Because they are a religion, doing religious things. Their main goal isn’t to stop harm to animals, but rather, to gain a sense of self worth by taking an unassailable moral position.
Hence, the people who make them angriest aren’t the people who hate them - but the people who ignore them.
Unless she goes through a particularly weird rebellious phase and has other cubans to integrate with, with her pedigree, she will be very white. Outwardly, she will likely just look like a tan white girl. Socially, based on the international mixing and gay integration in your family, she will be socialized as a part of the globalization class, who give up any real cultural identity in the service of improved integration with people of many diverse cultures - and this class is predominantly inhabited by white people. She might go through a phase where she wants to learn more about her cuban heritage. But being part of the globalization class, she will identify the living elements of cuban culture as trashy, and will quickly (though discreetly) reject them - if she ever comes into contact with them at all.
Welcome to lemmy
Followup: what are the impediments to using, say, seawater instead?
I wouldnt doubt this was true. Peasant farmers and university educated elites often believe different things
Earth is lopsided. Only has one big tiddy
I mean, you can resolve your current problem with a single conversation. You say to your wife “hey, I feel like you are acting super checked out. What’s going on?” You will get one of three answers:
If 3, you need to come back with “Hey, no, this is a real problem for me. We need to figure this out.” And press the issue until it resolves to 1 or 2.
The outcome with be either improved communication in your relationship (possibly facilitated via couples councilling) or a divorce. Or you can choose to do nothing, and live with the current situation as it is. But I wouldn’t suggest this.
Or - they are selecting for people that are good at understanding how to reframe. Which is probably one of the most important skills you can have in life.
Like, if they ask “why do you want this job?” And your answer is “because I want money” then you will not get the job. Not because you lied or failed to lie, but because you failed to acknowledge the context of the question. The interviewer wants to know why you won’t be a miserable sack of shit while working there, because they don’t want to deal with that in a coworker. And it is useful to consider the framing that leads to the answer “because I want money” - it is the assumption that jobs and money are scarce for you, and you desperately need any job right now. And this is the type of person most employers are desperate not to hire - which is why you hate this question. Because it outs you as someone people don’t want to hire.
The better framing is that you are confident that you can get any number of jobs, that you are looking for one that will pay you, of course, but that you also care about a number of other things like the day to day tasks you’ll be doing, the people you’ll be working with, and the impact you’ll be having on others.
And neither of these framings are untrue. Your desperation to get a job is a function of your emotional state. Sure, you can want to get a job sooner rather than later - but all you have to do is realize that things will still be okay if it takes a bit longer to get the job you want than you would really like it to. And we can observe this to be true - that everything will be okay - because it has been true every other time in your life (you’re still here, aren’t you) and in others’ lives.
Literally any “annoying” interview question that gets listed here will typically not stop being asked, because it serves a purpose for the interviewer. If you are annoyed with questions about “what are your strengths”, “what are your weaknesses”, “where do you see yourself in 5 years” - interviewers know these are cliches. They don’t care. The fact that they are cliches means they get to catch you the person who hasn’t bothered to think of an answer to these questions, and not hire you. Sure, some interviewers are going to ask these questions with blind naivete - but some know that they are actually asking “can you answer a simple fucking question that you don’t like answering without having a breakdown?”
It is not hard to come up with answers to these questions. Hell, you can practice saying the answers in the mirror or to a friend, and come off 100% more confident and polished than other candidates. So just do that and come out ahead, rather than dreading these questions, flying in unprepared, and bombing the interview on what should be a gimme
I feel like this article misses the big underlying problems of car dependency, and is mostly directed at dense urban centers which are already reasonably well equipped to ween off car use.
The real issue is reforming car first infrastructure and urban design. The science is clear: you literally cannot transit your way out of an auto-dependent suburb. People’s homes are so spread out that having enough transit lines and stops to cover everyone would be astronomically expensive, and much slower than simply driving.
The solution to reforming the suburbs is twofold.
First is to give people reasonable options for living in less autodependent spaces by allowing and encouraging denser housing development in already walkable areas, and relaxing suburban zoning to allow walkable spaces to develop naturally in these areas.
Second is to, essentially, force people to stop using their cars via economic leverage. Gas taxes, carbon taxes, registration fees, additional infrastructure fees for sprawled suburban homes, no free parking, fees for using highways and fees for exiting highways into dense urban areas, etc. The reality is, cars are extraordinarily convenient, comfortable, and safe, and we will continue having ample roads for them to drive on for the forseeable future.
If only we could get that idea in people’s heads.
