Gloomy

I'd suggest that they already are in the process. For example lots of companies have stopped their DAI programms due to eight wing pressure.

Yes, but that is because there is a power imbalance at play here. It makes sence to avoid such situations to prevent sexual violence in institutions.

You can normalise beeing naked without shame beeing involved and keep children safe in a situation that could be potentialy abused. In my opinion that's not mutually exclusive.

Ironically not making parts of our body a taboo best not even to talk about is what helps children speak out if they have been molestered. Same with knowing what is appropriate and what not. Sex-Ed is just so important to prevent sexual violence against children. Which is, just to make the clear, still not their responsibility. It's just something that helps a lot, you still need systems of protection in institutions.

/rant I guess.

This is btw one main reason why milk is murder, because many of those calves are often killed for their meat. The other reason is that cows stop beeing productive and are killed way before their natural death, since the replacement calves are rdy to go (I think it was something like after 5 years with their natural life span beeing around 25, but I'm not sure if I remember correctly).

A bit oversimplified, but just to add a bit more context why vegans don't drink milk.

Where have I heard this one before?

France? Sweden? Italy? US? Netherlands?

God, I hate the world rn.

Nope. Stimmt so nicht, sry.

48 % der Deutschen leben weniger als 25 Kilometer von ihrem Geburtsort entfernt, 31 % sogar weniger als 10 Kilometer.

https://chrismon.de/artikel/2020/48939/umfrage-wie-weit-von-ihrem-geburtsort-leben-sie-entfernt

Ist jetzt nicht die perfekteste Statistik, das gebe ich vorweg. Wenn du etwas hast das deine Behauptung stürzt nur her damit.

That is of course possible and ultimately we will never know.

I don't have hard data on this, but if interbreeding between slaves / sex-slaves and whites would have been widespread I think there would be a lot more interracial people in the US. As it is the black and white ethnicities remain still notably separated, with laws up into the 1960 making it a crime to have partner that is not one's own race.

And yes, 1865 to now is a vastly smaller time frame than 45.000 years, and if we make it that long one the picture would be a different one.

or assimilation of the hot ones into Sapiens I should say

Why the hot ones only? Having a warrior brute around sounds sensible too. Or just a refugee family of neanderthals who's children interbred with the sapiens after a generation.

I think violence is a very valid theory in the process of interbreading, given how humans tend to be a violent species. But the fact that children resulted out of that interbreeding that were aloud to interbreed themselves speakers for at least some level of peacefully integration.

Yeah, well, that realy doesn't add anything to the discussion.

What revolution would that have been? From my limited understanding universal healthcare emerged as a byproduct of the industislistation, when states where confronted with a fast growing population of poor citizens that flocked to the cities and needed caring for in some sense. Bismarck intruduced the first European Healthcare system with the goal of keeping workers alive and healthy.

So, to answer my own question, if anything then the industrial revolution (aka capitalism) gave us healthcare.

Somehow I don't think that's where you were going with your comment.

Location: Germany

For me it's the shift to the right in culture and politics that is making me anxious. It not just the US. In Europe there are several countries that have been shifting towards the far right. France, Germany, Netherlands, Finnland, Sweden, Italy... and more. It's a matter of time untill one of the major player, either France or Germany, will have a right wing government. In both countries the current government has failed and on both countries the main reason has been right wing propaganda doing it's work.

This will habe some consequences on many levels, climate deniers beeing in charge and not only stopping, but working against the progress the world has achieved beeing one of them.

You can feel it in the people too, here. It feels like people are staring to dial back on the progressive ideas they express on public. It's going to be harsh world our there for us, who are not amongst the majority.

And it is science denial to have a scientific opinion that is interpreting facts differently then the consensus?

Also, from my first source:

"The IPCC supports the overwhelming scientific consensus about human impact on climate change, so we would expect the reports' vocabulary to be dominated by greater certainty on the state of climate science -- but this is not the case."

The IPCC assigns a level of certainty to climate findings using five categories of confidence and ten categories of probability. The team found the categories of intermediate certainty predominated, with those of highest certainty barely reaching 8% of the climate findings evaluated.

"The accumulation of uncertainty across all elements of the climate-change complexity means that the IPCC tends to be conservative," says co-author Professor Corey Bradshaw, Matthew Flinders Fellow in Global Ecology at Flinders University. "The certainty is in reality much higher than even the IPCC implies, and the threats are much worse."

What? You literaly poster an opinion peace. By a climate scientist, yes, but so is the response I posted.

Plus, I quoted a study in reply to the comments about the IPCC.

How is that climate science denial?