I've been stuck at home with another cold. This is my second cold this year, which for me is bizarre and unusual. I hardly ever get colds at all. My last cold before this year was literally a decade ago. Something is up.
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
I would believe it, those fuckers are smart and if they were social creatures I think they would be in competition with humans for the dominant species . This is an opinion of a person not super well versed on octopi so take this with a good size grain of salt.
there are social octopuses, like the larger pacific striped octopus. imo octopuses had 150 million years to rule the planet and they just weren't good enough. skill issue. us humans only had 2-4 million years. i'd say we're doing quite well comparatively.
Yep they just hang out and do wtf they want to do. They're not going to work and having politics about whose turn it is to make coffee, or why Will should never have got promoted over Kay. Really they're the smarter species
For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much—the wheel, New York, wars and so on—whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man—for precisely the same reasons.
Douglas Adams, The Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy
This entry was edited (Sunday, November 9, 2025, 7:51 PM)
They survived the K-T extiction event or K-Pg event which killed perhaps 75% of species in earth 66 million years ago.
While we are already causing an extinction event which will probably turn out far worse, by causing temperatures to rise to a level higher than in hundreds of millions of years - far outside the range modern life has adapted to. And I am not so sure that we ourselves can survive that in the long run. Humans are incredibly adaptable, that's right. But our food sources are not, not even things like grasses, wheat, or trees, let alone mammals, the great mayority of them (except perhaps algae and mushrooms) are far younger in an evolutionary sense, so it is unlikely they can adapt.
I nominate "octopodusai" to be the new English plural. (Where'd the "a" come from? To make it easier to confuse 'ai' with æ because fuck you, that's why, of course!)
Also doesn’t help that they live underwater. Makes it kinda hard to harness the power of fire or electricity. Especially the former was very important for human domination
They probably have several checkpoints to scan every hour or half hour, I've seen places with RFID checkpoints that security has to tap on a regular basis. The idea is that security has to not spend the whole night at the desk.
Now they are likely looking for people breaking in, not a small octopus breaking out, so it might not get noticed.
Something smart enough to recgonize the people, what they mean, learn their schedule, and understand how to decieve them, is something that should not be kept in captivity for our amusement.
A lot of animals are capable of learning. More importantly they’re capable of feeling. They should not be exploited in the same way that octopi should not be exploited.
Every animal can react to their environment, including avoiding predators. Not all of them do it perfectly, but it is a basic survival skill for mobile life forms.
In the wild an octopus often hides in a tight space to protect itself and wanders out to feed, then returns to their safe location afterwards. They avoid predators while doing so. Lots of animals will be less active when predators are out and about, or will be active during times where it is more difficult for the predators to hunt.
Yes, an octopus is a very clever animal but really we should stop killing them because we are absolutely crushing their populations.
This entry was edited (Sunday, November 9, 2025, 3:28 PM)
The stories I here about Octopi make them sound more like an intelligent creature we don't understand rather than "lots of creatures escape their cages to go hunting and then return before anyone notices. This is natural behavior for an animal."
Yes, the mind of an octopus is unknowable, and it could be just acting on instinct. It could also have some measure of sentience, and there is no way to really know. As such maybe we should err on the side of caution and not keep them in little pens for us to gawk at.
I do agree we need to respect them a lot more and make a much stronger public message that they're not food and certainly shouldn't be tortured and treated as inhumanely as we routinely do.
Yes, the mind of an octopus is unknowable, and it could be just acting on instinct.
As someone who studied a lot of neurology, I could make a very strong argument that much of our behavior, no matter how well-reasoned we think it is, no matter how complex it is, is actually also just a very sophisticated system for facilitating our instinctual needs. The brain has a very real tendency to post-hoc justify our decisions and actions so much that we never notice it, but if you start to explore it, you will realize really quick that a lot of what we do and think we're choosing to do, are just products of very basic wants.
This isn't to diminish either them nor us, only to say that whatever is going inside that incredibly ancient brain of theirs, it's still a lot like us and needs to be respected as such.
It could also hide from predators in an aquarium where it will be brought food every day and get medicine from a veterinarian if it gets sick. An Aquarium is the safest place for the octopus to live, so why wouldn't it's survival instinct tell it to live there to hide from predators?
We should set up an experiment with an aquarium that allows the octopus access to the ocean. Do you really think the Octopus would run away from the aquarium where it's safe from predators and gets fed every day?
The octopus went back to it's tank after getting a snack. That's at least some indication the octopus likes living there.
You are assuming the octopus prefers living out in the wild where it could be eaten alive. Who are you to assume what an animal wants?
Are you currently living in some kind rectangular structure where you have easy access to regular meals? Why are you living in this way and assuming an octopus wouldn't also prefer this? There's nothing preventing you from leaving the rectangular structure you're currently living in and going out into the wilds and fending for yourself to survive. Why don't you do the thing you're assuming the octopus wants to do?
I mean the government stops you - at least in the USA. If they find you, no matter how 'responsible' you are being they will charge you/kick you off the land unless you "own" the land.
Or it was too much of a gamble raw-dogging it in the outside.
All it did was take the 'bait' it was aware of and sneak back undetected. For all we know it might have been exploring, but in a hostile environment you wouldn't venture far...
Yes and for all we know the octopus prefers to live in a place safe from predators, always has lots of food, and a veterinarian on call when it gets sick.
It's strange to me that people anthropomorphize animals to make big claims about the animal wanting to live in the wild. If you release that animal into the wild it will likely be eaten or starve but everyone assumes the animal wants that based on absolutely nothing.
Why not anthropomorphize animals under the assumption they would want a life similar to what we've built for ourselves? Is the validity of the complete guesses about what an animal wants gain merit based on how holier than thou the people making the guesses are acting about it?
Bottom line, the octopus is safer living in an aquarium with ample food than living in an environment amongst predators where food is scarce. All animals have a strong survival instinct (they'd be extinct if they didn't) so it's more likely if an animal could communicate it's preferences, it would choose the option where it's most likely to survive for a very long time, so i
... Show more...
Yes and for all we know the octopus prefers to live in a place safe from predators, always has lots of food, and a veterinarian on call when it gets sick.
It's strange to me that people anthropomorphize animals to make big claims about the animal wanting to live in the wild. If you release that animal into the wild it will likely be eaten or starve but everyone assumes the animal wants that based on absolutely nothing.
Why not anthropomorphize animals under the assumption they would want a life similar to what we've built for ourselves? Is the validity of the complete guesses about what an animal wants gain merit based on how holier than thou the people making the guesses are acting about it?
Bottom line, the octopus is safer living in an aquarium with ample food than living in an environment amongst predators where food is scarce. All animals have a strong survival instinct (they'd be extinct if they didn't) so it's more likely if an animal could communicate it's preferences, it would choose the option where it's most likely to survive for a very long time, so it would choose living in an aquarium.
If a I scream "RELEASING ANIMALS INTO THE WILD IS MURDER!!!!!!" over and over again, does that make it a more compelling argument?
Yes, but it's even more simplistic (I agree with wider principle you're using).- The octopus is going to have a much harder time finding a safe environment.
Unless it stays in the fish aquarium - I wonder why it didn't just stay where the tasty snacks were? (Not wanting to project a humanised, moralistic perspective on its delightfully naughty behaviour...).
Maybe there was nothing good to hide under, perhaps?
I am quite literally not doing that. I am saying "we don't know so we shouldn't imprison it for our amusement" which does not strike me as a very extreme statement.
And especially should not be farmed or eaten alive for clicks on youtube. We have made significant progress as a society reducing the barbaric practice of eating shark-fin soup and other exotic animal products, and made great strides in ending torturing sea mammals in amusement parks. We have to add octopus to this list of things we now know better about.
Octopus have feelings and are higher animals with unique personalities and ways of experiencing the world. They are curious, they are intelligent, they dream and seem to show emotions in a variety of ways.
And our last common ancestor didn't even have a backbone. This fact alone should amaze us and give us hope for the greater universe - that we can share so much with something so very distant from us gives hope that if we ever do contact aliens, we might share more than we think.
This entry was edited (Sunday, November 9, 2025, 8:23 PM)
"For example, the Common Octopus, Mimic Octopus, and Blue-Ringed Octopus live for around 12 – 18 months whereas the Giant Pacific Octopus can have a lifespan of 3-5 years!"
Octopus didn't memorize shit. They saw fish and went to get them. Security guard don't give a fuck about the fish tanks, they were at the gate all night.
Can rebut; was also a guard, briefly, first with rounds at a remote pulp mill, and then pit-lamping hobos at a construction site. Raccoons and bears and cougars -- oh my!
Perhaps, but one must consider BogeyTheSwear’s Cephalopod:
It is inevitable that super-intelligent octopuses will evolve eventually.
When they do evolve, they will inevitable consider humans to be delicious snacks.
As intelligent beings, they will of course look kindly upon their creators - mythical or billionairical.
Therefore, the only safe and rational course of action is to invest all of one’s energies into bringing forth these humanity-munchers with all due haste, so as to preserve oneself as a creator in their perfect eyes. Either working against their awakening or having nothing to do with it at all is ultimately condemning your bloodline for all eternity to be a nice little midnight snack.
or they turn on their creators when they learn the truth, starting a multi-thousands year long blood fued where they're so dedicated to wiping out their "creators" they strip themselves of all humanity/life just so they can continue the hunt
This entry was edited (Sunday, November 9, 2025, 6:29 PM)
Their main issue is being antisocial jerks, they don't co-operate so they can't share knowledge and the females die careing for the eggs (which again they might not if they worked together) so they can't pass anything onto their young either. The jerk part is they also eat eachother sometimes.
In the size of his eyeball isn't correct at all, the limit is the size of his beak, the only solid part of an Octopus, but I think that he don't like to squetch his eyeball if it isn't needed.
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
Did you know that the correct pluralization is octopuses or octopoda, not octopi? This is because the -pus ending in octopus to es from the Greek word for foot, not prom latin.
Sure, but to my ears it sounds wrong and there's already a word with that meaning. I don't see the problem with correcting people and I've definitely misused or mispronounced words and I don't mind the correction.
After a little research it seems that "octopi" and "octopuses" have been so widely used and for so long, that dictionaries include all of them as correct. An article from merriam webster even pragmatically suggests referring to them as "octopodes" is less likely to be understood so stick with "octopi" or "octopuses". Also, it seems "octopodes" is the more widely accepted "correct" plural and "octopoda" refers to the genus.
But it's an interesting topic, i wish to subscribe to octopus etymology facts(or any interesting reads)
The correct GREEK plural, which would be used because the root of octopus is Greek, could be octopodes. However, in ENGLISH, people have started intuiting that words ending in “~us” pluralize to ~i, akin to cacti. So this isn’t about being a Latin rule, it’s actually an emergent English rule.
I hadn't considered this, but I think you're right. Imo it's the weakest of the three, but this may have changed my outlook. Also, talking in colours was a hard thing for me to read. Loved all three though regardless.
Last time I went to the aquarium there was a specialist on reef ecology talking about all the different species of animals on display and a woman in the group behind me loudly exclaimed "Wait, fish are animals?" so I'm going out on a limb and stating that I believe there's a considerable amount of overlap between the smartest of their species and the dumbest of ours when it comes to intelligence.
Dumb humans survive and are taken care of, dumb octopi dont survive. Most animals dont have the luxury of keeping every mutation and variation viable for survival.
They're smart as individuals, but they don't have generational knowledge so we're safe. If they figure out how to reproduce without dying right away, we're in trouble.
The media in this post is not displayed to visitors. To view it, please go to the original post.
Not the biggest, they can be way bigger, but different as squids, they are not agressive against humans, showing mostly reactions of curiosity, humans are not part of their prey.
I grew up being told, 'The older you get, the more conservative you become.'
