Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts
Coming soon

The blood clot thing is certainly fucking true: family history increases the likelihood, but this is a legit, serious risk factor, and if you’re overweight, your chances of having plaque filled arteries is already higher, therefore increasing risk from those blood clots. I don’t know why this is hard to understand.

see more

It’s hard to understand because people like this only search for information that confirms their beliefs and disregard objective truths if it doesn’t conform to that belief. Good old confirmation bias.

I'm so fucking depressed about not being able to own a firearm. Don't ever be suicidal, kids.

see more

With your username, I’m kinda glad you can’t.

-1 points · 11 days ago · edited 3 days ago

That kid folded faster than a chain of Rhea Perlman themed all you can eat diarrhea restaurants named Diarrhea Perlman’s.

2.6k points · 11 days ago

Bananas are now ten dollars each but there is a sale on multimillion dollar yachts (not too much of a sale though we don’t want the commoners to have access).

see more

Get rid of the Seaward. I’ll leave when I’m good and ready.

1 point · 12 days ago · edited 12 days ago

Not my grandpa, but my grandma was born in Ortona, Italy in 1937 and was 6 years old during the Battle of Ortona. Her family which included 10 children, with barely anything to eat themselves, would feed and house Canadian soldiers from the Loyal Edmonton Regiment and Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry. It is said that the hospitality of the Ortonans towards the Canadian troops helped them win the battle of Ortona against German forces.

She moved to Edmonton in 1958 to marry my grandfather, with whom she was pen pals for a few years. In 1993, on the 50th anniversary of the battle, the PPCLI tracked her down as being the only Ortonan living in Edmonton who was alive during the battle. She was honoured with a celebration and medal for her family’s help during the battle.

I love Italian hospitality. This perfectly displays my experience from all our Italian family and friends when it comes to feeding anyone. Mangia mangia!

169 points · 19 days ago

Do you mean the Baby Boomers who have been living like Kings and Queens compare to the rest of the world ? Buying every useless stuffs they can get, burning energy like there's no tomorrow, never once they stop to think about what sorts of world they're leaving the children with ? Their own shortsightedness are finally going to screw them ? Good!

see more

That’s a very narrow-sighted view. This will impact everyone, not just them.

11 points · 22 days ago

Shit, I would've classified you as "ripped" in the Before pic, but that After one..... You single?

see more

Ah, how all good, long term relationships start.

Initial thoughts: Don't see a lot of women wearing up-dos. The ones that do are usually going for a special occasion in which they'll go to a stylist to get it done and will want to spend the money doing it. So they wear up-dos rarely enough that buying a product just to do it doesn't make sense. If your goal with having this product is to allow women to wear up-dos more frequently, you would be trying to create a movement, which is pretty hard to do with fashion. You could try marketing in countries or areas where up-dos are more popular, (18th century France, jk, but maybe some European countries or India?) or maybe market it to hair salons to show how they can save time and still give women really nice up-dos.

Effectively you are trying to sell a "what" when you should be trying to sell a "why." Don't market to what it is (it'll make wearing an up-do simpler,) market to why someone would want to wear an up-do or why buying that product will make their lives better. In the case of a salon, maybe this shaves off 30 minutes from each up-do that they can do, so it actually saves the salon a certain amount of money and time. As someone else mentioned, maybe try adding on a product, or better yet, pitch it to a company whose product it could be marketed well with (professional blow dryers for example could include it as a bonus to buy their blow dryer, or high-end hair sprays.) Approach Wal-Mart and see if you can put them somewhere in the hair care aisle. Look at selling them to destination resorts where people often go for weddings where women still want to look good but aren't close to their normal stylist, so they can sell them in their gift shop or at their on-resort salons. Or for that matter, any hotel gift shops. Just some ideas, hope it helps!

Original Poster3 points · 23 days ago

Thanks for the commentary. I can clarify for you in a more civil way.

So you get a 4% return in a 2.9% inflation environment. What about the bonds decreasing in value in a rising interest rate environment? Surely you must know about is it really a 4% return?

Additionally, yes as a company’s EPS slows, the multiple in which investors are willing to pay for the stock compresses.

Hope that helps!

see more

Just wanted to comment on a couple points on the video, on u/Money_Manager's comments, and your response.

The video: Pretty decent. Cute background music, nice crisp drawings, offers some engagement. Audio quality could stand to be a bit more crisp/clear.

Who is your audience with these videos? Complete newbies, people who know a bit and want to know more about investing, people who are interested in reading the book but want the Cliff's Notes version first? Make sure your content is tailored to your audience. So for example, when you get a bit technical and say "You don't want to get caught holding a company with a high multiple when growth slows," that is only going to be understandable to intermediate to expert-level investors, and might confuse newbies who think that if it's going to be this technical right from the get go, they might get discouraged.

Bonds: You discuss why you don't like holding bonds but then shortly after say that the book suggests to hold onto 25% of your portfolio as bonds. Without further explanation, this could confuse some newbies. You could stand to be a bit more clear that your 2% bond scenario is just an example and that there are other bonds that pay more or less, depending on risk/credit rating, especially if you're going to talk about how Graham advises to hold 25% as bonds.

Inflation Example: It may seem super obvious, but again, depending on your audience, if you don't do the math, some people might get confused as to why you're getting a -2.8% interest when inflation is 2.9% and savings account interest rate is 0.1%. I'd say do the math for them, and spend a bit more time explaining why inflation decreases your purchasing power. But that's just a personal observation from me.

In regards to your response to Money_Manager, yes you are correct that bonds decrease in value in a rising interest rate environment, but that's only on the secondary market. Remember that if you hold any bond to maturity, that bond's value will be the entire face value of the bond (assuming they can pay it back), plus the value of the coupon over the entire period, regardless of which way interest rates go. Given that Graham/Buffet talk about not day trading or speculating, I would imagine that selling bonds on the secondary market is not something that one should endeavour to do often if they are interested in following value investing strategies. My take is that you invest in a bond until it matures and take the capital repayment to reinvest in more bonds, re-balancing as needed to maintain the 25% ratio.

Good job overall. Don't listen to the haters, pursue your passion and keep improving.

"Nice onesie, does it come in mens?"

"Oh I think you come in men enough for us all."

Definitely stealing "The Seaward" (C-word) from Arrested Development.

Michael: "Get rid of the Seaward"

Lucille: "I'll leave when I'm good and ready."


Edit: thank you for the gold, kind sir or madam.

Consider this thought experiment and try to think of possible solutions to the problem.

For those who believe that bitcoin should entirely replace fiat currency, what happens when you loan bitcoin at interest? Well immediately one would think, “sure, no problem, you just pay back your original loan plus a bit more bitcoin in interest.” Sounds fine right?

The problem is, the moment that one person lends a bitcoin and charges interest, it sets in motion a dilemma that I don’t think many people are considering right now. You have effectively created an obligation to pay back more bitcoin than will ever exist.

Currently, this may not present as much of a problem because there is always more bitcoin being mined. What happens when we’ve mined the final coin? So now you have 21 million bitcoin in existence, no more being created and yay the government isn’t stealing our wealth by printing more money. One institution loans 100,000 bitcoin at interest to a bunch of different clients. It is to be paid back in 5 years, with a total repayment of 130,000 bitcoin. There now exists 21 million real bitcoin with 30,000 additional bitcoins needed to be paid to someone and they don’t exist.

Surface level you may say “well, that’s okay because the people who borrowed the money will obviously make more money as a result of their loan which was used to build a business that generates income, and they can use that to pay back the loan’s interest.” Sure this may seem fine, and work for a bit, but the fact of the matter is that you still have 30,000 more bitcoin that at any point in time is owed and cannot be created. Still workable though because of the velocity of money and how it circulates.

What happens when more loans are created? What happens when eventually, 1 million or 10 million bitcoins have been lent with interest due? What happens when the total loan obligations exceed the total amount of bitcoins in existence?

What happens if before the final coin is mined, if they aren’t being mined fast enough to keep up with repayment obligations and it significantly slows down economic progress because no further loans can be made?

What is your solution to this potential issue?


Posing impossible scenarios is pointless. Vomit much?

see more
Original Poster1 point · 25 days ago

Butt hurt much?

For the foreseeable future we don't really have to write debt in bitcoin in my opinion. Basically it will not be very clever to sign a debt contract in a strong currency while many fiats will loose its value big time.

Same as people who live in a country with not so strong fiat, they tempt to get a mortgage in eur/usd because the interest is much lower. But they can easily end up paying much more because the eur/usd will outpreform their currency.

Lets first make bitcoin big and less volatile before worrying about future applications too much.

see more
Original Poster1 point · 26 days ago

Totally see your point, but I just worry about the snowball effect of doing things with BTC early in its creation that cause a snowball effect later.

Load more comments

Your mom might be infuriated to know that the queen actually cannot be arrested nor charged while she is the head of state, which is essentially the rest of her natural life.

-11 points · 25 days ago

She can absolutely be charged, as per the Magna Carta

see more

Load more comments

Yay good for you! Love the Instagram handle btw.

Original Poster22 points · 26 days ago

Thank you! I chose that name basically because it was really hard to get the courage to go outside and exercise at my highest weight. People would make fun of me. Someone once dumped water on me as they drove by when I was biking and I felt humiliated. So I just wanted a reminder to go outside anyway!

see more

It’s hard to believe how fucking senseless some people are as to do something like that to someone who is trying to better them self. Good for you for pushing past that. You are an inspiration.


Video for reference.

Hi everyone. I am a gay cis-male who has an honest interest in becoming educated on transgender and gender identity issues. I'm ashamed to say that I have not done much investigation into the issues that affect my non-binary brothers and sisters (I hope I'm using the term correctly, please forgive and correct me if I'm not). I consider myself a supporter of everyone's gender identity and sexuality, because I don't feel the state or anyone else should really care about things that are intrinsic to you and do not affect anyone else.

Just a warning, there are a lot of triggers in this video, and a lot of sensational phrases used to drive home her point, which clearly shows her bias towards her position. But some of the topics she discusses, I would like to discover more by hearing other sides of the issue by people it actually affects. Below I'll post some of her points and some questions that it raises for me:

  1. "Our bodies declare our sex. Biological sex is not assigned. Sex is determined at conception by our DNA."

From what I gather, no one really disputes the fact that most people are born either male or female as per biological markers (chromosomes, etc.). The issue isn't biological markers of gender, but non-cis people feel that they do not necessarily identify with the gender they were born as. Non-cis people don't dispute the fact that they may have DNA of a biological male or female, but that is separate from their gender identity? (This is my basic understanding, please feel free to clarify/correct if I've gotten something wrong here.)

  1. "There are at least 6500 genetic differences between men and women. Hormones and surgery cannot and do not change this."

Again, my understanding is non-cis people electing to go through HRT and surgery are not trying to change all of the genetic biomarkers of gender, but they do so to align their physical appearance more with what they feel their gender identity is?

  1. "If I walk into my doctor's office and say 'Hi, I'm Margaret Thatcher,' my physician will say I am delusional..."

My initial thought on this was "okay, if someone truly felt that they were Margaret Thatcher, what are the differences between that and saying you identify as female when born as a male." My counter-argument to my thought is "non-cis people don't actually try to say that they are someone else in specific, having lived another person's specific life experiences. What they are saying is that they feel that their emotions, feelings and thoughts align more with a certain gender (or non-specific gender) whose general behavioural characteristics can be adopted to suit your own personality."

  1. "If I were to say, 'Doctor, I am suicidal. I am an amputee trapped in a normal body. Please, surgically remove my leg.' I'll be diagnosed with body identity integrity disorder. But if I walk up to that same doctor and say 'I'm a man. Sign me up for a double mastectomy,' my physician will."

Thoughts: I'm not too sure on this one. Can one identify as an amputee, feeling so closely aligned in thought and emotion with an amputee that it would be reasonable to have their leg cut off so as to conform closer to their personal identity? Usefulness of body parts aside (I would argue a leg is more useful than breasts,) what are the arguments (if any) that identifying as an amputee when you're not, and identifying as a female when you're not, is a false equivalency?

  1. "No one is born transgender. If gender identity were hardwired in the brain before birth, identical twins would have the same gender identity 100% of the time. They don't."

Do non-cis people actually claim that gender identity is hardwired in the brain, or is this just being put up as a straw man argument by this doctor to discredit the transgender community? If it is claimed as hardwired, are there counter-examples to this doctor's idea that it would result in identical twins always having the same gender identity?

  1. The doctor's story about the young boy named Andy who started identifying as a girl after his parents gave birth to a special needs girl and most of the attention went to her. Andy misinterpreted that in order to be loved you have to be a girl (in his naive, childhood innocence), and thus started him down a path of transgenderism.

Okay, this is just anecdotal evidence and correlation does not imply causation. However, I'm curious to know if other transgender people can think back to similar situations in their early development as to when they first started feeling different, and if there was any particular trigger they can think of that may have started it off. I know when I was younger, around the age of 6 or 7, I saw a psychologist because I would often say "I wish I was a girl, it would be so much easier if I was a girl." I didn't have the best upbringing, but not horrible. But what I do remember is my entire family except my dad was girls and I didn't have a strong father figure and I often felt left out of fun activities because I wasn't a girl. For me though, the benefits of being a boy still outweighed being a girl and I had strong male friends who I bonded with. I wonder if this could have been a tipping point for me between going down the path of entrenching transgenderism in me or not?

  1. All the medical information she states about certain drugs being harmful to the other sex, etc.

Is this a case of risk/benefit analysis? Transgender people are aware of the risks of the medicines, but to them the rewards outweigh the risks, or are these risks exaggerated to prove her biased point?

  1. Her talk about how we automatically assume now that any child with gender identity issues should not be tried to be convinced out of that but to instead let them take that natural course.

What are your thoughts on this? Is guidance and intervention to give children all options available important to do in some cases, or should all gender-confused kids be immediately treated as allowing for them to take their own path and just providing the most supportive environment possible for them to make that decision without interfering in it.

Again, I am doing this to learn about different perspectives so I can come to an informed opinion on the topic. I know that there are a lot of emotions and trauma surrounding this, and if I've triggered anything with some people, I sincerely apologize. When I see videos like this, that only present one-side (and the multitude of comments to those videos of uninformed people spewing their opinion), I am always curious to get the other side so I can learn more and speak intelligently on the issue when it comes up in person. Love you all and thanks for any insight you might have. Please remember that there is no judgment here from me on any of my ideas, and if some of them are very ignorant, I really truly am not looking to offend, and am very opened to being enlightened on those issues.


"Our bodies declare our sex. Biological sex is not assigned. Sex is determined at conception by our DNA."

This is obviously the prevailing, status quo view. But that doesn't make it necessarily a scientific view, no matter how firmly someone tries to word it. There's a bit of an exception that proves the rule in the form of intersex people, whose bodies do not necessarily "declare their sex" in an either-or way. The fact that intersex people are a minority does not diminish the fact that they exist and are forced to fit into a model that has no room for them. Which tells me that the model can't possibly be based on reality, but is instead a social construct.

"There are at least 6500 genetic differences between men and women. Hormones and surgery cannot and do not change this."

Who cares???? This is a no-true-scotsman fallacy. I guarantee you that there are some men or women whose bodies only express, say, 6499 genetic differences between themselves and the opposite sex. At what point do we let some doctor decide that a man who's been living his life pretty normally this whole time is actually not a man, but a woman, because he doesn't have enough genetic differences? This view seems to imagine a world where cis men and women have ideal bodies 100% of the time and never have hormone imbalances, genetic abnormalities, etc. to upset the boundary lines used to invalidate trans people.

"If I walk into my doctor's office and say 'Hi, I'm Margaret Thatcher,' my physician will say I am delusional..."

This is a red herring fallacy. I am not pretending to be anyone. When I go to the grocery store, or the mall, or gym, people speak to me as ma'am without me having to say a single word. They see me as a woman. I'm not telling them that I'm someone that I'm not. I can literally dress in men's clothing, and people still refer to me as a woman. I'm living my normal life. How is that delusional? I'm living my life with a name I have acquired the legal right to use. It's my name, not someone else's name, and it's my identity, not someone else's identity. I'm not pretending to be someone else. What a completely hogwash argument.

"If I were to say, 'Doctor, I am suicidal. I am an amputee trapped in a normal body. Please, surgically remove my leg.' I'll be diagnosed with body identity integrity disorder. But if I walk up to that same doctor and say 'I'm a man. Sign me up for a double mastectomy,' my physician will."

This is putting dogmatic thinking above the needs of patients. If a person is in seriously poor mental health and wants their limb to be removed (this is a real thing, btw), the ethical dilemma isn't "is it okay to amputate something that doesn't strictly require to be severed at risk of necrosis," it's "would doing this lower the patient's quality of life?" In the case of people who want limbs amputated for cognitive dissociative reasons, it's usually the case that they're asking for a body part to be removed that provides some kind of important quality of life purpose (walking, holding a spoon, etc.).

Nobody cares if someone wants their appendix removed, because its removal doesn't drastically affect the patient's quality of life. A double mastectomy doesn't get in the way of a person's ability to live a functional life, unless you think that your idea of a life for them as a woman with breasts is the only valid way of life for them.

"No one is born transgender. If gender identity were hardwired in the brain before birth, identical twins would have the same gender identity 100% of the time. They don't."

Who cares???? It's true that there are correlations showing that twins have a higher chance of being trans when one of the twins is trans. This is just another permutation of the "6500 genetic differences" argument. What if gender identity emerges a few days after birth; a month; a year; three years? This is an argument that simply deflates because no one is staking their gender identity on the idea of "this is hardwired into my brain from gestation."

The doctor's story about the young boy named Andy who started identifying as a girl after his parents gave birth to a special needs girl and most of the attention went to her. Andy misinterpreted that in order to be loved you have to be a girl (in his naive, childhood innocence), and thus started him down a path of transgenderism.

I'm assuming that there are some details to this in the video that aren't in here. There are several assumptions being made here. The first is that gender dysphoria is the result of a childish misunderstanding of gender dynamics. This is like an "oops! I'm so silly!" view that I've seen before--transgender people are just foolish and lack wisdom. The example given here is of a child, but I've seen doctors and therapists take this perspective on grown men and women, saying things like "oh, I had this client who is bisexual, and she says she wants to become a man. I think she might just be getting ahead of herself."

This sort of view glosses over the intense, visceral feelings that gender dysphoria can invoke. Before I transitioned, I would dissociate whenever I looked in the mirror. I felt intense revulsion at my own body. When I transitioned, those negative emotions and cognitive states went away and were replaced with calmer, more positive ones.

Without watching the actual video, this anecdote also gives the impression that the doctor who spoke to Andy knows Andy better than he knows himself. If the doctor wanted to invalidate Andy's actual feelings of being a girl, he could easily have drawn the conclusion that "he's not transgender, he's just jealous of his sister" and decided on that as truth, even if Andy felt differently.

All the medical information she states about certain drugs being harmful to the other sex, etc.

I don't know exactly which points she is arguing about. According to the endocrinologist I go to for HRT, there isn't some inherently damaging effect that HRT has. Estrogen increases the risk of breast cancer to around the level of a cis woman's, but it also lowers your risk of prostate cancer. As long as you are on HRT with a doctor's supervision and regular blood tests, there shouldn't be any harm.

Her talk about how we automatically assume now that any child with gender identity issues should not be tried to be convinced out of that but to instead let them take that natural course.

I think this is a really disingenuous view that some cis folk have. I'm not the goblin king, trying to kidnap children and turn them into goblins. I absolutely think that if a child has gender identity issues, they need to have well-meaning and thoughtful adults speak to them and help them understand their feelings better. The problem is that, to many cis folk, being trans is a bad thing that should be avoided, so they feel like conversations with children should be biased toward steering them away from it. They would rather have an unhappy child who is in the closet about being trans than a happy child who is openly trans. In other words, they are anti-trans.

