Drivebyhaiku

How on earth did you interpret I was suggesting you place that kind of burden on a beginner - are you mental?

No! You, the converter make tea for the convertee so all they need to do is put fabulous tea in their face and benefit from your experience.... Or just go to a good restaurant and have actually great tea. Point being is if you want someone to potentially like tea the burden of proof that tea is awesome is on you to prove.

Some might be swayed by giving them stale preportioned box tea that is formulated not to be awesome - just harder than average to fuck up with a long steep time because it's overroasted... But good luck.

I have converted non-coffee /tea people and it's not like they've never had tea before. Some people legit don't like it but more or have been trained to ambivalence because people have given them a lot of mediocre tea and sold them the idea that the mediocre was good. For those people it takes way more than another banal so/so experience solidifing their notion that tea kind of is just "okay" to actually get them curious.

Yeah, but if you are trying to actually impress someone it's not where you start. I buy Yorkshire when I am hard up for cash because I am already addicted to black tea and it's ridiculously cheap but in the realm of tea in general it's equivalent to the same supermarket coffees.

If you actually want to hook someone you give them the good stuff first to show them the experience to aspire. If it's coffee go to a roaster, buy whole bean, grind it yourself before brew and use good technique in prep or go to a shop that knows their shit to do it all for you. If it's tea go and spring for a loose leaf properly sealed, pay attention to steep time and ideal water temp. You want to see their eyes shine when they take their first sip with the realization of a new word opening up.

Give it like a few years and they'll drink Yorkshire of their own volition. If you didn't grow up with tea as a nostalgia you got to traverse a barrier and create a memory they want to relive in another way.

I am sorry... They gave you Yorkshire tea and expected you to be impressed? Please tell me you are joking.

In Canadian equivalent it's like trying to take a foreigner to Tim Hortons. Just because it's the historical cheap swill choice of the masses one participates in out of habit doesn't mean it is objectively good.

They didn't get free food. In the common case they had to grow and manage their own after their coerced work was completed.

Imagine breaking your back for a 10-12 hour day under a boss with a whip and then having to do your own farming, slaughtering, milling and household work.

Well... A lot of their biblical evidence is less a rewrite and more of a translation issue. Take the whole Sodom and Gehmorra story about tje two angels that everyone is so keen to turn into a condemnation of the gays.

In the OG text the words used to describe the angels were analog to genderless forms of the word "master" and because there were two of them they were always referred to by genderless they/them plural... Which is probably why there were two of them. We are probably supposed to imply the perceived gender of the angels was irrelevant to the tale.

The first Latin and English translations off of Hebrew however used gendered terms for the two angels that coded them as male. Stuff like "Masters" "Lords" that kind of thing in large part because those societies were respectively fairly misogynistic and not primed to interpret either of the two genderless entities as possibility female coded. Then you see the anti same sex interpretation gain popularity in the case of England and France at the time they were going through a population crash via plague which caused amoung other things criminalization of same sex unions as a threat to sexual replacement of a sharply diminished population. So really we can trace this story being interpreted as God's condemnation of the gays rather then just regular old rapists around the same time the word "sodomy" came into the lexicon in the 1300's and the first waves of plague.

I really want to watch Harris take this chicken apart bone by bone in debate like a mechanical separator. The world demands this man be turned into Trump McNuggets on live tv.

Because AI is just a fancy statistical model which predicts things pixel by pixel. Hands create more statistical variables than other body parts because of all the things fingers can do or angles they can be viewed from. The model isn't sophisticated enough to count hands or fingers properly.

"Being Hot" is never someone's entire personality. Most of the time it's just the veneer used to keep people at a distance. There are advantages to not being hot - mainly you are not hassled by people for attention. Getting approached by people who want something from you all the time tends to make one put up walls. It's easier to be kind when so little is generally expected of you because it's not being demanded regularly.

Not everyone has the strength to be as nice and polite to the 50th person trying to score their number that week as they are to the first. We as a society spend way too much time dehumanizing people because of this shit. I am not conventionally attractive and I bless my lucky stars that I grew up never being denied affection by family or friends because I wasn't good looking. I see people at my job talk about the pretty actor folk behind their backs and it sounds just as catty and insecure as the shit people said about me for being unattractive.

I fucking hate thos saying. The moralizing of vanity is just another way to feel superior. The people who put a lot of work into how they look do so for a multitude of reasons. Sometimes it's because they are just having fun but other times it's because they grow up being told that they are never enough. That they are simply being deficient for not trying hard enough in which case their lack of vanity becomes instead the moral failure of gluttony or sloth. There is no win state. So then you are simply reinforcing that who they are aside from their appearance is worthless because they are empty voids for caring about the one thing that might be a rare source of validation. We all experience the effects of the privilege of attractiveness or it's lack. A lot of us spend lifetimes unpacking the toxic effects of that programming. This isn't the way to go about stopping that cycle.

"Vanity makes a person ugly inside" is just another way to put someone down so the person wielding this cliche can feel big. It's moralizing someone's relationship to their physicality and preying on places where people are trained to be weak.

Do they just figure the brainwashing has stuck by now? Is that it?

Like if they draw a connection between whatever weird thing they can possibly shoestring to trans women all of the conditioning will kick in and they will go "Brrr Trans woman BAD, me no trans! Me hate bad thing that will make me trans! "

It's funny being neurodivergant and dealing with neurotypicals who really don't get it and then finding someone who is your exact brand of neurospicy and then watching them sit back in confusion as all of a sudden they are the odd one out.

"How about we verbalize our intentions?" "Pppft! You're the only one here who needs verbal cues. Try reading body language and not just assuming anything SUSAN."

Yeah I got a older co worker who behaves in a way that strikes me as very undiagnosed autistic of his generation. He went on a whole rant about how the Olympics should be like a family reunion where you have to mask your less socially acceptable behaviours and cannot just be yourself because you shouldn't always be yourself around your family for the sake of overall unity...

And yeah... I was just thinking how sad that was. Like bro. We've since realized how toxic that is to people and our generation is trying to undo that expectation and damage. The neurotypical flattening of self expression always was a tyranny, you just normalized it.