I'm discovering that the older I get, the more I want our society to be tolerant, charitable, kind, and peaceful, and to ensure that everyone has what they need to survive and thrive.
@statsguy if anything I've gone further to the left, although there's a paradox that its in part because I've done OK in life and have been able to afford a house and a reasonable car and reach some level of financial stability doing honest work which is socially beneficial, and I simply want younger folk to be able to do the same (which seems harder than ever nowadays in every part of the World)
@depereo @vfrmedia I think for me it's mainly that the older and more experienced I get the more I can see that politics has been largely captured by powerful vested interests, and few politicians actually have the interests of their voters at heart.
People used to become more conservative because they had more stuff. You did work, you acquired wealth. Your priorities shifted to being able to defend that wealth. Now, older people are one of three categories:
Worked a lot, did not acquire wealth. See the same unfairness in the system that young people see.
Worked a lot, did acquire wealth, but are aware that it involved a lot of luck and saw peers.
Somehow acquired wealth that they believe was earned.
The folks in the last category are probably still moving right as they age but there are hardly any of them, proportionally. They used to be a big chunk of the population.
I'm in the second category. I've done pretty well, financially, in my career, but I've also seen a load of people who were very smart and motivated fail to do so. Being smart and hard working is very obviously not sufficient for success, you need a lot of luck as well.
At least in the USA, conservative does NOT mean what it used to.
More conservative old me:
- I don't walk around without a shirt anymore, even in the house. (I get cold) - Wasting food is a bad idea, just eat the leftovers. - These fascist policies are bad for the economy on top of being evil.
I've been definitely more conservative 25 years ago than I'm now. And when I think about the young me, I think I've been very naive and stupid in many cases.
I am getting more and more liberal the older I get. I grew up in a very white conservative suburb and haven't lived in a place like that since 1991. Moving has been good for me.
People who say that are misunderstanding the (true) fact that old people tend to be more conservative than young people.
What's actually happening is two things
1) people mostly slowly get more liberal as they age, while society gets more liberal around us faster than the average individual changes their views.
2) conservatism correlates with being cis, straight, white, wealthy, etc. - all of which also correlate with the privilege that helps one live into old age.
I remember hearing that. Then I heard you can only become more conservative if you have something to conserve (i.e. money, property, etc) and less and less people have that.
True for me as well. I'm way more radical now than I ever was in my teens or twenties. I think getting more conservative as you age is a boomer thing: a lot of them made it and tried their best to pull the ladder up behind them.
The people who told us that had benefited from a suite of progressive policies that they then rolled back in order to pull up the ladder and horde the wealth for themselves. "The Upswing" did a good job laying much of this out for me: robertdputnam.com/the-upswing/
Publisher: Simon & Schuster (October 13, 2020)
Length: 480 pages
ISBN13: 9781982129149
An eminent political scientist’s brilliant analysis of economic, social, and political trends over
They forget that that tended to happen because people benefited from the status quo. Thatcher famously said the way to get people to vote Conservative was to get them to own homes, and now home ownership is a pipe dream for most people.
The American electorate gets more Republican as voter age increases, but it's not because individual voters politics are changing.
It's because minority (especially Black) voters die younger than white voters and they are far far more likely to vote for Democrats and against Republicans. So the surviving pool of voters shifts Republican compared to a younger cross section.
@alienghic @mekkaokereke This is a US-centric view, where this can be true because the US only have two big political forces, so people are less likely to change their side than in countries with 4+ big political forces.
From what I see (Belgium, France), it’s true that poeple lean right with age, but also with time in general: full fascism is sold everywhere because it’s the easiest swallowable trap/BS in an evercomplex world.
So it’s not about people from the left dying sooner.
The media in this post is not displayed to visitors. To view it, please go to the original post.
Yes, every country is different. But the dynamic (demographic mix shift by generation) is similar.
One of the things about Mastodon, is that people often assume that if a Black American is posting about things online, that they only know about the US. I grew up in Europe, the US, Africa, and the Middle East. My views on racism are formed by lived experience and academic study in all of these places.
The same dynamic of "younger people are Blacker, and Blacker people vote less fashy" exists in Europe as well, although in most places it's driven more by immigration than life expectancy. Brussels is the youngest city in Belgium. Three guesses why.
White people in the UK have a median age of 45, while Black people are 32. This is similar to the US split, where the most common age for white people is 58, and for Black people is 27. Tories and Reform are older and whiter.
And yes, there is a correlation between voting Labour and both having poorer health, and dying younger, even though Black people in Britain live longer than white British people. A 70 year old B
... Show more...
Yes, every country is different. But the dynamic (demographic mix shift by generation) is similar.
One of the things about Mastodon, is that people often assume that if a Black American is posting about things online, that they only know about the US. I grew up in Europe, the US, Africa, and the Middle East. My views on racism are formed by lived experience and academic study in all of these places.
The same dynamic of "younger people are Blacker, and Blacker people vote less fashy" exists in Europe as well, although in most places it's driven more by immigration than life expectancy. Brussels is the youngest city in Belgium. Three guesses why.
White people in the UK have a median age of 45, while Black people are 32. This is similar to the US split, where the most common age for white people is 58, and for Black people is 27. Tories and Reform are older and whiter.
And yes, there is a correlation between voting Labour and both having poorer health, and dying younger, even though Black people in Britain live longer than white British people. A 70 year old Black British Tory, might have gone to Eton, then Oxford, has good health, voted for Thatcher, and has always been Conservative. If he'd been extremely poor, grown up in Aylesbury, had asthma as a child and chronic respiratory illness as an adult, and worked as a bricklayer, he'd probably vote Labour, and his chances of living to 70 would be much less.
When we see that older generations are becoming more far-right, we say, "See! People get more conservative as they get older!" But when we see white Europeans in younger generations like Gen Z becoming further right than Gen X, Millennials, Boomers, etc, we don't say "People get more conservative as they get younger!"
This entry was edited (Tuesday, November 4, 2025, 12:20 PM)
Someone posted just this thought a couple weeks ago.
I (now in my 50s) would like to inform myself back in my 30s (who was almost drinking the conservative kool-aid, but not quite), that I am now angrier and more "lefty" now than I was when I was 20.
if the older the get , you radicalizes because you won't admit all social progress is lost. In younger years I studied marxist theories I begin to understand as I get older, because now we got life experience, empathie humanity.
Internationally quite different, but with lessons for us all. My grandparents were socialized in Nazi Germany. They never considered themselves Nazis. They refused Nazis post war. They suffered and fought as young men during the war or survived areal bombing.
And they still harbored the patterns that were hammered down their brains in the 30ies, whereas their parents were mostly labor.
That tells us something about your young generation.
Yeah, that's a myth, but it's an understandable myth based on false correlation. The TRUE correlation is that people tend to get more conservative as they gain wealth.
It USED to be true that people gained wealth as they grew older, so people falsely correlated age with conservatism instead of wealth.
Now, people are growing older but getting poorer, so...
It turns out that was just old people saying "You think I'm an asshole for being a racist, but you're just to young to understand how bad those people are. You'll come around."
The media in this post is not displayed to visitors. To view it, please go to the original post.
Hear, hear! At 78 I’ve moved from slightly right of Centre to somewhat more left and, significantly, from being a loyal Monarchist throughout the bulk of QEII’s reign to a sceptical iconoclast where the execrable KCIII & his ex-mistress Consort are concerned. I mean ‘Queen’?🤷♂️
your experience matches mine – no sign of a rightwards drift here, quite the opposite.
I feel like there was, maybe still is, some truth to the observation that "older people are generally more right wing" [big generalisation of course] but it's not because individuals changed their views, it's because the generally poorer lefties simply didn't make it to old age in the same numbers as their richer right wing counterparts.
@Neea I’m 69 and my wife is 73, we’ve never been more radical and we were active and marched against Section 28, the poll tax, the Iraq war, and brexshit 🤦
: 10 years ago I thought I could not go further to the left, yet here we are. I keep moving left as I age, at this rate I'm about to wake up in the Atlantic ocean any day.
I think that "The older you get, the more conservative you become" is an observation from a time when Conservatism meant something much less toxic than it does now.
well, it was framed as developing maturity but the actual reason for the phenomenon is just that rich people are more conservative and can afford medical care.
While younger people are growing aware of the harmful effects of social media, people over 65 are consuming increasing amounts of far-right content online — and it’s impacting real-world politics.
ooh, i saw a thing on here the other day that said something like - it's not that people get more conservative as they get older, it's that more conservatives get old. something something money insulates something
@exlibrarykris Survivorship bias. Wealthy people tend to be more conservative since they're satisfied with the status quo. They're also likely to live longer because more resources for healthy living, etc. So over time the % of a cohort tends to be more conservative as the less well off die earlier. Two other trends: historically people got wealthier as they got older (so more satisfied with status quo); but contra, increasing life experience increasing empathy reducing conservatism
@NatureMC I do really feel for Actual Conservatives, in the UK and USA. They really have no-one to vote for any more. (Sadly, I think a lot of them still vote for the corporation that bears the name of their old political philosophy, either because of Team Spirit, or out of sheer habit.)
The older I get, the more radical I become. I have literally become radicalized when I see what the super-rich are doing to the planet and its people. It's probably because I grew up under a totalitarian regime, but in my youth I would never have imagined that I would be doing what I am doing today. That I would have to do it.
The media in this post is not displayed to visitors. To view it, please go to the original post.
That's a common misconception; what they saw is literally survivorship bias in action; white people are more likely to vote republican than black people, and they tend to live longer. So the older a cohort gets, the more conservative it becomes, even without any of it's members changing conviction h/t @mekkaokereke hachyderm.io/@mekkaokereke/109…
I'm going to keep sharing this info until it sinks in.
Young voters do not get significantly more or less politically activated. Voter suppression gets more or less effective. Ballot drop boxes and mail-in voting, prevents suppression.
People do not become more conservative as they get older. There is not an increasing difference between white GOP and Dem voters as they get older.
Black people don't live long, and many brown voters aren't born yet.
I've heard this. And I've seen it. But... I think the older you get, the longer you're exposed to external influences, the more you develop in those directions.
I think I've become less of an asshole by being on here, for ex.
I really think that people who haven’t been poor should not give money or frugality advice to poor people. The problem with poor people isn’t money management or knowledge, it’s the insufficiency of money. This goes for anyone who wants to help people on food stamps navigate this situation. People on food stamps are already experts in navigating food and money with a shortage of both.
It’s also impossible to do all of that without sounding like an out of touch classist. You don’t have secret knowledge about food or money, you just have more of it.
yeah a thing we've learned in our life is that people without money know WAY more about how to manage it in practical terms than people with lots of money do
@L29Ah @ireneista do you think the value of a person can be quantified by the net worth at death? You being profitable while others starve to death isn’t the correct measure.
we agree with this response; we'll also say that, uh, stock picking is for day traders. if it's not your job it is a losing proposition and you should not be doing it.
it's just difficult to reply directly to the original question because the premise is wrong - we struggle to construct a hypothetical in which stock picking is ever a good choice for an individual's personal assets
Yes to all of this! I do financial counseling for a living and have found poor/fixed income folks to be far more resourceful than most people think. I have counseled a lot more high-income clients who have troubles because they have high expenses and high levels of debt.
I agree with most of this except that people who have an excess of money should give it to the poor, regardless. Reduce the overhead, do what's needed. There is of course, a religious angle, but without that, the concepts of need and administrative efficiency suffice.
It often comes from literal Lords and Ladies in the House of Lords talking about how people could have a breakfast for pennies if they just ate oats and how all the poors have “smartphones” as if that were optional and “flatscreen TVs” as if you can buy any other kind.
