MonkRome

I don't think Chapelle deserves the level of hate he's received, but he was certainly punching down in his bid to play oppression Olympics. His whole point was one of being jealous that black people have a much longer road to acceptance that trans people. The problem is, because of his discomfort with the topic, his jokes fell flat, which leaves only the punching down. If you're going to cross the line, you better be funny, or people will only see malice.

Iirc somewhat like the fish

Not a huge fan of Chomsky as a person, even if he's said things I agree with. But it's worth considering that he was extremely critical of the exact apparatus that is reporting his demise. Not saying he wasn't a creep, he was arrogant enough to be, but this could all be fiction. Also plenty of people knew Epstein that were not part of his extracurriculars. As much as I want to see a lot of these rich fucks squirm, we really lack incriminating info. And even if we had it, I'm not sure I trust the current people handling the documents.

Anyone using any technology can miss something and end up in the same spot. I think the real takeaway is that there is way too much consolidation of our technology.

I don't follow this either, but devils advocate, a review would find no wrongdoing without evidence beyond someones word. But just because something isn't provable, doesn't mean it didn't happen. At my workplace there is a tenured professor that has been harassing people into quitting for 30 years, and they still don't have "evidence" beyond someones word, not enough to get around tenure. If they were forced to give a statement they would likely say no wrongdoing.

Upper middle class, used to be poor. I've been fighting for things my whole life that would disadvantage our current comfort if they were put in place. I also just helped organize a union at work, because most of my coworkers make half what I make (I'm not in management, but with a tech salary). In contract negotiations. We are not all shitty, though many of my neighbors in a nice neighborhood are greedy trumpists, whining about the scary poors, so I could certainly understand some animosity towards people who enjoy comfort in this shitty economy. But I think many people that grow up poor and get money remember what it means to be poor.

I'm in Minnesota, twin cities, sounds like property is comparable. To pay less than $300k you're probably getting something you couldn't realistically fit a family of 5 or likely something that needs $100k of work to bring up to code anyway. You could get a dump for $150k and fix it up yourself, but most people are not going to do that. Not the most expensive city, but far from the cheapest.

I've come to realize over the years that most TV is problematic, but you can still be consciously aware of it and still enjoy what you like within that context. I think it's worse if you watch it, but have no idea that it's problematic. My dad watches big bang theory sometimes, and that show is incredibly misogynistic for laughs. He has no idea, he thinks the humor is normal. He just takes a lot of that stuff in completely unexamined. My point being, if you are consciously aware of something being problematic, it makes your consumption of it more responsible.

I don't like it, but it's plenty well written, it's obvious why people like it. I think people just like to hate on things they don't like, it can be fun to be negative with no substantial harm, like complaining for fun.

If you're talking world wide you could give everyone on earth that is currently in poverty about $1200. That's enough to help a great deal in poor countries, but it would be very temporary. If you're talking just the USA, you'd be giving everyone in poverty $30k. That would certainly keep people out of poverty for a while. But under capitalism where people have to work many would be back in poverty in a year. Cash infusion would only work if it was permanent like a UBI.

Even if you spent that money to build free housing all over the country, it wouldn't be enough to end poverty, though that would probably be the best use of the money. Just flood the market with housing availability and living gets way cheaper.

Mentally going through all the couples I know and half of them involve overweight men. Absurd to live in North America and think you can't date if overweight, 1/3 of our continent is overweight and the majority of that is men. Over 2/3 of Canadians are in common law relationships or married at the age of 35-44. To be this deluded you have to believe basically 100% of single people are overweight, which is not true. But seeing what you type I'm guessing weight has nothing to do with it, people don't like people with defeatist, lazy, downer personalities way more than they dislike overweight people.

App dating isn't the only way forward, you actually have to have a life and put yourself out there. All my relationships were when I wasn't really looking but still kept my circle of friends wide, and I'm not an extrovert.

At no point in this conversation were they inconsiderate, you on the other hand... Your self righteousness is making you completely blind to self reflection. Take a moment and reread this thread putting aside your moral certitude and it's clear who's tone was inconsiderate.