Oh I see your playing the legacy monopoly where house prices sort of match the money paid out by the bank…you need to index property and utilities to inflation but you don’t adjust any of the money paid out by the bank to the players.
Aka Millennial monopoly.
The game is over much faster, unless you introduce a gig economy payment system. Then it really drags on.
And that’s what we do IRL too, a bunch of people aren’t playing by the rules, creating false hope through windfall lotteries, so it’s taking longer to get to the part where we flip the board in frustration and destroy the bank… Behead the mega rich and seize the means of production.
Accessibility.
We will never get rid of the analogue clocks from our school, we’re an adult education and alternative model highschool qualifications centre.
We primarily teach adults with no to low English, adults and teens with disabilities, and adults and teens refered via corrections services.
There is a significant level of illiteracy within numeracy, and for some of our students, it’s not a failing of the education system, it’s just a fact of life given their specific circumstances (eg, acquired brain injuries are common among our students)
Some students can learn to tell time on an analogue clock even if they didn’t know before.
But even my students who will never in their life be able to fully and independently remember and recall their numbers can tell the time with an analogue clock.
I tell my students “we will take lunch at 12pm, so if you look at the clock and the arms look like this /imitates a clock/ we will go to lunch”
And now I avoid 40 questions of “when’s lunch?” because you don’t need to tell time to see time with an analogue clock, they can physically watch the hands move, getting closer to the shape they recognise as lunch time.
And my other students can just read the time, from the clock, and not feel infantalised by having a disability friendly task clock like they’ve done at other centres I work at - they’ve had a digital clock for students who can tell time, and a task clock as the accessible clock. But a well designed face on an analogue clock can do both.
I myself have time blindness due to a neurological/CRD issue, so analogue clocks, and analogue timers are an accessibility tool for me as well, as the teacher.
That’s alright, there will only be a handful of gen alpha even eligible to vote in a 2029 election, since they were born 2010-not even born yet
I never really understood at what point a language evolves enough to be an entirely new language.
Old English feels so far removed from even middle English, let alone modern English.
We have “new” and “old” to differentiate them, but with how many Latin words alone entered English between Old English and Modern English, It’s something I’ve never found a comprehensive answer to.
I guess, what is it about proto-indo European that we acknowledge as a distinct language from the hundreds of thousands of languages that evolved from it, other than time scale and global impact.
I don’t think a stereotype can ever be constructive because it will always involve the need to be restrictive and limiting in order to be a stereotype.
I guess we need to question who benefits from the constructive stereotype.
“drivers can’t see you” is constrictive for pedestrians, and also drivers, but it’s not constrictive to the graffiti tagger who is trying to go unseen by passing cars (not that a tagger is being constructive in the first place)
Food I cook is starting to taste more and more like my mother’s cooking. Moving out of home I always assumed my mums poor cooking was down to technique, boiling the brussel sprouts, steaming the peas until they were grey, water frying everything. As soon as I learned to cook properly it was amazing how much flavour everything had. Letting things brown fully, using oil, not overcooking everything.
But recently, no amount of skill can save the sad veggies sold in store.
It makes the hyperprocessed foods even more appealing when there’s nothing you can affordably do to improve the simple produce and staples. When potatos cost the same as Pringle’s, calorie for calorie (and they do, 
) it’s easy to see why “just eat beans, rice, and in season produce” isn’t helpful advice - yes it’s frugal, but it’s depressing, and not as easy as it used to be. Why waste money on already rotting food that tastes bland when the same money can buy me a more nutrient dense food that lasts longer and tastes better?
I’ve got a few things growing on the 2m concrete slab my landlord calls a back yard, it helps having home grown spring onion, parsley and pea shoots to dress up a dish.
I’m a terrible gardener, I can’t even get mint to take. “grow your own” is thrown around too readily when people complain about produce quality. It’s not always an option, there is a physical skill, a cognitive skill, and resource requirements.
In Australia we call this “skimpflation” because they aren’t shrinking the final product, they’re skimping on ingredients to lower production costs.
It’s the bane of my existence because brands I know and love will change their ingredients without warning and without changing anything on the packaging (sometimes not even changing the ingredients list! If the ingredients list has always just said “starch” they don’t have to change anything going from arrowroot starch to cheaper potato starch)
I have allergies and I’ve bought two boxes of the same product at the same time, and had an allergic reaction to one, but not the other.
I used to always blame it on my housemates not washing the cooking utensils properly, but I now use separate cooking equipment and I clean down the kitchen before I start and cook at odd times so I’m the only one using the kitchen.
