Well that is a nice illustration for the fact that listing an h index with no context doesn’t mean much.

CW self harm

I mean, the lines are pretty blurred! For myself, I only categorise something as self harm when feeling physical pain is the primary objective of what I’m doing. Exercise is often painful, but the pain isn’t the main reason I’m doing it, so it’s not self harm. Likewise, when I pick my skin, the goal isn’t to experience pain, but to have a non-pain sensory stimulus. The fact that it harms my body is an unfortunate side effect that my lizard brain deems to be worth it sometimes. Same with overtraining when I know I have arthritis (because the mental health benefits are still worth it to me).

For me personally that’s a somewhat helpful way of framing it, sorry if that’s not the case for you! Made it easier for me to quit intentionally causing myself physical pain. Also made it easier to be compassionate with myself about the skin picking and nail biting when I slip up, because it’s more a force of habit and not a self harm thing. Also also made it easier to pivot to just rubbing my fingernails or clicking them together, because it’s sensory stimulation I’m after, not pain.

Tangential, but I haven’t figured out how to categorise causing myself pain to snap out of a panic attack. I usually slap my face or run very cold water over my hands, and the pain brings my feet back on the ground (metaphorically speaking).

Biting my nails and picking my skin :3

Some of them might, a lot of them won’t. But most of them would be happier if personal freedom of expression weren’t at direct odds with professional fulfilment. Just like, yano, human beings in general.

Girls want to be able to choose how to look. Femininity often causes people in the sciences (and other places too) to take you less seriously. So, there’s negative consequences to choosing to look pretty, making it less of a free choice.

Someone above explained it better, but women are more likely to have unwanted and even dangerous side effects from medications because most meds were only ever properly tested on white men.

Me and who

Yep, as I said, it wouldn’t still be good if it were still around

I’ve never seen TikTok but isn’t it basically the same as vine? Vine was only good because it didn’t stick around long enough to become bad. It would’ve become unfunny, enshittified and full of influencing aka thinly veiled ads eventually.

The shrimp colour vision thingy turned out to not actually be true https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.14578

Ist nicht deine Schuld, wenn dein Chefy nicht auf die Reihe kriegt, dein Potential sinnvoll einzusetzen. Ausserdem hat dein Nutzen für einen Job nichts mit deinem Wert als Mensch zu tun.

Huh, this is how I learn mall Santas exist outside north America.

Well then that would be the point where it becomes important to protest it. Being against it right now, with what it’s currently like here, seems paranoid to me.

I said society. The word ‘men’ isn’t even in the thing I said that you quoted. Much less ‘all men’. Both men and women saw reproduction as a woman’s responsibility. Can you explain why that’s a sexist thing to say? Or, if it’s not true, why nobody tried to research male hormonal birth control at the same time they were researching female hormonal birth control?

Also, I didn’t have to look that up. It’s common knowledge. But, as I said, there’s no reason to believe your claim that barrier methods were ever solely men’s responsibility. You didn’t even really offer evidence or a justification for that claim.

I also never said men are pricks. I said that the responsibility to use barrier methods isn’t always on men and that women who have casual sex with men could easily confirm that. There’s people who are being responsible and people who are being irresponsible of any gender. Once again, I’m just taking issue with your claim that barrier methods are and always were men’s responsibility.

Yes, the websites for digitally checking my medical files and for doing my taxes. I could do both of those in person with my physical ID.

And yeah, you just press a lil button that says ‘im over 18’. No proof required.

They did write into the law that it’d never be required to have digital ID. But the concerns make sense, thanks for your reply!

100% agree. The fact that they’re only researching it now has been hurting everyone involved.

Can you please point out the thing I said that you consider sexist, and why? I’m striving not to be, and like to learn where I can.

I mean, yeah. But the nature of games is that you play with and/or against someone and that’s not much fun if you’re noticably dragging everyone down. That mindset works much better in running for me, and I actually apply it to that!

Ok so. I’m Austrian, I’ve had a digital ID for a few years now. Use it to access all my medical files, sign stuff without having to own a printer, and do taxes. Loads of people do not have digital ID and it’s not being pushed. It’s very much and optional opt-in. There’s nothing you need it for that you can’t in some way do on paper or in person with your physical ID.

They don’t have any additional data on file due to this. Except that I have the ID, I guess. Not even my phone number- it uses 2fa through an app that I had to activate with a password I got on a piece of paper. The app doesn’t have any permissions. I in fact have it on a phone that doesn’t have a sim card. They could probably find out where my wifi is, but they obviously already have my address on file. My digital ID is linked to the exact same file they already had linked to my physical ID.

Can someone explain to me why digital ID seems to be such a hot topic these days and what the risks are? I may just be super out of the loop.

The issue isn’t that the premise is false, it’s that it’s a non sequitur.