So Jesus was canonically into foot stuff and vore. Cool, cool.

Certainly, but it’s the only real starting place

That’s the entire point of citation, repeatable experiment, and peer review. The only way we can ever touch at reliability is cross-referential consensus.

Y’know, if it had ham in it, it’s closer to a British carbonara

I mean, I don’t buy fast food anyway. Seems like they have in fact shifted away from, institutionally, supporting anti-LGBT groups, although private support continues. So technically I was correct, but functionally just seems like corporate whitewashing.

Bookmark the stuff that warrants a bookmark.

Close the stuff I’m not as interested in as I thought I’d be.

Group remaining tabs by subject (books, articles, products, etc. I have a system).

Close redundant tabs in groups.

Stranger was considerably more thoughtful and deliberate than you’ve described, but even still how is that different than Starship Troopers? Heinlein used his novels to explore worldviews, not really to endorse them. If you start trying to pin down his sincere beliefs with any one book, you’re pretty quickly going to run into inconsistencies with the others.

Do they? I thought I heard that they did a u-turn on that a few years back.

Twist: those are psych researchers, and he is in the experimental group.

I don’t get this perspective. Obviously being gay is a “bad thing” in these contexts because the person in question is vocally homophobic. The insult isn’t being gay, the insult is being a hypocrite.

Sometimes you read something like “camo print garlic cock mistake”, and there are no words.

It could be ambiguous to a general audience. A Chevron logo would’ve been more elegant

Because of the “every time”. Only sith deal in absolutes.

I mean, yeah? I think a lot of my traits are hard-coded caveman traits that I’ve adapted to the modern world.

Not necessarily, depends on the groceries. If you shop irresponsibly, you can spend just as much if not more on groceries.

Look into the kabbalistic concept of tzimtzum, it’s an interesting take.

Is that why Jews say “la chyme” before they drink, since it’s going into their stomach?

Ahh the French

The low 000s are all generally pretty meta subjects, how we interact with and organize knowledge in general. Journalism and library science deal with reporting and classifying information, computers and programming deal with processing generic data, unexplained phenomena deals with things that can’t be assigned to a specific subject by their very nature.

Witchcraft, Feng Shui, and Tarot are all generally found in 133 (Parapsychology and Occultism), although I could imagine particularly high-level books to be sorted into 003 (Systems), since they are supposed to be comprehensive systems.

Books about computer hardware would be next to electronics. Computer science is where it is because it’s a more abstract topic about general information processing. If anything, I’d argue that fundamental mathematics belongs in the 000s with it.

Actually, I don’t really like the progress flag and think it contributes to division. The original rainbow flag is perfect: sexuality and gender expression are a broad spectrum, the stripes don’t represent individual groups, the whole rainbow represents all groups.

The progress flag adds symbols for specific groups which were already included in the rainbow. Once you start singling groups out piecemeal, you enter an endless spiral of having to individually acknowledge every group, and there’s always another subdivision being left out.

I also like the reclamation of the word “queer” and think it’s a far more unifying label than LGBTQIA+, for the same reason.

It’s fine to have focused actions, but unified movements are better.