The "What Are You Thinking About Right Now?" PIP

[CandleVixen]

14 minutes ago, Stromboli1 said:

That made me chuckle. 

[Cult Icon]

 

That's how deer always behave.  

 

They halt, turn their head around and just...stare at you.  It's a staring contest.  They are very shy animals and your actions determine if they 1. leave  2. continue grazing with the occasional peak at you. 

 

Do you encounter deer much where you live?

[Matt!]

 

 

[Matt!]

[Cult Icon]

@Enrico_sw

 

I've just about worn out the Moab2 waterproof after 1 year of use.   There is a cushion hole forming and the shoe will probably last 1-2 months, tops, making its lifespan on gravel to be about ~5,500 +  walking hours.  The non- Vibram hiker I used only lasted 7 months.

 

[Enrico_sw]

5 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

@Enrico_sw

 

I've just about worn out the Moab2 waterproof after 1 year of use.   There is a cushion hole forming and the shoe will probably last 1-2 months, tops, making its lifespan on gravel to be about ~5,500 +  walking hours.  The non- Vibram hiker I used only lasted 7 months.

 

 

 

Vibram are definitely the best soles! They are so durable and you can walk basically everywhere with them (they're all-terrain soles).

 

I usually buy high top shoes, I find that they are better to protect the ankles, especially when you go downhill at a faster pace. They can be warmer, but if you buy good gore-tex ones, they're usually pretty "breathable".

[Cult Icon]

2 minutes ago, Enrico_sw said:

 

Vibram are definitely the best soles! They are so durable and you can walk basically everywhere with them (they're all-terrain soles).

 

I usually buy high top shoes, I find that they are better to protect the ankles, especially when you go downhill at a faster pace. They can be warmer, but if you buy good gore-tex ones, they're usually pretty "breathable".

 

 

They protected my knees better than the regular soles, however past the 2 hour mark I still get some knee pressure.  

 

how do  you rate Gore-tex in rain?

 

The Moab2 Waterproof only lasts about 50 minutes plus in steady rain, after that the water starts getting through.

[Cult Icon]

The waterproof Moab2 provides adequate warmth in the coldest weather and is fine to wear up to around 85 degrees F.  After that it gets too hot.  The cheaper, Moab2 "ventilator" is supposed to be more breathable.  

 

However the temperature rarely goes above 85 degrees over in the Northeast so it's not a big problem. Only in July-August.

[Enrico_sw]

51 minutes ago, Cult Icon said:

 

They protected my knees better than the regular soles, however past the 2 hour mark I still get some knee pressure.  

 

how do  you rate Gore-tex in rain?

 

The Moab2 Waterproof only lasts about 50 minutes plus in steady rain, after that the water starts getting through.

 

Gore tex is pretty good.  I can walk in rivers without having water getting through. I can stay for several minutes (but I guess at some point, if you stay too long, it won't work any more).

 

In moderate rains, I never have problems (even for several hours). In very heavy rains (like Scotland) or when I walk in high layers of snow, I usually wear gaiters (which mostly prevents water from getting in via the top, but it also helps with the water-tightness of the upper parts of the shoes).

[Cult Icon]

41 minutes ago, Enrico_sw said:

 

Gore tex is pretty good.  I can walk in rivers without having water getting through. I can stay for several minutes (but I guess at some point, if you stay too long, it won't work any more).

 

That sounds really good and far superior to normal waterproofing.  What is the hottest that you can wear Goretex comfortably? (measurement?)

 

I might get this as a replacement:  Moab2 goretex

 

[Enrico_sw]

17 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

 

That sounds really good and far superior to normal waterproofing.  What is the hottest that you can wear Goretex comfortably? (measurement?)

 

I might get this as a replacement:  Moab2 goretex

 

I don't know, I think I've already hiked with them at 35°C (or even hotter), but I usually wear shorts or light trousers when it's this hot (which helps a lot!).

[Prettyphile]

 

Quote

The 2020 EU Kids Online Study concluded that some children and young people “intentionally seek out sexual content” for a variety of reasons and that seeing sexual images “might also represent an opportunity” to provide answers to questions about puberty and sexual identity. The study encouraged “seeing the nuances” which lead children to seek out and view sexual content online.

