I have a cat just like yours with the same problem and can attest that it really does help. My fluffy guy really was no fan of the process, but he enjoyed summer much more afterwards. There really was an immediate change in his attitude, less apathic, more playful, cuddlier, and just happier overall. Will certainly do it again this year.

The Rogue storyline proves that New Who has a writing problem that has nothing to do with being too woke, and, in fact, at least in parts more with being not woke enough. What reason could there be to hint at, introduce, develop, carry out, end, and bury a love interest all within one single episode, if not as concession for people against those story line to be able to avoid it altogether? Disney isn't actually progressive, they never were, and where corporate pride/POC representation is implemented it's because the cost calculation tells them it pays off, not because they actually represent any of those values.

The Doctor would never give up on anyone. Heck, in the next episode he cried more about some random guard post than the man who proposed to him. Until he at least attempts to get Rogue back I will have to assume the Doctor has either been replaced by some kind of doppelganger, or the writers at Disney lack the balls to actually portray a modern and gay Doctor after all.

And it can mean building something with them and then talking about how they are. I work closely together with OTs who do exactly that.

And it already exists, called occupational therapy or ergotherapy.

That wouldn't be a problem at all if we had better science journalism. Every psychologist knows that "a study showed" means nothing. Consensus over several repeated studies is how we approximate the truth.

The psychological methodology is absolutely fine as long as you know it's limitations and how to correctly apply it. In my experience that's not a problem within the field, but since a lot of people think psychology = common sense, and most people think they excel at that, a lot of laypeople overconfidently interpret scientific resultst which leads a ton of errors.

The replication crisis is mainly a problem of our publications (the journals, how impact factors are calculated, how peer review is done) and the economic reality of academia (namely how your livelihood depends on the publications!), not the methodology. The methods would be perfectly usable for valid replication studies - including falsification of bs results that are currently published en masse in pop science magazines.

HawlSera is generalising feminists, while at the same time critizising them for generalising.

Sorry, thats just not a perspective that deserves to be respected. It deserves to be corrected and criticized.

You seem to have left the conversation about the topic at hand altogether if the only thing you're willing to talk about is her background.

Now you've lost me - should we all be held to the same standard or should OP be exempt from the general rules of decency because of their background?

Because if we're talking about the standard of "unfair generalisations are unfair, don't do it" (which is what I've been talking about, don't know about you) then Queen HawlSera clearly failed to meet it.

The alternative is not what youre thinking likely. The alternative is something more nuanced than this-or-that thinking. Something where everyone that’s not bigoted is recognized and considered. Not just a single group.

But working against feminism is bigoted. I feel sorry if someone acts destructively because they had a horrible childhood - nevertheless, acting destructively in itself shouldn't be tolerated.

I mean who actually benefits from ruining the reputation of feminism? Probably the very people who hurt Queen HawlSera as a child. We're not doing kids like her any favors by allowing that.

Proof that if you don’t tow the party line, it doesn’t matter what your background is.

Well, yeah? What's the alternative? "If we like your background it doesn't really matter what positions you hold - trans people should be allowed generalise a bit and trash feminism, as a treat"?!

I'm queer myself. I will hold you responsible for your words, no matter your background. Especially when it comes to feminism. And that obviously includes women of all backgrounds. If anything I expect more solidarity from them, not less.

All feminists?

Because if we had a mandatory global meeting I sure as hell missed my invitation.

And what does that have to do with feminism?

All this comic does is emphasise how stupid it would be to lump all feminists together. If you deny this you are doing exactly the same thing as those you're complaining about.

And now you blame feminists? It's kinda astounding that your life experiences haven't taught you what nonsense stereotypes and generalisations are.

...I guess it is kinda in theme with the comic though. Assuming that all trans people would get that would be just as generalising, and very apparently wrong.

you will need it eventually for its actual meaning.

Yeah, that time is now and this is what we need it for.

The next time to use it would be retrospectively, when historians try to explain how democracy died in Germany again.

Hitler wasn't a blond blue-eyed adonis either.

Facists don't concern themselves with the truth, and certainly not with authenticity.

It reinforces the idea for men not to bother getting help in the first place - you're a man, they won't take you seriously anyway, they will call you weak, don't ask for help, just give up. That's the inner logic of clinical depression and the comic supports it.

And it's a really dangerous thing to imply because it could keep men further from the available support systems. It's discouraging. I'm not questioning weather those things could have been said by someone, but it kinda seems like the author took some horrible TERF talking points and went "I guess it will be the same in mental health".

The mindset of “it’s gotta be one or the other” is a false choice presented by the fossil fuel industry and conservative politicians.

What fossil lobby or conservative politician is currently saying "okay guys you can have renewables, but then we will have to cut back on nuclear"? That's the opposite of what conservatives are saying.

You are repeating a talking point that's being spread around to distract from the fact that it is financially rewarding for the fossil lobby to postpone the transition away from them to sustainable energy sources as far as possible, which is exactly what will happen if we drain resources from renewables towards nuclear. And acting like our resources aren't in some way limited is nothing but wishful thinking.

While you wait for the next nuclear power plant, the fossil fuel lobby is raking in record profits for decades to come.

Invest the money into renewables instead. And every bit of money you think you can get from "just raising the taxes a little" or "printing it" - invest that too. Everything else is a waste of time and resources.

We can do both.

If you have a set amount of money and resources to invest renewables are almost exclusively the better choice. Investing in nuclear instead means it will take even longer for us to wean off fossiles. That's why it's so useful for the oil lobby to support nuclear.

Aber das heißt ja nicht dass es das nicht gibt und dass Tiere kein gutes Leben haben können nur weil sie zur Fleischproduktion dienen.

Sogar im utopischsten seltenen perfekten Fall eines tatsächlich artgerecht gehaltenen Tieres darf es nur ein kurzes Leben haben. An Altersschwäche sterbende Tiere isst man ja nicht.

"Tierfreunde", die Tiere essen, lügen sich selbst was vor. Stell dir einfach mal vor jemand würde das mit seinem Hund machen - mit 1-2 Jahren, wenn er noch lecker ist, schlachten und essen. "Ich bin trotzdem ein Hundefreund, versprochen, denn vorher war ich sehr nett zu ihm!"

Und nur weil du an die Lüge gewöhnt bist ("vom Land") heißt das nicht, dass sie außerhalb deiner Bubble nicht trotzdem offensichtlich falsch ist.

Germany wanted to replace nuclear with renewables. This "replace with coal" bs is straight up misinformation.

You know what sucks as well? Taking too many painkillers against headaches actually causes headaches. Horrible ones at that. Glad to read that you're feeling better, but that's a real trap many people out there are stuck in.