I really should stop making new blogs for every issue

Honestly

Art of the swindle

Art of the hold up

At of the rip off

NO ONE DIED

Fukushima

NO ONE DIED

Chernobyl

essentially a human-made accident through gross mismanagement and neglect, that physically can't happen with other reactor types (in part because they all have containment buildings now). so yes we can guarantee that nothing even approaching chernobyl will ever happen with modern reactors.

even so chernobyl still killed fewer people than the German Atomausstieg has through increased air pollution because of additional coal being burnt

That’s like telling a communist how bad feudalism was in defense of capitalism.

i think its meant to be the most popular new series (not sure how far back it counts) so i guess it really just reflects the users of the site

but yes WHY are they all like? why arent you guys reading what I like (Which is obviously objectively the best manga)

i do get annoyed about how often its just some super horny thing with nothing going like this though:

from the creators side ive always assumed they must be able to make more money by running in an actual magazine or something, but i dont get why people dont just read straight up porn if they want to see people fucking. like what is the point of WORLDS END HAREM? whats the appeal?

if you want to see lots of naked people in your manga you should just read baki the grappler

Porn manga is 2 pages of introduction and then 15 pages of sex. Useful if you're reading it onehanded if you catch my drift but not if you're trying to replay it in your head later.

Okay.

Most of you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference from a cow and a steer yet you honestly think you’d be able to put people in place who can take care of the men and women who have made such a thing their lives.

The idea was to protect against a few states’ cultures being forced on the rest of the union.

Don’t like guns and hunting? Alright, then live in a state with similar cultural values. Don’t take over the federal government and force everyone else to live the same way.

That’s literally the point behind the electoral college. It’s because the US is literally a Union between 50 semi-sovereign states. The federal government was supposed to only be involved in a very few issues regarding inter-state conflict, with everything else being decided on a state-by-state basis, because each state has its own culture.

They don’t just buttstroke you either. They yell at you first, then if your smarmy asshole and don’t do what they tell you to you get butt stroked. and considering the overall lack of discipline and respect a lot of people have today? Yeah I kind of do think that it’s a good thing. The world operates by rules, you break them you pay the consequences, and too many people have forgotten that actions have consequences these days.

The truth of the matter is that expecting mothers who find out that their baby will be born with fatal defects will be given the option to carry out the birth, rather than terminate early, in order to allow for organ donation.  Note this this is simply an option, and there is no incentive or penalty for either choice.

I don’t think a single other person read that headline and thought they were “encouraging women to somehow disable their fetuses in order to use them for organs.” That’s not why people find it incredibly disturbing and I’m astounded those were the conclusions you drew and thought it needed to be corrected. No seriously where did you get the idea that it was being claimed that mothers were being told to disable unborn children so they could be harvested? That makes no sense, that’s like the logic of Ricky from Trailer Park Boys who thinks that as long as you drag stolen goods down to the curb it becomes garbage and it’s not illegal to steal garbage. The very idea of a baby needing to be disabled in order to justify harvesting it’s organs should be offensive, it implies disabled people have less right to be alive and have their organs inside their own fucking bodies. The article title wasn’t misleading your terribly needless strawman explanation of the title was misleading. This is the exact reason I hate “fact checkers” you need fact checkers for the fact checkers they can be so bogged down in spin and semantics and dumb bullshit like this. The problem is with the harvesting of organs from disabled babies full stop. I didn’t think this needed to be explained but here goes.

First of all it turns human life into a commodity, and not just a commodity but a commodity that would be controlled by the medical system of an increasingly fascist socialist government. What could go wrong?

Like for example it hasn’t even happened yet and already there seems to be confusion about what exactly constitutes fatal defects. A system that always is going to want more organs is going to determine for themselves what is disabled enough? And what level of disabled is enough that you should be determined as scrap parts instead of a person? How do you know the baby will die? Doctors tell people their kids will be born dead or will die soon all the time that live full lives. One of my best friends parents were told he wouldn’t make it past a few weeks and he’s in his late twenties now. Really glad this wasn’t the policy back then.

“will be given the option to carry out the birth, rather than terminate early” No, carrying out the pregnancy has always been an option it’s the harvesting of organs that would be the new factor here. If it’s as you said that they are being given the option to carry out the pregnancy does that mean that right now women are being forced to have abortions? No giving birth is and always has been the default option. I find it gross that you think the only thing people do when they find out a baby will have serious defects is just abort it. These fatal defects represent a percentage chance of survival not a guarantee, so while yes a lot of people just say fuck it and abort at any sign of a problem there are also lots of people that take the risk give birth because worst case scenario the baby dies naturally best case scenario it survives. Medium case scenario it survives but raising it is costly and they have a lower quality of life…but it’s still a life and it should be up to a person to decide if their quality of life is low enough that they would rather not have it at all. 

The horrifying part is they are not talking about stillborns, they’re not talking about babies that died in the womb. They’re talking about babies they believe will die eventually after being born. Who makes that determination? You trust the NHS… a system so shitty they amputate the wrong limbs on people to decide what babies are basically done for before they’re even born. Especially when they will benefit from every single baby a parent decides to allow be harvested. If there is room for corruption there will be corruption.

 So what happens once those babies are born and they’re alive? Do they start up a daycare center thats whole purpose is to wait for babies to die so they can be harvested? I’m sure the care there would be super humane and hospitable. What do they do with the ones that survive? By that point they would have become property of the NHS because they’re not babies they’re just living organ donations that haven’t had the courtesy to die naturally yet. Do they call up the mother and say hey so remember when you told us we could harvest your dead baby…well can you come by and pick up your two year old… that fucker is being really stubborn about not dying like we promised. Or much more likely they’ll just kill the babies immediately to avoid that burden and complication and not give them the chance to survive. I’ve already heard the term post birth abortion or as someone with a soul left would call it baby murder. 

They try to get around this by claiming the harvesting wont be an option until they are told the mother wants to have an abortion. What a great failsafe right? Well except that they can tell the mother whatever they want to get her to say she wants an abortion. They can tell her that her baby will definitely die when it might have a good chance of living. Which happens already without the added incentive of wanting to harvest the organs.

This is to be used instead of an abortion. Now you have the options of either killing the baby, or killing the baby and get some medical use out of it.

So if you’re mixed or a light skin black person you can’t say the word? Even if you have the heritage in your blood, you can’t say it cause of your skin?

And I don’t mean a great great great grandma had a mixed baby and you’re 1/16th black. I mean you have current, by blood black heritage. One of your parents is black, or you for whatever reason have less melanin than your parents who are both black.

You can type in any word, and see a chart of how often that particular word shows up in student evaluations for male/female professors, by field. The charts for “genius,” “brilliant,” and “sweet” are unsurprising, and sad. 

see genius: 

on a related note, I read a study recently about how perceptions of genius keep women and people of color out of fields that are associated with innate brilliance. the article is here but it’s behind a paywall, I think. the main takeaway though, is that: “women are underrepresented in fields whose practitioners believe that raw, innate talent is the main requirement for success, because women are stereotyped as not possessing such talent. This hypothesis extends to African Americans’ underrepresentation as well, as this group is subject to similar stereotypes”

as illustrated by this handy chart: