I got hooked at first because as teenagers when we smoked weed we would smoke it cut with nicotine.

feddit.fr?? so cool

It’s important to separate the personal from the political here. You’re right that not every instance of genetic selection is equivalent to Nazi-style eugenics. But you say that eugenics is “not inherently bad” without really looking at proper definitions or recognising the deep social and historical baggage it carries, especially in how it’s been used to justify racism, ableism, and state violence, and that risks repeating the same logic that allowed those atrocities in the first place.

Choosing not to pass on genetic diseases through voluntary IVF and screening isn’t the same as state-led population engineering which is what eugenics often refers to politically. The key difference is consent and context.

When you talk about selecting against diseases like sickle-cell anaemia, you also have to ask: who defines what counts as a “horrible illness”? Who decides which lives are worth living? (For example, your example of sickle cell anemia comes with the caveat that this illness makes one immune to malaria, which is why it evolved in a significant chunk of the subsaharan african population. Yet Sickle cell anemia was also a favourite scapegoat by 20th century eugenicists to argue that african genes were “inferior”).

Historically, eugenics has disproportionately targeted disabled people, people of colour, poor people, communities with less power. Even modern-day genetic screening isn’t free from those power dynamics. So, no, it’s not “propaganda” to be against eugenics, it’s a necessary ethical stance informed by history and lived experience.

And the IVF example isn’t really eugenics as it is understood. For example, here is the wikipedia definition of eugenics:

Eugenics (/juːˈdʒɛnɪks/ yoo-JEN-iks; from Ancient Greek **εύ̃ (eû) ‘good, well’ and **-γενής (genḗs) ‘born, come into being, growing/grown’)[1] is a set of largely discredited beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population.[2][3][4] Historically, eugenicists have attempted to alter the frequency of various human phenotypes by inhibiting the fertility of those considered inferior, or promoting that of those considered superior.

So a better example of eugenics is for example the nazi slaughter of 80% of people with schizophrenia. Thinking that by “removing the bad genes” schizophrenia will go away. Yet modern day germany has an average rate of schizophrenia, so that didn’t work. (Ignoring that fact it was literally genocide and is morally apprehensible in nearly every way).

Unfortunately Reddit has plenty of racists these days. Like I’d say the average redditor is somewhat racist now. Which wasn’t the case 5 years ago.

Yes the microblogging quote function should have an option to appear at the top aswell as the at the bottom. Depending on context, top is more practical.

Eugenics…

Don’t be suprised if they add gas chambers to RFK’s wellness farms.

They did a recent south korea video which was super neolib biased.

It has been neoliberal biased for ages. For example this is a 2021 article calling out their neoliberal bias. https://aninjusticemag.com/the-inescapable-neoliberal-bias-behind-kurzgesagt-in-a-nutshell-215eb1e9b70f?gi=9574bf28f4a0

But it has undoubtedly gotten a lot worse recently. That south korea video was abymaly blind and baked in unrealistic capitalist assumptions.

Cool. For once they do something good. Fuck the auto industry.

Probably the most realistic of the side effects

Maybe we should delete the CEOs instead

I would say as someone who has spent significant time in the UK, US, and Australia. That irl, people outside the US swear far more. Maybe USians are taking out their frustrations online since they don’t let themselves do it as much irl?

I know this is a funny joke but the fact this keeps on being repeated can be quite hurtful to actual people with brain damage who are often quite mobility impaired and active in leftist disability rights movements.

Honestly i’m sorry but why do it if it hurts? Is it just for fame?

Out of 11 we have:

Maggie Simpson Lisa Simpson Louise Belcher

And maybe Hayley Smith and Meg Griffin? Or are they 18?

Anyways, that’s a really high proportion, like a thirdish.

Lisa Simpson??? Please no tell me this is joke

That website is so neoliberal brained it makes me want to puke.

“Property Rights Index” “Investment Freedom Index”

What’s next? “Oppression of Working Classes Index”

The cool thing about being on an instance with downvotes disabled is I never have to worry about this sort of petty random downvoting stuff because I never see downvotes.

Also it’s not just a trans thing.

JK is incredibly ableist and regularly mocks disabled people. For example one of her latest books is basically painting all chronically ill people as malingerers.

It’s decent for something small but the rampant duplication of books sort of ruins the experience.

Like there aren’t many users so if we have 12 copies on the same book each with between 0 and 2 reviews it sucks when we could instead have one copy with pretty metadata and 15 reviews and some discussion.

You can help fix this manually but this is really more of a structural issue that needs fixing.