A lot of replies here ignoring the obvious - patriarchy, religion, and capitalism.

I’ll be honest, if you don’t have an understanding of how deeply these (along with white supremacy, cis heteronormativity, ablesim, classism) impact not only society at large, but our individual choices (or lack thereof), and it sounds like you don’t (E: among other reasons - the existence of feminism doesn’t negate the impacts of the aforementioned systems, if anything, it exists because those systems are still completely pervasive and need fighting against), I can’t really help at this point, there’s just too much to unpack and it’s not work I’m interested in doing for you.

As for your ulterior motives - the first is easy to resolve by opening a search engine and looking it up, the second absolutely makes you sound like a creep, and also provides a perfect demonstration of the kind of external pressure we face that more often than not compels us to cover up - we feel you “appreciating” our “pups” (aka your “male gaze” or simply you objectifying us. And no, trying to pull an “all genders sexualise” doesn’t change the fact that cis men are who predominantly harm women and others afab). And it’s fucking gross.

Maybe you should read my first reply again, this time try and actually listen to the experience of a person explaining to you the pressures they and others like them face from society that you never have, instead of dismissing it because it makes you uncomfortable to confront, and then invest some of your own time actually researching the topic, not of why people wear bras, but of how fundamentally social constructs impact society and all the individuals in it, and maybe you’ll start to get an idea of what the actual answer to your question is.

But I have a feeling you’re not interested in doing any of that, so I’ll just leave you with this - boobs don’t exist for you.

A lot of replies here ignoring the obvious - patriarchy, religion, and capitalism.

There are plenty of examples of societies past and present, for the vast majority of the time humans existed probably, where breasts are free to exist as they are. The people those breasts are attached to do all manner of work and activities without hinderance, or chafed nipples. Just like those with flat chests do.

The reason that in (especially our western) modern world we are expected to wear bras has to do with puritanism, shame, control, and profiteering from all of the above.

Comfort is categorically not a priority of the billion dollar bra industry, the trillion dollar advertising industry, nor those who demand we wear them to be “respectable”, lest we “excite” their, or their son’s, urges or “distract” them from their important manly duties (and if we don’t, and they attack us, it’d be our fault for not being “modest” enough and “asking for it”).

When we have all been socialised with these demands and expectations for centuries, they become so deeply ingrained, it’s really hard to separate from our own free will, and yet ask any group of people who wear bras what the best part of the day is, and they’ll tell you it’s taking it off.

And to be clear - this isn’t a judgment of anyone who wears a bra, I wear an underwire once in a blue moon which I hate, but am usually in a sports bra because I feel more comfortable with everything held in place (and also have nosy neighbours I’m not that friendly with), it’s about questioning why I feel more comfortable that way, and how much of that is natural vs manufactured by a society that demands I keep everything held in place, hidden (unless they’re “required” to sell something or entertain the mens), and forever impossibly youthful and perky.

Anyway, I’m stoned too and I tend to ramble, so I think I 'll leave it at that for now lol

This may sound weird

We should absolutely normalise thanking those who work to produce our food.

Ha, it’s your cake day today…

This is evil

(not exactly the same noise but can be used to the same effect)

Alternatively - hand farts for the times it’s too hot to want to stick a hand in your armpit lol

How do you deal with external problems you can’t solve around you? What is the moral thing to do here?

You don’t, you deal with your internal problems, like classism, ableism, and general ignorance of these people’s circumstances. Instead take the time to understand, learn empathy, show compassion and solidarity, instead of disdain. You don’t have to give people money you don’t have, but the least you can do is show them basic respect (no, homeless people aren’t all alcoholics or addicts, but many of those who do drink or use drugs do so to try and ease the deep distress of being homeless. And no, homeless people aren’t dangerous, those who create a society where they have to exist to keep people like you in line, are). (Edit to clarify: once you care about homeless people, rather than fear and/or look down at them, and understand the many reasons that lead to homelessness, you’d be equipped to actually tackle the systemic issues, but you can’t do that if you refuse to see them)

You are literally a blink of an eye away from being in their shoes, act like it.

That’s a perfect example of what I meant, it’s cute and personal to your relationship, and leaves the other person room to choose something they’re comfortable with.

Personally I think the ring should be the least important part of a proposal (though I say this as someone who is not interested in getting one, and who also hates wearing rings lol)…

The proposal can still be a surprise, just think of a way to do it where going ring shopping together is the big surprise, rather than the ring itself (if they have a good sense of humour, maybe use a gummy ring or a mood ring, something really silly as a stand in, otherwise maybe a ring shaped “coupon”? Or some other symbolic token that would hold meaning to just the two of you?).

I’ve heard of those, but while I can see adblock working, if me just clicking “decline all” doesn’t actually decline the so called legitimate interests, I don’t quite trust that an extension doing it will, so for now I’d rather still make the call of whether I trust a site myself…

Omg, yes, that shit is enraging.

The “legitimate interests” are only legitimate for their and their advertisers data collecting, not your experience (never mind privacy and security). It’s just a scummy workaround to avoid regulation.