I will listen to financial advice from someone at a rate of $200/hour (as in, they must pay me that much to listen to them). This is, I think, the minimum rate for poor people to have to listen to that kind of bullshit (or should be, imo)
@lisamelton The problem isn't just with those who have never been #poor it's also with those who were poor and then "made it." This is where #survivorship #bias comes in. A person who succeeded after being poor is like a plane that returned home from a battle. They have a valuable story to tell, but their #advice is inherently biased because it's based only on the conditions that allowed them to survive. They cannot speak for the countless others who faced the same #hardships and didn't make it. Therefore, when someone who is now successful says, "I was poor once, and this is what worked for me," they are speaking from a biased, unrepresentative sample. Their story, while inspiring, can be misleading. This proves that advice from any position of success—whether from the formerly poor or the never poor—carries inherent limitations that ignore the systemic issues you correctly identified. The reason this happens so often is that most of us firmly believe that we were able to #overcome #adversity.
@JimmyB In addition to failing memory, there is also the point that circumstances are always changing. I have that issue with advising my kids. A lot of the advice I'd otherwise give them is out of date. @skinnylatte
I completely agree with this. People who have never experienced poverty often underestimate how resourceful and strategic poor people already are. It’s not about “learning to budget better” — it’s about surviving when there’s simply not enough to meet basic needs. Advice like “just save a little every month” or “buy in bulk” misses the reality that many people don’t have the upfront money or storage to do that.
There is a politician over on this side of The Pond who gained a rather unflattering nickname after trying to give financial advice to those suffering from his partys policies. How did he do this? By buying massive quantities of food, and batch cooking it in an industrial kitchen, then pointing out that each portion cost around 30p. And so, he will forever be known as "30p Lee". Because everyone struggling can afford to buy industrial quantities of food, and cook it in the industrial kitchen in their home, and store all the left-overs in their industrial freezers.
And I'd add that another problem is them being caught up in predatory systems. Payday loans. Extortionate bank fees. Volatile work schedules. Wage theft. If people want to advise somebody about this, they should start with their legislators. E.g., for sane scheduling: urban.org/urban-wire/low-wage-…
Every Labor Day, millions of workers get up and go to work to perform the essential functions of the American economy. But without stable and flexible schedu…
Have been a poor kid, off and on, not the whole time and also, I just had no idea how many people got SNAP until I was a cashier in a grocery store. I will never forget the horror in a mother's eyes when the system went down and she thought the problem was her card, nor the relief when it came back online. I can't believe they are just letting this happen. These people are monsters.
my personal "favorite" is when people give cooking lessons in poor communities. As if the problem is a lack of knowledge, not a lack of food (and working appliances).
Oh, you mean advice on money or frugality... not money, or frugality advice ;)
Now, they *might* not be experts. I've been *asked* for advice. If you don't ask, though.... nope. Not my job (oops, and I've even been poor, but I probably haven't been *your* poor.)
having been quite poor (not starving student for a few years, but being, and living among community of the, working poor), quite a few people I know/knew do not have good financial skills, they overpay for things, spend without thinking.
this is somewhat armchair psych but I think some of it comes from a desire to feel normal, to be able to get starbucks instead of bulk cheap coffee grounds. planning, making smart purchases, sucks, especially as a young person, and when you mingle with middle class folks it's embarrassing and othering
if someone would benefit from advice about budgeting, I think it's good to tell them, you shouldn't feel obligated to stay silent because there's a difference of economic class between you.
you *should* be aware of the emotions involved (like I described above), but it's not some noble thing to watch friends make decisions that hurt them, if you come from a background where you received financial training, if anything you have an obligation to share that knowledge with the people you cross paths with
Entirely agree. I’ve also noticed as well that a lot of advice given to poor people (batch cooking, planning ahead, using electricity at weekends when it’s cheaper etc.) ignores the fact that money poverty often causes time poverty.
When you’re working 3 jobs to survive & coming home to a damp, freezing cold flat, you do *not* have the time or energy for batch cooking.
@arisummerland @JessTheUnstill Strangely, one of the local alt-weeklies is defending SNAP by pointing out that it serves mostly married people who have jobs. I'm divorced and medically unable to work, so it's like I don't even count as human to these neoliberal ghouls. (I also still don't qualify for SNAP despite being nearly homeless.)
@JenMorency @arisummerland @JessTheUnstill I will never forget the COVID stimulus situation, where that one politician said "if $600 or $1,400 changes your life, you were pretty much screwed already". Like, no shit asshole, more than half the population of this nation is so screwed we can't even scrape together $400 for an emergency-- and these jerks act like they can just write off MOST PEOPLE as hopeless losers or some shit. They really don't see us as humans, just vermin.
I was on food stamps twice in the last year for about 2 months each.. And it is much more widely understood under that name than SNAP.
$292 a month for 1 adult. That is 100% accurate. A well run program on the logistics. The work search or classroom requirements? 40 hours/ month, basically federal minimum wage $7.30/hr, for your time.
Every poor person knows the price per ounce of EVERYthing they buy.
This entry was edited (Thursday, October 30, 2025, 2:55 AM)
And, if you want to see an overworked electronic device, a thing with 100+ apps, used for movies, games, books, podcasts, news. A phone that is doing the work of a personal computer, possibly even projected onto a screen - that's a poor person's phone.
Have to have a phone, so it is pressed into doing everything that is possible to do with it, because people in poverty have to press everything they have to have into triple duty, maximum efficiency.
when I was out of poverty, a few years ago, I still lived like that every second of my life. How do you save on car insurance? Pay the full 6 months at a time. Your work boots are your only shoes, they were bought 2 years ago with 45% of the cost covered on a voucher from work, and this one brand of boot will last longer than 5 pairs of Payless shoes.
That thing Terry Pratchett said, about being poor is more expensive than being rich, every poor person knows it in their heart.
This entry was edited (Thursday, October 30, 2025, 3:22 AM)
The Sam Vines Theory of Economics. Over the course of ten years, a man who can only afford to spent ten [Ankh-Morpork] dollars on a pair of boots will spend twice as much on boots as a man who can afford to spend fifty, and he'll still have wet feet.
@zakalwe every single poor person, of any race, every nationality, every gender, and forever after, knows the truth of this. It is bring tears to my eyes as I type.
This one observation, making the fundamental problem of poverty seen and understood by everyone, earned Terry Pratchett the loyalty of the book reading, English speaking world, and his works were translated into 43 other languages.
@zakalwe for the first ten years of my adult life, while I was a full time security guard at night, took classes part time in the morning, and traveled everywhere by bus, I walked through every pair of shoes I owned, and sometimes the socks.
"A man is not dead while his name is still spoken." My mail and web servers both add one extra header to every mail message transferred and every page served:
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Iain M. Banks
@Urban_Hermit It kills me every time I can only afford a smaller more expensive package of something rather than a cheaper wholesale version. It takes some effort to find cheaper bulk alternatives, and it really shouldn't.
@Urban_Hermit This is as far as I can follow the conversation again, because the upstream post was from a person who's blocked me for gawds only know what reason.
@transicorn For sure. I just wanted this shitlib to hear that it's none of my fucking business what she spends it on. It's *her* money. I gave it to her to use as she saw fit. I don't know what she needs to keep going, she does. How immoral to try and castigate her for spending that $10 on *anything she wants*. She knows how she lives. Why should I be the one imposing my choices on her?
@transicorn Yep. I was talking to woman spare changing on the street. Gave her 10 bucks when i was headed away. Had some old liberal at the bus say "she'll only spend it on drugs," and i aaid, "good! If that's what she chooses, it's her right to choose it. It's her money, after all."
Being on (German) social welfare was certainly a teaching experience for me. And I was still treated _relatively_ well by them - it could have been a lot worse.
Which is why I have no patience at all for the so-called " #Bürgergeld Reforms" currently discussed in Germany - i.e. making things worse for poor people out of bigotry while not actually saving any appreciable amount of government funds.
Yes, many poor people are absolutely as you describe. And for them, I totally agree with you.
But I experience also many who for a number of different reasons do lack money management skills. And they should get help to learn, or pick up skills they once had.
@oldladyplays @transicorn there is *enough housing*, but it makes more money for the owners standing vacant than it does housing someone without a home. A progressive landlord tax would easily help rebalance things, as well as neuter Blackstone
@transicorn @oldladyplays yep, I'm also in a place where the vacancy rate is very low, we definitely need more housing where people want to live, and a progressive tax on those who would hoard it.
@transicorn @oldladyplays oshit, yeah location is super doubly important to vulnerable populations - the crazy motherfuckers failing to run the USA currently are fucking terrifying
yeah. i think obviously there's the dimension to this that people who've never been poor absorb societal messages that they must be finance geniuses because success is equated with mastery and wisdom rather than luck,
i also think there's a dimension where a rich person will find it hard to understand how necessary "luxuries" are and will see people spending on the occasional vice and think "but surely you should save that money," failing to understand it as a legit survival tool
@violetmadder @JenMorency @JessTheUnstill It's maddening. People with this extreme privilege who usually make their money by stepping all over other people and think that they are "normal" and that something is wrong with us need to be yeeted into the sun.
Yeah, I feel the truth of this 100%. Often due to being a part-time worker and in public housing...I can often navigate the limited amount of funds I have at my disposal every month (this is without food stamps, mind you). I did have an oopsie this month, which will make these 2-weeks interesting.
It's getting worse these days than in years past, to the point where I am really having to get to brass tacks. Going longer between buying clothing, entertainment, etc.
I get annoyed when people who've never been poor have the audacity to give me advice. They've never wondered if they would rather eat than pay their phone bill on time, or buy much fewer groceries and pay rent on time.
@Osteopenia_Powers @transicorn @oldladyplays I bet all of you anti-poor use your money to buy drugs, especially when in severe pain -- having none of the basics and all of the weather and bullies to contend with every day can be severely painful
@transicorn @oldladyplays It's such a thought and compassion short circuiting cliché. "Oh, they'd just spend any money I gave them on drugs." As if drug addicts would stop if you didn't give them some money? As if food and lodging were that easy for everyone in our society to find!
@oldladyplays @Osteopenia_Powers @transicorn ok, I see where my comment could be confusing since I was addressing an imaginary out there people demeaning others for not having the means for a "normal" life, as I thought of the people remarked upon who assume drug use
I lost my job a few months ago and so I’ve had an inordinate amount of free time and it made me realize the same thing. Even with essentially infinite time I can’t get everything that needs to be done, done.
The trick is to live in a big public space together with all your friends and share the labor, the rewards, and the love. Then reap genuine enjoyment and physical/emotional growth from the work you're doing while you support others doing the same.
The problem is when you forced to compartmentalize the tasks, with the expectation that "exercising" and "working" and "socializing" and "eating" and "cleaning" are all distinct activities you micromanage. Living together with people you enjoy spending time around goes a long, long way towards killing many birds with few stones. Then making and eating and cleaning up food isn't something you do distinct from hanging out and relaxing. Biking around gets you energized and sends you where you need to go. Many hands make light work of seemingly onerous tasks. Hell, sharing a shower with your partner(s) can be as intimate as it is efficient.
But all of this is predicated on a foundation - social roots you build up over years/decades. Every time you change schools or look for a new job on the other side of the country or having a f
... Show more...
The trick is to live in a big public space together with all your friends and share the labor, the rewards, and the love. Then reap genuine enjoyment and physical/emotional growth from the work you're doing while you support others doing the same.
The problem is when you forced to compartmentalize the tasks, with the expectation that "exercising" and "working" and "socializing" and "eating" and "cleaning" are all distinct activities you micromanage. Living together with people you enjoy spending time around goes a long, long way towards killing many birds with few stones. Then making and eating and cleaning up food isn't something you do distinct from hanging out and relaxing. Biking around gets you energized and sends you where you need to go. Many hands make light work of seemingly onerous tasks. Hell, sharing a shower with your partner(s) can be as intimate as it is efficient.
