You can sort of block publishers/devs, if they have their own “steam page.” If you click on the publisher/dev in the listings underneath review scores, if it takes you to an actual dedicated page you can click the gear icon on the right and click “ignore this creator.”

This does not completely block them but it has them show up in less places (or are greyed out in some places.) Basically they can pop kinda randomly up in sales when steam forgets to add that, or greyed out in the tabs section on the front page (new and trending, top sellers, popular upcoming tabs)

It’s not the cure-all “erase EA” button I’m sure we’d all prefer, but it does help a little.

agree. my own thoughts:

if a therapist is ever telling you what you “can’t” do in interpersonal relationships, they’re not doing their job. their job is to guide you towards you building your own best life, to find your own answers in a safe environment, …it is not commanding you to do stuff because they think it’s “right”

you should be on board with every decision made about you.

gravity falls

When Black Birds Fly. It feels an extremely particular type of sick to me. It’s one of my favourite movies, and I haven’t watched it all the way through yet. The rainbow vomit aesthetic of it is, as far as I can tell, unique. Most people hate it.

It’s also unique in that it’s the only thing I’ve had to stop watching despite being very interested. I’ll finish it fully one day.

I’ve probably watched other things people would consider more extreme, but for some reason, this one gets to me, in the best way. Not even necessarily just disturbed, also… overwhelmed.

The horrendous, stilted acting and animation is not accidental, it is a precursor to how nothing in the movie will be comfortable.

cryptid energy

People who do this professionally, or even as a volunteer, receive training for a reason. It is likely one could hurt more than help, despite the best intentions.

Maybe try signing up for a hotline? They’ll give you the training required to at least give a solid attempt as well as more rationally limit the amount of people you feel obligated to handle.

The dog has swimmer’s syndrome.

As far as anyone can tell, the original is from a tiktok animal “funny” explotation/abuse account.

They have several repeat videos of this dog doing the exact same behaviour, they seem to keep them in tiny enclosures, and keep feeding it milk. Milk is not good for dogs, especially not that much. There’s no guarantee that they feed the dogs regularly or humanely.

It’s difficult to actually tell context because of the nature of these types of channels. Labradors can have food aggression, especially pound dogs, that needs essentially “dog therapy” over time to abate. Considering animal abuse is rampant on the channel in general, I don’t have high hopes here. The channel posting this specific dog over and over does not give context.

The last few videos with those two dogs does show some progress with the labrador starting to gain walking ability, so maybe they are trying to rehabilitate, but they’re still giving them insane amounts of milk. They don’t look bone thin, exactly. Again, hard to say with no context.

If there’s an original source with more information, chances are it’s on some website somewhere in chinese, which can be difficult to convince browsers in english to find :/ Language barrier. I’ve spent a few hours looking, including trying reverse image search. I’ve seen this a few times and memeified animal abuse bothers me, so wanted to know if it’s… not. If someone knows actual context with source links, I’d like to know.

I literally just found out yesterday you can utilize a virtual second monitor with (some) split screen multiplayer games to stream the “second screen” to a friend, giving you a multiplayer experience that you could previously only have with online connections, having totally separate screens with streaming which blows my mind, and this comes out today rather than having to try to figure out how to set it all up myself. Sick.

At least on my instance, the top right hand corner on all thumbnails has a little symbol that shows if it is a “link picture” or an “expandable picture.”

The link symbol looks like a box with an arrow, the picture symbol is the generic white outline hills and sun symbol it seems like many places use for images.

Doesn’t really answer your question directly, but it might help?

I have no interest in further talking to someone who brings up what the article counters with zero counterpoints, and just insists the original point progressively louder.

(Edit: Total comment rehaul to better explain my position, but similar sentiment.)

deleted by creator

If I wrote out a list of things I am interested in regarding my appearance that are gendered by society, I would think I was “a girl.” However, in practice, it was incredibly bad for me and being forced as such was a constant drain on me.

