c: drive? Are you crazy? If I was that type of guy, I very much doubt I'd store something like one-of-a-kind nude pictures taken by myself on the c: drive. Imagine if the os crashes or *GASP* someone finds some flaw in Windows or something and they were stolen or lost!
Not to mention, a woman with perky B's will still have perky B's 10 years from now. A 20 year old chick with D's will likely have her navel between her tits by that time, and likely looks far less good without a bra than with one already. =P
I concur! Women know full well what cleavage, tight pants, short skirts, etc. does to men. The whole argument of dressing up for themselves to "feel pretty" that I hear over and over is kind of moot. Not that it's not all good to fix yourself up to feel good about yourself, but the satisfaction of being content with what the mirror shows pales in comparison to having people notice or even complement ones looks. Now think about the amount of attention a hot woman gets when she wears clothing that is, undeniably, designed to arouse men and invoke thoughts of what said man and said woman could be doing (tear off that barely concealing top, flip up the miniskirt and.. well, you get the idea).
Getting slapped because you check out a womans cleavage is bullshit. It's like a guy buying an awesome sports car and slapping a woman for showing interest in the car! If he didn't want to get attention for the car, he could damn well drive something less attention-grabbing!
I think the old Balls Out Pants sketch from MadTV pretty much explains my point.
The problem, I suspect, is actually putting the women in the same situation. It's not hard to find a few women that would be considered sexy and beautiful by any given heterosexual male.
Women on the other hand seem much less impressed by appearances. My impression is that most chicks don't generally see guys hot enough who cause instant sexual arousal every 2 minutes. Hell, some women find Brad Pitt irresistible, while others think he is nothing special at all but start drooling at the very mention of Johnny Depp.
Place any above-average looking, well styled chick wearing sexy lingerie in a room with a man trying to do an IQ test and he won't just score low, he will fail. Put any random male underwear model in the same room with women doing the test and most likely they will only feel uncomfortable by the half naked guy flexing.
How do I know this? Because I used to say the same crap: "I only like smart girls." Took me years to realize that biology was oh so much more powerful than intellect or free will.
Cut yourself some slack. I very much doubt that you give into every "biological" whim without consulting your intellect and will! I like smart girls. In general I prefer people capable of critical thinking and intelligent conversation. That doesn't mean that my penis has never been attracted to some stereotypical "dumb blond" who thinks her greatest assets are her ass, boobs and styling skill.
Yes, biology is powerful. Doesn't mean I'll hump "anything warm". To me, there is a bit of talking involved in the whole "getting to the bed"-process, and someone who brings nothing to the table but appearances quickly looses my interest. In fact, my impression of someone vastly changes how physically attractive they are. Someone plain-looking but fun and interesting can become pretty, while the hottest dumb chick quickly becomes about as attractive as a walking Fleshlight.
Gee williger, Captain Obvious! Thanks for clearing that up! =P
Getting enough proteins, fat, fiber, vitamins, minerals and the myriad of other things we need is healthy. Carbs are too, but not the high GI processed crap most people eat these days. Exercise and eating well is vital for a healthy body and a sound mind.
Quite aside from all the health issues connected with overweight itself, doing healthy stuff keeps you from becoming a lard-ass. Ergo, being a lard-ass is the opposite of being healthy.
Sidenote: you won't see me arguing the virtues of using BMI for anything. I currently have a BMI of 27 (where "normal weight" is in the range of 18.5-24.9) and a body fat percentage of roughly 13 (where "healthy" is 12-18 for males my age).
Forgot to mention, in Norway, most non-whites (god, that feels politically incorrect!) are immigrants, or children of immigrants who's parents haven't necessarily even learned the language very well. In America, everyone's an American, regardless of background.
Had you read the stuff I have posted, you would have seen that my main point is that representing yourself as different to the extreme isn't a good way to get people to accept you and ignore the (in reality, quite insignificant) difference!
I'm not saying you misrepresent gays, nor am I saying the majority of gays do. Still, enough do that whenever I hear "gay culture" images immediately pop into my head of the gay pride parade and Blue Oyster Club from the Police Academy movies.
Please enlighten me, what exactly is gay culture? You say you look like any other person, and you think pride parades to be detrimental and self-defeating (exactly what I am saying). So with you being more or less like me, except who you want to spend your life with.. what defines this "gay culture" you are part of that I am not? Is it illogical that for many, "gay culture" carries associations of overweight men in tiny fairy costumes, Village People tribute bands and generally bondage, leather and pink vinyl?
Where the hell do you live where calling a black man black gets you repeatedly punched in the face?? Even here in California that sort of thing would be unheard of.
Ok, I might have exaggerated a bit to make my point. Whether things get physical depends on who overhears, there are many who seek reasons to get into a fight (black and white alike) and to a black person with this mindset, a reference to skin color is as good a reason as any. With more normal people, I still cringe at the idea of using words like "black" because here in Norway it is a bit of a tabu. "Political correctness" has gone way to far, last year there was even a proposed law that would criminalize the act of referring to skin color in any way, because some people might find it offensive! Gladly, this law wasn't passed or I'd not be living here right now.