Seems misguided to me. People only do these sort of society-wide prosocial actions when it is within their convenience tolerance. It reminds me of this:
Sure, you occasionally will run into the desperately poor person working 3 jobs who also finds the time to pick up litter in their local park. But most of the time this person has more important things to think about than litter - like getting a job that doesnt require them to work 3. The idea that we need to get people to be more pro-social so they will take the bus feels a lot like the idea that we need to teach people that exercise is healthy so they will cycle more. But the reason people don’t cycle, we know, is because it is inefficient and dangerous, and the reason people don’t take transit is because it is slow and unpleasant. And when cycling or taking transit is faster, cheaper, safer, and more pleasant than driving, people do that.
Douchebags, obviously.
No, really, it’s basically the same thing. Healthy, ambitious, intelligent, nice guys with golden retriever energy will attract those girls. If you are having trouble, then your problem is either presentation, or substance, or both.
Substance - are you actually a healthy, ambitious, intelligent, nice guy with golden retriever energy? Like, do you exercise and eat healthy and sleep enough most days? Do you have lofty goals that you are working towards and that you are making significant progress on? Can you sit down and solve problems by thinking about them, or else do you have a witty sense of humor? Do you try to treat everyone with kindness, and help others when you can? Do you walk into social situations excited to see all your old friends with a huge smile on your face, and ready to get to know every stranger there with the expectation that they will eagerly give you head scratches? Because if not, the perscription is simple - go be that guy. Of course, you don’t have to be perfect - but as long as you are making progress in any of these things, you are going to be a more attractive date.
Presentation - like… do you look good? I mean, I guess backing up, do you look at all - that is, are you even showing up to places where you can meet new people you might want to date? Because you can be the most dashing gentleman in the world, but it doesnt matter if you never leave the house. Even online dating, at some point, will require you to leave the house. Anyway - you don’t just need to be good, you need to look good. Groom yourself, express who you are by how you dress (make it good, not cringe), and then leave the house and say hello to people you’d like to date. Yeah, you have to say hello. Sexual dimorphic behavior is still alive and well on the dating scene, and this is your job - so nut up and start talking to pretty girls. Lots of women get turned on by the simple fact that a guy too the initiative to talk to them in the first place. Then, just move the conversation towards having a date. Done
Most colleges in Germany have options where you aren’t stuffed in a room with others unless you want to. It’s generally a tiny bit cheaper to stuff yourself in
This is literally the same situation as most American universities.
I don’t see the appeal unless you know your roommate.
Ya know how all the kids these days don’t know how to socialize and are super lonely? This is their opportinity to very easily make friends when they are starting college
The impression I get is that teal and grey have been hooking up casually for a while and have been open in their discussions about actively looking for other people. Teal’s “thank god” is a call back to grey’s consistent difficulty finding s suitible partner or complaints about being unable to find one. Grey then responds with faux outrage.
I’ve had these sorts of message back and forth with fwbs before, but even meaner. They’re hilarious
But I can tailor my feeds to be primarily people I know. Also, I have largely stopped using the feeds on these platforms. On fb, for example, I use Messenger and Marketplace. My feed, otoh, I scroll down through for a post or two that my friends made on my way to marketplace, then stop scrolling once it runs out of content relevant to me.
On reddit, content made by people I don’t know is all the content. So if it degrades in quality, I will stop showing up. Which I did. Which is why I’m here.
Two reasons.
I think /u/trem gives a reasonable statitical explaination. But it likely goes farther than that. The reality is, these days it is generally considered impolite to start a conversation with a stranger without pretense, and especially so to start a conversation with a woman with romantic intentions. The zeitgeist of our time is that women, by default, are not interested in men’s advances, and that making an advance on a woman for no reason other than her physical appearance (which is all you can know before approaching) is chauvinistic. Thus, almost all intelligent, pro-social men have been trained not to make advances on women they might be interested in in public. So who are you left with? The dumb, not-forward-thinking, idgaf crowd. The kind that spend every night at the bar, and then don’t care if anyone thinks they are a trashy peice of shit. And so that’s who approaches you.
