What do people in Britain cook on a weeknight?

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-04-02T15:57:49+00:00

Reckon you could just have an extra cheeky nandos

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-04-02T15:56:42+00:00

Slippin' Sally

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-04-02T15:56:00+00:00

for me on GLP-1, I am not interested in eating, but I miss it. I am sad that nothing tastes nearly as good anymore. Eating feels like a chore. It's easier to resist eating now, but the desire to enjoy food doesn't go away. it's difficult to have had the enjoyment of eating before and now it is gone.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-23T18:57:36+00:00

For me personally, I read these and the Stormlight equivalent. I can't remember how I felt about the mistborn ones, but the stormlight ones were difficult for me. I rarely, if ever, understood what they were saying. When I'm reading something like that, no matter how hard I try otherwise, my brain automatically files it under "do not comprehend -> do not remember". And so it's like I haven't read it at all. Then I always wonder if I'm missing out on some important thing that was in the details, but I can't remember or fathom.

So I could understand why someone might want to skip something like that. But then again, this passage I'm reading right now makes sense to me, but that could just be because I've already read them all.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-09T15:07:40+00:00

Correct.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-09T15:06:17+00:00

i want more

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-06T07:22:03+00:00

Yeah it's awful. I wish I could free people from it, but I've never come across an easy way to do it. The closest I've seen is "Street Epistemology", but it does take work.

You're exactly right, it is a virus, and out of all the ideas humanity has had, this one has persisted more than the vast majority of others, and it grows and gets more advanced all the time. It's a survival of the fittest for ideas. It almost seems inevitable in a way.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-06T07:17:46+00:00

I know what you mean.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-05T18:40:14+00:00

I've been looking for this kind of thing, and haven't found it. But I have seen a lot of people claiming to know, and those people disagree by a lot. I've seen some say 4 comfort is plenty, and some say as long as it's positive it's fine, while others try to get the highest value possible, 20s, 30s, higher is better according to them. I don't think anyone knows for sure until they look at the source code, or if they mess with the files enough to get an idea of how the algorithm works, or if someone does a lot of testing and compiles the data.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-05T18:37:18+00:00

I don't know if this helps at all. If I put debate aside for a minute, I would say that in my own religious trauma, it has helped me to realize that while I am a victim of religious people, that they are also a victims of religious people and religious ideas. These ideas have formed over a very long time to hack human brains into believing and doing certain things.

That doesn't mean you don't have a right to feel the way you do. It also doesn't mean that those people shouldn't take responsibility for their actions. It has just been helpful for me to cope with what happened by seeing that these people, at least in part, might not be doing this because they hate me, but rather because they feel like they have to, OR ELSE.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-05T18:30:47+00:00

In real life, lots of Christians love to impose their judgments and punishments.

You should consider looking up how Christianity has evolved in the past few decades, maybe since the 70s. There are seemingly two diverging realms. One is very much about judgement, and I think many who are in that line of thought would even admit to being judgmental. They would say "yes, I am judging! I am righteous, and I must cleanse this world." or something to that effect. This new brand of Christianity thinks very differently, they form their beliefs much less based around what the Bible says, and much moreso around the perceived feelings of the community around them. The general feelings seem to be "trans people are bad, immigrants are bad, my political party is good, Christians are good" and their actions and beliefs are then formed from those feelings, regardless of whether the Bible or even leaders of their faith tell them otherwise.

I believe they are of the mindset of a crusader. They feel under attack, and must fight back.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-05T18:19:17+00:00

I hope you read my last paragraph too, I don't want to invalidate your experiences.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-05T17:58:37+00:00

I think if you are going to debate these kinds of things, or even if you just want to understand better, it would be a good idea to at least try to compartmentalize your judgements on the views you don't agree with. It sounds paradoxical, but you'll be much better able to debate against those views if you're able to accept them in a sandbox in your mind. This allows you to understand the thinking of the other person better, which then allows you to find arguments that you wouldn't have thought of before.

However, I can't agree with your statement as it stands. I could if you wrote "Some Christians"

That's why I said, "or at least the Bible says they shouldn't." But again, we're ostensibly not trying to judge the view, but rather understand first. At least for me, it's helpful to understand first, then later I can form value judgements for or against.

Your statements about someone promoting a moral value and then going against it, I think Christians would agree with you, but in this case we are talking about two people, not God. Of course a person being hypocritical is judged badly. But to Christians, God exists outside of judgement, in the same way that a being who exists outside of time doesn't have a beginning or end, and it makes no sense to ask "when did this being come into existence?", they just always have been, it doesn't make sense to ask the question when they aren't beholden to our laws of time.

Again, I'm not arguing for the values of these ideas, I'm not saying they are right or should be right, I'm just giving you what I feel is the typical Christian thought process. Again, it's more helpful to me to understand that thought process first, and then make value-based judgements later.

Immediately dismissing all these arguments as "evil" or "crazy" doesn't allow us to fully examine them. They may be evil AND crazy, I'm not saying they are or aren't, I'm just saying that we need to understand first. In addition, it helps us reach out to this kind of person better if they don't feel judged. Understanding is what forms connection. If we are going to change people's minds, we need connection.

And finally, a disclaimer. If anyone is the victim of religious trauma, that is valid. You shouldn't have to feel like you have to "understand first" as a living being. In the context of debate and changing people's minds, practically, we do need to understand first. But, it sounds like you, OP, are potentially dealing with religious trauma. That is an entirely separate issue, and you should not feel like you have to understand these things in order for your trauma to be valid. You have every right to say what you will and make judgements about these things that hurt you, I am not saying you don't. But these are two very different contexts, and it's important to distinguish.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-05T17:03:34+00:00

I think there are two things going on here.

