TTRPG enthusiast and lifelong DM. Very gay 🏳️🌈.
“Yes, yes. Aim for the sun. That way if you miss, at least your arrow will fall far away, and the person it kills will likely be someone you don’t know.”
- Hoid
A drug casino doesn’t solve those problems though. Better social services for addicts can. Addiction is impossible to eradicate, all you can do is provide good social services for addicts and recovery programs (which aren’t judgemental and Christian). Requiring transportation to go get and use drugs is the same thing as criminalizing it for many people.
Neither does making a drug house that people need transportation to get to. That’s the same as criminalizing it for many people.
I feel like you have issues with the way capitalism takes advantage of people’s vices and you blamed half of it on the vices. If it wasn’t exploited, and drugs weren’t criminalized, with normal and healthy social standards taught instead of total abstinence creating an attractive taboo, none of that would be an issue.
Excellent question, but I have no idea. She tears the medicine labels off for some reason so I’ll ask her when she gets home and edit with more info. It’s a capsule and a tiny pill, taken morning and night respectively, if that means anything to you.
Edit: Phentermine and topiramate
My parents and my fiancee have gotten on an equivalent of Ozempic specifically for weight loss and covered by insurance. It seems to be easier now than it was, because if my fiancee wasn’t covered we absolutely couldn’t afford it.
Is this true? I thought with things like danger to oneself or others they’re mandated reporters.
That makes the assumption that trans athletes consistently outperform cis athletes, which there isn’t evidence of. A trans person winning something does not mean all trans people will always have an advantage, which is the assumption conservatives make. What place does a trans person need to place for it to be okay? Are trans people ever allowed to win? Any time a trans person places above any cis person, it’s used as evidence of unfairness, even though that makes no sense.
It’s just an x frontend that correctly embeds lol
I wouldn’t say either. Sex is way more intimate than just hugging. I’d say it’s like “making out” but better. It’s lots of fun, and I don’t care about the societal norms restricting it between romantic partners. Pregnancy isn’t a risk for me, and I’m very careful to avoid STDs. I haven’t had sex with someone without a recent STD panel, and I use protection when necessary. My fiancee feels the same way, so I have sex with my friends all the time
For context I guess, here’s my views on the list you posted, as someone who is very much not religious and dated plenty before finding my fiancee:
Marriage might be awesome for some, but it’s also not for everyone, and there are far too many bad marriages that could’ve been good casual relationships
Standards are definitely good to have, but I guarantee mine are very different than the average Catholic
No shame in being single. Better to be single than in a toxic relationship just for the sake of a relationship.
I probably couldn’t see myself marrying a religious person, but if their beliefs don’t infringe on other’s rights then I guess they can do them.
Sex is just sex, cohabitation is convenient, cheaper, and pleasant. I’ve never been married and I’ve lived more of my adult life with a roommate or partner than not. I also don’t believe sex needs to be confined within the boundaries of a relationship either, and I have sex with people that aren’t my fiancee, both with and without her, though that’s definitely uncommon and always done with the full consent of all parties.
Dating could be for finding a future spouse. It could also just be for fun, or for a casual relationship, or a long term relationship with no intent to marry.
Relatively wide variety in how long people date before marriage, if ever. I never planned on it for years, but I met my fiancee and changed my mind. We dated for a year before getting engaged.
Normal to date in highschool.
Obviously this is only my perspective. No judgement, to each their own. Other than the views on polyamory (though more accurately, just sex. Open relationship? I don’t have a label for it), these opinions seem very common among the average dating population. My sample may be skewed since I’m bisexual and over half my relationships have been gay.
I can confirm this from first hand experience. The doctor’s office I was seeing wouldn’t answer my very basic questions, almost comically choosing to ignore or deflect me. I called my dad, he asked the same questions, and immediately got answered. I asked them why they wouldn’t tell me that and they couldn’t explain themselves. They gave me a halfhearted apology and I found a new doctor.