None of these stories are proof, but slowly realizing the sheer number of them from my past did indicate exploring was worthwhile:

• I could not see myself growing into an old woman. I used to think that was only because I did not think I would live long enough to be as such.
  But the fact is, when first asked about it, the thought of growing into an old man actually sounded a bit nice.
• I told every boyfriend I have ever had that I “might be trans” and asked them if they’d still stay with me as a man. It was very serious and very nonserious all at the same time.
• I clung to masculine presentation, even if it often still felt wrong, because “masculine woman” felt closer to the “femme genderfluid man” I somewhat unconsciously wanted to be than “feminine woman.”
• When I first played a man in a TTRPG game, it was incredibly fun in a way that is hard to describe. Something like, just… comfortable, for the first time.
• In preschool I demanded that the teachers use a male name and refer to me in character with male pronouns. This was not a one-off occurrence. I was very upset when they did not comply.
• When I was older, when people mistook me for a man I would feel relief. When they “corrected” themselves I would go back to being miserable.
• People using “ma’am” on me would make me extremely uncomfortable. Hearing the word “she” used for me made me oddly angry.
• I hated people looking at me and perceiving me, and, worst of all, desiring me.

All of these were difficult to see at the time. Difficult to see all at the same time. It is hard to tell if you are miserable when you are constantly miserable. It takes perspective to put it all together. It takes self-examination, experimentation, experience. You are stuck in your own head, after all.

I did not feel like I was in the wrong body. I felt like I was trapped in expectations of what I could do to my body.

I won’t regret any of it even if I suddenly decide to “transition back.” My life is a journey and I will do whatever feels right for me. My body is my own. It’s done me so much good to be able to explore who I am.

My suggestion to those questioning is generally to “try out” your gender of choice somewhere completely inconsequential. Video games, a temporary account, etc. Quietly following trans spaces for a while can give some perspective as well.

I don’t care if I “know for certain” that I’m trans. I think trying to answer that question as some kind of solid certainty can often run counter to the entirety of being trans.

I’m happier in a testosterone-based system, I am comfortable in a way that I never was, and life feels like I have a future now. I made changes that made my life better, and only changes that made my life better.

Trans just happens to be an accurate label. Labels are tools, shortcuts in communication. Not prisons.

Is it not violent for a child to go to bed hungry in the richest country in the world? I think that is violent. But that type of violence is so institutionalized that it becomes a part of our way of life. (…) And that again is because the oppressor makes his violence a part of the functioning society. (…)

Now, I think the biggest problem with the white liberal in America, and perhaps the liberal around the world, is that his primary task is to stop confrontation, stop conflicts, not to redress grievances, but to stop confrontation. (…) once we see what the primary task of the liberal is, then we can see the necessity of not wasting time with him. His primary role is to stop confrontation. Because the liberal assumes a priori that a confrontation is not going to solve the problem. (…)

I think that history has shown that confrontation in many cases has resolved quite a number of problems (…) In many cases, stopping confrontation really means prolonging suffering.

The liberal is so preoccupied with stopping confrontation that he usually finds himself defending and calling for law and order, the law and order of the oppressor. (…)

You cannot engage with the article in good faith without addressing the point that the system engages in passive but pervasive constant violence against minorities.

When you say you do not want to legitimize violence, you ignore their point that violence is nonetheless happening, and will not change through politely requesting those in charge, currently enabling or actively doing the violence, to stop it please. They are actively rewarded by inflicting violence on others through material gains. They have no good reason to stop, since it is already clear pesky morals are not getting in the way.

You state “we should just get rid of exceptions,” but you have no actual proposal for convincing those with no reason to be convinced, e.g. the people in power. We are not in a void where everyone starts off on equal footing. We are in a world where pervasive violence is quietly carried out every minute of every day.

Police violence, overseas wars, cutting minorities off from basic needs, these are all things that quiet lawful protests and “voting really hard” have not budged.

Your argument is not at all engaging with this article’s content.

My point is less to convince you to suddenly engage in good faith than to point out to onlookers how you are not. My suggestion to those onlookers is to read the actual article themselves, as it makes for some interesting reflection, regardless of agreement with it.

What on earth is crust-punk by the way?

music genre:
punk rock but with extreme metal elements, bassy and dirty (also known as stenchcore)

a type of punk person: panhandling, squatting, and/or homeless punk person who is homeless often by choice (also known as gutter punks)

(they also tend to be associated with each other)

another example of an “older” -punk, if it interests anyone, is splatterpunk, used primarily in the 80’s ^^

definitely rebellious counterculture in its roots as well. very simplified summary is some authors felt stifled that horror was increasingly getting very “literary” and threw everything extreme at the wall

(decent article from 1991 explaining it: here )