

Who needs to stop taking themselves so seriously?


Who needs to stop taking themselves so seriously?


Your example sentence simply uses the english verb “wake” in its original meaning.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wake
Not the adjective “woke” that this thread is about.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke
By 2019, the term was widely being used sarcastically as a pejorative by conservatives, as a way to disparage socially liberal movements as superficial and insincere performative activism.


I’d like to remind you that we’re in a drought, please limit your shower time.


Washing face after going outside, keeping the house clean, and using an air purifier help a bit when at home.


deleted by creator


I’m confused about why people think the guillotine is cool. Feeling entitled to lynch people who you see as the enemy is the symbol of being a psychopath, not a symbol of social justice.


Not really. But try playing a game of sliding stones on ice with some golf clubs designed for precision shots!


That escalated quickly.
Ok many comments bash OP for the word choice “prudish” to point out this is a bad faith troll. I would also point out the issue with “hate sex”. There are people who are not prudish at all, and love sex, and still don’t want to see lewd things. Famously, arousal reduces thresholds for feeling disgust. I would argue that it is quite normal for humans to see overly revealing images of most bodies off putting, unless in an actual sexual situation. Then, there are people, I would be fine calling them prudish in the lack of a better term, as shyness kind of undersells this, who really don’t want to see, hear, talk about, or even mention sex. Someone like that can still really like sex- doing it, not talking about it. So “hate sex” is not the same as “don’t want to see explicit porn all the time everywhere”.


It’s too late to record a baseline, so any metrics will need to work retrospectively anyway.
Yes, I tried both before going self hosted; and both try very hard to make your life difficult if you don’t subscribe. Actually I got hooked on RSS with Google Reader, which was a perfect, simple, free reader. It got shut down, because I guess it doesn’t make sense to provide that service for free.


I will try rephrasing it: its a nonsensical, fucking stupid proposal that gdp should equal earned income, and that somehow if the two are not equal then the difference amounts to slavery.
Do you care to elaborate, why do you even think these two should be the same, and what the difference has to do with slavery, as it relates to the actual meaning of that expression, not random things you don’t like.


I go to work for money (in the job I chose), and I get money, i call that a fair deal. If I was owned by someone, was forced to work, and would not get paid in return, I would be a slave. I mean what do you think it should be like? I don’t go to work and I get paid anyways? Who makes the shit I buy with the money then?


Mm, so if a worker creates added value, that makes the worker a slave? Interesting theory.


Would make more sense if post was talking about slavery, not labor. Labor is compensated.


But these are not ideologies, they’re made up derogatory terms. It’s like asking what is the difference between a fuckwit and a dickwad.


Isn’t the bible god’s perspective? It’s supposed to be his words.


Then why do you equate stress with biopsy?
It is outright ridiculous to say that undergraduate degrees are standard and one would get similar education out of MIT and Oklahoma State University. The professors are not the same, the facilities are not the same, and the peers are not the same. May I ask: are you making this shockingly incorrect statement after completing an undergrad degree at MIT or Stanford or similar school, and being disappointed in it?