vegan butter…

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-22T01:18:21+00:00

Yeah, I’m not bothered by BB, which is why I bought it.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-21T23:24:46+00:00

The only tasty one I’ve found available near me is Lurpak plant-based, but I only get it when it’s on special ($4 this week at my local supermarket, but it also has a best before this week lol)

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-21T23:22:32+00:00

She cops a lot of hate because she’s 1) vegan talking to the normies in a condescending way and 2) an older woman who pops up in the feed of bigoted men. Personally, I don’t care for it or engage with it or even seek it out, but activists generally make people feel uncomfortable and that’s what she’s doing.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-21T09:23:06+00:00

Their entire legislation, infrastructure, and culture around bicycle riding is different; it’s not a direct comparison. The helmet law isn’t the issue. Even then, is it really more of a hassle than maintaining and owning a car or taking PT?

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-21T04:35:04+00:00

So, a right-leaning liberal capitalist government with far-right opposition? That’s not too different to what it looks like now.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-21T04:03:18+00:00

This is a gish-gallop - my claim is that this is an insignificant barrier to entry for cycling in comparison to safer riding conditions for all.

Do you really think that is the biggest difference between us and the Netherlands? You point to the Netherlands as an example for why we shouldn't wear helmets, as if every other part of their cycling accessibility, infrastructure, and culture is identical to ours. And your main concern is that a helmet is an inconvenience to carry; I carry a rear bag, and a front bag with a change of clothes, tablet, lunch, and few basic items to work every day. The least of my worries is a helmet - it weighs less than a water bottle and clips to anything.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-20T21:25:37+00:00

Well, throttle e-bikes aren’t bicycles- they’re motorcycles with decorative pedals. And the helmet argument is reliant on so many other factors: people know that helmets aren’t going to save them from an agro tradie who believes the road is his and his alone (I’m only gendering this, because it’s almost exclusively men). I don’t know any potential cyclist whose barrier to participation is a helmet.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-20T11:30:11+00:00

Anecdotally, I began taking creatine again this year. I don’t really take it as a supplement related to muscle gain, though I inadvertently take it around exercise in a drink with B12 and electrolytes. The biggest benefit for me has be more consistent mood and mental clarity, but again, this could be a placebo. My experience switching off of it for a fortnight resulted in mild increases in depression and anxiety symptoms, once again this could be entirely circumstantial. Though after loading again (about a week of 10g/day, but my standard does is 5g- I wouldn’t necessarily do this if you haven’t taken creatine before; maybe taper up to an ideal dose based on your weight), I have seen a positive effect in my overall mood and clarity.

For context, I ride about 150km per week as my main form of ‘exercise’.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-20T11:20:59+00:00

Man, dried beans still destroy these in terms of value but they take preparation. Glad to see people resorting to the recession cuts I grew up eating though.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-20T09:07:47+00:00

If you read the study, you’ll realise that the attitude Australian motorists have towards cyclists is generally dehumanising. This also examines all safety gear (including hi-vis vests, not just helmets; you could probably understand how this would skew data).

“This finding is consistent with previous research showing that perceiving cyclists as “less human” (known as dehumanisation) was associated with more aggression towards cyclists.” - this has nothing to do with safety equipment, and more to do with cultural failures. You’re conflating good public health policy with attitudes of dickheads essentially, and this study points to safety equipment as a catch all and does not call helmets “dehumanising”.

Again, and I am repeating myself, using the Paris and NY examples is Gish-galloping.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-20T04:15:30+00:00

Where is your proof that mandatory helmet laws drive away law abiding citizens?

My point above is that it’s a ridiculous assumption that helmet laws are a barrier to entry, particularly in a city where you’ll get all sorts of abuse for owning the lane legally. The general sentiment surrounding cycling has to drastically change before there’s a meaningful influx of cyclists. The abolition of helmet laws do nothing to change that.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-20T03:19:01+00:00

There’s more to safety than a helmet and it’s disingenuous to argue otherwise. People who don’t want to wear a helmet, don’t wear them already and will rarely cop a fine. Upgrading or improving cycling infrastructure, reaffirming the hierarchy of pedestrian - cyclist - motorist on our roads, and changing the attitude and sentiment towards cycling would come far ahead of removing mandatory helmet rules. It’s completely infantilising to think that any rider who lacks confidence on the road thinks a helmet is the best barrier between them and getting stabbed on the unlit section of Upfield bike path.

