idiomaddict

Bodily curiosity is good and penises are funny

Is that true regardless of her VP?

Trump proved that lip service is the only requirement

Sadly on brand.

As an example of the opposite, I recently got into a YouTube channel that does very involved videos about appliances (technology connections). It’s absolutely my bag, and I suspect that the audience is more neurodiverse than average.

I was super excited to see a video about fire alarms, but nearly didn’t watch it at all, because I did not want to hear one. I put it on mute with subtitles and the first thing the creator said was, “just so you know, I won’t be setting off any alarm sounds.” 🥰

It’s cheaper

They’re actually way more convenient than that! You have a strap on the inside of the window that you can use to raise or lower the shutters as much as you like. When it’s fully closed, the light is blocked out nearly completely though.

If I’m interpreting the other poster correctly, they might be referring to what’s known as Roll-Laden in German, and they’re outside the glass.

I live in a garden level apartment (I think, it’s mostly underground with one exterior wall above ground for windows, set into a hill) and it’s extremely energy efficient. We do have to use dehydrators, but that can be done in very energy-efficient ways.

The apartments above us are significantly less energy efficient, so the big drawback I see is around housing density, which is probably a bigger issue than heating/cooling energy, but I don’t actually know.

Just look at what happened to the European royal families …

Yeah, I was interpreting it under the lens of current legal application, not reality. In reality, it’s a group of people who want to violently oppress their fellow citizens through any means possible.

No matter who's president? Because fighting off rebellions was a big part of what those militias were used for.

Ostensibly. They’re obviously lying, but that’s what they say.

It's WELL-regulated, not "barely regulated at all with little to no enforcement to speak of"

It’s my understanding that the extant gun laws are legally considered to fulfill this requirement, otherwise private gun ownership wouldn’t be possible. Personally I disagree, but I’m not sure what standard would otherwise be used.

I do hope you’re correct, but I don’t trust the US government to adhere to common sense anymore. I guess we’ll see what the court says, because someone’s going to challenge this.

Or maybe he’ll get voted out in November and this will be disbanded before anything happens with it. I think that’s probably the best option, because then it doesn’t get a chance to be approved by this SCOTUS and nobody has to have their civil rights violated by this group.

Neoliberal hubris