One of the things of "why not class only" is because in America race matters a lot. I mean it quite literally: studies have shown simply having a black-sounding name makes you equivalent to a white-sounding name of an order of magnitude less qualification. In some cases black people with a college degree have job prospects similar to a white person with a felony record.
Can you clarify no 1? What are you if not your thinking and your feeling? I'm not trying to be snarky, i am actually legit curious about how to develop a sense of self that doesn't have to do with, y'know, sensing.
At least in my experience I've noticed some things. I don't check general subreddits anymore. I only check my own locale-specific subreddits (town, country, etc). For my niche hobbies, I already moved off reddit into other communities, like discord is immensely popular for this.
Low intensity shouldn't involve panting at all, because low intensity exercises are designed for people with specific health issues where anything above slight exercise is dangerous to them. [consider: significant osteoperosis, serious heart disease, etc] Stretching is low intensity exercise.
Also, an exercise you can only keep up for 20 minutes at a time is pretty high intensity.
No, In mean quite literally the described situation does not have anything to do with whether or not sunblock itself causes cancer. Like a whole paragraph of scenario was provided and then out of nowhere "and then they get cancer from chemicals in sunblock". Which chemicals, specifically? What do we do about the fact that nearly all women are recommended sunblock daily in nearly all beauty regimens for decades and yet facial skin cancers aren't gendered?
The chain of events doesn't form a causal relationship that substances in sunblock cause cancer. It just expresses someone might use sunblock more often after the advice from a doctor.
Actually I think a man who doesn't seriously acknowledge their own self as an emotional being is the opposite of adapting and overcoming. There should be nothing weak about acknowledging when you're too upset to handle a situation. My professional life would be vastly improved if the men around me had the emotional intelligence to realize they're getting worked up about a code review or something and to take a walk for 10 min instead of assuming their anger is always logically justified somehow.
I think it depends on your culture, but generally women's appearances matter way more than men's appearances and are considered a personal responsibility thing. Simply becoming older and being visibly older is considered a failure of a woman to "age gracefully" or whatever it is that means.
But also, I think most of the HN crowd are men, and I don't think we're broadly the populace to discuss with any serious authority whether or not women are raised to blame themselves in some way lol.
I think being trapped on an overcrowded ship, bodies pressed into you, as the ship capsizes, is also viscerally terrifying. You don't know where you are. You don't know who is around you. You have nothing except what you could've carried. You are trying to leave a downed ship with hundreds of pressing bodies. The waters are rising. There's too much froth to see where you're going.
Everyone is screaming, death is all around you. People are drowning, and in their drowning flailing limbs they are pulling others to their deaths.
[Edited to add: The migrants would've had time to process what was happening to them. There would be many long minutes of terror, suffocation, as they died. Hundreds. Women, children.]
No, this is more akin to hiring an uber, the uber driver does something illegal and the cops arrest you for it with the idea that you can sue uber for the injustice. That's obviously wrongheaded.
I would hesitate to arrest passengers that can't override the taxi. There are knock-on effects that can't be remediated by suing a robo taxi company, such as loss of job, violation of parole, or simply not having any money to begin the suit to begin with. [I know that it's unlikely that someone wealthy enough to hire a robotaxi for a trip may not be wealthy enough to hire a lawyer, but you never know and it would be a supremely nasty edge case]
> But to be honest, the thing the teachers union doesn’t seem to get is that getting the best and brightest strongly implies that most teachers would have to leave the profession to make way for the best and brightest.
We're actually in a teaching shortage, so I don't think this is true.
I actually think this is a conspiracy theory. The Federalist's society's explicit goal is to make more justices in courts that will not waver in very specific belief systems. It's a fairly transparent process going back decades. It isn't like this is an organic club from people who already held these beliefs. It's a group of people who held these beliefs thereby installing recruitment centers and solicitations in specific academic institutions in order to influence the students therein towards certain career trajectories. This is like when wealthy people purchase economist departments (this is also a real thing that happens!) by donating tons of money with the stipulation that the head of the department is a specific academic who has views aligning with the wealthy.
I actually doubt this, but you have to be very particular. You can't just go to the grocery store and pick up a free-range label. But e.g. my local farmer's market has a guy who is definitely pasture-raised chickens with the $$$ to match.
