Just let me be clear, it incenses me just as much as you, lol, but here’s the thing, run on sentences are much worse for us in the interim and we need to circle back around so that that issue becomes a lesser thing, lest we forget the true horrors of english perpetuating themselves through a normalization of nominalization that makes a trivialization of our original lines in the sand aaaaand now I’m just getting into the weeds with my niche micro-interests and brought in too many limes.

Guess it’s time to go start up that computer game I’ve been putting off.

“Exceeds expectations”

“Exceeds expectations”

“Exceeds expectations”

“Exceeds expectations”

‘Well, nanner, you got one write up, which is lower than 95% of the company, so looks like you’ll only be getting 1.5% instead of the 3% for average, and I don’t personally give out the 6% raise I’m allowed to.’ - my fucking supervisor, while other supervisors hand out everything like candy (not really, they just shower their favorite)

And a very large amount of nimbyism and zoning for residential areas. Capitalism has so many ways to attack the common man’s wallet.

Just remember that newsom is the epitome of the neoliberal. He is perfectly willing to throw any supposed principles under the bus to gather support and votes. Just look up his publicly made remarks on gender dysphoric folks, his vetoes, and his bootlicking of billionaires.

Poor brazil. They have gone up against germany since then, and definitely cleared away the poor results from that one match.

Because selling sex is much more about the teasing than the actual presentation. I’m convinced that the reason we don’t have nude models selling you stuff on billboards is that the lingerie/just-before-the-bedroom clothes are more effective, so advertising companies don’t care to get case law or actual legislation allowing nude advertisements.

Are they the ‘touch the handle, gentle arc across’ kind, or the ‘sensor begins smooth laminar flow stream into bottle’ kind? Because the first should be banned, ugh (I mean, not really, I still use the ones at the park), and the second is amazing.

It’s silk, because apparently it’s the least likely material to rip out fine hair when sleeping. As for the pillow being trash, it’s what I like. I can fold it, double it, squash it, twist it into a bowtie inside of the pillowcase, and it works great and I don’t have to feel like I’m messing it up.

I wouldn’t be pulling out the fucking receipt… that’s something that only epstein had.

eeesh. I have a $70 pillowcase, but the pillow itself is still just trash.

It’s the difference between the philosophy of conservatism and its practitioners. I can kinda sympathize, seeing as every mention of socialism somehow becomes a riot against the ussr.

Oh god, the high protein fad is even making its way into hair care! Ruuuun!

Oh, lol, I remember the shampoo with menthol I had. I loved how it actually brought feeling back to my life.

People.

Yes, that one, thank you.

If you’re going to tell people to look into the lens of romantic*/companionate (and all the other ones you didn’t mention: nonlove/liking/infatuation/empty love/fatuous love/consummate love) you should at least give them some starting points.

• Triangle theory of love: Robert Sternberg (1987, 2006)
• Brain regions; attachment/commitment vs sexual desire: Diamond (2004), Aron et al. (2005), Xu e al. (2011)
• Lust/attraction/attachment, dopamine/serotonin influences: Helen Fisher (2006), Aron et al. (2008),
• More influence of dopamine/serotonin: Ackerman (1994, p. 165)
• Critiques of simplifying love: Fehr (2006)
• Some more neurotransmitters and hormones: Macdonald & Macdonald (2010), Hill et al. (2009), Gouin et al. (2010), Ditzen et al. (2009), Theodoridou et al. (2009)
• Loves sternberg didn’t consider: Berscheid (2010), John alan lee (1988),
• Decreases in romantic love: sprecher & regan (1998), Tucker & aron (1993), Gupta & Singh (1982) and the followup D. Myers (1993), Walster & Walster (1978), Abhmetoglu et al (2010), Call et al. (1995), Klussman (2002)
• Non-decreases in love: Acevedo et al. (2011),

Personally, I would really, really recommend the textbook Intimate Relationships by Rowland S. Miller to anyone who is curious about the subject. I had to go pull my edition off of the bookshelf to quickly throw out all the references above.

*because passionate love isn’t the category. The proposed idea was the triangle theory of intimacy, passion, and commitment, which led to the eight above categories----

I thought the bulge was reality, but it working in any way was fictitious? Or am I misremembering how he fucked up his dick?

Aye, it’s like the ‘sex scene’ in lion king. When in the context of the film, you wouldn’t even notice it as potentially lewd, but a single frame can appear pretty different.

Yeah, but you can still get pretty close to the same idea with the normal, I’d say. Good on the creator for making it a bit better.