UNICEF says any efforts to block children from accessing pornography online might infringe on their human rights. UNICEF bases this claim on an expansive interpretation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

UNICEF also claims that asking for age-verification to access pornography online may deny children access to what it calls “vital sexuality education.” It should be noted that critics charge “comprehensive sexuality education” is pornographic and harmful to children.

🤡🤡🤡

[Enrico_sw]

2 hours ago, Prettyphile said:

 

🤡🤡🤡

 

 

You gotta be kidding me????!!!

 

Is this source legit? Cause if it is, this is the craziest thing I've seen in a while

[Enrico_sw]

@Cult Icon What type of windbreaker / rain jacket do you use?

 

I have this one, but it's starting to fall apart, I might have to buy a new one. I've used it in many countries/situations, including hikes in the US (West coast).

[Cult Icon]

edit:  In the cold weather I just wear a puffer jacket.

 

I walk up to 2 hours at once in all weather so I prefer the layered approach.  The body temperature will rise noticeably every 25 minutes.  So I look at the temperature data, wind, outside feel, and adjust based on experience.

 

So when the weather gets warmer and no jacket is required, I use this very thin, hooded Champion pull-over.  It is so thin and simple that it can be worn even if the temperature is 60 degrees, and the hood plus facemask protects against all sorts of wind.:

 

''

 

Undernealth I have options depending on the situation:  I  either wear a thin, windproof vest for additional warmth or I wear a long sleeve undershirt over the short-sleeve undershirt I always wear.  Or I wear nothing but the short-sleeve undershirt. 

 

In temperatures circa 50 degrees F with extremely strong wind (eg. 25 mph)  I sometimes wear two thin windbreakers.  The base layer is the pullover shown above and the second windbreaker has a heavier and larger hood.

 

For pants I have three options- an adidas double-layer windproof pant, a reebok superthin windproof pant, or shorts.  I often prioritize the top and wear just shorts and the jacket in warmer weather.  It depends.  

 

Sometimes I only wear shorts and the windproof vest.  

 

Also for headgear, if there is no hood I always wear a waterproof wide-brimmed hat.  This helps even if it is 90 degrees F as it does break up some of the wind, besides stopping the sun.  Also I wear sunglasses if it's sunny.

 

 

 

I also carry a very small backpack for water, tissues, and other things at all times

 

 

[Prettyphile]

3 hours ago, Enrico_sw said:

 

 

You gotta be kidding me????!!!

 

Is this source legit? Cause if it is, this is the craziest thing I've seen in a while

It was legit, UNICEF had a link on their official website talking about it, and due to the backlash they've recently taken it down.

 

Here is a link to the PDF saved by the Center for Family & Human Rights.

http://c-fam.org/wp-content/uploads/Digital-Age-Assurance-Tools-and-Childrens-Rights-Online-across-the-Globe.pdf

 

Its conclusion is based on a European study of 19 EU countries that found in most countries, most children who saw pornographic images were “neither upset nor happy.” In fact, the report UNICEF relies on says 39 percent of Spanish children were happy after seeing pornography.

Porn fighters disagree with the UNICEF data. “UNICEF’s report ignores the vast body of research demonstrating the harms of pornography to children. By ignoring the real harms pornography can have, UNICEF is playing roulette with children’s health and safety,” said Lisa Thompson, vice president and director of the Research Institute at the National Center on Sexual Exploitation.

Thompson’s organization, which provides expert research to inform policy decisions to end the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and children, has found that pornography can be a central driver of this abuse.

“Mainstream pornography contains horrific sexual abuse, rape, incest, racism – all of which children should not consume,” continued Thompson, and “UNICEF’s milquetoast assessment of the impacts hardcore pornography on children does nothing to challenge the political narrative that pornography is benign, and as a result, puts children in harm’s way.”

The 2020 EU Kids Online Study concluded that some children and young people “intentionally seek out sexual content” for a variety of reasons and that seeing sexual images “might also represent an opportunity” to provide answers to questions about puberty and sexual identity. The study encouraged “seeing the nuances” which lead children to seek out and view sexual content online.

UNICEF says any efforts to block children from accessing pornography online might infringe on their human rights. UNICEF bases this claim on an expansive interpretation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

UNICEF also claims that asking for age-verification to access pornography online may deny children access to what it calls “vital sexuality education.” It should be noted that critics charge “comprehensive sexuality education” is pornographic and harmful to children.

