“People started seeing Bluesky as something to run to, away from Twitter,” Dorsey said
This quote in context with all the rest of his statement makes it clear he didn’t understand what people were running from. Unless he intended it to be like Truth Social and thought folks were running towards that.
So if a worker somewhere breaks something, every single employee should be held responsible for that?
I’ll say the same thing as Flying Squid with different words: How many times have you seen a cop in any discussion, offline (edit: online) or in person, be pissed off about a shitty cop? If your answer is anything more than “almost never” I’m going to be fairly skeptical.
Police have made it clear that they will do whatever they want, and fuck what we think, even when there is clear video evidence.
You have a group of folks with immense authority, a criminal justice system that elevates their word and testimony above that of others, and a literal license to kill, which seems not to be made up of particularly compassionate people, or many who can think much beyond “hit it, tase it, or shoot it until it does what I want.” And who trains them in and reinforces this behavior? The other police they work with.
Why wouldn’t they keep doing what they do when they have this scam in place: Taxpayers pay police budget --> police fuck people up --> Taxpayers pay the inevitable settlement which includes a gag order for victims and no admission of wrongdoing --> Police have no incentive to change their behavior, so don’t --> Taxpayers pay police budget…
Where’s the incentive to change policies and procedures? They’ve shown public trust and opinion isn’t something they value, so what’s left?
Nothing against Fedora, but generally I’d steer a noobie to mint or popos before Fedora. It has been some time since I tried Fedora (years) but not very long since I’ve seen someone complaining about dependency/repo issues (which is where I always ran into problems with Fedora eventually)
Having said that, folks who don’t run Arch tend to say it breaks far more often than it actually does, so my opinion on Fedora may be just as uninformed. (I don’t run Arch BTW, but I do run a derivative.)
How about if people who want to create safe spaces just create the safe spaces they want to create, and we try to respect their need instead of making sure they’ve covered every corner case an uninvolved third party can imagine?
I’m pretty sure that if there is a large enough community of people abused by mascots in a given locality, someone will create a safe space for those people. The presence of a “safe space for female rape survivors” doesn’t preclude someone who wants to from creating that, nor a safe space for male rape survivors.
Thinking about how to make women feel safer in for example gyms seems like a better long term solution for absolutely everyone, but also doesn’t feel like it’s talked about a lot.
That’s because it ends up being the bear meme discussion in microcosm. (At least every time I’ve seen it come up.)
Context - cisgendered man here, FWIW.
Every time I’ve seen any discussion of helping women to feel safer in any context, that discussion is full of men who are offended that women even feel the need to be safer, because they tend not to believe that sexual harassment is as common for women as every woman in my life has repeatedly told me it is. So the conversation becomes about the women being “oversensitive” (or similar euphamism/synonym), not about making the discussed environment safer.
I can’t fathom why I’d give a shit about not being able to go work out a particular gym because women wanted a place to feel safe, unless it was literally the only gym within 50 miles. (And I’m doubtful that’s a common scenario.)
You would likely be screaming about the sexism from the top of your lungs if a business refused to take women as customers, or charged women more for the same thing, or any of that sort of thing.
There’s a bar right down the street. Ah, excuse me, “private club” where this very thing is true. My reaction? shrug My wife’s reaction? shrug
If we want to keep segregated spaces for things like this, fine, but there has to be some equality of access. If not with your specific group, then having a network with other groups, for instance. This is a huge, complicated topic with a lot of possibilities and nuance, and is a bit past the point of this post.
Why? Let’s pretend I’ve got fuck you money, and I’ve had some close personal experiences with family members or friends suffering through sexual abuse or rape. All those friends are women.
If I create a shelter for women who need to be safe from sexual abuse and predators and away from all likely triggers while they recover (or, say, a crazy museum for the same purpose) - what exactly obligates me to any of that? I’m taking my money and building a women’s shelter, because that’s the group I’ve got a personal connection with, and the group I want to help. Elon Musk can build a men’s shelter if he wants.
I’m not asking about laws, I’m asking about ethics. Why am I obligated to help EVERY group because I’ve chosen to help ONE group?