Even so called “necessary” cookies are often bloated with shit that isn’t really necessary (and often leave out necessary functions from where they belong and include them in a separate “functionality” category, where they can pile on extra trackers, especially social media ones).

The worst part is, that some “decline all” don’t decline these so called legitimate trackers, so I double check to make sure they are all deselected (sometimes it’s an “object to legitimate interests” other times you have to click through to the list and deselect them manually. If it’s one of the latter and it won’t let me deselect all at once, I leave the site. There isn’t any piece of information worth unticking hundreds of boxes for). (ETA: I’ve found that one of the worst offenders of this is fandom wiki sites, which is where breezewiki comes in and saves the day! If their search function doesn’t find what you’re looking for, try looking for the fandom you’re after + breezewiki on your search engine of choice and if it exists, it will come up)

Never trust companies to have anything but their own interests in mind.

Yeah, yeah, “not all”, only enough to make sure there isn’t even a hint of socialist influence left in the party. Also, he doesn’t have to personally have removed someone from the party, for his actions and the actions of those who would fall in line with his establishment backed agenda to affect members of the party being sabotaged out of the party or leaving because they were made to feel unwelcome. The few that are left are relegated to the back benches and left with no real power to speak of.

In this thread there is already evidence of his dirty, unethical, and down right bigoted tactics, you not being comfortable enough to confront it doesn’t change the reality - Labour under Starmer is a neoliberal party that is serving capitalists and the establishment, and doesn’t have a hint of socialism nor solidarity or concern for the working class left in it (because when it does prop up as enough of a threat to the status quo, the threat is removed by whatever means necessary, it’s not like he has to go far when he’s deliberately stacked the party with other bootlickers who easily tighten ranks against anyone they no longer want around).

Obviously they won’t because that same system put them in power

Yes

and is currently holding far-right at bay

No, they’re acting as an establishment backed placeholder while the right regroups in preparation for a surge even further right next elections (when they get to blame all of the countries problems on “lefties”). Also the far right has made pretty significant gains this election.

Either way though you’re right - he has no reason to fix the voting system. People really need to let this sink in - Starmer isn’t there for the good of the country or the people, but his own and that of the establishment.

Absolutely, in case anyone needed more proof that the guy is 100% dedicated to the establishment and furthering his own career, not working class, and definitely not otherwise marginalised people (sadly, many do, so spreading this kind of info far and wide is not only welcome, but necessary).

If you’re not from here, my issue isn’t with you, people aren’t obliged to know the politics of all countries (though wherever you are, something similar is likely happening - the Overton window is shifting to the right globally), it’s the masses of locals who buy in to the idea that Starmer is a leftist that I find frustrating…

Corbyn was also at the helm of a horrible Labour defeat in 2019.

Corbyn lost by less than 3 million votes (E: in spite of a brutal years-long smear campaign literally designating him “unelectable”). A “horrible defeat” is the narrative the neoliberal media wants you to follow because it makes him seems like less of a threat to the establishment than he really was.

E: it’s a bit late and I doubt anyone will see this now, but after seeing it just mentioned on tv I had to add that Starmer won with about a third of the votes, while Corbyn lost with just under half. So no matter how the media or those who believe it try to twist things, and as if there’s really any doubt when you look at the reactions to each, but obviously it has to be said - Corbyn was demonstrably more popular than Starmer is.

The media is pushing the narrative that Labour is on the left of politics as a way to fear monger and ensure his failures will be seen as failures of left wing policies, and shift the Overton window further to the right as a result, but they haven’t even been in the centre, but rather completely past it and in to mild right wing since Starmer took over and purged all the actually left leaning members from the party, and made it clear that he has zero class, or any other conscious.

His entire career in opposition has been proof that he’s nothing but a Tory in a red tie, since he didn’t oppose them on anything of any substance, and his entire election campaign was cantered on benefitting businesses, not the people of the country.

He’s gone against unions, he’s neglected health and social services, he’s ignored disabled people, he’s mocked the fight against racism, he’s made it clear over and over and over again that he’s in politics to serve the establishment, and his own career, not the country or the working class people who carry it on our backs.

So like, yay, Tories are out, but actually, we just have more of the same, only this time the veil is thicker and there is a pretence of progressiveness, that is only going to lull liberals in to a false sense of security, and push centre and right winged voters even further to the right, and leftism remains unrepresented in our parliament, because it’s too big a threat to the establishment (why Starmer was brought in in the first place - damage control after Corbyn).

They could, but aren’t going to.

So far they have u-turned on every pledge they’ve made, specifically those about nationalising services, saving the health and social services from complete destruction from underfunding and privatisation, and stopping further cuts to a cruel benefits system they have no intention of addressing.

Meanwhile taxing the rich more wasn’t even in their pledges, all they talk about is making Britain “better for business” and making the population less “work shy”.

Anyone pinning any hope for significant change on Starmer’s blue Labour, hasn’t been paying any attention (or is out enough of direct harms way to not give a shit about those of us already at the bottom who will continue getting pounded).

Lmfao

I mean, it’s your own shitty take I paraphrased, so… ¯\(ツ)/¯