You can heat a pizza stone as hot as you want, it’ll never be able to transfer that heat as quickly as quickly as metal. It’s the conductivity that makes the difference.

Oooh I’ve never tried making pancakes doigt sur la photo. How was it?

It’s called grabity because it’ll reach up and grab ya!

https://youtu.be/kLUj2Sto7T8?feature=shared

You’ve got a bit of a catch 22 trying to make shrimp stuffed braciole because traditionally braciole is tougher cuts of beef (when nonna taught me we used round steak) braised in tomato sauce until the heat and the acid tenderizes them, but braising shrimp for that long is gonna turn them into chewy, flavorless lumps. Upgrading to ribeye (that I assume is both butterflied and pounded thin) and cooking less is an interesting way to try to solve that problem

In America, race and sexuality being irrelevant is a privilege of straight white men. When someone has done you violence because of who you are, you’ll spend every second of the rest of your life with who you are and how likely the people around you are to try to kill you over it in the forefront of your mind. When I, as a queer person, walk into a room I immediately sort everyone in the room into threats, allies, and people who will just stand off to the side because experience has taught me that if I don’t some people will beat the shit out of me and others will tell me that I deserve it for “being a f*g about things”. Ask your black friend, or your gay friend, or your woman friend. I guarantee you every one of them is more on guard than you because race, gender and sexual orientation will never be irrelevant to them.

This isn’t about forcing people to disclose their sexuality. “Why does he have to be gay?” Is almost always an effort to force people not to disclose their sexuality, but it’s only ever used when the sexuality being disclosed is non-straight. You have never seen and will never see any reaction at all to a straight cis male character simply using the phrase “my wife” but a cis female character doing exactly the same will elicit a backlash. They’ll dress it up as being against unnecessary sexualization, but the only sexualization that’s ever unnecessary is queer sexualization. Straight sexualization is never a problem.

because I’d “like” to “know”. Some people use them to communicate dubiousness, some people use them to indicate they’re actually quoting someone, some “people” use them for emphasis.

I still only have ever heard “Tim shot Eric dead.” I’ve never seen it any other way except in this headlines.

I’d love to see an example of “I shot dead him”. I’m not trying to be defensive, I’d really enjoy seeing it. Dialects fascinate me.

But we absolutely see backlash of the type of “why does he have to be gay” in response to something as simple as two men holding hands, or other things that would never be seen as “making a point to mention someone’s sexuality” if that sexuality is straight. I’m generalizing away from this particular example and addressing the idea that anything that isn’t cishet is abnormal and requires justification.

Did they run out of monkeys?

Why are straight white people the only people who don’t need a plot justification to exist?

Imagine how difficult it is to try to tell people that you are, globally, the pre-eminent batman researcher…

The headline is technically grammatically correct but ambiguous. “…shot and killed unarmed black man” would have been better. If you absolutely need to stick to word/character count, “shot unarmed black man dead” would be less ambiguous and more in keeping with how people actually use “shot dead”. I’ve watched a lot of westerns and I can think of quite a few where someone says “I shot him dead” but not one where someone says “I shot dead him”.

Why is she in quotes?

Are they wrong to do this? I believe so, and I can’t comment on UK law but US law agrees with me. But can I tell you why they do this? 18 years in foodservice and one of my most common complaints was coffee or tea that isn’t hot enough. Sometimes it was that I poured a cup and then had to go do something else before I dropped it off, but a lot of times it was just done brewing and I had walked the pot straight to the table only for someone to send it back and tell me to microwave it until it boiled.

People love narratives that are simple and have an easy to understand moral to them even if they’re absolutely wrong. In this case, the narrative is that she asked for hot coffee and got hot coffee, and the moral is that people are greedy and stupid and you have to protect yourself from them. I’ve often found that one well-constructed point can blow these narratives up though. I was talking with my dad about this particular case, he’s a big “gotta do something about these frivolous lawsuits” guy because he used to own a business that was adjacent to real estate and real estate is probably the most litigated business in America. I’m a big “frivolous lawsuits is a term exploitative industries use to get people excited to give up their rights” guy, so we were at loggerheads about this one. Eventually I was like “Have you ever spilled coffee? When you did, who paid for your skin grafts?” Turns out that when crafting their narrative about how she was “suing them for giving her what she asked for”, the industry lobby left out the part where she had to spend 8 days in the hospital and have multiple reconstructive surgeries.

He’s a repeat offender. He was convicted on multiple counts. Strictly speaking, he’s not just a rapist, he’s a serial rapist.

But I do think we’d agree about plea bargains. They let the guilty off scot free and let the overworked, underfunded judicial system off the hook when it comes to innocent defendants.

He didn’t get convicted of rape and being unlikeable. He was convicted of rape. The penalty being assessed is the penalty for rape. Whatever else he may have done, good or bad, he did the rape. He should pay the penalty for the rape that he did. If he collects money for disabled children on Sundays, he shouldn’t be punished less, he should pay the penalty for rape. If he’s a jerk who gets drunk on weeknights and starts his political opinions with “I’m not racist, but…” he shouldn’t be penalized additionally for that. He should be penalized for rape. This thing where we make room for “He’s a rapist, but…” is fucking garbage. It reeks of Brock Turner’s dad trying to reduce the lifetime of harm his son inflicted on a woman to “10 minutes of action”. If a rapist who operates a puppy rescue is less of a rapist than a rapist who does other things we all agree to be unpleasant then it’s not about the harm inflicted, it’s about how much we all generally like the rapist.