this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2024
548 points (97.2% liked)

Microblog Memes

10442 readers
4180 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

RULES:

  1. Your post must be a screen capture of a microblog-type post that includes the UI of the site it came from, preferably also including the avatar and username of the original poster. Including relevant comments made to the original post is encouraged.
  2. Your post, included comments, or your title/comment should include some kind of commentary or remark on the subject of the screen capture. Your title must include at least one word relevant to your post.
  3. You are encouraged to provide a link back to the source of your screen capture in the body of your post.
  4. Current politics and news are allowed, but discouraged. There MUST be some kind of human commentary/reaction included (either by the original poster or you). Just news articles or headlines will be deleted.
  5. Doctored posts/images and AI are allowed, but discouraged. You MUST indicate this in your post (even if you didn't originally know). If a post is found to be fabricated or edited in any way and it is not properly labeled, it will be deleted.
  6. Be nice. Take political debates to the appropriate communities. Take personal disagreements to private messages.
  7. No advertising, brand promotion, or guerrilla marketing.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] namarupa@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Could you help me understand where his argument is specious?

[–] forrgott@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

His primary argument was all about lifetime earning potential. That is not what salary refers to. So, his argument doesn't actually apply to the allegation. Therefore, it is specious.

[–] namarupa@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I can't see where his argument was about lifetime earning potential. Seems to be just simply women with children make less money, which seems reasonable.

I also don't see anywhere he even implied that salary and lifetime earning potential were the same thing. And salary would be reflected in lifetime earning potential.

What is your position? I'm not even certain what the point of your disagreement is.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

And all was well in the fediverse

Hopefully the deleted commenter doesn’t see this but if you do thank you!

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I have come to the conclusion that their position is mental illness, because everything they've typed so far is non-sensical.