Really? That’s why I got a down vote? Dude, my metaphor in the first comment was likening it to “if we (Americans) called First Nation land ‘Indialand’”. So, no. If you map the metaphor back onto to the counter, it’s the UK’s fault, not America’s.

Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers. Rita Repulsa and Lord Zedd

Edit: special interest rant, it’s actually very interesting how they got these two to interact on screen because Rita is from the Japanese show (Super Sentai) and Zedd was an addition solely for the US version (they used a double for Rita while the voice actor continued to dub over her in post)

Thank you. Papers, Please isn’t the ending we need to run to. They can’t treat us like criminals cause they feel like it

Ghosts must remain close to the place where they died. Dinosaur fossils are underground, therefore dinosaur ghosts are as well.

Since you don’t follow your remains after death (people ghosts tend to haunt houses rather than graveyards) it means we have no method to excavate them. They will always be underground.

This is the fate of all ghosts, to slowly be buried by time until you wander the dark abyss alone.

I like the idea that Archie isn’t this semi-popular comic from the 40s that’s had moments where it returns to the zeitgeist, Riverdale being the most recent, but instead is this colossal juggernaut that’s never left our collective consciousness. Like Mickey Mouse impact, but it’s teens trying to fuck each other.

I might be overblowing the horniness, my only exposure to Archie is reading Menage a 3 in high school (webcomic with obvious influence from Archie)

I didn’t see it before so it wasn’t happening! /s

Yes, it is. It’s why they moderated that they did it as “very intentionally, just trying to get through”. Moving someone or their stuff without permission is an act of physical aggression. I’m not saying they punched them or anything, but there were aggressive in a physical manner.

… is there a member of one who isn’t a member of the other? (This is joke)

Such a great piece of fiction that the phenomenon I just recounted has been lived by real people before

https://www.reddit.com/r/blackladies/comments/1202192/asked_reddit_why_white_people_dont_move_for/

Am… am I god?/s

Yes, that’s what I mean. I’m unintentionally aggressive, but attempting to moderate that causes me to shutdown and not say anything instead. I’m making the conscious effort to speak instead of give into the obsession of over-moderating what I say to the point where I stop talking. So by making the choice to talk regardless, I’m intentionally being aggressive rather than quiet.

Dude was twisting my words and using fallacies to protect his paper thin “argument”. I did my best without directly insulting him. Well, until that last comment. Shouldn’t have done that.

So, you attempted regular social cues to communicate what you wanted, and when that failed you escalated to physical aggression and then got upset that the other person got upset?

Like, not trying to throw you under the bus or anything, you both miscommunicated in that situation but you were the one to escalate. If the other person didn’t know what they were doing wrong, couldn’t you have just told them “I’m so sorry, but I can’t get my cart around yours” when they didn’t get why you couldn’t get past?

It really sounds like you were both tired and didn’t have the grace in that moment for each other, rather than some failing on either of your parts.

I feel like you don’t understand the position because there is nothing in what you’re saying that implies that you do.

I’m going to play this conversation as it occurred from my perspective to see if you see what I mean.

Your first response is “you’re taking an absurdist position, so I’ll take the opposite absurdist position to demonstrate the problem. Could we eliminate all racist rules, of course not. Car rules can be racist, but we can’t just not have car rules”

I reply “yeah, but we can not have cars. Cars aren’t a requirement for society”

You reply “but rules would still apply to those who do the not-car transport”

I reply “yes, but that wouldn’t exclude them from society. They would still be able to participate, unlike those kicked out of the hypothetical store”

To which you reply “but the grocery store wouldn’t apply to everywhere”

And I retort “no, but if they had any popularity, they would expand in order to deny disadvantaged people groceries at these ‘better’ stores”

And then your latest reply, which I can’t summarize without it becoming a straw man (my failing, not necessarily yours).

This grocery store isn’t “people extending basic decency” it’s “people not inconveniencing others on threat of permanent removal”. One is a social contract extended by and agreed to by others (basic decency) and the other is a threat enforced by the system, in this case the grocery store. You’re arguing that systems need rules. I’m arguing that using systems when it could just be standard human interaction is insane. Do you see the disconnect now?

Systems should be built to accommodate humans, not replace human interaction. Jane paying with a checkbook isn’t a reason she be barred from a public service. Christ on bikes, man.

Yeah, just like it was an Italian man that first called them Indians. Wouldn’t make it Italy’s fault if Americans called it Indialand, though.

Agreed. Fuck cars and accept that other people aren’t going to be perfect and that that’s okay for them to be.

Separate but equal, eh? Gonna introspect on that, or nah?

Someone in this thread went the extra mile and even called them “the shitty” stores. Which is nice. Brings the warm and cozies, that /s

People walking towards each other on the sidewalk usually subconsciously move out of each other’s ways. But there’s a hierarchy to these interactions that you’re probably only aware of if you’re at the bottom of it. White people tend to resist deferring to people of color. White women will rarely defer to anyone, expecting everyone to get it of their way. People of color will defer to white people, etc, etc.

If you break this subconscious hierarchy, people notice and assume you’re being rude or weird. Like if you move enough out of a white women’s way so that she, too, can move a little out of your way so that you both avoid each other (like equals would do), she might just walk into you. Or cuss you out for being rude. Or when I, a white man, defer to a person of color, it trips them up for a second.

Since this hypothetical grocery store is nothing but “don’t break unspoken rules about rudeness or you get kicked out” it means that a black person would need to act meek and submissive in order to avoid scrutiny and thus be able to stay. Meaning the rules would be more stringent against people of color, thus less people of color would be accepted, thus justifying their usual exclusion.

Ableism is super easy. Since this hypothetical prioritizes convenience over people, if you’re slow at something or need more accommodation, you’d get kicked out.

Lol, you think Karens would be kept out of Karen heaven. Lmao, even.

Yes. I made the choice to be like that rather be perceived as polite. Apologies that that wasn’t clear. I’d rather spend my time thinking through things rather than making my words nice for others. I’m neurodivergent, I’ve spent a lifetime trying to mold myself into the box of etiquette and it drove me mad and made me quiet. I’m choosing now to say what needs to be said in how I need to say it.

Like saying that something would be used to further racism and ableism and then checking the people who don’t like to be confronted with that idea.

If this idea was implemented and had any amount of popularity it would spread everywhere like wild fire cause it’d be one more thing to crush the poor with cater to white people who can’t be fucked to talk to people don’t want to be inconvenienced. People usually don’t have much choice in what stores they have access to (see food deserts)

Yeah, I tend to be perceived that way. I’d rather be seen as aggressive than be a polite asshole