ObjectivityIncarnate

This is a very good way for a lot of terrible people to fly completely under the radar. There isn’t a(n accurate) ‘child molester’ stereotype—you do victims no favor by making assumptions like these.

how many women have been inappropriately approached by adult men.

This isn’t actually a useful metric for drawing any conclusions about men, objectively speaking.

The typical woman has met thousands upon thousands of men in her life; if she was inappropriately approached by as few as a single one of them, on a single occasion, she now falls in the ‘women that have been inappropriately approached by adult men’ category. It’s very easily possible for the percentage of such women to be as high as literally 100%, while simultaneously, the percentage of men making those inappropriate approaches is far, far below 1%.

Also, it merits mentioning that the number of victims should not be assumed to equal the number of perpetrators. The kind of man to do this sort of thing is certain to be several different women’s ‘man who inappropriately approached me’. This also widens the gap between the actual percentage of men doing this, and what may be assumed based on individual personal experiences.

One thing you could take as a data point is what searches are most common on Pornhub.

Neither ‘barely legal’ nor anything adjacent to it even made the top search list in 2024. On the other hand, there are several entries in that list that imply older women (e.g. milf, step mom, teacher).

As an aside, I was also intrigued to see that “wife” made the list.

So we had sex one more time

…

After all, for all the doc knows, you could be a trans guy.

Not after the first physical, lol.

Force of habit is likely to play a role at that point, lol.

she has experience in the field so documentation of symptoms is something she understands

This jumped out to me as a possible contributor to the distrust. Speaking with that level of familiarity is probably something they see much more often from people experienced in lying/exaggerating to get meds, than from people in the industry, simply because the former group has a lot more people in it overall.

If you aren’t going to believe me anyway just give me the damn test and don’t bother me with the question.

It’s not about not believing you, it’s about the fact that it’s possible for people to be pregnant without realizing it, and the doctors obviously don’t know you personally.

The reason they ask at all is because if you say yes, then they don’t bother giving you the test. They were always planning to give you the test if you say anything but “yes”, to cover all their asses against lawsuits bases.

I remember the joke that Microsoft called it that deliberately so that if people wrote “I hate ME” it wouldn’t sound like they were trashing the OS.

You thought that because the headline is pretty deliberately misleading. Clickbait trash.

The article is clear the broken update effects a specific subset of enterprise users, on a specific mix of base versions and cumulative updates.

So you admit the headline is lying, then? The headline doesn’t even try to use weasel words to say “some users”, it just straight-up says that the update removes things, heavily implying both that it’s a global change, and that it’s deliberate.

you just get loans against your static wealth at incredibly favorable interest rates.

It’s more than that, because the wealth of those who utilize loans this way typically isn’t static. It’s not about just getting a good rate, it’s that the assets they use as collateral appreciate in value at a rate higher than inflation and the interest rate combined, so in practice, the interest rate is literally negative. The price of having access to these loans is that their net worth just grows a bit more slowly as a result.

Of course, this only works as long as said assets continue to appreciate at that rate.

This would be funnier if it wasn’t so aggravatingly accurate, lol.

That headline works whether or not that C is capitalized, heh…

How much would you like to bet? Please respond before clicking on the link below:

https://i.imgur.com/ddxLOrA.png

It isn’t.

As someone who needs to actually feel peaceful while I have 45-60 minute threesomes in the shower during the week, I’m all set.

That’s not the number of people using Amazon, that’s the number of people paying for a premium subscription service on top of their Amazon usage. No one, whether they buy things on Amazon or not, needs Prime.

That is the point they’re making.

I’m trying to figure out where “I don’t know about illegal” is coming from.

Is there another more ‘generic’ German term that would fit when talking about this period of time in retrospect? So you could have one line that says the German equivalent of ‘he was the leader in Germany during this time period, commonly referred to by the title Fuhrer’, and then no need to keep using “Fuhrer” anymore in the rest of the article.