To be honest, when I was younger I would have said that I wasn’t a feminist for the reason that I found such generalized criticism to be hypocritical. Since then I’ve kind of grown to be pretty numb to such statements, since I think I understand the intention behind such generalizations (I think being important here, when it comes from strangers I never feel certain whether they’re being hyperbolic or not when they’re generalizing things). There’s additionally the whole punching up vs. punching down argument and, personally for me, such generalized statements do make me reflect and reconsider my behaviour.

But this article is seriously making me think again whether I should be numb to these things. Does such comments, no matter how well intentioned, contribute to making young men vulnerable to getting influenced by people like Andrew Tate? I can see how folk could become more drawn to someone who seems to care for them above a group of people who appear to hate them.

I’m going to have to reflect on this some more, certainly.

Edit: I’m sure there’s many in the 16% of 16 to 29 year olds quoted in the article who are just… nasty folks where it would be incredibly difficult to convince them that women deserve rights in the first place. But if even a small number of these men were otherwise reasonable folks but have grown up to be nasty due to being turned off of feminism in their formative years, then that’s just… well. It makes me feel like I’ve failed them and humanity as a whole.

I was once a huge fan of Nintendo. If there was ever a brand which was one of my personality traits, it was Nintendo (cringe).

I only say this to highlight just how much Nintendo has disgusted me recently. I haven’t financially supported Nintendo for the last year or so and will continue to not do so. The Switch is going to be my final Nintendo console.

If you believe men are having a hard time, then feminism is right up your alley, isn’t it?

Yes, this should be the case from what my understanding of feminism is.

That said, I think there’s an increasing confusion as to what feminism is. There isn’t really one “feminism”. Not all people who call themselves feminists have the same set of ideals. There are lots of different types of feminists (of which some I would say are absolutely not feminists e.g. TERFs).

So when someone says they think feminism is harmful, such as in this survey, I don’t really have a clear idea as to what exactly it is that they’re opposing.

My understanding of feminism is, to put it briefly “we need to destroy the current status quo that certain genders should fulfil certain roles or exhibit certain behaviours, which is something that negatively impacts everyone regardless of gender”. I can’t imagine any reasonable person would think this is a harmful goal.

Wow Sonic and Shadow are dating now? So proud of them. Wishing them all the best.

Microsoft often imposes some additional hardware requirements on major PC makers that sell Windows on their devices, beyond what is strictly necessary to run Windows itself.

Is this another of many examples of Microsoft asserting an unfair market monopoly?

I recently switched to Linux and it only just occurred to me within the last few weeks or so that’s it’s very strange that every keyboard I’ve used has a “Windows” key (often branded with the Windows logo).

My response here is targeted at the other people replying to this message.

I am extremely distressed at the amount of people justifying deadnaming and upvoting the comments justifying deadnaming compared to the amount of upvotes on this comment.

Deadnaming someone because it’s convenient for you is not a good justification.

It is very upsetting for the grand majority of trans people to be referred to by their deadnames. You should not do it unless specifically you are told that it’s okay! Please listen to trans people when they say that this is upsetting and that you should not do this.

Edit: Adding the following:

A simple search for “Emily Young LTT” is all you need to find out who she is anyway? So it reiterate the original comment, there is no NEED for the deadnaming. There is only your comfort and convenience.

I’m not an expert on longtermarism but I have read William McAskills “What we owe the future”.

The quote highlighted about AI is a clear demonstration on how longtermarism is being misappropriated. It describes a “rush” when the impression I got from McAskills book is that AI ethics needs to be very carefully discussed and that rushing into it is the opposite of what longtermists should do. To try and describe it briefly, this is because AI presents the risk of what McAskill describes as “value lock-in” where our current society’s values will continue long into the future, or the values that will persevere into the future will be decided by the few people who create the first generative AI.

In reality, people like Musk probably see AI as a means to push what they believe are the correct moral values long into the future. Which is terrifying…

This is why AI ethics is extremely important. We are already seeing institutional prejudices our current society possesses being perpetuated by AI, such as racism, sexism, etc. This is why when I saw that Microsoft/OpenAI was scrapping it’s AI ethics team that I was absolutely horrified…

The “rush” to produce AI is a problem with Capitalism, not longtermarism. There is a rush to create the first generative AI not because it will benefit society but because it will make buttloads of money.

The problem of “AI” and all labor-saving technology in the last few centuries is not the technology itself but is actually Capitalism.

Yes, you are absolutely correct.

I have something to add to the arguments you have already presented in your post.

The problem with Capitalism is that in order to live you have to make an income. In order to make an income you have to be able to work.

AI, and in the future, robotics, presents an issue to people because it creates less jobs for people to work. And what are people meant to do if they cannot work and therefore cannot earn income? Capitalism requires jobs in order to be a successful system, at least for the common folk like us.

But, should this be the reason that we work? In order to live?

This is how it has always been done, we have to work in order to survive. Whether it was because we worked to procure food otherwise we would starve, or if it’s to work to earn an income to buy food otherwise we would starve.

As humans, we are seeing perhaps the first breaths of an era where we could no longer need to work in order to survive. AI and robotics is still in its infancy and it presents a great danger if it is handled incorrectly (which is currently is). Imagine a future where menial, repetitive tasks are automated and we can all live lives of comfort as in order to eat, we only need to exist. We can focus our time to working for the sake of working, because we find the work meaningful, because it enriches our lives, and because it helps others. A world where we can create art for the sake of creating art and not because we need to create art in order to eat.

I know I am speaking in ideals here, and the real world is different. Basically, what I am trying to say, is that the future I strive for cannot be a Capitalist one. The issue is not the technology, it’s Capitalism.

I’m a vegetarian.

I was, and still am, surprised by how often people will go into a long rant justifying why they eat meat to me as soon as they find out I’m vegetarian. All the while I’m just sat there, not saying anything, because I literally do not care whether or not they eat meat.

Me being a vegetarian is a personal choice for me and myself only. You do you. I don’t care. You don’t need to explain yourself to me. It makes me feel so awkward.

People will often ask me why I’m a vegetarian too. But it feels like a very personal and heavy question to ask someone immediately after finding out they’re vegetarian… I don’t especially want to talk about animals dying all the time and how it makes me sad especially to strangers.

Edit/Addition: It feels like a lot of focus is brought on how vegetarians/vegans force their views onto other people but my experience personally is non-vegetarians/vegans trying to force me into conversations about this topic.