UNICEF’s release of this report comes just days after the U.S. Agency for International Development announced its renewal of its longstanding partnership with UNICEF, committing an additional $300 million in direct program funding. The U.S. is UNICEF’s largest government donor with 2020 funding reaching almost $994 million in humanitarian and development programs.

UNICEF generally has joined the feminist push at the United Nations in calls for abortion. The children’s agency was founded to help displaced children after the Second World War. Critics say UNICEF has strayed far from its founding vision, and that this call for children’s access to pornography under the guise of human rights and sex-ed underscores this change. At one time, the Holy See stopped its annual symbolic donation to UNICEF.

[Matt!]

Grattis alla svenskar på nationaldagen! 🇸🇪🇸🇪🇸🇪🇸🇪🇸🇪

 

 

 

[Enrico_sw]

15 hours ago, Prettyphile said:

It was legit, UNICEF had a link on their official website talking about it, and due to the backlash they've recently taken it down.

 

Here is a link to the PDF saved by the Center for Family & Human Rights.

http://c-fam.org/wp-content/uploads/Digital-Age-Assurance-Tools-and-Childrens-Rights-Online-across-the-Globe.pdf

 

Its conclusion is based on a European study of 19 EU countries that found in most countries, most children who saw pornographic images were “neither upset nor happy.” In fact, the report UNICEF relies on says 39 percent of Spanish children were happy after seeing pornography.

Porn fighters disagree with the UNICEF data. “UNICEF’s report ignores the vast body of research demonstrating the harms of pornography to children. By ignoring the real harms pornography can have, UNICEF is playing roulette with children’s health and safety,” said Lisa Thompson, vice president and director of the Research Institute at the National Center on Sexual Exploitation.

Thompson’s organization, which provides expert research to inform policy decisions to end the sexual abuse and exploitation of women and children, has found that pornography can be a central driver of this abuse.

“Mainstream pornography contains horrific sexual abuse, rape, incest, racism – all of which children should not consume,” continued Thompson, and “UNICEF’s milquetoast assessment of the impacts hardcore pornography on children does nothing to challenge the political narrative that pornography is benign, and as a result, puts children in harm’s way.”

The 2020 EU Kids Online Study concluded that some children and young people “intentionally seek out sexual content” for a variety of reasons and that seeing sexual images “might also represent an opportunity” to provide answers to questions about puberty and sexual identity. The study encouraged “seeing the nuances” which lead children to seek out and view sexual content online.

UNICEF says any efforts to block children from accessing pornography online might infringe on their human rights. UNICEF bases this claim on an expansive interpretation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

UNICEF also claims that asking for age-verification to access pornography online may deny children access to what it calls “vital sexuality education.” It should be noted that critics charge “comprehensive sexuality education” is pornographic and harmful to children.

UNICEF’s release of this report comes just days after the U.S. Agency for International Development announced its renewal of its longstanding partnership with UNICEF, committing an additional $300 million in direct program funding. The U.S. is UNICEF’s largest government donor with 2020 funding reaching almost $994 million in humanitarian and development programs.

UNICEF generally has joined the feminist push at the United Nations in calls for abortion. The children’s agency was founded to help displaced children after the Second World War. Critics say UNICEF has strayed far from its founding vision, and that this call for children’s access to pornography under the guise of human rights and sex-ed underscores this change. At one time, the Holy See stopped its annual symbolic donation to UNICEF.

 

Wow, this is crazy! These people are crazy

[Prettyphile]

33 minutes ago, Enrico_sw said:

 

Wow, this is crazy! These people are crazy

 

Yup, and it's only getting worse.

These increasing bad behavior types and messages being forced on society are similar to what happened during the fall of Rome with the eroding of the traditional Roman values system. I feel like we are headed towards a precipice and eventual collapse of our moral society ... which sadly will be for the best because we can't get much worse at this point... we only have one way to go and that's up (HOPEFULLY)

 

I've said it before and I will say it again. The swing away from God, moral obligations to do right while understanding whats wrong, parents not parenting, people (teachers, parents, family, friends) not holding kids accountable for their actions, participation trophies, and social media rewarding bad behaviors with instant likes recognition & praise has ruined generations of people.

[Matt!]