CW-boost: sexual assault
"De historisch hoge prijs voor koffie stuwt de winst van koffiebedrijf JDE Peets op. Het moederbedrijf van onder andere Douwe Egberts en Senseo heeft afgelopen jaar bijna de helft meer winst behaald dan in het jaar daarvoor. [...] Volgens JDE Peets overstijgen de resultaten de verwachtingen, onder andere door een zeer sterke stijging van de koffieprijs. De prijzen zijn hier meer dan verdubbeld."
Duidelijk. Die 'hoge koffieprijzen' zijn dus voornamelijk het gevolg van winstbejag van Westerse tussenhandelaren zoals JDE Peets, en hebben weinig te maken met het meer (moeten) betalen bij de bron, de boeren die het daadwerkelijk verbouwen.
Een verrassing is het niet, droevig is het wel.
“What radicalized you? Nothing. Not wanting people to starve and suffer is not radical, it’s normal. Stop saying it’s radical to be base level empathetic, and start asking what made people into sadists. Call out sick behavior, because I’m tired of people thinking kindness shouldn’t be the default.”
—credit Tara Belle Enoch
political assassinations (2)
I don't talk about this kind of topic often, because it's very easy for people to steamroll the nuance and misconstrue or misrepresent what I said.
Don't make me regret this.
political assassinations
Something I think isn't talked about enough, is that political assassinations are neither fundamentally effective nor ineffective; it all depends on the context.
Broadly speaking, assassinating someone to stop them from causing damage doesn't work. In relation to my last boost; it's the underlying systems where the harm comes from, the individuals in charge are 'just' their avatars. Shooting Trump would not stop things in the US from falling apart.
But that doesn't mean that there's no purpose to assassinations either. A good example would be the UnitedHealthcare shooting; it didn't directly stop UnitedHealthcare from causing harm, but it sure did spook the hell out of the entire healthcare insurance industry.
Less claims got rejected for a while; harmful policy changes got cancelled; executives of various insurance providers suddenly felt threatened and were more careful with what they did or said publicly. These were indirect but useful effects.
It wasn't removing a CEO that made the change; it was connecting very visceral consequences for the perpetrator, to the harm being caused, making other executives afraid of exercising their power. The public and sensational nature of the shooting contributed to this effect.
Should a whole society be run on this concept? Absolutely the fuck not. Can political assassinations be an effective political tool for dealing with gross power imbalances where other solutions have proved ineffective? Certainly, as long as you have the right expectations.
There are numerous times where I think "if that person simply had better aim, the world would be so very different".
But then I remember that where we are right now globally is not down to one or two evil people - but the result of rot in many social, economic, and governmental systems. The people we think are making evil choices are avatars for the system, more than individuals.
We have to fix the systems.
EDIT: They're still evil assholes. I just mean they're replacable, not unique.
Also it was clicking and making an intermittent 'sad beeping' noise so I'm pretty sure it's fucked 🙃
... did I just get transported a decade back in time? http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/
"De historisch hoge prijs voor koffie stuwt de winst van koffiebedrijf JDE Peets op. Het moederbedrijf van onder andere Douwe Egberts en Senseo heeft afgelopen jaar bijna de helft meer winst behaald dan in het jaar daarvoor. [...] Volgens JDE Peets overstijgen de resultaten de verwachtingen, onder andere door een zeer sterke stijging van de koffieprijs. De prijzen zijn hier meer dan verdubbeld."
Duidelijk. Die 'hoge koffieprijzen' zijn dus voornamelijk het gevolg van winstbejag van Westerse tussenhandelaren zoals JDE Peets, en hebben weinig te maken met het meer (moeten) betalen bij de bron, de boeren die het daadwerkelijk verbouwen.
Een verrassing is het niet, droevig is het wel.
hospital/doctor advice for neurospicy folks
If you get some uselessly vague advice like "don't eat/do things like <list of hyperspecific examples and nothing else>", keep talking and asking (and mentioning your understanding so far out loud repeatedly, even if it's probably wrong!) until they tell you the underlying mechanism.
Example:
"Avoid intensive exercise."
"Okay, what qualifies as 'intensive'?"
"Well, try to avoid sports like football or tennis, for example."
"Okay, but what about VR then? It's virtual so you can't get hit by anything, but I don't know if that's safe enough."
"Ah, well, you should avoid any kind of exercise that causes shocks to your body, like when jumping a lot."
And just like that, you learn the underlying mechanism that the advice originates from (which might be "shocks to your body can cause issues with healing" like in this case), and now you can reason for yourself about whether something is or isn't safe to do, instead of being limited to a (usually heavily neurotypical) set of 'common' things.
(Sometimes you can also just ask point blank what the underlying mechanism is, but it's pretty much luck of the draw whether you get a doctor who trusts you enough to actually engage with that.)
I was looking up something else I recalled that cloudflare had and found the exact user agent in tech info page for cloudflare always online thing
the thing that uses the internet archive when the website is down
I—
hospital/doctor advice for neurospicy folks
@joepie91 oh yeah! if i can add, one thing I find really helpful with this kind of thing is, even if it seems clear, ending with a reiteration of your full takeaway for confirmation, and tossing in another example if you can
like "okay, so I'm avoiding shocking my body from jumping, maybe running around, that kind of thing?"
this could just be me, but i always find it SUPER helpful when the conversation ends with a "yes, that's correct"
Technical debt collector and general hype-hater. Early 30s, non-binary, ND, poly, relationship anarchist, generally queer.
Sometimes horny on main (behind CW), very much into kink (bondage, freeuse, CNC, and other stuff), and believe it or not, very much a submissive bottom :p
Feel free to flirt, but if you want to actually meet up and/or do something with me, lewd or otherwise, please tell me explicitly or I won't realize :) I'm generally very open to that sort of thing!
Further boundaries: boosts are OK (including for lewd posts), DMs are open. But the devil doesn't need an advocate; I'm not interested in combative arguing in my mentions. I am however happy to explain things in-depth when asked non-combatively.
My spoons are limited, so I may not always have the energy to respond to messages.
Strong views about abolishing oppression, hierarchy, agency, and self-governance - but I also trust people by default and give them room to grow, unless they give me reason not to. That all also applies to technology and how it's built.