I was forbidden from having a MySpace account. It didn’t stop me.

Infinitely incorrect. Not reproducing is the greatest lack of a negative impact a single person can have on the environment

Don't stop there. You can end all your emissions now by killing yourself.

NOTE: I would not like anyone to kill themselves. I am pointing out the logical end to this particularly stupid argument.

Unfortunately, I don't think that's true. Here's some US data I found with one quick search.

To add to that, as underdeveloped areas become more modern and income levels increase, it tends to follow that meat consumption increases along with it.

I would be very happy to be proven wrong on this.

I’d say the person repeating the fossil fuel talking points.

I'd say it's the one discouraging people from changing their habits, thereby continuing to give money to fossil fuel companies and big ag.

Yes, also vote. But discouraging people from changing is so obviously in favor of the groups you purport to be against.

I provided my source showing BP hired a marketing firm to get the public to focus on their individual carbon footprint.

I find that comments like these seem to give the person making it license to continue doing things counter to their stated goals of reducing the affects of climate change. I'm sure it makes you feel better about doing it but I'm here to say, you can certainly make a change on your own, every single day and do not have to wait to act twice a year (in the US example) to vote to improve things.

That is a good example and heavily informs my voting habits.

What’s more realistic to change? A few dozen companies or billions of people?

My comment was meant to encourage the readers of the thread to make a change. So I think I'll switch around your question.

What's more realistic to change? YOUR own consumption habits or corporations?

What's ironic is your argument is perfect for discouraging individuals from making changes in their own lives which would improve climate change. Who is the shill?

Obviously women DO have it worse

In what ways? That's important.

For example, we're WAY better at killing ourselves.

“But the defect that prevents independent presidential candidates West and De la Cruz from appearing on Georgia’s ballot does not pertain to the number of signatures acquired; it is that West’s electors and De la Cruz’s electors filed no nomination petitions at all,” Warren wrote

https://apnews.com/article/georgia-election-cornel-west-cruz-ballot-access-7e819ec5e06925e88bc36a20b0d69526

This is who you want representing you? They couldn’t even properly get started, seemly because of a misunderstanding of the law.

I also find this quite telling:

A spokesperson for West’s campaign urged voters to still choose him even though such ballots wouldn’t be counted.

You had no chance before though third party voters don’t like to admit it. Now you literally have no chance in hell and yet you still want to siphon votes. Hmm.

“ YoU CAN’t kNow Gods True nAtuRe”

Proceeds to give you prescriptive moral guidance as if they know gods true nature.

Hello fellow former southern Baptist.

I hate to admit it took me way too long to realize the blatant hypocrisy.

Glad you made it out.

Ahh yeah. That’s tough.

If you’re in a position to sell snacks I wonder if that would do well for those walk ins.

Atheists: Us too, right?…

Notice this response isn’t “that’s wrong and here’s why” it’s “someone else also said this”.

Even if it were true that I was repeating BP taking points, that’s not a good reason to discount it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

To help drive the point home, how many widgets will a company make if no one is buying them anymore?

Corps make and sell what we buy.

Arguments like yours seem to condense down to “I won’t change until a corp forces me to” which makes no sense to me.

That's how Reddit used to work until they made the idiotic change (IMO) to go the other way. A blockee loses the ability to even participate in any thread/post started by the blocker.

For example, after the change if I blocked you now, you wouldn't be able to respond to me or anyone else further down a thread I started.

This is a boon to bullshitters, disinformation campaigns, etc since those people could just post their bullshit and then block anyone who attempted to call them out.

I meant in terms of hiding a particular user.

To me, blocking means "I don't see $". Not "$ doesn't see me". Ad blocking, script blocking, site blocking via DNS, etc is my mental model.

.... I'll allow it.