It’s OK, this is what the majority of American voters chose.

I’ve heard that statistic but it doesn’t match what I’ve seen in my own family. My grandparents weren’t physically intimate with each other even when I was a kid and they were relatively young. (I lived with them so I would have noticed if they ever wanted private time together, and they never did.) This, combined with the fact that many people in nursing homes are in no condition to actually have (consensual) sex, makes me wonder if the explanation for that statistic is not as straightforward as it seems.

But are you saying that there can be romantic attraction without significant physical aspects, or are you talking about romantic attraction with fewer (but still some) physical aspects but more emotional ones?

What do you mean by “emotional attraction”? I enjoy spending time with my good friends, and I would even say that I love them in the way that friends love each other, but I am not attracted to them.

I don’t see how I could have a romantic relationship with someone I didn’t want to have sex with. The man I mentioned who is no longer attracted to women his age does have a woman his age in his life who was his girlfriend when they met 25 years ago and the two of them still enjoy spending time together, but they no longer have a physical relationship although he does still have a sex drive. He’s sad about this but accepts it as the way things are for older people. I don’t know how she feels.

I can understand how you don’t want to date someone a lot younger than you, although I don’t have any personal experience with that - I’ve never had a partner more than a couple of years younger than I am. However, I’m a man who has had little in common with most of the women I’ve dated, simply because I have little in common with most women. (My hobbies might be crudely called “autistic”.) Thus, for me dating has involved finding women I get along with surprisingly well despite having so little in common.

Maybe I also wouldn’t enjoy the company of someone a lot younger than me, but the main problems I foresee are that (1) no one like that would want to date me and (2) even if I found someone like that who wanted to date me now then I doubt she would still want to date me when I was old as opposed to just middle-aged.

Even if I wasn’t bald, I’d pick my early 20’s. Adults generally don’t get better looking as they age.

I already knew that people who spit gum out onto the ground are monsters.

Oh no, not $300k! How will the parade survive the absolutely no difference that will make?

Today, I noticed that a restaurant I manage had its OpenTable booking integration replaced with Google Assistant.

Replaced in what context? My understanding is that OpenTable still works just fine but Google is, on its end, no longer automatically referring its own users to OpenTable. I wouldn’t call that “hijacking” unless the restaurant had a prior agreement with Google.

No Available Reservations

That’s not the error message. Google says that you can’t get a reservation through Google Assistant not that there are no reservations available.

19, because I started going bald very early. I’m about 40 now.

Whole home water filters is what you want.

My well water had arsenic in it and I installed a filter only on the cold water line to the kitchen sink. I only drank that water and unfiltered water was fine for everything else. Something like that could be much cheaper for OP.

I get suspension or expulsion as punishments, but what does it even mean to have a degree temporarily revoked? I have only ever heard of degrees being revoked (permanently) after plagiarism was discovered.

They don’t control the entire government in this context. That’s why they need Democrat votes.

As for fault: the spending bill is in itself reasonable. Refusing to vote for it may be the optimal strategy (I don’t know) but it doesn’t look great.

While the grant language does include a single sentence acknowledging that transgender men are among those who menstruate, there was no indication that they were the focus of the grant or even part of it. The passing reference to transgender men in the original grant application appears to be the sole justification for its cancellation.

I think it’s ironic that the bullshit intended to pander to one set of ideological gatekeepers has now caused another set of ideological gatekeepers to cancel the grant. I wish it was possible to just stick to the science.

Maybe it varies by industry. I’m a software developer and even as an employee, I’m expected (but not formally required) to learn about advances in the relevant technologies, programming languages, etc. on my own time. If I didn’t and I was fired because my skills weren’t what the company needed anymore then I would get unemployment benefits, but I don’t see how either wage theft or improper dismissal could occur unless the company did something really weird.

It’s surprising to me that the relevant treaty allows lawsuits for the value of potential future profits rather than just compensation for actual losses, but if that’s what Greenland agreed to in order to encourage foreign investment then I don’t think Greenland has grounds to complain when it is expected to follow through. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

not how most places function

That hasn’t been my experience. Even places that pay for employees to get certified expect those employees to study on their own time unless they’re sent to formal training.

Modern heat pumps are efficient enough to be cost-competitive and electric stoves are not universally liked but technically functional. However, what are buildings supposed to do about water heaters? Aren’t electric water heaters a lot more expensive to operate than gas or oil ones?

I’m not convinced that Trump has done better against the Democrats than an ordinary pre-MAGA Republican candidate would have. It’s normal for the party in power to switch every eight years, and in that context the unusual thing about Trump is not that he won in 2016 but that he lost in 2020. Biden/Harris’s loss in 2024 is also unusual but so is running a senile candidate, forcing him to step aside far too late, and then replacing him with his vice president who has no significant accomplishments and no way to distance herself from his unpopular policies.

There is something important that Democrats need to change about their strategy, but that’s running candidates based on their appeal to the public rather than on their seniority within the party. I had hoped that they learned that lesson after Hillary Clinton’s failure but they didn’t. I think they will do well if they run a young, charismatic centrist like Bill Clinton or Obama in 2028.

It doesn’t have a record either way - it’s an unknown.