Is that a community already?

Thank you for posting exactly what came to my mind. (It’s Gurren Lagenn y’all)

I am reflecting on my own parenting. I see possible benefits of a leash.

We’ve never used a leash. Instead I do a lot of yelling / stern vocalizations to keep kids away from areas they shouldn’t be. My approach is fraught with negative side effects because I often come off as angry, and my spouse and I work on checking me if it gets to be too much.

A leash could be a good alternative, or just an additional option to incorporate. It’s food for thought.

I read the OP as if they’re highlighting a double standard, rather than positing that OP themselves think they’re bad. “Can you articulate why a leash is always bad” seems improper if I understand OP correctly.

I could be wrong :P

I’m out of the loop. Is CRINE supposed to be “crying”?

Our noise canceling headphones were for my 6yo but I use them more often than he does. Sometimes when he wears them he cranks the volume on the tablet to hear it through those headphones and we’re still educating him on why that’s no good.

“Educating” my ass; have you ever thanked a teacher for calling you a wrong stupid cunt?

If I want to educate you on the proper way to respond to someone stating their own possibly-naive experience, I’d undermine my effort if I let my own cunt face follow it up with “Now go wipe your mom’s ass for the umpteenth time cuz you’re a shitty teacher.”

Sincerely, I don’t feel the kind of hostility towards you that that example suggests. But if you feel insulted, reflect on that and go from there.

Our company of 5000+ US employees just ended a hybrid model and now requires full return to work. I sit near HR. Here are some things I’ve heard:

• Asked in a public forum what metrics were involved in revoking work from home, VP said “Metrics? None. Next question.” All other questions received some kind of diplomatic answer but not that one.
• A couple of HR employees vocally shit on the complaint emails they’ve been tasked with responding to. They’re the bootlickin-est people I’ve ever heard in a professional setting. 3+ times I’ve heard “If it bothers you that much then quit, simple. The company’s not for you then.”
• A global company, our intranet shows the head honcho taking pride in work life flexibility and touts the same fukkin hybrid model. US workers were told it’s a “participating locations only” situation.
• VP said they didn’t anticipate how beloved working from home was, and said (despite no communication otherwise) it was their plan all along to end it, and that they made a mistake by not doing it sooner because it gave us the false impression it was permanent.

In contrast, we employ some union and some non union workers all over the country. As much HR shit talk as I’ve heard over 5 years, I and they still have to abide by WRITTEN PROCEDURES whose express intent is not running astray of the Collective Bargaining Agreements. I hear these HR people on phone calls about something union related and I get to hear “Jump? How high?” and other cowtowing phrases, knowing they’re fuming inside but can’t do anything about it because we’re beholden to those CBAs.

Regularly, I witness stark evidence that union workers are treated better than their counterparts. The CBAs have teeth and the company knows it.

+1 for Technology Connections <3

This was informative, and unexpectedly candid. I guess I understand downvotes as an expression of disapproval of the act of making fake IDs but if it was legal at the time to make them, then only the ethical argument remains and that’s moot if it’s illegal now.

I feel smartened

We might make new friends on the road that day.

Bald for Bieber

My local branch of the ICE Enforcement and Removal division is not answering calls. It rings and rings without end.

Thank you for the link. It’s as if that article was spying on my wife, and I’ll share it with her when she wakes. Happy Tuesday!

David Steven Cohen, the head writer, died recently on 15-Mar-2025.

Stop twiddling your thumb

Would @douglasg14b@lemmy.world please share your thoughts on the response from @Maldreamer@lemmy.world?

Of course if these ideas were ever put into practice, they’d require the establishment of definitions, scope, parameters, exceptions, consequences, etc.

I think a lot of us understand the spirit of the OP, and you’re showing us you aren’t on the same page or even opened the book.

Sure, if the offered idea was to abolish every philosophically tangential advertisment, then you’ll be the advertisor of reason when we advertise bans on flowers’ colors because they advertise to pollinators, or bans on babies’ cries because they’re advertising their want of nourishment.

They’re not wrong. It’s feeling like Jaden Smith posting.

They must’ve swallowed