Hostility to a person is not hostility to a message. There were other people saying the same thing and getting upvoted for it :)

Removed by mod

And yet, based on context clues (upvotes on other replies), we can guess that the downvotes on that comment are based on its tone and not based on its message, which other comments delivered quite successfully. This is the exact definition of cherrypicking.

I just feel like it’s always better to use real examples than manufactured ones, and holding up troll comments like this can do more harm than good for the cause.

Removed by mod

It’s sad to see stuff end, but honestly I’m glad whenever fiction gets a real ending instead of just dragging out for a million years.

And it looks like the author is planning a new comic about gay bird boys, a topic I somehow keep finding more comics about, lol.

This art is very cute so I went to read the comic and it is also very cute!

And for once it’s some mer content that’s not full of the dreaded (by me) mermaid knees…

I am under no circumstances saying you can’t criticize art or say that the writing was bad or whatever you seem to think my position is.

Writers can and do get fired for not doing the job they were hired for and rarely get to lead the creative process (and usually if they do they’re like, writer/director, or a big name). All I’m trying to say is that a worker can do a good job within the bounds they’re given and still have the result be terrible because the bounds were terrible.

You seem to be giving a LOT of agency to writers for the stories they tell. Some stories are going to be something writers worked hard on wanted to write, and in those cases ya they should be blamed for the resulting flaws, but many times they are constrained by the instructions they’re given.

To go back to the metaphor, did the worker decide that the stuff you need goes out of your reach or are they putting it where they were told to?

“Just following orders” absolutely does excuse bad writing as long as it’s not harmful. I wouldn’t get mad at a writer of a thing a studio ruined just like I wouldn’t get mad at a grocery store worker for rearranging the shelves for the fifth week in a row. Just because I don’t like it doesn’t mean doing a stupid and pointless job makes them a bad person. If the writing is racist or whatever, sure, they’re complicit, but writers have to eat and it’s not morally wrong to write a boring script if that’s what your boss is asking you for.

The problem is, nazi is a political ideology, but Russian is a nationality and ethnicity. I agree with your point about gay nazis, but would you say the same thing about gay germans?

So guys who say stuff like “I prefer natural looking girls, not ones with caked on makeup” or “I’d only date a virgin. I don’t want any roast beef” or “no fatties, I only like thin girls” are what? All secretly gay or ace?

ETA: my point is, people do comparisons all the time when talking about how one person is more attractive than another or than most other people (some more mean spirited than others). It often isn’t right or cool, but being mean doesn’t mean you’re not attracted to the person you’re contrasting.

You seem to be saying no one attracted to women would ever denigrate them? Have you seen straight men before?

The point is never that we need more democrats. The point is always that we need fewer Republicans. Democrats refuse to make things better, but they typically block things from getting worse, which is a better starting point than anything the GOP would give us.

So please, organize, protest, do whatever activism you can do, but on voting day take the little bit of time and effort to block Republicans from undoing all that hard work, even if it means voting strategically for a pile of shit.

The left will always be fighting against the administration to some extent, and through voting we get to pick our enemy, and the dems are going to be an easier fight and on fewer fronts.

It’s not explicitly trans (like atkion said), but it is hosted on blahaj.zone, an explicitly trans instance.

OP is implying gender transition. Do you know where you are right now?

Yes. People say it outgrows its premise but I’m really not sure that’s possible, and I noped out after the first episode so I wouldn’t personally know. Explanation point I think does a good job of exploring both the problem and why people still defend it

The problem with calling these tools AI is not really an argument from definitions. The argument at its core is saying that the general public brings a lot of assumptions to something that’s being called “AI”, which aren’t true but benefit investors.

Like, all those stories of chatgpt citing fake studies and fake case law blew people’s minds. If you know what chatgpt is (a fancy predictive text algorithm) these are pretty unsurprising events, but a lot of people had heard “AI” and applied their own associations onto its perceived capabilities, which was exactly the point of calling it “AI” instead of “LLM”