• 1 Post
  • 291 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle

  • The USA doesn’t recognise the ICC because they do not want their citizens to be subjected to it. There are quotes from senior officials and diplomats essentially saying that the USA agrees with the concept of the ICC but only for lawless countries where people who violate international law are unlikely to be held to account. Essentially it is a humdinger of an example of “rules for thee but not for me” creedo. The US hides behind its UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) as a panacea excusing it from subjecting itself to the rules it wants to enforce on the rest of the world. The argument is that the UCMJ is sufficient to enforce accountability and international law, and that the ICC is superfluous. It’s a tenuous argument at best and ultimately shelters the USDF from international accountability for their actions.




  • fulcrummed@lemmy.worldtoYou Should Know@lemmy.worldFound this in the wild
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    The tracking is used to identify the source user who shared the link - that is connected in the DB to the user who received and used the link. That connects their two digital footprints as far as the website is concerned. It’s one element that leads to strangely tenuous “people you may know” style lists. If you and the person you share with have totally separate online lives. The moment you share that link - everything YouTube (Google) knows about both of you is connected. If one of you has shared your contact lists, your phone number, address etc is potentially now connected to you even if you’ve never posted it to anything online. It doesn’t take much for someone to be linked to 1000’s of people in a chain reaction of connections started by a single shared link that hasn’t been anonymised.











  • The racial metaphor is misplaced and disingenuous to the conversation. Let’s say as a woman, just about all of your women friends have been at some point attacked by a dog. Some have been completely mauled, some have managed to fight the dog off after a couple of bites, some managed to run away from the dog and jump into a car before it could bite them, and most have a combination of stories from their lives. Some are traumatised and scarred for life, others have been able to move on largely as normal, but they haven’t forgotten that scary moment.

    Now our woman may or may not have been attacked by a dog before, but because of all these experiences she’s seen her friends go through, the fear, the lifelong injuries they carry - the pain, the embarrassment, the shame, the blame - she’s pretty anxious about getting a dog. Especially one where she doesn’t know its history. It’s a big dog, strong, gorgeous and seems so sweet wagging his tail. But most dogs are like that when you first meet them. It’s the rarest of dog that shows you complete aggression from the beginning and you know full well to stay away from them. She doesn’t know if she brings this dog into her home, if something seemingly benign might set it off. It’s even riskier if she lives alone.

    (As an aside, isn’t it ridiculous that a woman should feel embarrassed or ashamed for having been attacked by a dog… or good god - blamed for inciting it - was she carrying beef jerky visibly as she walked down the street, she should have known a wild dog couldn’t control itself at the sight of jerky??)

    If the frequency of dog attacks were as prevalent as violence and assault against women is - no one would be allowed to keep a dog for a pet. Sure, it’s NOT ALL DOGS, but the likelihood and the severity of the consequences is such that you’d be crazy to go into the situation of dog ownership without taking precautions, and in the back of your mind you’ll keep remembering all those friends who’s dogs were sweet right up until they weren’t.

    People who have beautiful dogs at home, who see their dog snuggle their baby and is sweet to their cat, and have only ever had warm interactions with dogs won’t understand the fear. Not all dogs they’ll say.

    Someone else will come along and say it’s only brown dogs you have to worry about. (Sounds ludicrous in this phrasing doesn’t it).

    But you know what the difference is between dogs and humans. In a pack of dogs, the good dogs will call out the bad ones. They’ll pin them down, bark at them, gnash their teeth - make it clear that’s not acceptable if you want to be a part of this pack. Even when play fighting gets a little rough - they say when it’s enough. The dogs keep each other in line.

    What we’re seeing in life is that the dogs are saying to women, not all dogs are going to maul you and leave you with scars for life. Most of us are good dogs, and it’s not fair you’re scared of us when we’re not doing the attacking. We’re not seeing enough good dogs giving strong reinforcement. Making sure they’re being well socialised when they’re growing up. They’re not going out and engaging with younger pups and teaching them how to behave properly, they’re not even pulling their friends into line and baring their teeth saying that behaviour is not ok. Even as a joke.

    The point is - every woman has multiple stories of people she knows being victimised, and sadly the odds are, she will have some kind of personal experience with it in her lifetime. The impact of being assaulted is every bit as lifelong and traumatic for the victim as a frenzied dog attack.

    If we treated it with the severity it really carries, and according to the overwhelming frequency with which it occurs. We’d realise a response of “not all men” is not enough.





  • The logo on their chests is a US Space Force Logo, perhaps it’s an ICE parallel as he’s an illegal “alien” and their job is kinda like ICE but for space? Edit: also getting a little vibe of the torture/humiliation video that came out from Gitmo where the soldiers were enjoying themselves, and even a bit of the hostage videos that come out where they make the captive say how well they’re being treated etc.