• 2 Posts
  • 73 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 7th, 2023

help-circle
  • Possibly, but I also honestly find it an interesting idea.

    The way it is described it doesn’t sound like they recommend doing it with total strangers but have a conflict/discussion with a group that can chime in but is not focused on resolving the conflict but more processing it together. And honestly I think for some people that could be a good way to potentially learn and hone their way of speaking to each other.

    I also really like the contra-culture idea they establish that conflict does not have to be uncontrollable and that we are responsible and accountable for our behaviour in conflict. So I think this could be an experience where you are able to air things that unsettle you while reaffirming that you bring it up because you care about the other person.

    But I‘m sure this is not for everyone and is most likely a potentially energy intense way. I think the meme as well is more aimed in: I wanna butt in and say my piece without really having skin in the game.


  • Hmm okay I think I get your point but I don‘t know if I follow the premise that a narrow definition of rape is ultimately better for rape survivors/victims.

    I think I would argue that especially in public discourse opening up what sexual harassment is and how we define rape allows more victims to step forward and share their experiences.

    In the example for male rape survivors for example a common contention to not believe them is that they could physically overpower their abuser. And awareness work aims to show that even strong men can be forced and coerced. (The actor from Brooklyn 911 was an example for that discourse)

    So that’s why I would not feel its a disservice if we call it rape because as the others have mentioned, it hinges a lot on the fact that we have learnt that the victim was dead at that time.

    Just wanted to share my perspective but I feel I get yours a bit better now


  • Thanks for posting this!

    As a cis man I have to admit I always enjoy it when experiences of women are put in the spotlight in discussions. I think if we keep our ears open and listen empathically we can learn how to do better and the knee-jerk reaction of: „But men also suffer!“ Always feels so weird because I think why isn’t our reaction: „God this really is happening to all of us, let’s finally combat it!“

    Thanks for bringing the topic up and I hope future discussions will not be met with such a barrage of trolling and opposition. Thanks for the moderation as well.

    I think I also wanna highlight that WHEN we listen we also hear that the demands and wishes being proposed by women especially in a health setting are not only totally achievable and doable but would also improve service for EVERYONE. So there is also a lot of good stuff to gain from listening and acting on it.



  • I mean I can kinda see the point of using kings instead of oligarchy. But using oligarchy is a bigger stab at the billionaires in the room as well so I still think it captures a bigger part of the problem.

    Otherwise I think I‘m down for her saying that she wants to get stuff done but I mean is she? I‘m totally uninformed but being highly ignorant it reads a bit like a whatever statement. Like you mentioning it is also just a performative act so yeah shrug

    I do think the Dems have a problem in establishing words and totally losing the plot or narrative control over their words. Woke totally slipped into an insult and I don‘t think that was an unavoidable thing. I think if Dems would go for more public social policies they would get a lot of the votes back they have been shedding but I think their oligarchic interests are in their way. Like Harris could’ve just campaigned on getting SOME change done and I think more people could’ve warmed up to her but that particular ship has sailed.

    Thanks for linking the article and centring the discussion.





  • Ich denke viele Leute werden dir da unterschiedliches Feedback geben, wann sie es als rassistisch empfinden. Es ist aber ein sehr typischer Moment von Alltagsrassismus. Vor allem weil ich als Empfänger der Frage ja auch niemals wissen kann, ob du es „nicht abwertend“ meinst.

    Alleine die Erfahrung immer in eine andere Schublade gesteckt zu werden, ist meist schon die Rassismus Erfahrung.

    Ich finde die Frage in vielen Kontexten legitim, wenn klar ist das mein Gegenüber wirklich an mir als Person interessiert ist und nicht versucht mich schnell zuzuordnen.

    Leider fühlen sich halt auch viele PoCs (mich eingeschlossen) nicht wohl in dem Therapie Setting wenn unser Gegenüber weiß ist. Ich muss halt hoffen, dass meine Erfahrungen Ernst genommen werden und ich nicht in der Behandlung selber wieder mit ner Rassismuserfahrung konfrontiert werde. Ich denke diese Spannung sorgt auch dafür, dass je nachdem wie früh oder wie die Frage gestellt wird, es auch negativ wahrgenommen wird.

    In deinem Beispiel ist es zum Beispiel real ein Dialekt, der die Frage triggert und nicht die assumption: ah andere Hautfarbe du kommst von bla. Manchmal sind es solche Kleinigkeiten an denen ich es zum Beispiel festmache ob ich die Frage komisch/weird/unangenehm finde oder ob jemand einfach interessiert ist. Aber auch PoC experience is natürlich kein monolith.



  • I mean yes sure couples have to communicate but relationship anarchy isn’t really about who does the dishes but if a relationship includes sharing finances, includes financially / emotionally caring for each other or if it is potentially a „purely“ sexual relationship. Or just a platonic relationship.

    The anarchy is not meant in the same way as its political ideology counterpart but states that you do not adhere to established rules or hierarchies within traditional relationships.

    Maybe as a relationship anarchist you want someone you only fuck from time to time but you also want to share finances but you don’t want emotional sharing. This would be an uncommon constellation that could be easier to make sense of using their concepts. You could also obviously get there with other means but likewise maybe this also generally just wouldn’t work/vibe with you - which is also fine.

    I really just wanted to give people the chance to engage with potential tools to talk about their relationships differently and maybe that helps.

