Men shouldn't be allowed near children that aren't their own. It's rarely stated but regularly assumed.

Welcome to the future! I believe this is how the next world war starts?

Unless it runs Linux it doesn't stand a chance. The moment you decide to sell a handheld gaming console running Windows you doom it to failure. It's the worst OS possible for that purpose.

If you work for Boeing or know someone who does, now is the time for you (or them) to look for a new job. At the very least, update that resume (or help them update it)!

It pains me to think it but this advice could save someone's life.

"We are living in a highly sexualized society."

History would disagree. We're still living in a society shaped by Quaker beliefs about sex, children, and the human body in general.

It's telling that the article didn't interview anyone with expertise on the history of sex or people who study sex professionally (as academic scientists and researchers). Porn is definitely more easily viewed than ever before and that may be shaping kids views of sexuality but how is that shaping adult's views of sexuality? Why are kids special?

I'll tell you why kids are special: It's because it has become acceptable to assume that kids being exposed to sex of any kind is somehow "bad". Nowhere in the article do they talk about why it is that kids aren't learning about healthy sexual relationships: Because we hide that from them.

No one wants to talk to their kids about sex but if there's one thing you should tell kids (not just your own!) about porn it's this: It's fake

You've set off my 1984 alarm: Never use the term, "thought police" in reference to private individuals making decisions about others actions. If you actually read 1984 (it's a short book and easy to find online, go read it) the Thought Police were part of the government. As in, policing people's thoughts was a function of the government (in order to maintain the status quo, avoiding change aka extreme conservativism).

Here, you're referring to a collection of people that have decided--on their own--to boycott a comedian because they don't like where he stands on certain topics. That's not Thought Police! Call them snowflakes or "too sensitive" or "hysterical" or some other bullshit (don't care, really) but please for the love of Orwell stop using that term to refer to non-governmental entities or the actions of people that aren't part of any authority.

When the government starts cracking down on people's speech then by all means refer to this action as, "Thought Police".

As you get older the existential dread of not getting things done fades. I'm fact, I'm now proud that I blew off putting things away for so long that I've moved five times and I still have stuff from those boxes I packed during the first move still in the same boxes 👍

Obviously those things will come with me to the next home. I can't just throw away old cables! They don't go bad! Some day I'm going to be the hero that still has the proprietary cable that connects a specific model year, early 90s vintage mini video camera to RCA and composite connectors!

Not only that but if the SCOTUS rules that presidents are immune to prosecution for anything they do while in office Biden should just straight up murder all the justices that voted in favor of the opinion. There would be no (legal) consequences!

One of her friends used the immortal eye on him and saw that he had zero sin.

The reason why conservatives of the past seem to be more reasonable is because there's much more evidence (and easy ways to cite it) to refute their seemingly well-reasoned arguments.

In the past a conservative might say something like, "taxes on corporations are pointless; they're just going to be passed on to consumers" and they could make a well-reasoned argument from simplistic economic principles.

These days when someone hears that argument they can just look online and find a zillion well-researched and cited articles pointing out how it's a flawed position based on bad assumptions. Just looking at how changes in the tax code over time (massive reductions in corporate tax rates) have impacted the economy and the price of goods. Spoiler: Reducing taxes on corporations has two effects: It reduces tax revenues (obviously) and makes the rich (owners) richer. Changes in the tax code that increased taxes on corporations also had no impact on prices. In short, the entire idea falls flat on its face even though it seems like it would make sense.

They're the same conservatives they've always been; refusing to change their beliefs despite the evidence. It's also that we now know more about their beliefs and the more we know the more extreme they seem.

Conservatism has become a political package: By "voting conservative" (making it a part of their Identity) a person is signing on to conservatism as a whole. They may not believe everything their peers do (e.g. racism, xenophobia, sexism, violence, etc) but these things they do not agree with are not game changers. They may not believe that whites are a superior race but they're OK with those people being on their team.

The researcher, who asked to remain anonymous because he wanted to separate his professional life from the kink-related work he does, said he gained access to a database containing records of more than 10,000 users,

10,000 users‽

sucking their own dicks over Linux

This one trick explains why people who use Linux love it so much!