I don’t know why everyone doesn’t use an allergy cover with their pillows. Keeps pillows clean and dust mites away from face while sleeping.

Celebrities and politicians are simultaneously the most-watched and poorest-behaved people on the planet tho

But you should always wash clothes before wearing them for the first time???

(Seriously though, they have all kinds of dirt and chemicals on them)

My point was more that a pickup’s core demographic live in places where range is absolutely a consideration. Some city folks do have good reason to own a pickup, but for most it’s an aesthetic/image thing. Which, given the environmental/traffic safety consequences of driving a larger vehicle than necessary, is plenty deserving of judgement imo.

Rural people, as in the folks who actually have a use for pickups. As it so happens, it is about 200 miles round-trip to my nearest airport/major city, so if this were my vehicle, I’d have to take a charge break when picking someone up/dropping them off at the airport, or making a shopping run, or going to a concert/special event, or seeing a medical specialist. And I’m not even that far off the beaten path; I have family for whom the one-way drive to their nearest major city/airport is over 200mi. Plus if you’re hauling anything, I’d imagine that range goes down quick.

RIP science documentaries I guess…

I would need to go back and rewatch the early episodes to have a confident take on Mr/Ms Garrison, but the biggest problem with the character IMO is that they are consistently one of the most garbage characters in the series, yet for a long time were the only part of the main-ish cast who were gay, and afaik is the only trans character at all (I’m blanking on any other trans characters besides “Heather,” a fake-trans, although I haven’t watched the most recent seasons). So while I would argue that Garrison was portrayed as a bad person who happens to be gay/trans rather than bad because of their gay/transness (basically the whole point of the episode where the kids are uncomfortable with Mr Slave, which the parents misinterpret as homophobia), it’s not a great look for that to be the only LGBTQ+ character outside of a few minor characters, and I certainly would be understanding of folks who take offense at this. But as you say, it’s not all black and white; even Garrison’s sexuality/identity journey is handled sympathetically at times, and the other LGBTQ+ characters are handled quite sympathetically on the whole. That said, the series leans very heavily on the “G” part of that acronym, but that’s not too surprising in a show that’s always been from a primarily male perspective.

I’m not sure if OOP understands context; yes South Park has made jokes that could be construed as homophobic and not all of their older episodes have aged well (e.g. the core message of the episode about why it should be okay to use the f-slur, although it’s worth noting that the episode is generally sympathetic to people who face anti-gay bigotry), but they also had an entire episode against homophobia in season one, way back in the 90s and well before gayness was widely accepted in American society. With the noted exception of Mr Garrison (admittedly a very large elephant in the room), South Park’s portrayal of gay characters has almost always been sympathetic, and the simple fact of their inclusion used to be quite progressive (including, I would argue, their handling of a gay Satan early in the series).

Now their portrayal of trans issues has been more problematic, but at least it’s showing signs of evolving in a positive direction, which is more than I can say of society as a whole, and it could have been so much worse (they never even approached Ace Ventura levels of transphobia, for example). Considering also South Park’s handling of literally every other issue they’ve tackled over the decades, irreverence is obviously their MO, so OOP’s desired level of unequivocal acceptance is a bit ridiculous to expect. Their irreverence has allowed them to play the role of joker, which has in turn given them a lot more leeway than most shows in lambasting and criticizing truly deserving targets.

But mostly, expecting perfect levels of political correctness from a show that’s three decades old and that made a name for itself by covering hot topic issues is just ludicrous.

They at least have owned up to some past mistakes due to this attitude (such as the Al Gore manbearpig apology episode)

I would generally agree that their best episodes are well behind them, but they still produce some amazing moments. I recently rewatched the Pandemic Special, and it’s hands-down the best mainstream media I’ve seen in terms of encapsulating what living through the pandemic as a general member of the public actually felt like.

Watching this most recent season I got the impression that they were trying (and not just dialing it in), but were fighting the same problem that all satirists are right now: that reality has surpassed satire in its absurdity (although their plotlines about POTUS being equivalent to Saddam Hussein and Jesus himself falling into the manosphere certainly implied this predicament). If nothing else, it’s good to see a show that for a long time would have aligned itself with “free speech absolutists” fighting against them instead, not because they’ve abandoned free speech, but rather because of all the other baggage that side now carries.

The unfortunate result of this “requirement” for creators to clarify their position such that everyone consuming the work understands that it’s satire, is the complete and utter loss of subtlety. Because now you’re just dumbing down your work to the level of the slowest kid in the classroom who, as the last decade has proven, is in fact very slow indeed. It would be one thing if bigots were known for their intellect and media comprehension skills, but alas…

You’re basically describing activities that align with farmer’s carry, deadlift, and rows, so maybe put more focus on those exercises?

Nice assertion. Too bad there isn’t a single fucking number or specific statistic in the entire article to back it up. Terrible journalism.

Unfortunately hydropower is its own flavor of environmental destruction.

I think it depends on what you’re looking for in a restaurant experience. Having lived in Japan and being a second-language speaker of Japanese, I will sometimes seek out Japanese restaurants specifically so that I can chat with the wait staff or workers behind the bar and temporarily soothe the feeling of missing a place dear to my heart. I’ve had some great conversations with restaurant owners and employees who seem genuinely eager to talk with me about their old home as well as my experiences in the country. Also there is a lot of bad, inauthentic Japanese food out there, and usually if the restaurant is mostly staffed by Japanese folks they can provide the genuine article (or at least help you steer clear of Americanized dishes).

So for me this comic rings painfully true, but I’m a rather specific edge case. Generally I don’t care who made the food, as long as it’s good and authentic (I have been to plenty of restaurants where the staff were the same ethnicity as the restaurant, but the food itself sure wasn’t!)

Are you me? I would do this because I didn’t have anywhere else to practice Japanese outside of class. The first Japanese restaurant I went to the experience was great; the waitress was first or second gen and seemed tickled that this random white girl was trying to communicate with her in broken Japanese. The second place I went the waitress replied with embarrassment that she was Korean. I didn’t try again after that.

Best foods to give crows

“Rave Ramsey” makes him sound too cool

Not to be a cynic, but I’m not sure how relevant data from two years ago (survey conducted spring 2024) actually is, given the fast-placed nature of AI development/adoption.

Sold out to whom, though… customers or scalpers?