@FirmWeird's banner p

FirmWeird

Randomly Generated Reddit Username

0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 23:38:51 UTC 

				
User ID: 757


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
FirmWeird


								

								

								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				
Randomly Generated Reddit Username

				
				
				

				

					0 followers  

					follows 0 users  

					joined 2022 September 05 23:38:51 UTC
				


				
					

					
No bio...

				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 757


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 22, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


If you think its so juvenile, can you think of something better?




Sure - nothing. Just doing absolutely nothing and not even bothering with enforcement is a better suggestion than giving a company like Amazon this insane amount of power over the lives of their employees and the incredible competitive advantage of a workforce who are unable to leave their jobs without losing their homes. Amazon already treats their workers incredibly poorly and pays them so bad that a huge proportion of them receive government welfare on top of their earned income - are they going to be included in this program too and forced to do a bunch of extra free shifts for the existing employer in order to get those benefits? They were even projected to exhaust the US labour pool this year because their churn rate is so atrocious! Amazon is a company that has repeatedly gone out of their way to ensure that they get concessions and exemptions from government policies in the pursuit of profit, and I can't imagine that they'd change their spots for this.


The potential for abuse here is just staggering - do you think a woman who is on welfare is going to risk reporting their boss for sexual harassment/abuse when that all but guarantees they'll be homeless for the next 90 days? Your proposal only even makes sense if you're talking about a very specific subsection of welfare recipients. If I'm a university graduate who failed to find a job in six months because the economy just entered a recession, what exactly would I be learning from my new role as a serf for Amazon? Having that experience on my resume would make me less likely to get a real job (to say nothing of the opportunity costs, where I could be using that time to upskill or expand my resume) and more likely to stay dependent upon the system for life. If a hard-working coal-miner with two decades of experience finds themselves struggling to find a job after their mine got closed and all the jobs in their town got shipped off to China, what are they going to be getting out of this? If a housewife whose husband died due to COVID ends up applying for welfare, what greater purpose is served by taking her away from her children for eight hours a day to do menial labour so degrading and demanding that she has to piss in a bottle to avoid taking bathroom breaks? And of course on the flipside, if a hulking 7 foot tall gangster with violent tendencies and substance abuse issues shows up on the welfare rolls, you're actively putting the people who they work with at risk.


I'm sure there's some small subset of people (other than Jeff Bezos) who would benefit from this insanely expensive and demanding program, but the juice just isn't worth the squeeze. My answer might have been glib, but I'm under no real obligation to provide a functional alternative because I think your proposal is seriously flawed.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 22, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I actually just interpreted "attacked" as the sort of attacks I've actually seen - shouting, protest signs, criticism, dialogue etc. I haven't seen any jews getting murdered or brutally assaulted in the west by left-wing activists in order to change their political views, though I'll happily update my post if it turns out there's actually a brutal pogrom taking place on American university campuses. Additionally, "internal struggle" is directly from the post I was quoting.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 22, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Imagine that individuals in section housing have to work at Amazon fulfilment centers. Perhaps the government and Amazon could strike up a deal that with enough workers, Amazon could lower the throughput per worker (to increase livability) in exchange for a tax subsidy to offset the cost of having to hire a non-optimum amount of workers. People in section housing could be bussed to the job, and also have regular police presence and social workers more intimately involved in their lives along with people helping them understand budgeting. It would require insane amounts of manpower, but it would also be the first step in actually beginning to address the problems of the slums.




Was this modest proposal made in jest? I want to reply seriously but can't help shake the feeling that I'm just missing the joke.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 22, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


In a general sense, I think university leftists have done a great job convincing college students that being anti-Israel, pro-Palestine is the default "leftist" "intellectual" position. That's going to have ripple effects down the line.




I actually disagree here - that is and always has been the default "leftist" "intellectual" position (sic). You don't need to posit some conspiracy among campus left-wing activists to explain why modern left wing political thought takes a dim view of white-passing ethnostates that convert American tax dollars/weapons into dead brown people.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 22, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Scary? What exactly is scary about that? I'm not trying to get an own here, I'm legitimately curious because the only thing that comes to mind is that you're scared of changing your own mind after a period of internal struggle. Changing your mind over a serious or contentious issue as a result of a period of internal struggle is generally regarded as a positive development by most people, and they use terms like "personal growth" to describe it.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 15, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I do agree that they elite any real structural issues or serious suggestions for reform, but that's because it's all so stupid that they don't think to ask those questions.




