You might disagree with the argument, but it's not completely random. From the US, we gained most of the benefits of having nukes and spooks, without having to maintain them ourselves. Since we can't trust them, we now have to decide if it's worth developing our own.

Because when everyone knows that your only play is to support the reds, then the reds themselves know that they can abuse that desperation, renege on deals with you, etc. After all, what other plays do you have?

Dropping the deal is short-term disadvantageous, but by establishing a reputation for punishing allies who don't uphold their end of a bargain, they can be more influential in the future.

May not be a very useful one, but it hardly seems bizarre. Of course I wish that fascists were less fascist! Then there would be less fascism, and I don't like fascism and want there to be less of it! Wishing doesn't do anything on its own, but it's not a strange wish to have.

If I was a woman I wouldn't have dysphoria, no? Unless it altered my body without doing anything to me.

(I guess if it was a sadistic genie it could also alter the brain but not the body, handing out dysphoria without physical change.)

I don't like that the conservative party is using provincial funds to advertise for their political views -- especially with advertisements which aren't rigorously truthful. It feels slimy, but does anyone know if this is legal?

Depends on the income period -- I'd do 25% of daily income for a first offence.

It's actually counterproductive! People who want to screen stuff about abuse from their internet experience can set up filters. Those filters are broken when you censor the relevant words!

Interesting. Unlike most measures, bike lanes are also a positive on their own, climate change or not. I assume this analysis doesn't include negative-cost solutions like carbon pricing.

That's not how exploitation works, not really. The rich will exploit as much as they can. Prices are already set to maximize profit. The rich can't pass higher prices along, because if they could charge more, they already would. Cutting taxes on big companies doesn't create jobs or lower prices -- and raising taxes won't destroy jobs or raise prices.

The teacher was selling prints of the art for hundreds of dollars. The article doesn't say how much profit they made, but it could be substantial. There's also the privacy violation, and split amongst ten kids it's $160,000 per victim. Don't get me wrong, that's not nothing, but it seems reasonable for such a wilful and knowing violation of copyright, rights to one's image, and privacy rights. (Assuming all alleged facts are true.)

Typically it does flow better, but I have a little mental stumble every time someone uses "woman" or "women" as an adjective. I know why they're doing it and I can't really fault them, it just... feels off.

Made an account with mailinator.

Lewis Harvey recalls the moment the internet realised he was a male of a certain age: he started being bombarded with ads for stuff it thinks Australian men are supposed to like.

Harvey noticed how algorithms seeking to capture young men chased him with unsolicited content, including information about drinking, gambling ads on high rotation, and clips by misogynist influencer Andrew Tate.

Harvey, 23, a screen production graduate, has placed a bet only once in his life and feels fortunate to have positive role models of manhood, including his soccer coach, in his life.

But harmful messages about men needing to be dominant, aggressive, have as much sex as possible, be in control in relationships with women – and use violence to get respect – still hold power over many Australian men, research has found.

The biggest Australian study of attitudes about what it means to “be a real man”, just released by The Men’s Project of Jesuit Social Services, has revealed 37 per cent of men aged 18 to 45 – nearly four in 10 – feel pressure to conform to rigid male norms, including that men must be tough, not show emotion, be in control, not do household chores and have the final word in relationships with women.

One-quarter of the representative sample of 3500 Australian men said they believe in these rules, which lead to a greater likelihood of them perpetrating violence and experiencing poorer mental health and wellbeing.

Harvey said he had noticed the internet trying to pigeonhole him, and how even when he actively dismissed clips popping up in his feed, the algorithm still “gives it a shot”.

“Every second advert I get on any social media platform is a gambling ad, to the point where I could recognise the guy from the Sportsbet ad sitting in a bar I was in. It was funny – like, ‘I can’t believe I can pick him out of the crowd’,” he said.

“I always noticed, and found it interesting, especially in about the last 10 years when the internet got big enough to kind of pigeonhole you; to see a lot of things that are being assumed – because I’m a bloke – I want to hear about.”

The Man Box 2024: Re-examining what it means to be a man in Australia report is the most recent such study by The Men’s Project. The data, collected by CloudResearch and analysed by Wallis Social Research, found Australian men who most strongly endorse rigid male norms are more likely to have sexually abused their partner, sexually harassed women, experienced poor mental health, and displayed problematic gambling behaviours.

Jesuit Social Services’ Matt Tyler said the research showed the negative impacts of believing in outdated ideas about masculinity: “[It] finds that when men believe these rules, the results can be devastating for people in their lives, particularly women, as well as for men themselves.”

Men who most strongly agreed with the rules were 31 times more likely to believe “domestic violence should be handled privately”, and 17 times more likely to have hit their partner. They were eight times more likely to have thoughts of suicide nearly every day, and six times more likely to have forced a partner to do something sexually degrading or humiliating.

“More than half of the men who most strongly agreed with Man Box rules met the criteria for problem gambling,” the research found.

