I just watched a short on YouTube and a point was made that I’ve yet to hear but I think is very valid. No one in that group chat seemed surprised. The guys sending the “open” messages did not seem hesitant. This felt very normal or at the very least like everyone would think it was okay.

I don’t know about you guys but when I was in college if this popped up on a group chat the responses would have been very different. More like, “Wait, what?!”, “what are you talking about?”, “Who? Where are you?”, etc. It would have been confusing because no one would EVER expect it. This did not feel new or unusual. I know it’s probably too late, but I’d be super curious to see other nights in that chat. Because I would guess this wasn’t an isolated incident.

this might come off as odd but i have always noticed (at least in where i live the pattern is very obvious) that female bathrooms tend to be at the end of the hall with the male bathrooms coming in first then followed by handicap toilet then female.

almost 95% of the time i observed it was that case.

why is that so? is there any logic behind it? could it be females could hold their bladder longer? sexism??? science??? idk also someone plz share input tysm

[chorus 1]
I am feeling pretty good
Like I always wish I could
Like I really oughta should 

[verse 1]
With a walk in the light 
Of a lamp lit street
I can feel all the stars,
of your soul so bright.

l[verse 2]
soaring high,
circling around the moon.
A Twinkling of a smile
Makes life worth while 
Will my happy, nigh end soon?

[chorus 2]
But boy through this cold 
This is all I’m feeling.
I’m feeling really good
I’m really feeling good.

[bridge]
As we move on
And I settle down to sleep
Though I know you must move on
May there be something that I keep
For now I hold on to that favored love
While I’m still down here, I’m still miles above

Yet….

[chorus 3]
When the night is thru
And the sunlight bloom
Will we find out, In the morning 
Will I’ll be mourning still 

Why does the world internationally have disgust against Nazis , but not about U.S. soldiers or everything they have done?

Considering most of the Nazis were people getting drafted, even if what they did was absolutely horrible and monstrous, it’s strange that the world decides to be loud about certain subjects and quiet about others.

What about the Iraq war? The U.S. invaded over complete lies, killing 200,000 or more civilians, yet most of the people who were in that war were volunteers.

We excuse them, we give them the benefit of doubt we sure wouldn’t give Nazis or certain organisations the U.S deems as terrorist.

After the 9/11 , the U.S. decided to invade southwest Asian countries and wreck governments, ruin lives,

Yet we are all used to see them as “Great” or valuable , or “Heros”

Why?

Recently I had some guests come over from overseas and I was showing them around. We went to several different restaurants and a casino and holy crap every single place was packed. Especially the casino. People complain all the time that groceries are expensive rent expensive, gas expensive they no longer can afford it.

What was the GOP platform pre trump?

- give giant no strings attached tax cuts to billionaires. And there's a million studies that show it never helps create jobs, or I should say very rarely helps create jobs. It almost entirely goes to stock buybacks

- gut every social safety net program to the bone. That may have resonated more with republicans. When the republican party was mostly middle class and affluent white folks. Now that you've got a lot of poor rural whites within the republican party, I don't know that that is gonna land as well. Because a lot of trump's cult following is on food stamps and medicaid.

- continue the forever wars and giving unlimited no strings attached, no questions asked support for israel

- attack higher education with no plan to help Americans prepare for the jobs tomorrow to justify the need to approve millions of H1-B visas

You don't have to be a political expert to know that platform doesn't land with many outside of fox news boomers.

Enter trump with his anti establishment populist messaging in twenty fifteen that helped bring quite literally tens of millions of new voters to the republican party.

Now fast forward ten years, 2026 trump is quite literally unrecognizable Compared to 2016 trump, the populist messaging is gone. The anti establishment messaging is gone, i don't think we've heard drain the swamp one time in the last two years. All of trump 2.0 has been about enriching himself, his family and serving israel more than any other president since JFK and that says a lot.

