybe we live in very different places, but this is not in my experience a normal thing to do. Maybe a gift card to a store that sells them, but generally most people don't know their friends maternity bra size, and even if they did, all manufacturers are slightly different regarding size and comfort and people would have to know the exact fit and clasp style they would want. I don't know you. Maybe you are surrounded by a bunch of pregnant women and have bought them all nursing bras, but this does not seem like a statement someone familiar with women, pregnant women, or bras in general would make.

You don't know OP nor their relationship with their coworkers.

You're right, I don't know their relationship, but I wasn't commenting on it here. I said that reading about someone doing that to a coworker is gross to me. It's maybe not gross to you, or their coworker, but I did not say anything about how their particular coworker would feel about it here. Again, please read the comment you're responding to.

downvoted into oblivion on probably the most progressive online community I've ever participated in

That says more about you and less about me than you're implying. A meme community on a site that's 80% men, sure sounds like a bastion of progressivism to me. Please see this fun comment chain from right here in this safe space of peace and love where someone just responds to me with sexual harassment, admits to knowing it was sexual harassment and then just doubles down only to have their comments upvoted: https://lemmy.world/comment/26712143

I legitimately do not care about about upvotes or downvotes, but if I were to, I would note that I do have a few upvotes but not one comment in agreement. Geez, I wonder why no one would want to comment. Would it be because publicly stating these opinions gets you publicly and privately harassed? Would it be because it's safer to stay silent?

The weirdest thing to me is that there is a button conveniently located right next to my username that people could use as a disagree button, but plenty have instead decided to spend their time writing comments that don't even attempt to address my point and just have been rude or hateful.

Based on most of the comments and messages, I'm guessing that the majority of people responding are men. I'm guessing, and sincerely hoping, that it's mostly young men. I shared my opinion as a woman that seeing people talk about women's bodies online has been othering. No one wanted to engage with that, much less hear it, and that's their and your prerogative, but I commented it because I felt someone should say something. Every response I have received has basically solidified that sentiment. People need to speak up because if not then you end up at a place where "progressives" see explicit sexual harassment as a fun retort to a woman expressing an opinion they don't like online. A somewhat low stakes opinion too, if I may add. I don't think I'm the first person to suggest not to make comments about other people's appearance, and it's not like I suggested slaughtering puppies. I just said I don't like when X and a lot of people seem to have taken that quite personally. To the extent they needed to comment "defending" their right to do that. I just wanted to shed some insight into my perspective. If you disagree or aren't interested in it, that's fine. You can downvote or block or send hate. Do what you need to do. I just hope I got at least one person to do some self reflection, even if their takeaway really was that I'm "off base."

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    You understand that your comment is just sexual harassment, right? If you disagree with my opinion that's fine, but you're just doing sexual harassment about it.

    This is exactly the kind of thing that makes women feel unsafe or uncomfortable online. You're literally proving my point. You don't have to care about that, but I hope you legitimately think about what you're saying and if you would feel comfortable saying that to a human being standing in front of you whose only offense is that they expressed an opinion you disagree with.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [+] -7 points 1 day ago (5 children)

    Plenty of things were once considered funny jokes that we now recognize as harmful. Your personal opinion on the humor of their comment is not an actual response to my critique. You don't need to to do any introspection on my account, but if your reaction to someone saying something is harmful is to defend it by calling it a joke then I would hope you do some introspection on your own account. You don't have to agree with me, but you're not really providing a considered response.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [+] -9 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Can you explain what specifically is making you suggest this?

    Someone made a comment about their postpartum coworker. I expressed my personal position that we should not be talking about other people's bodies and that there is an undercurrent of sexism online. I never suggested they were personally sexist.

    Are you suggesting that there is no undercurrent of sexism online? Are you stating you support talking about random women's bodies to strangers?

    So many women talk about how the internet and Lemmy specifically are hostile to them. I knew when I posted that it would not be the majority sentiment, and I expected downvotes. I'm surprised that people are openly attaching their username to comments suggesting that the act of expressing my opinion is the problem.

    It really feels like your suggestion boils down to "I'm not made uncomfortable by this so you should leave because your opinion doesn't belong here".

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [+] -72 points 1 day ago (16 children)

    I get that this is an attempt at a joke, and I'm sure "it's not that serious", but I swear I'm so sick of reading people talk about women's bodies, especially pregnant women's bodies. I feel like there was really no need for your comment, as it's basically just the OP observation, and it really just adds to an undercurrent of sexism/misogyny/objectification I'm seeing online. I doubt that was your intent, and I'm not sure if you personally care, but I just thought I'd mention in case it has any chance of changing the way you or someone else decides to talk about others.

    If you want to talk about your own chest or what you do with it, feel free to, but talking about the chest of a work colleague in this context just comes off as gross to me, especially because it's relating to them being postpartum.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 11 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Though I understand the underlying sentiment, and I recognize that politics isn't a once every two years thing, I disagree that it should somehow be on us on.

    I would love an engaged electorate, but realistically people campaigned on a specific platform. We pay them to read the bills and ideally vote in accordance with what they said their values are. It's completely unrealistic to push that back on the constituents. Often even congresspeople don't have time to read an entire bill before they vote on it. Do I understand all the intricacies of every omnibus bill? No. I give them my hard earned money so they have the time and staff to. If I have to be on the phone all the time reminding them that they promised no more wars just so they remember to stop Trump from bombing Iran then they have failed to do their job.

    Does that mean we shouldn't call and express our opinions? No, of course not. But the entire point of having representatives in a representative democracy is so that your average person doesn't have to sit down and understand the ins and outs of every policy. It's really not their job to, and especially in America it's unrealistic to act like people will. Party leadership should be the ones capable of looking around, seeing the direction the wind is blowing, and coming up with a unified vision that addresses the issues of the people that voted for the party.

