Conservative masculinity:

Honestly the fact that anybody is attracted to men proves sexuality is not a choice

Would have cost you exactly 0 € to not be a cunt, but here you are.

I didn’t correct it because I was away from my computer for an extended period – the current version has a different image and is correctly attributed. I didn’t delete it because then the existing conversation in the comments would have also gotten nuked, exactly the same reason the mod didn’t delete it either.

Yeah I doubt those particular comments have anything to do with “AI”. It just seems fashionable to blame AI for absolutely everything nowadays

I’ll just make a new one (this isn’t oc) when I get home but that’ll be 10h at least. It’s OK to nuke this since it is sorta misinfo, although I didn’t know it when I posted it

Ah, figures. I should know better than to post quotes without checking if they’re attributed correctly

It’s the same with conservatives pretty much around the world right now.

I really don’t know how we’re going to unfuck the situation without a lot of bloodshed – and make no mistake, it would be them who spill that blood like they’re already doing, just at a much larger scale. As it is, conservatives are a threat to stable and peaceful societies, and due to their resistance to meaningful climate action they’re an existential threat to humanity in general.

I actually originally dug this picture up for a post of this RawStory article titled ‘Their ignorance is willful’: WaPo analyst says enough with the MAGA voter pity, which is highly relevant.

The problem with the majority of right wing extremists isn’t that they’re just stupid misled bumpkins, but that they’re actual psychopaths who vote for people like Trump because he’s promising to hurt everybody they hate

Where on earth did I say or even imply anything about men being one way or the other? And what does it have to do with anything that you were “replying to a comment”?

More of a tragicomedy, really

Didn’t occur to you that maybe women aren’t a hive mind and the ones saying the first thing might not be the ones saying the second thing?

Calling reverse() on a function should return its inverse

"E".reverse() == "∃"

I dint know many OO languages that don’t have a useless toString on string types.

Well, that’s just going to be one of those “it is what it is” things in an OO language if your base class has a toString()-equivalent. Sure, it’s probably useless for a string, but if everything’s an object and inherits from some top-level Object class with a toString() method, then you’re going to get a toString() method in strings too. You’re going to get a toString() in everything; in JS even functions have a toString() (the output of which depends on the implementation):

In a dynamically typed language, if you know that everything can be turned into a string with toString() (or the like), then you can just call that method on any value you have and not have to worry about whether it’ll hurl at runtime because eg. Strings don’t have a toString because it’d technically be useless.