As I pointed out to another poster, I think there is a much more equal distribution of different colors/cultures/etc. in America than in Norway. I don't know if it has any relevance (but I imagine it does), but in California, blacks aren't really a numerical minority are they? They are here in Norway but as I said, I don't know if that matters.
I keep reading about this insulin:carbohydrate ratio thing online. Perhaps I will give it a more serious, scientific-minded try! Sadly, my hospitals diabetes specialist couldn't answer my mothers (a few years back, have since cut the cord =P ) questions regarding protein powder and possible effects on diabetes. The (only) diabetes nutrition expert at the same hospital told us that protein powder was b/s as I would get must as much protein from two slices of bread with cheese as a 60g shake containing 98% protein. The only help available is researching stuff myself and trying it out. Sad state of affairs.
I might be a huge asshat for saying this but in the vast majority of cases T2 is a lifestyle disease. Ergo, don't be vastly overweight, eat well and perhaps even work out a bit, and this will never be a problem for you. Likewise, your statement claims that there are T2's who have a hard time controlling their disease. On the other hand, there are T2's nearly completely rid themselves of the disease by loosing weight, educating themselves on nutrition and working out. That last bit isn't an option for a T1. We can't simply put in an effort and end up all better. It's a life-long effort on par with what the T2's that get healthy put in, just to avoid severe complications.
So yes, I would choose T2 over T1 any day! There are times when I even think I'd choose cancer over T1, for the chance of actually having my health restored.
Are you American? Admittedly, your culture is more mixed than it is here in Norway. At any given location you'd not expect there to be an equal share of all ethnic groups (is that politically correct? I sure can't say "races".. what am i supposed to say here?).
Perhaps this contributes to the black guy thinking there is a racist motivation behind every and any reference to his skin color, but I fail to see it. There isn't a whole lot of discrimination going on over here against any group, even if we are yet to arrive at the "cultural melting pot" state of the USA.
Yes, someone who proclaims to put logic before prejudice probably uses two of the most derogatory, insulting, hate-laden words in the English language, only to go on whining about freedom of speech being crippled by the fact that I can't even talk about a genetic trait that someone possesses without getting the racist/nazi/biggot/asshole stamp. Brilliant deduction, Mr. Anonymous Coward.
To clarify, I have never called anyone a nigger or a faggot and I never will! Both are terms that relate not to skin color or sexual orientation, but to racist/biggot beliefs that some genetic traits make you less worth as a human being. This is, of course, a planet-sized load of crap and as such I want no part of it. Also, I never go out of my way to hurt anyones feelings, so the motivation to use such words is completely absent!
Perhaps we come from different places, but the politically correct term for "black" changes almost from month to month here. You are never "safe" lest you inhibit your freedom of speech by never ever mentioning someones skin color or sexual orientation. Even the most level headed black guy I have ever spoken with told me that any reference at all to his skin color triggered an initial response of feeling somewhat insulted. Why, he could not explain. He agreed that the logic was screwed up as he would never react to anyone commenting on his black hair, but that's the way it is.
I don't know why you deny it but there is a culture to homosexuality. It's no secret to acknowledge historically that homosexuals have been viewed or shunned as a counterculture and it's that counterculture that we should not be afraid of and -- actually -- recognize.
I can only speak for the people I know and the "general public" I am part of here in Norway. It seems to me that gays are not discriminated against because they are homosexual, but rather because they constantly feel the need to shove in my face who they have sex with. Frankly, I don't give a damn. I'd be shunned rather quickly if I constantly needed to tell people I like female genitalia. I'd be arrested if I walked down Karl Johan (main street in Oslo, the capital of Norway) wearing only my manly underwear and a tool belt, wielding a wrench in one hand and a dildo in the other while shouting about how fantastic it is to be straight and making out with every straight woman in eyesight who cared to celebrate their straightness with me.
I'm not sure who you're hanging out with or why you think this way but I have several gay friends and if someone says "fag" or "gay" in a demeaning manner, they start saying "breeder" to refer to something as stupid or dumb.
You make my point, thanks! If I refer to someone as gay because they are, in fact, obviously and by self proclamation gay, it's fair that they start calling me "breeder" because of some perceived insult? If I go to a gay bar and get to talking with some people there, I assume they will jokingly refer to me as the "breeder", the "straight guy", the "virgin", the "uninitiated" or some such and I'd take no offense to it and laugh with them. By your argument, it would be acceptable for me to reply to a joking reference to my straightness (which I felt was somehow demeaning) with derogatory terms like "fag" or "faggot".
Thanks for your judgment, I hope you enjoy forcing your values and ideas on people. Good luck "making" everyone correct.
Apart from the fact that I referred to the wrong hemisphere.. x) If I got to enforce my values on everyone, this would be a pretty decent world because primarily I'd force everyone to put logic before prejudice. People would acknowledge that black people are in fact black and gays are in fact gays, and that none of the above has any implications on anything what so ever.
Trust me that's very wrong. Gay people have been forced out of mainstream society long enough that they do have their own culture which is very different from mainstream society.
And I still hold to my opinion that if many gays did not go out of their way to appear flamboyantly different, I'd not give a rats ass what gender they are attracted to! It seems strange to me that being discriminated against gives rise to a response of exaggerating and shoving the traits that make you different in everyones face.
Exaggerated and simplified somewhat.. "Your grandparents didn't accept gay people? WELL EAT MY PINK MAN-STRING! I DEMAND ACCEPTANCE!". Am I just an idiot for not seeing how embellishing what makes you different to the point where you and your friends look like circus performers is a good way to garner acceptance..? As opposed to just being yourself and sharing your life in peace with your friends and the man/woman you love, which obviously would be completely stupid..?
Getting sick and tired of replying to people completely missing the point of my original post.
So what you're saying is it's only okay to celebrate culture if it's your own culture, the most popular culture?
I'm saying that if minorities don't want to be seen as different, they should stop shouting about how different they are. Do you see many white people becoming aggressive because someone calls them "white" or "pasty"? No. Do you know what would happen if I wanted to throw a "straight pride parade" to celebrate (as you say we do) our culture? Let's just say, it wouldn't be met by smiles and friendly faces. The Norwegian gay pride parade gets quite a bit of government money to have their celebration. Do you think I'd get the same kind of cash to celebrate loudly that I am straight..?
Regardless, since when is evolutionary fitness the defining feature that declares the worth of a person?
I have never claimed such a thing! You, sir, are the enormous asshole here, for putting such words in my mouth when my entire point is that logically these differences are completely moot. As soon as minorities stop screaming that they are minorities I'd cease to see them as such. The way I see it, where I come from it's perfectly valid for a minority to go out into the street by the hundreds and celebrate them being different, while the rest of us get a racist/biggot stamp on us if we so much as mention the very difference they are celebrating!
I would argue that for me, being straight is no more a choice than having 10 fingers. I look at a fit woman and get aroused. I look at a fit man and while I might envy his good looks I do not feel any tingling sensations in any part of my body.
On the other hand, I am aware of how things were in the old Roman Empire and as such accept that with sufficient "cultural influences" I could probably get off having sex with a man. However, at the age where I began noticing that tingling sensation, it was triggered by girls. This was at the time where I read no magazines and watched only cartoons and other kid-friendly stuff on tv. As such, I'd argue that I wasn't brain washed by said "cultural influences" and yes, sexual orientation is inherently genetic even though I strictly speaking could have mechanical sex with a man and have an orgasm, if that was the absolute norm.
Drawing conclusions out of this air (or your ass, I don't know), good job!
I have never in my entire life used the n-word because it's degrading. It refers not to skin color but to the racist view that people possessing differing genetic traits are somehow inferior which is about as big a logical FAIL as you can get.
Wow, my first foe! =D Wait, that's not a good thing is it..? Allow me to at least try to clear the air, ok?
Why is that the measure of whether something is acceptable? Besides, if you're going to be perfectly "logical" and "scientific" about this, then you should be rejecting the supposition that homosexuality is a trait that evolution would suppress--because it hasn't been suppressed, has it?
Where did I say it's a measure of what is acceptable? Woah, my grip on the English language must be more fleeting than I thought, because my point is that logically, there is a difference. And, logically, it doesn't matter worth shit! So, logically, gays shouldn't feel the need to dress up in the most extreme ways possible (without getting a fine for indecent exposure) just to shove the fact that they are not different down peoples throats while celebrating the fact that they are different to the point of claiming their own culture!
Different from what? Heterosexuals? Why is that the measure? And I challenge you to define "heterosexual" and "homosexual" as distinct identities in such a way that they meaningfully describe people's behavior. It's not possible.
Again you miss the mark completely! Sexual orientation can't be used to define ones identity. If I wake up tomorrow and find it arousing to look at a fit man, my identity will not have changed. Who I date, fall in love with, have sex with, and want to spend my life with has, though I utterly fail to see how this would make me part of some culture that involves dressing up in skimpy leather outfits to celebrate loudly how different I now am while arguing that I should not be treated as different.
Are you getting my point, or are you angrily penning down a reply before actually reading my reply? My point is, people are different and it shouldn't matter one bit. How celebrating this in the most obscene way possible aids in gaining acceptance is beyond me. No one cares that you are in a same-sex relationship. Everyone cares when you dress up in a fairy costume 5 sizes too small and prance down the street. Are you getting my point, dear foe of mine? =)
if I refer to a black guy as black (...) most likely I will get a fist to the face, repeatedly
Wait, what?
It's true. As I wrote further down, if I am out clubbing and I ask someone "Hey, did you see where my friend went? You know.. the black guy with the blue jeans.." and another black guy overhears.. I will be in trouble. I might not get beat up, obviously not everyone resorts to violence, but I will at best get away with a very strict verbal reaming and a "friendly" request to leave.
Kinda weird.. Most likely, referring to my friend as I said would mean eliminating a lot of the people who were not him, making it easy for the person I asked to answer my question. What the hell else I am to say? "The dude with the brown eyes and nice teeth who is about 5"11 and has no freckles and is of medium build, wearing blue jeans and.. uhm.. a white'ish sweater"? Yeah, that's real convenient! And why should someone with blue eyes (a minority) not accuse me of being a discriminating asshat for classifying people by eye color? It's just a genetic trait, along with sexual orientation, skin color, hair color, height, hitchhiker's thumb and anything else about someone's appearance.
