The "parent with extra crap" stuff is actually easy to solve. Just get a large duffle bag with all the stuff and throw it in the trunk when the car shows up
This is what my wife and I do for our 10 month old. All of his stuff is in a large carry bag. Occasionally we have to add the stroller, but generally it is all taken out when we're at home. Of course, we only have one small car, and it would be a hindrance to leave things in it. I'd like to think we would do the same if we had a larger vehicle.
it is refreshing to have someone that doesn't... lie to voters
A. A ha. A ha ha ha. A ha ha ha ha hahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahaha... ha ha... ha... what?
in the UK, the figures show that unvaccinated kids visit the doctor a *lot* less than vaccinated kids
Tell me about it! My infant son has been to the doctor 4 times this year just to get his vaccination shots.
Seems rather obvious now that they point it out!
Subject A: my bones grow too much!
Subject B: my bones don't grow enough!
Researchers: Hmm, I wonder if we can find out what causes A and apply it to B?
Lotteries are a tax on stupidity.
People paying for fancy cars is a tax on stupidity because I personally can't see the value of it. People paying to see a play is a tax on stupidity because I wouldn't enjoy it myself. Paying any money at all for a coffee is a tax on stupidity because I hate coffee. Everything you do for enjoyment that I wouldn't personally enjoy doing is a tax on stupidity.
If you don't get any enjoyment from it, don't do it. Other people enjoy it, which is obvious, so why be a prick about it? Very, very few people buy lottery tickets as a financial strategy, so the actual odds are irrelevant as long as it's run honestly and someone shows up in the news with a win occasionally. Personally I spend about $10 per month on lotto tickets. I enjoy it, it's fun for me, so fuck off with your judgmental generalization.
but since the only difference was the "gender" setting it is clear that at some point in the chain (Google, advertisers, recruitment companies) there is a rule that says "favour males", just like there is a rule that says "favour females" for tampon adverts.
As someone else mentioned, it is conceivable that women have a much larger pool of ads being targeted to them than males, something this study should have been able to discern, but the article is all "NUMBERS ARE DIFFERENT THEREFORE SEXISM!!". If women have an ad pool that is 10 times larger, such profiles would expect to see any specific ad significantly less often than men. There is nothing nefarious in that case, and it certainly seems plausible.
While I agree that certain ads probably shouldn't be allowed to be gender-biased due to societal concerns, such restrictions by themselves would not make these statistics even.