Being human shaped is a wild disadvantage in many contexts as well. Creating machines allows for all sorts of geometry humans simply aren’t capable of mimicking. The idea of designing something to look human for the sake of doing so seems like a non-starter. If being human shaped is optimal for a task, so be it, but it just feels like people unable to overcome a sci-if image of the future (robot people doing everything for us) that existed before contemporary industrialization and frankly had much more to do with humans acting the parts in film and theater and ease of humans relating to human appearing objects in film and other media than any imagined industrial utility of human shaped robots.

Historically psych research has ranged from wildly pro-sex, treat a handjob like a handshake to no one should ever have sex other than to procreate. Saying ‘the research is very clear’ is just wrong. In general, the number of topics that can be considered very clear in psychological research can be counted on one hand.

Personally I don’t think any of it is meaningful outside societal context. In a very conservative culture, having casual sex could lead to judgements from third parties that significantly impact one’s life. Hard to say that’s the fault of casual sex more than it is a case of violating a taboo like any other. I don’t know of anywhere this is currently the case, but I think we could imagine another ‘sexually liberated’ culture where not participating in casual sex could lead to suspicion among others pretty plausibly too.

Ok absolutely. I got caught up on a random detail and missed the forest for the trees a bit when reading what you were saying.

That’s exactly why capturing it physically makes no sense. It’s already controlled territory for all intents and purposes. Begging the people of Greenland to form an insurgency by invading the country, all so the US can own the territory on paper (more so than being part of NATO already makes it) has no benefit whatsoever.

Making deals to build more bases is exactly what Harris would do to accomplish the goal Trump is interested in. But that’s exactly business as usual, the polar opposite of threatening to invade.

Maybe I’m not understanding your point. You saying Harris would make deals to get more bases undermines the idea that Harris would be threatening Canada and Greenland with capture—which is what Trump is now doing. I thought you were saying that Harris would also be threatening to invade Greenland. That’s a ridiculous notion. Harris building bases in Greenland and deploying more troops to the arctic certainly isn’t, but a Harris govt (and any other presidential admin in memory, even Trump 1, when he was surrounded by old guard Bush republicans) would get the blessing of Denmark and Greenland to do it.

Do you not see a difference between making a deal with Denmark and Greenland to build bases vs the US threatening to take the land and personally physically administer all of Greenland? If you’re of the mind that it ultimately doesn’t matter how US troops end up in Greenland, whether as welcomed troops of an allied power, or an invading force, that may be our point of contention. I think that difference between new US troops in Greenland being perceived as ally or invader has huge implications for how the Euros and Canadians understand their relationship with the US from here forward.

Harris would be Biden 2. Biden made none of those moves or anything resembling them. The idea that a Harris govt would be making overtures to physically capturing NATO territory is so ridiculous that I’m not sure how you could possibly form such an opinion genuinely.

To your point, I think people substantially overstate how different it would be, but Trump’s threats to capture Canada and Greenland, the arbitrarily imposed and lifted tariffs, and humiliating Euro allies in a way that causes even the sycophants over there to try and do something about it, wouldn’t have happened under Harris. I think the Trump admin is accelerating the decline of the US to the point that I’m no longer concerned the US empire will manage to limp along until climate change makes the planet uninhabitable. A long line of uninterrupted Obama-style admins could have kept the empire rolling for decades longer than could possibly be managed after this Trump admin.

Prior to the second Trump admin, I think what you’re saying is undeniable. Trump 2 is a bit of a new animal though. His intense breaks from previous foreign affairs and financial moves in opposition to the steadiness and easy predictability loved by big capital is a paradigm shift away from business as usual. We’re in uncharted waters right now I think. That’s not to say the dems will in anyway rise to protecting the previous govt paradigm, as you put it well, they aren’t there to be opposition.

She’s not wrong and usually I find her writing insightful, I just think “actually you and the group you view as your mortal enemies are the same” is a less than optimal rhetorical strategy for convincing anyone who isn’t already in the know and just comes across as incredibly smug and annoying to ‘normal’ folks. I was being overly flippant though I’m sure.

