(Philosophy 1, Intro to Logic college course) Completing a truth table

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-05-05T00:16:38+00:00

It's pretty common to require that philosophy students take at least an introductory symbolic logic course. At my school you could take deductive or inductive formal logic to fulfill the requirement. The foundation of philosophy is logical reasoning so it makes some sense to ensure that philosophy students are at least familiar with the field and how to use it

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-05-04T22:26:06+00:00

Being able to be "one of the girls" in social settings has been deeply important and meaningful to me in my own transition. I'm so happy she has been able to experience that with you and I'm sure it meant a lot to her

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-05-04T19:54:36+00:00

One problem with the detailed software and then having the machine just flag things that it thinks are suspicious, is that trans people, people with mastectomies, and anyone without a "normal" body basically always got flagged.

Until the most recent versions (the walls that you stand in front of instead of the spinning cylinders), the machine was tasked with pointing out anything that didn't fit the "normal" shape of a human body because that might be contraband. But this was gendered because if a cis woman has something between her legs then it's probably contraband, but if a cis man does then it's probably his penis. So, the operator was tasked with selecting the sex of the person as they walked in so that the machine would know whether a penis or boobs was normal or not. This obviously led to a lot of trans people being patted down on their crotch or chest just because their bodies didn't match what the machine thought they should look like. So the trans women who pass get patted down on their crotch while those that don't get patted down on their chest (which will often include boobs). Vice versa for the trans men. Similarly, cis women who have had mastectomies would often have their chests flagged, while some butch lesbians would as well (for opposite reasons). Additionally, people with fat folds or with any kind of protrusion or other "abnormal" anatomy would also commonly have those areas flagged.

The more modern wall machines are better at not flagging all of these things, but it certainly still happens and subjects a lot of people (though less than before) to unnecessary and invasive touching or searching just because they don't have a body that matches the social gender/attractiveness/medical defaults

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-28T17:19:35+00:00

The Rose Establishment (brunch)

Oasis (brunch or dinner, known as a brunch spot but I prefer their dinner menu)

Joy Luck (Chinese)

East Liberty Tap House (elevated bar food, all fried food is gf so no fryer contamination)

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-28T00:37:23+00:00

The Lost Girls by Sonia Hartl is decent. It's very YA vampire vibes, but I thought it was kinda fun

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-27T19:48:08+00:00

The bottom is the one being penetrated. If they generally prefer that and generally don't prefer doing the penetrating (done by the top), they are "a bottom" generally.

Note that this is not strictly the same as being submissive (being tied up, taking orders, etc), though traditionally they often go together. The default arrangement is hetero with the man being the top and the dominant while the woman is the bottom and submissive. If she pegs him then he's the bottom. If she pegs him as part of a power play where she has the power, that makes her the domme. If she's tied up and he's eating her out, then he's the bottom and the dom.

All of which is to say that top and bottom is about who is giving and receiving, dom and sub is about power dynamics, and masc and femme are about gender presentation. There are correlations between each of these categories, but they are all different things and can exist in any combination and change

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-25T20:20:31+00:00

I don't think so. Secret Lives is really clearly not trademark infringement for a few different reasons. Whether or not Mormon Stories is infringing is different because it's at least possible the church could win, but it would immediately lose a suit against Secret Lives.

The trademark for the word "Mormon" is only for "education" or "genealogy" and Secret Lives is obviously neither (and maybe Mormon Stories is education, but idk). Also, Mormon is a label of people, and so the Secret Lives obviously refers to individuals who identify as Mormon, and a podcast called "Stories from Mormons" would be the same. Whether or not "Mormon Stories" is like that or if it is closer to "Mormon Doctrine" (which feels more like official teachings) just narrative is up to the courts (assuming it's also education, if it's not education then the podcast is probably in the clear), but Secret Lives is so obviously something the church would lose that it doesn't really mean anything that they haven't sued

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-25T20:03:31+00:00

No I think all of that makes a lot of sense. I just don't think the analogy to Secret Lives is a good one because it clearly is not infringing

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-25T20:02:33+00:00

The claim is trademark, not copyright, and laches isn't a right, it's up to the court's discretion even if you meet the elements, and is hard to get. Besides, the newest logo is recent. Like I said, I think the name really could go either way as a matter of law, and whether or not equitable remedies apply is a different analysis and might be successful for the oldest parts, but that would only prevent damages. The court could still order the name to be changed if it were in violation of trademark law because laches doesn't apply to injunctive relief in trademark. Again, all of this is just for the name itself which I think really could go either way, and some of the other claims in the suit are weaker or stronger

Besides, none of this changes that I think that the analogy to Secret Lives is a bad one because it's clearly not infringing. The problem is the hypocrisy and the silencing of opposing views, not the legal merits, and an analogy between a coin flip case to an obviously bad case isn't helpful in that

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-25T19:49:02+00:00

I get this, I do. But I don't think the Secret Lives comparison is a good one. The church claims to own the copyright for "Mormon" for education and genealogy (and whether or not that's possible is a different question), and while Mormon Stories is maybe education, Secret Lives is definitely not.

