Hastily Assembled

vinegar and bleach makes chlorine gas, which is highly toxic

ammonia and bleach makes chloramine, which is highly toxic

rubbing alcohol and bleach makes chloroform, which is highly toxic

hydrogen peroxide and vinegar makes peracetic/peroxyacetic acid, which can be highly corrosive

Because part of what being clean is about is killing small alive things that can make bigger alive things (aka: you) sick.

This basically requires poison, in small doses that do not harm the bigger alive things (aka: you.)

Once you start mixing the poisons though? You get stuff that can actually harm thr bigger alive things.

AKA?

"A marriage ending isn't a failure at all. I spent eleven years with her. We were so in love that we couldn't image life apart from each other. We got our own place, adopted a dog, and supported each other through school. I thought if tow people loved each other enough the rest would fall into place, except... love isn't everything.

And I didn't want to believe that, but we were sitting in counseling one day, talking about our future and I realized we were describing two completely different lives. Where we'd live, what kind of life we wanted, what made us happy. And it hit me that- I love this woman and this woman loved me. And after eleven years of loss, grief, career changes, we were so deeply in love... but we weren't aligned. And I kept thinking 'We just need to try harder. We can find some compromise to make this work,' because that's what you're supposed to do when you love someone, right?

But the reality was, we had just become different people. Her trade school took her in one direction, my graduate degree in another and trying to force us back into who we were five years ago wasn't coming from a place of love. It was coming from a place of fear. Fear that, if this ended, it meant we wasted eleven years. But sitting there across from her, I realized: That's not how love works.

Those eleven years happened. They were real. The dog, our home, showing up for each other through grad school and trade school. I wouldn't change a single thing because loving someone doesn't mean you're meant to stay with them forever. And letting go doesn't erase what you had. We measure marriage by whether it lasts forever or not, but what if we measured it by whether it mattered?

What if we measured it by the love we gave, the life we built, and the people we became? Because love's job isn't to last forever, it's to help you become fully completely yourself, and sometimes the most loving thing you can do is give each other permission to be yourselves, separately. But the dog doesn't know were' divorced. He just gets two Christmases now."

They truly are not. I originally heard the moniker and thought I had found my people, as I was super tired of the whole “men are rational and women are Feelsy” thing and wanted to hang out with people who would analyze everything with me.

I came to realize, less quickly than I probably should have, that they are EXTREMELY feelsy but vehemently claim they aren’t rather than stepping back and thinking about whether you’re right when you tell them they seem angry or afraid.

Which makes interacting with them feel like staring into funhouse mirrors without the fun part.

Bodily autonomy (like abortion, anti draft, etc) -> “The government shouldn’t be able to force anything on my body I don’t want.”

Anti surveillance -> “I don’t trust big government/big tech (big brother if you’re feeling frisky) with the ability to spy on me and my family.”

Immigration -> “Next to all of us immigrated at some point, I don’t see why the elites get to decide who’s allowed to be where. What’s to stop them coming for me?”

Climate Change -> “Big oil shouldn’t get to determine whether or not I get to go places. I don’t want to be dependent on some big business to survive.”

State Violence -> “I don’t want the goddamn secret police breathing down my neck! I trust my community a whole hell of a lot more to help me than I do the state!”

"Dad, we don't want to go outside, there are 30-50 feral hogs in the yard!"

*BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM*

This is a given.

If the last digit is divisible by 2 (a.k.a. even), then so is the whole number.

If the sum of the digits is divisible by 3, then so is the whole number. The recursivity of this means that if the sum has multiple digits, you can add them up again until you get a single digit and see if it's 3, 6, or 9.

Like the rule for 2, but check if the last two digits are divisible by 4.

If it ends in 5 or 0.

If the rules for both 2 and 3 apply.

No shortcut. Alas.

Like the rules for 2 and 4, but check if the last three digits are divisible by 8. (Yes, this pattern keeps going for 16, 32, etc.)

Like the rule for 3, but the sum of the digits (or the sum of the sum of the digits, etc.) must be 9.

The basic principle is that if A is divisible by N, and B is also divisible by N, then A+B and A-B are divisible by N. So we want to split the number you're testing into a number we know is divisible by N, plus a small number that you can just look at.

2 and 5: the number is in base 10, which is 2*5. You can split the number into a number ending in zero, plus the last digit (9876 = 9870 + 6). The number ending in zero is always a multiple of 10, so it's a multiple of 2. So the whole number is a multiple of 2 if, and only if, the last digit is also a multiple of 2. (And the same for 5.)

4, 8, 16...: do the same, but split off the last n digits (9800 + 76, 9000 + 876). The number ending in n zeroes is a multiple of 10^n, so it's a multiple of 2^n. Then check the last n digits.

9: Much more interesting!

If you sum the digits of a two-digit number, what happens? You're subtracting some number of tens (whatever is in the tens place), and adding the same number of ones, which is the same as subtracting nines. If there's a third digit then you're subtracting hundreds and adding ones, which is subtracting a multiple of 99. And so on: each digit corresponds to a power of 10, so when you add it to the digit sum, you're subtracting 999... which is a multiple of 9. So the starting number is the sum of its digits, plus some multiple of 9. (This works because 9 is 10 - 1.)

And the sum of the digits has a sum of its digits, and so on until you get to a single digit. So the original number is that digit plus a big stack of nines, which is divisible by 9 only if the single digit is 9.

3: Same as 9, except at the end the single digit has to be divisible by 3, so it can be 3, 6, or 9.

A guy(? That’s my guess, transmasc of the Victorian foppish variety) posted a video showing all the Slytherin themed clothing he can no longer wear in public.

The first thing was a scarf he liked that was warm. Which, okay. Personally I think you should wear your warm shit, climate change is no joke. But sure, fine, “lol find a new scarf transphobic loooseeer.” For the sake of argument, okay.

But the second thing he brought out was a Slytherin sweater that belonged to a friend who had died. He said the exact sweater had given his friend gender euphoria and that he treasures it for that reason. He wore it one day in memory of his friend, not thinking about the new meaning it’s taken on since, and people shunned him over it.

He no longer wears it. He is considering sewing a new patch over the snake so he can wear it in public again.

A Facebook friend did not watch the video and commented on my share with “I would readily give up fandom stuff. I’ve done it many times. I’m offended someone would say it was difficult.”

When I mentioned that the main thing that resonated with me in the video was the discussion of grief… silence.

Things like that are why I’m okay with cutting off your friends for not boycotting, but if their fandom stuff looks old I’m not gung ho about ending friendships.

You don’t know why that person has that unless you ask. If you’re super rude they’re not going to answer when you do.

It’s especially weird to see on Tumblr, the “there is no thoughtcrime” webisite. It’s like there is no thoughtcrime…