don

I mean, we can talk about it for a bit, Angie, if it’d make you feel better, but that’s really about it, honestly.

Governor Ron DeSantis said during a panel discussion in March: “Why do we say we need to import foreigners, even import them illegally, when, you know, teenagers used to work at these resorts, college students should be able to do this stuff? … What’s wrong with expecting our young people to be working part-time now? I mean, that’s how it used to be when I was growing up.”

And a lot of things were different for your great-great-grandparents, and yet here you are not living as they did, you cheesedick dumbfuck.

Ragebait

Also Ubisoft: aqueous hydrofluoric acid cleans your teeth.

“Don’t mind me, just arguing semantics in a discussion about pedophilia. Carry on.”

Doing a quick search on “Yorshik” (Ёршик), of the very few sources I could find on the topic, while the word does seem to translate to “brush” there doesn’t seem to be any surface connection to toilet brush per se, though naturally it may be possible on a colloquial level.

This source that deals with meanings and etymologies of Russian words says:

Слово «ёршик» является диалектным выражением, используемым в русском языке для обозначения маленькой ёлочной игрушки в виде ёлочной ветки или шишки. Это слово имеет древнерусское происхождение и связано с древними славянскими обрядами, связанными с поклонением природе и деревьям.

Which DDG translate says means

The word “brush” is a dialectal expression used in the Russian language to refer to a small Christmas tree toy in the form of a Christmas tree branch or cone. This word is of Old Russian origin and is associated with ancient Slavic rites associated with the worship of nature and trees.

The only other resource I’ve found is this 11 year old YouTube video in Russian, that I can’t really understand. They seem to be joking about something, and “New Year” is mentioned, but I didn’t hear the word for toilet.

As far as I can understand, Yorshik seems to mean “brush” or “little brush”.

Oh, at least two, I’d guess. But seriously, I left when the api was shut down and I could no longer use Apollo to browse. There were other signs, but that was my tipping point.

power to you if you can pull it off!

Jesus fucking himself christ, that’s horrific

Well, that’s not exactly nothing, though it may not be the something you want.

deleted by creator

Absolutely, yes.

I have seen a pic, and he’s hideous

2312 miles, or 3,721 km. From the east coast of the US to the west coast.

Oh, for sure! Without a doubt.

Pretty sure the state has its fair share of roadkill, just the country

He has to use a giant sharpie because that’s the only way he can see where his signature’s going to wind up.

that’s not at all how evolutionary adaptation works. We are full of parts that are no longer useful and are infact sometimes downright more risky to have just because they aren’t likely to negatively impact our ability to procreate.

Do you plan to provide examples (other than the appendix and tonsils, that can be harmful to have if infected) of these useless organs we’re so full of? And why would I associate the foreskin, which has a clear protective use case, with these many, many other apparently useless/dangerous  organs we’re chock full to the brim with?

If you’re going to make a claim about evolutionary adaptation works, you have the burden to back your claim with more than just vague proclamations.

When you’re invested in the kayfabe to such an extent that it completely defines the nature of your very identity and existence, the lie is made real, and the odds of you being successfully extracted and deprogrammed go ever distant with each passing moment.

Off topic, but look at the difference between his face and hands lol 🍊af lmao stupid fucking Cheeto-faced pedophile

Given that language is prescriptive, “random” has, at least in regards to colloquial usage, rather lost its dictionary definition of “made, done, happening, or chosen without method or conscious decision”. Hell, I use it colloquially, as well. There’s nothing wrong with this usage.

I’m just trying to provide a bit of a humorous comparison between the usages by somewhat demonstrating what the charcuterie might look like if the dictionary definition was to be used, instead.