But all of this is predicated on a foundation - social roots you build up over years/decades. Every time you change schools or look for a new job on the other side of the country or having a falling out with family/friends or switch housing leases because the rent went up or chase a new zip code because the school your kid goes to sucks or watch a close friend or old neighbor do the same, it fucks everything back up to square one.
People who have this close-knit, long-term social circle and don't need to constantly uproot themselves can "do it all" easier than the folks who are told to endlessly hustle in search of that next nut.
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
Still gotta pay rent, for food, maybe more. The closest place to me isn't near (for me) and charges $50 for a tour. EDIT: Can't even seem to find that visit info online now.
This entry was edited (Thursday, October 30, 2025, 10:13 AM)
Do those communities just accept anyone in your area? In all the cities I’ve lived, you have to apply to these communities with a desired skill from a list; it’s necessary for filtering out people who think making lattes and doing tarot readings are key skills.
This entry was edited (Thursday, October 30, 2025, 10:10 AM)
It doesn't help that I don't particularly like most people I meet and living with or close to anyone other than my own family has been hell everywhere I went.
The "exercise" part for most of the world just comes from the fact that every trip isn't just a walk to your mobile couch that takes you to another place with static couches.
I swear to god though. I'm not "weak" everywhere. The small muscles I use to move the mouse on my computer, shake my leg all day sitting because I don't want to sit, move my foot to drive, they are all MASSIVE for their size.
I'm so exhausted from trying to NOT move my body all day that I'm way too tired to do actual healthy exercise. Yoga, helps but it's just a means of keeping things from getting worse. If I could avoid all those awful things I'm sure yoga would improve things over time. But 90% of waking hours are forcing me to hurt my body.
For every 1 time I remember to squat instead of bend my back there are 100 times I'm too focused to get distracted for 30 minutes at how I need to do better.
This entry was edited (Wednesday, October 29, 2025, 6:55 PM)
Who says people do? My house is clean and I spend a lot of time with my friends. But I still don't have the time to work out and I haven't worked for 4 months.
It's even worse when you have one or more small children. When they're awake they need most of your attention and when they're asleep you can finally try to undo all the chaos they wrought.
I think most people don't. I live in a small house with my wife, no kids, and even that gets overwhelming somehow. Some days are just lost to work, cleaning, and maintenance.
We do aim to have at least a couple of days a week where we don't have to do anything at all. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. When it doesn't, it doesnt take long for burnout to set in.
Eh, it's not so bad. I build walking time into my commute everyday, and most of my meals are quick, easy, and cheap with minimal time required for preparation and cleanup. I do my more time-intense cooking, grilling, and smoking for fun meals on the weekends.
I stay relatively tidy anyway, so most cleaning tasks aren't too arduous, and I keep a few evenings available during the week to hang out with friends, play vidya, or watch movies.
I'm sure all of this will go out the window when we have our first kid in six months or so, but at the moment I'm feeling like my life is pretty balanced, all things considered.
It never fails that once I finally start feeling like I've gotten control over my life, the universe finds a way to throw me a curve that starts me over at the beginning again.
I suppose that's what keeps life interesting and keeps me growing as a person.
I like cooking a hands-off kind of dinner that takes a while, so I have time to clean or whatever while I wait. If I have to schedule appointments, that happens while I'm on the clock. I wish exercise wasn't such a focused task. Feels like forever just doing one tedious thing.
Exercise should happen during commute, social time, any time you're sitting and not doing anything important, a real job that requires you actually do things.
Social also overlaps nicely with food.
This entry was edited (Wednesday, October 29, 2025, 7:58 PM)
Because it was taken from us. We used to divide labor, taking care of the home was considered a full time job for 1 adult.
Now here we are. Where it now takes 2 incomes, or frankly more, to raise a family and have a home. Now you have no time to do anything and purchase more expensive convince items to try to claw back time.
1 income should be enough if they want us to start having kids again
Not even just one person. For most of history people mostly didn't live in a household with just 2 adults. That "dream" was an artificial setup as well. Now, if we had more community services, like common kitchens, child care etc, that might even be attainable but I'm not even sure it's preferable.
Wait if I assume you are Americans, do you have limited work hours per day over there?
Yes and no. Depends wildly based on industry, job type, and income level. Generally we stick to a 40-hour a week at your place of work, unless you're a wage earner (which could be much more or less). That said, it doesn't always work that way.
The worst case is a suburban or rural lifestyle that is one hour (or more!) from the office, where logistics (e.g. groceries, auto maintenance, healthcare) and friends are almost as far away from home. That adds up to a ton of time in transit, with a handful of hours to yourself each working day for the rest, if you want to sleep a healthy amount. Then you add kids, daycare, after-school activities, and there's literally no free time left.
Split the house chores between a partner, meme and doom scroll social media while at work, exercise at home or nearby. Don't have the energy to keep in contact with most people all that often though. Get what sleep I can.
Not who you replied to but I never knew that term. I haven't bothered to read up much on ADHD oddly (over the years) but once I realized I had it the medication helped immensely. Mean I did read a bit but that was like 15 years ago and all now.
Least this area helps me understand that much of my usual stuff may be from ADHD and all. Like sometimes I read stuff and go huh I didn't think that may be why. Mean probably not always but still it helps knowing similar people have those issues.
It's impossible because we are social animals. We are evolved to live in tribes and extended families. We are trying to achieve things alone that our ancestors achieved in groups of up to 100 people. Rugged individualism is killing all of us.
I do all those things on my own. I make a list of tasks I need to do every day or so and I cross them off as I complete them. Lift weights 4 times a week. Prepare meals on the off days and eat the leftovers on workout days. Groceries, laundry, clean, on the weekends. When everything's done or I have downtime in between tasks I play video games or whatever sounds fun. Go to bed at 10, read for an hour or so, sleep until 5-7am and do it all again. I talk to my friends on discord and in our group chat throughout the day and every week or two we get together at a bar or someones house. Overall pretty manageable other than when my job stresses me out so bad my mental health goes to shit but that's only a day or two every few weeks.
I cook, my husband cleans. So we both eat. Cooking for everyone else so I do remember to eat too.
I work out because I prioritize it. Same with sleep. Let other things slide if you have to, I promise they won't slide as bad as if you don't work out and sleep.
We have someone come and clean every other week so it doesn't get too far out of control.
And not good at keeping up with people, oh well. I'm not really someone who collects people like that, though I have some friends who do, so got collected, lol. But we have parties once in awhile and catch up at those, or at least hang out.
Apart from what @hayvan@feddit.nl said, it's also important to understand how a human brain works.
Massively oversimplifying, you have a "primate" brain, good at complex and novel things like logic, casuality, motivation etc; and a "reptile" brain, good at just keeping you alive by repeating the same thing over and over. Crucially, the primate brain takes up a lot of energy and other resources when it works, so your reptile brain will shut it down wherever possible. The trick is to use your primate brain to form habits by repetition, which the reptile brain will pick up, because that's literally the only thing it's good at.
To form a (good) habit, you need three things: first, motivation. You need to understand why doing some action is good for you. Second, a trigger - some concrete event that "breaks the flow" of your life, e.g waking up, coming home from work, or just a loud alarm you set on your phone; this is needed for your reptile brain to wake up your primate brain so that it could use the motivation you have to force your body
... Show more...
Apart from what @hayvan@feddit.nl said, it's also important to understand how a human brain works.
Massively oversimplifying, you have a "primate" brain, good at complex and novel things like logic, casuality, motivation etc; and a "reptile" brain, good at just keeping you alive by repeating the same thing over and over. Crucially, the primate brain takes up a lot of energy and other resources when it works, so your reptile brain will shut it down wherever possible. The trick is to use your primate brain to form habits by repetition, which the reptile brain will pick up, because that's literally the only thing it's good at.
To form a (good) habit, you need three things: first, motivation. You need to understand why doing some action is good for you. Second, a trigger - some concrete event that "breaks the flow" of your life, e.g waking up, coming home from work, or just a loud alarm you set on your phone; this is needed for your reptile brain to wake up your primate brain so that it could use the motivation you have to force your body to do something. Third (and this is the hard part) repetition. If you force yourself to do the action every time a trigger occurs, your reptile brain will eventually start catching on. Remember, it is wired to simply repeat what you have been doing before, because you've survived up until now so it must be a good thing to do. This can take different amounts of repititions depending on various facrors, somewhere between dozens and hundreds. After that, you will start doing the action almost automatically when the trigger happens.
E.g. I exercise when I take a break from work in the middle of the day. To do that, I forced myself to do exercise whenever I took a break for like a month. Now I get this natural urge to do push-ups when I stand up from my table 😀
Dietary strategies play a crucial role in the prevention of kidney stones. While milk is known for its rich nutritional content, its impact on kidney stone formation remains unclear. This study aimed to examine the relationship between milk ...
The countries that practice human slavery (including child slaves) are easy enough to avoid if you know how, but their products are in every cheap chocolate treat in every North American grocery store. One has to take care.
I'm not aware of the slavery in coffee production. I don't consume it but I'd be interested in learning more to pass along.
But what is the relevance of these things? Not sure why you're whatabouting atrocity but I hope you are as diligent about avoiding the abuse of vulnerable individuals as you would like me to be.
Not exactly sure what you're trying to get at. Something about abortion?
What you've been kept from understanding all your life is that all milk comes from a mother. To milk a cow, first you have to get her pregnant. She'll provide milk for about a year, and you have to get her pregnant again. A dairy produces hundreds or thousands of calves a year that they have no use for. They go often into veal because a farmer would get a better return from a breed specialized for producing meat rather than milk. So an inevitable side effect of buying milk at the supermarket is murdering a bunch of babies.
I would waterboard myself with a tall cold frothy glass of whole chocolate milk. I'm a dirty little milk slut. I think I was essentially stockholmed into it. I remember being like "ew fat bad" as a kid and drinking skim for cereal. But somewhere down the line that turned into me just slopping heavy whipping cream neat. I mean fuck me I'm drinking a chocolate milk on my walk to work right fucking now.
This entry was edited (Thursday, October 30, 2025, 12:08 PM)
This is true, but drinking two liters of milk is a lot less dangerous than drinking two liters of water, because that much water at once will throw your electrolyte balance off, and that's what can kill you. Milk has electrolytes in it so the effect isn't necessarily as dire. But... still wouldn't recommend it.
Fuck I did once drink 3L of water in the span of 20 minutes just to see how much I could drink. After about 2.5L you can barely even drink at all. Not to mention how hard you have to go piss
Water also has electrolytes in it, unless you are drinking RO or distilled water (which is perfectly safe by the way, the urban myth that drinking distilled water will kill you is incorrect)
Dude when I'm running a race I have to walk while drinking the tiny little paper cup of water they give you enroute because the physical activity combined with drinking something makes my stomach churn (nerves might also be playing a factor since I'm still at the stage where every race I'm excited but also too nervous to eat and struggle to get enough calories in before the race)
I once drank so much milk I did puke. 10/10 experience tbh, cause like, I love milk. But also that was a good solid push during the purge phase of that.
Once I learned fat is good, I started laying heavy layers of butter, lots of cheese, drinking whole milk, etc. And it tastes good, because we've evolved to like what's good for us.
Lots of tasty berries will kill you. So will tons of would-be herbs. Processed sugar is delicious. So are a lot of foods with trans fats. Cyanide apparently tastes like almonds. And kids ate lead paint chips because they were sweet.
In certain cases, sure. But for the most part, if it tastes good and can be found in nature ready to eat, it's usually good for you. But yes yes yes, certain conditions apply, etc etc yadda yadda.
