I think the most shocking this about this image is that it doesn't have an iFunny watermark on the bottom.
I have three siblings. One of them has died. That's a 33% death rate. This shows that statistically, being my sibling is one of the most dangerous things you can be in the world.
100% of people that are born, die. Being born has a 100% death rate. Being born is the most deadly thing in the world.
That's not how statistics work. Your numbers are correct, your conclusion is not.
Correction -- Number of whistleblowers: at least 14, likely more
This whole boeing whistleblower conspiracy theory is just silly. Now, the first one very well may have been killed by them, who knows? But the second one very clearly died of natural causes. He died of a MRSA infection after developing two common infections, influenza b and then pneumonia. Why would boeing go from plainly assassinating somebody, to then trying to kill somebody with influenza b, a usually easily survivable infection for somebody in his age range? Why wouldn't they just assassinate him too? Everybody already thinks they did it, it's not like they saved any face by using such an unlikely method. And how the hell did they even manage to do it?
There is literally zero evidence whatsoever of this being an assassination, and yet half of lemmy seems to preach it like it's the obvious truth. You're all stuck in a conspiracy theory rabbit hole. This man could have been struck by lightning in broad daylight and you people would still find a way to blame it on boeing because of the circumstances.
Also, I feel like, as I'm technically defending boeing here, I need to make it clear that I believe they're a cartoonishly evil and horrible company. Fuck boeing. That doesn't make the conspiracy true.
You're the ones turning the frogs gay aren't you??
Oof. I imagine that's a rather rare occurrence, but I stand corrected nonetheless.
But as usual when it comes to discussing women’s issues, it leaves out a very important part, namely, the role women play when it comes to eliciting this sort of behavior in men.
You can change the argument all you want, but let's not forget you actually said this. Literal victim blaming.
As far as the other half goes, I never said I don't like it when the shoe is on the other foot. Men have it rough in life too, I know, I'm one of them. That's why the only thing I mentioned was the hypocrisy of your statement.
Bear attacks are incredibly rare. Even brown/grizzly bears just want to be left alone, the only bear that actively hunts humans are polar bears. If you're attacked by a grizzly, it's because it thinks you're a threat, not food. Now, true, if you do piss off the bear, then you're probably fucked. So I'm not saying bears aren't dangerous, but that their level of danger can be predicted and avoided to at least an extent.
You can't really say that about people. Most men are good people and would help you, so on average they're safer. But unlike bears, you have to ask, "what if they're one of the bad ones?", especially so if you're alone in a forest with them without the punishment of society to deter them. I mean, 1 in 6 women in America have experienced either attempted or successful sexual violence, and again, that's in a society where they can actually get punished for it. So it's not exactly a statistical anomaly that the man you're stuck in a forest with is a bad actor.
The question wasn't would you rather share a cave with a man or a bear. No, you have an entire forest to avoid the bear in. Unless you're for some reason in a forest with a polar bear, the bear is going to leave you alone assuming you don't piss it off or threaten it. Being eaten alive (it would absolutely kill you first) is simply an avoidable threat. Predictability and avoidability is the key here.
But as usual when it comes to discussing women's issues, it leaves out a very important part, namely, the role women play when it comes to eliciting this sort of behavior in men.
Haha yeah, it's the stupid women's fault that they need to be afraid of men drugging or raping them. Holy victim blaming, Batman!
When a man is useful, they'll exploit him. When a man is neutral, they'll ignore him. When he is dangerous, they will court him.
Lol, I'm sorry, but did you just make a sweeping negative statement about women while trying to argue that sweeping negative statements are sexist?
I think Biden would please a lot more people if he just didn't pick a side. Nobody I talk to, no matter where on the political spectrum they land, likes him supporting Israel.
I get it. Nobody wants to actively vote for a guy supporting genocide. But they need to grow up and realize that if they can't make a good choice, they need to make the better choice, no matter how much it sucks that we're at this point.
Try to refund a second time. From what I've heard, the first request is done by a bot but it will be manually reviewed on the second try.
This is white people twitter, our jokes aren't that funny or creative, unfortunately.
Sure. Because you were able to find success, that means everyone should also be able to do it, no matter how different their circumstances are (like the fact that a game genre may be more niche, or that you actually have to pay for games).
You seem like the type that unironically tells people to just pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
Right, "oh well" is all you can say about that. Which is why publishers are useful to many games.
