Idk who needs to hear this but:
Your children don’t owe you self assurance, if they chose to cut contact with you fully then that’s their right.
deleted by creator
I’m not sure I understand what you’re talking about. You’re related to a couple who have a son who went no contact, but it had nothing to do with politics or abuse? I’m not sure how that maps onto this situation.
I know some people who have gone no contact due to manipulative dynamics, though the parents refuse to acknowledge they’ve ever done anything wrong. E.g. financial manipulation, or refusing to use their child’s preferred pronouns. I feel like if the parents apologized, acknowledged the problem, and made a commitment to change it would make everyone happier. Not sure how that applies to your story, but that’s been my experience.
Ah the classic:
“Your behaviour has harmed me, so I do not wish to see you anymore”
“No, wrong, it is YOUR behaviour in saying this that has harmed ME”
The leopards, they hunger
Leopards after January
Everyone else:
deleted by creator
Slightly off topic:
When my parents divorced, I was bummed out that I had to attend two thanksgiving dinners. The second was not turkey. We charred hot dogs over an open fire (lived in the midwest at the time) and made smores. It was pretty great.
This had nothing to do with the election. It’s just a nice memory.
bummed out that I had to attend two thanksgiving dinners
I’m not skinny enough to understand this sentiment
I, too, choose this guy’s second dinner.
Check out this random story from some guy.
I don’t know why my memory of hot dogs on an open fire and smores doesn’t appeal to you. We’re different.
“I just supported taking away your rights. Why are you mad at meeeeee???”
To be fair, he might have not supported taking their rights… he might have just loved a rapist, criminal so much he was willing to overlook taking away their rights.
If liberalism is a mental disorder than neoliberalism is a new mental disorder that is so bizarre it doesn’t even have a definition yet.
merely because they believe my one vote…
He thinks his vote doesn’t contribute or something?
Conservatives think consequences are extremely unfair. Everything is an act of god to them.
“Childish and rude”.
Kinda reminds me of someone.
Oh nonononono - you see, when Trump does it, he gets the good words: HE is “good at nicknames”, “strong” and “tells it like it is”. When anybody Trump doesn’t like does the exact same thing, then they are being childish, rude and it is altogether absolutely inacceptable.
“I let them”
Dudes showing internally he thinks he controls their votes. That he could’ve not let them had he chosen so.
So his daughters should be thankful for such a benevolent patriarch. /S
He clearly said in context “I let them vote in peace without objection or argument frome me”. Kind of like how I can either let your comment go or choose to respond without claiming to have control over you. The man is still ignorant AF though.
Your explanation is accurate, but your undercutting the importance of the statement. If you don’t have the power, then you don’t “let people” do anything.
Which is to say, he was contemplating being a giant a****** and pressuring them to vote the way he wanted, but he decided to use common sense, to not be a jerk, and now he’s asking for a prize for doing what most of us do all the time everyday.
This doesn’t make him a horrible human being, but it certainly doesn’t make him a good one. In his mind, special rules apply only to him.
You are contriving crap out of thin air here.
Well it’s kind of semantics. The symbolism behind this is not the hill you’d want to die on. Letting somebody do something can either be allowing it or simply not disallowing it. I hate Trump and his low IQ followers, but that sentence does not imply anything.
can either be allowing it or simply not disallowing it
Exactly.
When I go take a shit, did you allow it, or not disallow it? Neither, because you have no agency over me, so it’d be a stupid fucking sentence.
I’m not saying he thinks he owns his daughters like some 16th century inbred minor noble.
But connotations and implications can exist even when they weren’t particularly intentional by the writer (or speaker.)
I let you waste my time but somehow I’m implying I own you.
Sure buddy.
You’re welcome for not disallowing you to post this. I will also allow you to reply with something snarky if you like.
Sure buddy
I hope the three girls organise their own thanksgiving dinner and invite their mom.
Interesting that he phrased it as liberalism.
The American definition of Liberalism is the exact opposite of the original meaning, so maybe he was just being extra-oldschool?
What do you consider to be the original meaning?
Neo liberal / laissez-faire applies to both major parties in the USA.
Although, it’s certainly becoming less so with the GOP than the Democrats. IE: bailouts for farmers affected by their own tariffs, mass deportations which will affect business, etc.
Sure, and what ideological branch does a right winger who doesn’t follow liberalism fall under?