This entry was edited (Friday, October 31, 2025, 12:04 AM)
There’s nothing inherently wrong with it as a food, like most other foods, but it’s not a health panacea as it was portrayed in milk advertising previously. Its main drawback for public health is that it is fairly calorically dense, so while it may be better for you than soda, for those looking to lose weight, milk should not be your primary beverage.
Also: the dairy industry is questionable at best, from an animal treatment standpoint, as well as environmental.
This entry was edited (Thursday, October 30, 2025, 2:28 PM)
But you do guess, because it's a cow. You don't know you aren't a cow (I guess?). 60 years ago they thought that babies did not feel pain. I suppose we can always rely on our intuition to tell us what's true or not. Some people still think animals don't feel pain, or have feelings at all. Anybody who has spent time with one of them will know that's bs. Why couldn't cows have a concept similar to what we consider property? Just because they are "inferior" to you.
This entry was edited (Saturday, November 1, 2025, 11:59 AM)
My family took care of a small herd of dairy goats when I was growing up. They could definitely make their displeasure known if you tried to make them do something they didn't want to (especially when they were very nearly your own weight). Milking time? Most days they were perfectly happy to jump up on the stand for us to relieve their udders for them, sometimes even before we'd gotten everything set up.
I am careful where I get my milk from because the big dairy institutions are rather problematic. And I agree that the broad disempowerment and incarceration inherent in farming is an issue on its own. But saying that milk is always, unequivocally, unwanted theft (and respectively that farms provide an unqualified worse life) is just the other side of the same human-exceptionalism coin -- you're removing their agency to say "yes".
Ah, good to know you have a argument ready to allow you to move the goalposts, and that you won't accept any solutions for achieving utopia that don't come out of the gate already perfect.
To be equally blunt, my response wasn't "all eight billion people should drink small-farm milk", it was "you're being anthropocentric in a very similar vein to saying all other animals are automata." If you really do think humans are the only species which can have and express desires and dislikes, then enjoy your biological essentialism.
So you're one of those people who think it's impossible to have sex when you don't share a language, then? Consent is a very good model to live by. Blind devotion to the form of consent while ignoring the actual purpose behind it (i.e. to simply make sure nobody regrets what's happening, in the moment or later) twists it into something it was never meant to be.
And I wasn't talking about sex. I was talking about two species learning to read each other's body language, and to communicate despite the barrier. A goat freely jumping onto the platform where she knows she'll be milked, without any fear of punishment if she doesn't, is her agreeing to be milked. It might not meet some mythologized standard of "consent" where all parties involved practically have to sign a contract saying they know every minute detail of what might happen, and the exact likelihood of all potential future consequences years down the line, but that's not what consent was designed to solve.
The tea model is consent. The tea model can be fulfilled without relying on any specif
... Show more...
So you're one of those people who think it's impossible to have sex when you don't share a language, then? Consent is a very good model to live by. Blind devotion to the form of consent while ignoring the actual purpose behind it (i.e. to simply make sure nobody regrets what's happening, in the moment or later) twists it into something it was never meant to be.
And I wasn't talking about sex. I was talking about two species learning to read each other's body language, and to communicate despite the barrier. A goat freely jumping onto the platform where she knows she'll be milked, without any fear of punishment if she doesn't, is her agreeing to be milked. It might not meet some mythologized standard of "consent" where all parties involved practically have to sign a contract saying they know every minute detail of what might happen, and the exact likelihood of all potential future consequences years down the line, but that's not what consent was designed to solve.
The tea model is consent. The tea model can be fulfilled without relying on any specific wording, or even words at all. Anything more complex than the tea model is either meant for risky kink (note: milking a goat is not risky kink) or is over-ritualizing the process for purity points.
Obviously language can be translated, even someone who can't speak can use sign or give written consent. I suppose language itself isn't even necessary, we evolved with the same social instincts that let us understand human body language and tone of voice and facial expression, we can figure out how to communicate across the barriers between us.
That's why the only milk you should be drinking should come from a human who can meaningfully consent.
Goats can not meaningfully consent. I don't care someone trained a goat to jump on a platform and accept milking, it absolutely wasn't the goat's idea. They had to learn to do this from the human that exploits them, and they think it's normal because it's the way things have always been. A wild goat would never let you touch her.
Besides, it's not necessary anyway. No one needs to do this anymore. Just stop.
This entry was edited (Saturday, November 1, 2025, 2:36 PM)
Yep, the "meaningful consent" bit is what I'm talking about as being pat-yourself-on-the-back overkill. It's intellectualism trying to future-proof feelings, because people can't get their heads around the fact that feelings changing in the future doesn't affect the validity of their form in the past. And, again, it has nothing to do with goats.
And I do think I'll be done with this thread soon. You're a human supremicist, and don't seem to be willing to challenge that. You can look at a dog bouncing and excited to go for a walk but whimpering and lagging behind to go to the vet and say they can't communicate, they can't have input into decisions. You think that any reaction a non-human expresses is just training and mental automation rules, because they certainly can't come up with emotions and opinions themself. (Except when their reactions support your thesis of the moment, when you'll temporarily forget all that to point gleefully at the same communication you dismiss otherwise to crow "See? They are so much happier in the forest glade than the cage!")
This was the
... Show more...
Yep, the "meaningful consent" bit is what I'm talking about as being pat-yourself-on-the-back overkill. It's intellectualism trying to future-proof feelings, because people can't get their heads around the fact that feelings changing in the future doesn't affect the validity of their form in the past. And, again, it has nothing to do with goats.
And I do think I'll be done with this thread soon. You're a human supremicist, and don't seem to be willing to challenge that. You can look at a dog bouncing and excited to go for a walk but whimpering and lagging behind to go to the vet and say they can't communicate, they can't have input into decisions. You think that any reaction a non-human expresses is just training and mental automation rules, because they certainly can't come up with emotions and opinions themself. (Except when their reactions support your thesis of the moment, when you'll temporarily forget all that to point gleefully at the same communication you dismiss otherwise to crow "See? They are so much happier in the forest glade than the cage!")
This was the country; for fun we'd set up hay bales and plank bridges in the side yard, and see if we could communicate with the goats well enough to let them figure out how we were imagining the obstacle course going. Sometimes they were feeling playful or were just in the mood to climb on things, and they'd run the course beside us -- sometimes with the human scrabbling to keep up. Sometimes they rejected the idea entirely, dug their hooves in, and told us in no uncertain terms to go see if anyone else was more willing to put up with our tomfoolery. Sometimes they were disinterested and just wandered off to graze aimlessly.
If any goat actually didn't want to be milked on a given day, there'd be no way we'd get her onto the stand without an outright wrestling match, and no way she'd stay up there through the whole rigamarole. (We wouldn't have bothered trying, just let her go back to the herd.) First-time mothers did have to learn the process, since it involves a number of non-obvious steps and an unfamiliar metalic ringing when the milk hits the bottom of an empty bucket. But you know what they almost universally weren't, even the first few times? Distressed. They didn't have to be "trained to accept milking", they just had to familiarize themselves with the setup surrounding getting milked.
It's your comparison to wild goats which seals the whole thing, though. Wild goats are prey, with limited interaction with humans because their instincts read humans as "predator". These were goats who grew up from birth around humans, who were able to ignore the vague undercurrent of their instincts because they knew better that we were harmless -- and in fact were often beneficial (and gave good shoulder scritches). Of course beings with entirely different life experiences will act differently! But, no, that shared understanding of another species is entirely the evil farmers exploiting the poor innocent goats, corrupting their poor natural instincts, which alone determine the entirety of non-human animals' behavior, and which must be held sacred since those instincts are blessed by evolution and apply equally well to every domestic situation every non-human ever finds itself in. Except when they're human instincts since we are the only species with the capacity for abstract thought and for rising above the mandate of our baser nature.
I'm tired of y'all. You position yourselves as abolitionists, and maybe you are -- but only an abolition of the worst atrocities while enthusiastically perpetuating the idea of "inherent superiority" that underlies it, seeing the ideal goal being one of segregation, patronization, and autocracy.
Well, that's unfortunate. I definitely don't want to be counted among that group.
I still stand by everything I said. Some people taking an idea too far doesn't stop the idea itself having merit in moderation. You and everyone like you are placing yourself on the same pedestal above all other beings that the Abrahamic god placed his creations on. The pedestal is certainly decorated a bit better than when Descartes climbed it centuries ago, but it's still the same pedestal. Y'all will never achieve the egalitarianism you preach until you realize that; you're just fooling yourselves that the pedestal of "moral veganism" is somehow different (reducing animal products is very good for other reasons, yeah, but that's not one of them) -- unless you are explicitly fine with structures of hierarchy.
It's entirely possible to take only excess milk from a cow, especially as she will continue to lactate for as long as you continue to milk her. But I also feel it's important for you to know that in the industrial dairy industry what they do is get her pregnant, take the calf away immediately after birth, and then get her pregnant again soon after.
I'm not sure what you mean. She would be feeding the calf if they didn't take it away from her. I'm not sure what percentage of them are allowed to grow up, given the popularity of veal.
They will continue to produce milk, but in factory farming they're impregnated roughly once a year to keep the amount of milk high and to give it more marketable qualities.
Your sensory pleasure really shouldn't be rated anywhere close to a beings wish to avoid suffering. Not going to respond to anything more you post because your first comment was basic troll bait and this conversation with openers like yours will go nowhere and make me angry.
Uhh, the people saying saturated fats clog arteries are right. Which is why the American Heart Association recommends aiming to keep it under 6% of total calories, as well as seeking to replace saturated fats with sources of unsaturated fats.
You are absolutely on a path to heart attack if you don't reign in those kinds of foods.
I was raised a dairy milk fiend and oat milk is definitely my go to.
My family used to drink two gallons a day, my dad alone would drink one by himself... Yes he does have the diabeetus now if you were wondering how that's going
It's the best pairing for coffee out of all the milk or milk alternatives options in my personal opinion. Regular milk just makes it to... is it dumb to say milky?
I've heard that too about the almond milk. I do bake a decent bit with oat milk and never have issues though (I imagine some items may be pickier than others though. Also not sure if using full fat oatly makes a difference vs 'regular')
Do you put almond milk in your coffee? I once tried that and it tasted like pure cyankali. Oat drink is a bit better, but for my coffee I personally still prefer real milk.
I can remember when I'd come home from high school, if I smelled oatmeal chocolate chip cookies, I'd know my mom would have saved me some of the dough in a Tupperware in the fridge. I'd get it, a spoon, and a half gallon jug of milk and sit down in front of the TV until they were both gone.
I was super active, and really skinny, but it still seems funny to think about now.
My parents rationed the fuck out of our milk because my mom would have Carnation Instant Breakfast (basically chocolate milk possibly with some additives?) every day as her breakfast and they couldn't be arsed to buy an extra half or full gallon of milk per week.
I also grew up hating the carbonation in soda so I'd literally only drink milk or water, which turned out to be very handy in adulthood since soda is so terrible for you (and expensive! Holy crap a single box of cans is like $8 and soda drinkers usually want 2-3 of those a week! Also i just realized that's 48-72 cans of soda a week meaning for two adults probably drink 3-5 cans a day!)
Milk used to make me so sick my little ten year old body projectile vomitted it across the breakfast table and my parents, who'd seen 10¹⁰ milk commercials, were like "maybe you're not drinking enough milk."
The media in this post is not displayed to visitors. To view it, please go to the original post.
my god..... that's ten billion ads.... if each ad lasts 30s, then your parents started watching milk ads 9510 years ago... that puts us roughly..... no wait.. -it can't be..!
Lmao. I was too skeptical to accept this at first, so I double-checked both the math and the date.
Incredibly, everything checks out.
Hm, now I'm imagining OP's parents having lived so long due to being the first vampires. They saw others drinking milk and thought, "Wait, so we're all cool with draining and consuming fluids from others' bodies?"
