I literally ripped up a giant amount of my lawn to put in a shitty but sizable wildflower garden. Also ripped up almost the entire perimeter and put in an unreasonable amount of lilies to surround my property.

All because when I moved in, I saw people just casually cutting through my yard.

I equate it to trying to hold a rational, reasonable conversation with a guy screaming on a street corner: not going to happen.

Walk on by and go about your day.

Thank you! Seems this tragedy could absolutely have been avoided. The guy didn't want to have to run it through inspections! Vile.

Could you please explain this or point me to a source on this?

I heard that this game is actually pretty good.

If I can't see it right in front of me, right now, it doesn't exist! That's just science!

Personally, I don't think you have to try to get along with someone who wants to cause harm to or supress the rights of certain people that they don't like/agree with .

It's wrong, and it makes me sick.

Had to cut off a dear friend of mine recently for just that reason, and we'd been friend for nearly 20 years. I don't have to tolerate hate or intolerance in order to "get along" with people.

This particular group/instance seems to be in support of "equity", not "equality".

If that is an issue for you, there are many many many other places better suited for your needs & wants.

There's not a single person here who cannot infer from the context that the term "minorities" used in this instance in referring to "historically oppressed racial minorities". You also know this. This is semantics, at this point.

But I'll bite: in your opinion, what term/word should be used instead of "minorities"?

The problem with people who have this mindset is that they've simply dehumanized people who struggle.

Poor people? Political agenda. LGBTQ? Political agenda. Minorities? Political agenda.

They refuse to think about ways these people can be helped or why these people are in these positions in the first place.

It bothers them because it is not a problem they have to deal with, so when it pops up, they get annoyed because "I've never seen/experienced this happening in my own life, so it's either A). wildly exaggerated or B). it doesn't actually exist."

They're not thinking about the people who face these issues on a constant basis: they're thinking about "the issue" removed from who it is affecting. Thus: it's political. So of course they hate when it's brought up. It's meaninglessness to them! You're just trying to "stir the pot" if you mention it.

Nope nope sorry sorry! I just woke up and misread your comment as disagreeing with the sentiment, but I just reread it and realize that you were in agreement. I was just trying to explain my view further.

Sorry!! Lol I'll try to post less when I'm still tired!!

Hopefully this is not inappropriate, but regarding the "this platform was made by tankies"–argument:

It's different with subs focused on addiction & recovery though.

Maybe it's a very bad idea to targeted knife ads in a suicide watch sub, you know? Susceptible people and all.

Is existing as a minority inherently part of a political agenda now?

Is making sure that minorities that are often targeted or made to feel unsafe have a place where they aren't made to feel that way also a political agenda now?

Come on now.

Not only that, but tons of advancements in female healthcare in the US was made because doctors often experimented on black female slaves with the permission of their owners. Obviously, these women did not consent, and you can surmise how horrifying this is.

You can enjoy the benefits of more advanced healthcare for women in many areas now because of the results of these without being complicit in these histories or endorsing the way they came about.

The knowledge and tools we now have can be used to make things better and use them to further good causes, despite their orgins. That does not put blood on your hands.

More herps! More herps! 💙

Oh nooooo, how terrible!

Yeah, my posts & replies keep giving me a longer wait time. I grew up on dial-up internet, though, so it doesn't bother me too much.

I figured that the lag was because of the migration.

I appreciate your thoughtfulness.

Do note, though, that there are aces who don't mind sexual discussions or comments. The only connecting factor between the label is that we do not experience sexual attraction, nor do we desire to have sex.

Some aces break it down further into preferences when it comes to sexual discussion: sex-neutral, sex-averse, and sex-repulsed. Sex-positive is there, too, as some aces have no issues discussing it, but that often gives the impression/misinterpretation that there are aces who desire sex, which is obviously an oxymoron.

Lastly, the asexual community is actually very very very small. Like, ridiculously so. The chances of you running across an ace-identifying person is a fraction of a percent, so don't worry too much about tiptoeing to cater to our subsect (although I very much appreciate the sentiment)!