Yes, I know there has never been slavery based on eye color but honestly.. a person possessing distinct African traits who has been born and raised in Norway has never been a slave and although there are actual racists here(as everywhere else) they are a vastly smaller minority than "foreigners" of any origin or gay people. I don't think the amount of discrimination a well integrated black 20-something Norwegian has been through justifies such a strong reaction to any mention at all of their skin color. Similarly, young gays in Norway might get a bit of a hard time in school (but everyone who stands out in any way does), but my general experience is that people here don't care at all who you are attracted to.
Damnit! Thanks for pointing that out. I had just watched an episode of House M.D. and got my hemispheres mixed up.
Stop claiming that I said "homosexuals are flawed" as if I mean they are less worth! I meant that logically, they are attracted to mates with whom they cannot reproduce which from natures point of view seems.. illogical. Granted, I have been corrected. I knew there are homosexual animals, but I didn't know homosexual individuals could contribute to group survival better than their heterosexual counterparts. As for evolution in humans.. As a previous poster pointed out, it's not happening. Or rather, evolution is happening but not survival of the fittest...
..for which I am rather glad. God knows I'm riddled with genetic trash and fuck-ups! Born with Asthma Bronchitis, developed allergies (both of which have been slapped into medication free submission), and now I have T1 diabetes. Do I consider myself of less worth? Well.. no, not as a human. As breeding stock? If T1 diabetes is in fact genetic and I can pass it on to my offspring, I will consider adoption both to spare my kids this crap and to at least contribute in my small way to the gene pool. Say what you like, but that is at least a personal choice.
Of course I know gay people. How can I not, they are as much a part of everyday life as anyone possessing any other genetic (assuming genes are at least in part responsible) trait!
I don't discriminate against them for being born gay. That would be incomprehensibly stupid, and contrary to/. opinion at the moment, I am not. I do however find it weird that someone who claims to be discriminated against feel the need to not only express what makes them different but express it to such an extreme that one cannot help but noticing!
I assume that if I were attracted to men, my personality would still be for the most part the same as it is today. I fail to see how I would feel the urge to shove my sexuality down everyones collective throat any more than I currently try to make an unmissable point of being heterosexual.
I am frightened by the replies I am getting from a community I assumed was logical at least to the point of reading my post and consulting with their brains before answering! I wasn't writing a paper on evolution, simply trying to point out that celebrating which gender you are attracted to is not going to garner much acceptance and to me doesn't make one bit more sense than a "straight pride parade" or a "diabetics pride parade". After all, diabetes is a disease that should have been cured decades ago (according to way smarter folks than me), but we are being discriminated against by money-grabbing pharmaceutical giants at the cost of limbs and life.
The whole point of my post was that homosexuals, bisexuals, blacks, whites, asians, diabetics are all different, and it doesn't matter!
What does matter though, is that claiming to work for equality and acceptance while dancing shit-faced drunk and concealed only by your pink underwear and purple feather boa in the gay pride parade because it is your "culture" doesn't seem very logical.
Until the minorities stop constantly screaming in my ear about them being minorities, how on earth am I supposed to forget and ignore their differences and just get on with my unbiased life? How can I ignore these differences when there are people shrieking about how different they are in every possible media outlet?
And by the way, I live in Norway. If you go out clubbing and you ask someone "Have you seen my friend? He's black and wears blue jeans." (because.. well.. he's black and wears blue jeans and that is fairly easily recognizable compared to eye-color, hairdo, etc.) and someone black (who is not your friend) hears you, you better have an impressive gift of speech to avoid a whopping!
Checking those numbers, I end up at 34 to 51 units of insulin per day. I'm not sure what the definition of "basal" is. Is that the type of insulin that clocks in between fast and slow acting? That many people take in the morning, in addition to fast acting for each meal? I have never been recommended that, or even been told about it. The so-called specialists over here are horribly out-of-date it would seem. =/
Anyways.. At the moment I do a lot of resistance training as that is what impacts insulin sensitivity and metabolism the most. I eat 4-5 reasonably healthy (limited carb, well rounded) meals a day and I still have to take roughy 12-15 units per meal. That's 48-75 units per day, and my HbA1c is still too high.
As for calculating.. Yes, I just "look at the plate and guess". I know the difference between eating potato, pasta and bread as opposed to eating broccoli, brusselsprouts and meat. I usually hit the mark fairly well but now and then I have a fruit or eat something I'd usually not, and overall the effect is a too high HbA1c.
On the upside though.. I just had a full battery of bloodworks done and my good cholesterol is higher and my bad is lower than an average healthy person my age. My kidney function is 100% and there is no sign of damage to my retinas.
If you say your friends have T1 I can't really say anything except that I have insane respect for them and their parents for keeping the insane level of diet control needed for a diabetic, especially back when blood glucose meters didn't exist! Still though, I consider having T2 a luxury problem. They do have insulin production, meaning their bodies do actually take care of the fine-tuning and most of them can get by fine by either working out and eating healthy, taking pills to lower resistance or worst-case, taking basal insulin.
Slashdot Mirror
c: drive? Are you crazy? If I was that type of guy, I very much doubt I'd store something like one-of-a-kind nude pictures taken by myself on the c: drive. Imagine if the os crashes or *GASP* someone finds some flaw in Windows or something and they were stolen or lost!