So we complain about people trying to shelter women under the current “complicated situation” because we’re afraid that a racist might take advantage if we allow it to happen? How about we let folks trying to make things better for women do their thing, and we cross that road when we come to it with the racists?
I think there is a fairly reasonable distinction that could be made (but which I’m far too weary after this rough day to try wordsmithing) between those two scenarios such that it should not be difficult to write the related laws in a way that handles both circumstances appropriately.
Otherwise, we’re deciding not to let people who need them have safe spaces because assholes might take advantage of our permissiveness. I’m not OK with that.
I also think there are already MANY defacto white-only places even today.
Here’s my problem with that (reasonable) viewpoint.
I think there is a fairly reasonable distinction that could be made between those two scenarios such that it should not be difficult to write the related laws in a way that handles both circumstances appropriately. You can phrase it as “the discrimination we like vs the discrimination we don’t like” but I think that’s overly reductive.
No one using this example (and there are a few) finds it hard to see the difference between a safe space for women and a club for bigots. If we can perceive that distinction, we can describe it with words, and we can legislate accordingly.
Otherwise, we’re deciding not to let people who need them have safe spaces because assholes might take advantage of our permissiveness. I’m not OK with that.
The short version is that I think safe places for people who have a reason to need them should be encouraged not discouraged. Focusing on equating that to scenarios where people are just being bigots feels fairly disingenuous to me.
I guarantee you that the folks who make the sorts of argument you and others are making here are broadly folks who live in an environment that is and has always been architected in a way that is generally safe and supportive for folks just like them and possibly not so much for folks who aren’t.
Edit:
Thinking about how to make women feel safer in for example gyms seems like a better long term solution for absolutely everyone, but also doesn’t feel like it’s talked about a lot.
That’s because it ends up being the bear meme discussion in microcosm. (At least every time I’ve seen it come up.)
I would also suggest that in your rush to imply I’m a hypocrite you don’t ignore the opening statement to the comment you replied to.
What I said always happens is what we are doing here. So if you have some constructive ideas on how to help women who need it to feel safer in particular spaces (like the gym for example) that works better than letting them open their own damn gym I’d love to hear them.
The real problem is that gyms don’t pay enough to hire enough good employees. Most people who work at a gym are there because they have free access to the gym. Gym owners are cheap, mainly because gym-goers are cheap.
I can’t solve that problem. But me and a few like minded people might be able to pool our resources and open a gym for women only, where they can feel safe.
Are folks going to show up here to scold us all for thinking he’ll never see consequences like in every other discussion of a similar headline, or are we starting to move past that point?
Donald Trump and the judge presiding over his hush money trial are staring each other down with profound implications for the former president, the coming election and the rule of law in the United States....
I’m angry that facing the actual consequences is likely to make him more popular with his base.
This does anger me. But what angers me more is the feeling that a significant factor in this kid gloves treatment is fear of how his supporters will react. It’s literally handing power to fascist regressives.
Must have been a whistle blower... (lemmy.world)
Never Forget (mander.xyz)
Jack Dorsey claims Bluesky is 'repeating all the mistakes' he made at Twitter (www.engadget.com)
Does not make me sad he’s gone, tbh.
superfile - A pretty fancy and modern terminal file manager (raw.githubusercontent.com)
github.com/MHNightCat/superfile
A teen said a deputy threatened him as he filmed his mom's arrest. A jury awarded him $185,000. (apnews.com)
Chicago Man is ungovernable (lemmy.world)
Addiction is a scary thing (lemmy.world)
Windows is hell, i need to do something
Yo linux team, i would love some advice....
Women-only museum becomes a toilet to keep men out (www.bbc.com)
Australia’s Mona asked a court to reverse its ruling that allowed men inside a women’s only space....
Federal judge indefinitely postpones Trump classified documents trial (www.cnn.com)
Judge’s warning provides dilemma for Trump over whether he will risk jail for a political point (www.cnn.com)
Donald Trump and the judge presiding over his hush money trial are staring each other down with profound implications for the former president, the coming election and the rule of law in the United States....
Temperatur (sh.itjust.works)