The original Pride flag was designed with eight colours, but quickly moved to six and seven stripes because of issues with sourcing dyes and mass production. As others have said, each colour did have a specific meaning like Sex, Life, Harmony, Art, Sunlight. These were aspects of the queer community, but they did not mean specific or narrow identities, and did not only describe ‘gay’ or ‘lesbian’ people.

In the words of Gilbert Baker (who designed the initial flag) “We needed something beautiful – something from us, and the rainbow is so perfect because it really fits our diversity in the sense of our race, our gender, all of those things.” Since then people have added specific colours and extra features to draw attention to identities that they felt were undervalued or overlooked, which is laudable goal, but not because the original did not include everyone.

You’re throwing around a lot of strong negative claims about the discussion here, if you really want to make a case that the meaning of original flag did not include queer people who were black or whatever, please bring some sources. And just to note, personally I actually like the chevrons of the Progress flag, but that doesn’t invalidate people claiming that the original flag included everyone.

This gets my vote

Perhaps, or too boomer

If we’re just talking “don’t worry about money day to day” then I’m that, but that’s more about being a couple who both work with low expenses (no kids). I never really think about how much money I have in my account, or worry about bills or rent or anything. I can’t afford to buy super expensive stuff all the time, but it doesn’t feel like a hardship to not buy the latest flagship or constantly upgrade stuff, and if I do want something I just get it.

Not stressing about money is fucking amazing, ngl. It creates this relaxed sense of calm, even when things are difficult. I certainly didn’t always feel like this, I’ve been unemployed, and so broke that I’ve been starving and wandering the street in the hope to find a coin that someone dropped so I could buy something to eat. When you don’t have enough money everything is difficult and any new crises is anxiety inducing.

Now, if something goes wrong while travelling, I just book into a hotel, while before I’ve had to sleep rough because I missed a flight and couldn’t afford a room. I never worry about the price of a restaurant or how overpriced a drink is (partly because I rarely eat / drink out so it’s not a big expense) . But that attitude of not having to check prices, or order the cheapest options, is so liberating. I think people who’ve never been poor have no idea how exhausting and stressful it is to constantly be on your guard and how feeling guilty about the cost can even ruin the enjoyment of the treats you do allow yourself.

It’s not the size of virtue, but how you use it. Or so I’m told.

I don’t understand why it’s so difficult. In France voting is done entirely on paper and results are often released later that night, and almost all the results are in by the next day. Same in the UK, although it generally takes them a few hours longer, probably because the polls close later in the evening.

It’s the dates they’re laid!

Looking through their post history, they don’t seem very concerned with being inspirational. Mostly being antagonistic, and racist of about romani people.

Normally like this, but we ate them all yesterday.

I think this is a pretty dumb topic, because it really involves a lot of stereotyping and bullshit (like the other comment suggesting that fancy cars aren’t linked to penis size anxiety) but anyway…

If we take “penis size” as a metric that men believe is important to their sexual attractiveness, and the assumption that they buy expensive cars to compensate, then we could see the goal as increasing their diminished sexual value in an alternative way. A rich man with a small penis may (in this silly logic) be as sexually attractive as a poor man with a large penis.

So for women, what is a stereotypical number that they could worry about and try and compensate for? The two that spring to mind (in this clichéd view of the sexual economy) are age and weight. Weight feels different, as there are methods of managing it that are more effective than “this secret ancient method will grow your dong 3 inches!” but for many people it is not an easily controlled factor. Age is, chronologically at least, a one way street. For both of these, make-up and grooming are pretty effective at reducing the “negatives” (bleurgh!) of being old / overweight, but that would be the equivalent of men stuffing socks and salami down their pants. What is the equivalent of “I’m not conventionally sexually attractive, but I have other redeeming qualities, like a willingness to waste money trying to impress women”? I wonder if it’s “being kinda slutty”?

When I think of the equivalent to the cliché of the needy middle-aged businessman in his sports car, I think of the stereotype of the middle-aged, overweight, divorcée wearing too much makeup and dressing too young/slutty. She’s not really trying to pretend she’s young and hot, she’s visibly demonstrating that’s she’s willing to make an effort to attract a man “if I’m willing to look like this in public, think how much of an effort I’ll make on the sack!”

But I think this is a pretty silly topic, and making stereotyped judgements about other people is pretty bad. The “facists have small dicks” memes that kick about are kinda funny, but are really just reinforcing a body image problem that exists much more in society and the minds of men than it does in the tastes of their actual sexual partners. And women can be whatever age, weight or whatever else they want, and dress how they like. Some people just love leopard print! No need to project society’s ills onto them!

You’re doing the Lord’s work. As someone who lives in a country where I can barely speak the language this is a constant frustration.

I also hate how hard it is to override location for other searches. I travel back and forth to my native country regularly, and so I’m often trying to search stuff or buy things for a different country than the one I’m literally in. If Google is so keen on making money from me, why can’t I tell it to do a Product search in a specific country, instead of forcing me to use a vpn to trick it?

This is something that I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about. I think there’s a danger to doomscrolling and upsetting yourself about things you can’t change, and it can be really unhealthy. But there’s also a real danger from turning away from the bad things that happen. And in my experience, the people who know least about the world, who “don’t follow politics”, etc are often the people responsible for the problems.

Although wallowing in tragedy doesn’t help anyone, being aware that bad things happen and doing what you can in real life to make the world a better place is important. But the moderation is important - getting upset doesn’t help anyone. So I try to limit my time with current affairs to specific times reading articles and reports, so I can learn about the world in a calm way. Rather than the drip drip anxiety provoking chaos of 24 hour news and social media.

There’s quite a lot of reviews and comments from the time hating ESB (a muppet as a spiritual guide? Contrived twist!) and RotJ (too cheesy! Just an excuse to sell toys!).