• 0 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 7th, 2023

help-circle
  • current@lemmy.mltoAsk Lemmy@lemmy.worldWhat gets you downvoted?
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Elaborate. You’re saying my comment has a bad generalization? Do you think that Lemmy’s demographic appeal wasn’t primarily towards males with niche usually tech-related interests? Or are you surprised that large parts of said nerdy male demographic (e.g. gamers, techbros, cryptobros, webdevs/software devs) often have sexist/misogynistic views and objectify/sexualize/"other"ify women significantly more than your average leftist, even if they don’t think they do?

    If it’s the latter, do you really think that the claim large communities of mostly male gamers, techbros, and the like are often known for harboring much misogynist thinking, so it makes sense for that to carry over to a site which those groups primarily compose is baseless?

    Or was your issue something else completely unrelated to the site’s former demographics and the general tendencies of technology-related communities?

    Was it me saying that sexist attitudes are extremely common on the site? Because I did base that on numerous observations of users treating women like a different species and casually using very degrading sexist language when speaking about women. And people taking generalizations of women to the extreme, which seeing as you apparently hate generalizations you’d probably love to argue with them for. And people constantly complaining about women’s “privilege” and seemingly blaming them for men’s societal issues. What made me realize that I’m not just getting a bad sample is when I went to look on communities on Lemmy for women & non-binary folks and the literal first threads I saw were saying how they experienced the same things, like these, although they’re tamer than much of the stuff I sometimes see:

    Link 1 | Link 2 | Link 3 | Link 4



  • at firehouse subs a gluten free roll costs +$1.50, they don’t even prepare it separately from normal bread and use all the same tools for it (except for not cutting it) so it’s not actually properly gluten-free, it’s almost certainly contaminated with gluten.

    jersey mikes also charges +$1.50 (medium) to +$3.00 (large) to get gluten-free bread, but at least they have to go through a whole ritual to prepare it where they use COMPLETELY different tools and gloves and stuff, and it is generally actually non-contaminated unless, you specify that it’s not for allergies.

    source: i worked at both firehouse subs and jersey mikes before, i fucking hated when people ordered gluten-free at jersey mikes but i always did it as required obviously. i didn’t actually ever charge extra to people who were getting gluten free because i didn’t know that was an option on the cash register at first lol, but even after i learned i just forgot / didn’t care enough to do it. some people were really grateful and thanked me after seeing me go through an entire process to make sure the gluten-free sub had no gluten on it








  • I literally stated it in the comment. It’s clear I was talking about providing kids the food they need to develop properly and not suffer from malnutrition.

    It’s not about “ham sandwich worse than nothing” it’s about the fact that you’re taking people’s shock and complaints, and immediately going to use these “ham sandwiches” to deflect from the issue of kids’ lunch debt being legal in the first place. And many of your comments under this post are just “actually it’s not technically the child’s debt”. You’re presenting parents not sending kids in with barely-meals as the problem.

    The issue to focus on isn’t “the parents”. The blame often isn’t even on parents. The blame is on conservatives, on our society, on people who rail against the basic welfare that every civilized, developed, first-world country has.

    As far as everyone else is concerned, you’re just trying to make excuses for the right causing our country’s dysfunction, and you’re trying to defend the existence of school lunch debt by using parents as a scapegoat and saying they’re the ones that really cause this.


  • sorry but a ham sandwich and an apple aren’t even close to enough to be an apt meal for a child, for many kids school lunch is the most nutrition they get in a day and ripping that away from them is evil. the advice in your comment is terrible.

    sliced meats sold in the US generally have EXTRAORDINARILY little nutrition, and are pretty expensive, while at the same time having a fuck ton of salt stuffed into them both for flavour and as preservatives. all you’re doing with a ham sandwich is wasting money to give your kids malnutrition and high blood pressure. sliced cheeses are less bad but they’re mostly salt and saturated fats still – and are still very little nutrition compared to the cost.

    the most nutritious thing is the bread, but the most commonly bought bread slices are mostly just grains other than fiber, which while not necessarily a problem is still NOT something that can compensate for the lack of nutrition in the meal.

    fruits are great and all but they’re only one part of our diets, it can be really difficult both money and time wise to do everything else. schools shouldn’t be ADDING on to that difficulty, they should be helping families with it instead.

    but instead of that, our country is filled with people like you who choose to deflect from the issue of a dysfunctional social welfare system by pretending it’d be manageable if only it weren’t for those bad parents. i agree that most parents don’t deserve their kids, but it’s not always in their control, and regardless of that, whether or not a kid won the birth lottery is completely irrelevant to it – we should guarantee that ALL kids can, without shame and without punishment, get the food that they need to develop properly.


  • Is this the child’s debt? No its the parents’ debt for something they needed to buy for their child.

    Except for the fact that the child is punished for it via methods such as not being allowed to graduate if there’s any of this debt whatseoever, and in the language of the paperwork & websites used to pay it off it’s generally portrayed as debt belonging to the child.

    Kids also used to flat out be refused food if they had lunch debt, but now kids just get a shitty non-nutritious “debt” lunch instead which is better than nothing I guess (but still causes them to be judged by peers). It’s actually not even illegal to prevent stigmatizing/shaming kids who have this debt…

    I was nearly prevented from graduating (in Georgia, the same state in this article) because I owed something like $4 or $16 in “debt” to the school, lol. Schools can also prevent you from advancing to the next grade if you have debt.

    It’s also completely legal to withhold school records, report cards, etc. from students if debt is unpaid – so even if the student graduates, have fun getting the things you need to go to college… oh wait, they’re not going to college anyways because they definitely can’t afford that. I don’t think they do that here though.

    Also your comparison with ballet lessons is bad. Those are outside of the school system, outside any government organization, and it’s completely the parent’s responsibility and choice to even enroll the student in such things. The education system, and basic human needs like lunch, are completely different. Your remark comes off as you commodifying school lunches, treating it like a child’s basic human needs are even remotely comparable to voluntary non-school activities.

    If you were to compare it rather to, band or drama or ballet class (extracurriculars) then I would actually say the point still completely stands for those too – such things can be vital to a child’s health, development, and social life, and to assign DEBT to participate in those activities is absurd and directly affects the students negatively. My school was one of the few in my area where it didn’t cost hundreds of dollars just to participate in band in middle and high school. And it still costed a lot of money to do things like marching band, because the program was underfunded! A majority of extracurricular funding goes to sports, specifically football, in most of the south, so programs like band had to have parents of students sponsor them for tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars, and to do plenty of fundraising events, just to make it so we could function. Students still had to contribute a lot of money if they wanted to do specific things.

    That’s just band, but there are many examples. That wasn’t my parent’s debt, that was my debt. When I had the opportunity to take AP tests and the like and potentially get scholarships, I was ashamed to do so in the fear that I might fail and waste my family’s money. And I’m still lucky in this regard, because many other kids can’t afford those things, and they can’t take on the debt because it prevents them from graduating. With the fucked state of financial aid/welfare in the US, many of those kids don’t even qualify to have those kinds of costs covered by the state, so at best they’re left in shame with the only other choice being to beg and hope that the people they go to aren’t dismissive or can help.

    It is the student’s debt, practically. They get all the consequences and they’re treated like they’re responsible. If it wasn’t their debt, they wouldn’t be prevented from graduating their grade, or graduating high school, or being given proper nutrition, or doing extracurriculars.