You said “with your current knowledge still intact”. If that means I can know beforehand which things I’ve already invested in which didn’t pay off and those which did (and I mean relationships, careers, life choices, not necessarily money) that alone would be a massive perk. You want to give me physical perks on top of that, I’m not complaining. But the deal was already a no brainer.

If there isn’t knowledge remembered then I’m a bit ambivalent about which of the two. I think I might go for magic but if you strip all memory away I would have nothing to compare it to.

I’ve watched this anime, read the manga, totally forgot about the character’s appearance and didn’t get the reference either. I was wondering if he was supposed to be some public figure who did something horrible to their wife, daughter, dog, and as usual I missed the news

I once saw heard a 4wD crash right on the neighbors’ solid brick wall, right across the street. The cops were chasing the car, which was stolen, and arrested the driver. My 16y/o chicken self got so scared with all the noise that I didn’t dare to peek through the window for a good ten minutes. When I finally did, I thought the hole in the wall looked surreal. The impact also damaged the garage door. I can’t even begin to imagine the insurance shitshow that must have been.

Oh no, who ever saw this coming. Who would have guessed.

Easy, do I get a sense of achievement with this job? Is it part of my identity in a healthy way? Then, raise

Do I just do the job because I need a way to pay the bills? Then, simplify. Less stress has a massive health impact

Am I desperate to pay bills and debts? Probably raise and side hustles and overtime I don’t know

Not sure I’m following your point. If someone doesn’t give me a raise, doesn’t cut hours but I get my job simplified- what’s the problem with that? The only caveat I could see is if you have a job that you liked because of the challenge, and having it easier now equals it is unfulfilling. Similarly if you see an easier job as future reduced opportunities. But, if you just have a job to survive or that you are ambivalent about, I don’t see where the problem is.

Watermarking never meant to be a legitimate way of telling this stuff apart. Anyone slightly savvy could run a generator locally and produce images without watermarking, if they really meant to fool others. You are right in that the watermarking makes it (or did) more difficult for the average joe, but yeah. This is a never was kind of scenario

Not sure if this applies to you but maybe you have heard a phrase about you that doesn’t make sense fully. In my case, it was “you’re intimidating” and that took me a long long time to understand because as a woman who has a lot of insecurities and can’t physically fight this is absolutely ridiculous. Then one day I was watching some relationship guru video clip and the guy said “if you’re told you’re intimidating and can’t make sense of it, it means you are hard to impress”. That clicked. At least, within dating contexts. I don’t know. I think most of the honest feedback I’ve gotten from potential dates, from boyfriends, from family members (though that required always a difficult argument beforehand and getting feedback was never the goal) and also from teachers who get fed up with your bullshit occasionally. It’s never going to come to you from a comfortable source, but you shouldn’t be asking your enemies either, because they’ll lie too.

This is now part of my headcanon. Romeo dies and a random cat that was nearby plays with his hair.

Yes I understand “good enough” and that it could just be out of whimsical preference by sexual partners. But what if not? The best answer I found here was that greasy long hair, in those cold climates, was somewhat water repellant. Nobody wants to get wet in the cold.

You aren’t subject to every pressure every hominid ancestor ever was. Bald today still gets you laid, congrats! And you got hats to keep warm and look fabulous. :) I believe long hair must have presented some kind of advantage at some point though, there are some interesting comments here.

Yes, I understand this and it is in my post as part of the question: is it just a showoff feature like peacock’s feathers? I also understand traits that don’t impact fitness won’t be selected against.

But I have the nagging feeling that the body does spend a fair amount of extra resources creating long hair when it could make do with just a fraction. Use it or lose it is a popular trend in the animal kingdom. You can have a very showy coat using a lot less resources, if we’re talking about health markers only.

But, fear not, there are theories that support long hair as having an actual practical function that impacts fitness, and people in the comments have posted some.

What I like about these theories is that they aren’t mutually exclusive. You can have a variety of factors that mildly favor the same trait, it’s not always one single factor exerting clear pressure on things.

Aha, this answer is satisfactory. You introduce the concept of greasy long hair. At first I thought, well why not just greasy fur then? Why only on the head? But then I remember humans and probably early hominids like to wrap themselves with things like other creatures pelts and the head is probably the only place you can actually grow hair from. And if greasy it’s like a sort of raincoat thing.

I can sleep now thanks

Heh that’s an interesting consideration. I also wondered about this. It’s not mutually exclusive with other theories, so…

That’s an interesting take, agreed. But it doesn’t explain why the length… You can still shave hair that doesn’t grow too long. And look dangerous to fuck with

Yes, that’s very interesting, and I also read about similar studies which explain pubic hair texture as having moisture isolating capabilities. However this doesn’t address my question, which is about the apparently excessive length of head hair regardless of texture.

Alright, that’s true with the history since long hairs stay for years, good point. I’m not sure I follow with shearing and technological capacity, mind explaining that a little bit more please?

Well… More to my point… That means it’s a liability, right ?because that’s all fine and dandy when consensual but over the course of history more people have died as a consequence of getting caught by the hair than the offspring such long hair ever facilitated. I mean most military forces cut their hair for a reason. But I’m neither a scientist or a soldier so, I could be wrong too.

Why do we get an advantage from hairs longer than 60cm? 20cm already does the job, it even covers your neck.

Rogue, because stealth