erin (she/her)

On the contrary, since growing my nails out my nails have been way more clean. There is an awkward period between no nails and long nails where stuff gets caught underneath, but once you grow them out (only two weeks or so), they’re perfectly clean because there’s just more space underneath and nowhere for gunk to get caught as the angle is wider.

(Classic guitar players have long nails)

I feel no need to be protected in my day to day life. My partner provides love, companionship, empathy, and a listening ear. Sure, some women might care about protection and toughness or whatever you’re on about, but attraction varies from person to person. Most other women I know want to be heard and loved. People are allowed to want to fuck “fragile” men. They can be hot without needing to be “manly.” You’re putting so much stock in traditional gender norms, not realizing that it’s not women that actually care about those. It’s the men that are trying to be that. Some women will, of course, but women aren’t a monolith. Want an example? Timothy Chalamet is very commonly considered to be an extremely attractive actor, and he’s far more androgynous and “fragile,” as you put it, than your traditional masculine ideal. Just as many women might be attracted to any number of different appearances, because people are different! The days of needing a strong man to support us frail women are over. Your insecurities and ideas of masculinity are clouding your judgment.

To answer your question succinctly: No, they aren’t fragile looking, they’re just slim. No, they don’t look “dehumanized,” they look like people. The dehumanization happens in industry, not with their faces. I know people that look similar. Some women find them hot, and want to fuck them, and idolize them, because they are hot! They’re very attractive people, if that aesthetic is what you’re into! If your only metric is how likely they are to win a fight, sure, they probably aren’t at the top of the scale, but the vast majority of people DON’T CARE.

They told you to look into therapy because you have an unhealthy idea of what women are attracted to and what masculinity should be. They called you insecure because you sound insecure (why do women like the weak little boys and not big manly men :(( they look so frail and weak, don’t women know they can’t protect them??). Whether or not that’s how you’re actually thinking, it’s how it comes across. Instead of realizing that some people do like strong men, you took it to a place of jealousy and defensiveness.

TLDR: Different strokes for different folks. Don’t obsess over people you don’t find attractive still being attractive to others, as it isn’t good for your mental health and isn’t a good look.

Plumber, carpenter, construction, woodcraft, metalworker, etc etc. There are plenty of good reasons to own a large vehicle. People who use a large vehicle for its intended purpose aren’t the problem, it’s the assholes driving them for fun that makes everyone else unsafe.

Do you think the first long truck sprang into existence in 2008? We’ve had super long trucks for specific use cases as long as we’ve had trucks. This is like one of the few times a person has a good reason to have a large vehicle, and is being safe and polite about it by staying out of the way and writing a polite note to explain. Large vehicles aren’t the problem, people owning large vehicles who don’t need them are the problem.

Do you know for sure they were protesting cars, not emissions, not raising awareness for any other cause? It doesn’t matter, I’m just curious.

Your complaints about public transportation make no sense. “Public transportation is bad so don’t spend money on it.” Obviously, if we spent money on it, it would be a viable alternative. I spent some time in Austria this year, a country with excellent public transportation. I could step onto a bus (there was one at nearly every stop about every 10 minutes), be at my destination with no delay, hop off, all without ever needing to show my ticket or talk to anyone. Cars would have been vastly more inconvenient to get around the cities, finding parking takes time, and you almost never have the right of way over other vehicles/pedestrians (as you shouldn’t, you’re in the safe metal box and they’re vulnerable). With effective public transportation, I was able to get out into the Alps, go hiking, and come back into the city without needing to worry about any of the complexities of a car. I could hop on the tram, grab dinner downtown, and be back, without ever getting stuck in traffic. It was so much easier and more convenient than anything I’ve ever seen living in the US, and I fully don’t understand the argument against it. No one is stopping you from owning a car! I own a car, and I won’t stop. There are some things I need one for. This movement is about effective public transportation, and there is no reason to be against it except insecurity, and apparently a fragile ego. What’s next, antifascism protestors block your way to work and you start wearing a swastika? Being reactionary accomplishes nothing good for yourself. If you’re that easily manipulated, every false flag will work on you with no questions asked.

My experience is so different, and so are the market statistics. A “forever mouse” is a dumb idea just looking for a subscription cash grab, but the PC mouse market is expanding year over year as more people get desktop computers, and especially for PC gaming, an expanding market in its own right. The customer base of people who use mice might be shrinking in some Linux communities, but stating that across the board is just incorrect.

Authoritarian doesn’t mean exercising authority. Banning slavery did exercise authority, of the law, over slave owners, but it was anti-authoritarian. It took power, and authority, condensed wrongly in the hands of a few and, in theory, distributed it to the many, however effective it actually was.

You’re thinking of “snaps,” where someone might send a photo just to keep a streak going. There are regular text chats on Snapchat.