u/arealscrog

No worries. I wasn't sure what the actual stats were so it was good to have an excuse to look them up.

Interesting. What research group are you getting your stats from?

Pretty much every study I've found after a quick google search shows higher rates of infidelity for men across all age groups except one study ( run by the Institute for Family Studies) that showed that among people aged 18-29 women are one percentage point more likely to cheat (11% women vs 10% men).

It should also be noted that in that one study, the 18-29 year old group had the least cheaters of all the age groups.

Trans "comment"? Singular? Are there still people who don't know JK Rowling has made hating trans people her entire personality since making that first "comment" years ago?

God we’re so fucking tribal. This is why this generation shit is so obnoxious. It always turns into a war of who had it better/worse based on stupid stereotypes. I say this as someone who falls into this trap too. It’s stupid.

It almost always relies on pointing to the experience of most privileged subset of the generation you want to position as “better off”(white, suburban, middle class or higher). Then when someone in that group says the claim is wrong, they will either get shat on or others will agree, and the goal posts will shift to excuse their portion of that generation (xennials, zennials, cusp, ect).

The exceptions to the rule will keep piling up and getting argued about until hopefully you realize it’s all bullshit and you’ve just been falling prey to the oldest fucking trick in the book. Divide and conquer.

Every generation has its horrors and its privileges. Some things get better for some people while others get worse.

The only thing that stays the same is that the capitalist overclass are more than happy to watch us pretend to “punch up” at other working class people because we don’t believe our fists can reach the real enemy.

You forgot one of the biggest ones. Golf.

18 holes can take up a significant part of that 22 hours and I know for a fact people bank that time as working hours, including drinks before and after at the golf house.

Do you have an obligatory slash quota you need to meet?

Unfortunately, none of the working class people alive on this planet had the good fortune to be born with a boring future ahead of us. Some of us are just more in denial than others.

Which means they don't really believe their own religious nonsense because they are refusing to disprove it

You're missing some nuance here, namely cognitive dissonance, double-think, alief vs belief, and a barrel of other mechanisms the human brain uses to avoid challenging a belief structure. These are often subconscious or instinctive, or trained into them since childhood, so that they're not even aware they're doing it. So it's absolutely possible for a person to believe two completely contradictory facts at the same time.

If it was as black and white as you're making it out to be, religion wouldn't still have such an incredible hold on people in spite of our access to scientific information. And as that person below said, there were a handful of flat earthers on that expedition who did a 180 on their beliefs after seeing the evidence for themselves.

Don't get me wrong, fraudsters and stubborn people who know 100% consciously that they are wrong DO exist. The flat earth influencers who refused to go on that trip and proceeded to shame the ones who did are like that. But that type are generally among the smaller "cult leader" group, not the mass of followers.

Skepticism and whimsy aren't mutually exclusive. And campfire stories are stories, by their nature, and likely much more worthy of your time than poor ring camera footage.

As are dolphins. Those guys are 100% real and whimsical af.

Please, oh wise troll, bestow upon us quirky chunguses the sacred knowledge of what mature, attractive, female-gaze approved hobbies a man should have.

That’s a pretty big leap you’re making there. It doesn’t look like the person on the left is necessarily focusing on themselves more than the person on the right.

But even if they do, picking a personal style that signals advocacy for causes you believe in doesn’t take so much time that this person couldn’t possibly be working a full time job or contributing to society. In fact, I’ve seen plenty of people who work in stem fields who wear eccentric outfits outside of work. It’s no weirder or more time consuming than wearing a prairie-house inspired wardrobe in 2026.

In fact, I’d say cultivating the trad-wife aesthetic takes just as much time, money and self-focus. We could jump to conclusions here too.

She could genuinely be a completely selfless religious mother who dedicates all her time to her family, or she could be a wealthy right-wing influencer who puts out content aimed at making regular moms feel inadequate because they don’t make their kid’s snacks from scratch while homeschooling them to protect them from “woke”. We don’t know.

Either way, all we have to go on is how they’re dressed. It’s personal bias, not reality, that makes you think one of them is contributing more to keeping the world running than the other.

It is. Fascists are miserably uncreative and they will always co-opt whatever cultural symbolism or aesthetic they think elevates them. Sadly, all it does is tarnish the symbols for everyone else.

