I worked at an aquarium store in high school and owned saltwater tanks for decades. Some fish do get something like the zoomies where they will dart around the tank. I had a wrasse that would get excited in way that didn’t seem frightened but more like playful.

I don’t know about “tag” per se, but they do sometimes have territorial sparring which is more like swimming up at each other quickly and trying to chase each other away from their spot, without it ever really getting violent. If one of them didn’t chicken out though I imagine fins would get bitten.

My clownfish would come up and nibble my hand if I put it in the tank and I could scoop her up from underneath with one hand. It was not so much playful though, she probably just associated my hand with food so she’d hang out as close as she could get until I gave up the goods. Clownfish have instinctual behaviors that encourage them to rub up against anemones, so maybe she was treating me like her weird semi-aquatic anemone buddy.

Oh yeah, it’s definitely creepy both ways. Just speculating on why their ages might have looked so off to you. I know media has influenced my perception of what people actually look like at a given age!

He’s 31, she’s 34 (the actors). I think you might be thrown off by how Hollywood always has extremely young actresses playing older roles while older guys get cast as young characters. They look like they’re similar ages to me.

Yep, first thing I heard about him was from my husband. “Have you seen the photo? The shooter is hot!”

He knows a thing or two about sucking!

Ok boomer.

Sorry, couldn’t resist.

Can I do both?

Here’s an article going into some of the crown’s crimes, which Charles has willingly benefitted from and continues to do so.

You don’t exterminate mosquitoes because they are evil, you get rid of them because they are parasites, unable to exist without feeding on you and your loved ones. They are disease vectors, it’s us or them.

The royal family feeds into hierarchical structures. They benefit from our subjugation. They knowingly and intentionally contribute to death and misery worldwide for their own benefit. If Charles was a decent man he’d abdicate.

Can we get those corneas first though?

You didn’t say “Western countries being developed is a quirk of environment, not the consequence of any innate superiority” though. You said the thing I quoted above. I’m addressing the words you actually said.

Honey, I’m bored. You’re either incredibly dense or unwilling to have a straightforward discussion. I think you should stick to your plan of leaving the internet.

You still haven’t answered why you’re bringing up white supremacist talking points (even for the purpose of “debunking” them).

“I have always assumed that white light-skinned people have a leg up because they’re white light-skinned.“

You’re voicing white supremacist talking points. You don’t even really debunk them in your original post. You just propose an alternative. You still haven’t explained why you felt the need to even bring this line up. Nobody was wondering about skin tone’s role in economic development. Except you I guess.

Seems to me you’re pissed off that you made a stupid argument and people called you out for it. Frankly, you came in with white supremacist talking points and you shouldn’t be surprised that people were distrustful. You got a lot more grace than you deserved from most in this thread. Not from me, admittedly, I assumed you were malicious because you didn’t seem thick. Now I think you’re just overly emotional about the whole thing and it’s clouding your perception.

Did I say I only expect nuance or charitable interpretation from one side? I expect it from both, but I’m not seeing it from you. I see people largely agreeing with you but begging you to reconsider the way you frame your argument. I see you responding only to the negative and evidently not even SEEING the positive responses. You might be right that the internet isn’t a good place for you, you seem ill-equipped to handle even gentle disagreement.

Quite a few people engaged with your argument. If you read back through the responses with a charitable eye you might be able to see it. Those who criticized you were ultimately trying to help you get your point across to others by suggesting you drop the part of your argument that addresses white supremacist talking points. That part of your argument was distracting and largely irrelevant to the conversation, and it made people think you were attempting to covertly inject racist ideas into the discussion (a common white supremacist tactic).

You’re big mad about this, huh? Everyone else is crazy, you’re the only one making any sense. Couldn’t possibly be something wrong with your argument.

People are just trying to point out why you’re getting shit my dude. You don’t want to hear it. If you want to be part of conversations in the future, learning to accept criticism is a skill you might want to work on developing.

Why are you trying to explain this correlation? Nobody else had mentioned skin tone, so you weren’t correcting anyone. You just brought up a completely unrelated correlation out of the blue for no reason? And you’re defending it in comment after comment instead of just saying “sorry that was a non-sequitur, my bad”.

If you give kids free lunches, they will have no incentive to get jobs cleaning slaughterhouses! Without this opressive welfare program, the kids will be free to choose whether to continue on to middle school or leave their studies behind for a lucrative career in an abattoir.