I’ll start, I missed the outdoor cats struggle session so i don’t know what its deal was except a vague idea that outdoor cats were bad, so I’ve let my two cats stay being outdoor cats because I feel bad locking them inside, like I want to give them some experience of freedom to go where they please so they can live more fulfilling lives

Edit: also kruschev is imo a lot better than most hexbear users give him credit for

  • mkultrawide [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I hate the quote “the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.” I am positive I can demolish his house with his killdozer.

    EDIT: I’m pretty sure I got yelled at the last time I posted this lol.

  • SeventyTwoTrillion [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The best struggle sessions need to not be so important that they might split the site (unless getting rid of the reactionaries is the point), but also not so unimportant that nobody will give a shit.

    It also needs to be something that people will have a personal opinion on, so like “Should we have critical support of this small party from 1952 in Liechtenstein” probably won’t bring engagement because nobody knows anything about it.

    And finally, it should be something that hasn’t been debated to death already in the mainstream, so that people aren’t already tired of talking about it.

    so the outdoor/indoor cat thing was purrfect. outdoor cats do have very real-world consequences on species but aren’t like, a driving cause of ecological destruction unlike capitalists, people have opinions on it because many are cat owners or know cat owners, and it wasn’t something all over the news already.

    my only real idea is “Nuclear energy: good or bad?” but that’s been a public debate for decades now

  • beef_curds [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    1 year ago

    Can we do “please use a washcloth in the shower?”

    I think it has the potential to really annoy the core audience here, and also gives room for loofah posting.

    • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There’s not really anything to argue about here, I think everyone can agree that altering a babies genitals is bad. I don’t see how it becomes contentious unless you start including stuff like male initiation rituals into the mix

    • edge [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Permanently cutting off a body part (especially such a sensitive one, especially on a literal baby) without consent or medical necessity is bad, there’s no good argument against that.

      The best argument I’ve heard for circumcision in general is hygiene, but like, just pull your foreskin back and wash well, it’s not that hard.

      Also reminder that it’s only a thing in America because the Kellogg’s cereal guy thought it would stop masturbation, which it doesn’t even do.

      And now the most contentious part:

      I feel like most defenders just can’t accept that their dick got messed up for no good reason. Which yeah, it must suck, but don’t do it to others because it was done to you.

      • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        I feel like most defenders just can’t accept that their dick got messed up for no good reason. Which yeah, it must suck, but don’t do it to others because it was done to you.

        One of the most horrifying and weird common grillman takes is when they normalize the idea of circumcising their sons “to look like their old man.” kombucha-disgust what-the-hell sus-torment

        • autismdragon [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          My dad said this lol. But my mom was a crystal loving weirdo hippie at the time and refused to allow it, and thank god for that.

          (I feel almost bad posting this because 99/100 times my dad was the better parent.)

          • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            My dad said this lol. But my mom was a crystal loving weirdo hippie at the time and refused to allow it, and thank god for that.

            It’s kind of spooky that they somehow told you or you found out how close you came to an unnecessary surgery you didn’t ask for and you didn’t want.

            • autismdragon [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Never really thought about it, but you’re right. I think its because I accidentally saw my dad’s dick once and saw his lack of foreskin and asked my mom about it or something? Can’t remember.

              • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I can’t even fully get down to why the statement “make the baby look like the old man” creeps me out so much. The pathology of it is weird even if no direct sexual connotations are made.

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        The best argument I’ve heard for circumcision in general is hygiene, but like, just pull your foreskin back and wash well, it’s not that hard.

        Yeah, that argument is bull. It’s just flat out not a real thing.

    • iridaniotter [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do we even have enough people that are pro-circumcision? I think the most contrarian take you’ll get is that it’s not equivalent with FGM like some redditors would say.

      • edge [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s definitely nowhere near as bad as FGM, afaik the male equivalent would be cutting off the entire head, but it’s still comparable in that it’s a permanent genital modification done to a baby. I consider it to still technically be mutilation, but I understand using that word can imply equivalence between the two.

        • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I actually have some nuance to throw on the fire, and I’m going to put this behind a CW: because it’s not nice to talk about, but it deals with NGOs misrepresenting cultural practices to further NGO imperialism.

          spoiler

          Liberal NGO imperialism uses, or at least used to use, FGM as a bludgeon. There are a great diversity of “female circumcision” practices. Some, like infibulation, are horrible and cause enormous damage and trauma. Some involve or more less destructive surgical mutilation, including some practices which are directly analogous to male circumcision. And some, and this is where the NGO imperialism becomes more obvious, don’t involve any cutting or removal of tissue. In some cases a needle is used to produce a drop of blood which is considered sufficient to achieve the necessary ritual cleanliness or whatever. In some cases there’s no blood at all - In one example a needle is held near the clitoral hood and a drop of chicken blood is dabbed on the body - The “circumcision” has become entirely symbolic with no actual harm to the child.

          But infibulation and other practices where there is actual cutting are so horrifying to westerners (and many people from the cultures where it’s practiced) that NGOs found if they inform westerners about infibulation, then use the broad term “FGM” to encompass many different practices from across a broad swath of the world. All those cultures would be stained by the association with infibulation, and NGOs could use this to justify whatever interventions they wanted to carry out under a “save the women” campaign.

          Okay that’s my take. Carry on.

          And unfortunately I don’t have any sources on hand. I looked in to this once, but it was years and years ago.

      • ICantStopSuckingDick [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think the most contrarian take you’ll get is that it’s not equivalent with FGM like some redditors would say.

        That would only be an appropriate response to saying “what about men” in a thread about FGM, which I have seen a million times, but I’ve never seen a stray post on circumcision that would warrant it.

    • Erika2rsis@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      Am I allowed to say “this, but only half-ironically”?

      The problem isn’t really with dictionaries, which are a great tool for documenting and learning a language as it changes. I have nothing but respect for the editors of dictionaries. The problem is more with the way that a lot of people treat dictionaries as an authority, even though that isn’t what they’re supposed to be used for. This ends up being just one way in which a sort of hegemonic standard language is established/reproduced, which marginalizes non-standard language use.

      …I dunno where I’m going with this. I just started typing and then blacked out for a second.

      • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        nono 1. you never admit irony voluntarily and 2. blacking out and continuing the rant is what starts the best struggle sessions. in the spirit of this thread, BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD, AND THE POST MUST CONTINUE FOR HIS THRONE

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Prescriptivism is racist! Every culture and subculture has “correct” grammar! Everyone has an accent even if they don’t acknowledge it! You’ll never catch me alive spelling police!

        *jumps out the window on to a waiting horse*

    • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      100% unironically absolutely agree. Standardization of spelling was a bougeious trick played on society to make factory work more efficient and linguistic prescriptivists are are scum.

      Descriptivist gang gang!

      Oh sit I just realized I fucked up this meme now I have to fo and fix it.

    • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 year ago

      the problem with this one is that all the libs/chuds have the biggest opinions. it’s hard to struggle over “he’s fine, the US should leave Venezuela alone”

      • MaoTheLawn [any, any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I guess so. Selfishly I guess I just wanted to hear people’s takes on it who were better read than me on the situation so I could have some data/resources to look at. I figured that the best way to get that was to do some infighting, lol.

        Takes on most countries are “they’re fine, the US should leave them alone”, I was hoping for further insight.

      • barrbaric [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, like, I think it’s pretty difficult to judge how well eg he’s managing the economy when they’re under crippling sanctions. Like okay that means he’s worse than Fidel but christ that’s a high bar.

          • WoofWoof91 [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            1 year ago

            the one “failure” that comes to mind was that time a Venezuelan navy guy thought stopping dead in front of an ice breaker was a good idea
            in a vessel that was essentially made of fibreglass
            versus something designed to plow though sea ice
            i get why Maduro went all “this is a grave attack on us” and all that shit, but come on, your navy guy is not the smartest lmao

      • MaoTheLawn [any, any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hahaha, yeah, it was some gibberish about Guiado, I honestly couldn’t tell if they were saying he was good or bad it was so incoherent.

        Anyway, before I could figure it out my post actually showed as -1 comments due to the deletion.

