I'm a man the same way Kraft Singles are Cheese

Under normal circumstances, if a given industry finds itself unable to sell products to a given market demographic, we’d say it’s that industry’s fault for failing to offer products that that demographic is interested in buying.

It only makes sense to blame the target demographic itself is if we’re assuming that the established industries have some intrinsic right to that demographic’s disposable income that’s being denied - which is clearly nonsense.

Like, I have worked very hard to put out real, genuine quality stuff. The best that I can make while offering it at a reasonable price, because a business transaction should be fair; you get a good product, the business makes some profit, everyone walks away happy. I am not even that old, and I have already seen a significant decline in the quality, craftsmanship, materials and labor sources in almost all of my purchases compares to the items that my family bought when I was growing up- and I’m talking the expensive stuff, too! We have bought two Dysons from Costco in the last two years (returned both, thank god for Costco’s return policy!) and neither one functioned as well as Megan’s old parent’s Dyson that was made in the 80′s. My grandmother has an old metal sewing machine that has been kicking longer than I have but I’ve been through about four sewing machines in my lifetime, each one managed to last twoish years. And these are the things off the top of my head, and it goes all the way down. Like how they started manufacturing secretly-smaller containers for things with the bubble on the bottom so you don’t notice there’s less product inside, or how Charmin made their rolls ‘shorter’ than they used to be but they are still technically the same number of ‘sheets’- I mean, I know I sound a little crazy, but if you’re Charmin and you reduce the amount of paper material per-roll by even a single penny, even a fraction of a penny, it would add up to much bigger profits; and a bigger expense passed on to the consumer, who won’t notice that the rolls are an inch shorter (except me because I’m weird that way)

there's this one youtuber, reysuka, that's a paleontologist (like. for real, with a Ph.D.) but she also does cosplay, specifically also including onlyfans/sexual cosplay. and i really wanted to sub to her, bc i like paleontology and she does videos applying her paleo knowledge to video games (cool!!!!) but.... throughout the video she'll include so many agonizingly cringe like... anime fanservice things. best way i can describe it. like hamfisted inuendos and winks at the camera and stuff and it's so very very ☹️

like she clearly knows her shit, but i can't stand watching her because it's so uncomfortable to see and listen to.

I had to look her up like why 😭 palaentology is so cool (contemplated studying geology before) why do you have to do this e-girl hentai shtick, have some self respect.

if i had a phd in my dream field I'd be outside collecting wolf poop or smth like that! and not whoring myself out on social media.

"Rey has traveled to remote areas in Antarctic South America, China, Denmark and the Western United States to search for dinosaurs. She has worked with fossils in Natural History Museums around the globe in China, Denmark, England, Chile, and the U.S., most often studying dinosaur fossils and the skeletons of living birds at the American Museum of Natural History and the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History." (from her about page)

genuinely pisses me off that people like this get to live your dreams while you had to drop out of uni just before finishing your thesis due to poverty.

This is the typical extent of the scandalous deviance OP is bitter about

fifa kills whales 💔

Wyland has said any financial recovery from the suit would support public art, ocean conservation, and environmental education through his foundation.

the biodome team watching grace get up in the middle of the night and easily navigate his hut without turning any lights on:

I'm going to try it.

First, let me preface this with something very important: you can treat all of this advice as SECOND-DRAFT ADVICE. It is so much easier to rewrite this kind of stuff once you have words on the page. Telling yourself the first draft is totally appropriate and acceptable.

What we’re talking about here are FILTER WORDS (and to some degree verbs of being). Yes, “thought” words are included. But so are “heard, saw, looked, tasted, smelled” etc.—most words having to do with the senses.

This isn’t black and white advice; sometimes you’ll use these words and that’s okay. They’re not WRONG. They’re just weaker. And they’re weaker because they create distance between the reader and the experience of the character.*

If you want your reader to feel like they’re experiencing the story right alongside the character, you want to cut down on filter words.

*This is particularly important with first person and close third POVs. The reader always knows whose eyes they’re seeing through and thoughts they’re privy to. So you don’t need to tell them “I saw X.” Or “I heard X.” Or “I thought Y.” You can just jump into the action/observation as it’s happening.

This is also where you want to pay attention to verbs of being.

you want to pay attention

to verbs of being.

That means that when you read a line like

John saw that the curtains were open.

It immediately takes you OUT of the character's perspective and instead tells you what they experience as a secondhand observation.

You don't have to get fancy or purple with how you rephrase things like this. Not everything needs a ton of breathing room.

You wanna know what's perfectly impactful while keeping a tight POV?

The curtains were open.

Some of this, yes, is about POV distance--but some of it is also about the information being conveyed by the sentence. If you are using a sentence like "John saw that the windows were open" it should be because the information you are seeking to convey is that John saw it.

Maybe this matters because the next time John looks back they are closed, and so he's doubting what he saw. Maybe it matters because he later has to recount information about the room he was in, and it's notable that he specifically saw that the windows were open. The fact and method of his observation is part of the point of the sentence, rather than simply the observation itself.

When we are using sense verbs, it should be because part of the point is the sense. Same with "thought", "felt", etc.: "Mary thought that Susan looked a little thin" is telling us a different piece of information than "Susan looked a little thin."

Contrarily, at least in my opinion, simple telling phrasing like "It was rainy" can sometimes bring us more into a character's head than something showing like "The rain howled like an injured animal." I have read books when a relatively plain-spoken/plain-thinking character suddenly starts having elaborate descriptions of things like scenery or weather, and it is abundantly clear that the author wanted to spruce up their writing and avoid "telling." The problem is that it drags me as the reader out of the character's head and shows me where all of the strings are. I'm suddenly thinking about how the author is worried about being yelled at for "telling" instead of just reading the story.

A little bit for Monica, she's my wife

A little bit for Erica, for her strife

My books all go to Rita, cause she reads

My greenhouse goes to Tina, she plants trees

The furniture is Sandra's, on my lawn

Jewelry for Mary, she can pawn

Ashes go to Jessica, that's my plan

If you're tall, you're applying your force at the very top of the chair when you go back... That multiplies your effort to exert more force. Combined with you just straight-up having more mass, that means you apply enough force to tip the whole chair over. You need a larger chair, with more mass in the base. (And probably a larger gauge of spring inside, too.)

The smaller person is having the opposite problem. It's a different kind of lever, but the same fundamental relationship:

The bottom of a chair is a second-class lever, with effort extended on the opposite end from the pivot, and resistance applied between them. But you still have the same issue: the effort is intended to applied at the very end, and you're applying it closer to the fulcrum, thereby cutting the down on the effective force.

And these differences can be significant! Even within manufacturers. The distance from the base of the seat to the end of the foot-rest on the La-Z-Boy Pinnacle model is about 40", of which less than half is the foot-rest part; in a La-Z-Boy Redwood, it's 5" longer. Which means that if you put a small person in a Redwood, their force is going to be exerted about 5" closer to the fulcrum than it should be.

(There's also 2 different recliner mechanisms: la-z-boy's, which is patented, and everyone else's, which isn't. You actually don't get that putting-the-chair-down problem in a la-z-boy, because la-z-boys you HAVE to use the handle. But that's beside the point.)