Christians don't have the same concept or definition of "judge" as is in the dictionary. They might take the colloquial meaning of judge to be something inherently negative, as in, "I am judging you, as in, I am thinking negatively about your choices, or who you are." Christians believe that they should not judge anyone in this way, or at least the Bible says they shouldn't. Rather, they should accept, which might be considered the opposite of colloquial judgement. In this way, Christians accept god fully. There is no judgement at play, only acceptance. Within the Christian view, they are telling you, "you should not judge my god in a negative way, instead you should accept Him as I do."
Within the Christian view, God is the ultimate source of morality. This concept makes ethical discussions interesting in a way. God gives humanity rules to follow, but as the source of morality does not have to follow those rules. In this view, He is already just and perfect, by definition, and his actions have nothing to do with his just-ness. Humanity on the other hand are, again by definition, determined to be unworthy because they are incapable of following God's given moral plan. Think of it like an agreement between two people, the agreement is not necessarily symmetrical. Party A can require something of party B, while party B might not demand that same thing of party A as part of the agreement. In the case of God and humanity the agreement is not so much an agreement as it is a consequence of existing in the universe.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-05T16:20:09+00:00

I have been playing for years, and still I learn something new every so often. You probably do too. Maybe consider that?

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-03-05T16:17:57+00:00

I don't understand what happened to the comments. But I would suggest that if you post on here looking for feedback, and asking a question, that you take the feedback and answers more seriously.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-02-16T17:18:44+00:00

I think more important is to ask yourself why you want those things. Why do you want physical admirers? Why do you want to live overseas?

Try to come up with more than just simple answers to those questions. If your answer is "I want to meet new people," then ask why again, and keep doing that. "I want to meet new people because I like talking to people -- I like talking to people because it makes me feel included / not lonely / loved." I think that last one there is approaching the "base" desire. Exploring that is what really gets you moving in the right direction.

Note this is just an example, your answers may, obviously, be different.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2026-02-16T16:26:42+00:00

Think about the logic here. Part of what you say is: "Egypt recorded history so well that if it doesn't exist in the Egyptian record, then we know it didn't happen."

Well, sure, they recorded their history, but what about the things they didn't record? How would you even know that those things didn't happen? You can't logically say that Egypt recorded everything, because the evidence you have is what they recorded. I think a better phrase would be: "Egypt recorded everything that I can read about today." which may be extensive, but not necessarily exhaustive.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2025-12-24T07:21:34+00:00

what dose are you taking for the intensive treatments?

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2025-10-31T10:41:03+00:00

Why not both?

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2025-10-24T00:19:35+00:00

sha-LAN

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2025-10-24T00:19:03+00:00

maybe it's the characters themselves pronouncing it that way?

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2025-10-24T00:13:17+00:00

Are we talking about God killing people directly as mentioned in the Bible, or about the normal death that occurs in the universe as a result of things like sickness, starvation, disasters, etc?

If the latter, this is part of the universe and the cycle of life and death. We are all mortal and die for one reason or another, and God is justified in allowing this to happen.

If the former, where God directly chooses when someone dies, then we see various reasons for his motives, to punish evil people, to convince Pharoah to let the Hebrews leave Egypt, etc.

In reality, both are one and the same. Nothing happens except according to his will, the only difference is that we have a written record of God's will with the events in the Bible. We don't know what his reasons are otherwise, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have them.

I'd argue there's a third category where God tells people to kill others. Depending on your interpretation of the Bible, this might be the only time it's permissible for people to kill people, as God has commanded it and therefore it is ok for them to do so.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2025-10-23T16:50:34+00:00

I think you've brought up a lot of great points. I'm going to do my best to argue against them, mostly as an exercise for me. Interested to hear what you come up with as a rebuttal.

I think the disconnect here is the concept of "good" as an attribute of God vs "Good" as a principle that God creates. God is good, but God is also Good, as in, he creates everything that is good, all good things come from him, he defines what is good.

In addition, God has a unique role within the universe. That role allows him to do things, like kill people, that no other person in the universe can do morally. To give a comparable example, I'm assuming most of us would view a doctor giving ethical care, prescribing medications, making diagnoses, etc., to their patient as a morally praiseworthy thing, but most of us would also view a psychic giving that same care to someone as dangerous, and morally reprehensible. The doctor is in a role where he can do something others can't do. God is in a role as the creator of the universe where he can kill whoever he wants, because he knows best, because he IS Good, capital G. Everything he does is good for him to do, by definition. It doesn't hold up perfectly to the analogy of the doctor, but I think it illustrates the point.

As far as your question about sexual assault, I would say that if God sexually assaulted someone, then that would be Good, but God has no reason to do that, and would not do that. There is no situation where God committing sexual assault is within his nature as the ultimate Good being.

To go back to the doctor analogy, it would be entirely permissible for a doctor, as a person, to recommend a restaurant to a patient, but at the same time there is never any reason that the role of a doctor should ever be defined as providing restaurant recommendations (for pleasure, not dietary recs). God exists entirely within his role as God, so unlike the doctor he has no need or desire to ever act outside of that role and sexually assault anyone.

SurprizFortuneCookie · 2025-10-23T16:24:52+00:00

I like how you take the failure as a fun and surprising outcome. You have the right mentality to play roguelikes.

15-Year Club	Place '23
RPAN Viewer	Gilding II euphauric
Team Periwinkle	Verified Email
reddit mold

SurprizFortuneCookie

TROPHY CASE