Yeah, the two measurements are really not enough to fit all the different boob shapes. And just offering different shapes with the same two measurements leads to problems for those who otherwise could rely on the two alone.

I have that problem with trousers where one measurement for width is not enough to fit both my waist and my hips. With bras it's just that apparently you can't have more than B or at maximum C if your underbust is 28/30. According to companies at least.

Ich dachte das wäre ein Witz von dir. Aber haben die wirklich so gesagt. Aber die Platzierung im Artikel war super mit der Überschrift "Radverkehr hat sich verdoppelt" direkt anschließend.

Only knowing your cup size is not enough. You need to know the underbust size as well. A 32D and a 34C have cups with the same volume. Sure, there is still some variance but not as much as I thought before I learned that.

Edit: This calculator and the community of the same name on the-site-that-shall-not-be-named helped me a lot in finding my actual bra size. Now my only problem is that almost no company here has more than two or three bras in that size...

I think I remember some years ago a zoo fed a dead giraffe to the lions and people went absolutely insane about it. I'm not sure about the details anymore, they might have killed it because there wasn't enough room in the zoo for it? Either way I didn't get it, what do they think the lions are fed any other day? Animals that weren't killed explicitly to become food? Some cows that couldn't bear existence on this world anymore and offered themselves as lion food? Where is the difference?

I also hate discussions with people who miss my point and argue against things I never claimed.

But what if it turns out we do need it in 10 years?

That's the point, we likely wouldn't have any new nuclear power plants in ten years, even if we started planning them now. The one they are building in the UK was started somewhere around 2017 I think and maybe, fingers crossed, it might be finished by 2029. Right now the estimated cost is around £46 billion, up from originally about £23 billion.

That's one plant. We need many more for any relevant effect. Not even starting on the fact that nuclear energy is very inadequate for balancing out short term differences in the grid since you can't just quickly power them up or down as needed.

Pumping all of our waste into the atmosphere is a much better solution!

I never said that. But there are ways we have to do neither. Why not concentrate on those, especially since they are magnitudes cheaper.

If we had started building them the first time that question was asked we'd have them by now.

That might be true, but how is that helping us right now? That's why I said it doesn't matter how the horse died. It's dead now. There are many faster solutions, why take the one that takes longest?

I deeply wish that people would understand that this horse is deader than dead. There is no Frankensteinian experiment and no virus that will bring it back to even a zombie-like half-life. So would you, please, please, just stop beating the poor thing.

It doesn't matter anymore how it died, it's really time to get a new horse.

Edit: Instead of just down voting, could you explain to me:

• How should we get nuclear plants running in any time frame relevant to our current problems?
• Who is going to pay the billions of Euros to build new nuclear power plants? The energy companies are not interested.
• Where we should keep the waste, since we have not yet found a place for the decades' worth of nuclear waste we already have.
• How this is making us independent of Russia, our former main source of Uranium

I just fail to see any way how this could right now solve our problem.

In that case I don't think you should go. Your son is 14, he will be able to tell that there is bad blood. Maybe sit him down and explain that you would like to go for his sake but think it's too soon and you are not comfortable around them yet (without throwing blame on them, as difficult as that may be).

I can't say I know enough about the topic to have formed an opinion on whether or not reparations would be justified or not. But here is a point I've seen made that has stayed with me

While it's true that none of us actively participated in colonialism, we still continue to profit by it. Many businesses were founded by money made in the colonies or by wares imported from them, many institutions grew by exploiting and stealing from the people living in them. At the same time the people in the former colonies still suffer from the consequences.

It's a bit similar to calling for the higher taxation of rich people. Often they inherited their money and huge parts of it were made by exploiting poorer people, which is why it seems unfair to many (including me) that they should give back something to society. Some of my ancestors made good money owning a colonial goods store and I'm sure I owe at least part of my privileged situation to this money. I can understand that the descendants of the people who laboured for these goods might not think that that is fair.

If anyone is in need of a more secure option in these dystopian times: drip keeps all your data on your phone. You can export the data, so you can keep the tracked data when changing phones. I only use it for tracking my cycle and sometimes symptoms though, so I can't say much about using it for birth control.

While I generally agree with you, I think we have to look at it from the moderators' perspective, too. What are they supposed to do? Deal with the same persons every few weeks until hopefully some of them grow? Moderating a community is already a lot of (often thankless) work. I don't think adding this would help finding and keeping good moderators.

Ultimately it's not only about what is the most fair but about what tools are needed to keep a community running.