I generally agree. My possibly naive hope is that Trump is significantly weakening the US’s position as global hegemon, which will eventually benefit humanity. But his admin’s actions are chaos at best and monstrous at worse.

Edit: Nvm already posted

Edit: I don’t know why I was so cranky earlier. Just ignore my complaining that someone was supposedly complaining.

Depends on what harm you care about. Trump is very clearly much more damaging for Americans than Harris could ever hope to be, probably to the (eventual) benefit of the global population, however.

Anyway, Johnstone’s insistence on whining about a single lib imagining she has any influence to get anyone to do anything is tiring but maybe an ego-boost on some level—I couldn’t imagine why else she thinks it deserves mention at all.

When I say recovered memory, I intend to refer to a specific therapy technique that is full stop no longer used by anyone at all credible in the field. ‘Body keeps the score’ is a very popular book for clinicians to recommend to patients, so while I haven’t read it I imagine it’s not promoting what I intended to refer to and likely isn’t especially controversial. Though, I would caution you that as it’s a book for popular audiences, the language contained within may not be the most technically precise—especially a decade plus after its first publication. With that said, I wouldn’t say my own perspective on memory and trauma is necessarily in opposition to what ‘Body keeps…’ is saying based on a quick summary I’m looking at.

For whatever you may view the worth of this, as an until very recent psych researcher in a lab that focused on PTSD and specifically CSA—I finished grad school I wasn’t kicked out for my unorthodox beliefs or anything—I can tell you that is not the commonly held opinion by contemporary researchers and that those cases have not been meaningfully substantiated, despite the huge amount of evidence that would have to exist for the stories to be true, nor have similar events been seen in the following years—despite the Qanon movement’s popularity with local police forces which would seem to indicate willingness to accept these cases as possible and investigate them. My difficulty with accepting the satanic abuse at face value comes down to this, how are archeologists able to investigate and establish ritual sites from the megalithic era but no solid evidence for these major satanic rituals that occurred within the lives of many still living can be located, despite the significant public backing (including in the govt) that existed at the time and again more recently with Qanon to investigate?

Ultimately it’s not my place to say, but in my opinion, this theatrical stuff belies that the vast majority of abuse is committed by an individual known to the victim, not cults the victims and their families weren’t active members of, guys in vans handing out candy snatching kids off the street, or predators in online chat rooms.

None of this speaks to OP’s question about forgetting trauma, but the satanic cult abuse specifically to be clear.

It’s not clear but maybe. The satanic panic cult torture obsession of the 80s and 90s, where people with significant credentials were claiming individuals completely blocked out memories of experiencing torture rituals at the hands of satanic cabals was heavily reliant on the ‘recovered memory’ concept and all of that has been thoroughly discredited. Because of that embarrassment, there was an aversion to research on forgotten traumas for a bit. A more sober approach to researching these topics has followed more recently. Personally, with present evidence, I wouldn’t definitively come down on it one way or the other.

If it’s true, that’s an argument that the African societies in question were deeply flawed not that euros should be morally absolved for chattel slavery.

What’s your preferred method of determining industrial strength? Russia’s PPP is higher than their relative manufacturing output by value added or cost of goods, and they only have half the industrial CO2 output of the US. I’m not arguing one way or the other, I’m not especially familiar with these stats and such so I’m just curious about the apparent discrepancy.

Alright, alright, world bank says they’re the fourth largest by PPP which is still pretty modest for the guy personally bending the world to his will in my mind lmao

Putin really ought to bend these GDP numbers to his will, but I’ll cut him some slack. He’s got a lot going on now that he’s single-handedly responsible for controlling American foreign policy too.

As someone who spent several years working at an arboretum (ie someone who frequently tended to gardens and lawns), I’m gonna challenge the folks claiming it’s because lawns are easier to care for. Keeping grass looking nice and uniform is difficult and resource intensive any place in the world, whereas a thoughtfully planted garden of local flora can require relatively little intervention. It’s all about how intensely you want to stick a middle finger up to Mother Nature and try to grow plants that don’t belong in the environment. Lawn grass doesn’t belong anywhere so it’s always a challenge.