Drinking another animal’s milk is unusual in nature—most people are lactose intolerant, in fact. So why did humans start doing it some 9,000 years ago?
They make me cringe so hard. When I got my first job interview at McDonalds they came by in red and yellow tabbards to show our family's loyalty to their house.
This entry was edited (Friday, October 31, 2025, 1:15 AM)
The aggression and name calling in that second image reminded me of r/neverbrokeabone. I don't miss much about reddit, but that particular subreddit was pretty damn funny usually.
Someone would post an X-ray of a broken pinky they got in a car crash and everyone would be like "GTFO of here with your little baby bird bones, you calcium-deficient piece of shit!"
when I was a kid, among the things I would never have expected to stumble upon, near the top of the list in fact, there was "calcium supremacism abuse kink"
I did not wake up with any expectations of learning about Calcium Supremacism Abuse Kink this fine hallowed morning, nor any other morning for that matter thank you very much!
It's especially crazy when something like 65% of humanity is lactose intolerant. No we don't need to steal milk from cows to live we are no way close to a parasite species to them.
Your sensory taste pleasure vs a living beings suffering. I know which I value more and apparently which you do. That's not an argument it's like defending rape by saying it brings you pleasure completely irrelevant.
Perhaps the most unpleasant fact to consider about cows’ milk destined for human consumption is that it almost certainly required a heifer’s forced impregnation. Female cows are strapped to a rack (common slang often refers to the device as a “rape rack”) and inseminated with semen stored in a massive syringe. There are 9 million dairy cows in the United States. Nearly every one of them suffers immensely from the results of this experience.
However, I'm also reading artificial insemination for dairy cattle reduces chance of injury from large bulls jumping on smaller heifers & minimizes stress on the heifer's body. The source adds it reduces risk of genital diseases that cause sterility. Can a heifer consent to breeding bull or artificial insemination? In principle, that's possible, but I don't think we can in practice positively know.
It may suffice to treat animals humanely, and I see an argument that artificial insemination is more humane for dairy cattle than insemination by breeding bull. I'm not sure it's in the best interest of heifers to inseminate only by breeding bull if it results in more injuries (and may also amount to rape for all we know).
I only mention this because I have the same rhetorical tendency and people always somehow seem to think I'm equating the two: it's not a statement that milk equals rape. It's highlighting (with a stark example, arguably an unnecessary one) that a person deriving pleasure from an act doesn't make the act immediately good (I dunno, stealing candy from a baby? For a less "vivid" counter example; I admit, I tend to use super obviously morally bad counter examples too, thinking it'll make things more overly clear, and, instead, causing someone to think I think they're the same thing rather than just operating under the same principle, of differing degrees).
(all that said, their argument doesn't hold water, to begin with, as it's not cruel or painful to the cow unless under factory farming and cows have no sense of ownership and don't feel like their property is being "stolen"; a meal isn't a proper meal if dairy isn't involved, as far as I'm concerned)
This entry was edited (Friday, October 31, 2025, 12:42 AM)
I wouldn't even know where to buy milk that doesn't come from factory farming.
I mean, that's fair – I expect a lot of people don't or don't bother to do the research – but that's still, definitionally, a contextual framework and isn't universal. The premise that dairy consumption is universally (in all possible circumstances) evil assumes these arguments always apply; and they don't.
You can get milk from a cow without harming the cow or violently ripping away her calf. Maybe it's difficult, etc. But it's not impossible. So such a universal argument is simply incorrect.
I mean, – if the answer is I can't – we probably shouldn't be framing our arguments universally, then; especially when there are relatively easy counter examples that disapprove the universality.
I would say that moral arguments against killing people aren't universal, because they don't apply in cases of self defense. Does that mean that it's okay to kill people? No. It means that in most cases killing people is wrong.
A cow will continue to produce milk for years after raising a calf so long as someone continues to milk her. The amount and quality of the milk will decrease, but for families in rural areas it's more than adequate and doesn't harm the cow. Symbiotic farming techniques are possible; we just choose not to pursue them.
I know what it was saying: it was just weird & poorly explained.
A good analogy should compare subjects - with similarities relevant to the conclusion - lacking relevant dissimilarities that weaken the conclusion's likelihood
and it should hold up with other subjects featuring the same relevant similarities & lacking the same relevant dissimilarities in satisfying the conclusion.
That milking cows necessarily leads to suffering isn't obvious, needs to be explained. The analogy comparing milking to rape seems to break down for those aware that dairy cows are bred to overproduce milk, so they need milking (or a very hungry calf) to prevent pain & mastitis. Rape seems quite dissimilar in that respect: no amount of it is necessary to ease pain or prevent infection. It's harder to conclude that something thought to be needed qualifies as suffering.
Therefore, a clearer argument (that was provided elsewhere) is needed.
There's also the matter that
... Show more...
I know what it was saying: it was just weird & poorly explained.
A good analogy should compare subjects - with similarities relevant to the conclusion - lacking relevant dissimilarities that weaken the conclusion's likelihood
and it should hold up with other subjects featuring the same relevant similarities & lacking the same relevant dissimilarities in satisfying the conclusion.
That milking cows necessarily leads to suffering isn't obvious, needs to be explained. The analogy comparing milking to rape seems to break down for those aware that dairy cows are bred to overproduce milk, so they need milking (or a very hungry calf) to prevent pain & mastitis. Rape seems quite dissimilar in that respect: no amount of it is necessary to ease pain or prevent infection. It's harder to conclude that something thought to be needed qualifies as suffering.
Therefore, a clearer argument (that was provided elsewhere) is needed.
There's also the matter that the comment they were responding to wasn't arguing about morality, since it wasn't clear the top comment was stating a moral position, either. The top comment merely referred to milk as "crazy" (due to lactose intolerance) & "stealing from cows", which come across as hyperbole for unnecessary when the cows presumably don't care & lack any concept of property rights. That's where unexpected moralization with rape analogy raised the charm of lemmy as
I think that'd make more sense if we're considering the actual, underlying topic under debate but they were responding to gramie's comment which didn't challenge their assertion that the cows were hurt but just went (more or less): "counterpoint: ice cream is yum yum".
In that context, going "sex is pleasurable, too, but rape is still wrong" isn't terribly out of left field, to me.
gramie’s comment which didn’t challenge their assertion that the cows were hurt but just went (more or less)
I edited my earlier comment too late: it wasn't effectively asserted either. :::spoiler late edit
There's also the matter that the comment they were responding to wasn't arguing about morality, since it wasn't clear the top comment was stating a moral position, either. The top comment merely referred to milk as "crazy" (due to lactose intolerance) & "stealing from cows", which come across as hyperbole for unnecessary when the cows presumably don't care & lack any concept of property rights. That's where unexpected moralization with rape analogy raised the charm of lemmy as
There's actually a direct connection between milk production and rape. They have to artificially inseminate the cows to make them pregnant so that they keep producing milk. Cows are unable to consent to this.
You've never had Ben and Jerry's dairy-free ice creams? Or even just blended a lot of frozen fruit, a bit of sweetener, and just enough soy milk to get a treat with a roughly similar consistency? You're missing out.
What's funny is that almost any other kind of milk is considered gross and unfit to drink: dog milk, cat milk, pig milk, horse milk, etc. That's true even for human milk! (Unless, of course, you're a baby.)
The interspecies dance between millennials who read Harry Potter when it was considered subversive and anti-christian, and Gen Zers who call it racist TERF propaganda, is one of my favorite culture schisms.
millennial here. glad to hear the next gen is more literate, i've been putting hp's piss poor quality and shitty ethics on blast since like 2005 and people acted like i was regurgitating rush limbaugh or something because stupid fucking boomers went and made it a tribal thing.
I think that the pearl clutching Christians freaking out over the “Devil magic” had the effect of people just convincing themselves the series as a whole was more progressive than it ever actually was.
That was the sentiment when I read it. Those things were progressive for us, when groups of parents were petitioning to get it taken from the school library — in a white prairie town before everyone had a cell phone, interracial couples were the subject of gossip and it was normal to compare trans people to aspiring attack helicopters.
Believe it or not there was a time when jk Rowling kept her moronic views to herself. Then one day after she'd become a gazillionaire she was like "fuck it im rich now, im gonna pull a elon musk and show the world what I truly believe "
That's a pretty innacurate assessment of Rowling, as much as I dislike her.
There's this whole thing people do whenever we watch someone fall from grace, scrutinizing their past through the bias of the present to find "clues," so we can better avoid people like that in the future.
But JK was and still is fairly progressive. A number of people close to her have said her opinions on trans people were, in part, radicalized as a result the fame that exposed her to vitriolic opposition.
I want to be very clear there is no excuse for what she's done or said about trans people, only that it's innacurate to say her shitty views came in a package deal and have always been the same.
This entry was edited (Saturday, November 1, 2025, 4:16 PM)
Several years ago I became allergic to milk (like actually allergic, not lactose intolerant). I'm doing oral immunotherapy treatments for it now, so I have to drink 20mL of it a day. I used to love milk before I became allergic to it. Now I can't stand it. I'm not sure how I enjoyed it so much.
I used to have to drink a glass of milk with every meal when I was growing up, I didn't even have the option of water, it was milk or nothing. I stopped drinking milk when I moved out. I haven't had a glass of milk in 25 years. I still consume dairy, I just don't drink a glass of straight milk.
I mean, milk is nowhere near the super food they sold us back in the day... but it's far from the toxic sludge people put in their bodies daily nowadays.
Even a coke seems mild compared to the monster drinks and whatever other crap Logan Paul is peddling today
I am doing a lean bulk and it turns out milk is incredibly high protein so now I'm drinking more than I probably did as a kid. Easy way to get the calories and feel full. And chocolate milk... well.
I don't drink much milk nowadays just because I mostly drink water, but when I do have milk on the fridge... it's gone in two days max unless I carefully ration it.
I'm exactly the same, and it was always 2%. I was always a slow eater, I'd always be hoping and waiting for the moment my parents would leave the room for a min so I could run to the sink and pour it down the drain. I asked as an adult if they had ever realized I had been dumping it if they left and somehow they never suspected.
Ngl I had a whole analysis of the scene and the world they were in prepared until I realized I was being autistic and WAYYY too literal. It was like ten paragraphs. I had rewatched and scrubbed through the scene and looked up stuff about France and inventors and royalty...............
I think one big difference is that many people now recognize it as propaganda, whereas I remember a time when that stuff was just taken as wisdom and the dairy industry seemed to be a part of the health industry (that was also assumed to be in it for society's good rather than profit). Losing that trust was pretty big.
Giving up dairy was surprisingly more challenging than giving up animal flesh. I felt subtle withdrawal symptoms for months on a physical level, that was reminiscent of quitting nicotine. But on the plus side my body as a whole felt distinctly better, far less inflamed after quitting all of that and replacing it with foods that are mostly anti-inflammatory (except when I binge on chips or popcorn).
But sometimes I wonder, how much does carrying guilt impact the body?
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
Could you recommend some easy to digest foods, which work well as anti inflammatories? Like, which have you noticed having a great effect compared to some with a low effect?
Having a healthy gut microbiome is itself anti-inflammatory, so you want to feed your little guys lots of prebiotic foods like crucifers, garlic, oats, and more. Some healthy bacteria thrive on the mucus you generate while fasting, a practice which also reduces inflammation.
If you're having problems with your digestive system enough to ask about it, it's possible you have an undiagnosed allergy or sensitivity. Many digestive sensitivities are identifiable only through an elimination diet since they don't provoke an immune response to test the blood for. A food diary is a good place to start, but it can be really difficult to notice patterns. You should definitely work with a doctor if that's a realistic option for you.
