Nah just gonna laugh at this specific reaction a little bit.
I’m 99.99% with you on the sentiment, right up to particularly egregious (and not culturally or ethnically significant) haircuts. On that one, I may continue to do like only half of this woman’s hair, and throw a little shade.
And seem to be real sensitive about it.
Lol alright. Gimme your worst.
I get where you’re coming from, but an intentional, statement haircut that you could easily change feels like it’s ok to make a statement about, while I never would about someone’s weight, height, etc.
If I posted a picture of myself and the hair was what people roasted me for, I’d be happy lol.
Yahoo was a massive failed effort, but it hardly even compares to that haircut.
There’s a big difference between “reflecting on him” and actually being the one to write the policy. I don’t see why the former is an issue.
Imagine what the best one could do
That’s fair, and same when it comes to trying to explain behaviors evolutionarily (though some are definitely just random, too, since if a characteristic doesn’t actually directly cause an early death/fewer reproductive years, evolution will never affect it). Such guesses just get further from reality as they get more specific. So it would make sense and likely be accurate to say there is an evolutionary explanation for the behaviors that we demonstrate to divergent levels, but it becomes a bit more strained to say that that evolutionary explanation has to do with neurodivergent people being more closely connected to cats than neurotypical people.
Most behaviors in mammals can be seen in other mammals (and in even less related species). Don’t read too much into it.
I’m an introvert and easily overstimulated, so I like:
Is my brain part tree? (No, these are just qualities/behaviors easy to find in another living thing, and my brain is searching for a pattern.)
Interesting observation, but it’s a bit extreme and fantastical that some shared behaviors would suggest neurodivergent humans have an evolutionary link to cats.
Ah yes. Characterizing an entire population by the acts of the most extreme. Always accurate.
“Canadians aren’t saints. They’re a conquesting and genocidal people who wiped out an entire population of natives and continue to marginalize those who are left.” And going by your argument, this means we shouldn’t feel too bad if any of them get assassinated?
It’s like a series of tubes