Could, sure - this was a fast example off the top of my head; someone else in the thread used “Great” as a better example.

But even here, while “Yay” could be seen as sarcastic, “Yay.” looks even more so

I hadn’t heard of this before, but I think I can see how they’re getting there. With no punctuation, you have to infer the emotional detail from the context. If you add a period, it can be perceived as specifying that you’re using a flatter, less excited tone.

Compare:

Grandma’s coming this weekend

                     Yay

To this:

Grandma’s coming this weekend

                     Yay.

On top of that, these kids are used to using emoticons and such to indicate a variety of emotional shadings, rather than just an exclamation mark - so deliberately specifying the flattest, least interested emotional load could very well read as just waiting for the conversation to be over.

Did it? I’m not able to read the article that far

People keep talking about divided media and a lack of shared shows - did nobody else see all the KPop Demon Hunter outfits last Halloween? I swear it was about 20% of the outfits at my kids’ school. Nobody seeing the Stranger Things merch in stores for the new season?

There’s still new shows most people see, and some are good ones - but the media landscape changed. Used to be, in the US, you had CBS, NBC, ABC, etc. The difference is now it’s Netflix, Disney, Paramount, and so on. The quality mix is still pretty much what it was, but you’ve got to go to where they’ve moved to - YouTube doesn’t have much professionally done content.

As for 67, that just seems like what memes have always been to me. The Beans meme here was random too, but no less meaningful for it.

So nothing would really change for them, right?

They’d get UBI, but it wouldn’t cover their lifestyle. So they’d still be working to support that, no? And UBI would just mean they have a safety net?

And not only did he see for himself, he wrote up and published his results.

In our case, it’s a sign that my kids struggle with extra-long noodles. We’re letting them get used to scooping with a fork before worrying about much longer strands.

Man, played that a bunch as a kid, then we found a copy again at a random estate sale!

Just ended up Youtubing the VHS tape, though

I largely agree, but I don’t think people actually need to have an “other” to hate. I suspect it’s an easily activated community-level defense mechanism, if that makes sense. One that’s easily a used by manipulative people.

I’m just trying to figure it if there’s an evolutionarily-selected use for having manipulative power-seeking types in our populations, or if they truly are more analogous to a parasitic mutation of a more conventional personality type.

You wanna mention fossil fuel subsidies too?

In the American Midwest at least, it varies by household. You basically just pay attention to what your host does.

Used to be less common to remove them, but at least as far back as the nineties, it was a thing to be aware of.

For a similar reason, I’ve gotten a kick out of the back seat shots in Bluey:

They do (mostly) keep the house surprisingly clean, though

The only incident like this I can remember is Firefly:

Simon: “Are you Alliance?”

Jubal: “Am I a lion? …I don’t really think of myself as one. Though I do have a mighty roar!”

Simon: “…I said, are you Alliance”…

Jubal: “Oh. I thought you said…” Points gun more at Simon “Where’s your sister?”

I like it because it doesn’t really drive the plot or anything, it’s just the first time we see Jubal Early misstep, and seem awkward.

Similarly, when a movie scientist/engineer insists a thing can’t be done, until an authority figure chews them out/threatens them. Then, there’s suddenly a breakthrough.

There’s other ways the person in charge can help!

I think their world view just needs more information. Bill Gates is a horrible person, who has had an excellent PR team whitewashing his name for at least a decade. And unlike Elon Musk, he doesn’t step out from behind the PR team’s cover.

We just need to keep bringing it to people’s attention.

To begin with, instead of “Italy has a major issue with domestic violence”, would it be more fair to say “The Italian government sees domestic violence as a major issue”?

My post was a response to all the “it’s still just murder!” comments; because per your first source, Italian domestic violence does largely target women, and that does need addressed.

But it sounds like your problem with this legislation is that the government is using it to prop themselves up and make themselves look virtuous while they target other disadvantaged populations. Would you mind expanding on that? My knowledge of Italian current events is woefully lacking!

I’m reading a lot of responses here that seem to rhyme with the “White lives matter!” responses to the BLM movement.

As was the case then, what seems to be getting missed by those saying this is the context. Italy has a major issue with domestic violence, including spousal murder. From the sound of it, it’s usually women who are the victims. Thus, a new law to target wife abusers specifically.

There may be some merit to debating whether this is an effective move or not, I’m not up on my research there; but let’s not deny that they see a need, and are attempting to address it.

I’m honestly not clear if this is a sarcastic comment or not.

For myself - those all seem like gender neutral virtues, viewed separately and together. I don’t know that I agree with each one as a virtual, but I don’t see anything that would or should apply to one gender more than another.

Along with the world building communities already mentioned, this just sounds like how GMs (and authors) come up with their content.

Certainly I’ve got a few; I need to peek at those communities again to share…

I thought Incredibles predated the Disney takeover? Otherwise I agree