Oh shit I’ve been waiting for this one.

Two competing toxic 1950’s mentalities.

“Mexican land form makes dangerous terrorist attack on proud American munitions.”

They will not just eat it they will go ballistic and fight each other over it within .5 seconds of realizing they can get it. They are vicious little animals.

Don’t kink shame.

It’s all typos all the way down. I was actually trying to type a totally different comment.

Do we have historians on Lemmy?

for absolutely no reason

🤔

Easy choice for me.

I’ll note that kissing is not culturally universal. Remember that colonialism has made a lot of European ideas and norms seem way more universal than they are.

Why wouldn’t I want to imagine it though?

If you haven’t been accused of being a terrorist in 2026 you’re doing something wrong.

What is the evidence she ordered people to be blown up? I didn’t see that skimming the article you linked.

Dude fuck off. Obviously they can do what they want. I’m just explaining why it’s a bad idea. Neither of what we think matters, it’s for Iranians to decide how they want to handle this. But if I were them, I’d pick literally anyone else.

It’s totally ridiculous to suggest that there are no leaders remaining in a country of almost 100 million. There surely religious figures, protest organizers, local heads of community, literally anyone would be better than a monarch. Or if there is truly no one then I have to believe a better exile exists who is not so clearly a Western puppet and with the same toxic baggage. Or, worst case, let there be no singular leader. The protestors can choose delegates for a council of leadership. Even no experience is better than such a dangerous outsider.

There no point in overthrowing the government if what replaces it will be no better.

I mean his only qualification for leadership is he’s a prince. If you can’t see that alone is a risk of reinstating monarchy I don’t know what to tell you.

Surely there is a better option, someone who has actually done leadership work on the ground in Iran, not just spend his whole life whining about his birthright and being a tool for fascists.

I didn’t really interpret it that way. I took it as “look how annoying people who complain about social justice are”.

I don’t think she literally supports slavery but it was clearly an allegory for what she views as annoying activist types.

If you think the Shah will be any better than the ayatollah then you are a fool. It always starts out temporary with these tyrants.

My favorite part of Harry Potter is when Hermione tries to get everyone to oppose slavery and everyone’s just like why are you being so mouthy?

JK Rowling has views that were regressive for the 1800s. It’s amazing we didn’t see it sooner.

I guess people are missing my point. People aren’t getting those useless degrees for no reason. They’re getting them to avoid being discriminated against, and even though, yes they are useless in a practical sense, avoiding that discrimination is pretty valuable.

Oh, I’m sorry, you misunderstood. Did you think your degree would earn you something? No, what you’ve gained is the privilege of not being treated like actual garbage and being able to work for some scraps. Count your blessings.