Saving the kid from cavities.

There is nothing in the definitions of pride that necessitates it either, so yes including if you care about what it actually means rather than what you want it to mean. If you look up the definition of the word it includes multiple definitions of pride that do not require your own personal accomplishments or actions, and those are not new definitions. It’s extremely common in the English language for a word to have multiple meanings depending on the context they’re used in that may be connected but are not necessarily the same.

There’s nothing that necessitates that you can only be proud of things you have personally done.

I mean there are different types of pride. Being lgbt isn’t a decision either, yet we have Pride, because being proud of who you are is often about more than just accomplishments, for many people it’s about accepting and embracing the parts of you that you can’t change. Just because you don’t personally like that it includes that definition, it doesn’t erase the fact that that is a part of the definition and has been for a long time.

If it’s a spot the difference style thing then the art won’t be dramatically different and you still get to have the box art at least.

This just provides a small added challenge, I don’t really see an issue . If you want an easier jigsaw they might sell them at a toy store.

If you can get away with dropping a couple of classes and still have enough credits then try to do that to lessen your workload. You can also potentially reduce it further if you request accommodations.

I mean let’s not pretend than when we were kids we didn’t dream of going on a field trip like the ones in the show. I wanted to slide around on the frictionless baseball diamond so bad.

Or maybe they thought it was referring to something more specific in American politics that they weren’t knowledgeable about and didn’t realize it was a more general message?

As someone with adhd it’s completely normal for me. When you’re a kid you have good reason to keep track of your age because at that time of your life you change dramatically between ages as you develop as a person, plus it’s important when asserting your identity to other as that too develops. When we’re older it’s just a number that only comes up once a year and is not that much different from the previous number, and so it’s easier to lose track of especially for people who have an affected working memory and time blindness like me. Idk if you have adhd or how often people without adhd experience this sort of thing but I can speak for my own experience. I forget how old I am, and other people’s names, all the damn time lol.

Fucking idiots, trying to act like the chatbot wasn’t their responsibility.

How small was this library? My town’s local library is more than big enough that I would be able to move to a different room or floor or section to escape noise, and they had a designated children’s area downstairs. Even in smaller towns I’d imagine the average library has more than a single room. I live in Canada but I wouldn’t think it’d be that much different in most places in the US. Heck even my university library had multiple floors and was more than big enough to escape noise in one location especially with noise cancelling headphones.

Englandn’t

Do you happen to remember who won that particular scuffle? And who had an enormous statue erected in memorial and is the most popular presidents in history? And whether slavery is in fact still legal or not?

Yes I did, I read and reread them many times as a kid and I never saw enough evidence that he had enough limitations to prevent him from doing something like lobbying for legislation. The degree of influence he held in the Wizarding world was huge and none of the reasons given for why he would struggle with changing things convinced me that they were enough to combat the sheer volume of feats Dumbledore had achieved throughout his career, the number of friends he had in high places, or the fact that he, again, very publicly defeated Wizard Hitler 1.0. The 5th book actually showcased pretty strongly how far his influence had spread and how much it intimidated the ministry. He had inside men in both Voldemort’s circle (Snape) and the ministry’s circle (Kingsley), neither of which were ever suspected or discovered by the leaders of the organizations they’d infiltrated, and he even orchestrated an entire underground order of powerful and influential wizards and witches working in the shadows to fight against Voldemort right under the ministry’s nose. It’s not like Fudge was terrified of him aiming for Minister of Magic for no reason.

Oh no two whole paragraphs longer than 3 sentences. I didn’t mean to frighten you with words.

I mean with the right flight sim and setup it’s functionally identical to the experience of flying a real plane, just without any of the potential danger.

That’s like saying “Dumbledore had the biggest assault rifle of anyone, so he can do anything”.

Except it’s not, not even close. Having a gun is not the same as having authority and influence in an institution or government. He ran Hogwarts, for one thing, as you said. He could have very easily refused to have house elves at the school unless they were paid employees, and that alone would have made a very public statement, which would have meant a lot on a societal level coming from such an important, influential, public figure. There are other options for labour, so it’s not like he had any excuse not to. He also had political influence and could have pushed for changes in legislation if he wanted. Part of why the ministry was so afraid of him was because of the influence he had. It wasn’t because he was a string wizard and they thought he would come to the ministry one day and shoot up the place if he didn’t get his way, Dumbledore could only do so much against an entire building full of powerful wizards, even he wouldn’t be able to stand up to all of the ministry’s aurors. He had friends, connections, a reputation, a history, control over one of the most influential schools in the world which produced a significant percentage of the world’s licenced and trained Wizarding population, direct access to thousands of witches and wizards who could all potentially be the next minister of magic or the next Voldemort or hell the next Dumbledore. He absolutely could have leveraged that to change something societally but he only ever used it to maintain his own status quo when the ministry got too jumpy and tried to knock him down a few pegs.

If he goes with 1, he has to maintain favor.

You say that like it would be difficult. He was beloved by most of his students, many of which had influential parents or would become influential themselves. He had an untold number of connections from favours he’d provided over the years, people he’d helped, or even just friends in high places. He was close with many high ranking experts in their respective field including his professors and others outside of Hogwarts. He’d previously been the one to take down the first wizard Hitler, and had been instrumental in fighting the second wizard Hitler. Etc, etc. His favour only slipped with the ministry precisely because they were aware of the power he held politically and were afraid of him leveraging that, and thought his claims of Voldemort returning were part of a move to take over the ministry. That was the entire deal behind the Dumbledore’s army conspiracy. Even when they managed to force him out of Hogwarts they had to basically play dirty and strong arm him out of the position because they knew they couldn’t do it through any legitimate channels. Even then the school constantly pushed back against them taking over and it became a nightmare to deal with.

But it’s not like he would have to stage a revolution to enact meaningful change. All he’d have to do is suggest a change in legislation to important figures who respected his opinion, openly advocate for said legislation to gain public support, y’know, regular everyday activism and political lobbying, and he’d undoubtedly get results.

I don’t know about you but I think the people who argued in favour of abolishing slavery were not historically ridiculed as far as I’ve ever heard.

Tries and fails. It never goes anywhere, and she’s mocked as a well-meaning fool for trying in the first place because “welp most elves just enjoy being slaves what can you do shrug emoji”. Jkr sets up something with Hermione and the elves and then doesn’t follow through with it in any meaningful way (and I don’t count commentary from her outside the books as following through) so it’s left to just sit there uncritically as “slavery is a thing in this universe and is seen as completely normal by most characters, and only one person ever tries to do anything about it and she’s depicted as a cringey radical in the process”. Jkr doesn’t even show the beginnings of societal change like more elves coming to Dobby’s side of things once they see it’s an option and that Dobby’s is happy that way, or other house elves being motivated to think differently about their situation and starting to unlearn their generations of indoctrination. We don’t even see a glimpse of Winky starting to recover instead the last we see of her is as a depressed alcoholic whose life was ruined by her being freed from slavery. Jkr depicts it as “yeah slavery is bad but you can’t change the way the world works so might as well not even try.” the house elves’ servitude is treated as something so fundamentally tied to their species that it seems to be biological and thus humans taking advantage of that is to some degree the natural way of things which, I shouldn’t have to explain what the problem with that sort of depiction is. Maybe that wasn’t what she intended, maybe she just added slavery because it’s a common world building trope, but if that’s the case she did so without considering the implications or how it would come across in the end product or the messages it would send.