u/Little-Fig4328

& vise versa

I keep seeing people say that on lightly broiled and up cultists throw different varieties of dynamite depending on which difficulty. I've literally never seen this. I'm currently on the second level of episode 2, I always play normal mode on games I'm playing for the first time because I need to learn the game of course and it's the base version. Playing hard first would make me feel like I'm not understanding the game if that makes sense. Normal is the normal game hard is a bit of a different thing. I'm playing with a folder I downloaded off of internet archive and using dos box to run it. I'm worried I'm playing on a lower difficulty because it's honestly hurting my pride and I wanna play the right mode. Are people getting things confused when they say cultists throw dynamite on this difficulty? Is it rare? Is my game messing up? In all the footage I've seen of lightly broiled it looks to be the same as my game, with enemy count and behaviors

Also is there any way to see what keys you have

I'm not particularly into tea or anything but recently I've been really into earl grey. I like it with a tiny bit of milk and sugar. I was wondering what I should get when my current box runs out though. I hear loose leaf tea is far better. I have a French press that im sure would work for making that but I don't really know how that stuff works in terms of what I should buy. Is it very expensive?

Also, is adding milk to tea seen in a similar way it is to coffee? Is it like mainly used for poor quality tea or is it seen as a valid preference based addition? I'm American so I'm not really familiar with the concept in general but I've been liking it. I use almond milk because I love it and dislike the taste of cow milk. Would it be wrong to do the same thing for an early grey that is specifically stated to have high bergamot? Because I know bergamot is citrusy. Wouldn't you usually drink a tea like that without milk?

Hello, I am asking this question in very good faith so please do not react offensively. I am simply trying to understand the book better. In the first story, Purity, Candy is introduced as a black woman and is then described as doing these really gross things while living in a destroyed disgusting home. It becomes even worse when it says she's unable to understand the concept of Europe... Whatever that means. There is much about her character that seems incredibly racist and stereotypical and everything and I feel uncomfortable ignoring it. The story is otherwise very intelligent though and I'm having a hard time believing it's actually just using racist stereotypes in such a straightforward manner. It understands how social constructs like religion, nationalism, class, and gender impact the world and are ultimately "impure delusions", so how could it be so blind to race? It seems unlikely but I still just can't understand how it could be not racist. No one talks about that aspect anywhere I look! It's very disappointing about the book because otherwise it would be kind of a perfect work for me.

I'm also considering how the people who are fans of his work do not seem to be people who are or would be racist

There is also My Case for Retributive Action where Ribello is described as "rachitic", I originally thought this meant "ratchet" (obviously a very racially charged term) but after looking it up it is a way of describing someone who has rickets? Is he using it in this way? Isn't rickets specifically a thing children get? I looked it up and it said when adults get something like rickets it's called something else. What does it mean when Ribello is described as that?

Please help people I don't know :[