Here’s my opinion of how to try a bagel in its most classic format, me being someone from the northeast but not New York. Everything bagel, cut in half (like a sandwich), toasted, smear each open face with plain cream cheese (can substitute for veggie cream cheese), eat each half separately.

Otherwise it’s just a different shape of bread like ciabatta or baguette. Personally I don’t love bagels for sandwiches because they tend to not hold up structurally, but bagel is my favorite context for cream cheese.

The world is literally burning.

The world is actually burning though, and there are fewer birds, and people are tired and stressed all the time, and money is tight, and this is all in the real world, no internet required to experience any of that. The internet may expose you to others struggles that don’t affect your real world, but it still affects theirs. The ability to commiserate is what helps a lot of people cope with their real world, and might even invite insight on how to end some of those struggles.

That’s just a safety tip

Dude, we’re probably the only 2 people on earth who are going to see this conversation, how am I trying to force anything? The responses you’ve given have made you seem like a very close minded person. If you don’t agree with what I’m saying that’s fine, but if you’re going to engage in a debate then please address the things I’m actually saying. Otherwise I’m just going to stop responding.

I’m not obligating anything or asking for any accommodation. I’m trying to make an argument for a better system than what we currently have, whereas you just seem to be saying ‘change is stupid’.

It’s not that contrived to have two subjects in a sentence be a single person and a group of people. I have personally been in situations where someone was confused about the use of the singular them. Obviously it’s possible to understand in most circumstances, but why not make it easier? Especially when it’s a simple solution that also stops most of the misgendering people experience.

Are we not intelligent enough to make language whatever we want it to be? We actually do that all the time with political correctness and ungendering words like policeman.

You could use a similar argument to stop literally any innovation. Things don’t have to be an issue to be able to be improved.

I understand that, my point is that they’re not useful. Or at least it would be much more useful to have a singular and a plural pronoun, because that distinction is more relevant to modern speech.

More like…

Using gendered singular pronouns: kinda weird and pointless

Using they/them for both singular and plural: possibly confusing

Making a non-gendered singular pronoun: reduces confusion

So that means that’s the best way for it to work in the future? Having a distinction between singular and plural is useful, so why *not adjust our language and repurpose the not useful gendered pronouns?

I’ve been arguing this for a while and I don’t understand why so many people are against it.

He/Him: okay i guess

She/Her: weird change and doesn’t fit previous convention

He/Her: actually builds off of each other

That and while the distinction between Male and Female pronouns is kind of pointless, having a distinction between singular and plural pronouns is actually a helpful feature.

For a dog example, a black lab (with dark skin) is more genetically similar to a yellow lab (with light skin) than a black pomeranian (with dark skin).

Username checks out

This one’s actually pronounced with a soft j

X gon give it to ya is still a great choice

Why not just a second white noise, or other white noise adjacent sound? Even if they’re both looped they’re not going to have the same loop length and that will be a changing rhythm that way.

It also has built in ads

I don’t think you’re saying anything contrary but I wanted to make one point clear.

The democracy we live under is not unique to capitalism. In fact, our current system has less democracy than an anarchist system would. Also capitalism doesn’t have any requirement to be democratic. Whereas with anarchism, any dictatorship is directly against the core tenets of the system.

That being said, (I have not read enough theory to know for sure but) anarchism doesn’t necessarily preclude the idea of having managers or even CEO’s. It does preclude those positions having total power and control of an enterprise though. Dismantling the hierarchical structure of modern society doesn’t mean having someone be a coordinator of a larger group isn’t helpful. It just means that job isn’t given greater power or more significance than those being coordinated. Our current idea of a CEO is very dictatorial, but that’s not how it has to be.