I’ve found Bewley’s to be quite good with hard water too.

IMO Yorkshire does well with hard water, and takes milk well.

I’ve been wondering a lot about absurdism in humour. There are people who laugh when they see something disastrous happen, like a man reflexively trying to stop a cement truck from tipping and getting squashed dead. Or a recent news story of the only fatality in a school bus crash: it was an observer who got hit by a vehicle as he ran across the highway to see if the kids were ok. A lot of the time this laughing response to a disaster is interpreted as schadenfreude, but a good portion of the time I believe it’s absurdism.

We try so hard to have agency, to do something, but the World doesn’t give a fuck. You have two choices when shit goes so wrong: you can wail about the unfairness of it all, or you can laugh at the absurdity of our efforts in the face of the colossal chaos of it all. The laughter is stronger.

It’s interesting to me that some cultures seem to have absurd humour baked in. The Aussies and Kiwis seem to have it. They just make jokes about and laugh at the most horrific situations.

I’ve been wondering a lot about absurdist humour. Dan Carlin relates a story of an old Air Force colonel who

Lots of good articles on Canadian brutality in WW1 if you do a search. As for war crimes in particular, here’s one of many articles mentioning how Canadians killed prisoners of war:

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/the-forgotten-ferocity-of-canadas-soldiers-in-the-great-war

Birds are reptiles.

I mean, we’re kind of known for war crimes too. Was anyone in WW1 worse than the Canadians?

Holy shit! This dude’s pluralising in Greek!

Do you change the emphasis? da-ko-TANT?

No. This story starts with filthy SE Asians. Europeans are just the man-whores that gave them to everyone else.

“Vamipre”.

When they are in Kill Mode they are absolutely vicious. They’d reach through the fence and pull the chickens’ heads off.

Old English was ‘den’. Place names ending in ‘den’ or ‘don’ were originally farmsteads cleared in the forest, i.e. Wimbledon, or Camden.

Like, what made him vomit, what was his vomit made of, and if that wasn’t a fucking joint then what was it?

I don’t know what you’re talking about. They’re naturally superior.

That sounds like Gabor Maté’s work.

Not sure you’ve given us enough context. Why would I feel the need to defend myself when someone asks me directions.

I have a suspicion you’re asking if someone questions my actions or something.

I’ve started to think of “optimum solutions” rather than “right solutions”.

We talking about horoscopes here?

The word “extreme” colours your question a fair bit. I think equality of all genders is good, I don’t think anyone should be subject to unfair treatment based on gender. As a cis-het man I like to be in a relationship with a strong woman.

However, I dated someone for a while that probably fit into the “extreme” category. It was exhausting. I sometimes felt like I couldn’t do anything without it being subjected to the question: “is this the patriarchy?” Like, she needed to hang some closet doors, had no tools, and I was like, “Oh, I can bring my drill over next week and do that!” That offer to help needed to be examined.

It also got annoying that workplace frustrations we both faced were always primarily parsed as “men being sexist” when it happened to her.

IMO often her “fierce conversations” were her being kind of dick about something.

Her model for independence and autonomy strayed very close to a refusal to take anyone else’s needs into account. Her desire to treat everyone like they were equal ignored actual power differentials and the responsibility with which they come. For example, she argued she wouldn’t put the booze away if someone she knew was an alcoholic was coming over because that would be patriarchal and robbing the alcoholic of their agency.

It got exhausting.