I love how you’ve looked to dismiss the idea that cutting skin off of a babies genitals is damaging and inherently wrong, outside of medical emergencies, as an appeal to nature fallacy. Even if that was how it worked, it’s an informal fallacy.

will aggressively reject any and all “appeals to nature” as to the health effects of someone being beheaded!

If my foreskin was pulled back over the head of my penis, due to the sensitivity of the head, that would be quite uncomfortable for me. If I wanted to walk, I would have to adjust myself or I would be in a lot of discomfort. Yet, that’s how it is for someone who was circumcised without their consent.

The only conclusion is that there would have to be a significant desensitisation of that part of the penis. That desensitisation would also have to apply to the feeling during sex.

How is it that people in the 21st century still need to be told to leave babies genitals alone and not to cut bits off of them? Bonus points if you did it because yahweh like the smell of them rotting.

It’s not even that they don’t care that they did it. Most of the time, they literally don’t think they’ve done anything wrong.

In other news, my toaster absolutely wrecked my T.V. at making toast.

Just like the UK, it always has been. It really screws with the narrative of billionaires trying not to pay for the health, infrastructure and welfare that allows them to extract their wealth.

The first rule of colonisation is to make the colonised pay for their colonisation. It’s just that we all, collectively, forget that our governments colonise at home too.

I know right? Who do these people think they are, shareholders?

That’s the same thing though.

The phrase is more of an indication of a lack of hostility on their part. Even something neutral like “what country is that” could come across as a bit confrontational, in English. It would almost be like asking the question with an assumption that you can’t answer because it wasn’t correct when clearly it is and they would just like to find out more.

Theres a fair amount of performative politeness you have to go through to take the edges off of English. It’s not just fake-ness, as it can sometimes come across to non-native speakers. As I’m sure you know already, English is the a very information efficient amalgamation of 3 different languages. For example, some people find poetry and literature far more rich and descriptive in other languages. Due to it being particularly efficient at information exchange, it can also come across very blunt too.

Just thought you deserved a proper answer, with context, as you were kind enough to give one yourself.

Don’t worry, as the Internet is forever, you’ve already criticised dear leader. We just have to hope they don’t get into power.

I mean, you might as well call it the Walmart expansion model

And they say you guys are humourless!

I wasn’t being too serious tbh. However, as we’re here, I feel like fairytales might have been around a little bit longer than nazis.

You should read about how the Franks “christianised” German saxons and then cross reference that with the time period those kinds of fairytales come from, as we’re swapping reading ideas. It’s just a guess on my part of course.

Apologies for interrupting your work.

Burned alive for using the wrong sewing technique / burned alive for worshiping the wrong god or maybe the “right” God but, in the wrong way, who knows?

Either way, somehow, someway, the idea of being burned alive for not following rules seems to be almost literally burned deep into the Germanic saxon psyche.

They’re not a humourless people. They’re just terrified someone might catch them not working or following the rules and laughing isn’t working.

We got football, pints and coke for that, mate

Wait a minute

Conservatives want you to carry on working for them. Talkies just want to change who you work for. Both can get fucked.

Yup, I took a large venti in your bathroom

Youd be hard pushed to find many who weren’t

Well, they might look like clown shoes but, I’ll have you know, they cost $5,000

Who’s the clown now?

Youre right, the police do have a monopoly on violence and will kidnap you for meeting violence with violence, as they can’t have their monopoly or their authority questioned. Although, I don’t consider that a good thing, myself.

The role of the police has and will always be to protect the assets of the rich. Everything else they do is a side hustle to justify their authority. Please dont get me wrong, some of those side hustles are very important but that’s not what they’re for. Nearly every modern police force is built on either or a combination of the British police officer or the American. One started as a private security force to protect wealthy peoples assets from starving people during the bread riots and the other was founded by slave catchers.

Every single police force started out that way and i just don’t think you can build from or reform-away that kind of foundation.

They know how much control they can assert of the population through controlling social media. They’re not about to allow anyone else to use that, if they can help it. Also, it’ll dilute their messaging, even if it wasn’t as problematic as something like tiktok.

It makes sense the second you stop presuming any good faith.

You know what it’ll be yet?

Yes, they’ll be a wage slave.

Sex education was a muttered warning about the school janitor