    Also, however much I support contacting your congressperson, and have done so often myself, I've never once had it have any affect whatsoever. I still do it, but that's not a reliable way to get policies you want to happen. The only real reliable way is to vote in someone who was going to champion that anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 34 points 1 day ago (7 children)

    If they mess up coming out of this midterm win, I will be astounded if they are able to take the presidency. Dems will never have another chance like this to really demonstrate a new vision. I hope they don't fumble it.

  • source
  • I'm not glossing over anything. Her plan should not have to include acquiescing to a random company's perceived morality concerns, which they regularly break for the right people. If she does not want to do nudity or hypersexualization that is her prerogative, but the only factor in that decision should be her personal desire to do so.

    A lot of medical residents in the US work 80 hour shifts in pursuit of their goals. I would never say "good for them, more people should do that". I would definitely say that no one should have to be in that position to achieve their goals and we should do more as a society to prevent that from being acceptable. Not everything done in pursuit of noble or value neutral goals is good or should be emulated.

    Women should be allowed to be both sexual and a princess. Maintaining the idea that they can't perpetuates the Madonna Whore complex which is counter to women's liberation. I'm not saying she's perpetuating that, but Disney certainly is if that's actually a concern actresses should have.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    This show was recommended to me recently and though I've not been obsessed with it, it's been watchable. Just got to episode 3 and long story short they run an MMO company and it's come to their attention that there are a bunch of nazis who play their game. The episode culminated in them making a private server just for the nazis. This is a widely agreed upon solution and it does not seem solely motivated by "evil money man". I thought maybe I had missed some nuance so I looked it up and there's an article (linked below) where the writers of the show seemingly pat themselves on the back for coming up with such a fair and balanced solution.

    Am I missing something here? Have I gone too woke? The community is still filled with nazis who will likely still be engaging in online and offline activities related to the game. You as a company have seemingly no desire to distance yourself from that kind of community? The issue with nazis is not just that they're mean to people in your video game and giving them their own private Nazi clubhouse does not seem like the solution. There's that popular story about how a bar will slowly become a Nazi bar and I just don't know why that's not a concern for the writers of the show or the team in universe. This is not an always sunny type show where the people are supposed to be bad or incompetent and the whole episode rubbed me the wrong way. Has anyone seen the show? When I looked at other discussions online people were actively saying this was their favorite episode?

    Article with the commentary: https://decider.com/2020/02/12/mythic-quest-dinner-party/

    McElhenney joked that he thinks his server-banning plan may be able to work in real life. “You know what? That’s what we gotta do. Let’s get Zuckerberg on the phone!”

     

    Has anyone seen this?

    I'm a fan of period pieces, and can tolerate some Netflix slop, but my goodness is the writing bad. I'm not familiar with the original book, so maybe it's a feature of that, but the main character insists she's headstrong not fierce, then takes issue with being called stubborn all within a couple minutes of runtime. She brings a whole bag of books to her grandmothers and is excited about the library, but when there's quiet time in the evening doesn't bother to even have a book in hand? I'm not sure if it's supposed to be funny because she's young and still figuring herself out, but it just seems like the script was written piecemeal by some weird write one line then pass it along rules. The only consistent thing seems to be that that the characters are all obnoxious. People speak in exposition with no intentionality. Not to mention the terrible music choices. It seems like a very visually appealing show, I just cannot get past the first episode. Does it get any better?

     

    Video link: https://youtu.be/W0x7bMbOavU

    For context, Ashley is one of the women who had a baby with Elon and who wrote an anti-trans children's book. I'm not a religious watcher, but I'll occasionally watch one of Taylor's videos. This one had me on the fence for the first 20 minutes, but the latter half made me a bit more accepting of a possible change in Ashley. I don't think the change was prompted by a desire within herself, and she clearly has a lot more work to do, but I'm open to see her change. I'm mostly seeing lip service in this interview and would have preferred a more "hard hitting" approach, but I don't think that's what Taylor really does. The comments seem pretty mixed on the interview and Ashley overall.

     

    I'm not really into flowers, so I'm looking for some advice. I have grocery store orchids from two years ago that are always in bloom. They have 3-7 flowers each basically nonstop. Unfortunately they have far outgrown the 17" stakes I put in their very small original pots and I don't know what my best option would be. I water them with two ice cubes once a week and I'm not looking to really increase the level of investment I'm putting in. I know I'm not doing a lot, but I've not had to feed them or mist them or any of the other things I keep reading online and I'd like to not have to worry about that. My main issue is that they are getting way too tall. I read that you can cut the stems, but I'm worried that any cutting will prompt additional flowering and maybe a need for more water or food or something that I likely won't be able to recognize causing them to die. I also keep seeing people talk about pots with holes and special airable soil, but they are in little plastic cups and I can lift them straight up and the soil is basically a solid almost styrofoam-like consistency so I'm not sure I believe what I'm reading. Any advice or suggestions to preserve the low maintenance aspect while trimming and possibly repotting would be greatly appreciated. I looked online and this post is my exact same experience to a T: https://www.reddit.com/r/orchids/comments/1igq42f/my_orchid_is_over_3_feet_tall_and_not_sure_what/

    Most comments there say to cut the spikes so it focuses on leaves and roots, but I really don't think they have enough space for more leaves or roots, and I'm worried that repotting will ruin whatever my streak is with keeping them alive on just ice cubes since that seems uncommon. I've never kept a flowering plant alive for this long, despite a thriving vegetable and herb garden, so I'm a bit attached. If I cut just the ends of the spikes will it still flower? Should I cut the whole spike and just hope it doesn't get too big for the pot? Is repotting really as care intensive as the comments suggest?

    view more: next ›