I think the only sensible thing for adults to do is not paint one as better than the other. The only thing that matters is that the child feels safe to be themself. If you're trying to goad them in one direction or the other, you're doing a bad job at listening to the child and helping them understand their own feelings.

see more
Original Poster1 point · 26 days ago

Thank you for taking the time to reply so thoughtfully to this post. It has definitely enlightened me to many things that I will be better able to speak to when people bring up some of these quacky points against transgenderism. ❤️

So the first quote is basically contradictory, if sex is determined by dna, then sex must be assigned, as infants don't have their karyotype tested when born. Physical sex isn't determined from conception (only "chromosomal sex" which doesn't really mean anything) without sufficent androgen exposure during development Fetuses with XY chromosomes will develop a female typical body. The reverse process as occurs. So fetal development not DNA determines what sex a baby is assigned at birth.

But no to answer your question almost all trans individuals do accept that they're "biologically male or female" but there's some disagreement about what that term actually means.

Second quote: her views on genetics are super simplistic, but as you said this statement doesn't really have anything to do with being trans. So I'll just skip correcting the statement.

Third quote: yea, trans people are still themselves, they're just changing their physical appearance to be treated more like how they feel their innerself is, and to remove the mental dissidence that occurs when their body doesn't match that.

Fourth quote: I mean in some cases they have amputated limbs of people with BID, and in a good number of cases they still had the condition, so the procedure isn't really sucessful in achieving the intended purpose. While SRS has an overwhelming effect on people's quality of life, I've seen satisfaction rates quote as high as 90%+, and the vast majority of trans people are satisfied with their transition as a whole, have much lower suicide rates, and are objectively happier than before transition. So comparing the merits of the two procedures is kinda laughable, without considering the obvious differences between a dick/vagina and an arm.

Fifth quote: This would only be true if there was like a cut and dry "trans gene" it could still have a genetic component, it's a myth that identical twins have 100% the same Dna, there can be diffrences such as copy gene variants. Brains are super complex and sensitive parts of the body, like fingerprints in twins they'll be unique, to say they'll be the exact same is just absurd.

Sixth quote: (my personal experience) I'll give that my first trans memory you could extrapolate there could of been external motivators. But all my other trans memories as a young child I can't really come up with a external motivator.

Risk: yea the risks of modern Hrt treatment have pretty manageable risks, at this point the medical community as a whole doesn't consider it questionable.

I mean "trans-conversion therapy" doesn't work, ignoring it doesn't help, and personally my family's attempts at "maning me up" (they didn't know I was trans at the time) didn't work. So I feel like taking the natural course is the most rational path....

see more
Original Poster3 points · 27 days ago

Thank you so much for sharing your experiences and insight. Very insightful information.

Load more comments

Please be nice to me but I don’t think that this one is too bad; I know it makes no sense to post something like his/her post for no reason, but the way it’s actually worded doesn’t seem purposefully complicated. I think this person probably saw some news article somewhere and copied some of a line verbatim or something.

Edit: not sure whether poster is mail or fee mail

see more

I agree. Sometimes I’ll run through these scenarios in my head too just to see what my imagination can come up with. Helps me fall asleep.

Former ambulance dispatcher for a medium-sized area. We weren't allowed to sleep.

One time, I came in after only getting one hour of sleep (scheduling snafu + I had an infant). I took a 911 call, turned to my partner, attempted to tell him about it...and fell the fuck asleep. Dozed off mid-sentence.

He sent an ambulance to the call, then sent another ambulance to 7-11 to get me an energy drink.

see more

We are still human. Life happens. Good thing we have coworkers to cover for us 👍🏾

1 point · 27 days ago · edited 27 days ago

Ambulance dispatcher for a medium-sized area. We bring couch cushions and put them in front of our desk at night so we can sleep and let the sound of the phones ringing wake us up to take the 911 call. Usually get it after the third or fourth ring.

Edit: I should clarify, this was at a previous job and they may have changed this since.

-1 points · 27 days ago

Are they still the RCMP if they're not on horseback?

see more

Actually they are called RCMP while on horseback and RCDP while off. Royal Canadian Dismounted Police.

Not gonna lie, I'm going to copycat that later tonight. Nicely done

see more
Original Poster1 point · 28 days ago

Yay! Post a pic.

Comment deleted28 days ago
Original Poster7 points · 28 days ago

Are beets not healthy? Damn

Load more comments

Cake day
November 26, 2016
Trophy Case (3)
One-Year Club

reddit gold

Since July 2018

Verified Email

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.