🎓 Doc Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@qoto.org

@Jojothegoodperson

I wouldnt go that far. You acted, in that post as a horrible person. You have not apologized to luna or in any way shown you were sorry, that means you continue to be a horrible person. I'm sure there are other ways in which you are good person. That does not negate the fact that you, in this instance, are acting deplorably.

@Luna @Jar

@louisrcouture

The world has plenty of biological diversity, i only see that as an excuse. As long as there are too many people (and that has been the case for way to long) then anyone who has a child is acting selfishly and for the harm of man kind.

Ironically if people stopped having kids it wouldnt take very many years before people could resume again in theory.

@twotwenty

@Jojothegoodperson

Jar is welcome to contact me from an account I can talk to Jar directly on. Otherwise I wont discuss through proxy it is too confusing.

and I am not talking about bringing you into the conversation with jar, i am talking about the conversations **we** started (and jar is a tangent conversations) about your hate, bigotry an disgusting behavior. If you want to continue being a horrible person go for it, you want to discuss it, go for it. Up to you. Has nothing to do with jar though.

@Luna @Jar

@Jojothegoodperson

Your last reply was addressed to you, not Jar, as you said it yourself and didnt indicate it was from jar. It seems now your last reply was in fact a copy and paste from Jar you just didnt say it.

The fact is, jar's opinion are one thing, I dont want to continue arguing with jar through copy and paste so they will have to use an alt account or we will just have to drop it for technical reasons.

Now if **you** want to discuss your actions jojoj, we can.

@Luna @Jar

@icedquinn I prefer kernbread. Pretty sure the supermarket below has some.

@axxss morning!

@pganssle She is already qualified enough to be tier 3 tech support

@djatropine444 All houses can be waffle houses if you dare to live the dream.

@Jojothegoodperson

"The issue is not bodily autonomy.
The issue is the idea that you can make those alterations and then identify as a member of another group of people, an oppressed group and expect that oppressed group to be ok with it. If they don’t fully support it then they are bigots, right?"

All of that implies you had a conversation with Luna and they expressed their views at all... you didnt. So no you dont get to make that defense. The only thing you knew is they were trans (that they either had hormone therapy, genital surgery, etc). They said absolutely nothing about their view and you had no interaction with Luna other than to be a bigoted asshole. No you dont get to use the excuse they called you a bigot for any reason, literally the only interaction you had was to actually **be** a bigot.

Trans gender is not a "movement"... it is an action people take on their own body. Beyond that the opinion of any individual trans person as to what rights they should have or to what extent they deserve the privileges of a woman is entirely different from person to person.

Luna never uttered the phrase "trans women are women", not that I would fault her if she did, but again your desperately working backwards to justify your disgusting bigotry on points that are pretty weak to begin with rather than trying to grow the hell up and admit you were wrong (which apparently at one point you did but now you are back peddling).

Yes I am calling it irrelevant because your making generalizations and assumptions and none of this in any way applies to an iota of interaction you had with Luna. So I really dont give a crap about this noise. What matters is you were an asshole to someone because of what they did with their own body, period, everything else you said never took place with Luna and you are assuming it based on your interactions with some nebulous trans people you once interacted with as if they are all one person with the same ideas. Like I said even then I'd side with trans people in that debate but it is a tangent in this case.

You want to get into general trans issues as a tangent such as identifying as a female or not, we can do that, separately, thats fine. But for this particular incident no, none of this applies. You acted in a disgusting way and you cant just talk your way out of it. You own up and be a man and learn from it and correct your behavior, or dont, those are your options.

@Luna @Jar

@djatropine444 STOP, i am waiting for food to arrive. I am too hungry for this shit.

@lucifargundam I am desperate for cavatelli is what I am... all that swimming today has me craving some carbs.

@kingannoy@octodon.social

Bias is a matter of context. If a news organization worded it like that, then yes, I'd say that is bias, in the sense that they are selling a conclusion rather than jut providing the evidence and being neutral.

Here we are having a conversation about our conclusions. Conclusions arent bias in thsi context, they are conclusions. Thou you could say the evidence biased me, but thats a horrible use of the word.

As for why its not 3 protestors tryign to disarm him, there are several reasons why not 1) it was testified in court that "kill him" was screamed while chasing him 2) the people were throwing things at him despite he was running away screaming "friendly" so they **already** commited violence proving they were violent long before a shot was heard 3) these people all historically have criminal charges for committing some pretty heinous violence in the past suggesting their character (and yes character is important in evaluation the likelihood someone will be violent) 4) Even if they were trying to disarm him, since he has a legal right to be armed this alone does not redeem them, they have no right to illegally and forcibly/violently disarm a person, so its no excuse anyway.

As to your last question. If you dont know if the person is a victim and you try to violently remove their only means of protecting themselves, then yes, that is an act of violence in itself, one based of no information to draw your conclusion and yes you put yourself in a sitution where you forfeit your safety and dieing is a rightful consequence of that. I wouldnt say they "deserve" to die, but their actions absolutely is where the blame lies for their death, not with Kyle.

@louisrcouture

@djatropine444 You should check out "The Bernie Man Festival". It is pretty much the same idea as the Burning Man Festival but instead of burning a giant effigy they burn a pile of money.

@djatropine444 Bernie will invite you over to diner to one of his four houses and when you arrive Bernie will go "So what did you bring for us to eat?"

Grubhub be like:

Subtotal: $7.54

Total after taxes and fees: $43.68

Seems I found some old images on my drive from when i was doing a write up on how restrictions in gun laws consistently cause violence and homicides to increase int he years following it. I was citing other sources but also did some of my own analysis. These images are from third-parties I was referencing (had to go and reverify the data and add some of my own). some thankfully cite their sources.

Anyway they are 4 examples out of about a dozen I analyzed and in every single case we consistently see pretty huge spikes in violence/homicide following restrictions in gun laws and they almost never recover to baseline (though they do sometimes have rebound).

@kingannoy@octodon.social
@louisrcouture

@2ck at first my ears were 100% clogged. Once i got the otoscope with the help of that (it has a scoop attached) and drops i got most of the block out that day.. but there was a clump left that was like you described right against my ear drum. I could still hear but not 100% in that ear and when i moved my jaw it would crakle... took me 2 more days to get that out, and mostly invokved a few rounds of ear drops and water jets.

@stux Funny, I used to say the same thing about my ex.