pechmogul

Humans have driven hundreds of thousands of SPECIES to extinction. Humans have genocided each other into extinction. Not in the name of survival but in the name of selfish greed. Humans are the greatest threat to all other living creatures (except scavengers and parasites and viruses that live off of us and our garbage) and to the planet, and even to ourselves. Humans harm and murder other humans systematically through structural inequality and privation, through religious and ideological and colonial wars and preventable diseases, through clinging to and enforcing oppressive and repressive socio-cultural norms and traditions. The most dangerous animal, in comparison, is the mosquito. According to the WHO, mosquitoes kill about 700,000 people annually but traffic accidents kill 1.19 million per year. Just humans being careless and irresponsible in a car are almost twice as deadly as the deadliest animal alive. When animals have killed more people directly and indirectly (say, through environmental destruction, denial of healthcare, housing and food, instigating suicide through bullying etc), I'll be very, very glad to like people more than animals. Until then, I'll continue to have more respect for ladybugs and ants, even though I have had entomophobia ever since I was a toddler. My ethical considerations and moral compass are not determined by my base "animal" biological reflexes and I really hope it is clear why this should be case. Yes, "Some" being the key word here. Only some do it. Now please name me a country, city, town, school or even family where humans do not lie, manipulate, steal, harm, hoard, hate. Instead of like with animals where you can easily list the minority of species which display behaviour like deception, violent oppression, forced mating attempts and resource hoarding at the expense of others' survival, with humans, it is the handful that do not perform or experience any of these acts that are the lucky minority.

I hadn't thought of that. What a clever coping mechanism!

It's not well regarded. Most research rather suggests that because social ineptitude is not tolerated in girls and girls are made to focus on developing nurturing and empathising skills from a very young age that female autists simply learn to mask much earlier and better than male autists. As someone who was only diagnosed at 37, I can offer my own anecdotal opinion that this is very much the case. I was made to play with dolls and kitchen sets and babysit even when I had no interest. It was made clear to me that not doing so made me a bad daughter and bad sister and bad girl. Even as adults we are assigned caretaking responsibilities by default even when we have no inclination to the role, and declining is met with confusion at best and spite at worst. Not being able to read social cues and respond appropriately among girls and women very quickly leads to ostracisation and often even bullying. In other words, women are underdiagnosed for autism because the diagnostic criteria was developed by studying men and we are great at masking our symptoms because it is very much more socially unacceptable for us to display such traits as compared to men. https://www.asdhelpinghands.org.uk/women-and-girls-with-autism-why-diagnosis-is-often-missed/ https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/understanding-the-diversity-in-neurodiversity/202202/why-autism-has-been-underdiagnosed-in https://www.uclahealth.org/news/article/understanding-undiagnosed-autism-adult-females

Isn't it the same reason they like twins? Conquest. The fantasy is to be so undeniably domineering that you forcefully overcome female biological programming with nothing but your broody nonchalance and your polished penis. Lesbians are biologically disinterested in if not disgusted by the notion of sexual intimacy with men but you're so much of a man that you can not only make them ignore their deep attraction for each other but make them overcome their natural aversion to men and willingly prepare a sensual orgy for you to feast upon. Twins are the single closest form of family, so the incest of twins the most taboo, worse than parent-child or standard?? sibling incest. You're such a man that you can make two women overcome their biological programming to be repulsed by each other's sexuality, and mate with each other enthusiastically, simply for the sake of being able to garner a little crumb of your attention. It is simultaneously the allure of the forbidden and of exclusivity. These women would never cross these lines and even think of doing such a thing for any other man... but you. You and your irresistable WMD go around crushing social norms and genetic programming like an anvil on an egg basket. Boom. A breeze. Just built different, you know what I'm saying? I believe these themes are found in most porn categories: nuns, mothers, sisters, teachers, schoolgirls, secretaries, bosses, married women, public sex, voyeurism etc. Perversion and subversion do not only overlap alphabetically.

As far as I know not all teabags contain plastic. I drink Messmer and Yogi teas in bags which are made of 100% biodegradable and natural fibres (like cotton or banana fibres). Messmer even apologises for the glue holding the bags and boxes together as it is the only major component that is non-renewable (but still compostable). Link below. https://www.messmer-tea.com/our-world/sustainability/sustainable-raw-ingredients I've seen the teabags made of plastic, they're the ones that are made to look fancier, like lace, or have a pretty sheen and marble pattern. Although I suppose for the purpose of reducing waste in general, it is indeed commendable to only consume loose leaf tea.

I have absolutely no knowledge of marine biology but this sounds so fascinating! I would guess inshore because I believe corals prefer sunlight and shallow waters? I honestly have no clue so please tell me the answer!

As far as I know, recycled plastic is actually more toxic than 'virgin' plastic. I stopped using and especially drinking/eating out of plastics as much as I can but I especially avoid any and all recycled plastics, specifically for health reasons. Unfortunately, I do not know anything about construction so I'm not able to suggest an alternative. It sounds like you've done your research so if there's no alternative then I would say you're doing the best you can with what you have at the moment and I think that's better than what most people would do. I don't know if I would call it an ethical option but I know I would call you an ethical person based on your decision-making process. https://phys.org/news/2025-02-experts-toxic-chemicals-plastics.html https://baug.ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/news/2024/03/blog-recycling-plastic-is-not-a-quick-fix.html https://theconversation.com/dangerous-chemicals-found-in-recycled-plastics-making-them-unsafe-for-use-experts-explain-the-hazards-220498