I guess my pessimistic lens is a little strong and I generally don’t trust large companies to act in good faith. So maybe I’m over scrutinizing here and being a bit of a curmudgeon.

I think your perspective is fair, and it’s likely this is akin to a high school faculty dealing with some random word or idea becoming a meme of sorts and causing problems. So they have to write some new rule that sounds ridiculous or weird.

It sucks there’s so much racism and bigotry driving forces in the world that it’s hard to not be dubious of everything. You always kinda wonder about the actual motivation behind things like this.

Calling zionism what it is shouldn’t be discouraged with dog whistles masquerading as conduct policies.

At the same time I’d like to remind folks that not all Jewish people subscribe to Zionism.

There are a couple Jewish lead organizations that fight for the freedom of Palestine and have been very critical of Israel for many years.

Jewish Voices for Peace is one group. I wonder how they’d feel about Twitches new policy. I’m genuinely curious what their opinion would be.

Edit - corrected Jewish Voices for Peace

People can get really defensive and hostile about fireworks and I’ve never really understood it.

I quit smoking at the beginning of this summer because it’s a terrible habit that’s inconsiderate to others at best(and bad for me too). So I quit. The thing is I actually liked smoking…Nicotine is something else(I used nicotine gum for anyone wondering)

So if I can accept that about smoking, why is it so hard for folks to understand that fireworks, while enjoyable, can have detrimental effects to other living creatures nearby? Some of whom might be people? It’s just really strange to me.

My old early 2000s Ford focus that had manual windows and locks died a few years ago. I miss that car, but towards the end every door handle broke and only the back passenger door opened from the outside… which means I always I had to leave a window down(no key hole on that door) or climb through the trunk.

Unfortunately Ford decided to make car doors using a tiny piece of plastic that holds the wire that moves when you pull the handle. When that breaks the handle goes limp and does nothing. But you can’t just replace that piece of plastic… nope. You have to buy a whole new internal mechanism.

Like i said that car died finally, but I’m still salty about the doors. Those broke one at a time about 5-10 years before the engine went. Anyway, sorry about the rant. I loved my not electric windows and doors, but never expected that issue with it down the road.

Do people really buy new phones every year? I keep mine for a minimum of 4-5 years and always have. I had one for so long that it was no longer supported and I was forced to upgrade.

I guess I just never paid attention to how often other people get new phones, but every year seems excessive.

I wanted to find that article before I responded to you, but like I said it read about 10 years ago and not having much luck finding it.

But yes wetnurses were available to all women because not all women can produce breast milk.

If one poor woman’s baby is starving it was not uncommon for a friend or sister to fulfill that role to help them. Women were pregnant more frequently due to no birthcontrol. So a woman lactating was more common. However they weren’t hiring a wet nurse in the same way the wealthy were, and if a poor woman could feed her baby she would. A rich woman(almost) always hired a wet nurse regardless of her ability to produce milk.

I read once that it had more to do with not seeing wealthy women’s nipples. For example wealthy women would hire a wet nurse to breast feed their babies. It was a way to show off wealth and social standing. So the hired help in the form of a wet nurse could show her breasts, but her wealthy employer would not because its beneath her.

So not showing breasts, even for the purpose of breast feeding became affiliated with wealth and power, whereas the inverse was true, showing breasts meant you could not afford to keep them covered.

And that’s not even including the influence of brothels and prostitution.

Let that cook for however many hundreds of years, mix in religion and you get whatever the fuck we have now.

It was an interesting theory and seemed to make sense to me. I’ll have to try to find the article later. I read it maybe 10 years ago so it might take some looking.

Was this some iteration of “straight men don’t care about aesthetics, they care about function” type of thing??

Because that’s such a boring existence. I’m sorry your dad hates aesthetics. I hope you’ve found your own tastes despite him.

When supreme court justice kavanaugh was followed by protesters he had a hissy fit and said they couldnt do that. But it’s totally fine to spy on everyone with a phone and expose their medical data.

These hypocritical fuckheads deserve exactly what you are proposing and I’d fucking love to see it happen.

We could even say it’s to protect the children… make sure certain politicians who have expressed interest in legalizing child marriage aren’t left alone with any.

We can put paper bags over our heads if we forgot our towels though.

And that too

Some of us prefer not drowning in bots and pathologically hostile individuals.

Social media like Twitter preys on people’s fear of missing out.

Manufactured Problem - not being up to date on internet bullshit. Marketed solution - be on twitter. Supply and demand died a long time ago. Now it’s all about manufactured problems, and conveniently marketed solutions.

This sort of psychological manipulation in marketing works. It’s why it’s so hard to get people to leave websites like Twitter, reddit, fb ect. They’ve made their brands synonymous with media trends.

It took long enough, but I’m genuinely happy to see folks wising up and realizing they don’t “need” Twitter. It’s like watching a bunch of people break up with a toxic ex all at the same time.

I don’t know, it was really super weird how randomly it started shoving them in my face when it didn’t previously.

I don’t think Google gives a shit if I have kids, but the republican party has voiced concerns over “the domestic supply of babies” multiple times over the years and I wouldn’t put it past them to give google “gratuities” to shove baby related ads on people in general, not just me specifically.

It’s just a hypothesis I have about the sudden increase in baby related stuff. I’m not dedicated to the idea or anything, but it honestly wouldn’t surprise me if that was the case.

I don’t even want a baby, but I was getting nonstop diaper ads for weeks this summer.

I think it’s because they’re desperately trying to get people to have kids(thats my hypothesis anyway). Not saying yours isn’t picking up you talking about the topic, but I got so swamped with them at one point I was starting to wonder if I was losing my mind. I asked my husband about it and he was getting them too.

It was honestly weird as hell.

Ad revenue is like Crack to corporations. Once they get a taste for it, it’s all downhill from there.

Mostly because it’s the easiest money they’ll ever make and it’s more profitable than subscription models. Gotta see those numbers go up at all costs.

I had this thought too. Probably unrealistic because of all the ways that can go horribly wrong, but somehow that solution seems easier than convincing a certain subset of men to behave themselves.

Same, still playing my ps4, probably won’t buy a ps5 though. I’ll just wait for ps6 or whatever to happen. As of now ps4 plays elden ring and bloodborne(two of my favorite games) so I’m content with it.

Critical thinking and how to cross check your sources to verify if something is true are invaluable skills.

I graduated high school in 2006 and we had to learn both of those in order write research papers. I grew up in a blue state, and went to public school. My English teacher also taught us that “anyone can get a book published, or write an article online, so always cross check your sources and make sure they aren’t making stuff up.”

They taught us those skills so we could write papers for college, but I feel like they’re even more important now just for navigating the internet.

I see your point, I do. But I also see theirs. There will be no one around in the future to enjoy or make art if we continue fucking up the world with fossil fuels the way we are.

Maybe it’d be better to walk around posting little signs on the paintings descriptions with a catch phrase like “like art? Stop fossil fuels” then a little blurb about how there’ll be no art in the future if there is no future.

That’s probably how I’d handle it, maybe even try to work with the museum so the signs wouldnt get taken down. But, that doesn’t get media attention. It’d never end up in the news. Maybe after contacting 50 museums it’d get a small mention, but ultimately no one would care.

Our current news cycles don’t encourage people to act civilly when trying to be heard. So that’s why this sort of extreme behavior keeps happening. It’s a vicious feedback loop and just like climate change we don’t seem to be making any moves to stop it.