    Either way connecting and communicating with people and partners is always complicated and you have to train it and keep the communication working. So yeah it might be more complicated but maybe thats why it might work for different folks.


  • I‘m not that deep in relationship anarchy and in a currently monogamous queer relationship.

    I do think the difference lies in the traditionality you have touched upon in that you and your partner have a script / rough idea that has/is guiding aspects of your relationship and that relationship anarchist would want to explicitly frame/structure themselves in most of the relationships they engage in. This is more in the direction of: my romantic partner is also a partner I share finances with or plan to cohabitate with or think about offspring with etc.

    I don’t think there has to be an inherent value judgment in this. Different people prefer different things so I think it always works out and either way you have to communicate with your partner in what works in your relationship. (Who does what housework, what do esch of you want out of the relationship, etc.)


  • I mean you can be heavily invested in a relationship as a relationship anarchist.

    The anarchy part is that you do not take for granted how a relationship should be structured and that you are open to have very unique and consensually agreed upon aspects in your relationship.

    If you want commitment and reliability and loyalty you can for sure ask for it and name it as something that is essential for your relationship and if they do not give it to you it might just be best to split ways.

    Of course I understand that there will be people who weaponise relationship anarchy to just do whatever the fuck they want to and rationalise/justify their behaviour but I think the concept isn’t condemnable per sé. There are also people who weaponise therapy speak to gaslight and I wouldn’t want to generally talk bad about therapy.

    Just wanted to give a counterpoint because I think engaging with relationship anarchy and for example looking at a smorgasbord can even help monogamous people to figure out what is important to them and what they want.


  • I think your comment reads quite combative.

    I think with the context of the Meme, yes there are some people who call you and you just know its gonna be a huge annoying phone call that you should just avoid and text the person after because some people just wanna talk your ears off.

    I dunno if we have to do the: omg millenials/gen alpha is too phone anxious thing.

    And sure its called a mobile phone, but as an argument that feels somewhat pedantic nowadays. Primarily its a mobile internet connected computer nowadays I would say. I use the camera/ texting/ social media functions way more than the real phone capabilities. Maybe thats different for you but I don’t think it’s uncommon that its one of the lesser used functions.

    Sure if people are too anxious to pick up the phone and it negatively impacts their life they should get help for it. I don’t think we should shame them in that case though. It feels to me like shaming depressed people when they cannot find the energy to shower, which I would similarly feel is inadequate input.




  • Okay, ich hab das Spiel nicht selber gespielt. Aber ich finde den Takeaway von dem Artikel ein bisschen flach.

    Klar müssen wir koalieren, um eine Brandmauer gegen rechts zu haben. Aber ich finde die Formulierung impliziert mir etwas viel, dass man als linksorientierte Person mit der Koalition unglücklich sein würde, aber dass dann ja später vielleicht bessere Zeiten kommen.

    Ja klar geht es immer langsamer als man es haben will, aber ich sehe auch nicht warum man nicht kritisch sein sollte? Ich kann auch mit Leuten koalieren, die ich kritisch betrachte, ich habe momentan aber eher das Gefühl dass sich CxU sehr darauf ausruht Migration als Thema zu haben und den Aufschwung nach der Ampel zu nutzen um einfach wieder ihr „übliches“ Programm abzuspielen.

    In welchem Szenario kommt es also hier auf meine Koalition an? Das Spiel impliziert und der Artikel auch dass man noch Macht hat und Sachen bewegen kann. Ich finde die Demos zeigen total klar, dass der Weg der CxU sehr sehr negativ betrachtet wird. Die CxU kann trotzdem einfach mit der AfD anbändeln und es ist egal was meine Perspektive dazu ist. Natürlich hoffe ich, dass unsere laute Stimme gegen Rechts durch Merz‘s „Dickschädel“ geht, aber mit welchem Angebot von Koalition sollten wir hier denn locken?

    Sorry für den etwas unsortierten Rant, irgendwie hat mir der Artikel echt nicht zugesagt, aber danke dir fürs Teilen.



  • It sounds horrifying to me still to be honest. I dunno how his wives being hot (is that what we are talking about?) really changes that.

    I just don’t see how the „success“ alleviates the self-commodification and how regimenting your whole life based on some ideas around extracting highest value sounds like a pleasant life?

    But sure, if you do relationships to extract value out of it, then maybe that is a reasonable way to go at it and maybe you even get together with pretty people that makes it worth it for you. if this was me I would still ask myself what the fuck am I doing this for, but maybe thats just my existentialism talking.


  • Agreed especially on the comment as a showcase of „mod differences“.

    I think this just rather corroborates Ada‘s statement of how there were multiple reports the mods did not follow up on and how Ada had to eventually always do it.

    So even with a good faith reading I do not see how this is a problematic ban and not just a common recurring topic which this instance has always protected us from, which is the whole reason I am on this instance.

    While I understand that the „modding differences“ were the reason you aimed to migrate, I as a user do not remotely see the benefits of a move when it was Ada that stepped up to do moderation. Especially if as Ada mentioned our community had reported these instances, a move would just signify a deterioration of our experience.

    I have to reiterate that I have always appreciated Ada‘s decisions. The stepping up and sheltering many of us on the Reddit exodus and providing me with one of the few places nowadays I can go to and expect a civil, homely and communal experience.