I always hope something will make the Norse stuff less appealing to Nazis and cleanse it of their taint, but no such luck. As long as they have a hard-on for their warped idea of Vikings, they won’t let it go.

I dunno, I have some issues with you urinating all over the left lane at high speed.

The gender divide is the oldest and easiest way to keep the masses focused on blaming each other instead of looking up at power structures holding us all down. Pretty much every difference we have as humans gets exploited this way by the rich and powerful. And when one divide temporarily crumbles, they just pick another one to focus on for a while. Race, nationality, religion, sexuality, generation… the options are endless.

Divide and conquer. Until we realize it and stop taking the bait, we’re all losers.

They’re talking about the gif from Emperor’s New Grove, not the vid OP posted

Yeah, see I figured that long haul drivers had a lower rate of accidents just based on the differences of that type of driving. These drivers are also going to be racking up the highest total mileage per driver, I’d assume, and would have a higher ratio of male to female drivers.

So my question is really should we be including long haul drivers in the data if long haul driving is inherently less accident prone suburban or city commute driving?

Most male drivers aren’t long haul drivers, but if most long haul drivers are men and they are inflating the miles driven by men, isn’t that going to skew the data to suggest men have less accidents than women per miles driven?

But yeah, there really can’t be an objective answer to this, especially since there are so many social factors at play here too (ie: women disproportionately drive their kids around, kids= massive distraction).

Thanks for providing some stats. Just curious, that trillion vs billions mileage number, does that factor in long haul and delivery drivers?

Not saying they shouldn’t be counted necessarily, but driving an eighteen wheeler cross-country and a car to and from work are two very different animals. The higher proportion of men to women in those professions would skew the miles driven by a lot, and they really aren’t the same type of driving.

Not to mention several factors would need to be considered to draw a complete picture of who’s objectively a better driver, including consistently driving in congestion traffic and the unique hazards of street and highway driving. I don’t know off the top of my head which type of driving is more deadly/accident prone.

I did give him the benefit of the doubt, but after taking a look at his Facebook I’m even more convinced. He definitely uses AI to write his articles and even his tribute post to Dolly Parton. But when he’s just making regular posts he sounds totally different and tends to capitalize random words (as many Facebook boomers do).

I don’t agree with you that arguing over whether this one guy’s post is AI takes away from the discussion on climate change and therefore we should all shut up about it. There are still plenty of people in the comments discussing that.

But to many of us, the fact that people who have been outspoken about climate change in the past can have this blind spot with AI is an important part of the conversation. Not the whole conversation, just part of it.

I’m confused, why is this comment being downvoted? Is some context missing I’m not getting?

Not saying I know for a fact the article is written using an LLM, but just because the article's author is a real person with credentials doesn't mean they didn't use AI to write this article. Plenty of journalists and authors have "added AI to their workflow" as the euphemism goes.

Just skimming the article in question, I can definitely see things I'd normally associate with an LLM assisted article. A few cases of "It's not just x, it's y", groupings of threes, short little pithy one-liners between paragraphs, and 2 bulleted lists. It also just kind of has that LLM voice that's hard to describe. I'm pretty sure this was at least AI assisted.

Unfortunately, the internet and journalism are becoming so saturated by AI that some writers are picking up its manner of speaking. So even if they haven't generated their article wholesale, they often will have used a chatbot for the research and have become so used to its turns of phrase that they adopt it unknowingly into their writing style.

Thank you! Absolutely agree with you on words and their meanings ! I really wish I’d omitted my first paragraph because the rest of what I said was really more important to what I wanted to say and the synonym stuff was silly and just distracted from it lol

No you make a good point, thanks for hearing me out!

Let me just be clear that I wasn’t saying commanding is a better word than forceful, I was saying it might be a closer adjective synonym to forceful than rough, that the person before me suggested. Forceful is the better word for what’s being said.

I can see where you’re coming from. I think command and dominance are probably on the BDSM end of “forceful” synonyms. Rough is on the less intense end of forceful. YMMV

But either way, consent is the key here. If someone enthusiastically and consistently consents to their partner being forceful during sex, whether that’s just rough or going into BDSM territory, that’s not inherently rape.

Totally agree! But after reading the screenshots and OP’s caption on this post a few times I think maybe they’re the one in the conversation that was arguing that forceful = forced sex and yelling at people to stop using the word. I might be wrong, but that’s how it’s reading to me now.