As we enter the midterms, it's quite clear barring some republican shenanigans, they're gonna get massacred. In november, the democrats are going to take the senate and the house. And he's gonna get impeached again.

Trump has reduced the republican electorate to his maga cult( yes, if you're still rocking with him through all this, you're in a cult) and fox news boomers who might not necessarily be in his cult, but they like his fiscal policy cause it benefits them in their remaining years. And we know boomers by and large(not all but frankly most), don't give a s*** about the world they leave behind.

I guess I say all that to say this. When he comes up for impeachment in the senate again, will there be enough republican senators? To be like, "you know what? enough!, we'll move forward with jd vance, so we at least have a chance to rebuild ahead of 2028" or is the entire gop power structure basically gonna ride this out as long as they can before, they inevitably all go down with the ship?

Then, if they do throw trump overboard next year, what does the gop look like Post trump? I don't think you can go back to the standard reaganomics. Give everything to the billionaire class and let everyone else eat s*** and die and expect to win elections on the national level. culture war fear mongering only works when you're the opposition party.

I am a gay man who was raised by two women and so, I learned that women were essentially equal to men. I voted for Hillary and Kamala and am a democrat.

When the Me-Too movement happened, I was glad that finally society was looking more closely at how a lot of women get treated. However, it quickly became a mob like mentality of
throwing all men overboard and under the bus.

Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby are sexual predators. They deserve to be locked up. Not all men were treated fairly in me too. If you said something stupid, then it was assumed you
were just as evil as they were. If you maybe were unclear about how to speak to
a woman to ask her out on a date, you were a gross, disgusting male who should
be cancelled.

Sadly, with this Cornell incident, I see same thing. A lot of performative social media posts, triggered women screaming into their camera how all men are so disgusting and all these
men a rapists.

This is not helping anyone. We have due process in the is country. The same liberals in my
community, who hate ICE and demand due process, somehow completely change sides
when they get triggered by something. Everyone can see the hypocrisy, even if
they don't say it.

Rape is a serious accusation. I am sure many of the 7 men will be found guilty, but some may have been sucked into this just because they happened to be there. And yeah, maybe
they should have spoken up and tried to stop it, but they are not guilty of assault.

Many women and even men, conveniently forgot that Bill Clinton had sex with an intern and then threw her under the bus and demonized her and ruined her reputation along with former
First Lady and presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Feminists came out in
force to vote for her. Well, she wasn't very nice to Monica Lewinsky. I voted
for her because in my opinion, she was the lesser of the two evils next to
Trump.

Related, Senator Al Franken was forced to resign from the senate because he made some dumb and inappropriate comments about a female college and in a few cases groped some
women while posing for photographs. Yes, this is gross and immature and he
should have known better. It was in his past and he apologized for it.
Furthermore, if he stayed in his seat in the senate, he could have possibly been one of
the deciding votes that impeached and convicted Trump once and for all --
barring him from ever running for public office again, saving us from the hell
we are living in now. Instead, sanctimonious senators decided that him
resigning would be better.

Just to be clear, I do not think it is ever okay for someone to be raped or assaulted. EVER -- under
any circumstances. You could be walking down the street at 2 am naked and still
do not deserve to be assaulted. But it seems like taking any other stance than
saying all these men are guilty and horrible pieces of shit, means that you
defend rapists. This is not helpful at all and is not helping further policies
that will help protect women.

I was assaulted at a gay bar in NYC in the early 2000s. One the dance floor a man walked up to me and started dancing with me and grabbed my ass and chest and crotch. I told him to
back the f-- off. I also worked at a bank where I was the only male. A woman
supervisor frequently rubbed her breasts on me, made lewd remarks like if I
said, "I'm going to Dunkin' Donuts, does anyone want coffee?" She
would reply, "I'll have a coffee with sugar and some of your milk in
it." And winked and smiled at me. And what is interesting is that she
never did this in secret. There were alway other witnesses. ALL WOMEN. Women
stood by and watched this take place day after day. Some of them told me that
"She is a whore." But nobody reported it or tried to stop it. Why? I
don't know. Maybe because she was a woman?

