Post #1694509

2026-04-26 08:47 UTC

@kete @AimeeMaroux Wait - re-read that a sec - is your argument really that women need to make themselves more prepared to meet violence with violence so that tech bros can get rich off self driving buses and bus companies can get richer by reducing headcount? That’s can’t be the side you picked right? You didn’t on purpose pick the side of Men Get Richer over Women Get Safer by telling women to hut people more often?

Replies (2)

@leiawelsh@toot.wales 2026-04-26 08:48

@kete @AimeeMaroux Surely surely you meant to say was “what we ideally need is one or more of the following More women on tech companies boards so they can point out these bloody obvious issues earlier in the process Legislation to force comoanies to prove they’ve considered the societal harm of their product. Strong unions to fight automation related reduction in staffing Right?

Open ##1694510
@kete@mstdn.social 2026-04-26 13:26

@leiawelsh I'm not making an argument. I thought I used the word, "we", meaning what women, men, and non-binary people could do everywhere in this forced scarcity and social separation, not just on buses whether or not they have drivers. Does that sound like I'm siding with "Men Get Richer over Women Get Safer"? I read that women's liberation involved guns. Sex workers have to defend themselves sometimes. @AimeeMaroux

Open ##1694513