Yeah the time to boycott FIFA was years ago, after the human rights abuses and corruption scandals. Way to have a spine now, I guess. Feeling like this is just an empty threat.

There’s a whole trove of portrayals of happy, loving single-child families out there! You just have to look to China’s one-child policy era.

“But Fireweed! This is literally propaganda!” It’s all propaganda, whether it’s “be content with one child” or “be fruitful and multiply.” Media depictions of large families appear fun and loving because the creators make it that way (the more kids the more you have to work with: there’s the jock kid, the geek kid, the uptight kid, the…). Even media about the difficulties of large families (e.g. Cheaper by the Dozen) still end with everyone being happy and loving because it makes for a feel-good ending; that doesn’t mean it reflects reality in the slightest. Society doesn’t like to talk about the darker sides of large families because of heteronormativity, but there’s some media out there portraying large families as hopelessly dysfunctional (Shameless for instance, or you can read about any of the large family “reality TV” shows that have ended in scandal).

Remember that we’re in unprecedented times; large families used to not only be the norm but were practically required (have lots of kids to work the farm, or because you don’t know how many are going to survive to adulthood, or because there’s no social safety net for when you become old/sick/injured except your family members). Nowadays it’s the opposite: more kids equals less resources to go around, and unchecked population growth combined with unchecked consumption is wrecking the planet. But media hasn’t caught up yet, and with influential, wealthy people out there screaming racist nonsense about “crashing birth rates” and “great replacement theory,” there’s pressure to continue to portray large families positively and small families poorly. It’s the same situation as the propaganda I linked above, but in reverse.

In other words, rejoice that you’ve eschewed the media narrative and done the right thing for your family! Also forget visual media (where creators use large families to portray the appearance of a happy family, because more kids = more hugs and smiling faces in the shot = more love, right?) and look to books, where there are plenty of depictions of loving, functional, single-child households.

I like how Worf from Star Trek* is portrayed: a reluctant father to the end. He certainly doesn’t hate his son, Alexander, but he’s nowhere near as invested in him as a parent should be. Great example of when conception happens on accident and both parents aren’t fully on board with having the resulting kid. Even when Alexander is thrust upon him and he’s forced to be a single dad, Worf only goes through the motions. He kind of tries, but you can tell his heart isn’t in it, and he never “gets the hang of” being a father.

Worf, for all his complications, is still one of the good guys, yet it’s clearly portrayed that that alone is not sufficient qualification for him to become a good dad. Being a good parent is like being a good singer or good athlete or good mathematician: some people just don’t have it in them, and both the parent and child suffer as a result. Alexander is never straight-up abused or abandoned on a street corner, and arguably has a fantastic childhood upon the Enterprise, but he still suffers greatly from his emotionally distant father, both as a young child and as an adult.

• I’ve only seen Worf and Alexander in The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine; I don’t know if/how their relationship is portrayed later in the franchise.

no problem on Earth is a result of the population being too high.

Pre-industrial humans caused mass habitat loss, species extinction, and even climate change, and that was with their relatively miniscule populations and emissions. What quality of life are you imagining over eight billion people having such that we somehow don’t continue wrecking the environment? And how do you plan on putting the genie back in the bottle regarding all our polluting technological “advancements” that require fossil fuels and/or intensive mining? Who’s declaring to the world that plastics, electricity, and all forms of motorized technology are over, and how do you imagine this would be enforced?

Even completely stripped of all our technology, humans are still animals, and any animal species will wreak havoc on their environment when overpopulated. Hell you don’t even have to be an animal; go look up the Great Oxygenation Event or what happened when trees first evolved. What do you suppose Earth is going to be like for the millions of years required for it to adapt to the changes we’re making? Unlike monocellular organisms and plants, however, we are sapient creatures; if we can observe this is happening and know we’re the ones causing it, how is it not in any way a moral issue?

Even for work where sick days are unpaid, many businesses (especially small ones) are going to suffer having a worker missing. After all, workers are supposed to generate more revenue than their salary costs, so the excess value is still being lost when someone calls out sick.

I’m confused by this. I’ve never worked at a business that required (or was even interested in) a doctor’s note when I was sick.

Why would I go to the doctor if I have any of the most common causes of sick days, like cold, flu, stomach upset, etc? They’re not going to be able to do anything about it except take my temperature, confirm my described symptoms, and recommend fluids and rest. Meanwhile if I’m feeling too ill to go to work I’m going to feel too ill to go to the doctor, and being forced to go to the doctor instead of resting at home is only going to exacerbate the condition and potentially spread whatever I have to other patients at the doctor’s office and on public transit (or do you want me behind the wheel in my condition?). Do y’all really have so much excess medical capacity that having people take up doctor time just for them to confirm “yup, sick” isn’t a problem?

What happens when a company is like “this is dumb, we’re not ‘requiring’ shit”? How is this even enforceable? Like, we all recognize this is overreach, but just from a practicality point of view how is any of this proposal feasible?

The trial compared the catnip lotion against 15% DEET, so it’s unknown how it compares against stronger formulas. However this is quite promising and I hope further studies are conducted globally! Catnip, as a member of the mint family, is quite a fast-growing, hardy plant, and could easily replace DEET for both home and commercial products if it continues to prove effective.

I assume it wasn’t drilled into them by whoever taught them to drive. Using turn signals is so natural to me that I don’t think I could stop using them without an extended effort at deprogramming myself.

Gotcha. Might I recommend using “e.g.” instead to avoid confusion in the future?

Does you use of “ex.” above mean “example” or “except”?

I was planning to eat this pie as my sole food over the course of 2 days for my One-Meal-A-Day (OMAD)

???

You seen very focused on the “cost per calorie” measure. Have you never heard the phrase “empty calories”?

Iirc, ODD is only diagnosed in children and adolescents. Is this something you’ve experienced since childhood?

I’ve seen them at “classy” parties, such as for Christmas or new years, when there’s a lot of people expected, because you can write your name on them with a sharpie and prevent a million abandoned drinks from accumulating everywhere.

But usually I’d agree, I associate them with college dorm parties and house parties for teens-20-somethings, who don’t want to deal with the mess and/or may not own a sufficient number of glasses for all the guests.

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…