Of note one of the things not mentioned in "BetterHelp" is that the ability to not text your therapist at all hours of the day is actually very important for mental health. The therapist is a tool, not a crutch, and shouldn't be treated like a coping mechanism. A therapist is supposed to help teach and guide someone to develop healthier behavior patterns, and time away from the therapist to implement those patterns by onesself is very important.
Frankly if I am horny all the time, I need that addressed. If I'm homicidal all the time, I need that addressed. Same thing I think if a fat person is hungry all the time that should be addressed. People are generally not wandering around wanting to fuck all the time or wanting to kill all the time, and we generally consider it a disorder if they are. I think obese people are disordered in some way, either they need psychological help to navigate their relationship with food or medical intervention to handle their hunger [semaglutide affects hormones and reduces hunger, so I think something is wrong with an obese person's hormones?]. But I refuse to believe it is totally normal and healthy for fat people to just feel hungry all the time.
No, I'm not arguing against eating until satiety. That's fine. I'm specifically arguing against feeling "somewhat hungry all the time". That sounds bad and definitely not what I feel as a thin person and not an expectation I would have of fat people. I wouldn't even describe my satiety as feeling a little hungry. I just feel not-hungry, not-full, and I've been thin all my life so I think I understand what it's like to be thin and eat as a thin person.
TBH that sounds like a sucky life and I don't think we should expect all fat people to live it just because they're fat. That sounds like something's wrong with your hunger sensors or something.
I am totally down for fat people losing weight in a sustainable way that leads to better health outcomes. I think fat people in general should strive to lose weight through diet, exercise, and non-harmful medical intervention where applicable. I'm merely arguing against the very specific point that fat people should just learn to be hungry all the time, like that's an acceptable standard to expect out of anybody.
I think there are some things that are a bright red line though. I don't think it's prejudicial a black person to avoid people who have a "habit" of going to KKK rallies. Or an immigrant to avoid people who have "one belief" that we should forcibly deport immigrants.
I think for certain habits, beliefs, etc. people who avoid you aren't simply "unwilling to overlook this one bad thing". Maybe that one bad thing is actually just bad enough to poison you the person. [hypothetical you]
I totally agree for the other, more general case though. Not all catholics are pedos and I know plenty of catholics super frustrated with their leadership, excellent and loving people catholicism included.
> If sketchy drugs are the only ACTUAL way to get the 3/4ths of the country to lose weight and be healthier, shouldn't we try it?
Well the thing is, I actually am super skeptical that eating explosive poison is healthier than being a fatty. I am way more optimistic for wegovy and other hunger-regulating hormone treatments that don't seem to cause you to die from overheating, and I'm all for fat people taking them if it helps them be healthier. But like, I'd rather a fat person stay fat and work on doing runs (even though exercise doesn't help much in losing weight, exercise is still good for fat people) than change nothing about their lifestyle besides eating poison. Skinny isn't always == healthy and shouldn't be treated like an "at any costs" measure. A great way to lose 25% of your body weight is to chop off a leg, but chopping off legs is obviously a stupid way to get healthy.
Okay but, again, this is a waaay higher standard to place on a fat person than a thin person just because they're fat. As a thin person I never have to "learn to live with" somewhat hungry forever and I think expecting fat people to is stupid. I never have to decide whether or not a lifetime of hunger is worth 5 extra years of life, or if my hunger isn't so bad I can tune it out. That's a standard I don't hold myself to as a thin person, why would I hold a fat person to that standard?
The parent poster literally said "better to feel somewhat hungry all the time". I disagree! I don't want fat people to feel "somewhat hungry all the time"! That sounds like a shitty existence and I a thin person would be appalled if we think that's just what it takes to be thin for some people! I acknowledge being thin for me is great: I eat when I'm hungry, I lay off a little bit if I know I've eaten a big thanksgiving dinner or something. I am never "somewhat hungry all the time"!
I don't think anyone really acknowledges that "just be hungry for the rest of your life" is a stupid expectation of fat people. I don't even think living another 10 years is worth it if you're hungry all the time, because I know what I'm like when I'm hungry and I hate it-- I hate the person I am hungry (cranky, rude, depressed). I wouldn't wish it on a fat person forever just for the crime of being a fatty. I'd rather fat people be happy, fat, and then die off quickly, than thin angry and depressed people surrounding me in a retirement home until dementia or alzhimers takes them slowly and brutally.