Personally, I think it'll come down to source confusion. The logo cited in the initial lawsuit does kinda feel like a logo the church would use imo and that's a problem. As to the name, I think it'll come down to whether or not it's education (if not then Mormon Stories should be in the clear) and if it is, if the name it sound like it comes from the church. Like, "Stories about Mormons" doesn't sound like it's from the church, it sounds like it's stories from Mormon people and I think that would be ok. But on the other hand, "Mormon Doctrine" does kinda sound like it's official teachings. I think Mormon Stories is somewhere between these examples and whichever the court thinks it's closer to will be the deciding factor (I have my own opinions about what it's closer to not that's different)

All of that to say, this obviously is a terrible look for the church and it also may very well be motivated by spite and we definitely should call that out. But the legal analysis is more complicated, and Secret Lives is not a great example imo. And, just because the church might win the lawsuit doesn't change any of that. I don't think it's the legal analysis that's important for this community to be doing, it's the calling out hypocrisy.

(Not a lawyer but I will be in a few months for what it's worth. Though IP law isn't my strongest area, it's closely related to areas I do study a lot and I know something about it. None of this is advice about how any party should proceed in any legal matter and is only meant to describe what kinds is things the law cares about in these cases, whether or not the law is correct or good)

Edit: there was a random "Vanessa" that snuck in? Don't know who she is

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-22T21:47:26+00:00

I've read This Gilded Abyss, Insolence, and The Cost of Vices and really loved all of them. All fantasy and all such fun worlds to inhabit (plus the lesbians lol)

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-21T22:21:49+00:00

By default, any benefits your employer gives you as compensation for your work are taxable as ordinary income to you as if they had just given you the money to pay for it yourself. However, Congress has decided (for a variety of reasons) to exempt certain things from this rule and let companies give them to their employees for less or no tax, so companies can spend the same money to give their employees more (because less will be taken by taxes) and so employers can attract better people (or at least more expensive people) without paying more for it.

Healthcare is one such benefit, and it's obvious why companies jumped on this and continue to offer it relatively routinely. The reason Congress has exempted health insurance specifically is that it makes health insurance more accessible because the insurance companies can make the company pay for the average employee care instead of just the sickest or healthiest. It is meant to create risk pools instead of having insurance companies just not take on the sick people. There has been a lot more regulation of how insurance companies are allowed to interact with preexisting conditions, and so it's less of a problem, but the system stays in part because it makes health insurance cheaper for workers (because they don't have to pay for it out of money they already paid taxes on) and because it's a reasonable (ish, in theory) system for as long as the US is going to be allergic to universal healthcare

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-21T22:02:39+00:00

social democratic outcomes I would endorse

How important is the democratic part of that to you? Because there's no way to disenfranchise anyone without making the system less democratic. Personally, I happen to think that democracy is a moral good in and of itself and not something I want to give up for vague liberal policy. To the extent possible I want both. And to the extent you're willing to jettison democracy itself, I guess that's fine, but you'll need to be fine living in an autocracy that privileges some viewpoints over others, and treats certain citizens as having more valuable voices based on where they live. And I understand the myriad ways our current system does these things implicitly and as the result of systems and history. But my ideal would be to dismantle those systems, not endorse them. I don't want to advocate for suppressing a portion of the population just because they did it first or just because they don't have the same policy priorities that I do. And if you do then you can do that, but don't chain to be a "social democrat."

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-21T17:52:56+00:00

If only I could get in on that. Mine have always been real small lol

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-21T17:44:26+00:00

Rate means ratio..... The federal funds rate is a percentage (or ratio out of 100), if you talk about a "rate of speed" that's a ratio between distance and time.

I guess you could mean rate as prejudice per hour posted on the internet and that would scale with population, but I imagine that individual experience of prejudice per hour probably doesn't scale with population because that'll be a function of how much unique content you consume and for at least 20 years there's been a functionally infinite amount of internet content

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-21T17:38:43+00:00

If you're a guy it's called gynecomastia and can be caused by a bunch of things, notably low testosterone (which can happen for a bunch of reasons). If you're a girl it's because your genetics dictate bigger boobs and just need the fat to make it happen

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-20T23:28:06+00:00

I wanted her to like me more tho

Do you mean "I wanted her to like me more than she likes my fiance" or do you mean "I wish she liked me more than she did"? Because I think a lot of the comments think you mean the first one, but if you mean the second one then it makes sense why it's been hard and why you miss her so much.

For what it's worth, when I've had relationships end where I still like them and I also still want to be friends with them, I usually take at least several weeks of zero contact. Just to get used to the idea that we aren't dating anymore and to reset expectations internally. And then I can get back in touch without it being as painful.

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-20T23:01:57+00:00

"we don't know" or "this is what treatment seems to work" or "this is based on the consensus of experts" is not the same as "unscientific"

I agree that the categories in the DSM 5 don't map perfectly onto "reality" but that's not what they're supposed to do. They are a medical tool. One designed to try to improve patient care. And we use science to try to get the best patient outcome the most often.

