Too pricy. Good ol’ depression is free and can overpower hunger signals if you languish long enough.
Too pricy. Good ol’ depression is free and can overpower hunger signals if you languish long enough.
What a sandwich of a comment. Agreeable point - what a tremendous assumption filled leap - agreeable point. I am reeling.
Lad, women are tenser at first fucking’s because, in theory, you’re both getting used to each other and what most turns on the machinery of arousal. They tend to feel smoother, slicker, and downright hungrily pulling, when a woman is most aroused. You are self owning a tad bit to any one who knows how to lay a proper lovin’.
The dictionary is…literally (hello self-evidence) full of words for which there has long existed an ‘Objective Definition’ but which usage has brought a consensus based ‘Subjective Definition’. Etymology is the study of a shifting process, and both you and them are correct:
Them in the expected usage a publication should use to apply it to a discreet entity, and you in the fact that the subjective shift in meaning gives us words that map anecdotally to our lives.
Truly…language is awe-some.
You’re missing the vital forest you started on by getting stuck defining trees it looks like, but I get it.
Minorities are treated by a separate physical rubric by law enforcement and even the court of public opinion. The biases abound, yes. And those absolutely involve secondary physical characteristics, of which biologically speaking are…things that exist. Like skin color is one.
I get what you’re saying and while I don’t know why other folks are uncomfortable with that, but if I clocked things right, your original point (paraphrased below) is damn right imo:
Whether a 16 year old child is American Samoan, Black, Hispanic, or White, they are still a child, however large or mature the specific kid’s genetics may have rolled them to appear. Further, it is fucked up for cops to default to feeling more threatened by the bigger/more developed ones, to have more bombastic reactions, as does tend to happen.
This is reality for minorities; my large colored ass doesn’t get away with certain behaviors even as the affronted party, unfairly as it is.
Case of not seeing the wit for the trees. In the topsy-turvy landscape of the last 8 years or so, the problem is that “dripping with” part. The weirdos do always go for the double-down after all, so adding more starts risking confusion with that tactic of theirs.
I thought I had a problem with taking a point or two and stretching them across a handful of paragraphs. I no longer think I have a problem and indeed have learned a few things to limber up and aim for greater mental gymnastic heights.
You’re not just a fly in history’s wall, to hear you retell it, you can read hearts and minds better’n than most deities too. A graph tells a shaky story but your certainty of the intent of every actor involved is inviolate?
Please don’t write back at me, for the first time in my life, I comprehend the fear of my acquaintanceships and the long rambling.
In 1998, Baker, Ruoff, and Madoff that the organism is most likely a species of Mycoplasma called Mycoplasma phocacerebrale.[7] This Mycoplasma was isolated in an epidemic of seal disease occurring in the Baltic Sea.[8]
It’s not that we don’t know what causes it, and it can be cultured from seals and has been. It’s that in order to empirically and categorically say in any way that matters that the organism is definitely the cause of seal finger…
You would need to be culturing a person infected with the disease from whom treatment is being withheld. Either against their will or with their “consent” wouldn’t matter. As we know what the disease can lead to, the ethical course of treatment is clear: a bunch of culture ruining antibiotics injected into you. Right away, without delay.
Because asking or even taking advantage of someone declining treatment to assess and write the confirmation study that says “Mycoplasma phocacerebrale definite cause of seal finger” goes against a lot of ethical science limitations.
This is what makes the donating the affected limb of someone who never got care for science post-mortem also work as both a neat joke and ethical loophole. Researchers could accept that gift, ethically.
Believe what you want to believe and may it chase you as you deserve every night.
But keep your goalpost moving grubby mitts from the idea you know words or are any good with them.
Being disingenuous is piss easy and transparent, cool the back patting.
Learn to read what others comment, so that at least you can keep consistency if you’re gonna clutter public forums with your drivel.
I wonder if any of the sycophants remaining to stare at the dangling keys to power like mesmerized toddlers would even retain the presence and ability to scheme.
That’s one long cultivated and pruned garden of shitbaggery with a history of rich men whose abilities extend to amassing stolen wealth and an inability to handle windows. How many Kingmakers could possibly remain?
The whole house of cards may fall after time’s dues are paid and Putin finally runs out of track to run away from his pedestrian mortality.
Not willing to entertain bets on whether that will be the time of changes or more “and then it got worse” though.
You can use every language in the world to define any other word in any other language and it still does not save you from semantic pitfalls and poor rhetoric.
The solution seems simple. AG Bailey and Judge Hickle both need to be seen engaging in [illegal action they are innocent of] by a sane Missouri Justice System officer and an arrest warrant issued for them.
Only death row inmates…it’s not just that it’s beyond the pale but it’s so stupid while it’s at it I can’t summon words.
There is. The more they stumble, the more they are questioned. The answers to the question cannot be anything but utmost certainty because “maybe” is simply not a message that sways anyone.
Pretty answers don’t change reality though, so the stumbles continue or even increase leading to more questions and the doubling down. You just can’t do anything else unless you’re ready to commit to another answer.
My mom says they make me look handsome and agrees that it’s neat that I can carry all the sticks and rocks we find at the park!
You can’t read. Those are facts and written in a passive voice. Condoning the behavior reads something like: “The state of Israel has sown seeds of ill will nurtured by lies and here comes harvest time” or “Yeah fuckers, get dunked on world stage” or something similar and in-between.
But neither of you know that. That’s just the most anecdotally likely. You’re doing the same thing as the presumably real friend is doing: discounting the reality OP is saying they’re experiencing (they don’t feel like celebrating currently because ofcurrent affairs) and replacing it with head in the sand “touch grass” disguised with the words it takes for you to feel like you’re correct.
Maybe that friend always has their head in the sand. Maybe that friend is maliciously giddy about the possibilities espoused by shit like Project 2025 and deflecting.
I, am hoping you can both understand I’m saying you look like hypocrites. No inference needed.
How do you select the worthwhile content without the use of your opinion or taking the matter to your tastes?
What is the problem they’re so pragmatically a part of? And how do you pin both the content creators needing to eat and the reasonable take of that commenter on the poor Marketing executives who care about neither but just want–actually what do they (end goal of marketing, literally, semantically) want, in your eyes while you’re at it? It is their (the marketing execs) side I take it you’re on, since the commenter you replied to is part of the problem and the creators do “an ad is an ad” things?
Challenge; remember capitalism exists in the world as it must as the beginning of your answer (but if you can make it vanish and it all works out by the end of the answer, that’s cool too as lots of us are looking for that one).
How is that other commenter part of the problem, actually part of the problem suspect?
Man woman TV Camera Person, his arms wide.