I don’t love the take “men dressing feminine is a fetish.” Are tomboys a fetish? Just because some people choose to engage in fetish and also are femboys doesn’t make it “in and of itself” a fetish. It isn’t.
Right. Both I and my fiancee voted against Trump. These tariffs are already making our financial situation untenable, and we were one missed paycheck from flat broke before Trump. Do we deserve to suffer too? Do our community, who also opposed Trump? Do we need to be “educated” about the economic hurt we knew was coming, or the tariffs we knew were a stupid fucking idea? You sound hateful in the same way as the MAGA supporters are. Let those I’m better than burn because I can take it.
Yeah I don’t know if that source or that college make the point you think they do. AI art cannot exist without a constant feed of (non-consensual) human creativity. You can learn everything there is to know about AI “art” in a relatively short time span, because you have the plagiarism machine to do the composition for you. It isn’t so for any other medium. This point isn’t worth arguing, because it’s so self-evident. The knowledge and skill of photography clearly set it apart as an art form, whereas AI does not. AI “art” requires the knowledge and skill of actual artforms to even exist.
Photography’s genesis is fascinating and is taught about in art school. You conveniently left out the other side of that time, where the fledgling artform pushed back to prove its validity through multiple evolving forms and styles, which demonstrated that it is simply a new medium, not trying to replace or replicate any other style. That is explicitly what gen AI stands to do, and it even requires constant input of actual art to exist. Additionally , impressionism was far more a reaction to realism than it was to photography. Every new wave in art creates pushback from the other styles more popular at the time. Never before has every field of art so unanimously opposed what is clearly the cheapening and commoditizing of creativity through soulless reproduction. Gen AI can be fun to mess with, it can be interesting to explore the technology, but it is ultimately just a bubble being propped up by the exploitation of actual artists and consumers alike.
You clearly do not produce or understand the production of art, and why there is such a difference. Prompt engineering is not composition, and the only art that uses AI relies on human composition to give it any form of soul. This conversation isn’t worth having, as you’re still trying to argue that photography is analogous to AI art. Talk to artists.
Repeating it does not make it so. There are no AI art colleges.
I’m not dismissing it, and that doesn’t address the point at all compared to AI. It isn’t that technique isn’t important, it’s just far less of what you learn as an artist compared to the theory. Photography has its own advanced techniques just like all artforms.
I cannot disagree more, as someone that paints with multiple mediums, including oil. It may be much more time consuming, but most of the art is in learning how the human eye views images, how to make the eye be drawn around the image in the order you want, and many other technical and artistic details. I can’t even begin to discuss it here, it’s a field of professional art like any other. Frequently, it intersects with sculpture and other physical and digital mediums. There are colleges of photography that offer the same level and quantity of schooling that other artistic studies do. The skill in art is not in the fine motor controls and techniques, though they are important to learn. Much harder is learning about forms, color, values, how to arrange artwork to be pleasing to the eye (or discordant, like a tritone), and all the other multitude of steps in arranging and capturing the message the artist is trying to convey.
You’re just wrong and misinformed. I’m an artist, and every professional artist I know and went to school with shares my opinion. You have a very limited view of what photography can be, and it shows.
Edit: To be clear, professional photographers can spend huge amounts of time applying the knowledge they’ve learned through study and practice to arrange their subject, which is not simply “point and click.” Look at the work of professional modern photographers. Photography is accessible like a set of cheap acrylics is accessible. High level art of all mediums takes far more study and skill to do well than AI art.
There’s a big difference between the weed shop I can walk to down the corner and the nearest safe use site/casino. I think people should be free to engage in whatever recreational activity they choose to, and the existence of addiction doesn’t give the government the right to infringe on those freedoms. Safe use sites and social programs can exist without a semi-dystopian puritan system. I don’t understand why addiction is so huge a problem that it requires such insane overreach. Without capitalist exploitation, addiction wouldn’t be monetized. A different form of government and legalization do a far better job at managing addiction than creating a black market with draconian laws.