I’ve started emailing companies after my allergic reactions to determine if they have changed an ingredient, and 90% of the time they confirm they have changed the ingredients. Usually they put some PR spin on it about the new ingredient being more allergy friendly or sustainable (they don’t clarify “environmentally” so I assume they mean “financially sustainable for the profits of our company”)
On the point of driving whilst stoned. Confidence comes with experience
I can definitely understand what you mean by this, but I think a certain level of confidence also comes from tolerance.
I don’t drive at all, so can’t weigh in on that, but I cycle everywhere, and in my youth I would have never considered cycling while stoned, too risky, too dangerous, not fair or safe to others using the paths.
When I started smoking, I stuck by that statement, I’d give it a full 12+ hours between my last smoke and getting on the bike.
But just like your example, 12 hours became 8 hours, became 4 hours, and so on, where now I might have an smoke and 40 minutes later get on my bike to go somewhere.
But then I take a T break, and I pick up a new bag, and I have my first hit in a month or two, and I sit with that high for a while and think to myself “fuck no, I absolutely will not be getting on the bike any time soon, this tiny toke is too much to cycle on”
Then I’ll smoke heavily for the next month, and by the end of the month, my tolerance has increased, and I’m back to riding my bike while stoned (or rather, buzzed, because I’m just not capable of getting as high)
Do I feel guilty for these decisions because I know it’s a big risk? Yes. Do I keep doing it? Also yes.
But now that I’m in discussions with my doctor about medical dosing, it has raised a very important question - if I use medical marijuana to manage my chronic illness (the one that renders me medically unfit to drive) is the ethical and legal obligation of that treatment plan that I can never ride my bike again? I must always walk or take the bus? The same does not apply for people who use opiate based pain relief or therapeutic ketamine. They are warned not to drive if the meds make them impaired, but ultimately it’s their judgement to decide what is “impaired”. It will only be externally questioned if there is an accident or a near miss. If I am assessing my level of impairment before I ride stoned, how can I best ensure my capacity to ride in those moments?
Also answering OPs question, I think this applies to a lot of hobbies, but I notice it a lot as someone who likes to sew my own clothes - the pressure from others to constantly get better, try harder, and keep building those skills.
I do my hobby because it’s fun, sometimes it’s fun to learn new things about it, but sometimes I just want to stick with what I know and play in my comfort zone.
My dad will often look at things I’ve made this year and say “you made something almost identical 5 years ago, and your stitches are still skew wiff, haven’t you learned to blah blah yet?” because his expectation is that I will get better and better with every passing moment as I practice my hobby.
Similarly, people will tell me that I have “clearly got the skills to make xyz” and I should “challenge” myself. And sometimes I will, but most of the time I retreat to my hobbies because I don’t have to challenge myself if I don’t want to. I like my hobbies to be no pressure (I go to the gym to push myself, I go to my craft corner to relax)
You are allowed to dabble, fool around, play, and have fun with a hobby. You are allowed to decide that “getting better” isn’t the goal.
But it seems others will always question this, or suggest you somehow aren’t doing the hobby right, or enthusiastic enough about it if you’re only ever doing it on a surface level.
Just today, I managed to get hold of a second hand overlocker, I’m really excited to make things with it, and my co-worker who also sews said “oh that’s awesome, the quality of clothes you’re going to pull off now that you can surge! I can’t wait for the fashion show”. She meant that in the most positive way, and I know what she was trying to say so I thanked her and promised her to show her what I was making, but part of me definitely heard “if the quality of your final product doesn’t improve as a result of this, you’re bad at this hobby, now you have no excuse not to be better than you were before” even though she meant nothing of the sort, and a lot of that was internalised shame because of previous discussions with people who were genuinely questioning my lack of improvement.
I would already be living in a vehicle, but I can’t drive (low vision) so it’s never going to be an option for me.
About 10 years ago I was looking into bike towed campers as a security plan for an unstable housing situation, only to learn they are illegal to tow in my country. You can own one, sleep in one, and tow it on private property, but to move it from one property to another legally I’d need to pay someone with a car to put it in a car trailer, then unload my camper at the destination.
Again, it depends on the purpose of the group you’re creating, does this person in question face discrimination for their perceived race? Then a support group for people who have faced discrimination for their race may be the right place for them, assuming the intersection of having “chosen” to present as a race they’re not doesn’t create an unsafe space for the other group participants.
However if your group is for people who have grown up POC or been raised in a non-dominant cultural group to discuss shared experiences, then obviously someone who identifies as POC later in life would not be served by that group, so would not be eligibile to join that group.