    • axont [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maduro does shady stuff like he’s involved in drug trafficking, but also his country regularly has its boats robbed and its money stolen by imperialist governments. I doubt he feels good about making money from mafias and drug cartels, but Venezuela has to bring in the money somehow. And imperialist nations have made it their mission to cripple Venezuela as much as possible through economic sanctions.

      If he has most legal avenues of money cut off, it’s only reasonable to expect he’d get involved with shady things. A country has to make money somehow, and at a certain point you have to decide what’s more moral: letting people starve or selling drugs.

  • Infamousblt [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    We can restart the struggle session about when 17 year old children make one big bad decision and that makes them irredeemable for life no matter what end of story. That was a fun struggle session. It’s extra fun because it’s also a far right wing view depending on the mistake, so it gets everyone upset

  • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think dogs should be allowed to stay outside all day provided they have shelter and lots of water.

    idk I’m trying to think of a really good one but I can’t come up with anything.

    How about “Reading Marx is revisionist because Socialism is supposed to be scientific and relying too much on a “golden age” of theory is akin to reactionary thinking”? Is that anything?

    • Nakoichi [they/them]@hexbear.netM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ooh that could be a good one. Could also just have the revisionism one, since almost nobody agrees where the line is there, it’s like arguing with people anywhere between Idaho and Missouri what “midwest” means.

    • barrbaric [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      How about “Reading Marx is revisionist because Socialism is supposed to be scientific and relying too much on a “golden age” of theory is akin to reactionary thinking”?

      I feel like that’s just answered by Mao’s “Against Book Worship”.

    • edge [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think dogs should be allowed to stay outside all day provided they have shelter and lots of water.

      If they want to, sure. But chaining them up outside and leaving them there all day or just never letting them inside isn’t good.

    • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hell yeah, I can work with this.

      I will literally constrict my own ravioli and become anerobic before I tolerate living in niccotine hell again!

      • Zoift [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think Covid & climate induced wildfires have caused a real shift in the perception of air quality. In that we’ve all realized its really shit. CO² levels alone in crowded buildings commonly exceed thresholds recognized to cause minor cognitive deficits. Even in hospital settings most modern buildings have a pretty pathetic exchange & filtration rate with the outside air, and thats saying nothing of the basically non-existant regulations on other public or communal spaces.

        Modern society requires drastic retrofits and rebuildings to basically everywhere to have decent quality air. Under global communism there will be robust enough filtration systems to let me smoke a fat blunt at Kroger.

        Edit:Also diner food hits different when the cook gets ash in the pan. You just dont get it.

  • SootyChimney [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The struggle session I’m always ready for: When are reactionaries deserving of death rather than a chance at rehabilitation?

    • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Depends on resources.

      Reeducation is always preferable, but resources to do reeducation are non-existent during revolution, civil war, etc. And you will not have the resources to hold them in camps either. There will be quick popup courts and sentencing out of necessity when resources are low.

    • axont [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Depends on what they did and how compliant they are initially. Like China’s proud of rehabilitating Emperor Puyi, even though the guy was a war criminal. Despite that he was cooperative with the new government and he was put through like a personal psychodrama where he was forced to meet with victims of the Japanese occupation. They did this to him for decades.

      Convenience is the real answer. If they’re responsible for genocide and have powerful allies elsewhere in the world, no good can come from keeping them alive. If they’re not cooperative and keep agitating fellow reactionaries, then get rid of them. I guess there’s a risk of turning them into martyrs, but there are probably ways around that. Like how the Soviets burned the corpses of Nazi officials so there wouldn’t be graves.

      • SimulatedLiberalism [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This was only possible because by the time the Chinese communists took power, there hasn’t been an emperor in China for 37 years. That means if you were born in the year of the Chinese revolution in 1911, by the time the Chinese Civil War ended in 1949, you would already be 38 years old probably with teenage kids of your own already. You and your kids have practically lived your entire lives without an emperor.

        If you think about how the Russian revolution happened, the situation was far more precarious because there was an immediate connection to the memory of living under the Tsar, and there were forces that would want to restore the imperial rule. In this case, would it be possible to rehabilitate the Romanov family?

        • axont [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, in the case of the Romanov family, other countries were foaming at the mouth for an excuse to invade the USSR. Restoring the old royal family was one of the justifications.

          It’s hard to restore a royal family if the entirety of them are dead.