check the username

It’s not bullshit, but neither is it the only accurate way to look at the situation. I think it makes sense and is a worthy framework for discussion, but if you’re facing someone who doesn’t, you’ll either need to sell them on the framework first or understand their framework and use that for discussion instead. More work for you, but that’s how the world goes round.

tidy doesn’t rhyme, and, uh, in my experience doesn’t rescribe the briefs either

the responses in both threads are clearly split between those who speak one language and agree with the manager, and those who speak multiple languages and think the rule is bullshit

Sounds like that wasn’t your employer, that was your manager. I’d take that to the employer and ask if this rule is authorized, because it seems like a huge overstep on your manager’s part.

I AM YELLING, CARL!

It’s a red flag but not a dealbreaker. I flirt a lot at work because, well, I’m a waitress, it’s part of the job. But my wife is the only one to whom I show my real feelings, good and bad.

It sounds like your ex trusted you with her real feelings. In this case, that meant the relationship was doomed, but isn’t that better than stringing you along or manipulating you?

The two things the Greeks are most famous for are philosophy… and conquering the known world.

Suffering doesn’t make one better. People are shitty by default and have to learn how to be better.

Yes. It would be stupid. You can always get married later if you change your mind, but for now focus on supporting her through the pregnancy and prepping to be good parent to the kid and a good coparent to the girl.

All battles are hopeless when no one fights them.

You’re not wrong, though. But even thirty years would be enough to make a change, perhaps… or maybe it seems that way to me because that’s when I started paying attention.

Friggen Tea Party bullshit was when it really started sliding downhill fast, IMO.

The government needs to adapt, yes, but carefully. You can’t just run with the first or second option, that’s a recipe for regulatory capture.

It’s not “no change is good” but rather “most change isn’t good, so we need to test them until we find the best change”.

that’s what your politics are, you’re basically just politically homeless…and have been since you started calling yourself that.

This, at least, is correct.

What is the point of labels like this if they don’t signal what it is you believe, relatively accurately?

This is exactly why it’s necessary to push back on those who would twist it to mean something else.

I’m sorry, did you need me to keep talking like you’re five?

I know what the generally accepted definition is, I just don’t accept it. Regressives don’t have a right to call themselves conservative and I won’t stop calling them out on it.

Your point remains unmade. If it was a defense of moral relativism, the arguments don’t support the conclusion. If it was something else, I’ve no idea what you’re trying to say.

Conservatives and progressives should agree on a whole lot, especially when we’re all trying to fight off an alarming resurgence of fascism, authoritarianism, and illiberalism worldwide. The disagreement was rarely about goals, but rather methods. And right now the method is clear: Get these Nazi fucks out of power, ASAP.

Exactly right.

This list is all things under attack by the current administration that I want to push back and protect, that’s the point. That was the question I was answering.