There are circumstances when even if you fit the criteria of the group, you may still be excluded due to the way various identities and experiences intersect, or because your personal actions are not serving the group.
It’s not discrimination to be told you can’t use a private service because the service can’t serve your specific needs, and your personal circumstances reduce the groups ability to serve its other members.
I’m not trying to be rude, I’m trying to understand.
As far as the language is concerned, I’m just trying to understand how a trans woman could be a cis lesbian, when my understanding is that being cis and being trans are mutually exclusive.
Am I missing something?
If you’re a private entity and there is a specific reason that having non-black people in the group would be detrimental to the purpose of the group, yes, in Australia you can make a black only space.
For example, if you want to create a support group for POC to discuss trauma around being subjected to racism, to ensure you create a safe space, making the space POC only is not only legal, but often the more ethical choice for this group.
Want to create a social and dating app for queer women to meet other queer women? What purpose would it serve to let straight people into that group?
There is difference between public spaces, that must allow access and entry to all, and a private organisation that caters to specific demographics, and being freely open would completely defeat the purpose of the private organisations goals.
I’m not an alcoholic, I don’t personally know anyone who has struggled with alcoholism. Why can’t I go to an AA meeting to talk about my feelings on alcoholism? Obviously, Because that’s not helpful, it has the potential to be harmful to the people who attend because they have lived experiences with alcoholism. I could argue I’m being discriminated against because of my medical history, but I’m not being discriminated against, I’m just not being catered to, because I don’t have an unmet need in this specific situation.
How does that even work?
I mean, to be a cis lesbian also implies being a cis woman…
I mean, given what’s happening with the women’s only art exhibit at the MONA right now, this woman definitely has a legal leg to stand on even with this being a private company.
Even if it’s just a matter of false advertising (if the app means cis women they should say cis women, not say “women” and then go out of their to exclude an entire group of women) or compensation for being given access then having access removed.
This is why they are also tell you the license plate number.
I don’t need to know what a Honda Whatever looks like to know that if the licence plate and my app both say “ABC123”, that’s my uber.
My uber is a white Toyota camry? So helpful, there definitely aren’t 7 of them parked outside the club each waiting for their uber rider and or kidnap victim.
I’m certain you understand, you are intoxicated, departing from the entertainment establishment before it closes, and you are responsible so you take it’s upon yourself to secure safe, sober transport home. The application you use to order the ride informs you that your designated driver will arrive in a “Kia Chevy Juke”. Despite being absolutely incapable of clear thought, you, or another member of your party is trying very hard to ensure you all enter the correct vehicle to avoid potential danger from nefarious individuals. Also, you have chosen to partake in this activity in a cold time of year, and as it is 4 o’clock in the morning, you are all quite cold.
“body type” has always been a general term to express the entire shape, size and proportions of a person, including excess weight and obesity.
When I was obese I couldn’t pull off crop tops because of my body size, it was incredibly unflattering, and now that I’m a healthy weight I still can’t pull off crop tops because of my body proportions, I have a short torso.
Body type encompasses both scenarios, so it’s often thought of as a polite way to tell someone something is unflattering without singling out specific “flaws” in their body.
Sounds like Dr Gunther von Hagen’s, he invented a the plastination method of tissue preservation that’s used in countless medical and anatomy training schools across the globe.
He had a series on BBC/Chanel 4 as part of his “Body Worlds” exhibits and that’s all over YouTube, as part of promotion for the new technique that let him preserve entire intact body systems. Fascinating stuff if you’re into general anatomical studies, or just body horror
The source of some of his older anatomical specimens is… Controversial
BBC 4 has a bunch of autopsy videos floating around on YouTube. I vaguely remember the one with the blonde doctor from supersize vs superskinny dissecting a smokers lungs and a morbidly obese heart, and an alcoholics liver.
Heck I still find myself thinking this on a subconscious level. I can’t let go of the sense that we should be able to discuss things in good faith and make change through civil discourse.
I have to remind myself that history does not support my blind faith in the goodness of humanity like this.
Even people who have less than two seconds ago proven they are arguing in bad faith, my gut reaction is to give them another chance to come to the discussion properly.
It’s like pathological naivety, and yes, it’s just as harmful as the original bad faith argument when all it’s doing is echoing the bad faith argument.
I have been booted from many communities for asking what I thought was a genuine question. And at first been left wondering why a community would ban someone for asking questions and trying to learn. I’ve experienced this my entire life and only recently began to understand that it’s not some personal slight against my curiosity and ignorance. It’s a necessary safety measure for that community.
I’m just an idiot, questioning an asshole, but from everyone else’s perspective there’s two dumb assholes over here.