Hot take: advertising doesnt have that much impact on womens views of their own attractiveness or society’s beauty standards, unless those women are completely disconnected from the outside world. If it did, women’s beauty standards would be completely homogenenized. Instead, we see significantly different standards for what women strive for between cultures and social strata.
Instead, women are picking up cues from their social circles and the broader cultures they participate in.
Idk, I get human girls messaging me somewhat regularly. Never the ones I want to see, but still…
The difference between bots and humans is that bots dont go on dates
People commonly lose weight during basic training in the US military, even as they are fed a terrible diet of extremely calorie dense processed foods. This is because basic entails consistent exercise from sun up to sun down, with extra exercise assigned as a form of punishment.
After having this experience, many servicemembers keep the mindset that diet doesnt matter as long as you exercise enough, so the military has a culture of excessive drinking, eating, and exercise.
The problem is that, unless your whole job is exercise, it is difficult to burn that many calories in a day - so you start gaining weight as soon as you get a desk job. And also, constantly pushing yourself like this is a good way to get an overuse injury, which many people gain as part of basic itself. And since it is difficult to train hard with an injury, you gain weight.
Also, I am gonna go out on a limb and say that this sort of culture is probably pretty universal across world militaries.
I mean, assuming we are discussing the US where almost all datacenters are being built -
the real thing to realize is not that datacenters are bad (I’m kinda ambivalent), nor that meat is bad, but that poorly written water rights laws are bad. Which is why we grow some of our most water-intensive crops in some of our driest areas and some farmers end up just flooding the desert with water for no reason each year. Restructuring water rights would massively reduce water usage while maintaining food production for the simple reason that then we would stop growing alfalfa in Pheonix
Hasn’t this been well known for decades?
As the above commenter mentioned, the “legally correct” answer is typically not the most expedient.
Even if the cop is a dick, they are almost always mostly concerned about doing their job more than pinning 10,000 trumped up charges on you. They are there to meet their quota and do a cursory poke around to catch people carrying a trunk full of heroin.
Really what you should do is keep your hands at 10 and 2 until told otherwise, be polite and pleasant, and comply with all requests promptly with a “yes, officer”. Of course, the lemmy edgelords will say that you should never tell an officer anything because “muh rights” - and sure, you have the right to make the officer’s job as hard as possible and piss them off to no end. But the officer has quite a bit of leeway as to how they might proceed in your interaction - and making their life harder probably wont endear them to you
Probably because most people who choose not to drink wine simply choose to drink water. The restaurant buys a case of the cheapest NA alternative they can find for the one person who comes in twice a month and wants some.
Dont worry, that’s the same look you would have if you could read it
My bike used to die if I idled at stop lights for too long before I worked in the carb a bit. So if I felt the engine slowing, I would blip the throttle to keep it running. But this was purely utilitarian, and my bike isn’t a loud one
Chubby David Bowie
BEHOLD! I have actually somewhat looked into this.
So, for buying stock in publicly traded companies, no, you basically can’t make the world a better place that way. Not because “companies must do what is best for shareholders by law” (iirc, this is more of a guideline than anything). But rather because if all the ethical people invest in Solar Panels and Gender Affirming Care For Everyone Inc, then all the ethically neutral money (which is almost all of it) will simply shift more towards Torture Palistinian Orphans Inc. Because everyone is investing based on value relative to price - so rational investors flee the “overinflated” prices of companies with ethically laudable missions. It’s like trying to lower the level of the ocean by filling up an 5 gallon bucket and dumping it down your toilet. You aren’t making a difference. Other water is just going to fill it up. If you want to invest in stocks, just invest in a broad market, low fee index fund, forget about it for 30 years, and forget about your ethical concerns.
If you want to invest in something that improves the world and makes you money, your best bets are
(1) Small local investments. You’ll have to dig here, but there are probably investors in your area who are getting together to give out small business loans. You are basically angel investors, but instead of funding Uber-But-For-Burritos, you are helping that guy in your neighborhood who is good at fixing things start his appliance repair business.
(2) Investing in yourself and your own business. Like, make a restaurant that gives out free burritos, or a clothing company that donated fancy hats to anti-Trump rallies. Its hard for a business to be really unethical when you’re the one running it
That’s pretty metal
So my snickers bar wrapper won’t last 100,000 years?
If you are using the linux terminal, this is probably a good community for you
Paywall.
But based on the first sentence, the “Economic Success”
Login required
In 2024, 15% of black voters, 48% of hispanic voters, and 40% of asian voters voted for Trump. So in order for your argument to stand that all Trump voters are white supremasists, you’ll have to make the rather unlikely argument that all these people of darker skinned races are also white supremacists.
And if they aren’t, then there must be some other reason to vote for Trump. In which case, your argument kind of falls flat.
I agree that this is generally the case, but it isnt the case here on Lemmy. Lemmy has a disproportionately large number of people across the left side of the political spectrum, from people who are as you describe, to actual semi-reasonable socialists, to tankies.
*Yes, Ociffer