unicorn

😄

Wow. Going into a place without knowing either what's on offer nor what prices to expect. I admire both your sense of culinary adventure and financially care-free nature! 😉

So how do you come to the decision to eat at that restaurant? Friends' recommendations? Just walking by? Tripadvisor?

Landing in Bangor, visiting Roosevelt Campobello International Park, Quoddy Head Lighthouse (easternmost point in the US, closest point in the US to Africa), Acadia National Park, Camden Hills State Park, Boothbay Harbor, Portland, Ogunquit, Mount Washington (weather-permitting), Lake Winnepesaukee, Castle in the Clouds, Franconia Notch State Park, Montpellier, Shelburne Museum, Burlington, Vermont covered bridges, Bennington Museum, Clark Art Institute, Norman Rockwell Museum, Providence.

We'll be going on a New England trip next month, and I've been looking over restaurants at the places where we'll be going. While it's not the norm, I'm still surprised by the number of restaurants which either have no website (!) or have a website, but no menu. Sometimes one can find the menu on other websites, sometimes not. I'd never go to a place without knowing what I was getting into. Would you?

A little over two years ago, my hubbie and I went to the Fire Island Pines event on the 4th of July when the drag queens parade off of the ferry from Cherry Grove. I wore a T-shirt, shorts, used a stick of SPF 50 on my face, and spray SPF 50 on the exposed areas of my legs, arms, and neck. I got a clear demonstration of how well sunscreens work, because the next day I was slightly burnt only in the areas under the shirt. I laughed about it later with my dermatologist, who told me T-shirts only provide about SPF 8 of protection. It's called a reverse farmer's tan. I guess I was the opposite of a redneck (white neck)! (photo is not of myself) I recommend stick-style sunscreen for the face, so that the sunscreen doesn't run into one's eyes:

That being said, although I would never test myself (and my ancestry's not Nordic anyway), if I knew I was homozygous for the mutation, I would probably be satisfied with condom use only (as opposed to condoms plus PrEP) as protection. The mutation in and of itself probably does provide 90% protection, and careful condom use can provide nearly 90% protection as well.

It seems like it's been almost a year since On Swift Horses came out, but it was in theaters for such a short time that I missed it. I've been checking every week to see when it'd make it to streaming, and it finally showed up on Netflix. Super-hot Jacob Elordi (from Saltburn) stars, as well as two other hotties, Diego Calva and William Poulter. I confess that I find William Poulter unusually sexy, although I thought he looked like a homely kid as a child actor 15 years ago in those Vacation movies. It's the Neville Longbottom effect; one never knows when an ungainly-looking child will turn into a handsome man. Elordi and Calva: William Poulter:

My husband's like that--doesn't want to know anything about a movie other than the genre and Rotten Tomatoes rating before seeing the movie. I actually prefer to know plots before-hand. As you noted, one can enjoy a movie even though one knows the plot. Why else would one watch a movie (or play, or musical, or opera) multiple times, even when one knows what will happen? The only movie I can think of in which I appreciated not knowing the plot in advance was The Crying Game.

Care to elaborate? Is he following right-wing politicians?

All Republicans, I can assure you. He will probably still be a menace to society when he gets out.

I must say I'm extremely fascinated by the gorgeous Pietro Boselli. According to his Wikipedia page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pietro_Boselli "Pietro Boselli (born 3 December 1988) is an Italian model, engineer, and former mathematics postgraduate teacher at University College London.... Reacting to his fame, while Boselli has been appreciative, he has spoken against male objectification and the 'dumb model' stereotype and similar prejudices on multiple occasions...." Pietro Boselli Born 3 December 1988 (age 36) Negrar, Veneto, Italy Alma mater University College London (BEng, PhD) Occupations Model engineer teacher Years active 2004–present Modeling information Height 6 ft 1 in (185 cm) Hair color Brown Eye color Hazel Agency Models 1 Website pietroboselli.com While he's spoken against male objectification, and notwithstanding his Ph.D., he now seems to be earning his living entirely from modeling and OnlyFans. I find it especially curious that while he seems to be against men being treated as sex objects, he's chosen to use his beauty rather than his obvious intellect to earn a living. Lucky for us, I guess!

Do send the link...

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/disgraced-former-rep-george-santos-begin-seven-year-prison-sentence-rcna221069 In the US at least, the law considers a person innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. As for George Santos, he's serving a 7-year sentence in federal prison. "Disgraced former Rep. George Santos reported to prison on Friday, beginning a more than seven-year sentence after pleading guilty to a laundry list of federal charges that included wire fraud, identity theft and money laundering. He is in custody at the Federal Correctional Institution Fairton in Fairton, New Jersey, the Federal Bureau of Prisons confirmed Friday.... On Dec. 1, 2023, the House voted 311-114 to expel Santos, making him just the sixth person in U.S. history to be expelled from the House of Representatives. After his guilty plea, Santos was sentenced to 87 months behind bars this past April and ordered to pay almost $374,000 in restitution and over $200,000 in forfeiture...".

