That definitely covers some of the workers, but there are people who pursue it as a career rather than a gender identity. There are many documentaries, YouTube videos, and streamer VOD’s about it where you can hear it in their own words.

The word is ubiquitous to describe that culture in Thailand—they literally call them “ladyboy bars”. Calling it a trans bar would be inaccurate in my opinion, because it is not a bar for trans clientele, it is specifically a bar that hires ladyboys as attractive staff, much in the same way a Hooters only employs big breasted women.

When you consider the drugs and toxins we consume, it isn’t that surprising. I feel like I blocked out a lot of memories from his first term, but I still had enough left to know it was a nightmare I didn’t want to repeat.

This is a genuine question: I would never use the word shemale because it strikes me as a slur, but I would use the word ladyboy to specifically describe the gender-bending culture of Thai bar workers because some of them do not consider themselves trans, but pursue that path for the career and lifestyle options. Is it still a slur when referring to that phenomenon in Thai culture, or is there a better word to use?

That is not what is happening here. They aren’t shutting these sites down to keep us safe, they are shutting them down to enforce protection of capital.

He’s used to it.

Every once in a while, businesses make an anti-piracy push to scare off potential users and make a statement. So far, these efforts have not eliminated piracy completely. This is one of those moments.

I was thinking the same thing.

People are using liberal in two different ways here. Most Americans call anything to the left of Republican liberal. Most of Lemmy considers liberal to be center-right and leftist to be Bernie style liberal.

In this case, they were saying that the Democratic elites (liberals) didn’t want Bernie to win, while the true progressive left (leftists) did.

Plot twist: Taliban member.

Don’t wait, ask her out. Nothing is worse than an opportunity missed from procrastination, and some girls have short fuses when establishing a romantic foundation with someone.

Asking her out isn’t a binding commitment for a long relationship, but it does bookmark you as an interested party.

I’m no expert, but it just feels like dropping nukes on Russia is a good way to get WWIII.

I could be wrong, but I think the religious logic is that it keeps the men in the community focused on society and their families rather than casting a wandering eye towards other women. Pretty sure that Muslim men aren’t looking at themselves as barely restrained rapists.

Whole thing is awful though, and I am in no way trying to support mandatory hijab laws.

It says right above that box that it requires the WHOOGLE_CONFIG_PREFERENCES_KEY or that option will be ignored. My guess is that you have to manually edit some config file to turn that key on, or generate an encryption key yourself that you provide through editing a config and adding it to that line.

Edit: you probably need to add your own domain or IP as the root URL too.

That is not what I was saying, and I don’t appreciate your interpretation of it.

You are taking only the most inflammatory version of what I’m saying. Sex isn’t the only intimacy, but it is a very powerful tool for that. There are strong biological drives for sexual expression and satisfaction, and denying those leads to emotional problems—we see this all the time with homosexuals who can’t be happy in a heterosexual box. If someone has been manipulated by one of the most advanced propaganda machines ever created, that isn’t a sign that they are a “terrible” ally.

I’m not saying men only want sex, I’m saying that suddenly taking away a biological tool for human connection that they have typically had, while also living though really difficult times, while also acting like the continued desire for sex is somehow selfish on the man’s part, is a really effective way to make someone listen to the opposing side when they are promising a fiction where men have it good again.

You didn’t answer my question about what allied men should do though.

Well they should consider making the implication clearer, because I honestly feel that the way it is stated will do more harm than good. If it is a birth strike aimed at abortion risks, then call it that.

I have supported women’s rights in every way I know how in my lifetime, but I can’t go along with this movement as it is currently stated—to me that suggests that they need to refine the messaging a little, or explain the desired outcome more clearly.

Short of shooting people, what step should the average man take beyond voting, protesting, donating, and holding other men in our circle accountable? Trump gained ground with women too.

That is reducing my point to the most inflammatory interpretation.

Some men have been very negatively impacted by the political climate of the last 10 years too. They have weathered a lot of “white man” blame while trying to be a force for good. They have voted as an ally, protested as an ally, and held their peers accountable. And now their partner cuts off physical affection.

A man doesn’t have to be a false ally for those realities to put him in a psychological place that will make him vulnerable to conservative manipulators. It opens the door to the question “how’s your liberalism working for you?”

Denial of physical affection is a real grievance, and outside of this protest, it is usually considered an issue that needs to be fixed in a relationship. Think hard before intentionally creating relationship issues to prove a political/moral point.

The movement is to deny sex, not specifically to deny pregnancy. If it was about that, then sterile men and women would be excluded from this movement, but there is no mention of that at all. It’s just “swear off men, swear off sex”.