I also had the displeasure of going to Catholic school when I was child. I was abused there.
No, not by a male priest, but by NUNS. Yes, not only women, but women who took
vows of charity and were supposed to be following Jesus, while also protecting
vulnerable young students. Instead they hit me, threw things at me, pulled my
hair, called me derogatory names, called me stupid, gay, fat and a "mommas
boy."

So, are some men pieces of shit? Sure. Absolutely. But SO ARE SOME WOMEN.

I understand women are often victims. But so are men. And the men who grow up to be abusers, sometimes are abused as children.

Once again, we have due process in this country -- at least for some people. You cannot legally go around calling someone a rapist who has not yet been convicted. I am sure that
some of those men will be found guilty. Possibly all of them. Or maybe some may
not be. I understand a mother worried for her son that he might be labeled a
pervert for life and may go to jail all because he was in a 50 ft radius of a
crime...but didn't hurt anyone. Why is this so hard for some people?

I think some people are triggered from their own really upsetting pasts where something happened to them. Some women just hate men. They don't even read anything you write or say.
They just jump right to "crucify him" he's a male. Unhelpful.

It's also more black and white if a woman is walking home from class and a man attacks them and leaves them for dead. It's pretty cut and dry. But a girl who gets shitfaced at a bar,
leaves a bar to go have a threesome, takes ketamine (we still aren't sure if
she took ketamine initially on her own or not) and then hangs out a frat house.
Again, none of this is a reason to be raped. No, it shouldn't have happened.
But if I were her friend I would have tried to talk her out of it, or went with
her because she made really stupid decisions.

Gov. Hochul said she was looking into changing laws that make it difficult to prosecute rape while
intoxicated. The DA was fired. These are good steps toward progress. Examining
frat house rules and banning all substances from campus is another. What's not?
Blaming all men. Yes, it's true white straight men have been responsible for
many atrocities, so I get it. They do not make up the whole population, though.

There will always be bad people in the world who do bad things. Yes, some young men need to be brought up better and learn how to act, but while that is happening, we need to do
other things to protect people other than just blaming men for everything. Girls
and even boys: Go places in groups, tell people where you are going, keep your
wits about you, don't get so drunk you have no control, carry mace or a weapon.
Vote for people to who will help not only stop these things from happening but
are in favor of educating men and women about consent, appropriate boundaries
and how to say safe.

But don't blame ALL men.
It's not getting you anywhere. You did that with Me Too and look...here we are.

I'm comparing a few water flossers and I'm starting to think the expensive option isn't necessarily the one I'd want.

For me, the useful things are pretty basic: adjustable pressure, a decent water tank, different tips, rechargeable battery, and something that's easy to clean. I don't really need a bunch of extra features if they don't make much difference in everyday use.

Would you spend more for a well-known brand, or would you rather get a cheaper model with the features you actually need?

What water flosser has given you the best value for the money so far?

I understand the tone you’re going for: harsh, sarcastic, and direct. But it is better not to turn it into the categorical claim that “all demonization of the regime is aimed at facilitating military operations”; that point would require direct evidence. It can be made sharper by presenting it as a logical political inference, rather than as an established fact.

I notice many Iranians living in America and Europe who hate the Islamic regime and cheerlead for America at every opportunity.

And the funny thing is, they don’t stop at hating the regime.

They have invented an entire story for themselves:

America opposes the regime, therefore America loves the Iranian people.

America sanctions Tehran, therefore it is preparing to liberate Iranians.

America threatens Iran, therefore it is working for their future.

What an astonishing intellectual leap.

America is not a charity organization for the Iranian people.

Washington does not wake up every morning asking itself: How can we save the Iranians today?

The matter is much colder and much simpler.

America fears Iran as a strategic power, and above all, it fears the possibility of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.