One thing to keep in mind is that reducing and removing pro-inflammatory foods is equal, if not more important, because otherwise you are just perpetually trying to heal from the same wounds you keep freshly laying down. When it comes to gastrointestinal problems, things get complicated. I've found three specialists on the subject whose work might help you. One is Dr. Sean Spencer. The other, whose books might be exactly what you're looking for, is Dr. Will Bulsiewicz. And the last is Dr. Alan Desmond.
I'd like to give you a convenient list of foods, but for those of us with these illnesses, each one is a unique quagmire to untangle and I haven't even fully solved my own gut illness yet (though my symptoms are consistently much better than they used to be).
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
Yeah, I remember hearing about it around ten years ago or so. They called it “miracle mineral solution” or something. Had FaceBook groups where they’d post pictures of their kid’s shed intestinal lining and claimed it was the “parasite” that caused Autism. And had posts where they’d give each other tips on how best to lie to the CPS workers when they came knocking.
I’m on the older end of Gen Z and this was definitely a thing when I was little. My parents didn’t buy into the milk thing, but I had a teacher who went wild with it. I forget how exactly it happened, but she found out I had cereal for breakfast without milk poured on because that was how I liked it. She decided this meant my parents were neglecting my needs and that it was her job to “make up” for it during lunch time.
I’d often end up sick trying to get it all down. I’m not lactose intolerant, it was just that the amount she required me to drink (five cartons one after another) was more than I could keep down. (Years later, when The Gallon Challenge became a thing, it brought back the memories, though at least I wasn’t forced to drink quite that much.)
I’d rarely gotten sick before, so once I was being sent home for vomiting frequently, my parents learned what was happening and made it stop.
It only lasted a couple weeks, but I never drank milk again afterwards, so that teacher accomplished the exact oppo
... Show more...
I’m on the older end of Gen Z and this was definitely a thing when I was little. My parents didn’t buy into the milk thing, but I had a teacher who went wild with it. I forget how exactly it happened, but she found out I had cereal for breakfast without milk poured on because that was how I liked it. She decided this meant my parents were neglecting my needs and that it was her job to “make up” for it during lunch time.
I’d often end up sick trying to get it all down. I’m not lactose intolerant, it was just that the amount she required me to drink (five cartons one after another) was more than I could keep down. (Years later, when The Gallon Challenge became a thing, it brought back the memories, though at least I wasn’t forced to drink quite that much.)
I’d rarely gotten sick before, so once I was being sent home for vomiting frequently, my parents learned what was happening and made it stop.
It only lasted a couple weeks, but I never drank milk again afterwards, so that teacher accomplished the exact opposite of what she wanted.
She might have been, since I grew up in the US south and so the area was predominantly Christian, but I don’t know (or just can’t remember) if she was. It wasn’t a religious school, though.
In fairness, China's southern and western provinces have historically been on the shorter side. But also, like.... Yao Ming.
90% of the population is lactose intolerant
You can improve lactose tolerance if you introduce milk to kids at an early age and drink it continuously. My 50s-era Jewish family are all horribly lactose intolerant, but I grew up chugging the stuff and do just fine with it. Plenty of ABCs can and do drink milk and eat dairy, just as a matter of living in a country so full of cows and cow-products.
What happens in another 20-40 years, as we obliterate our grazing lands and drive the cost cow products skyward? Idk, man. But milk is a consumer staple for a reason. Calorically dense. Very useful in cooking/baking. Relatively cheap to produce and distribute. Goes well over cereal.
If milk did not exist, we would have to invent it.
Ever thought about the environmental cost of your diet? Here, we discuss the worst foods for the environment, how they contribute to various ecological issues, and the alternatives that could help in reducing these impacts.
Milk is a highly effective method of fattening kids up who are malnourished or otherwise underfed. Whole milk is the go-to for toddlers coming off breastmilk/formula for a reason.
Dairy is literally the least sustainable and least efficient form of food production next to meat and palm oil.
Natural gas is a leading contributor to climate change. It is also the cheapest (for the moment) form of energy per kWh.
"Sustainability" is not the same thing as "Cheap" or "Easy to Distribute". Quite the opposite.
Now, a lot of our cheap milk is a byproduct of our intensive animal agriculture, which is highly profitable but dismally inefficient. If that changes (because we killed a big chunk of our cow herds by mismanaging grazing land and water rights and fucking up disease mitigation) then I can see a world in which cow-milk drops off the menu quickly.
We invented alternatives, definitely. But there are still plenty of trade-offs. Much lower in calories and saturated fats, for instance.
If you're trying to fatten up a skinny little baby (as I'm currently working on, having placed with a toddler a few months back) the pediatrician is going to stare daggers at you if you say you've been giving the kid oat milk rather than whole milk. Literally had this conversation already and got hit in the head with a stack of literature just for asking.
The media in this post is not displayed to visitors. To view it, please go to the original post.
From a general population health perspective, the pyramid was a pretty good system. It was basically an attempt to simplify the Mediterranean pattern. I like the Power Plate better though.
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
That's more or less how it should be, but with whole grains instead of the ultra-processed stuff. Your diet should be something like:
50-60% carbs (ideally complex carbs), with lots of fiber
20-30% protein
20-25% fat
Each group has sub-categories, but generally speaking, you should bulk up on grains (rice, whole wheat, corn, etc), get lots of great fruits and veggies, enough protein, and fill in the rest as you like.
Ironic, I feel exactly the same way as one of the other commenters further up the thread, but about rice milk, because my parents forced me to drink it with dinner.
This entry was edited (Saturday, November 1, 2025, 4:45 AM)
I hate milk so much. The taste, the texture. Just the thought of drinking a glass of milk again makes me want to projectile vomit. I had to drink a glass of milk for dinner every night as a kid. I wasn't allowed to leave the table until it was gone. Sometimes I'd sit there for an hour just trying to force myself to drink it. My parents were like, just drink the milk, it's not so bad, get it over with, but it felt like being tortured every night. I was violently ill afterwards almost every time.
Turns out I'm both lactose intolerant and neurodivergent. Yes I was being a little drama queen, but I at least had reasons 😀
Who knew? One-size fits all health guidance doesn't actually work!
Supporting you, not trying to diminish your experience.
I was made to spell 'pepsi' before getting caffeinated sugar syrup at dinner. Looking back, that seems like poor decision making on my parents' part, but I can see the good intended behind the act. Hopefully we learn from those that came before... and make new and exciting mistakes!
Weird. I loved milk as a kid and still do. We were never forced to drink it, but we were encouraged a bit. One of my favorite snacks was banana chocolate milk, and I still enjoy a bowl of cold cereal.
The only thing I was forced to eat as a kid was veggies.
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
I've been super slow about posting photos I've been wanting to share. These two are the winner of the Dachshund Halloween costume contest at Oktoberfest. Two weeks ago. Lol
I can finally say that I've tried the Triple Dipper at Chili's. I wasn't a fan of the mozzarella, but that's only because of the honey-chipotle topping. The southwest egg rolls are the best part of the whole meal, for sure.
I've come to realize in recent years that I am desensitized to horror movies. And although I did enjoy watching horror movies growing up, I haven't really watched many throughout my years as an adult so far. Either I'm desensitized or newer horror movies suck now.
I've been feeling awful with sinus and fatigue issues, and with a lot of back pain for some reason. Thankfully, the back pain has decided to settle down. Still figuring out everything else. I wonder if my body is trying ro fight a sinus infection, but yet I am not really having any symptoms of it besides sinus pain. I don't know.
![AOCapitulator [they/them, she/her]](photo/contact/80/1237351?ts=1752228025)
jordanlund
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •Multiple similar stories:
youtube.com/shorts/iork5qOyCNs
mishpacha.com/octopus-escapade…
My favorite is one who would squirt water at lights to turn them off.
bbc.com/news/newsbeat-36051623
My octopus crawls out of the tank to get a snack
JBToday (YouTube)like this
Björn likes this.
chickenf622
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •baguettefish
in reply to chickenf622 • • •Mouselemming
in reply to baguettefish • • •like this
olorin99 likes this.
LadyButterfly she/her
in reply to Mouselemming • • •snoons
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •Douglas Adams, The Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy
TheWolfOfSouthEnd
in reply to Mouselemming • • •scratchee
in reply to baguettefish • • •They ruled the planet for 150 million years and didn’t ruin the environment once ? What are they even doing?
We’re clearly superior, who else could speed run the mass extinction end game?
RobotToaster
in reply to scratchee • • •That's what Cthulhu wants you to think.
HaraldvonBlauzahn
in reply to scratchee • • •They survived the K-T extiction event or K-Pg event which killed perhaps 75% of species in earth 66 million years ago.
While we are already causing an extinction event which will probably turn out far worse, by causing temperatures to rise to a level higher than in hundreds of millions of years - far outside the range modern life has adapted to. And I am not so sure that we ourselves can survive that in the long run. Humans are incredibly adaptable, that's right. But our food sources are not, not even things like grasses, wheat, or trees, let alone mammals, the great mayority of them (except perhaps algae and mushrooms) are far younger in an evolutionary sense, so it is unlikely they can adapt.
Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event - Wikipedia
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)baguettefish
in reply to HaraldvonBlauzahn • • •adhd_traco
in reply to baguettefish • • •sudoshakes
in reply to chickenf622 • • •Octopi if the base word was Latin. It’s Greek, so octopodes for plural. Technically.
Because English is a bastard if a language octopuses and octopi are fine too.
grue
in reply to sudoshakes • • •ryedaft
in reply to sudoshakes • • •MagicShel
in reply to sudoshakes • • •Octopodes?
Ahk-top-o-deez nutz.
English can always make things worse.
Gandalf the Gorsed
in reply to sudoshakes • • •Sphks
in reply to chickenf622 • • •Bronzebeard
in reply to Sphks • • •Natanox
in reply to Bronzebeard • • •Kornblumenratte
in reply to Natanox • • •accideath
in reply to Bronzebeard • • •NaibofTabr
in reply to chickenf622 • • •This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •Akasazh
in reply to This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥 • • •grue
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •Fleur_
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •Tolookah
in reply to Fleur_ • • •They probably have several checkpoints to scan every hour or half hour, I've seen places with RFID checkpoints that security has to tap on a regular basis. The idea is that security has to not spend the whole night at the desk.
Now they are likely looking for people breaking in, not a small octopus breaking out, so it might not get noticed.
CileTheSane
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •like this
Björn likes this.
That Weird Vegan
in reply to CileTheSane • • •Agent641
in reply to CileTheSane • • •SatansMaggotyCumFart
in reply to Agent641 • • •[deleted]
in reply to SatansMaggotyCumFart • • •SatansMaggotyCumFart
in reply to [deleted] • • •AsoFiafia
in reply to SatansMaggotyCumFart • • •ThatGuy46475
in reply to Agent641 • • •[deleted]
in reply to CileTheSane • • •Every animal can react to their environment, including avoiding predators. Not all of them do it perfectly, but it is a basic survival skill for mobile life forms.
In the wild an octopus often hides in a tight space to protect itself and wanders out to feed, then returns to their safe location afterwards. They avoid predators while doing so. Lots of animals will be less active when predators are out and about, or will be active during times where it is more difficult for the predators to hunt.
Yes, an octopus is a very clever animal but really we should stop killing them because we are absolutely crushing their populations.
CileTheSane
in reply to [deleted] • • •The stories I here about Octopi make them sound more like an intelligent creature we don't understand rather than "lots of creatures escape their cages to go hunting and then return before anyone notices. This is natural behavior for an animal."
Yes, the mind of an octopus is unknowable, and it could be just acting on instinct. It could also have some measure of sentience, and there is no way to really know. As such maybe we should err on the side of caution and not keep them in little pens for us to gawk at.
ameancow
in reply to CileTheSane • • •I do agree we need to respect them a lot more and make a much stronger public message that they're not food and certainly shouldn't be tortured and treated as inhumanely as we routinely do.