Compared with the 2018 study, which looked at men aged 18-30, the data showed “some good news”, said Tyler, in that social pressure to conform to these standards had dropped by 12 percentage points – especially [regarding] thinking it was required of them to act tough.

“Where we’ve seen less of a change, and it is reason for concern, is related to ideas around the use of violence, and the expectations related to relationships with women,” he said.“For example, regarding the Man Box rules that men should use violence to get respect if necessary, and in heterosexual relationships, a man should always have the final say.”

The report found 44 per cent of men aged 18 to 45 thought a guy who doesn’t fight back when pushed around is weak.

Long-time gender and violence researcher Professor Michael Flood, a member of the study’s advisory group, said it was encouraging that in the latest survey, fewer respondents agreed that men should know where their female partner is all the time than in 2018 (though in 2024, 35 per cent of 18-35 year-olds, and 33 per cent of 31 to 35 year-olds agreed that they should).

Flood said it was positive that traditional models of how to be a man – “in which men are expected always to be tough, aggressive, risk-taking, stoic, heterosexual, homophobic and transphobic, emotionally inexpressive, hostile to femininity, and dominant” – did not receive majority support among young men, and most did not think society was imposing this on them.

“The messages young men receive about manhood have improved in some ways,” he said. “There has been some decline in the past five years in unhealthy and gender-inequitable forms of manhood.”

But Flood noted it was concerning that one-quarter to one-third of young men still endorse “dangerous and sexist models of manhood”.

“This endorsement is not declining fast,” he said. “Men’s levels of endorsement of traditional masculine ideology generally are steady.”

There was little change in attitudes towards male aggression, or in men always having the final say in relationships or marriages, but a shift away from men always knowing their intimate partner’s whereabouts was encouraging.

Flood agreed with Matt Tyler that “traditional masculine norms also constrain young men’s own health and wellbeing”, and said work to promote healthy or positive masculinities needed to be scaled up in Australia, including at workplaces, sports clubs, and in online platforms and communities.

Amanda Alford, acting chief executive of violence prevention agency Our Watch, said it was extremely concerning that men who accepted outdated views about manhood were more likely to have hit their partner.

“This research provides clear direction on what needs to be done to prevent this violence,” she said.

“We need to support boys and young men through the process of learning about who they are, particularly given the pressures they face from many areas of their lives, including friends, family, social media and pornography.

“We need to be having open and honest conversations about porn, sex and relationships and work together to make sure young men have role models that help them understand the healthier and more positive ways of being a man.”

Director of Monash University’s gender and family violence prevention centre, Professor Kate Fitz-Gibbon, said understanding harmful forms of masculinity was essential to helping prevent violence against women.

“This research is critical to understanding how we prevent men’s violence, and how men can be supported to challenge dangerous ideas about what it means to be a man,” said Fitz-Gibbon, who is chair of Respect Victoria, which supported the research.

“A strong focus on primary prevention efforts will continue to shift the dial on men’s attitudes towards themselves and others.”

Yes, but it is a problem. It's a problem that has no partisan component, which can be fixed without political grandstanding. It's also a problem which kills people: the 6% increase in car crashes it causes is a lot of easily preventable deaths.

If you can't come into work because your tires are slashed, you should not be fired.

Three options:

1. Don't talk about issues unique to men
2. Do so in feminist spaces, since this is ultimately a patriarchy / gender role issue
3. Talk about them in a dedicated space

1 results in suicide and men going over to alt-right nonsense. 2 results in the womens' spaces being invaded. 3, run effectively, gives men a space to talk without either squashing feminist discourse or jumping into the 4chan/incel cesspool.

No, I've never run Shadowrun. I most often run 5e, GURPS, and VtM.

...really? The post was clearly a joke, and if it had any stance at all it was the celebration of modern medicine.

I need to wear glasses, and when I switched from square frames to round frames I swear people were less scared of me. Nobody wears glasses to a fight so you look less intimidating, and larger, rounder frames make your face look softer.

Wear slightly fancier clothes, I'm not saying wear a suit but buy some cheap button-down shirts, maybe tuck it in.

You seem focused on your face especially. Learn how to do makeup. I believe a little eyeliner can make you seem kinder. (I don't use makeup myself, so you'll have to find someone else to teach you / verify this.) Done properly, nobody will notice the makeup.

Voice and gait training might also help. I have a theatre background and I know that there are ways to look more intimidating without actually changing your appearance, so you could probably train yourself to do the opposite of that.

Temporary but very effective fix, look at your phone. I'm a big guy myself, and if I'm waiting for a bus in the middle of the night and there's someone else there who seems nervous, I'll just read (or pretend to read) something on my phone. Instantly reduces your threat profile to nothing.

Corporations serve society, not visa versa. If lighter measures do not work, nationalize 'em all. (Many lighter measures have not yet been tried.)

PP would be worse, though.

We can condemn stupid things that children do while still giving them a chance to smarten up.