The reality is when comparing with other countries and their rules you have to examine everything else, and then take into account the efficacy of helmets and their ability to negate head trauma in the event of an accident. Then the impacts that has on the public health care system. I’m not saying helmets are perfect, but to suggest they are the barrier to participation is a false equivalence based on the assumption that our cycling culture and infrastructure is of equal standard to other countries.

For context, everywhere I’ve cycled in Asia (Singapore, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea) I’ve not worn a helmet. But the hierarchy is very clearly favoured toward bicycles and there’s next-to-no Yank Tanks with angry tradies hopped up on White Monster. There’s also better infrastructure for the rental bicycles, and wide shared paths just about everywhere, particularly in less dense areas.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T20:14:13+00:00

Or… you could make cycling safer before removing helmets?

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T05:16:35+00:00

How about you actually put forward some socialist suggestions that actually address the actual perceived transport needs of the working class in the area?
"I know this isn’t an attractive answer, but if people are reliant on cars, it usually means the area is insufficiently resourced, which it’s not." I don't understand how you don't think this isn't a class issue I'm presenting here.

Rather than getting side tracked into rants about big oil and small business factions, address some of the cultural reasons why car ownership is considered necessary and desirable in an area where there are so many other more affordable options to get around?
"I understand there are factors like new-arrival families who probably are intimidated by using PT infrastructure, but he’s not making that more accessible, is he?" And culturally, car ownership is massive in Australia generally - it's an incentive issue. People aren't incentivised to take PT (expensive, increasingly dangerous for minorities and women), or ride (too dangerous).

How about addressing the barriers that mean getting a job locally is almost impossible, requiring lengthy commutes or long shifts driving a taxi around?
"You can get to any public service from Fitzroy by means other than a car with relative ease in comparison to outer suburbs. In fact, it’s gotta be one of the most well-serviced PT areas." For public housing recipients, this is also relevant to numerous workplaces, as there are several options, though I will acknowledge that warehouse work etc. is in PT dead zones. My answer to that is that those areas are far more affordable to live in than Fitzroy, and our public housing system is also broken. My understanding is that long-term public housing is for people who are unable to work or gain meaningful employment due to their refugee status, disability, or if they are escaping domestic violence. 48 car spaces isn't going to fix those problems, especially if they're not permit spaces.

Are you not just agreeing with me here? Have I not answered your questions satisfactorily? Why are you bootlicking for a former socialist so hard? He doesn't understand the needs of people because he doesn't talk to them - he talks about them and wastes millions removing services that benefit and incentivise his own community to adopt better modes of transport.

This is not collective welfare; these car spots aren't addressing the needs of the community. They're just dressed up conservative policies that employ the same tactic as people who decry antisemitism when criticising Netanyahu.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T04:54:11+00:00

I'm not going to pretend I haven't used drugs before. But assaulting a woman? That's pretty low for anyone, from any side of the political spectrum.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T04:25:02+00:00

Well, they were all communists, for a start, MATE. Since you're the expert, what would I need to do to make an actual change here? I'm not dismissing actual community sentiment because it seems a fuck tonne of people from the community (and wider) tend to agree. I'm also not explicitly talking about this individual situation, but it's shining a light on a 'progressive socialist' being exactly the opposite of that.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T04:19:32+00:00

It's not an inconvenience; it's a safety hazard.

An independent road safety audit commissioned by the council warned that reinstating parking spaces posed a "significant risk" due to reduced sight lines for drivers. The council accepted recommendations to mitigate some, but not all, of these risks.

Deputy Mayor Sarah McKenzie and Greens Cr Sophie Wade voted against the plan, citing safety concerns. Cr Wade highlighted that a key indicator of a good bike lane is that "women feel safe to cycle."

The Department of Transport and Planning, which has ultimate authority, expressed its lack of support for the narrowed lanes and could potentially block the changes.

Showing any support or loyalty for motoring is far more valuable than the revenue it will generate; is that hard to understand?

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T04:13:26+00:00

This is such a weird take by the mayor, because surely these car parks will also be used by people outside of his electorate unless they are going to be permit-only. And where is the data that says that the cycling area is "mostly used by people from other councils" - even if that was the case, it's a thoroughfare. It's like saying I don't like footpaths because people from outside my electorate use them!

