During wet season its widest point can reach 30 miles. This means that if you're on a boat in the middle of the river, you can't see nothing but water in any direction. To cross it on foot, over some imaginary bridge, would take you over 8 hours.
I guess what parent is saying is that 'unrestrained' means you can add any word after the "with a ________", since it's unrestrained.
I have to disagree, though. Haven't we, as a society, been restricting (rightfully so in my opinion) more and more those sexual passions which we deem to be very harmful to the ones being sexualized?
Thanks both of u for being kind to me. I realize it is a hard issue to converse on, so i wont say too much
But since you're kind :)
Yeah. I suppose without sex, there are no children, and without children eventually there is no sex
So completely restrained is also wrong. Sex has it's context, and should be restrained within it. Children have their context and should be restrained within it
Which is what you're probably saying; to me "unrestrained sexual passion." doesn't mean that. So yeah, we're kinda in agreement, and questioning where the balance falls. That's a good place to be in
--
My suggested balance: focus on your spouse's benefit. That leads to _much_ more enjoyable outcomes. I have worked with prostitutes in the past (mostly trafficked women), and i can say forced sex, or unrestrained passion irrespective of another's feelings -- completely removes enjoyment -- unless the person doing it is also cruel
So my balance would be "love your neighbor as yourself."
I realize people can be unhappy with that for many reasons, but i suggest it is at least worthy of discussion
I actually meant "grandparent" instead of "parent". So I'm actually agreeing with you. "unrestrained sexual passion" can then mean almost any kind of sexual passion, since it's 'unrestrained', which will lead to sexual practices that we, as a society, have deemed to be very destructive to the individuals on the receiving end of that 'passion'.
when it comes to minors, people usually conflate rape and sex, as if having sex with a minor must necessarily be rape.
Many if not all children are ready for sex when they are around 9. I for one would have loved doing sexual things with older women I found attractive, I remember very clearly daydreaming of this.
If the mother doesn't drink/smoke, has normal sleep, and the baby is healthy, it's not considered dangerous and was practiced by all of humankind for most of its past. Separate rooms and separate beds are a very, very recent invention. For most of humankind's history mothers slept with their babies.
Yes but due to malnutrition, dysentery, accidents and a general lack of public health and medical care, not because their parents crushed them in their sleep.
I slept with my kid (I'm a father) for almost a year and trust me, you're still deeply aware of them when they're next to you.
Smothering does happen, statistically speaking, but the odds are so tiny and the benefits so great, it's basically a misinformation campaign based on bunk 1950's science.
100%, I think what has happened is smothering/SIDS/co-sleeping deaths got kinda lumped together into a single statistic and I know at least for me as a new parent it really freaked me out.
When I read more into the numbers it seemed that where co-sleeping has a real risk is when it happens outside of the bed, when the caretaker falls asleep in a chair. All of the deaths get lumped together and we are just told that you need to X so you reduce the risk of SIDs. It kinda sucks because it is so hard being a new parent, it would be nice to better understand up front what the real risks are.
What countries, you ask?? Try being an immigrant from a poor South American/African country and then try the traditional methods wiring money to your rural family who stayed behind. I despise the crypto hype, but sending money via cryptocurrencies is A LOT easier for the poorest people, since cellphones are so widespread now. I know plenty, plenty of poor people in my country who don't have bank accounts but have smartphones. If crypto payments were more widely accepted, a lot of them wouldn't come close to touching a bank.
I just checked the Detran and IBGE's numbers. There aren't more cars than people in São Paulo. It's a traffic hell, for sure, but still less cars than people.
No, São Paulo doesn't have more cars than people. I don't know where the parent got their data. I'll stand corrected if shown data supporting it, but the numbers I found were more like 7 cars for ever 10 inhabitants, and I don't even know if children taken into account. I lived in São Paulo for many years, and I sold my car before I moved there. Living downtown, one is better off without one. However, more cars than inhabitants seems and exaggeration.
Edit: Did some quick checking. According to the national institute of statistics, São Paulo's fleet is about 8.8 million (this includes over 1 million motorcycles, plus all the busses, tractors, trucks, etc. Regular cars are 6 million). Population is 12.3 million.
I've used and researched a lot of portable wood stoves. If you want a portable rocket stove, the one I would recommend is the Virestove. There are some video reviews on youtube that you can check out before buying it. I haven't used a more practical one yet. If you have the funds, they have it in titanium right now. Should be quite lighter than the stainless version. The mini version is more portable of course, but doesn't achieve the smokeless combustion that the larger version does. I guess it's the length of the chimney, but not sure.
For a flat pack grill that's practical and portable, I'd recommend you check out the ones made by UCO. They come in three sizes as of now. The only downside I find with flat pack style grills is that on most of them you have to raise the grill to add wood.
Somebody recommended the Firebox line. They're pretty awesome, but are regular wood stoves. They will smoke just like any fire pit or flat pack grill. No rocket smokeless combustion. The stainless version is very well built and will last forever. Haven't tried the titanium version, but seem to be well like by users. I'd also recommend the Bushbox, by Bushcraft Essentials. These towo are the best of the folding style portable wood stoves (not rocket style).
links to this stuff (some are available on amazon):
virestove.com
ucogear.com/portable-grills/
bushcraft-essentials.com/en/outdoor-stoves/
fireboxstove.com
I have to say though that I've been using wood stoves to cook less and less, mostly because of health concerns. It seems every year I find more and more reasons not to be around them.
With streets crowded with scooters during rush hour I think we'd have a lot more minor accidents/injuries, but far, far fewer deaths, right? What could be done to avoid the minor accidents?
> What could be done to avoid the minor accidents?
For one, more strictly enforce technical fitness and some form of age requirements. An awful lot of people don't care much about the roadworthiness of their vehicle, and many don't care about technological advances like anti brake-lock systems in newer models as well.
The other major contributor to motorcycle (or bicycle) accidents is road conditions like potholes, dirt and especially oil contamination, bumpiness in roads... a car doesn't care much (unless it's one of those super-flat sports vehicles), but a cyclist can easily lose control.