My working assumption has always been that not having to have those difficult discussions about class/real structural issues is one of the big reasons for the focus on privilege and identity issues. If you're looking at reality, a redneck from Appalachia whose local economy got destroyed by outsourcing and now has a massive fentanyl problem is actually substantially less privileged (in the actual sense of the word) than a pretty young girl going to an elite university. Focusing on the fact that the redneck is a white male allows people to ignore their own actual privilege, and while I'm not going to claim that that's the entire reason for those beliefs, I think that use gave it a lot of staying power.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 15, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I'll spoil the surprise: they can't. Too little, too late - and Ukraine cannot support or defend the infrastructure required to maintain them in the current state of the war.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 15, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Ukrainians and Israelis both are capable of adapting to a world without US support, that they received US support is because it is in the US interest to keep the conflicts within a narrow bound.




Harsh disagree here. Ukraine is currently losing and has been for quite some time, despite the US' support - and at this point there's no support the US can give that would make a difference short of simply announcing that their side of the Dnieper is under the nuclear umbrella.


As for Israel, it would depend on how exactly "US support" gets defined. They'd easily be able to survive if the US simply cut off the free money, but Israel takes (in some cases, like intelligence, without asking) a lot more than that. If they were actually and seriously cut off from the West they'd be reliant on their nuclear program for deterrence - and that just isn't enough to protect them from their threat environment, especially seeing as how they've been pissing off Russia and China. They'd have to find a solution to the problem of the orthodox as well, and that's not going to be terribly easy for them.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 8, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Claiming otherwise requires some sophisticated reasoning,




I actually don't think it really needs reasoning that's all that sophisticated. Transforming a hand with five fingers to a hand with three fingers and two stumps is something well within the bounds of current medical technology, and the risks of an unexpectedly negative outcome are substantially lower. In contrast, actual gender transition is so far beyond current medical technology that we're not even close to getting there. I think this is the big problem with the analogy, because the consequences here are extremely relevant. Yudkowsky had an article that I really liked on the subject, actually - https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/QZs4vkC7cbyjL9XA9/changing-emotions


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 8, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


But the idea that these Swedish charges were a trumped up excuse just to get him into the hands of the Americans doesn't pass the smell test for me.




Thankfully, we don't have to just use our noses for issues like this - we can just go look at the actual facts of the matter. To quote a fairly well credentialed expert on the matter, Nils Melzer...


https://medium.com/@njmelzer/response-to-open-letter-of-1-july-2019-7222083dafc8




Second, as far as SW is concerned, her police report states that, after Assange woke her up trying to initiate intercourse, the two had a conversation in which she asked Assange whether he was wearing a condom and he replied he was not. She then said he “would better not have HIV” and he replied that he did not, after which, she “let him continue” (lät honom fortsätta) to have unprotected intercourse. There are no indications of coercive or incapacitating circumstances suggesting lack of consent. Accordingly, Chief Prosecutor for Stockholm Eva Finne stated: “I do not think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape” and closed the case on 25 August 2010 concluding that the “conduct alleged by SW disclosed no crime at all”. Having examined all the evidence before me, I agree with her. My position, like Finne’s, is not that SW’s account is not credible, but rather that the conduct alleged does not constitute “rape”.






Third, as far as AA is concerned, even the Swedish prosecution never suggested that the conduct alleged by her could amount to “rape”. In a Twitter-message of 22 April 2013, AA herself publicly denied having been raped (jag har inte blivit våldtagen). AA also stated in a tabloid interview that Assange is not violent and that neither she nor SW felt afraid of him. While I agree with the prosecution that AA’s allegations, if proven to be true, could amount to sexual assault other than rape, the fact that she submitted as evidence a condom, supposedly worn and torn during intercourse with Assange, which carried no DNA of either Assange or AA, seriously undermines her credibility.






Fourth, according to their own accounts, neither AA nor SW ever alleged to have been raped, and neither of them intended to report a crime. Rather, evidence shows that AA took SW to a police station, so SW could enquire whether she could force Assange to take an HIV-test. There, they were questioned together by an investigating officer who knew AA personally and ran on the same political party ticket as AA in the general elections three weeks later. When superior investigators insisted on registering SW’s enquiry as a report of “rape” and to immediately issue an arrest warrant against Assange, SW reportedly refused to sign her statement and became so emotionally distraught that the questioning had to be suspended. While at the police station, SW even texted that she “did not want to put any charges on Julian Assange” but that “the police were keen on getting their hands on him” (14:26); and that she was “chocked (sic shocked) when they arrested him” because she “only wanted him to take a test” (17:06). Once Chief Prosecutor Finné had intervened and closed the case, it reportedly was again the police (not SW) who “revised” her statement lodged in the police system to better fit the crime of “rape” before it was resubmitted by a third Social Democrat politician to a different prosecutor who was prepared to re-open the case.




Your position directly contradicts the statements of the people actually involved in this case, and I think that the actual supposed victim's testimony is substantially more reliable than your nasal sentiment.




His game plan seems to have been to hole up in the embassy and then whinge about being a 'political prisoner' and 'held without trial' while doing everything in his power to avoid any trial, even on apolitical charges.




You haven't been paying attention to the case - Assange and his lawyers made multiple offers to testify and participate in a trail as long as there were guarantees that he would not be immediately extradited to the US. He also offered to testify remotely from the embassy, and these requests were denied as well. Assange and his legal representation clearly had substantial reason to believe that arrest in Sweden would lead to US extradition almost immediately, and he was more than willing to participate in the trial if there was an assurance it wasn't an excuse to just immediately send him off to the US. The Swedish prosecutors notably refused to provide any of these assurances, and so he didn't do it despite making multiple good faith attempts to actually have the trial! Your post is riddled with factual errors, and while I don't think everyone has to unconditionally love the man, I think you at least owe it to yourself and the rest of the motte to make sure your opinions are informed by the actual facts of the matter.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Practically-A-Book Review: Rootclaim $100,000 Lab Leak Debate
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
They don't usually, although I've noticed the occasional bit of slowdown or unresponsiveness. Astral Codex Ten gives me more issues than the rest by far.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Practically-A-Book Review: Rootclaim $100,000 Lab Leak Debate
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Why is Astral Codex Ten so poorly made? I've checked the article on multiple different computers and my browser constantly has performance issues or other bugs with it, despite the website not doing anything but show me text. I've tried to read this article multiple times and been unable to finish due to performance problems and bugs on the site - is there an archive or text-only copy somewhere?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				What Caused the Suicide of Anthony Bourdain?
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
The standard conspiracy theory on this is that what killed him was drama with Asia Argento. He saw photos of her dancing with someone else, then complained about how she was reckless with his heart and his life, then killed himself.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 1, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I'm aware that that's what lead to his death, but I can't find any indication that that's what lead to his first arrest in 2006




I believed his arrest was due to his activities garnering the attention of lower level law enforcement - people high up would obviously know that Epstein is off limits, but it isn't like they can just release memos to law enforcement across the country letting them know that Epstein has a government license to run a child sex ring. Intelligence agencies generally don't give lists of their assets to every single police department in the country to avoid left hand/right hand cases like this for very understandable reasons. That's why he got arrested and then given an extremely lush sweetheart deal - he "belonged to intelligence" and wasn't ever supposed to get picked up by a local police department, but not even the intelligence agencies can make cases like this just disappear from the public view without giving the game away.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 1, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
This combination applies just as well to "reading a book" as it does to playing Dark Souls, and you're making a lot of assumptions when you say "difficult enough to tire out your brain, but not difficult to be a really serious challenge".


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of April 1, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Epstein’s crimes were not of a financial nature, nor were they perpetrated against rich people, but he still faced consequences.




I think you're ignoring the several consequence-free decades of being an open procurer and supplier of child prostitutes for the wealthy and powerful, but you're also mistaken at the end there. Epstein absolutely did perpetrate crimes against rich people - the purpose of the entire arrangement was to blackmail the rich and powerful with recorded footage of them committing unspeakable crimes. Those were the targets that got him killed - Ehud Barak has much more access to the levers of power than Virginia Giuffre.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 18, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Bribed or not, they're sure not very compliant.




I can't really think of much else that Beijing could really get from them that they aren't already. Political leaders being corrupt doesn't mean they'll do things which get them voted out of office or thrown in jail unless they're not smart enough to see that as the most likely consequence.




It's not like the USA could actually force us into AUKUS without our agreement; more relevant IMO is our voting public which likes the USA and doesn't like the PRC.




The last time the voting public wanted to have a look at our relationship with the US, they elected Gough Whitlam. The message that got sent there was pretty clear to anyone paying attention. Kevin Rudd went through the same thing when he tried to pivot to China - something that the media didn't pay much attention to was the fact that the major players in his leadership spill were all US informants, and we only know that thanks to Julian Assange.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 18, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Given that this the actors in question are notoriously unreliable,




There's nothing wrong with claiming that the Russian government is notoriously unreliable, but not in the context of competing claims between them and the US government. If I listed out all the fraudulent and fake news stories that had members of the US intelligence community as sources I'd be here all week.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 18, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I'll say that I don't actually think Labour's in Beijing's pocket.




I think that Labour is absolutely in Beijing's pocket, but the coalition is also in Beijing's pocket. Australian politics are shockingly corrupt, but the nation itself is so small that keeping our politicians bribed and compliant would be a rounding error on the Chinese diplomacy budget. The bigger restraining factor is the influence of the US - we're still effectively a US vassal state (see the blatantly forced submarine deal), so the major political parties being in the bag for Beijing doesn't mean as much as it would elsewhere.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Small-Scale Question Sunday for March 17, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


And I think this phrase alone will bring a few thousand to the forum




He's talking about Substack. Substack is the site that can't be named on twitter, not here.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 18, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Apologies for the late reply - I've been busy with work recently.




How do you know it's deformed?




Because this is a hypothetical example meant to show the absolute worst case for a "no exceptions" policy. I'm not an expert but I believe we do have tests for this kind of thing - and in this particular case it'd just be something easily visible on an ultrasound.




I am now going to sit back and wait for the mods to scold you for using emotive language and being heated and obsessed with this topic. I've gotten rebukes before for my hobbyhorses, so let's share the love.




I didn't feel particularly heated or emotive - it's just that when you say "no exceptions" you open the door to every single horrifying outcome that can result from a policy like that. I chose my example as one that would be allowed if any of those three exceptions were being used, and less so for emotional reasons. But that said, if you think that victims of incestuous rape should carry their trisomy-18 foetus to term and risk their life delivering it, you should come out and say it - because that's what no exceptions means.




EDIT: If pro-abortion types would stick to "abortion for incestuously raped 11 year olds", I'd take that bargain.




I personally am not hiding or trying to be deceptive about my position - I flat out said that I personally believe that abortion should be legal. It isn't a particularly nice thing to have happen, but there are absolutely times when a couple is better off not having a child (especially if said child ended up with a debilitating and permanent medical condition) or delaying having a kid until they're in a less tenuous position. I'll even agree with the pro-lifers that abortion is effectively an evil - but it is in some cases a lesser evil compared to the alternative.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 18, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Once you start introducing 'exceptions,' you're just immediately back to condoning all abortion. "My health is at risk because if I'm not permitted to abort I might harm myself" is a free at-will golden ticket as long as you're able to memorize and repeat a sentence of that length.




This is completely incoherent and, though I hope to not fall afoul of the rules, inhumane to me. "Zero exceptions" means that you're going to have to own every single one of the nasty and truly horrific instances that show up. When an 11 year old girl shows up pregnant because she was raped by her uncle, you're going to have to look her in the eyes and tell her that actually if we abort the deformed and most likely non-viable foetus that's going to have a 100% chance of killing her upon delivery it might encourage other people to have unnecessary abortions - so she should write her will now. This isn't a hypothetical I plucked out of the ether, either - I feel like it is important to point out that the three exceptions are generally understood to be rape, incest and the life of the mother. That's what you're ruling out when you say no exceptions - that it is better for an underaged rape victim to pointlessly suffer and die because to do otherwise would be "meddling with the primeval forces of nature and attempting to play God".


Of course the issues don't end there - when you actually have a "no exceptions" policy, you're going to have to do some vigorous enforcement. Whenever a woman miscarries or has a stillbirth, you're going to have to send the police in while she grieves to make sure she didn't do anything untoward - after all, maybe that miscarriage was the result of taking a herbal abortifacient or engaging in risky behaviour to induce the death of the child. Every stillbirth and miscarriage becomes a potential crime scene, and if you're serious about "no exceptions" then you're going to have to have a police investigation every single time.


For the record, I'm personally a traditionalist when it comes to abortion - i.e. it is totally fine to get an abortion or simply leave the baby on the side of a wolf-covered mountain until they're a few years old (if they survive, great. if not, the gods didn't favour them anyway).


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 11, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
OP, I like your idea but my main criticism is that it doesn't actually do enough to hold officials accountable. I'd actually go much further.


My personal belief is that entering politics should permanently cap your income and total assets - if you're a politician, you make the same income as the median worker in your constituency, and you may have a home that is worth slightly more than the median home for someone in your constituency. At the same time, you and all of your extended family members agree that your accounts can be reviewed by the public as necessary to ensure that there aren't any favours being dealt out to family members. It is an invasion of privacy, but if someone is going to adopt such an important role that's just something they have to accept.


This doesn't just give politicians skin in the game and a meaningful incentive to improve conditions for the people they represent, it also shifts the filtering on what type of people go into politics. Going into public office should absolutely not be viewed as a way to acquire financial benefits - it should be an act of meaningful self sacrifice, and while this might prevent someone like Bryan Johnson or Donald Trump from running for office, I don't see that as much of a problem.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 4, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I took a long break from posting to go on holiday so feel free not to respond to this post in an ancient thread, but I wanted to reply anyway.




CICO is just a fact which we know from countless experiments of bodybuilders who count the calories they eat and from randomized control trials.




Yes, and I'm not disagreeing with it at all. This particular sort of diet intervention involves tackling the CO part. The claim is that these particular diets change some part of your internal chemistry in a way that prevents calories out from decreasing along with calories in. If this hypothesis is correct you can essentially get a free ECA stack with no side effects by shifting food consumption patterns in ways that prevent you from consuming environmental contaminants. That's absolutely worth investigating, and it would be regardless of whether CICO is true or not (I think it is, for the record).




Anyway, you decided to buy the meals you mention, and same previously. Surely, willpower plays a role in that?




In the sense that I actively wanted to eat tasty food that I could only purchase and consume during my limited time in Japan, yes. I wasn't paying any attention to my diet.




Although it was still bellow what you usually eat in the USA if you lost weight. Maybe you also were more active.




I don't live in the USA (but I do live in a FVEYS nation so not much of a difference). At the same time, I stopped going to the gym and working out while I was there - so while I did walk a lot more, I'm not sure how the total amount of exercise changed beyond losing the lifting portion.


Ultimately the core of my disagreement with your view of willpower being the determinant is that I have lost weight both through a lengthy and sustained act of willpower (protein sparing modified fasting + intense exercise routine), and through a dietary intervention that required no willpower at all - and in fact actually required me to exert mental effort/energy in order to eat enough junk food that my weight was stable rather than falling. There was a very clear subjective difference in my inner experience between the two, and the second felt a lot "healthier" - I had more energy and was more capable in a variety of ways when going through that second diet, and having gone through both types of intervention I'm actively trying the potato diet because I found that something equivalent worked that much better for me.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of March 11, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I didn't want to look too deeply into Steve Irwin, but he mostly wrastled large reptiles into submission in his public appearances




https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/crikey-praise-for-pm-puts-you-in-a-snake-pit-20031109-gdhqvg.html


Praised a conservative PM who campaigned on stopping illegal immigration as the greatest PM the country ever had - he was a conservative, so he's actually another example of "toxic" masculinity.