lovely_reader
Try to look at it from the perspective of the person you're talking to. Nobody wants to make a fool of themselves, and assuming someone is interested (without evidence) is a great way for someone to become very embarrassed. Flirting is how you subtly let a person know it's safe to suppose you might be into them and proceed accordingly. Conversations and invitations that are completely devoid of flirtation will instead tell them that you're just being polite or friendly.
So it's important!
It's true that some Americans don't have Social Security numbers, but those Americans can't collect Social Security benefits unless/until they get one.
Yikes, which one?
You must not have the soft close feature. I hate standing around for 20 seconds waiting for the soft close seat to drop so I can pee (learned the hard way that if you force it, it wears out in a couple years). So that would probably have killed this little ritual as soon as she had to go twice before you came along to put the seat down for her. It would annoy you sometimes too I bet, unless you stand up to shit.
Still, even though you don't want to spoil the magic, maybe there are other ways to show affection, because (in order of importance):
- Farticles on every surface ew?
- It's ugly to see straight into a toilet bowl when the bathroom is in view (and also very bad Feng Shui)
- Habit/muscle memory will likely lead her to leave toilet seats up when she is a guest elsewhere, which is kind of hilarious actually, but could be hilarious at her expense
Admittedly, none of this is what you asked. But it's weird how many people try to make toilet seats a fairness thing. If the lid is kept down, everyone has to take it from closed to open and back to closed again. Isn't that fair?
Both can be bad, right?
Somehow, I have profoundly failed to convey a very simple point here today, and I apologize for that.
We agree that grinder != quality. Neither of us is saying otherwise.
My assertion is simply that a higher noise level in and of itself does not strictly signal lower quality. Dishwashers with hard food grinders are louder (say 50 decibels vs. 40–45) but require no manual filter cleaning. Despite going out of fashion 10–15 years ago, this feature is appealing to many, but it isn't commonly known that there are two options or that noise can be a variable between them.
This information was of use to me when I learned it, so I am passing it on for anyone else who may find it helpful. I am not declaring that there is one right type of dishwasher or that your personal dishwasher is bad because it has a filter. There are two kinds; not everyone knows that there are two kinds (it seems like you didn't); the kind that makes more noise is not automatically inferior, despite the industry's emphasis on silence.
Right, disposals have become rare in dishwashers since manufacturers started phasing them out many many years ago (again, they cost more to produce, so the industry switched to the filter system and wisely marketed the machines as "quiet"). They do still put grinders in a few higher end models but you have to look hard and pay more. GE has branded their hard food disposal feature as "Piranha." Maytag has a couple pricey models that combine grinder AND filter, with the soft promise that the filter will never need cleaning (prompting the question, is the filter actually doing anything?). They're out there.
But you were talking more about cheapo filter dishwashers that skimp on anti-vibration material, and you're right, they are the pits.
To come to the defense of noisy dishwashers...the loudest ones are like that because they have food grinders inside. That means you don't have to pre-wash dishes or do nasty periodic work to clear the inevitable debris from filters and traps and spouts over time. I'm sharing this because I only learned it last year, and after decades of quiet dishwasher marketing, I had assumed they were using some kind of amazing technology to wash better than the old noisy ones. They're not. They're all just swishing soapy water around in a box, and it's way cheaper to manufacture a box without a grinder in it.
I have a silent dishwasher currently, and I feel like we share the work about 50-50, the dishwasher 'n me.
I respect your opinion. I do want to clarify that if, let's say, a white German living in Ghana were broadly discriminated against or mocked for wearing lederhosen (I won't pretend to be able to think of an up-to-date cultural tradition specifically associated with white people, please bear with), then it would be hurtful for their Ghanaian neighbors to start "discovering" lederhosen-inspired fashions while denying the impacts of the ill treatment endured by these oppressed German transplants. It's not about race or hairstyles, but mistreatment at the hands of people who (usually) don't recognize the power or perceived power inherent to their social position.
I will give some more thought to your comment about white people from African countries. My initial reaction is that cornrows may or may not be part of their own culture, and they may not be living in a context where white people have the social power to harm or harass other Africans on a racial basis. If we're talking about South Africa, of course, that's not the case, so it still seems like it comes down to who's in control. But I will reflect on it. Thanks.
I might suggest a fifth item for your list, which has to do with whether you, as a non-minority, are appropriating something that a minority has been given a hard time for. For instance, a number of Black hairstyles have been denigrated for generations, leading to people having to deal with damaging, toxic, expensive, time consuming chemical treatments to achieve more culturally acceptable hair. So when non-minority people wear cornrows or dreadlocks to be trendy, especially while Black people are still being made to feel uncomfortable (or being discriminated against) for wearing the same styles, that can sting in a different way. This isn't limited to cultural characteristics, but it's a sensitive aspect of appropriation that includes cultural stuff.
If you're talking about your computer and you have access to its keyboard, you can't beat screenshot keyboard shortcuts!
But if you're talking about your TV or some screen you're not in control of, fair enough. For anyone wondering, the reason this is tough to correct with an app is because your little bitty lens is trying to capture a grid of millions of LEDs to your itty bitty camera's sensor, which has its own pixel grid that almost certainly doesn't match up with the grid you're photographing. Also, photographing a colored light source makes white balance tricky for any camera, and this is a bunch of light sources that are kind of in motion, because LEDs give off rapid pulses of light, not a steady light. Modern camera apps are getting better at antialiasing to smooth it all out and using AI models to try to guess what the image was supposed to look like, but you'll usually still see some Moire effect from those mismatched grids. I wonder if we'll ever see a solution to this while LED screens continue to exist in their current form.
We're pretty lucky we can capture a shitty image of what's onscreen, though. Just ask anybody who's tried to photograph a CRT.