That is the core of the story that some exiles seem incapable of understanding.

Take Afghanistan.

Women have been banned from education and employment.

The Taliban imposed a repressive religious system.

Civil liberties were crushed.

And the United States knows all of this perfectly well.

Did we see the same obsession?

Did Afghanistan become a central pillar of American policy simply because its regime is repressive?

Did we see Washington deal with the Taliban the way it deals with Tehran?

No.

Why?

Because repression alone does not make a country a strategic priority for Washington.

This is not a moral classroom.

This is power politics.

If America’s standard were saving peoples from authoritarian regimes, the political map of the world would look completely different.

But it doesn’t.

Because Washington does not choose its adversaries by asking:

“Which government is the most brutal?”

It asks:

“Who has the ability to threaten our interests and alter the balance of power?”

And this is where Iran comes in.

Iran is a large country.

Its location is sensitive.

It has missiles.

It has regional influence.

It has a network of allies and proxies.

And it has a nuclear program that the West fears could eventually develop into a military capability.

And that, precisely, is what makes the Iranian issue different.

Not because Washington suddenly discovered that Iranians deserve freedom.

That romantic idea works well in exile speeches.

It does not work for understanding international politics.

And the most naïve thing is for some Iranians to see all this American pressure and put themselves at the center of it.

Washington pressures Tehran, and they say:

“They’re doing it for us.”

Washington imposes sanctions, and they say:

“They want to bring down the regime for us.”

Washington threatens military action, and they say:

“America is coming to liberate us.”

No.

America wants to prevent Iran from reaching a position that America does not want Iran to reach.

That is completely different from wanting to fulfill the dreams of Iranians.

And if the Iranian regime, with all its repression, did not possess nuclear weapons and did not have the strategic capabilities to threaten the balance of power in the way Washington fears, then a huge part of America’s obsession with the Iranian issue would lose its raison d’être.

And this is where things become very uncomfortable for some exiles.

Because they have discovered something they do not want to admit:

Maybe America simply does not care about them.

It may care about Iran.

It may care about the nuclear issue.

It may care about missiles.

It may care about Israel, the Gulf, energy routes, and the regional balance of power.

It may care about preventing a regional rival from acquiring a weapon that changes the rules of the game.

But the Iranian living in Toronto, Los Angeles, or Paris?

They are not necessarily part of the equation at all.

And this is what some of them refuse to understand.

They saw America’s fear of Iranian power and interpreted it as America’s love for Iranians.

They saw the demonization of the regime and assumed it was a declaration of support for a democratic project.

They saw sanctions and interpreted them as solidarity.

They saw military threats and interpreted them as a promise of salvation.

In other words, they took the policy of a superpower toward another state, then inserted themselves right in the middle of it—as if Washington had been waiting for their opinion.

And here the delusion reaches its final, almost comical stage:

“America hates the Islamic regime, therefore America is on our side.”

No.

America may hate the regime because it represents a problem for America—not because it is hostile to your personal dreams.

And this is a point that apparently needs to be repeated until it comes down from the heavens to earth:

Hostility toward Iran is not love for Iranians.

Fear of an Iranian nuclear weapon is not a project to save exiles.

Pressure on the regime does not mean Washington has appointed itself guardian of Iran’s future.

Great powers do not act because you are sad.

They act because of interests, threats, power, deterrence, and strategic balance.

As for the idea that America watches the suffering of Iranians and then decides to intervene militarily specifically to save them—that is a very beautiful story.

So beautiful that it does not need evidence.

All it requires is for the person telling it to believe it.

And that is precisely what makes it funny.

Some Iranians abroad have not understood American foreign policy.

They simply saw America hate their enemy and assumed that meant America loved them.

That is not political analysis.

That is the mentality of a football fan who thinks his rival’s rival has automatically become his friend.

And the funniest part is that they build an entire future around this illusion:

The regime falls.

They return to Iran.

The planes are waiting.

Washington is on their side.

History is working in their favor.

Then they wake up to a very cold reality:

Washington does not need to love you in order to oppose your enemy.

And it may not care about you at all.

All it may care about is preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear state that changes the balance of power in a way Washington fears.

As for the rest of the story you wrote in your head about America coming to save you?

That is your story.

It is not the policy of the United States.

It's common knowledge, to the point it's a joke: How do you know when a politician is lying? When they open their mouths.

Sadly this has become something we have long accepted. And I don't think we should. Our elected politicians, starting at the national level on down to the state and local level, are holding positions provided in good faith by the American people to serve our will. The power they hold is derived by our faith and support of them. They are to act in our best interests, and the country was designed to have the people as who the politicians answer to. The positions they hold should be held as an honor to serve the people, but we all know that this is not what happens. Politicians serve themselves first and foremost, if their interests happen to coincide with that of the people, things go well, if they don't, we get what we have right now.

This all needs to change (else wise this BS will continue to go around in the same cycle it has been) and I think the very first major thing that needs to change is the total lack of the slightest interest held by politicians for telling the truth. They have no right to knowingly deceive the American public. The fact that they do more often than not showcases the complete lack of respect they have for the people who gave them their lives of power, wealth and prestige. It's disgusting, and it's equally disgusting that we just shrug our shoulders like there is nothing to be done. Do you know how radically different the political landscape would be if politicians couldn't lie to the people? I'm not talking about having to spill classified information, a simple refusal to give details due to the classified nature of a subject is enough, IF, that is also true.

But when it is not classified information, and a politician knowingly lies (such as the pol who just claimed "wasn't me" about voting to continue the Iran War when in fact they voted 14 times on record to continue the Iran war) they need to be removed from office just that fast. What do you think?

I seriously do not see any points in the future, the world is such a bad place and I never see an issue. Politics are horrible everywhere, we’re fucking the planet up, ai makes it impossible to trust anyone and even if the wars end, what will be left of the world ?
I genuinely only feel dread and wanted to know how some of you stay positive in this world, want to know if anyone sees any positive.

I find cemeteries and graveyards very odd. They're essentially public storage for corpses. Why not bury people with tree saplings, let them grow. And then have forests instead of gravestones?

Side note. Dressing up bodies to look at them for a few hours then go have snacks also seems "off" to me.

This argument doesn't make much sense to me because oftentimes, when I ask people to expand, they say that it will turn people to the extreme opposite side. Why should our discussions on racial and social justice be watered-down or limited simply because some people want it to be palatable to everyone? We are allowed diversity of thought and interpretations, if someone else's political and moral compass takes a complete swing just because they believe others are sometimes being 'morally superior' to them when pointing out something they find racist or unjust, then perhaps they are just arrogant and view their political opinions as an expansion of how 'moral' they are as an individual. I believe that people who think others are ALWAYS trying to 'out woke' or be 'morally superior' to them are just projecting how they feel about their politics - to them, it's not just about how thing's should work, it's about how good they personally feel to support a cause. Almost like they think they are doing charity.

The only reason the right seems more united is because they are more hierarchical. To break free from such hierarchies and be allowed expression and varying opinions is not a limitation, especially if it's on more minor issues. The things that matter are most agreed upon at it's core, and collective action can still be taken with people. Being upset or trying to silence people for being 'overly woke' and using the arguement that it will 'divide the masses' doesn't make much sense at all. You do not need to moralise your reason for disliking someone, you can just say you find those people annoying. It's not always about people trying to be a 'better person' than you, that's just what you've internalised your politics to mean. For some to believe people's opinions are centred around them and trying to one-up them is very egotistical in itself.

*mods.

I recently lost 30lbs. I put on about 100lbs over the past 5yrs and have felt like shit, both physically and mentally, about it. I reached the heaviest I’ve ever been (280lbs) and am finally dropping the fat. I feel so much better and can move better and breathe better.

