• 0 Posts
  • 37 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 9th, 2023

help-circle

  • A friend of mine lived with an electrolysis tech for a while, and she got basically all her legs done for free over the course of multiple years. I experienced it a few times — I imagine the pain is similar to how a tattoo would hurt.

    For me, the cost was by far, the most expensive part. Sucks to be ginger




  • The article has a quote that I really like from Candice Breitz is a Jewish artist living in Berlin, who had an exhibition cancelled last November:

    “The Bundestag now delegitimizes Jewish points of view that do not align with the ideology of Israel’s far-right government, thus further exacerbating tensions between Zionist and non-Zionist Jews, while underplaying the real and ominous threats that Jewish people face.”

    - Candice Breitz
    

    That bit about exacerbating tensions between Zionist and non-Zionist Jews especially sticks out to me, as someone who has Jewish friends who have been active in pro-Palestine organising. Many of them have described a concerning uptick in antisemitism, but under this resolution, they, as anti-Zionist protesters, would be considered to be antisemitic. Equating anti-Zionism with antisemitism makes Jewish people across the world less safe.





  • I don’t know how much the UK collectively regrets Brexit yet. I come from a heavily Leave voting area and it was depressing as hell being a part of the vote count. Leave, Leave, Leave, Remain, Leave, Leave, Remain. Now in the most recent election, Farage’s Reform party got a concerningly high vote share, especially in areas like where I come from.

    I was glad to see the Tories go, but I can’t be too happy about the UK election when I consider Reform. I think back to how UKIP were like at local government level. They’d campaign on absurd promises like “we’ll slash council tax and increase public services funding. Lots of things are possible if we get rid of those fat-cat Labour councillors”. Then they’d get enough councillors that they could cause real harm to their constituents by obstructing progress; it helped their cause to make the Labour majority council look bad. They could promise the world because they knew that they were never going to get enough councillors to change much, so they could blame their utter failure to do anything useful once elected on Labour (in my area at least. Apparently the same playbook works in Conservative majority areas too)

    Brexit was unambiguously a political disaster. Many of the people who voted Leave have been actively harmed and I can’t even feel any schadenfreude at them because they haven’t connected the dots there. Like, I see people having their faces eaten off by the leopards they voted for, and they’re going “this is really hurting. See, this is why we needed the leopards eating faces party”. It’s honestly heartbreaking to witness.






  • I know I’m just one person, but your experiences are important and imo, necessary for women’s liberation (and human liberation more generally). I’m not going to say “you should share your experiences” because I get how exhausting it is to be challenged on basic shit all the time and that means commenting can be akin to self harm if overdone. I guess I’m just trying to expand that 1% of non-assholes into a larger percentage.

    I say this as a cis woman whose feminism has gotten a hell of a lot more intersectional in recent years, in part due to trans friends. Knowing trans women in particular has helped me to feel more at home and happy in my own gender (femininity and its relationship with womanhood is complicated). Having lived as a guy for a chunk of your life no doubt means that your lived experience (especially with respect to gender) is messy and complex, but that’s great, because the world is messy and complex. At least, it would be great, if more people were open to listening to you when you share. I’m sorry that you have to do the cost:benefit analysis before commenting — that part is something I can relate to.





  • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.nettoComic Strips@lemmy.worldMake it about me
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    I agree that it’s not quite the same, and I’m finding it real interesting to ponder how that happens.

    This comic and this comment section have been pretty thought provoking. (Heads up, this is overly abstract speculation from here): For example, here’s a mathsy diagram This is a commutative diagram, and I’m not at the level of being able to explain it properly, but part of it is the idea of equivalence, the fact that there’s two routes from A to D that are equivalent.

    I’m thinking about this sort of analogous to what we’re seeing in the comic and these comments. Like, the base experiences we’re talking about (being spoken over when you’re trying to share your experiences, for example) are fundamentally shared experiences, but the manner of experiencing them is different, because it’s coloured by our own positionality (of which gender is a big part of). I think sometimes though, it’s like discussions don’t work because we get separated — some of us at B, and some at C. Like, it does matter that our experiences are different, but also, there’s a sense in which it doesn’t, because we need to head to the same place anyway.

    I don’t know what converging on D would be in this analogy. Solidarity perhaps? Which would, I suppose, involve recognising that the route you’re on is different to the route other people are on, and that it’s possible to be heading to the same place. I’m not sure, this is quite abstract, but you said the word “meta” and that seemed to catalyse this thought, so here’s this comment. You’re welcome/my apologies


  • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.nettoComic Strips@lemmy.worldMake it about me
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    I’m sorry, but this comic doesn’t help.

    I don’t think it necessarily has to? Like, I agree with pretty much everything in your comment, aside from this part and what it implies. I read this comment as an expression of frustration from the artist, and it’s certainly one that I can relate to. I also realise that there’s a heckton of men who’ll relate too, because of how men who want to carve out space to talk about men’s issues can be cut off, even if they’re not the same men as the assholes who only want to talk about men’s issues when they’re speaking over a woman. However, I think that saying “both sides” to this misses the point of the comic

    It can be useful to ground statements in our own personal perspectives because of how it limits the scope of what we’re saying. A smaller, messier example is that I am autistic and have done both disability activism and autism activism in the past. I am autistic and because of that, I am also disabled, and so many of my experiences as an autistic person can also apply more generally to disabled people. However, generalising a statement can be difficult, especially if on a difficult topic, such as institutional ableism. I was able to speak confidently on how that affected me personally, and to a more limited degree, how it affects other autistic people, because of who I am in community with. However, I don’t directly know any deaf people, for example, and thus I am cautious when talking about my experiences as a disabled person, lest I over-generalise. I get a similar sense from the comic’s use of “as a woman”. Grounding stuff in that way is often an attempt to limit the scope of the discussion to something more manageable when grappling with something hard to articulate.

    I also do think it’s useful to recognise the difference in experience. As a silly example, I might say “as a woman, I need to breathe air in order to survive”. I could also say “as a human, I need to breathe air in order to survive”. I could also say “as an animal, I need to breathe air in order to survive”, but actually, I’d need to go and double check the facts on that last one. That’s sort of my point — sometimes statements are overly specific and should be simplified, like in the “as a [woman/human]” statements. However, limiting the scope (like in the “as a human” statement compared to the “as an animal” one) actually gives space for the possibility that some weird animals don’t need to breathe.

    Apologies if I have explained this poorly. I don’t mean to come off as lecturing or argumentative; I am replying to your comment because I appreciate your points and I am open to discussion.