12·
1 day ago
- 0 Posts
- 36 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
Cake day: March 7th, 2025
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
In addition to dieting you can try replacing fork reps with barbell reps. This gives a source of dopamine and increases your resting metabolic rate, making the dieting a bit easier.
Plus being stronger just makes day to day life easier.
Good luck, you got this!
51·4 days agoThat’s how English aristocrats (and aristocrat wannabes) say rugby. Whether that’s what they mean I dunno though
22·5 days agogestures broadly at the UK…
Because English is an arse of a language and I am a dumb dumb 🙃
A dumb dumb capable of providing credible sources though, which is funny considering the downvotes and the context of this thread. Maybe y’all aren’t as different from Gabbard as you think…
Proven? Is it? Care to provide some sources or argument beyond just an assertion? An administration does not an empire make.
It’s intriguing that posts with references get downvoted but posts without get upvoted. Great critical thinking Lemmy users 👍
Did you read any of my sources?
The BBC doesn’t outright say red is blue, because they’re not idiots and their target audience aren’t idiots, but to state they’re not comparable flies in the face of reason. They have shown on multiple occasions to push agendas, to the point that the criticism page on Wikipedia is huge. They are not the bastion of good journalism that they’re held up to be by the general public.
The Guardian has it’s flaws too of course but that is a far far better source than the BBC. It doesn’t claim to be unbias, it doesn’t lie to you that you’ll hear fair and even coverage from “both sides”, it doesn’t give preferential treatment to the ruling party in government because of fears its funding will be removed.
Edit: What’s scarier? An obvious bias source screaming nonsense 24/7 or a supposed unbias source subtly distorting facts when it suits them? Which will have more influence on public perception? Which is a better propaganda machine?
Nick Robinson and Laura Kuenssberg were by no means unbias (particularly Kuenssberg) and they were both previous BBC Political Editors:
The BBC were also found to be bias during the Scottish independence referendum:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/bbc-bias-and-scots-referendum-new-report/
And they’ve had journalists call out pro-Israel bias:
In November 2024, 230 members of the media industry including 101 anonymous BBC staff wrote a letter to Tim Davie accusing the BBC of providing favourable coverage towards Israel and failing its own editorial standards by lacking “consistently fair and accurate evidence-based journalism in its coverage of Gaza”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_BBC
The BBC are a giant government funded media company, they know how to present a good image of themselves and have years of good publicity and marketing to solidify that image. But be under no illusion that they are unbias. They push political agendas as much as any American private news organisation, just with more subtlety and an air of professionalism and officialdom to more legitimise their stance.
That’s not to say they don’t do good journalism or can’t be used as a credible source at times. But just to remember that they too are bias and have masters who push agendas.
Edit: to add more context:
It’s not going to stop the genocide, obviously, but would you rather they just shut up and put up with it? Would you rather they supported Israel?
This is a show of solidarity.
The more there are, the more emboldened others are to do it too. The more people condemning genocide, the more likely politicians are to do something about it. Particularly if those people have public followings of their own.
“I never wanted to stay in my small town”
“Uprooting for adventure is one thing”
Y’alls reading comprehension is pish.
You were looking for a reason to leave. I covered that in my comment, “Uprooting for adventure is one thing”.
OP’s comment reads like sigma male bullshit, essentially saying “I worked harder and smarter than everyone else, they just didn’t have the work ethic I do”. It’s wank. It repulses me, therefore the phrase “makes me feel sick”.
If my grandmother had wheels she would be a bike.
I’m judging/telling people what to do?
Did you not read the post I responded to?
Most of my classmates seemed to just want to check boxes and expect a career to happen.
Some people in my personal experience seem unwilling to do what’s necessary to make their degree worthwhile.
you really have to find ways to convince employers why you’re different.
I said in a sick world where money is our master would moving in the pursuit of dollars be insanity. Moving for other reasons is not what this post is about. So what do you think I was implying by that? It is normal, sometimes even necessary, for people to do this, what do you think I’m trying to say about the world?
Boot licking is chasing the shareholders/masters in the hope that they’ll treat you right and give you a few more dollars per hour than you would working in your home town. A few more dollars than your peers. Boot licking is defending this sick fucking system that we live under where Trumps, Zuckerbergs, and Musks rule the world because money is our master.
Great jobs? Doing what? Licking boots?
Uprooting your entire life, saying goodbye to all of your friends, family, community, home, all for the pursuit of some dollars, that’s insanity. Only in a sick world where money is our master is that viewed otherwise.
Uprooting for adventure is one thing, uprooting for work is not the same.
Your comment sounds like some AI generated LinkedIn status and it makes me feel sick.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_the_Sign_of_the_Black_Mark
This is from Bathory’s third album artwork, if only it was from the previous album, it’s called “The Return…”
Here’s a documentary on their purge of the left for anyone interested:
91·10 days ago
Shares of the vote in general elections since 1832 received by Conservatives[note 1] (blue), Liberals/Liberal Democrats[note 2] (orange), Labour (red) and others (grey)[1][2][3]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_general_elections
The Conservatives forming from a split in the Liberal party doesn’t mean they’re the same thing.
Labour and Liberal Democrats are two very different parties. Or at least they used to be, until New Labour became a thing…
Our politics are bad, FPTP is bad, but we’re not a 2 party system entirely. The Lib Dems, Greens, SNP, and Reform all manage to have a say in politics and how things are done. They all influence Labour and the Conservatives.