• 2 Posts
  • 406 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 25th, 2025

help-circle







  • curbstickle@anarchist.nexustoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldRepublican party right now
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    must say I hit a nerve here, hence unpopular opinion.

    Not really. Its just a stupid opinion.

    If anything - this minority of republicans you are speaking of should be called “neo-nazi”.

    “Neo” = “New”.

    So still a Nazi, just newer. Your complaint is we don’t specify that the modernized Nazis are modernized by name. That is what “neo” means. Modernized or revived.

    So let’s recap - your complaint is that the current batch is not specifically called ‘new’.

    Its not that your opinion is unpopular, its that your opinion is just really fucking stupid.

    Edit: It would seem I am the one who struck a nerve, for pointing out how incredibly stupid it is to specify that these people are, in fact, not 90yr old former members of the Nazi party in Germany.








  • piracy does not

    Piracy is actually a huge driver in both legally purchasing content and secondary purchases (art, toys, statues/models, etc).

    The overwhelming majority of pirates also point to the extreme increases in streaming costs as well as the constantly changing landscape of streaming services needed, sometimes to even watch a single show you’d need 3-4 services.

    I’d also point out that many out there just want their stuff to be seen. Freddie Wong and Matt Arnold recently made We’re All Gonna Die, which was made available in theaters and then a ton of streaming options.

    They then pointed to the availability of a 720p torrent (I’m not going to say that they released it) so everyone could see it. Why? Well maybe people will want to check out their other content, buy merch, or subscribe to their patreon where they make other content.

    But to say piracy is not a driver is incorrect.




  • Slight clarification there…

    Oral contraceptives were approved by the FDA, but the first that went for fda approval as a contraceptive wasn’t until a year later, 1961. It wasn’t available in all states until 1965.

    And most crucially, it was not available to unmarried women in all states until 1972.

    Which all coincides with exactly what I said.

    Again, precipitous drop after the great recession. How does that, at all, relate to the (then 50 yr old) existence of the birth control pill?



  • curbstickle@anarchist.nexustoComics@lemmy.blahaj.zoneBreaking news
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    I’m going to need to see some numbers on that.

    Contraceptives have reduced the number of children who weren’t intended in the first place, which, let’s be candid here, does not make for a good home environment in many cases.

    Studies have shown a massive decline in birthrates since ~2007. This is a long time after the existence of contraceptives.

    Studies showing such issues as “women are prioritizing their careers!” account for a tiny minority of the general public, while studies noting costs of raising children, childcare, the need for both parents to work to afford… Anything, even the costs of childbirth itself, the increasing limits of time off after childbirth (and limits of paid leave) account for a significant portion of the population.

    Following the pill, there was a sharp drop for ~20 years, followed by increases throughout the 80s, small decreases in the 90s and early 2000s, and then a drastic drop beginning in 2008 (as in, after the great recession).

    As far as I’m aware, and as far as I can see by any of the data, economics plays a greater role than the existence of reliable contraceptives.

    Aside from it being a bit silly to try and perpetually make the numbers go up.

    Edit: Somehow lost a whole sentence at the end of paragraph 4