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/)TB
Todd Bonzalez @lemm.ee
Posts 7
Comments 832
'I was given a choice of bosses to sleep with': Life as a female paramedic in the UK
  • Male colleagues would even walk around the crew room with their penis sticking through the zip of their trousers and their pockets turned out. They'd swing it and sing Nelly The Elephant.

    Holy shit is there a word for when you recognize that something is completely and undeniably reprehensible, but also completely fucking hilarious if you remove the problematic context?

    Like, I would do this to my wife. Scratch that, I'm gonna do this to my wife and she's gonna think it's funny.

    But, obviously, don't do this to your co-workers, or really anyone that hasn't given you prior consent to swing your dick around...

  • Police in New York shoot and kill 13-year-old holding a pellet gun, authorities say
  • I was going to resist saying that you were racist, but it seems like you say the same racist thing every time a black child with a toy gets killed, so it's pretty obvious that you are a racist person.

    It's pretty easy to just not shoot children, especially when they haven't even shot at you. An adult with a gun is potentially just exercising their constitutional rights, so we can't just kill gun owners on sight. A child with a gun is vulnerable, we can't apply a stricter code to children than we do to adults!

    I don't care how realistic the gun looked, they certainly had no reason to think that they were being fired upon. They fired the first shot, because the gun the child has isn't even capable of firing a round or even simulating the sound of a real gun.

    If you support the "shoot first ask questions later" strategy for policing, you're a fucking fascist. If you are indifferent to children being slaughtered for playing with toys, you're a fucking monster.

  • If Clinton, Trump, and Did Not Vote were presidential candidates in 2016
  • How does anyone not see it and get what’s happening? I feel like you would have to have eaten ALL the crazy pills for this to make sense.

    I keep repeating this, and people don't like to hear it, but 75% of American Adults identify as religious, 68% as Christian.

    The majority of Americans are willing to discard logic, reason, and evidence in favor of believing in an imaginary man in the sky. These aren't usually simple spiritual belief systems either, these are complex religious, historical, and social belief systems the rely entirely on "faith" to believe - or to believe it because you were told to, not because there are any real-world reasons to give these beliefs validity. The beliefs that the majority of Americans believe in range from "demonstrably false" to "having no evidence", and yet people believe in these things with their whole hearts.

    With the most devout (read: immovably stubborn) Christians concentrated on the right, it is no surprise at all that the far-right is completely divorced from reality. Republicans treat their political views like they are a matter of faith already. They believe, despite the lack of any evidence of it, that Jesus Christ personally supports their party and their candidates.

    Now, inevitably someone will chime in here to say "but Todd, I believe in the almighty skydaddy, are you saying that I am stupid?". Yes, I certainly am. My point here is that the further disconnected from reality we get, the worse our decisions get, and if you believe that there is a supernatural entity watching you from the sky deciding whether or not to torture you with fire, you are disconncted from reality and I trust you less than I would someone that doesn't believe obviously fake shit.

  • If Clinton, Trump, and Did Not Vote were presidential candidates in 2016
  • We should count non-voting eligible voters like this, and if not voting wins in your state you don't get any delegates for the electoral college.

    Then just scrap the "first past the post" system and whoever gets the most delegates wins. In 2016 it would be Clinton with 51 vs. Trump's 16.

  • Donald Trump doubles down on plans to dodge next presidential debate
  • It's one thing to point out that Trump has these kinds of accusations against him, but keep that 13 year old rape victim's name out of your mouth. Why does she have to be a prop in your political game?

    We knew about this exact accusation back in 2016, but people just started caring about it in the past couple months.

    It speaks to you not giving a single shit about sexual assault victims, but really only caring that you have ammo against Trump. It's gross.

  • $45 Million *Per Month*, As One Does
  • There are 756 billionaires in the USA, 2,781 in the world.