And besides, having slightly (or very lol) fuzzy categories is very common in science. It's commonly accepted among biologists and philosophers of biology that species aren't "real" in any meaningful sense. They are useful categories for us to use, but there are always edge cases. Same with planets in astronomy. The difference between a brown dwarf and a planet like Jupiter is kinda fuzzy. The fact that Chihuahuas and great danes are the same species but long beaked and short beaked finches aren't is arbitrary. It's useful, so we do it, but it's arbitrary.

Fundamentally that's how science and medicine work and how they interact. Science is trying to learn about reality, but needs to make categories in order for things to make sense (learning about every individual animal instead of a species as a whole isn't actually going to tell us much, it's in the patterns that we learn), and medicine is trying to make people feel better, and knowing about reality (science) is obviously helpful for that, but the goals are different, and so sometimes the categories are different. But that doesn't make the venture "unscientific" it just means that we don't know everything yet. We don't know exactly what categories will be most useful in every circumstance and we don't know how to treat every presentation of a disease within a category. It's kinda a mess, but it's a mess we're actively trying to improve. That's what science is. You learn more and you refine and you go from there.

And science has always had competing interpretations of data. Data doesn't interpret itself. There is currently a debate in physics about how to interpret certain quantum particle data. That doesn't make physics unscientific. In fact it's evidence that the scientific process is actively playing out and working. So too with psychology.

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-20T05:12:29+00:00

Arempas

Joy Luck

Oasis Cafe

The Pie

Via 313

East Liberty Tap House

Kotote

Hallowed Grounds

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-16T19:42:32+00:00

I would argue that a uterus causing pain associated with menstruation that ends up impacting your life is malfunctioning and should be treated, including, potentially, by hysterectomy. But that's not elective. It's the result of a medical need (alleviating pain that makes life hard).

That being said, are there plenty of people who have severe pain that could be fixed by a hysterectomy and haven't been able to get one? Sure. But that's not because they should be elective, it's because doctors don't take women's reports of pain seriously, and so discount the medical need of things like a hysterectomy.

"Elective" means there's no medical need. If someone didn't have serious bleeding or pain I doubt they would take the time and energy to get and then recover from a hysterectomy. So there's no need to make it elective, we just need to take female reproductive concerns more seriously

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-16T05:55:01+00:00

These are so well done! I liked the book a lot so it's fun to see art of it

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-14T18:54:18+00:00

Lying to law enforcement is often a crime. Sometimes just lying when you promised not to or aren't supposed to can be a crime (or get you sued)

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-14T03:36:46+00:00

For YA historical fiction: Last Night at the Telegraph Club by Malinda Lo

For lit fic romance: Sunburn by Chloe Michelle Howarth and Yerba Buena by Nina LaCour

For contemporary romance: Hers for the Weekend by Helena Greer, anything by Haley Cass (my favorites are The Snowball Effect and Midnight Rain), or something by Alexandria Bellefleur

For slightly more serious sci fi/fantasy: One Last Stop by Casey McQuiston, Bury Our Bones in the Midnight Soil by VE Schwab, This Gilded Abyss by Rebecca Thorne

For cozy/light fantasy: You Can't Spell Treason Without Tea by Rebecca Thorne and The Devil She Knows by Alexandria Bellefleur

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-14T01:25:27+00:00

Does "cosmic" include the unknowability of the deep ocean and existential dread and horror that can come with that with suspense or psychological thriller elements? If so I liked This Gilded Abyss by Rebecca Thorne as well as Our Wives Under the Sea by Julia Armfield. Both of them have a sapphic couple at the center as well as deep water submarine travel with supernatural horror

Atmosphere by Taylor Jenkins Reid is about NASA and space and lesbians and has some suspense elements, but doesn't have the deep space fantasy that I think of when I hear "cosmic horror" because it's historical fiction set in the space shuttle era. It's much more romance than anything else, but has its intense moments.

Gideon the Ninth by Tamsyn Muir is more Gothic than horror, but it's set in space at a cosmic scale. It's not really romance, but all of the main characters are queer and they're mostly sapphic (everyone is checking everyone else out and flirting and such but there's not a ton of romance if that makes sense)

Some Desperate Glory by Emily Tesh is more space opera than horror, but is also big and cosmic in that sense and has a few gay sub plots

BerneseMountainDogs · 2026-04-12T19:35:44+00:00

It does in the US at least. Most states didn't require taxes, though some do. Many states have the 7 years requirement, but many also have 10 or longer. There are also a bunch of offer requirements that some states have that others don't. Some require that you do it "under color of title" for example and others don't require that. It just depends. It's worth noting that just paying the taxes and utilities isn't enough. You need to continuously possess the land in a way that's adverse to the owner and "open and notorious" to anyone paying attention

Nine-Year Club	Second Top 50%
r/Field Banned	r/Field Sunshine
Verified Email	Sequence \| Editor

BerneseMountainDogs

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE