I’ve heard stories of people who’ve been overweight that’d never see lengthy lives because the burden of weight would be too much.

Absolute fear mongering! I see lots of people who comfortable being fat their whole lives and live a normal lifespan.

The hardest part from my experience of being slightly overweight is that it is harder to feel ready for any type of exercise, and I also got tired more quickly just from pulling the weight around when I walked to places.

It sounds very tough!

You are at least the second person to mention IBS/other stomach issues and interestingly I made this post because I’m suffering the worst stomach pain of my life, which i think must have been bought on by lifting with bad form. So I guess this is a sign I really need to see the doctor about this? I will.

And best of luck with seeking employment. Hiring cafe is good for finding remote work

I cannot self-terminate. If I could, I would have.

I have learned this too. It’s like the darkest sentence ever, lol. (Assuming you replace the middle period with a ; semicolon or dash)

But I’m proud of you and super impressed. Interested in the math and science courses if you have them to-hand

I loved watching the hobbit in the cinema, but i was a kid and I don’t think I will ever sit down to watch it all again.

The first one felt okay to have as one long film, i.e natural, but it’s weird that it would end with the eagle rescue after Goblin town.

If i think about it off the top of my head, some scenes they stretched out in film 1 (“An Unexpected Journey”) were:

• The “prelude” scenes of E r e b o r, which were very beautiful and cinematic, but most movies would convey in one or two scenes.
• confrontations such as with the trolls and the goblins
• CGI sequences like Radagast leading the wargs away from the dwarves

I’ve not thought about it before but it really is a shame because as soon as a shorter version comes along, people will prioritise that film instead.

Socialism!!! That’s socialism, how dare they!

That’s fair enough, but I guess the premise of star wars is that they’ve always known about the force since pre-space times (Though literature outside of the movies explains the opposite), so to me it seems more like just the fantasy premise of the series.

Honestly the only Bradbury novel I’ve read so far was Fahrenheit 451 (I loved it). That’s probably not sci fi, because tho it is set in the future, the futuristic elements which couldn’t exist today are spoke about in vague terms and it’s more a story of highlighting what’s wrong with our current society by extrapolating where it will go from here

One of the best documentaries I watched was Brian Cox’s Solar System, so yes that’s a very good example of how the purely scientific can create a pretty fantastical impression!

It strikes me as very sciencey.

• The space travel, for instance, is “how could space travel actually work?” And even when they have a satisfying explanation for planet to planet travel, they need one for longer distances, so they introduce those wormhole gates? I haven’t read very far into it
• it tries to make space colonisation as realistic as possible, including the body horror

And therein lies the balance. Real science for where we know (or think we know) the boundaries of science, and completely theoretical fantasy for things we don’t know about (the existence of alien life and what shape it might take)

Yes but I’m interested in other people’s views on this. Thought it would cultivate interesting discussion

Or just, wealth/stability. So many people would give away money to have their own vegetable garden attached to a multi-generational home - they can then figure the rest out from there.

Humans are different and have different interests but one thing common to all of us is that we enjoy:

• being outdoors
• exercising
• having community
• learning skills and creating things

There are actually some people who successfully self therapise. This is hard to do, so it’s actually a testament to just how many people out there need therapy, which reflects how unhealthy modern life is for humans.

The core idea of the tweet is correct - people can heal mental health sounds when given the right environment to. We live in a time where almost nobody is in the right environment for this, which requires what I listed before (healthy community, access to green space, purpose and recreation). This is basic stuff, I think it’s covered by Maslow’s hierarchy of needs - which, ironically, is often shown to business students in universities, but then disregarded by the capitalists who rule this world.

I’m sure I agree but your comment suggests you could summarise what else you think should be factored into the measure of success, and now I’m curious to hear it

At least OP said women and not “females”

Weaponised schizophrenia

Men are attracted to the “airhead type” because those women are good at making men feel good about themselves and keeping up lively conversation; and though people usually prioritise companions who have the same interests as them, they enjoy talking also to a lively conversation partner, perhaps someone as-different-from-themselves as possible: someone who surprises them.

Many men feel that all women have the “airhead” quality - no, not as in they’re all stupid, but as in they’re lively and conversational in that stereotypical way that disrupts the man-to-man conversation; and though they do not speak to men as equals (preferring to talk over them or jerk the conversation off on some other tangent, perhaps, or dwell on uniquely feminine topics which baffle/disinterest the male listener), this is seen as no big loss, really. For women are different to men, and their presence in our lives is welcome precisely because of that rather than in spite of it.

The important thing to remember is that people change overtime and every person is more multifaceted than massive media would have us believe - so yes, that is “just Hollywood.” Who’s to say why a man likes an “airhead,” she probably has more depth to her than you know about.

Edited to change one comma into a colon, and formalise grammar in final sentence

Pizza is a savoury cake.

Guacamole is so much nicer than avocado. I probably eat more guac than mashed potatoes, usually on toast or in wraps though. As the Aztec gods intended.

Hard to say if it’s Irish. It could be. But:

First printed recipe: English author Hannah Glasse published the earliest known recipe for modern mashed potatoes in her 1747 book, The Art of Cookery Made Plain and Easy.

The recipe: She instructed cooks to boil and peel potatoes, then vigorously mash them with butter, salt, and milk.

Obviously Britain and Ireland are very close to one another, and someone being English doesn’t mean they don’t have Irish parentage or tutelage or friends. (Even in those days.)

Britain + Ireland are also called “The British isles,” so unfortunately for the Irish, even if we disambiguate to include the possibility of it being an Irish creation, it will still be called a “British” dish - which merely makes it look like it’s English again, to most people.

Don’t worry about it

In the context of biblical history, I’ve heard that, because of the Alexandrian empire and it’s 3-4 off-shoot kingdoms, Greek was actually the ‘Lingua Franca’ (default language for international communication) throughout the middle east; from before the Romans arrived, to Jesus’s time, to until after the Roman empire split in two for good.

I guess it is hard to supplant an existing Lingua Franca. France today is a good example - they are very defensive of their language, once the Standard Internationale, and so France sees less English speakers proportionally than other European countries such as Spain, Nederland and Germany.

So… The middle East’s dominant languages were Greek and Persian, Greek and Persian, Greek and Persian - then Muhammed shows up with Islam, and they conquer surrounding states. Arabic is spreading. And this is testament to Persia’s linguistic domination, right - Arabic calligraphy comes from the Persian alphabet. That’s bonkers; a group of people, B, subjugated by A, manages to get A to assume their script for all writing.

At that point, the whole(-ish) middle east now had a different alphabet - neither greek nor Roman - to write in. Languages don’t tend to change their script once they’ve settled on one. The only examples I know are Poland, who did it because of catholic church’s influence , and Mongolia, who were forced to by the soviet union; it doesn’t happen naturally. Oh also Turkey, which was again a government mandate.

Certain scripts are better for certain language sounds; I don’t expect Arabic will ever be written in Latin script in general practice. It didn’t spread at first because Greek was already so dominant, then because the catholic church wast spreading into Muslim territories in the middle east, and now because it is not Lingua Franca, languages have settled on the correct scripts, and Christianity isn’t spreading in the middle east, same as usual.