The second reason is probably something about the vibe you are giving off. Reading your post here, and a few of your other comments on lemmy, I get the impression that you are walking around with an expression like you have a smear of shit under your nose. Like, I get that you aren’t interested in these men - but the way you say it, you sound like a very judgemental person who believes she is better than everyone else because she doesn’t eat fast food or something. And the problem with this vibe you are giving off is that it is going to repel the guys you want to attract - healthy, ambitious, intelligent, nice guys who want a healthy, ambitious, intelligent, nice girl. Maybe they interact with you a bit and think “oh, she’s judgemental, I don’t want to date her.” Or maybe they simply see the default look on your face and say “hmm, she looks pissed - I bet she’d yell at me if I tried to talk to her.” The girls who get lots of attention from attractive guys are the ones with golden retriever energy - they love meeting everyone, which means the attractive guys feel less nervous about striking up a conversation and asking them out. It reassures them that, even if this girl isn’t interested, she will at least be nice about it.
Where did I imply that making it so the planet doesnt kill us impacts only the companies?
You implied it when twice you went on long tangents going into the minutiae of the carbon production process while avoiding providing the simple, obvious answer to the question. Why do those companies produce all that carbon? Because they are making things that people want and need.
The problem with this framing is that it implies that climate change exists solely due to a few bad actors, and if we just constrained them or sestroyed them or whatever, then we would all live happily ever after. But this is not the case.
Suppose we round up all the CEOs and major shareholders to these companies tomorrow, and put them on a firing line, and threaten anyone else with the same if they don’t immediately dissolve the companies. Well, after maybe a year or two of a global economic crisis and restructuring of the world’s supply lines, do you think carbon emmissions would have gone down? Probably not. Instead, you would likely have new major players who stepped into the old companies roles. Or maybe now those roles are more dispersed - so instead of 7 companies emmitting all this carbon, we now have 700 million.
Now, I’m not saying that the concentration of global economic power isn’t a problem. But it isn’t the main problem to solve if we want to solve climate change. Because the production of carbon isn’t driven by companies making products, but by consumers demanding products. Nigerians coming out of poverty want dirty two stroke mopeds. Vietnamese pho vendors want propane to power their food carts. Latvian software developers want to display their wealth by driving low end luxury cars. Argentinian housewives want to eat steak for every meal. And remote villiagers in Pakistan want to keep enjoying the power they now have in their homes for only the last few years that comes from the coal plant 100km away. And if we want to snap our fingers and decarbonize the world, then at least some of these people are going to face disruptions to some of these goods.
That doesn’t mean that a decarbonized world has to be worse for everyone. But it means that maybe Latvian software developers need to develop a taste for expensive watches, and maybe Argentinian housewives will need to learn to grill jackfruit, and maybe an NGO needs to pay for rural Pakistanis to have solar panels on their roofs. But the actual number of companies that are the endpoints of pollution based on whatever statistical analysis is fairly irrelivant. Whether it is 7 companies or 700 million, we need to stop the demand for carbon intensive goods that is driving the supply - and that means changing peoples preferences or creating alternatives for those preferences to be met which do not depend on carbon emmissions.
The “constantly immediately responsive” part also means he’s probably a workaholic
You might be exaggerating a bit, but you’re right. I have quite a number of friends from, say, college or other interests that I want to keep up with. But maybe they live far away, or are now busy with a different stage in their lives, so we don’t or can’t hang out casually like we used to to catch up. I avoided IG for more than a decade out of a desire to not get addicted to it and somethingsomethingfuckcorporate or whatever. But the practical outcome of this is that I’ve lost contact with a lot of good friends that I would like to keep up with. Not through any malintent on either of our parts, but simply because I am choosing not to be on the platform where they share about their lives.
And along with your point, a great number of community events are run on these social media sites. There is a facebook group dedicated to playing pickup ultimate frisbee in my city, and I want to do that. So if I want to stay up to date on things going on in the group, like new games being scheduled or regular games being rainchecked, I need to be on facebook.
I often organize canyoneering trips for my friend group, and these trips often may have up to 40 people interested in going. And often there are one or two people who can’t join the facebook or whatsapp chats because for whatever reason they don’t have accounts on those platforms. It is so annoying to have to text them every new detail and update because they aren’t on the platform everyone else is on. I’ll do it, but it’s annoying.
They won’t.
Despite what you hear on lemmy, the average american is not living in some kind of fascist hellscape. They are working a pretty decent job for a wage that pays their bills, and everything for them is more or less the same as it was under Biden. They are unhappy with the increased cost of things - but they aren’t even close to “riot in the streets”.
Instead, their strategy will be:
Legally, the states can’t make laws that contradict federal law. But as the case of marijuana legalization has shown, the federal government is very hesitant to push back on laws passed by states with broad popular appeal. So in the meantime, we’ll likely see moves by the states to become more autonomous, and will see more anti-Trump politicians make names for themselves and get ready for the national stage.