Recent comments in /f/articles

neku wrote

Reply to No, heritability will not tell you anything about education policy by Moonside

i know that some people take freddie de boer quite seriously but every time i encounter him he's going off half cocked on some obscure technical point that serves nobody. plus he posted cringe on twitter like ten years ago. i don't remember the details of that but if i remember right it wasn't good

3

cute_spider wrote (edited )

Reply to The Money Is In All The Wrong Places by oolong

I do not care that some of this money was made in "options" or "bonuses" or the other kinds of ways that rich people hide how they pay themselves. That's how much they made; that much money, which might have gone anywhere and to anyone in the way that money does, instead wound up stopping with them.

Memorizing this for the next time I talk about wealthy people with my boss or dad

5

twovests wrote

Reply to Toxic Gaslighting: How 3M Executives Convinced a Scientist the Forever Chemicals She Found in Human Blood Were Safe by oolong

In subsequent weeks, Hansen and her team ordered fresh blood samples from every supplier that 3M worked with. Each of the samples tested positive for PFOS.

It's common knowledge by now, but imagine how horrifying it must be to be the first person to know that all of humanity (and later, every animal blood sample as well) appears to be contaminated by industrial chemicals.

The only blood samples without PFOS chemicals were from ones before 3M created PFOS.

Shortly after learning these results, her boss took an early retirement.

Whe she didn't know was that 3M already knew the PFOS were harmful.

Starting at the second-lowest dose that the scientists tested, about 10 milligrams for every kilogram of body weight, the rats showed signs of possible harm to their livers, and half of them died. At higher doses, every rat died.

Man.

I'm halfway through the article but this is a doozy. I knew everything was bad, but it's even worse than I thought.

When this article was posted on orangesite, someone shared an anecdote that I (through connection to 3M employees) had heard as well. (iirc it's also backed by stats, but i have no more time to post)

Related anecdote: I know someone who used to work in Oakdale, Minnesota, a town that 3M literally used as a PFAS dumping ground. I'm not saying it's normal for a kid to die of cancer at the local high school, I'm just saying it happens more often there than anywhere else I've ever heard of.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/3M_Contamination_of_Minnesota_Groundwater

4

neku wrote

Reply to Toxic Gaslighting: How 3M Executives Convinced a Scientist the Forever Chemicals She Found in Human Blood Were Safe by oolong

articles like these always sort of stun me. it always comes out that like thousands of employees knew the risks and ramifications of their company's products in like 1950 and nobody said anything to the press or to the government or anything until it was too late. i can't fathom it. imagine knowing without a doubt that your company was essentially poisoning people and the environment and not saying a word because what, you collect a paycheck from them? why were the generations before us so fucking gutless? is it still like this today?

6

neku wrote

Reply to Tate-Pilled by Moonside

this article is good insofar as it describes this cultural phenomenon (that in my mind is sort of already in the past, being that andrew tate stopped really being notable once the cops got him for being a fucking rapist)

But in Men, Wynn gently asks her progressive viewers to consider the possibility that men’s-rights activists’ concerns contain a nugget of truth: that the suffering of men is real, especially among those who were never high on any kind of ladder. Much feminist theory accounts for this, but many online feminists don’t. “Maybe the average man is also oppressed by the system the feminists call patriarchy,” Wynn says. She describes a “genuine crisis of male identity” caused by the decades-long shake-up of cultural gender norms. “The traditional protector-provider role of men is being replaced by a more equal and undefined gender dynamic,” she argues, and this loss of purpose has contributed to higher rates of depression, anxiety, suicidality, and loneliness in men, which is not ameliorated by well-meaning liberals perpetually calling them “toxic.” “I think a lot of feminists have failed to imagine the ways that being treated as invisible or dangerous can also kind of suck,” she says.

i just want to talk about this bit for a sec. theres this pattern of infantilisation of men in this line of thinking that i cant get over. men have lost this supposedly sacred protector-provider role (where they were free to beat and rape their wives and leave them alone to raise their children when the going got tough, but hey, i guess they felt that they were protectors/providers, and that's what matters) and now theyre just so helplessly adrift in this Just So Darn Complicated Post-Feminist World!! if only those nasty feminists could throw them a bone once in a while and realise just how hard it is to be a man now that women know that the emperors have no clothes. i think in 2024 this "patriarchy affects men too!!" argument is soooo played out and corny. its not surprising that this complex social phenomenon has drawbacks for men. but i dont understand why this problem is laid at the feet of feminists like its their fault or problem to solve.

also: "this loss of purpose has contributed to higher rates of depression, anxiety, suicidality, and loneliness in men, which is not ameliorated by well-meaning liberals perpetually calling them “toxic.”" is such little bitch shit i cannot help but roll my eyes. like first of all are liberals really calling men "toxic" en masse? it's (at the time of this article's publication 2023). be real. this is not an actual problem for anyone whos not the softest most sensitive snowflake. but after an entire article talking about how men and boys fell in love with tackiest, dumbest, most predictable mommy issues MRA on the planet, leading to changes in their behaviour that directly affected the women and girls around them negatively, i think it's fucking generous for someone to call masculinity toxic! if masculinity is so fragile and tenuous in this craaazy postmodern world of ours that this cigar-chomping rapist boor andrew tate becomes a symbol of its resurgence and strength then it deserves all the hate it gets. ugh!

3

anethum wrote

Reply to Tate-Pilled by Moonside

thank you for sharing this! i've been avoiding tate stuff because well, he's such a noxious person and even just talking about him feels awful. it's nice to read a good writing as to why he resonates

the part about boys complaining "i can't be me" and contrapoints being singled out as the person from the other side who gets it is a pretty amusing detail

2