mike carey

No, it hadn't, and no I don't think it does. The fact that someone might use a label in a screen name they chose in the past does not detract from the argument that such labels may not serve as much a purpose as is often assumed they do. But, as you say, carry on!

It's disappointing to me that there appears to be a tendency for people to take a hard line view that if someone even thinks about anything sexual that paints them as anything other than an absolute zero or six on the Kinsey scale that they are admitting that they are 100% at the other end of the scale. You can't have it both ways, if one BJ or dick in the arse makes someone NOT STRAIGHT, then one PIV experience would make them NOT GAY. Could it be that there are no people who are by absolute definition either gay or straight, but there are actions that can be so described? Could it be that the critical point is that orientation is self-identification, not objective fact? Or that as @MikeBiDude suggested, labels are so last century, or perhaps just not helpful? I can understand people wanting to apply labels or deny them, either from pride or from fear, or from wanting to magnify or diminish the number of people who 'are' straight or gay. To suggest that one act defines you, reminds me of darker times in history when one drop of the blood of a denigrated group could condemn you to servitude or worse.

Bandiera rossa trionferà!

How very dare you!!!

Methinks you see through the mask some of these old timers project better than they understand it themselves. Maybe some of them would be pleased if you showed them more of yourself, you speak much sense here!

Somewhere like Chengdu?

The US part yes, but at least it's not impossible. It looks as if it could be 'deliberate' in a way, dots he has a specific reason to be joining, not just a random list of cities. His claim to a background from Aotearoa and Berlin (specific, not just 'Germany') sounds credible, with the added data point that his ad has a German phone number. His reviews are from disparate parts of the world, the earlier ones in Australia, just across the ditch from 'home', implying that he has travelled, so continuing to do so isn't implausible.

There have been several threads about Dublin over the years, some as recently as early this year. You can find them by searching the site, making sure you select the 'In This Forum' option when you are in the Europe forum. I have merged this question with the thread you created last month, keeping the the title you used today.

G'day Steve, welcome to the forum. We've had considerable push-back in the media here from health professionals and academics. Take-way from what they said is that there is no evidence of any links between paracetamol (tylenol is a brand name, here the most common brand is panadol) and autism. Furthermore, there is apparently no evidence from any properly conducted randomised double-blind studies of negative effects on children from maternal paracetamol use during pregnancy. One thing that has been mentioned as being an established risk, although not for autism, was from a fever during pregnancy, something for which paracetamol is a recognised treatment. Here, over-the-counter sales from supermarkets, and from pharmacies without the a discussion with qualified staff, are limited to packs of 20 capsules or tablets. Overdosing of paracetamol is a known danger and can be fatal, so there are reasons for caution with its use, but not for the reasons that are being discussed in public at the moment.

Probably, I don't remember though.

Snow in summer? Or is it just a few snowflakes?

They are available everywhere except the US. Something to do with FOSTA-SESTA.

And the nicest guy!

Interesting, the last two characters are 'Nanjing' (in Pinyin, or Nanking in the old French post office romanisation of the name of that city, the system that spelt Beijing as Peking). But whatever, I think that the caption in the image is saying that they won't eat there, they'll go to an Indian restaurant instead. *Brought to you by Captain Obvious*

Short, succinct. And serious. Again. Grin

Anyone in particular in England?

This reminds me of one of the points a video I posted in the fast food thread about McDonald's in Australia had made. The video was basically a recounting of the way that in Australia, McDonald's had moved in different ways than it had in the US. It talked of their attitude to experimentation and innovation, and of paying attention to local market dynamics. To paraphrase part of it, in Australia they had taken the core product lines, and signature ones like the Big Mac (the item that had become the basis of a way of simple way of explaining purchasing power parity as a concept after the Economist created the Big Mac Index) and taken risks on specialist product lines and marketing methods to work in this market. The video made a point, perhaps a debatable one, but maybe more insightful than they realised, that in Australia they focussed on the menu items and kept the bundle methods simple. The bundle is simply called a 'meal deal'. The bundle is the burger, wrap or whatever, with a side and a drink. The price for the bundle is pitched as small chips (although they do call them 'fries') and a small soft drink. Substitutes are permitted, larger serves of chips or a salad, barista coffee, choose the size you want, with a price difference to reflect the adjusted bundle. Selling the food is focussed on the main menu item not the bundle. In contrast, and this is my wording not the video's, in the US the emphasis seems to be on marketing different bundles, no substitutions. In effect they are taking the same burgers and trying to sell it in a range of different coloured wrapping paper with a different bow tied on the package. To me, having tried to read the options on the menu board in an American McDonald's, it's just confusing. There's a limit to the number of times you can sell repackaging as a new offering.

To add to what @Simon Suraci said, satire builds on a narrative of what it critiques, but that narrative us usually a big picture that goes further than the individual elements that form part of it. Disproving, or calling out a lie in one small part does not necessarily debunk the entire narrative. Necessarily is the key word. Some things depend on the validity of every component. Narratives that tell a big story, whether for it to be satirised or merely revealed, are more like a jigsaw puzzle. Take out one piece and the picture is still clear. To mix metaphors, not every stone is a keystone.

The laughing emoticon was for the last two sentences. Made my day.

Welcome to the forum @SaintV. Hope it helps you to find some answers. It's not always smooth sailing but good on balance. Most people are helpful, but some voices are discordant. Hope you have fun here.

I err on the side of having quieter ones.