Fair enough, like most matters of language I suppose it’s ultimately subjective and comes down to differences in personal interpretations. Specific context and perspectives will always have the potential change things but by and large I stand by my point in general application.

I completely agree with what you mean, but I would argue it is actually quite simple just not easy. People often talk about the two like they’re the same but it’s important to remember that at times simple things can be quite hard and complicated things may still be easy.

Again, I don’t think your actually understanding what is being said. Yes, that is ridiculous. We agree. However what has been done has already been done.

Time as we humans experience it moves only in one direction. We can not go back to change that. Time travel does not exist. So the question is what should be done going forward.

Attempting even the least harm reduction, while inferior to avoiding harm altogether, is better than no harm reduction. Should OP have done much better? Yes. Should they do something now rather than nothing at all? Also yes.

Did you actually read Pelicanen’s reply? They’re not disagreeing with you. I don’t disagree either. The point they’re making is that it’s better late than never. Obviously doing the right thing in the first place is best, no one is saying otherwise.

Edit: if you’re trying to argue that returning ‘later today’, as OP claims to plan to do, is too slow/late then that’s a fair argument. That’s not what your comment reads like though.

That is assuming of course that all the women who said yes are in fact people being truthful and not creeps 'as-a-black-man’ing.

Let’s not jump to conclusions… he could be Bi.

My dude, you haven’t pissed anyone off here that I can see, you’ve just gotten overly defensive and are seeing slights where there aren’t any. People are disagreeing with you and some may be critical of your responses but that doesn’t mean anything is heated. Maybe take a short break from Lemmy and get a glass of water or something? I mean that with 100% sincerity. If you’re interpreting these comments as hateful you’re probably in a bad headspace and I’m doubtful the internet is going to help.

A bit of both in my non-expert but local understanding.

I mean, you should be slowing down at least a bit when passing someone pulled over on the side of the road anyways, no? Just like going through a construction zone. It really depends on how much braking we’re talking about.

That pattern doesn’t really hold though. The third strong enemy becomes a sexy man. Seriously though, it’s not the greatest show ever made but it is better than 95% of the isekai trash out there and isn’t nearly as formulaic as you seem to think it is.

Of course Anne of Green Gables is set in PEI so really it should have been set there. It would have been even funnier since they could probably outnumber the current population pretty easily if they immigrated en masse.

I mean, I think that’s just called science

Well, because it financially supports scammers preying on people is why not. And many medical scams aren’t harmless or innocent or may give people a false sense of wellness that can lead to them avoiding real medicine.

Ya, sadly while this is cute it is not in fact true.

Yes and no. I can’t speak to the particulars of this situation but differences in means matter even if they currently produce the same outcome. A toothless dog and a dog in a muzzle are different in important ways.

Organic does not mean pesticide free. It just means they use so called ‘organic pesticides’ which are just as bad or worse, but they’re ‘naturally derived’ which sounds better to some people. It’s marketing BS. Any agricultural practice at scale uses pesticides and all produce should be washed before consumption.

I’m not a doctor or even well read on the subject but my understanding is that: a) it’s not, and b) it’s a rather different texture/stiffness.

If that’s all you said, I agreed with that part. Why did you keep arguing with me?

I see people doing this so often (on the internet especially) and it honestly baffles me. The best I’ve ever been able to rationalize it is that people are often far more interested in arguing their own points and saying what they believe than actually listening to and understanding others or having a real debate. That may be overly simplistic but it’s how I cope.

I entirely agree, and that does sound like a good approach. I just caution against presenting recycling as a solution rather than as a reduction of harm.

You often can’t though unfortunately. Most plastics can only be recycled a handful of times before they degrade too far. Recycling, while better than nothing, is a far more inefficient and flawed process than it is often presented as. That’s why it is far better to reduce usage in the first place and reuse things as is where you can. Of course this is all still easier said than done.