Most people chose their name, sometimes choosing a name similar to their real name, sometimes choosing completely different names. The only time I saw someone assigned a name was when their name conflicted with another student’s.

I find opiates kinda boring tbh, and while they can be euphoric (sorta mixed for me) they can also make me feel sorta ill, so I don’t really like to take them.

When I was depressed, though, that was a dangerous drug because I had so little “happiness” and it felt like a special treat - so I could see it being very dangerous if I didn’t have other sources of happiness / mental well-being.

So glad you got that corner room and you had a good experience, that is such great luck and so heart-warming.

Also probably worth mentioning that recreational drug use of heroin is probably dosing more than the hospital is giving, if I had to guess - so stronger euphoria, but also stronger depressant effects, etc., so I’m not sure how accurate your hospital experience was to what recreational users are experiencing.

I kinda hate how quickly dilaudid fades, tho - but I have never had morphine to compare against, so 🤷‍♀️

but yeah, it’s annoying having to ask the nurse to administer another dose of dilaudid so frequently, I think I had to do it three times when waiting in post-op to be discharged, and even then it was only moderately helpful - maybe my doses were too low (I should go check the paperwork and see if I can figure out how much I took).

EDIT: I was given 0.5 mg each time, and I had to request another dose roughly once an hour (it was administered by IV) - so, I don’t know how that compares to your dose / experience … I think the max amount they would allow was 2 mg.

look at Mr. Rogers over here

lol, you’re right - white blood cells justify bigotry is a much better argument than “my sky daddy said so!”

yes, in fact our moral reasoning comes from the function of white blood cells and their extreme xenophobia - it is an important lesson to learn that foreign = bad, white = good … oh wait, hmmmmmmmmm

People tend to survive by working together - those with the capacity to form groups and cooperate will do best.

I forgot there was a movie; it’s such an excellent piece of literature it’s hard for me to imagine wanting to watch a movie adaptation. The book is gripping, really - it’s an easy read in that sense.

Either way, the perspective of the book is of a father and son who are essentially on their own. This is just not a realistic basis of long-term survival, especially not with hostile groups to contend with.

I’m not really sure it’s a matter of good or bad people - to be honest the same calculations about who to trust and when to cooperate or break with cooperation exist now, and forms a lot of the political dynamics you see today.

I also think this literature promotes too much a delusional sense of individualist survivalism - this is why I keep harping on the improbability of surviving a situation like in The Road. Go read about conflict zones in the third world and the way society breaks down. Usually gangs cooperate together and do whatever they want. You as an individual might find safety by joining a gang, but if that’s not an option, then escaping is your best bet. This is why conflicts create mass migrations. This is also why people in safe countries should probably be less cruel and more welcoming to immigrants.

I think the point is that you wouldn’t.

sorry by spa I was implying not a social club but a place like baths or an onsen where women might be naked in baths together; typically these spaces are sex / gender separated

I think the assumption in my question is that in the baths and locker rooms we assume the spaces are open and people do not have total privacy when in states of undress.

I think people often don’t seem to realize that sex-segregated bathrooms were a relatively recent invention, going back only a few hundred years: https://time.com/4337761/history-sex-segregated-bathrooms/

I do think the assumption that women will be attacked or sexually assaulted underlies at least some motivation (the TIME article above claims it is a view of women as weak and the public as dangerous - which generally fits that view). The fact that this reasoning was used to justify segregation in every aspect of public life, to the point of having separate train cars, and yet we saw that segregation go away nearly everywhere but bathrooms, it makes it seem like the claims about safety could have been overblown (or maybe more accurately: that segregation doesn’t necessarily protect as much as it claims). The TIME article argues that the only reason bathrooms are still segregated has more to do with the difficulty with changing codes and standards than anything like actual safety reasons.

OK, here’s another question: in the Middle East / Western Asia misogyny is quite a significant problem (that might be an understatement), and in northern Syria there was a women-only militia formed called the YPJ. The YPJ was formed as a group based on egalitarian, feminist ideology and has been praised for having improved the power and situation of women in that region.

It seems to me that segregation is sometimes used to oppress women, but sometimes segregation is also how women are able to carve out independence and push back against their oppression.

What do you make of this example of women who under extreme oppression were able to form a women-only militia which then increased the power of women in the region?

But my response to their claim is that, I am reasonable and I do have an issue with any group setting up places which discriminate based on gender. These safe places can form as a legitimate rudimentary form of protection, yes, but they maintain and often even promote sexism, and should all be challenged and turned into something better which serves the same purpose.

I’m curious whether you think you think this applies to, for example, a spa or locker room where people are in various states of undress and are separated into exclusive spaces based on gender?

no worries - just seems like you’re the kind of person that would care about these things, and thought it was information you’d like to have

https://glaad.org/term-to-avoid-transgenderism/

probably the most directly helpful boycott is one that ensures money is denied to US companies so they are motivated to lobby and change things to protect their bottom line (as a last resort of course, and maybe not at all)

cultural boycott is more extreme and less directly important to bringing about immediate political change, but is nonetheless probably an important part of bringing about rejection of US hegemony and dominance, so it’s not a bad approach in addition to denying the US your money

oof, you caught me red-handed, USian here 😭 <greatest country on earth she says between sobs>

would love indexing and numbers on my handle

or just go full Japan and incorporate a thermostat

I’m not an expert in media or journalism, so don’t take me seriously, but my speculation is that because American corporate media is for-profit and competing for attention, when something is new and getting attention, everyone competes to grab as much of the attention as possible (while it still generates interest), creating a fear of missing out for those who don’t try to monetize the new thing.

You see this in all kinds of markets, like - why were two big blockbuster movies about Napoleon produced and then published around the same time? The anticipation of a cash grab invites others to see if they can get in on it and siphon some of the cash for themselves. Producers all compete to capitalize on consumer fads in general, and fads can even be artificially generated, through manipulation of consumers (whether through celebrity or influencer endorsements, guerilla marketing, or just traditional advertisements).

Media is just another form of consumption and shows the same ebb and flow as other consumer markets.

I hate dishwashers, I wash dishes by hand.

😭

Embrace, Extend, Extinguish

this would probably just lead to the corporation taking more and more of a role until they take over development of the FOSS projects they care about, which is a particular nightmare I would prefer to avoid

was upset enough when Microsoft bought Github