• 0 Posts
  • 28 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: December 25th, 2023

help-circle

  • The original definition is a community where private property is not a thing. Private property is when an individual can control the land, tools, and knowledge people need to survive. Private property is factories, not your toothbrush.

    Most pro USSR, PRC, or Cuba leftists believe those countries governments controlling all or the vast majority of private property constitutes communism. Some think these countries are socialist and working their way to communism.

    Many anti-communist people don’t really understand how these countries work specifically. All their ideas of what communism is are based on how they view the above communist countries.

    Finally right wingers will describe California as communist because they have social programs and higher taxes than some states. Basically if the government is intervening in the market by supplying a service or good directly to a citizen that’s communism.

    From what I’ve observed most people lie somewhere on this spectrum of definition.








  • pearable@lemmy.mltoAsklemmy@lemmy.mlIs "female" offensive?
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago
    Discussion of offensive racial language

    There’s a similar distinction with “black” in regards to race. Referring to someone as a black person or people as black folks is largely acceptable. Referring to someone as a “black” or people as “blacks” on the other hand sounds old fashioned at best and actively dehumanizing at worst.


  • This might be a regional thing. For reference I grew up in Oklahoma and “quite a bunch” seems natural and familiar. In British English quite has the opposite meaning so I could see why it wouldn’t make sense in that context. I wouldn’t be surprised if it didn’t sound right to other Americans due to regional linguistic differences.







  • My SO was traumatized by her religious upbringing. The effects of purity culture have left significant scars that make it practically impossible to be physically intimate. Short kisses, holding hands, and hugging are okay but any amount of nudity is over the line. She wants to be intimate and has been working with a therapist to get there but obvious markers of success aren’t there yet. I knew all of this going in to our relationship or learned them pretty early.

    Intentionally helping someone to heal from trauma in a relationship is an appealing concept to me. Being in a romantic relationship with someone I can’t be physically intimate with has some unique problems beyond the problems I had as a single person but on balance out relationship is really good. We’re forced to have really good communication fundamentals so we don’t hurt each other with our conflicting needs. That helps us with tons of aspects of our relationship.

    By far this is the most comfortable, enriching, and benefitial romantic relationships I’ve been in.