I get that they're funded by think tanks, but that orgs like the Institute for Family Studies assume birthrates went down just mainly because of casual sex and not cost of living... it's like, are you even trying, do you even want to win
People ALWAYS had casual sex, if you think you're getting accurate reports of nonmarital sex from years 1900-1950 you're a fucking idiot
Edit: I... uh... wrong thread, sorry
Don't you love when you post a reply in the wrong thread, and now everyone thinks you're Ed Gein?
I once posted a comment in completely the wrong thread - I thought it was the current megathread. Everyone upvoted and responded positively so I only realized like two weeks later.
Is it a battle when it's one-sided, a much more organized us heaping comments and downvotes on them, who have to operate within Reddit's rules?
"I know you are here to ban me. Click, coward, you are only going to ban an account."
:joker-che:
I've always wondered if offerings were intended at some point to feed vagrants and travelers without explicitly endorsing it. Like, you leave out a glass of soju and a portion of rice in Japan for the local god, or you leave a bowl of porridge for the elves in Scandinavia, you gotta be aware that when it's gone, it hasn't been sucked into the spirit realm. It's a nice thought that some might have been aware that most people wouldn't want to feed the homeless, but had no problem feeding mythological beings, and it's even guaranteeing that only the desperate would take the chance on getting cursed from eating offerings.
That's really interesting, I've never thought of it like that... Makes sense though
Big if true. I also recently posted a notice for anyone camping near my house to ask me for wifi access and will give it out for free to car campers.
I've heard the same from backpackers(or what counted as that 45 years ago)
I'd think less of a church that had a homeless person sleeping in the graveyard and didn't offer to let them come inside