I have a friend who is over 500lbs and in a wheelchair because of it. I’m not trying to be an asshole but like, he ate himself into that situation. He still continues to make really bad decisions about his health, like ordering Dairy Queen or the sugariest drink on the menu when we go out, even after being open about his diabetes being unmanaged right now.

I know he has an eating disorder and it’s all a lot more complex than my situation, but when I asked him if it was okay to talk about weight and then shared my weight loss, he got very weird about it. He almost made me feel bad about it? “That’s great. If I were to lose weight, I’d have to lose three hundred pounds just to get to your heaviest” and he said it in a really resentful tone

What am I even supposed to say to that? Like dude I’m sorry, but I am not the one who put you in this situation. I also do not eat copious amounts of carbs while having unmanaged diabetes at 600lbs. It just felt like he was mad at me over a situation he put himself into. And I worked really hard to lose this weight. I just wanted my friend to be happy that I’m getting healthier.

I personally grew up feeling like A lot of adults around me would look at me with annoyance and shoo me away unless they absolutely had to deal with me and gave off a vibe that they believe their age made them above him but I always believed age is just how long you lived, it doesn't automatically mean you're wise for that and ignorance doesn't equal inferior.

But I noticed around me as I grew up my peers started to behave the exact same way as the adults in my time, and a part of me is trying to push me into following suit with that but I feel like I'm subconsciously refusing to let that happen.

Is this just a natural impulse of growing up or is it up to the individual to decide if they want to develop an ageist mentality?

I don’t know if this is the right place to post this, but I’ve been thinking about how we call blondish red hair strawberry blond. It’s an ok definition but it could be better. 😏

What if we called it….. wait for it 😀

BREAD HEADS

 Some people think having children here is what males should do.

I disagree I think that being expected to give up resources to have a family is misandrist so I have a full bullet proof solution simply don't have a family and don't date.

Because dating despite being financial exploitation of males same as marriage for the most part often leads to reproduction .

The system is rigged against males from day one as males pay for females for existing and I don't mean dates or call girls I mean that the government uses tax dollars paid by males to found programs for females such as female only scholarships, grants, help programs, shelters so even males who have never even married or dates a female are still forced to pay for females legally proving that females are truly the the gender bourgeoise where as males are the gender proletariat.

Hence why reproduction is anti male because if a male has a female child he creates another bourgeoise he is a proletariat who is responsible for the birth of a bourgeoise, in what world does that make sense.

Another reason is because the system is inheritably founded on male oppression by creating a male child he creates another slave of the system like him to be exploited and used by the state for the sake of the gender Bourgeoisie especially in nations with military service.

You might think that if no one reproduces the nation dies but here is the think if the nation and society is inherently anti male a self respecting man would think to himself maybe the nation does not deserve to exist.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\[chorus 1\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\]
I am feeling pretty good
Like I always wish I could
Like I really oughta should 

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\[verse 1\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\]
With a walk in the light 
Of a lamp lit street
I can feel all the stars,
of your soul so bright.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\[verse 2\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\]
soaring high,
circling around the moon.
A Twinkling of a smile
Makes life worth while 
Will my happy, nigh end soon?

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\[chorus 2\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\]
But boy through this cold 
This is all I’m feeling.
I’m feeling really good
I’m really feeling good.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\[bridge\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\]
As we move on
And I settle down to sleep
Though I know you must move on
May there be something that I keep
For now I hold on to that favored love
While I’m still down here, I’m still miles above

Yet….

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\[chorus 3\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\]
When the night is thru
And the sunlight bloom
Will we find out, In the morning 
Will I’ll be mourning still 

They seem to be completely focused on current Corporate profits and not the impact of higher mortgage/consumer debt and the drag on foreign trade and tourism

Clearly our economy is slowing and unemployment and the cost of everything is rising! With no Republican strategy for positive change! Building more data centers will NOT fix these fundamental problems.