To be liberal was to be open an accepting socially. The americans have changed it to mean to allow anything economically which is then coupled with bigotry because division makes the rich richer, or at least stops them being lynched
Bro this is just wrong on the fine details, starting with the fact that the original liberalism, and using that term specifically tends to mean the founding ideology of the American and French Revolutions btw, allowed racial chattel slavery and ending with the reality that the “liberal” parties in most countries besides America are conservatives.
His wrongness was so great, that it caused integer underflow and him saying something correct.
Or horseshoe theory.
Removed by mod
That’s sad. You shouldn’t have to hide the fact that you voter for Epstein’s closest friend to your familly.
Yeah, what you dont understand is that by voting für Trump you are actively hurting woman as well as trans people and the american economy as a whole.
And, even tho Im no expert about humans, I think people dont like you if you hurt others.
Removed by mod
W started two illegal wars… Trump singed the order to leave Afghanistan a mess. Wtf are you voting for exactly?!?
You can’t possibly be this misinformed
and the military deaths,
what the fuck is this bullshit?
Drug overdoses are not a democratic policy.
Military deaths are a policy of both major parties.
Afghanistan is not our country. If republicans were so concerned about the Afghan people, Trump shouldn’t have pulled our troops out of Afghanistan.
Try again, maybe with something that is a democratic policy, and not just a lie that you’ve been fed.
They don’t talk policies, huh?
Can you name one republican policy that’s both not hateful and something they actually follow through on? Just one.
Edit: I like to think that they deleted their comment because they had no answer.
I’m not that poster, but if you want a policy that Republicans have endorsed that’s not explicitly hateful, please consider tax cuts for the rich. Yes, the net effect is bad, but the stated motivation and I think the honest motivation is not one of malice towards the poor.
It is true that down the road Republicans will complain about the budget, so they will use their tax cuts for the rich as an excuse to try to cut benefits for the poor, but it doesn’t mean that when they cut taxes now it’s intentionally malicious. Many of them are just trying to get more money or give more money to their friends.
With lines like “[your political opinion] is a mental disorder”, why is he surprised they aren’t coming?
what would you call trump voters?
I’d call Trump voters Trump voters. I’m not sure I understand the question.
Touché
It’s kinda sad that we ended up in this political division. It’s also sad that increasing hate and and anxiety (and missing education and reasoning) fuels this dumpfire of societal development. That doesn’t really increase hope in the future, as stuff like climate change further accelerates this…
“I voted for the idea that women aren’t people, now the women in my life don’t like me.”
“Liberalism is a mental disorder” These people are very telling how they treat people who they think legitimately have mental illness.
Conservatives 🤝 Liberals
“The political positions I dislike are caused by mental illness”Socialists: "Hey guys maybe we could try not denigrating mental disorders? Maybe we could try building a left wing that welcomes and accepts the neurodivergent and marginalised?
Liberals: “Fuck you, we’ll never accept psychopaths like Trump!”
Socialists: “I never agreed with you that Trump is a psychopath. We don’t have to accept Trump in order to treat ASPD folks with dignity!”
Liberals: “You’re disgusting, enabling abusers like that. If we treat psychopaths with basic dignity, they’ll only use it to abuse us!”
The name of that socialist? Albert Einstein.
And everyone clapped.
Yeah, that definitely sounds like a real conversation.
And even if it were, we should totally go to the extreme of tolerating psychopaths
Oh, so now they’re delusional too?!
/S
Words like psychopath have a common usage for people not in psychology/psychiatry. I’m sorry that we’re not meeting the clinical definition that you want, but I don’t think ranting about it all over Lemmy is going to help anything.
When the average nonspecialist individual thinks “psychopath” they think of someone like Hannibal Lecter, who is dangerous and must be locked up to prevent them harming others, and that’s not going to change from a short form text post. It would take a semester of psychology.
Then we should make psychology a compulsory subject in high school.
Yeah drag, we probably should. More education is pretty much always good
Not having empathy should be cause for at least suspicion in and of itself
That’s a very vague statement. You didn’t specify which type of empathy. For example, cognitive empathy is the ability to intuit what other people are thinking. Autistic people tend to have less cognitive empathy, which is related to the poor social skills. It’s hard to participate in social situations when you have a clinically significant inability to read minds. Drag doesn’t think you want to treat autistic people with suspicion, so why don’t you work on clarifying your statement to an appropriate level of specificity?
