How did they get mixed? I see 1 in arabic and 2 and 3 in Hindu. Is there a good place to start reading or watching about this in your opinion? If not, I'm just gonna YouTube the history of numbers and see where I land

What's the difference?

Maybe it's having been raised in the south, but I'm used to hearing both. Maybe it's a regional difference?

Though if I go for til these days, I'm more likely to say until rather than just til lol

Say /s right now

(i had to look at it twice but I'm pretty sure it's supposed to be their, not they're lol)

1. you don't have to understand it, you just shouldn't be a legislative genocidal asshole about it (not that that's what you're doing, but that's what republicans seem to do to anything they think isn't their slim sliver of a definition of "normal")

2. if you're talking about furries, to my layman's understanding of the subculture, that's not how the vast majority of furries relate to themselves. From what I've seen, it's not that they are the animal itself, they are the aspects of the animal, and those things are just little icons that they're like boosting because they resonate with it. That said, there are at least a few people who DO feel that way, but I'm pretty sure they have a special category name (ferals? I think that's what they're called but I could be wrong, this is some deep lore I picked up years ago). If they do have that special name and I'm not just making that part up, then that implies that most furries do not feel that way about themselves.

But, acknowledging the existence of people like that at all does validate your question in my mind. I don't really understand that extreme either. My only point is that most furries are what you would likely consider "normal", they just have a particular hobby. It's no more nefarious or odd than being into gender bending cosplay. You're just taking something (yourself rather than an anime/video game character) and twisting it into something artistically different (a fursona instead of a cosplay outfit).

....no I did not intend to write that much defending furries but here we are lmao

...there is a joke here that I could make about incel forums. I'm not going to try to because it's in poor taste, but my point is that I'm pretty sure that does exist....

Also, what's your actual position if that's your devil's advocate position? I'm a bit unsure if the implication there is intentional or not

The way I (layman) read it, they seemed to be saying that it would be phased out by newer companies finding different alternatives, not that everyone is phasing it out as we speak.

Does this seem more realistic? Or just completely non-factual?

Ah I get that, like the frustration of a sociological paper pointing out a societal issue but offering no steps on how to solve it due to fixes being out of scope (utterly infuriating lol).

I still think the criticism is valid, but I do think I agree in that the criticism could be more constructive... But I still think laying the foundation of the argument, so to speak, is still constructive even though it may not go as far as one may need for it to cross the threshold back into polite...

I am still convinced this is a knee jerk feeling issue more than anything truly being amiss, but I have been wrong before. What do you think?

I agree it probably is a definitions thing, I'm very pedantic sometimes and it feels like my definition of constructive is much more optimistic/wider/encompassing than yours. That doesn't mean that my definition is right or that your position is wrong though, that's just what I think is going on here.

The first step to correction is understanding there is a problem in the first place. This is quite constructive, it may just not feel like it is because it's framed combatively.

You're doing it wrong is the phrase that lets teachers teach at one of the most basic levels.

The public is essentially a self teaching teacher, so this is just the process of public correction happening. It may look/feel like public shaming, and it may be if they're going too far, but that is the mechanism that I think is playing out here.

Does that framing make it any more palatable to you or does it still seem unnecessarily disrespectful?

Interesting, I personally wouldn't actually accuse the UN of being tankie.... Maybe capitalist but not tankie... I think if someone makes a convincing argument about the price of oil, it might result in the US or the UN (most likely UN I would wager though) stepping in...

I don't think the UN will actually do anything though, this is more just me harvesting some hope/cope

Hah! I see the logic, but I think that happened only because the big powers backing each Korea couldn't push the proxy war to overwhelm each other either way... But then again, I could be wrong, and that could be a viable option here, I really don't know... The less buried mines on earth, the better, but when you've got 1/4 of the population of your enemy, you don't exactly have the privilege of fighting traditionally either...

Fascinating, that hadn't crossed my mind at all. The actual world police could do something probably good (stabilizing at the very least) for the situation.

But that said, I don't think I would bank on the UN for this one... It seems like Guyana would need continual military presence to dissuade Venezuela because it appears that Venezuela is doing this because Guyana was too fiscally successful over the pandemic. But I mean if the UN does long term guarding like that, then it might be a viable option...