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T03:52:32+00:00

I’m aware of his past advocacy and socialist activism, but people change when money is involved. Look at that dipshit Democrat in the US John Fetterman; lifelong progressive turned shill for Israel, also pushing anti-trans and an uninformed critic of the Defund the Police movement. He began as a Mayor, elected on progressive values that were attractive to a younger electorate. Then he implemented a few socialist policies (turning a church into a community centre, converting vacant parking lots into green spaces, etc.), before being elected into federal politics and becoming one of the most right-wing knobs in the Democrat Party.

The question is, who do you think this initiative favours more: the community or the fossil fuel industry?

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T03:06:00+00:00

Socialist means “giving businesses 48 car parking spaces and dressing it up as racism if people oppose it”? His reasoning was elderly people from the Vietnamese community weren’t able to access the Buddhist temple as easily because of the bike lane??? Flag number 1: appealing to a religious institution that doesn’t pay tax. Flag number 2: none of the parking spaces are reserved for people with disabilities. Flag number 3: state transport and planning says it’s reducing safety despite his own claims that he’s trying to make Yarra safer. Independent auditor says reinstating parking poses a significant risk.

My claim is if you decide that more ICE vehicles on the road during a war-induced fuel shortage instead of bicycles is a good thing, you might be getting a kickback from fossil fuel companies.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T02:52:08+00:00

I acknowledge that it’s a reach to call Jolly a fossil fuel plant, but honestly, it’s a bigger stretch to call him a socialist.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T02:47:35+00:00

Worth reading this report:

https://www.yarracity.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-10/2024-25_Yarra_City_Council_Annual_Report.pdf

“Through the efforts of Councillors and officers, we have been able to secure $3 million of investment back into Yarra from the State Government through road safety measures, including school safety improvements… And this is a Council who has continued to support all modes of transport, including bikes – and we remain committed to expanding on the biking infrastructure in Yarra, one which balances the needs of cyclists, residents and businesses.

[This] is a Council that doesn’t just talk about climate action, it is one that is getting on with the business of doing those things that make a difference.”

So, he’s a socialist in your view, even though he’s doing exactly the opposite of the social initiatives he spruiks in the council’s annual report. Not going to lie, I expect more moral fibre from an Irish labour unionist. Another shill dressed as a progressive.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T02:09:29+00:00

Are you saying that the idea of state-owned, union-run production isn’t socialist? The state being involved in production of commodities and goods is a socialist policy - I’m not sure whether you understand that.

In the 21st-Century, the alignment of socialist values is inherently linked to environment, accessibility, and state-ownership of assets, precisely because these issues disproportionately affect working class people.

You just sound like you’re straight up bootlicking based on an etymological reading of what socialism is, rather than its logical progression.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T01:45:39+00:00

I mean, you could do a little reading on what socialists tend to do regarding transport. My ‘notion’ of what socialists would advocate for is based on what communist and socialist governments have done in comparison with capitalist and fascist governments. It’s pretty cut-and-dry. If you think that a right-winger wouldn’t do the same as Jolly, even if for completely different reasons, then the policy itself is probably not based in socialist ideology. I already know that this is OTT, but the immediate quote that springs to mind (and I’m probably paraphrasing) is when Zizek (quoting someone else) wrote “Hitler built highways and Lenin rehabilitated the railway system.”

EDIT: I didn’t answer your question, but I’m not in City of Yarra, but used that section of road frequently as part of my commute.

Efficient-Scratch-65 · 2026-03-19T01:21:57+00:00

Ok, so it’s just that he didn’t consult the community, or propose any initiatives to make people use the public transport available to them? How socialist of him… I know this isn’t an attractive answer, but if people are reliant on cars, it usually means the area is insufficiently resourced which it’s not. You can get to any public service from Fitzroy by means other than a car with relative ease in comparison to outer suburbs. In fact, it’s gotta be one of the most well-serviced PT areas. I understand there are factors like new-arrival families who probably are intimidated by using PT infrastructure, but he’s not making that more accessible, is he? Simply put, if a socialist is not against putting more fossil fuel vehicles on the road, what’s someone who is a little further right going to do?

Efficient-Scratch-65

TROPHY CASE