That reminds me of A&F's racist T-shirts from 2004, which they actually thought were funny:

My recollection is pretty good, considering this was a quarter of a century ago: https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/page-one-former-contra-costa-supervisor-gets-3012878.php "Stoic and steadfastly denying any guilt, former Contra Costa Supervisor Gayle Bishop was sentenced yesterday to three years in prison for perjury and misappropriation of county funds... Former staff members aided in her conviction, testifying at trial for the prosecution that Bishop ordered them to perform work for her private law practice and her re-election campaign and to cover up traces of misconduct... Burak estimated that Bishop's actions cost the county at most "a few hundred dollars."...". Although it looks as though her sentence was reduced after an order from the Court of Appeals: https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/bishop-gets-6-months-in-jail-and-probation-2962593.php "Holding a packed courtroom in tight suspense to the end, a judge made a surprise show of leniency yesterday to former Contra Costa Supervisor Gayle Bishop by not sentencing her to state prison. Instead, Bishop, 61, will be required to serve a six-month county jail term for her seven felony convictions on misuse of public office and lying to a grand jury. The same judge, John Tiernan, sentenced her earlier to three years behind bars, but two of her convictions were later overturned on appeal. She is scheduled to surrender to authorities on Feb. 12, serve 30 days in custody and then will probably complete the sentence under home detention, Tiernan said...". Obviously, the ultimate sentence didn't make as big a headline as the original sentence.

Not only have there been such resignations, but also criminal prosecutions. Prior to living in Los Angeles, I lived in the county of Contra Costa, near Oakland, California. One of the county supervisors (the lawmakers for county laws) was found to have asked her government staff to do some work for her campaign. Not only was she removed from the Board of Supervisors, but she was also fined and imprisoned for a fairly substantial period of time (I seem to recall about 2-3 years). Law enforcement has even created stings to catch dishonest politicians, including the infamous Abscam sting operation, which put quite a few members of the US Congress in prison for years. Of course, at least on the federal level, Trump has allowed any violation of federal law to be ignored with impunity, as long as the violator has actively supported him, or donated a sufficient quantity to his campaign. Once again, the 18th Century framers of the Constitution never imagined the public would vote in such a charlatan as POTUS. This happened due to the SCOTUS "Citizens United" ruling, which forbade limits to campaign contributions, as well as the advent of social media, which allowed fabrications to dominate over investigative reporting and scientific fact. Especially under Trump, Republicans have waged an all-out war against truthfulness and science. It definitely wouldn't surprise me if Trump pardoned Ghilesne Maxwell in exchange for her lying about Trump not being on Epstein's list. Indeed, there is a mysterious hole in the surveillance video around the time of Epstein's death, which was ruled a suicide, but I strongly suspect was murder. As for the British politician who defrauded the government of $54,000, was she sentenced to a prison term? I'd certainly hope so. One can question those who rise out of nowhere to power. Many, like Trump, are simply adept scam artists.

While it may be the case that those with the mutation are resistant to infection, the mutation does not make those with it bullet-proof. I certainly wouldn't rely on this mutation to throw caution to the wind. I know of no public health organization which either recommends getting tested for this, nor of any statement that prophylaxis isn't needed when the mutation is present. https://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/viruses101/hiv_resistant_mutation/ "...The CCR5-delta 32 mutation in a sense locks "the door" which prevents HIV from entering into the cell. 1% of people descended from Northern Europeans, particularly Swedes, are immune to HIV infection. These lucky people are homozygous carriers of the mutated gene - meaning that they inherited a copy from both of their parents. Another 10 -15% (the number has even suggested to be 18%) of people with European heritage inherited one copy of the gene. Just one copy of the mutation does not prevent against infection. It does however reduce carrier's chances of infection and delays the progress of AIDS. Since the CCR5-delta 32 is tied primarily to the Eurasia region, the mutation has not been found in Africans, East Asians, or Amerindians... ...CCR5-32 Delta is exciting. It presents possibilities for new ways to protect against HIV. Many wonder if genetic testing is available yet to see if one has the mutation. There are some tests available (just google CCR5-32 Delta testing and you'll see) but it is not yet widespread or widely recommended. The mutation is not completely fool proof. Cases of homozygous carriers that have become infected with HIV have been reported. These few exceptions have dissuaded health officials from fully supporting genetic tests over ethical concerns. It would not be wise for those with the mutation to assume that they can lead a dangerous lifestyle and remain healthy. Understanding how and why certain people are resistant to HIV/AIDS with the help of CCR5-32 Delta will hopefully lead to new and highly successful treatments in our lifetime."

