crapwittyname @ crapwittyname @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

462

Joined

2 yr. ago

It's just smaller food in greater variety!

Ok, ok, Italy has a claim, but Spain? Let's be real here.

If you really care about the welfare of trans people, then you should support giving us the healthcare that we and our doctors say we need.

I do. And with due respect, you're just an anonymous poster on an internet forum. Your opinions necessarily carry zero weight. That's nothing personal because I don't know you, and I won't believe your assertions, because that's not how this works.

Cheers. I'll certainly look into that. I've not made up my mind (until the medical consensus does), and I'm coming at this from an angle of wanting trans people to have an equal quality of life (and average lifespan) with cis people. Believe it or not.

It's been a while since I deep dived on this so I will have to go back and have a look at what's new when I have time.

Thanks for that.
Annoyingly though I'm getting down votes for expressing a sincerely-held and reasonable concern, so that prevents me from discussing it any further. This topic is unnecessarily toxic online.

The second part of what you say (puberty takes over as soon as the blockers are stopped) is not, as far as I'm aware, established. There are huge questions over this. First off, if I decide to come off puberty blockers aged 30, will I then go through puberty? If so, how different will it be to a normal puberty? If not, how long do I take puberty blockers for until I've bypassed my puberty? Can we quantify or qualify the potential harms inherent in the treatment? There're too many unknowns and not enough evidence to support this statement you've made. I've seen it made before which is why I looked into it.
I'm not trans myself, but some of the people I love are/were. I love them and I want them to thrive, which is why I'm concerned about the enthusiasm for a seemingly magic bullet which I think has the potential to do a lot of harm if applied without being properly understood.

It does have this! Amazing, thanks!

Thanks for the tip. I was sitting on a train today and I hit the back security ring against the headrest and the whole headset nearly came off. I was wondering how sturdy it might be. Now I know, thanks!

The time derivative of position is velocity. The derivative of velocity is acceleration. Derive again and you get jerk. Then it's snap, crackle and pop.

(For those too young, these are the names of those characters they use to sell Rice Krispies)

Thank you!

E: they're not available in the UK! Dammit, the search continues...

I just tried this and it works really well!

If you find a good one, and you remember, please let me know. I'd love to find one that lasted more than a few years.

I had to go to Amazon for it, it's the only thing I will buy from there because I haven't seen them elsewhere. The brand is Musicozy, cheap and made in China. I've had three and they've all broken because I'm only spending about 20 quid at a time. But it's worth it for the sleep!

Worried now as I only got mine last week from a no-brand seller

Open ear bone conduction headphones. Light, affordable, waterproof and safe to bike with. Also good in the office as you can still hear what's going on whilst listening. Only drawback is they're pretty quiet and easily defeated by heavy traffic/loud kids etc.

Also not recent but as someone who suffers from tinnitus, a Bluetooth audio sleep mask has improved my quality of life more than any other minor purchase I've ever made.

There's some faulty reasoning here.
Parent comment challenges the assumption that the marks were made by a female, and you say "you're the reason the professor felt the need to give this example", although the example was given in order to challenge assumptions of gender.
OP is actually learning from the example if anything, since they are challenging gender assumptions.
On top of that, your use of "you guys", and your generalisations about men are evidence of the exact type of biased thinking this example is trying to challenge.

It's not extremely pro aeroplane, because if a plane crashes there are 100x more fatalities than in a car crash. Even so, there are more than 100x more fatalities in cars.
It makes sense that flying is safer because it's so strictly regulated. People are able to drive tired/sick/hungover but pilots aren't. Your car can have a fault that you haven't noticed where planes can't.* There's a crew operating the plane as opposed to a single driver.

*The exception proves the rule on this one

Yup. This is the last vestiges of the diminishing returns of the doomed strategy of blaming consumers for climate change.

Mate, you forgot to downvote the above comment. Might want to get on that.