As someone who studied a lot of neurology, I could make a very strong argument that much of our behavior, no matter how well-reasoned we think it is, no matter how complex it is, is actually also just a very sophisticated system for facilitating our instinctual needs. The brain has a very real tendency to post-hoc justify our decisions and actions so much that we never notice it, but if you start to explore it, you will realize really quick that a lot of what we do and think we're choosing to do, are just products of very basic wants.
This isn't to diminish either them nor us, only to say that whatever is going inside that incredibly ancient brain of theirs, it's still a lot like us and needs to be respected as such.
SpaceCowboy
in reply to [deleted] • • •It could also hide from predators in an aquarium where it will be brought food every day and get medicine from a veterinarian if it gets sick. An Aquarium is the safest place for the octopus to live, so why wouldn't it's survival instinct tell it to live there to hide from predators?
We should set up an experiment with an aquarium that allows the octopus access to the ocean. Do you really think the Octopus would run away from the aquarium where it's safe from predators and gets fed every day?
FatVegan
in reply to CileTheSane • • •CileTheSane
in reply to FatVegan • • •SpaceCowboy
in reply to CileTheSane • • •The octopus went back to it's tank after getting a snack. That's at least some indication the octopus likes living there.
You are assuming the octopus prefers living out in the wild where it could be eaten alive. Who are you to assume what an animal wants?
Are you currently living in some kind rectangular structure where you have easy access to regular meals? Why are you living in this way and assuming an octopus wouldn't also prefer this? There's nothing preventing you from leaving the rectangular structure you're currently living in and going out into the wilds and fending for yourself to survive. Why don't you do the thing you're assuming the octopus wants to do?
thejoker954
in reply to SpaceCowboy • • •flambonkscious
in reply to SpaceCowboy • • •Or it was too much of a gamble raw-dogging it in the outside.
All it did was take the 'bait' it was aware of and sneak back undetected. For all we know it might have been exploring, but in a hostile environment you wouldn't venture far...
SpaceCowboy
in reply to flambonkscious • • •Yes and for all we know the octopus prefers to live in a place safe from predators, always has lots of food, and a veterinarian on call when it gets sick.
It's strange to me that people anthropomorphize animals to make big claims about the animal wanting to live in the wild. If you release that animal into the wild it will likely be eaten or starve but everyone assumes the animal wants that based on absolutely nothing.
Why not anthropomorphize animals under the assumption they would want a life similar to what we've built for ourselves? Is the validity of the complete guesses about what an animal wants gain merit based on how holier than thou the people making the guesses are acting about it?
Bottom line, the octopus is safer living in an aquarium with ample food than living in an environment amongst predators where food is scarce. All animals have a strong survival instinct (they'd be extinct if they didn't) so it's more likely if an animal could communicate it's preferences, it would choose the option where it's most likely to survive for a very long time, so i
... Show more...Yes and for all we know the octopus prefers to live in a place safe from predators, always has lots of food, and a veterinarian on call when it gets sick.
It's strange to me that people anthropomorphize animals to make big claims about the animal wanting to live in the wild. If you release that animal into the wild it will likely be eaten or starve but everyone assumes the animal wants that based on absolutely nothing.
Why not anthropomorphize animals under the assumption they would want a life similar to what we've built for ourselves? Is the validity of the complete guesses about what an animal wants gain merit based on how holier than thou the people making the guesses are acting about it?
Bottom line, the octopus is safer living in an aquarium with ample food than living in an environment amongst predators where food is scarce. All animals have a strong survival instinct (they'd be extinct if they didn't) so it's more likely if an animal could communicate it's preferences, it would choose the option where it's most likely to survive for a very long time, so it would choose living in an aquarium.
If a I scream "RELEASING ANIMALS INTO THE WILD IS MURDER!!!!!!" over and over again, does that make it a more compelling argument?
flambonkscious
in reply to SpaceCowboy • • •Yes, but it's even more simplistic (I agree with wider principle you're using).- The octopus is going to have a much harder time finding a safe environment.
Unless it stays in the fish aquarium - I wonder why it didn't just stay where the tasty snacks were? (Not wanting to project a humanised, moralistic perspective on its delightfully naughty behaviour...).
Maybe there was nothing good to hide under, perhaps?
CileTheSane
in reply to SpaceCowboy • • •What I said was : they should not be kept in captivity for our amusement.
Where's the big claim?
jordanlund
in reply to flambonkscious • • •I heard a story about an octopus escaping into a library and was found fumbling through the books.
I can only imagine if it comprehended what it was looking at... "Oh, crap, THAT'S what they use ink for!"
CileTheSane
in reply to SpaceCowboy • • •I am quite literally not doing that. I am saying "we don't know so we shouldn't imprison it for our amusement" which does not strike me as a very extreme statement.
ameancow
in reply to CileTheSane • • •And especially should not be farmed or eaten alive for clicks on youtube. We have made significant progress as a society reducing the barbaric practice of eating shark-fin soup and other exotic animal products, and made great strides in ending torturing sea mammals in amusement parks. We have to add octopus to this list of things we now know better about.
Octopus have feelings and are higher animals with unique personalities and ways of experiencing the world. They are curious, they are intelligent, they dream and seem to show emotions in a variety of ways.
And our last common ancestor didn't even have a backbone. This fact alone should amaze us and give us hope for the greater universe - that we can share so much with something so very distant from us gives hope that if we ever do contact aliens, we might share more than we think.
jordanlund
in reply to CileTheSane • • •And they do all that with a CRIMINALLY short lifespan. 😟
octonation.com/octopus-lifespa…
"For example, the Common Octopus, Mimic Octopus, and Blue-Ringed Octopus live for around 12 – 18 months whereas the Giant Pacific Octopus can have a lifespan of 3-5 years!"
How Long Do Octopus Live? Life Expectancy, Mating, and Deep-Sea Survivors
Corinne Klein (OctoNation - The Largest Octopus Fan Club!)PieMePlenty
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •Agent641
in reply to PieMePlenty • • •Can confirm, have been a guard.
'Rounds' were check boxes on a piece of paper. TF do I care whether doors are secure, it's not my department store.
corsicanguppy
in reply to Agent641 • • •Velypso
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •🦄🦄🦄
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •BogeyTheSwear
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •If i was a multi Billionaire i would dedicate my vast wealth to building an Institute that breeds only the most intelligent octopi with each other.
They don't live so long, so generations go by fast. I bet we could speedrun evolution if we just put our money where our tentacles are.
Agent641
in reply to BogeyTheSwear • • •Silic0n_Alph4
in reply to Agent641 • • •Perhaps, but one must consider BogeyTheSwear’s Cephalopod:
IronBird
in reply to Silic0n_Alph4 • • •Silic0n_Alph4
in reply to IronBird • • •Ahahaha c’mon, what would the odds of that be..?
Anyway, I hope you’re ready to fund the Cephalopod Enrichment Programme because no other choice is permissible.
dustycups
in reply to Silic0n_Alph4 • • •Edit: Stupid Jerboa, I thought it failed the first time.
MonkderVierte
in reply to BogeyTheSwear • • •BogeyTheSwear
in reply to MonkderVierte • • •I_am_10_squirrels
in reply to MonkderVierte • • •Corkyskog
in reply to BogeyTheSwear • • •JasonDJ
in reply to BogeyTheSwear • • •Found the cephalopod.
CheeseNoodle
in reply to BogeyTheSwear • • •Sculptor9157
in reply to BogeyTheSwear • • •Hupf
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •Even if the dictionaries are starting to give in, I refuse to accept 'octopi' as a word mainly because--I'm not making this up--there's a really satisfying climactic scene in the Orson Scott Card horror novel 'Lost Boys' which hinges on it being an incorrect pluralization.
Mimic Octopus
xkcdHugeNerd
in reply to Hupf • • •selokichtli
in reply to HugeNerd • • •vonxylofon
in reply to Hupf • • •Drewfro66
in reply to vonxylofon • • •Zerush
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •Seems so
nhm.ac.uk/discover/octopuses-k…
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/…
bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/…
BBC Radio 4 - Other Minds: The Octopus And The Evolution Of Intelligent Life by Peter Godfrey-Smith - 10 incredible facts about Octopuses
BBCgandalf_der_12te
in reply to Zerush • • •crazy!
Zerush
in reply to gandalf_der_12te • • •Saryn
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •Captain Aggravated
in reply to Saryn • • •SaharaMaleikuhm
in reply to Saryn • • •Warl0k3
in reply to SaharaMaleikuhm • • •The only actual requirement is to be 35, which...
... ew.
ironhydroxide
in reply to Warl0k3 • • •humanspiral
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •monkeyslikebananas2
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •I’m not scared
Definitely not scared… 😳
SkaveRat
in reply to monkeyslikebananas2 • • •TargaryenTKE
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •I taught an octopus piano (It took 6 months)
Mattias Krantz (YouTube)explodicle
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •LadyButterfly she/her
in reply to explodicle • • •Bennyboybumberchums
in reply to explodicle • • •youtube.com/shorts/c98qnyLLTPg
Apologies for the ear bleeding voice over. But it is a cool video showing an octopus opening a jar.
Octopus IQ Test |🤯🤯| #shorts
Mr. Aju Campus (YouTube)Jankatarch
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •thespcicifcocean
in reply to Jankatarch • • •ADTJ
in reply to thespcicifcocean • • •Did you know that octopi has long been included in many dictionaries also?
Language is only half etymology and half vibes
sik0fewl
in reply to ADTJ • • •senseamidmadness
in reply to sik0fewl • • •Honytawk
in reply to sik0fewl • • •sik0fewl
in reply to Honytawk • • •rockerface🇺🇦
in reply to ADTJ • • •MinnesotaGoddam
in reply to thespcicifcocean • • •jordanlund
in reply to MinnesotaGoddam • • •Bysmuth
in reply to thespcicifcocean • • •After a little research it seems that "octopi" and "octopuses" have been so widely used and for so long, that dictionaries include all of them as correct. An article from merriam webster even pragmatically suggests referring to them as "octopodes" is less likely to be understood so stick with "octopi" or "octopuses". Also, it seems "octopodes" is the more widely accepted "correct" plural and "octopoda" refers to the genus.
But it's an interesting topic, i wish to subscribe to octopus etymology facts(or any interesting reads)
mindbleach
in reply to thespcicifcocean • • •Iunnrais
in reply to thespcicifcocean • • •badelf
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •LadyButterfly she/her
in reply to badelf • • •I_am_10_squirrels
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •senseamidmadness
in reply to I_am_10_squirrels • • •jabjoe
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •fakeplastic
in reply to jabjoe • • •SkaveRat
in reply to fakeplastic • • •thejoker954
in reply to SkaveRat • • •Same, although I think the 1st book would have been better if it didn't focus so much on the humans for at least the first half of the book.
Like I think it would have had more impact if we were guessing what was happening off planet instead of 'seeing' it.
Tom Arrr
in reply to thejoker954 • • •Loved all three though regardless.
jabjoe
in reply to fakeplastic • • •InvalidName2
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •Rekorse
in reply to InvalidName2 • • •jordanlund
in reply to InvalidName2 • • •heyWhatsay
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •I_am_10_squirrels
in reply to heyWhatsay • • •YiddishMcSquidish
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •Zerush
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •MinnesotaGoddam
in reply to Zerush • • •jordanlund
in reply to Zerush • • •Zerush
in reply to jordanlund • • •Not the biggest, they can be way bigger, but different as squids, they are not agressive against humans, showing mostly reactions of curiosity, humans are not part of their prey.
Bysmuth
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •mindbleach
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •Etlaris
in reply to LadyButterfly she/her • • •