NoSpiritAnimal

No I saw the video, they did a group hug first

News in 30 days: Digestive Parasites are up 70,000% in Eastern Ukraine.

Reality: You weren’t ever getting those hostages back. They’re much more useful as symbols in the US than as people in Israel.

Anyone who has beliefs that violate the social contract should not be protected by it.

I wonder if he was swapped to set up a new patsy for the failing war. No window treatment makes me wonder.

This is actually a sign of rampant corruption. Bribery is a tight market, and with a lot of politicians willing to accept bribes the cost drops significantly. It’s one of the few areas where capitalism behaves as believed.

Pick a position and stick with it for more than a single comment:

It is not protest for the sake of protest, but mostly “convenience”.

It is a protest using existing social expectations of dress code, it’s not just about comfort.

“Protest for the sake of protest” is nonsense. By definition they’re doing it for the sake of something. That something is not convenience, it’s the 996 work culture like the subject of the article.

You have completely flipped the context of the quote. It’s not just comfort for comforts sake, it’s also a way of protesting the 996 work culture of China.

The article is definitely stating that this is a protest, your quote is about a fringe benefit.

Social media users have joked that if you wear your favorite outfit to work, it’ll be contaminated by the “Ban Wei” as the office vibe creeps into your personal life.

The remaining option: wear your gross clothes to the office.

Candise Lin who creates content on TikTok exploring cultural trends in China, broke down this viral trend in a recent video.

She used an example of one blogger who said that they only wears clothes with holes in them to work to reflect their “crappy job and shabby pay.”

Clearly stated like 2 paragraphs after your quote.

At least read the article before commenting. They’re dressing this way on purpose against the wishes of their employers.

You’re not making any sort of factual statement, you’re making a series of suppositions about people you’ve not met without any underlying evidence or even a firm idea on what problem you say you’re identifying.

You’re sharing your (uninformed) opinion and expecting others to give it weight.

deleted by creator

This is too subtle for the internet, or at least I hope it is

Israel is going to build camps to concentrate their prisoners.

No I meant the psychos downvoting you.

Sweet lord the Brazilian tourists are out in force on this thread.

They found him in a hotel known for sex workers, in a district known for sex work, with an 11 and 12 year old girl.

What was he doing, tutoring them?

He fled the country to escape consequences and I think we’re all safer knowing his name and face.

I like how colloquial this got over the course of reading.

“No no, that’s too obvious. BG Yossi Sariel it is!”

No, to have in this instance means for the cake to exist in your possession.

Once you eat it, you don’t have it anymore. You can’t share a cake you ate, or put it back in the fridge, or add more sprinkles, it’s ceased to be a cake.

So have your cake and eat it too is impossible. The saying means something is an impossible desire.

Removed by mod

Ah, the moderate urge to value politeness above justice.

You made up a scenario that’s not in the article to justify the 14 years someone is losing from their life.

If you support a just society you can’t also support harsh sentencing with the purpose of “sending a message”. Every regime in history has criminalized descent, and sentencing a person to 14 fucking years in prison for supposedly pushing burning trash at a cop car is trying to send a message.

At least open the article.