this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2024
-1 points (0.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35701 readers
1011 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

If a chihuahua and great dane, through much effort, can create an offspring, why are human beings so offended by differing externals which are a product of circumstance not choice?

top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] olorin99@kbin.earth 1 points 8 months ago

Because dogs are better than humans.

[–] zeppo@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I don’t really understand the question.

[–] notsure@fedia.io -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

@zeppo@lemmy.world

think about it long, think about it hard, think about it long and hard and smile…;)

[–] zeppo@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Are you seriously talking about wanger size?

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 months ago

They might as well be! Needlessly vague question is needlessly vague!

[–] SorteKanin@feddit.dk 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Are you asking why some people are racist? I'm not sure but it almost sounds like that.

[–] notsure@fedia.io -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

@SorteKanin@feddit.dk

ding! ding! ding! if dogs don’t mind, why do we?

[–] SorteKanin@feddit.dk 1 points 8 months ago

Because historically the most dangerous things to humans have been not other animals, but other humans. Were generally afraid of anything dissimilar to ourselves because that often meant war or competition between tribes and such.

It doesn't make sense in the modern world but unfortunately instincts are hard to let go of for some people.

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Why did you repeat the title in the body of your post?

[–] Fuckfuckmyfuckingass@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think they're fixated on a Chihuahua and a Great Dane getting it on.

[–] notsure@fedia.io -1 points 8 months ago

@Fuckfuckmyfuckingass@lemmy.world

@RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world

not at all, jungle boogie plays in background

[–] notsure@fedia.io -1 points 8 months ago

@RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world

it was unintentional, am from different instance, thought it formatted correctly

[–] aelwero@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Your question would be much better applied to height discrimination, which is something that's almost never mentioned, but is a lot more indicative of the nature of discrimination itself.

It is instinctual, as others have said, but it has nothing to do with tribalism or war, its about resources. Discrimination is almost always about resources (the notable exception being gender/orientation based discrimination, which I guess is religious?).

The discrimination against small people (and obesity and age as well), is more basic, and likely older (in evolutionary terms), and is oriented towards hunting and fighting. We think less of smaller, fatter, and older people because they're assumed to be less capable of gathering (and fighting for or defending) basic resources.

Discrimination against races is more recent, and more societal, and is more about monetary resources, and isn't even entirely a matter of race. Poor white people can be discriminated against in the exact same way for the exact same reasons. Racism is more classist than discrimination against height, weight age, etc. but is essentially still a matter of these classes being seen as less capable of getting resources.

You can see it more easily if you look objectively at the discriminatory tendencies of women (and I mean that in a very generalized way). They tend to be far more discriminatory towards resource based biases... Height, weight, physical condition... They're often inexplicably attracted to overly aggressive partners, occasionally to their own detriment. The more instinctual a woman is, the more likely to pursue the overly aggressive men. Race isn't anywhere near as much a factor, and there are notable exceptions in all factors for women if a man obviously has a lot of resources already (no indictment intended ladies, just is what it is, and generally)

And of course it's more obvious among women for the same reason... The disparity (again, in a very general sense) between male and female in ability to gather and defend resources affects women's choices of partners more so than men.

[–] notsure@fedia.io -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

@aelwero@lemmy.world so being black isn’t a disqualifyer if you two are relatively the same height? a chihuahua, bred in the central and south american hotter climates, with a great dane, bred for mor cold, hostile climates, requiring 300x(exaggeration) the resources….wtf, person?

[–] notsure@fedia.io -1 points 8 months ago

there are lies, there are damned lies, then there are statistics….

@aelwero@lemmy.world

[–] notsure@fedia.io -1 points 8 months ago

i have decided after this first experience asking a stupid question that i will never do so again

[–] awwwyissss@lemm.ee -1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Why are people downvoting this....

  1. look at the sub your participating in

  2. calm down

[–] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Probably because it’s not a real question, OP is just virtue signaling.

[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

The question is worded unnecessarily confusingly and the body, which is usually for elaborating on the title, is just a copy-paste of the title (which is confusing).

[–] pezmaker@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

And not just that, but it's disingenuous. There's no real interest here in an answer, it's just intended to provoke interaction. Even all but the most overt, direct, owning it racists will claim racism is bad, regardless of their own actions and tendencies. Bad post is bad.

Edited to add: I feel like this community should be interpreted as having an implied "genuine" to it regarding the questions involved.

[–] notsure@fedia.io -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

@PP_BOY_@lemmy.world

@awwwyissss@lemm.ee when one wishes to be precise and not mince words….

[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Yet you did neither