I generally agree with the article, but think you have a point when you say that it's hard to argue for self defense for a premeditated action. However, I don't think that the author was trying to make the point that self defense law was failing women, but more trying to illustrate that "self defense" as a legal concept is a bit flawed.

Unfortunately, DV laws in the US kind of suck and that doesn't seem to be changing anytime soon. I read an article not too long ago about how even when women try to use DV resources and go to the police, they can often face legal repercussions for failing to protect their children from the abuse. All around horrific situation that I wouldn't wish on anyone

Yeah the way the author points out the connection between their destruction myth and the realities of what's going to happen to their culture was really poignant

I'm obviously not an expert but I thought prion diseases took a long time to develop. Maybe prion diseases just aren't a concern cos their lifespans are already so short to begin with. I'd think bloodborne diseases would probably be more of a concern

The most interesting thing in the article to me was the dress code. Sources interviewed for the story say there's a culture of preventing women from "tempting" men, but at the same time women are banned from wearing pants or tights (they have to wear pantyhose instead). Like it's the women's fault they're getting ogled but God forbid they cover their legs cos that's too manly or something

I could see someone saying "well I don't really agree with Trump's extremism but at least Trump supporters haven't tried to kill Biden so maybe the left is the problem". It's not as easy to wave his fearmongering ravings about the left off as conspiracy theories--someone on the left (I assume) actually tried to kill him. He's a martyr now.

I really truly want to hope that you're right but damn if this doesn't make me super pessimistic about Biden's already shaky support.

TL;DR: swear words like "shit" usually emphasize the mood of a sentence rather than add new meaning, which is why "shit" seems to change connotation across your examples. Think like the word "very".

Traditionally in most European languages, the cycle of what is considered most offensive shifts between bodily functions (shit, piss), genitalia and sexual acts (cunt, cock, fuck) and religious profanity (hell, bloody), particularly against the Christian God. Some scholars define us as moving into a new cycle, where the most offensive words are slurs based on race, sexuality, or gender. These scholars speculate that this results in more willingness to experiment with already existing swear words of the 'traditional' categories since they are considered less offensive in comparison.

Swear words are almost always used euphemistically and in set phrases. Some scholars go as far as to argue that swearing is only euphemistic and words used literally do not count as "swearing". In fact, much of swear word usage can be classified as an intensifier, which is a word or short phrase that sort of heightens the already existing mood of the sentence but doesn't explicitly change the meaning. Using shit as an example, "Shit, the bread's gone stale again." In this example, you can also see shit being used as a sort of mood marker, since it is reasonable to assume out of context that the bread going stale might be desirable to the speaker. In this case, the "shit" marks the stale bread is actually bad as well as intensifying the mood as compared to, say "oh darn, the bread's gone stale again."

This part is a bit of speculation on the origin of set phrases like "ain't shit" or "the shit" and I haven't actually read any scholarly literature on this topic specifically. You can see similarities between set phrases like "this is the shit" and "this is the stuff" and "that's the spot". It seems like this is a construction common in the English language to express that something is pleasurable. Whether this is what caused the "this is the shit" set phrase or whether the "this is the shit" set phrase caused the construction remains to be seen. "Ain't shit" is definitely somewhat different because it probably comes from African American Vernacular English (AAVE). While I would argue that "the shit" could be AAVE in origin as well, I do think it has roots in non AAVE English, whereas "ain't shit" is grammatically AAVE.

If you're interested in reading more, I recommend The F Word by Jesse Sheidlower and Holy Sh*t by Melissa Mohr.

