u/Gym_frere

Disclaimer: this is only a comparison to Bale and Affleck’s Batman’s, as I did not watch Burton’s Batman. I am also not making an overall commentary on if Matt Reeves’ Batman was better than the others (despite the fact that it is indeed my favourite one).

From what I understand, the Batman in the comics has an answer to everything because he’s the world’s greatest detective. Bale and Affleck’s Batman mostly stayed true to this, but Pattinson’s didn’t. In fact, he needed a lot of help and got quite a few things wrong. Why? Because the movie wasn’t actually about Batman, it was about Bruce Wayne and his own shortcomings.

I believe this is what makes it the best portrayal of Batman because it wasn’t predicated on a polished superhero (Bale) or a godlike figure (Affleck). Instead, it was actually a Bruce Wayne movie, predicated on the flaws of Bruce Wayne and how his upbringing affected him, and made him imperfect. You can see it in some parts of the movie where Wayne’s personality shines through even even when he is wearing the Batman costume; this is not the case in the other Batman movies.

It showed that Batman can indeed fail, which is what makes us human. I dont want to write spoilers but most of all it shows that some things happened because of Wayne’s inability to make a positive difference in the city as Bruce Wayne, not as Batman. This is another key difference between the two. Bale and Affleck’s portrayals show the cause of Batman’s failures as Batman, but Pattinson’s portrayal shows the cause of Batman’s failures as Bruce Wayne.

Finally, going back to the detective persona, the way that it showed other characters helping Batman get some things and also Batman getting things wrong was truly excellent. Even people who are best in their fields fail occasionally. The fact that this Batman failed made this Batman more personable, more relatable, and more human.

Source for what he said today: https://x.com/jeffbezos/status/2057148900763385950?s=46

“The United States has the most progressive tax system in the world. The top 1% pay 40% of taxes, the bottom 50% pay 3% of taxes. We can make it even more progressive by zeroing out taxes on the bottom half. It’s a small amount of the total tax revenue but very meaningful to people in this group.”

To my knowledge this is the first time he’s saying something like this publicly.

A) Why do you think he said this now?

B) Say that this policy was actually implemented. Do you think the government should raise taxes on the wealthy to compensate for the lost revenue? How do you think somebody like Bezos would react if that actually happened?

Me (27m) and my girlfriend (27f) recently returned from an international trip. We have both travelled internationally before - I’ve done so more than she has, but she’s done it and has experience going through airports.

She’s naturally a really anxious person. She’s currently in therapy for it and I’d say it’s going okay but I have a tendency to dissociate when she gets really anxious about something because there’s usually nothing I can say to calm her down, so I kinda shrug my shoulders and remove myself from the situation until she chills out a bit.

When we were returning from this trip, she insisted that we arrive at the airport 4 (FOUR) hours before departure, in case anything goes wrong. I went along with it because I didn’t want to argue despite the fact that we would be leaving the hotel around 5:30am. I figured that at least I could get some breakfast at the airport.

On the way to the airport we missed our train and had to wait for the next one. This made her extremely stressed/anxious despite the fact that the trains come every 5-10 minutes. I tried to soothe her and tell her it’ll be ok but she just said we need to get there as soon as possible.

A train ended up arriving around 7 minutes later. We got to the airport 3 and a half hours before departure. I said I wanted to grab some food before security. She said she’s really stressed and wanted to go through security as soon as possible despite the fact that there was no lineup. I said ok you do that and I’ll go grab food. She asked if I’ll come with her and I said no I want to get breakfast especially because the restaurant I really wanted was only available before security. She seemed to get upset that I wouldn’t come with her.

Later on as we were walking through the airport she saw a woman crying and being comforted by her boyfriend and she said that’s how she wants me to comfort her when she gets anxious/stressed. At this point I decided to be frank with her and I said that I don’t do that because it doesn’t make a difference, that when she gets anxious about something she makes up her mind and I don’t feel like convincing her that everything will be ok. Needless to say this didn’t sit well with her and she says that she didn’t feel like im supporting her. I said im happy to support her but I have to protect myself and my mental health as well.

It’s been a little bit over 24 hours since we got back and she’s still upset over it so I wanted some thoughts on if I handled it badly.

Admittedly this may be because I’m over 30 but I remember when conservatism was all about the free market, smaller government, respect for the individual and for the nuclear family, and respecting institutions and traditions. This is not what the new, modern right believes in; I’m not here to debate whether that’s in itself right or wrong but i think this is something that we can mostly agree on.

So, do you think that we need a new name for conservatism and if so, what would it be?

Let’s say this apartment building had retail on the first floor such as coffee shops, butchers, doctors, groceries, corner stores, etc.

Assume that this apartment building had a parkade so street parking wouldn’t be an issue.

Not just happier but having a better quality of life and life expectancy.

Disclaimer: I am not referring to the 5% of individuals that have genetic issues that prevent them from losing weight.

I’ve lost nearly 50 pounds in the last few months. I don’t say this to brag but I say this because at times it was fucking miserable. It’s hard to be in a constant calorie deficit and doing a lot of cardio at the same time. It’s hard giving up the snacks and foods that you love. It’s hard when you use food for comfort and have to turn to something else.

That said, the satisfaction of knowing that I put in the work, I suffered on the stairmaster on a daily basis, and I gave up my favourite evening snack (a Smarties McFlurry with light caramel drizzle) made the accomplishment of this weight loss extremely meaningful. Of course, no one *likes* doing these things but if you accept that change is necessary, then why not put in the work for that change?

When you go on Ozempic, you don’t have to build good habits. You don’t have to exercise, which is good for you. You don’t have to learn how to say no to yourself because all have to do is take this magical drug that makes you forget about eating.

We shouldn’t be celebrating people taking shortcuts to do something that they should be doing anyways.

Edit: this post is proof that this subreddit has long since served its purpose. Everybody disagrees with me and yet no one is upvoting it.