Wow. Another great, and extremely hot dark comedy now playing in a theater near you (hopefully) is Twinless. There's even a gay sex scene involving gorgeous heart-throb Dylan O'Brien. And it has a 97% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. What more could one ask for?

While "boy" can informally refer to a young man, in most situations, particularly in the current climate, it's less creepy to refer to a youthful-appearing adult as a twink or twunk, depending on the person's muscular definition. Were I into twinks, I'd rather say "I'm into twinks," than "I'm into boys," which could be mis-interpreted. Of course, idiomatic expressions such as "Girls' night out," or "Boys' night out" are exceptions. Calling an adult "Boy" could also be interpreted as implying subservience. So the answer to the OP's question is this word can be used in the right context, but is best avoided for the sake of clarity/avoiding misunderstanding, whenever possible.

As those who run the festival like to brag, there are no visitors--only participants. https://americanart.si.edu/exhibitions/burning-man “‘No Spectators’ is a long-standing saying on Playa. You are encouraged to fully participate. It’s all about being there, being fully present, and not just observing. Two of the ten principles of Burning Man are radical participation and radical inclusivity, meaning that there are no outsiders. Everyone is part of the experience.” – Nora Atkinson, The Fleur and Charles Bresler Curator-in-Charge, Renwick Gallery There are definitely no day-passes, and it's essentially impossible to visit as a tourist. AI Overview Yes, the idea that there are only participants, and no visitors, is a core principle of the Burning Man event . The event is a temporary community, known as Black Rock City, which is created entirely by those who attend. Key aspects of this principle include: Radical participation: The culture is built on the idea that every individual is a creative and interactive part of the experience, rather than a passive onlooker. Everyone is encouraged to contribute to the city, the art, and the overall communal effort. "No spectators" is a common mantra: This longstanding saying on the Playa (the desert floor) reinforces that simply observing is not enough; you must be present and engaged. Creation over consumption: Unlike a traditional festival with headliners and scheduled performers, the people who attend Burning Man create all the activities and art themselves. This participatory ethos is one of the "Ten Principles" that guide the Burning Man community.

One has to understand that the US Constitution (including its bill of rights) was written in the 18th Century, when not just the US, but the entire world, was a very different place. Direct democracy was a new idea. There are many horrid aspects to the Constitution, including the Electoral College, the non-democratic Senate, and the virtual impossibility to hold the US President accountable under the law (especially under the current hard-and-fast political party system). I don't think anyone at the time imagined the likes of Trump. The one saving grace is that while Trump has appointed a plurality of the US Supreme Court justices, they are not beholden to him, and he cannot fire them once confirmed. Trump can even, in effect, fire Republican members of Congress by labeling them traitors--and he has done so multiple times. We live under a reign of terror with both Congress and the Presidency under Trump's control, and the mostly Republican-appointed SCOTUS putting few brakes onto his insane policies. We can only hope that at least the SCOTUS is not physically afraid of him--though I have a feeling he can figure out ways to put the squeeze even on them. We simply have to survive this reign of terror until his term is up or until he dies, whichever comes first. I never thought this could happen in the US, but I was wrong.

Wouldn't the abduction and enslavement of Thai citizens into Myanmar qualify? If US citizens were being abducted and enslaved into another country, I doubt the US would sit on its hands (unless, of course, the foreign country had an extremely powerful military, such as China or North Korea).

Shortly following 9/11/01, some form of passport has been required, even for land and sea crossings. Though valid for domestic air travel, even enhanced driver's licenses are not valid for entry into Canada and Mexico. https://www.tsa.gov/real-id/real-id-faqs Q: Can I use my REAL ID card to cross the border into Canada and Mexico and for international travel? No. REAL ID cards cannot be used for border crossings into Canada, Mexico or other international travel. For land and sea crossings (for example by train, car, or cruise ship), one can use a passport card rather than present the passport book, but most people who use the passport card also have a passport book. A Global Entry card (or NEXUS or SENTRI) is also adequate, although one must have a passport book to get such a card. Any international travel by air requires the full passport book.

I must admit that I've been curious for years, though never tempted to go. The festival definitely attracts a crowd of people who are not at all similar to myself. Those running the festival go to very great pains to make sure the site is not accessible to tourists and/or the curious. Money magazine estimated the cost of attending in 2017 to be about $2348 per person, and it hasn't gotten cheaper since: https://money.com/burning-man-how-much-it-costs/ And that's if you don't need to rent an RV.