    They are propped up on the efforts of tens of millions of immoral ultracapitalists all clamoring for a piece of the pie, willing to exploit the labor of billions of people to hoard as much global capital at the top of the chain as they can.

    Don't underestimate the evil of capitalism.

  • "Being LGBT is not a choice" is a counterproductive argument.

    I have noticed that a lot of LGBTQ+ advocates are strongly opposed to any insinuation that being queer is a choice, largely due to right-wing rhetoric from the 80's and 90's that homosexuality was a "lifestyle choice", an argument that aimed to establish queerness as a willful act that could be restricted and punished. I 100% disagree with this characterization of queerness, as one absolutely has no power to simply choose not to be queer. We cannot choose our attractions, we must be allowed to explore our desires and make the most of them. We have a fundamental right to pursue happiness.

    But that right is rooted in our ability to make choices. What else is freedom than the right to choose? Marriage rights include the right to marry the person of our choosing. Sexual freedom includes the right to have consensual sex with people of our choosing.

    Without choice, we don't have freedom.

    And yet today, even though we are mostly past the generic "harmful lifestyle" arguments of decades past, people will still reflexively reject any narrative that enshrines choice as a fundamental right as it relates to gender and sexuality.

    This prevents us from making some of the most universal and compelling pro-LGBT arguments we could make.

    Instead of letting the narrative that banning gay marriage only affects gay people, we can properly argue that banning gay marriage means that the government is taking away ~50% of your choices for marriage. It doesn't matter if you're gay or straight, the point should be that the government wants as say in who you choose to marry.

    Instead of letting the narrative be that banning being trans only affects trans people, we can properly argue that banning being trans means that the government is taking away your choice in how to dress or present yourself. It doesn't matter if you're trans or cis, the point should be that the government wants a say in how you dress, or what kind of makeup, if any, you're allowed to wear - or they want control over your healthcare choices.

    Bisexual and genderfluid people exist entirely on flexible choice, and despite the rhetoric that everyone is born with a lifelong sexuality, plenty of people have experienced changes in their sexuality over the course of their lives that strongly invalidates this notion that sexuality is static and inflexible. Sexuality exists on a spectrum and can be very fluid.

    Choice is fundamental to freedom, so it is a shame that when fighting for freedom for LGBTQ+ people, we often reject the importance of choice.

    EDIT: Thanks for the downvotes, message received. I wasn't aware that my opinion was so popular. I'll post something less popular next time.

    31

    He remains at large

    71
    Political Memes @lemmy.world Todd Bonzalez @lemm.ee

    Oh, you!

    More unserious memes plz.

    0

    Wikipedia has started allowing AI-generated videos to be added to articles.

    Discovered this today while browsing featured media on Wikipedia Commons.

    Today's video on Media Of The Day was a video about having sex in space. It is also pinned to the top of Wikipedia's Sex In Space article.

    It was amusing, but didn't include citations or appear otherwise credible. It was made using a service called "simpleshow foundation", which brands itself as "giving you the power to create simple and engaging videos with an easy-to-use, AI-powered video maker platform".

    So, yeah, more AI slop.

    8
    www.popsci.com Militarized Cybertruck cop cars are coming

    A California company is advertising ‘tactical response’ Tesla Cybertruck upgrades for police cruisers, including shotgun racks and sirens.

    Militarized Cybertruck cop cars are coming

    >A California company is advertising ‘tactical response’ Tesla Cybertruck upgrades for police cruisers, including shotgun racks and sirens.

    124
    www.theguardian.com ‘I’m the new Oppenheimer!’: my soul-destroying day at Palantir’s first-ever AI warfare conference

    America’s military-industrial complex took center stage at AI Expo for National Competitiveness, where a fire-breathing panel set the tone

    ‘I’m the new Oppenheimer!’: my soul-destroying day at Palantir’s first-ever AI warfare conference

    >“The peace activists are war activists,” co-founder and CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp insisted. “We are the peace activists.”

    WAR IS PEACE

    7