People are using liberal in two different ways here. Most Americans call anything to the left of Republican liberal. Most of Lemmy considers liberal to be center-right and leftist to be Bernie style liberal.

In this case, they were saying that the Democratic elites (liberals) didn’t want Bernie to win, while the true progressive left (leftists) did.

Plot twist: Taliban member.

Don’t wait, ask her out. Nothing is worse than an opportunity missed from procrastination, and some girls have short fuses when establishing a romantic foundation with someone.

Asking her out isn’t a binding commitment for a long relationship, but it does bookmark you as an interested party.

I’m no expert, but it just feels like dropping nukes on Russia is a good way to get WWIII.

I could be wrong, but I think the religious logic is that it keeps the men in the community focused on society and their families rather than casting a wandering eye towards other women. Pretty sure that Muslim men aren’t looking at themselves as barely restrained rapists.

Whole thing is awful though, and I am in no way trying to support mandatory hijab laws.

It says right above that box that it requires the WHOOGLE_CONFIG_PREFERENCES_KEY or that option will be ignored. My guess is that you have to manually edit some config file to turn that key on, or generate an encryption key yourself that you provide through editing a config and adding it to that line.

Edit: you probably need to add your own domain or IP as the root URL too.

That is not what I was saying, and I don’t appreciate your interpretation of it.

You are taking only the most inflammatory version of what I’m saying. Sex isn’t the only intimacy, but it is a very powerful tool for that. There are strong biological drives for sexual expression and satisfaction, and denying those leads to emotional problems—we see this all the time with homosexuals who can’t be happy in a heterosexual box. If someone has been manipulated by one of the most advanced propaganda machines ever created, that isn’t a sign that they are a “terrible” ally.

I’m not saying men only want sex, I’m saying that suddenly taking away a biological tool for human connection that they have typically had, while also living though really difficult times, while also acting like the continued desire for sex is somehow selfish on the man’s part, is a really effective way to make someone listen to the opposing side when they are promising a fiction where men have it good again.

You didn’t answer my question about what allied men should do though.

Well they should consider making the implication clearer, because I honestly feel that the way it is stated will do more harm than good. If it is a birth strike aimed at abortion risks, then call it that.

I have supported women’s rights in every way I know how in my lifetime, but I can’t go along with this movement as it is currently stated—to me that suggests that they need to refine the messaging a little, or explain the desired outcome more clearly.

Short of shooting people, what step should the average man take beyond voting, protesting, donating, and holding other men in our circle accountable? Trump gained ground with women too.

That is reducing my point to the most inflammatory interpretation.

Some men have been very negatively impacted by the political climate of the last 10 years too. They have weathered a lot of “white man” blame while trying to be a force for good. They have voted as an ally, protested as an ally, and held their peers accountable. And now their partner cuts off physical affection.

A man doesn’t have to be a false ally for those realities to put him in a psychological place that will make him vulnerable to conservative manipulators. It opens the door to the question “how’s your liberalism working for you?”

Denial of physical affection is a real grievance, and outside of this protest, it is usually considered an issue that needs to be fixed in a relationship. Think hard before intentionally creating relationship issues to prove a political/moral point.

The movement is to deny sex, not specifically to deny pregnancy. If it was about that, then sterile men and women would be excluded from this movement, but there is no mention of that at all. It’s just “swear off men, swear off sex”.

I’m asking because you seem to be an ally. How would your partner withholding sex from you improve the national situation at all? How does lack of sex enhance your already current position of being a supportive ally? How does others knowing that your partner is denying you sex entice them to adopt your views as their own?

My point is that the people this is likely to be deployed against are not the ones causing the problem.

Why risk it? Because human companionship can be an extremely rewarding thing.

People can find all sorts of reasons to shut themselves off and create walls to protect themselves from “what if”. I hope they are happy with their decision, but in my experience, that road is a one way ticket to loneliness, ineffectiveness, and resentful feelings.

Are you in a relationship?

This idea is so stupid, in my opinion. Liberal women are likely with liberal partners—they will be punishing their allies. Punishing allied men for things that other people have done is a good way to radicalize them into becoming republicans.

The more we solve our problems by withdrawing from each other and punishing each other, especially those who are not the direct cause of our problems, the more we exacerbate the division in this country.

The only people who should be withholding sex from loving partners when they would otherwise be interested are people who are sleeping with a Musk or a Trump. Everyone else is just causing more hurt with no positive outcome.

Agree to disagree, I guess. In my opinion, it is echo chambers that are the biggest danger, and TV is a bigger echo chamber than the internet.

There are leftist and activist websites you can visit if you choose. Platforms like Facebook and YouTube have a diverse set of creators you can watch, even if they arent pushed by the algorithm. There is no major leftist or activist news organization on American television, and they tolerate no opposing viewpoints on their respective channels.

I’m not trying to be pedantic, but how is it apples and oranges? Both are media delivery systems that are fine tuned to manipulate your opinion. The internet is more fine tuned for individual targeting, but both systems are designed to be exploitative of viewers.

The mainstream media and those who follow it have been confidently incorrect about the state of reality for 10 years or more now—they haven’t proven themselves to be any better than the internet for a source of truth.

Why do you think a parent is in charge of the TV? Algorithms and statistics are determining that schedule too. Even the ads you see on there are targeted towards your area and demographic.