ZombieTheZombieCat

or is women giving advice

?

You have the love the male commenters going "nuh-uh, that's not what women experience!1" as they get offended and make it all about them and "not all men." And then can't figure out why this entire thread just lends this comment credibility. It was one of those every single thread things on reddit and it's no different here. Except maybe worse.

Any policy that comes from this would also benefit men that have had to live with fake abusive images being generated of them. But some people would rather cut off their nose to spite their face. As long as women don't get stuff, then it's worth it for men have to suffer a little extra, amirite? /s

fuck straight white men.

But of course, this is what it always comes back to for men who try to make some transparent argument against protecting women from fake nude photos, revenge porn, domestic violence, sexual assault, sexual harassment, etc. It's never a real argument. It's some insecure guy getting his feelings hurt by just the mention of equality. They don't feel special anymore, so they inevitably claim that women being protected from abuse is somehow a privilege. It's just tired and predictable.

Some of us go to concerts alone. It's not that crazy to leave a single seat open.

Not that that should ever be the consumer's problem anyway.

nobody ever wants to pay for anything on the internet

To your point, maybe if what we got in return were worth a shit, people would be more willing to pay. But it gets shittier and shittier, more and more inundated with ads, worse journalism with more clickbait and AI, all for prices that go up every year to multiple times per year.

It was more reasonable when you could go to the store and pay for one newspaper or one issue of a magazine. Then if you really liked it you could subscribe. Now there's no other option but to subscribe. Not everyone wants to be paying a bunch of separate subscription fees per month just to get decent news, and not everyone wants one hundred percent of a news outlets content. But we're charged for it regardless. Fuck no, no one wants to pay for that.

Maybe if it were one of the only things that required a subscription. Like it used to be. But now, almost every single thing we use comes with a subscription charge and there's usually no other way to pay for it. It's all or nothing. And it gets totally exhausting, aggravating, and ridiculously expensive, especially when they force you to pay for a bunch of shit you don't need, or they charge you cancellation fees on top of an extra month, or raise the monthly price without telling you, or tack on extra charges for shit that should just come with it in the first place, etc etc.

My point is, no one should defend the subscription model. If an outlet does good journalism, they'll have donors. PBS Newshour, NPR, Democracy Now, they're some of the best souces and they're all nonprofit. And, what do you know, none of them have actual ads.

And shoutout to local libraries to loaning current magazine issues online. I get a Libby notification every time the New Yorker comes out. And I'm sure they're losing a ton of money because I don't personally pay for a subscription /s

I am so sick and tired of having two people standing right behind me staring over my shoulder as I'm using self checkout at walmart. It makes me never want to go back there. I actually have never "forgotten" to scan anything, ever. Yet these mfs are breathing down my neck at every store, every time I go. Target is the opposite. I swear these LPs (the plain clothes people but with walkies, come on) and workers are next to me at all times when I'm shopping. But then they usually leave me be at self checkout. I guess by then their ridiculously invasive theft monitoring system has determined I'm not a threat or something.

Fuck both of these companies. And fuck them even more for running every smaller company out of business so we have nowhere else to shop when we're sick of being treated like criminals and sick of being sold garbage at some insane markup.

What a gross comment

I am just saying that this burden shouldn't fall on other people in material need.

Well, good thing it doesn't in this case.

The whole point is that everything in this field is already, by default, directed at men. That's what it's like in the US. It's the same with race. And saying we have have equality when we don't is just ignoring the way these divisions affect historically oppressed groups. Acknowledging systemic hierarchy and division between races and genders in order to fix it doesn't automatically mean you have to ignore class divisions. They're far from mutually exclusive. Why would it be impossible to acknowledge both at the same time?

It's to the point where no one else can have anything without men going "what about me and my problems?" "Well here's what I think about all these social issues that have never and will never negatively affect me." As usual, the "not all men" of every comment section of every article about a women-only-something-or-other are just making a great case for women-only-something-or-others.

this seems the completed detached thought of someone who never faced material difficulties.

Yes, all of your comments do.

Absolutely. There has to be some little glimmer of already wanting to quit for them to take the help seriously. I would absolutely recommend AlAnon as well. You can't just force someone into treatment, and that's pretty much what interventions try to do, on top of making the person feel guilt and shame which likely is why they drink in the first place. Being able to have a one on one, calm conversation about how the person is affecting themselves and others is probably a good route, because people often do not recognize they have a problem in the first place. It would not be surprising for it to end with the person getting angry and storming out, but it plants the seed in a more reasonable way than having everyone they know cornering them, humiliating them, and saying "go to rehab now or we never speak to you again."

Source: in recovery, worked in the field.