That’s exactly it. He will forever have to say, it was awarded by Donald Trump, instantly loses all meaning. People will probably think he bought or bribed it from, DT.

People of science understand, without the parables, because they have the working and “book” knowledge to interpret the relative meaning of the presented data. To communicate the meaning relative data, without the background knowledge, and without taking the time to learn (or even package for small, focused learning) it is easier to understand, if put into a relative comparable, with similar, relative distance, or changes. Especially when people are already overloaded with *gestures towards everything. The way to eat an elephant, small bites. It’s an elephant to people without all that back knowledge or ability to interpret the science, so you gotta break it into small bites for them, using your understanding.

Haha lol, assuming people in cars count calories and or operate on minimal / in a deficit. Regardless of the car argument, people riding bikes are more likely to be counting calories and in a calorie deficit, as they’re more health conscious. People driving cars wouldn’t care as much, on average, and would consume more calories than necessary, probably triple the “cycling” extra calorie needs. Omfg. I could debate either side, if I had to, that’s the stupidest take I’ve ever heard. It holds absolutely no water. Where’s the data showing people in cars consume less food / calories.

Yeah! Same! I say that all the time. Although the cringe policing wasn’t as hard core before days of constant public documentation of all of the things. You kinda just drifted away from people who were cringe, and they had to figure it out without anything being spelled out for them. At least kids nowadays have a very complex and comprehensive guide to follow. Kinda. I’m still glad I’m pre, all of that.

It’s so much the emperor’s new clothes, though. It’s not real, it doesn’t work how they think or say, it’s gunna bust, big time. They’ve built thier castles on sand.

Omfg! Same!

How boring would you be if you didn’t have some cringe stories! They prove you really lived life to the full. You can’t get 100% correct in a fallible meat suit and the fickle, gatekeepy, hot or not, societal mind.

You go and collect your own wood? From land you own? Is it sustainably sourced? I don’t know where you live but it’s a few hundred a ton, here, now and has been for about 10 years.

If he’s responsible for the thanks, he’s responsible for the criticism, too. If he wants thanks for them being fed, he deserves a serve for every baby that’s died. Scum.

Yeah he did that on purpose.

Ellipsis

It’s not make up that causes long lines. Please tell me you’re being sarcastic and I’ve missed it.

I have one daughter

I don’t even understand people being angry at her, it might be cutting some funding, but it’s literally still sending funds to Israel for use in continuing genocide. Any money sent is too much. Why do people think she should have voted to send money to them for continuing the slaughter. I do not understand.

That’s not the only blockage to noticing sarcasm, there are so many people who say these / the things and actually MEAN them. We need differentiators, because the crazy levels are too high to wade through.

Nah. It’s still sending money to Israel, just a tiny bit less. It’s still sending money for weapons to continue the genocide. Just because it’s a little less makes zero effect on the morality, it’s still furthering the genocide. It’s just phrased to make you think it’s doing something to cause less harm. It’s not.

It’s reducing or it’s still a bill sending $ / weapons. So if they phrased it like, here’s a bill so instead of sending 3.8bil we send 3bil, to arm Israel. So therefore you are voting to send $ / weapons to Israel.

She wants that $ to be zero, or she won’t endorse it. It’s less, but less is still sending money / and or weapons to them. She would be voting for that. Even though it’s a teensy bit less.

It’s all about how it’s phrased. They phrased it like she supports the genocide because she refused to vote for a bill that SENDS MONEY TO ISRAEL TO FUND THEM USING WEAPONS TO KILL CHILDREN. Sorry. I lost my cool there. Not cool. My bad.

Because the propaganda aimed at getting women to remember their place and get back to domestic chores, still lingers today and people think that’s HOW it was, not that they had to try and shove a cat back in a bag, somehow. When women had to do all the blokey jobs while the men’s were all at war, and realised, yeah, they’re capable of this, sometimes better at it, earning a wage, something unheard of for women, as they would still need a man to have a bank account or credit card or sign anything or have a lease on a house, until the 1970s, in some places. But yeah. It wasn’t like that. Women were miserable and oppressed and drugged up just to get by. Grandma’s hydrangeas were sometimes the only way to leave a violent relationship. But yeah, probs was fine for the blokes. They got to fight in a war, pocket some trauma to take home, force themselves back into the daily grind with no recognition of that trauma and nowhere to outlet it… I’m not going to start on intergenerational trauma, I promise.

Either that or, the grass is always greener… Yk.

I think the real question is, HOW DO THEY KNOW WHAT HE WAS THINKING! HOW!

I was too lazy to actually go find the specific warehouses. I just downloaded taobao, it’s partially in English now. I’ve seen and saved a few tiktoks with descriptions of the locations and which places do which items / brands. I just genuinely don’t have time to deep dive and do proper research, though.