This is real. I’ve had folks in my cab that clearly were trying to probe my boundaries to see if I’m an easy target who immediately switched gears the moment I showed my personality. Just because someone is desperate doesn’t mean they want to fuck over someone who’s cool with them and is real. The way you carry yourself makes a difference.

It’s pretty obvious if you meet me in person that I’m a broke artist who cares about real people and detests fake corporate bullshit. That’s not really an appealing target and I have fuck all to give them anyway.

But if some fuck shoots me for being on their street while being trans, or literally just someone they don’t recognize, I don’t get the chance to show how I carry myself.

As a late night cab driver, if you’re ever wondering why I’m on the street rather than the driveway in your sketchy, pickup truck filled suburban neighborhood, this is why.

Give me a shady looking industrial district or run down residential neighborhood over semi-rural suburbia any day of the week. I feel much safer.

I love reading, but the moment an author tries to guilt me into reading their particular viewpoint as though I’m just a slave of the system if I don’t, I check out. I have better things to do, and this person doesn’t have any right to my time.

How are your tube grubs?

Does this still happen? The last time this happened to me I think I was about 9 and they couldn’t have been much older. I think I was wearing a 311 shirt. And that was in like 1993 when ‘poser’ was just about the meanest thing you could call someone.

I mean, to me the meaning of that juxtaposition is pretty clear.

The Gadsden flag highlights individual primacy, but the thin blue line sticker makes it clear that it’s his individual primacy that he’s concerned with. For an anti-authoritarian evoking that symbolism, the ‘me’ refers to the general autonomy of humanity or at least Americans, but in this case it probably literally refers to that specific individual’s autonomy or to the autonomy of the United States as a country in a nationalistic sense.

He’s basically just representing his subculture and thumping his chest about how nobody better tell him what to do or get in his way, while also showing that he’s affiliated with a big gang. Whether he’s aware of the racist speech the symbol is referencing or the symbol’s deeper meaning is kind of up in the air, but it still probably wouldn’t produce much conflict with his sense of nationalist autonomy in an authoritarian context regardless.

Honestly, it’s that context that I think makes the association with Punisher inevitable. Whether the character supports the current gang in charge or not, he clearly believes in an authoritarian model of crime and punishment; that’s the lens he views the world through and the impetus for his actions. If it’s satire, it certainly doesn’t read that way. Though, to be fair, the show is probably a lot more egregious in that regard than the comic (while also likely being more widely consumed).

Frank Castle supports authoritarian measures so much that he goes beyond what the legal system allows for. He literally names himself after an action designed to reinforce authoritarian hierarchy. Sounds pretty on the nose to me.

I mean, obviously birth control is cheaper and easier for everyone, but that aside there should be as many as there needs to be. No one should have to carry a pregnancy to term against their will, and that shouldn’t be anyone else’s business or a political bargaining chip.

Don’t get me wrong, I definitely think the stronger argument to sway those on the fence is to emphasize that better access to birth control decreases abortions and banning abortion doesn’t actually reduce the abortion rate, it just makes it more dangerous. But like, that’s not why I take that position. Personal bodily autonomy is plenty of reason in my book, and I don’t feel a particular need to try to bring the number of abortions down.

But yeah, I’m sure it’s not a particularly fun medical procedure either.

A fifteen year old version of myself somewhere inside just screamed in iptscrae induced frustration.

You know, there’s a discordian game that seems pretty appropriate right now.

I honestly can’t stand slowly scrolling and waiting for the text to appear. What a terrible design choice.

Can we start archiving stuff somewhere that doesn’t block firefox?

Have you ever experienced actual snow? Like, four feet deep with a frozen crust on top? You’re not plowing that with your feet.

They won’t if you get rid of cars. Good luck plowing with a bike.

Skis would probably be more reasonable at certain times of year, but the terrain between cities isn’t exactly designed for skiing.

I know you want American infrastructure to not necessitate some sort of vehicle bigger than a bike, but it literally just does. Wanting it won’t make the change, and making unrealistic suggestions will remain just as ineffective as making no suggestions at all.

Accessibility is also more or less non-existent with these proposed solutions.

If you tried to bike in heavy snow here your entire tire would literally be buried. Especially if there were no plows.

There are, in fact, places that get real snow.

There’s some good information in this article, but I would have appreciated it being a little less of an ad for a podcast.

The title implies that we’re going to hear from scientists about their opinions, but all we actually get in its body is a single quote from one scientist as the literal tagline. Talk about clickbait.

In some places. But if you’re in a non-metropolitan area somewhere that it gets cold and snowy, you’re going to need a vehicle to bring you directly to your house unless maybe you’re downtown, and it’s going to need to have four wheel drive or at least enough weight to grip the snow.

I just want to, for a moment, shed some light on the mental disconnect here for Ms. Clifford.

This is a person who literally ran CNBC’s climate change desk. She is, then, ostensibly aware of all the same information any of the rest of us have about climate change.

And yet, she seems to think we can somehow have a world where everybody can casually fly to Istanbul or some other place they’ve never been every single year, and that’ll be sustainable. Or if she doesn’t think it’s sustainable, she’s still totally fine using her own financial position to do it anyway.

If this is how people who actually focus their careers on climate change think, we’re pretty fucked.

The responses to this thread on SLRPNK of all places just shows how far gone we are. Even here people default to a commerce-centric worldview where the idea of not waking up to an alarm is a ridiculous proposition.

A world in which humans allow their bodies to sleep and wake up naturally? Don’t be absurd!How would we prioritize meaningless toil over our own health and happiness if we entertained our bodies’ own internal clocks?

Waking up in a panic is your duty as a primate.