Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)U

unknownuserunknownlocation

@ unknownuserunknownlocation @kbin.earth

Posts
7
Comments
510
Joined
9 mo. ago

  • They would still be bitching and bickering about it.

  • Of all the extra fees, parking fees seem like some of the most sensible...

  • Quite the statement of those men to stand in front of that as if that just wasn't written there. Almost like saying "your message is so shitty that it doesn't even deserve my attention".

  • do women statistically commit as many violent and/or sexual crimes? no. but some still do

    Even that assumption I've started questioning. My abuser never appears in any crime statistics, because it's not particularly easy to prosecute a case that is mostly based on psychological torture, since the crimes are hard to prove, easily dismissed as "just a bit of nasty behavior" and have relatively short times within which they have to be reported in order to be prosecuted, depending on the country you're living in. If on top of that you're a man and the abuser is a woman, have fun getting anyone in charge to legitimately believe your story. It doesn't diminish the violence that occurred, I just barely survived it.

    Certain kinds of abuse are vastly underreported. Domestic, psychological and sexual violence (which are not exclusive categories, by the way) belong to these kinds of abuses. Some statistics say northwards of 40% of domestic abuse victims are men, for instance. Well at that point, we're kind of close to parity.

    So let's focus on reducing violence entirely. Because another thing I've learned: while the individual elements of abuse tend to differ between men and women, the patterns are almost always very similar.

  • OK. I was abused by a woman. And know of many cases of abusive women (men too, but we've already decided in this context that all men are dangerous, so that's beside the point). So this means all women are dangerous, too?

  • Honestly... That sounds more like a case for therapy. I mean, if you're asexual or something similar, fine, but otherwise, it really seems like you have some mental connections that are holding you back when it comes to dating.

  • It isn't quite as simple as that. Take Germany, as an example. After WW2 there was the whole denazification process. Just about everyone knows about the Nuremberg trials, but the concept continued further into the era of the divided Germany. The Soviets in east Germany were much harsher in their densification process. One would think the result would be less problems with Nazism or fascist ideology in the former East. In fact, it's quite the opposite, Nazism and other fascist ideologies are much more alive and well in the former East than in the former West.

    (Not trying to defend Johnson, by the way, just trying to show that harsh punishments don't always get the results one would expect)

  • My thought as well. This has already existed for many decades.

  • This is essentially the key question that people in toxic situations are confronted with.

    Here's the thing: very often, in these toxic situations, the toxic person does everything to make that unfamiliar environment seem as scary as possible. Because in a toxic relationship (whether it be friendship, romantic or familial relationship) the toxic person does not want to lose their victim, since their victim is what they feed off of. So the scarier they make the unfamiliar situation seem (which can happen very, very indirectly or subtly as not to arouse suspicion), the more they can reduce the likelihood of their victim leaving.

    And yet, leaving is the best thing one can do in that situation. If you're starting to think, "hey, this sounds a little like an addiction" - you're right, there are many similarities. Which is to say, it is really, really difficult to muster up the courage to leave. And the best time to leave is always as soon as you can. You sound like you're in a state of mind where you have the mental strength to leave - do it before you lose that strength or even start believing that everything in your situation is normal (I've seen it happen, it's not good, and that's a massive understatement). Secretly gather up everything you need, things that are emotionally valuable to you, important documents, etc., and leave without any advance notice. Because they will try to prevent you from leaving - possibly by suddenly being much nicer and making you question whether it is that bad after all there.

    As to your plans after leaving, though - don't move in with him as such, as tempting as it may seem. I understand that you love him or at least have strong feelings for him and probably want to spend as much time as possible with him. The thing is, you've spent your entire life in this toxic situation. It will take time to recover. A long time. You will in all likelihood need therapy, even if you feel like you don't need it right now. And most of all: you will need to adapt to being independent. The better you can do that, the less likely it is you will land in another toxic situation. And an important part of that is having a place of your own. Crash at his place and use it to find an apartment or similar for yourself. As odd as it sounds, your relationship will be better for it (and if it isn't, then the question will have to be asked if that relationship is toxic as well, but I'm going to assume it's a healthy relationship). If, a number of years down the road, you move in together, that's perfectly fine. As long as you've built up the strength in the meantime to be your own, independent self. And if you can do that, you will be on the road to not only having a great relationship with this man, but most importantly building a much, much better life for yourself.

    And finally, if you end up going back to your parents for whatever reason or not pulling through with your plans - don't feel guilty or like you've failed. You have a monumental task ahead of you. It often doesn't work the first time. That's OK. Gather up the courage and go at it again. You'll get there eventually.

    I wish you the best of luck and most of all, all the courage you need to pull it through. I'm rooting for you!

  • Silica gel.

  • OK, I completely misread the post. I somehow read that the father yelled that...

  • Huh? It seems like "we got obliterated out there" would mean the same thing in that situation, not sure why that would tip the poster off as to what sodomize actually means.

  • Realistically, we would probably use it. Should we? Well, first of, the idea that there would be 0 risk is just unrealistic. Everything carries a certain risk, no matter how small. So the question is: how big is the risk, and what are the potential consequences. Problem is with nuclear, even if the risk is small, the potential consequences if something does go wrong is the problem here.

    But OK, let's say we managed to somehow magically get the risk to 0. Still no. It's a finite resource. It would just simply kick the can down the road. Only so much nuclear fuel will be available. We will probably start fighting wars over it again. Enough is enough. We're on a trajectory that, while it's still much slower than it should be, can bring us to a future where the vast majority of the energy we consume is renewable. Let's not fuck it up. Let's properly cure our addiction instead of using meth to get rid of our heroin addiction.

  • From Wikipedia itself:

    Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources, i.e., a document or recording that relates to or discusses information originally presented elsewhere.

    [...]

    Primary sources are often difficult to use appropriately. Although they can be both reliable and useful in certain situations, they must be used with caution in order to avoid original research. Although specific facts may be taken from primary sources, secondary sources that present the same material are preferred. Large blocks of material based purely on primary sources should be avoided. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.

    When editing articles in which the use of primary sources is a concern, in-line templates, such as {{primary source-inline}} and {{better source}}, or article templates, such as {{primary sources}} and {{refimprove science}}, may be used to mark areas of concern.

    In other words, if you don't have any secondary sources, primary sources are also OK, they should just be used with caution.

  • Oh Gott was ist denn da entstanden...

  • Ich war gerade erst vollkommen verwirrt weil ich dachte Höchsttapetesyndrom wäre Zangendeutsch und habe versucht herauszufinden, was es heißen soll

  • I know Gravitybox used to have one, but that project seems kind of dead, unfortunately, which is why I was looking for something else.

  • Meanwhile Germans are going: "wait, that's not the norm?"

  • Ich habe gerade keine Ahnung, worum es da geht 😂

  • Lemmy Shitpost @lemmy.world

    Yo dawg, I heard you like shit

  • Unpopular Opinion @lemmy.world

    I'm so sick and tired of people posting bad opinion columns and acting like it represents the paper it's printed in

  • YouTube Classics @sh.itjust.works

    Subtitles

  • No Stupid Questions @lemmy.world

    How do we prevent QR codes from containing swastikas or similar?

  • Mental Health @lemmy.world

    Is it possible that therapy can make things worse?

  • MeanwhileOnGrad @sh.itjust.works

    Tankie Bingo!

  • Unpopular Opinion @lemmy.world

    Nice guys often do finish last, and I'm tired of hearing the opposite