Not to mention, a woman with perky B's will still have perky B's 10 years from now. A 20 year old chick with D's will likely have her navel between her tits by that time, and likely looks far less good without a bra than with one already. =P
*WHOOOSH*
I concur! Women know full well what cleavage, tight pants, short skirts, etc. does to men. The whole argument of dressing up for themselves to "feel pretty" that I hear over and over is kind of moot. Not that it's not all good to fix yourself up to feel good about yourself, but the satisfaction of being content with what the mirror shows pales in comparison to having people notice or even complement ones looks. Now think about the amount of attention a hot woman gets when she wears clothing that is, undeniably, designed to arouse men and invoke thoughts of what said man and said woman could be doing (tear off that barely concealing top, flip up the miniskirt and.. well, you get the idea).
Getting slapped because you check out a womans cleavage is bullshit. It's like a guy buying an awesome sports car and slapping a woman for showing interest in the car! If he didn't want to get attention for the car, he could damn well drive something less attention-grabbing!
I think the old Balls Out Pants sketch from MadTV pretty much explains my point.
The problem, I suspect, is actually putting the women in the same situation. It's not hard to find a few women that would be considered sexy and beautiful by any given heterosexual male.
Women on the other hand seem much less impressed by appearances. My impression is that most chicks don't generally see guys hot enough who cause instant sexual arousal every 2 minutes. Hell, some women find Brad Pitt irresistible, while others think he is nothing special at all but start drooling at the very mention of Johnny Depp.
Place any above-average looking, well styled chick wearing sexy lingerie in a room with a man trying to do an IQ test and he won't just score low, he will fail. Put any random male underwear model in the same room with women doing the test and most likely they will only feel uncomfortable by the half naked guy flexing.
In other words, useless test.
How do I know this? Because I used to say the same crap: "I only like smart girls." Took me years to realize that biology was oh so much more powerful than intellect or free will.
Cut yourself some slack. I very much doubt that you give into every "biological" whim without consulting your intellect and will! I like smart girls. In general I prefer people capable of critical thinking and intelligent conversation. That doesn't mean that my penis has never been attracted to some stereotypical "dumb blond" who thinks her greatest assets are her ass, boobs and styling skill.
Yes, biology is powerful. Doesn't mean I'll hump "anything warm". To me, there is a bit of talking involved in the whole "getting to the bed"-process, and someone who brings nothing to the table but appearances quickly looses my interest. In fact, my impression of someone vastly changes how physically attractive they are. Someone plain-looking but fun and interesting can become pretty, while the hottest dumb chick quickly becomes about as attractive as a walking Fleshlight.
I know I should probably make a joke about how scenarios like that play out in every slashdotters head daily but never actually happens but.. meh
Gee williger, Captain Obvious! Thanks for clearing that up! =P
Getting enough proteins, fat, fiber, vitamins, minerals and the myriad of other things we need is healthy. Carbs are too, but not the high GI processed crap most people eat these days. Exercise and eating well is vital for a healthy body and a sound mind.
Quite aside from all the health issues connected with overweight itself, doing healthy stuff keeps you from becoming a lard-ass. Ergo, being a lard-ass is the opposite of being healthy.
Sidenote: you won't see me arguing the virtues of using BMI for anything. I currently have a BMI of 27 (where "normal weight" is in the range of 18.5-24.9) and a body fat percentage of roughly 13 (where "healthy" is 12-18 for males my age).
Why isn't this modded +5 Insightfu.. *err* Funny? xD
Forgot to mention, in Norway, most non-whites (god, that feels politically incorrect!) are immigrants, or children of immigrants who's parents haven't necessarily even learned the language very well. In America, everyone's an American, regardless of background.
Had you read the stuff I have posted, you would have seen that my main point is that representing yourself as different to the extreme isn't a good way to get people to accept you and ignore the (in reality, quite insignificant) difference!
I'm not saying you misrepresent gays, nor am I saying the majority of gays do. Still, enough do that whenever I hear "gay culture" images immediately pop into my head of the gay pride parade and Blue Oyster Club from the Police Academy movies.
Please enlighten me, what exactly is gay culture? You say you look like any other person, and you think pride parades to be detrimental and self-defeating (exactly what I am saying). So with you being more or less like me, except who you want to spend your life with.. what defines this "gay culture" you are part of that I am not? Is it illogical that for many, "gay culture" carries associations of overweight men in tiny fairy costumes, Village People tribute bands and generally bondage, leather and pink vinyl?
Where the hell do you live where calling a black man black gets you repeatedly punched in the face?? Even here in California that sort of thing would be unheard of.
Ok, I might have exaggerated a bit to make my point. Whether things get physical depends on who overhears, there are many who seek reasons to get into a fight (black and white alike) and to a black person with this mindset, a reference to skin color is as good a reason as any. With more normal people, I still cringe at the idea of using words like "black" because here in Norway it is a bit of a tabu. "Political correctness" has gone way to far, last year there was even a proposed law that would criminalize the act of referring to skin color in any way, because some people might find it offensive! Gladly, this law wasn't passed or I'd not be living here right now.
As I pointed out to another poster, I think there is a much more equal distribution of different colors/cultures/etc. in America than in Norway. I don't know if it has any relevance (but I imagine it does), but in California, blacks aren't really a numerical minority are they? They are here in Norway but as I said, I don't know if that matters.
I keep reading about this insulin:carbohydrate ratio thing online. Perhaps I will give it a more serious, scientific-minded try! Sadly, my hospitals diabetes specialist couldn't answer my mothers (a few years back, have since cut the cord =P ) questions regarding protein powder and possible effects on diabetes. The (only) diabetes nutrition expert at the same hospital told us that protein powder was b/s as I would get must as much protein from two slices of bread with cheese as a 60g shake containing 98% protein. The only help available is researching stuff myself and trying it out. Sad state of affairs.
I might be a huge asshat for saying this but in the vast majority of cases T2 is a lifestyle disease. Ergo, don't be vastly overweight, eat well and perhaps even work out a bit, and this will never be a problem for you. Likewise, your statement claims that there are T2's who have a hard time controlling their disease. On the other hand, there are T2's nearly completely rid themselves of the disease by loosing weight, educating themselves on nutrition and working out. That last bit isn't an option for a T1. We can't simply put in an effort and end up all better. It's a life-long effort on par with what the T2's that get healthy put in, just to avoid severe complications.
So yes, I would choose T2 over T1 any day! There are times when I even think I'd choose cancer over T1, for the chance of actually having my health restored.
Are you American? Admittedly, your culture is more mixed than it is here in Norway. At any given location you'd not expect there to be an equal share of all ethnic groups (is that politically correct? I sure can't say "races".. what am i supposed to say here?).
Perhaps this contributes to the black guy thinking there is a racist motivation behind every and any reference to his skin color, but I fail to see it. There isn't a whole lot of discrimination going on over here against any group, even if we are yet to arrive at the "cultural melting pot" state of the USA.
Yes, someone who proclaims to put logic before prejudice probably uses two of the most derogatory, insulting, hate-laden words in the English language, only to go on whining about freedom of speech being crippled by the fact that I can't even talk about a genetic trait that someone possesses without getting the racist/nazi/biggot/asshole stamp. Brilliant deduction, Mr. Anonymous Coward.
To clarify, I have never called anyone a nigger or a faggot and I never will! Both are terms that relate not to skin color or sexual orientation, but to racist/biggot beliefs that some genetic traits make you less worth as a human being. This is, of course, a planet-sized load of crap and as such I want no part of it. Also, I never go out of my way to hurt anyones feelings, so the motivation to use such words is completely absent!
Perhaps we come from different places, but the politically correct term for "black" changes almost from month to month here. You are never "safe" lest you inhibit your freedom of speech by never ever mentioning someones skin color or sexual orientation. Even the most level headed black guy I have ever spoken with told me that any reference at all to his skin color triggered an initial response of feeling somewhat insulted. Why, he could not explain. He agreed that the logic was screwed up as he would never react to anyone commenting on his black hair, but that's the way it is.
I don't know why you deny it but there is a culture to homosexuality. It's no secret to acknowledge historically that homosexuals have been viewed or shunned as a counterculture and it's that counterculture that we should not be afraid of and -- actually -- recognize.
I can only speak for the people I know and the "general public" I am part of here in Norway. It seems to me that gays are not discriminated against because they are homosexual, but rather because they constantly feel the need to shove in my face who they have sex with. Frankly, I don't give a damn. I'd be shunned rather quickly if I constantly needed to tell people I like female genitalia. I'd be arrested if I walked down Karl Johan (main street in Oslo, the capital of Norway) wearing only my manly underwear and a tool belt, wielding a wrench in one hand and a dildo in the other while shouting about how fantastic it is to be straight and making out with every straight woman in eyesight who cared to celebrate their straightness with me.
I'm not sure who you're hanging out with or why you think this way but I have several gay friends and if someone says "fag" or "gay" in a demeaning manner, they start saying "breeder" to refer to something as stupid or dumb.
You make my point, thanks! If I refer to someone as gay because they are, in fact, obviously and by self proclamation gay, it's fair that they start calling me "breeder" because of some perceived insult? If I go to a gay bar and get to talking with some people there, I assume they will jokingly refer to me as the "breeder", the "straight guy", the "virgin", the "uninitiated" or some such and I'd take no offense to it and laugh with them. By your argument, it would be acceptable for me to reply to a joking reference to my straightness (which I felt was somehow demeaning) with derogatory terms like "fag" or "faggot".
Thanks for your judgment, I hope you enjoy forcing your values and ideas on people. Good luck "making" everyone correct.
Apart from the fact that I referred to the wrong hemisphere.. x) If I got to enforce my values on everyone, this would be a pretty decent world because primarily I'd force everyone to put logic before prejudice. People would acknowledge that black people are in fact black and gays are in fact gays, and that none of the above has any implications on anything what so ever.
Trust me that's very wrong. Gay people have been forced out of mainstream society long enough that they do have their own culture which is very different from mainstream society.
And I still hold to my opinion that if many gays did not go out of their way to appear flamboyantly different, I'd not give a rats ass what gender they are attracted to! It seems strange to me that being discriminated against gives rise to a response of exaggerating and shoving the traits that make you different in everyones face.
Exaggerated and simplified somewhat.. "Your grandparents didn't accept gay people? WELL EAT MY PINK MAN-STRING! I DEMAND ACCEPTANCE!". Am I just an idiot for not seeing how embellishing what makes you different to the point where you and your friends look like circus performers is a good way to garner acceptance..? As opposed to just being yourself and sharing your life in peace with your friends and the man/woman you love, which obviously would be completely stupid..?
Getting sick and tired of replying to people completely missing the point of my original post.
So what you're saying is it's only okay to celebrate culture if it's your own culture, the most popular culture?
I'm saying that if minorities don't want to be seen as different, they should stop shouting about how different they are. Do you see many white people becoming aggressive because someone calls them "white" or "pasty"? No. Do you know what would happen if I wanted to throw a "straight pride parade" to celebrate (as you say we do) our culture? Let's just say, it wouldn't be met by smiles and friendly faces. The Norwegian gay pride parade gets quite a bit of government money to have their celebration. Do you think I'd get the same kind of cash to celebrate loudly that I am straight..?
Regardless, since when is evolutionary fitness the defining feature that declares the worth of a person?
I have never claimed such a thing! You, sir, are the enormous asshole here, for putting such words in my mouth when my entire point is that logically these differences are completely moot. As soon as minorities stop screaming that they are minorities I'd cease to see them as such. The way I see it, where I come from it's perfectly valid for a minority to go out into the street by the hundreds and celebrate them being different, while the rest of us get a racist/biggot stamp on us if we so much as mention the very difference they are celebrating!
I would argue that for me, being straight is no more a choice than having 10 fingers. I look at a fit woman and get aroused. I look at a fit man and while I might envy his good looks I do not feel any tingling sensations in any part of my body.
On the other hand, I am aware of how things were in the old Roman Empire and as such accept that with sufficient "cultural influences" I could probably get off having sex with a man. However, at the age where I began noticing that tingling sensation, it was triggered by girls. This was at the time where I read no magazines and watched only cartoons and other kid-friendly stuff on tv. As such, I'd argue that I wasn't brain washed by said "cultural influences" and yes, sexual orientation is inherently genetic even though I strictly speaking could have mechanical sex with a man and have an orgasm, if that was the absolute norm.
Drawing conclusions out of this air (or your ass, I don't know), good job!
I have never in my entire life used the n-word because it's degrading. It refers not to skin color but to the racist view that people possessing differing genetic traits are somehow inferior which is about as big a logical FAIL as you can get.
Wow, my first foe! =D Wait, that's not a good thing is it..? Allow me to at least try to clear the air, ok?
Why is that the measure of whether something is acceptable? Besides, if you're going to be perfectly "logical" and "scientific" about this, then you should be rejecting the supposition that homosexuality is a trait that evolution would suppress--because it hasn't been suppressed, has it?
Where did I say it's a measure of what is acceptable? Woah, my grip on the English language must be more fleeting than I thought, because my point is that logically, there is a difference. And, logically, it doesn't matter worth shit ! So, logically, gays shouldn't feel the need to dress up in the most extreme ways possible (without getting a fine for indecent exposure) just to shove the fact that they are not different down peoples throats while celebrating the fact that they are different to the point of claiming their own culture!
Different from what? Heterosexuals? Why is that the measure? And I challenge you to define "heterosexual" and "homosexual" as distinct identities in such a way that they meaningfully describe people's behavior. It's not possible.
Again you miss the mark completely! Sexual orientation can't be used to define ones identity. If I wake up tomorrow and find it arousing to look at a fit man, my identity will not have changed. Who I date, fall in love with, have sex with, and want to spend my life with has, though I utterly fail to see how this would make me part of some culture that involves dressing up in skimpy leather outfits to celebrate loudly how different I now am while arguing that I should not be treated as different.
Are you getting my point, or are you angrily penning down a reply before actually reading my reply? My point is, people are different and it shouldn't matter one bit. How celebrating this in the most obscene way possible aids in gaining acceptance is beyond me. No one cares that you are in a same-sex relationship. Everyone cares when you dress up in a fairy costume 5 sizes too small and prance down the street. Are you getting my point, dear foe of mine? =)
if I refer to a black guy as black (...) most likely I will get a fist to the face, repeatedly
Wait, what?
It's true. As I wrote further down, if I am out clubbing and I ask someone "Hey, did you see where my friend went? You know.. the black guy with the blue jeans.." and another black guy overhears.. I will be in trouble. I might not get beat up, obviously not everyone resorts to violence, but I will at best get away with a very strict verbal reaming and a "friendly" request to leave.
Kinda weird.. Most likely, referring to my friend as I said would mean eliminating a lot of the people who were not him, making it easy for the person I asked to answer my question. What the hell else I am to say? "The dude with the brown eyes and nice teeth who is about 5"11 and has no freckles and is of medium build, wearing blue jeans and.. uhm.. a white'ish sweater"? Yeah, that's real convenient! And why should someone with blue eyes (a minority) not accuse me of being a discriminating asshat for classifying people by eye color? It's just a genetic trait, along with sexual orientation, skin color, hair color, height, hitchhiker's thumb and anything else about someone's appearance.
Yes, I know there has never been slavery based on eye color but honestly.. a person possessing distinct African traits who has been born and raised in Norway has never been a slave and although there are actual racists here(as everywhere else) they are a vastly smaller minority than "foreigners" of any origin or gay people. I don't think the amount of discrimination a well integrated black 20-something Norwegian has been through justifies such a strong reaction to any mention at all of their skin color. Similarly, young gays in Norway might get a bit of a hard time in school (but everyone who stands out in any way does), but my general experience is that people here don't care at all who you are attracted to.
Unless you insist on dressing like this.
Damnit! Thanks for pointing that out. I had just watched an episode of House M.D. and got my hemispheres mixed up.
Stop claiming that I said "homosexuals are flawed" as if I mean they are less worth! I meant that logically, they are attracted to mates with whom they cannot reproduce which from natures point of view seems.. illogical. Granted, I have been corrected. I knew there are homosexual animals, but I didn't know homosexual individuals could contribute to group survival better than their heterosexual counterparts. As for evolution in humans.. As a previous poster pointed out, it's not happening. Or rather, evolution is happening but not survival of the fittest...
..for which I am rather glad. God knows I'm riddled with genetic trash and fuck-ups! Born with Asthma Bronchitis, developed allergies (both of which have been slapped into medication free submission), and now I have T1 diabetes. Do I consider myself of less worth? Well.. no, not as a human. As breeding stock? If T1 diabetes is in fact genetic and I can pass it on to my offspring, I will consider adoption both to spare my kids this crap and to at least contribute in my small way to the gene pool. Say what you like, but that is at least a personal choice.
Of course I know gay people. How can I not, they are as much a part of everyday life as anyone possessing any other genetic (assuming genes are at least in part responsible) trait!
I don't discriminate against them for being born gay. That would be incomprehensibly stupid, and contrary to /. opinion at the moment, I am not. I do however find it weird that someone who claims to be discriminated against feel the need to not only express what makes them different but express it to such an extreme that one cannot help but noticing!
I assume that if I were attracted to men, my personality would still be for the most part the same as it is today. I fail to see how I would feel the urge to shove my sexuality down everyones collective throat any more than I currently try to make an unmissable point of being heterosexual.
I am frightened by the replies I am getting from a community I assumed was logical at least to the point of reading my post and consulting with their brains before answering! I wasn't writing a paper on evolution, simply trying to point out that celebrating which gender you are attracted to is not going to garner much acceptance and to me doesn't make one bit more sense than a "straight pride parade" or a "diabetics pride parade". After all, diabetes is a disease that should have been cured decades ago (according to way smarter folks than me), but we are being discriminated against by money-grabbing pharmaceutical giants at the cost of limbs and life.
The whole point of my post was that homosexuals, bisexuals, blacks, whites, asians, diabetics are all different, and it doesn't matter!
What does matter though, is that claiming to work for equality and acceptance while dancing shit-faced drunk and concealed only by your pink underwear and purple feather boa in the gay pride parade because it is your "culture" doesn't seem very logical.
Until the minorities stop constantly screaming in my ear about them being minorities, how on earth am I supposed to forget and ignore their differences and just get on with my unbiased life? How can I ignore these differences when there are people shrieking about how different they are in every possible media outlet?
And by the way, I live in Norway. If you go out clubbing and you ask someone "Have you seen my friend? He's black and wears blue jeans." (because.. well.. he's black and wears blue jeans and that is fairly easily recognizable compared to eye-color, hairdo, etc.) and someone black (who is not your friend) hears you, you better have an impressive gift of speech to avoid a whopping!
Checking those numbers, I end up at 34 to 51 units of insulin per day. I'm not sure what the definition of "basal" is. Is that the type of insulin that clocks in between fast and slow acting? That many people take in the morning, in addition to fast acting for each meal? I have never been recommended that, or even been told about it. The so-called specialists over here are horribly out-of-date it would seem. =/
Anyways.. At the moment I do a lot of resistance training as that is what impacts insulin sensitivity and metabolism the most. I eat 4-5 reasonably healthy (limited carb, well rounded) meals a day and I still have to take roughy 12-15 units per meal. That's 48-75 units per day, and my HbA1c is still too high.
As for calculating.. Yes, I just "look at the plate and guess". I know the difference between eating potato, pasta and bread as opposed to eating broccoli, brusselsprouts and meat. I usually hit the mark fairly well but now and then I have a fruit or eat something I'd usually not, and overall the effect is a too high HbA1c.
On the upside though.. I just had a full battery of bloodworks done and my good cholesterol is higher and my bad is lower than an average healthy person my age. My kidney function is 100% and there is no sign of damage to my retinas.
If you say your friends have T1 I can't really say anything except that I have insane respect for them and their parents for keeping the insane level of diet control needed for a diabetic, especially back when blood glucose meters didn't exist! Still though, I consider having T2 a luxury problem. They do have insulin production, meaning their bodies do actually take care of the fine-tuning and most of them can get by fine by either working out and eating healthy, taking pills to lower resistance or worst-case, taking basal insulin.