Yeah it gave me a good laugh at how sudden it was 😆

I actually work in this field and it's a lot more complicated than it sounds. When you're training AI to recognize products in a store, you have a set list of products it needs to be trained on. A person might go to many different stores which increases the possible variation of products exponentially. Amazon's model is also much more complex than just cameras, involving weight sensors in shelving, pressure detection, facial recognition. A store where everything is laid out in predictable, well lit, organized rows is already a nightmare. A fridge, even if it's way smaller, is way, way less predictable

Keep in mind I'm speaking from the perspective of someone with fairly sensitive and dry skin. I also prefer heavier moisturizers with no fragrance which I know may be different from your preference. Personally, I haven't found any premium moisturizers that have worked for me better than drugstore but ymmv. Theres no shame either if you want to use a premium product just because it's premium or because you like the smell, skincare is all about self care. Different things also work for different people, so if the First Aid Beauty one really worked for you, I'm glad you liked it!

That being said, I swear by the CeraVe stuff. The Walgreens generic dupe is exactly the same too and slightly cheaper (although CeraVe is already pretty affordable). If you like a lighter moisturizer, LaRoche Possay has a couple nice ones. I don't buy it anymore just because I go through moisturizer suuuuuper fast and it's just too expensive. I also like Eucerin a lot but that's a brand that's sort of geared towards people with problematic skin or skin disorders. Cetaphil is alright, but I just feel like CeraVe goes on smoother and leaves my skin feeling moisturized for longer.

In terms of premium moisturizers I've tried, I liked the Tatcha rice one (yes from the Sephora birthday sample). It smells really good but again, I didn't feel like it did a lot more for me than any drugstore moisturizer and the price tag was hefty. I've tried something from Paula's Choice but that was ages ago and I don't remember which one it was. I've also tried that one The Ordinary moisturizer and I quite liked it and the price was good. The only reason I went back to drugstore was because it was more readily available.

Sorry for the rant lol I have opinions

And slugging was a trend at some point a few years ago where people would cover their whole face in a thick layer of Vaseline after doing their nighttime skincare routine. It made me break out and felt super gross haha

Oh man, I've got a bunch. I keep a list so that I don't make the same mistake twice lol

• Hyaluronic acid: used it for about six months as a serum, have tried moisturizers with it since then, I feel like it does nothing for my skin.

• First Aid Beauty: I swear everyone swore by them a few years ago, I tried the makeup remover and the moisturizer. Makeup remover didn't actually take any of my makeup off and the moisturizer was alright, just not worth the price.

• Foundation/tinted moisturizer (just broadly, lots of different brands): tried one and then the other, with all the different powder/primer combinations and techniques. My skin just feels way better without it, nowadays I just do highlighter and blush right on top of moisturized skin.

• lip oils: I don't get it??? It's like a worse lip gloss???? Just get tinted chapstick?????

• Any eyeliner that isn't drugstore: idk what it is about cheap liquid liner, but it always applies way better and lasts way longer than fancy liquid lliner. I believe I've tried the Too Faced one and the KVD one from before The Rebrand.

• Revolution brand: I think this may have just been in the circles I knew in the UK where people loved this brand, but not a single Revolution product I've tried has been good, even for the price. Maybe it's just my skin. Eyeshadows were super chalky and patchy straight out of the box and irritated my skin.

• Slugging: look, I've got real bad dry eczema prone skin, flakes, peels, cracks if I don't moisturize immediately after the shower sort of skin. I don't really think slugging did any more for me than a well formulated, heavy moisturizer did.

• Laneige sleeping masks: felt amazing for the first few minutes of application but I feel like it did nothing otherwise. Smelled really good though.

• (this one's just a personal preference don't take it too seriously lol) nude lipsticks: I mean fuck it why not just do something more fun than skin tone when you're putting product on amirite?

The point is that a TB vaccine wouldn't be administered much in the US, but mostly to people in extreme poverty in South Africa and Eastern Europe. The article says that the organizations most likely to buy the vaccine would be local governments and non-profits, which can afford to pay a much lower price than insurance companies in the US. That's why a TB vaccine is a lower priority than shingles, because the market for a TB vaccine would be people living in extreme poverty in developing countries, while shingles is mostly a concern for affluent people with insurance in the US, even though a TB vaccine would save many more lives.

I just copied the original title. Yes, it's definitely because they're not as visually impressive