I noticed in Ireland (at least) the word "cunt" is used to describe an unpleasant/objectionable person in general (regardless of gender) whereas in the US it's a derogatory term for a woman.
Okay, but the Jews were already being regularly persecuted for actual millennia at that point, and this was in... the 1930s, with a very different geopolitical situation. On the other hand, I doubt GP has any real reason to fear imminent ethnic persecution. We can and should take our best guess as to the likelihood of catastrophic events into account in our cost/benefit analysis, surely?
Because they're not being deported for their Hispanicity. It's for their nationality, which happens to be highly correlated with ethnicity. Why else would US citizen Hispanics have voted in record numbers for the current President?
The admin is overplaying their hand with some shoddy tactics, and the more citizens they drag into the net, the more quickly they'll lose the popular opinion here.
> Why else would US citizen Hispanics have voted in record numbers for the current President?
Perhaps because they mistakenly thought he wouldn't do exactly what he said he would do, or that there would be checks & balances to make sure it wasn't too heavy-handed so they personally were not in danger. Now he is doing what he said he would do in that regard (even when accidentally saying the quiet bits out loud) many are somewhat surprised and concerned.
Oddly while not beleiving he would go all-in on the purge many did believe he would do what he said with respect to what they saw as good things (lowering prices, and taxes (for them), ending the Ukraine conflict, keeping America out of other conflicts particularly in the middle-east, releasing any and all Epstein information, …), and are aghast at those things not being carried through as promised on the campaign trail.
> I doubt GP has any real reason to fear imminent ethnic persecution
I don't know them but they could be gay, or have a gay friend, or be atheist or religious, or maybe they once visited Costa Rica as a tourist and Costa Rica becomes the next pariah state or whatever. They might have driven a friend to an abortion clinic in the past
The very point is that you can't predict what could become a problem for a hypothetical future authoritarian state. If you look at the worst examples in history it could be something as innocuous seeming today as writing a non-political book or having distant relations with the same people as some other "undesirable" person.
I am pretty sure, the people of Netherlands didn't count the chance of a nazi regime invading them in a few years as very high.
The question is, is the marginal value that you are gaining from such services worth the risk, even if theoretical, at all. - I don't think so.
A decade ago, the idea that fairly light and frivolous social media discussion could be used as a reason to deport you from the bastion of free speech known as the USA was laughable. Now, it's reality.
The laws of gravity are entirely symmetric, so it doesn't seem fair to attribute it specifically to the sun; also, the energy in this case is coming out of the "v" in earth's good old 0.5mv^2 kinetic energy relative to the sun.
I don't think "smol pp" is meant to be unfriendly to women, but it's telling that men are expected to self-police such utterly innocuous jokes when women are present even though you couldn't find a phrase less applicable to women if you tried.
Oh I'm sure it's not meant to be unfriendly to women. It's meant to be unfriendly to men, who are the only people reading the article, in the author's mind. You do see the problem, yes?
If I make a joke about hammering a nail with a screwdriver in an article, I'd not feel like I'm implicitly excluding people who do not own a screwdriver.
If you’re writing a piece like this, you’re naturally going to pick an insult that will land with your audience, right? If you read an article where the author says “that’s training bra thinking,” obviously the author is envisioning women reading the article. If you read an article where the author says “that’s smol pp way of thinking,” obviously the author is envisioning men reading the article. That was all I was saying: I was just reading along and suddenly I was reminded that I’m in an industry where men write articles for men, and any women who happen to show up really aren’t expected to be there.
> If you read an article where the author says “that’s training bra thinking,” obviously the author is envisioning women reading the article. If you read an article where the author says “that’s smol pp way of thinking,” obviously the author is envisioning men reading the article.
Again... no?
If you read an article where the author says "that's training bra thinking", the author is female.
If you read one where the author says "that's smol pp thinking", the author is male.
