I haven't seen this option mentioned yet but you can also order your groceries online, and have them delivered. That's what I do at the moment, because I live outside the city and my nearest grocery store is 2 km away. I could bike or hop on a bus, and I do sometimes, but ordering online is just really convenient.

If anything it's the car-dependent infrastructure that is ableist, as many people with disabilities cannot drive. I can't, and if I didn't live in a place where alternative modes of transport were a thing, I would either be stuck at home, or have to waste money on buying a specially made car.

Far from all disabled people use wheelchairs or have mobility issues. Some have problems with their sight, concentration, fine motor skills etc. which prevent them from driving safely. Even if you cannot walk or ride a bike, and have trouble getting on/off public transport by yourself, living in an environment that is walkable and bikeable usually means that it is also easier/safer to get around in a wheelchair or on a moped.

We would be riding cows instead.

Americans seem very "fighty" compared to people from many other countries. You just have to say something that could be construed as liberal (the American kind) or conservative, too politically correct or incorrect, or mention you ride a bicycle or have an outdoor cat, to set some people off. With some Americans having a conversation is like navigating a minefield, especially those who have very little understanding of the rest of the world and reads everything you say into an American context, language barriers and all.

I love talking politics, and have had pleasant conversations with all kinds of people but I have learned from experience to just not bother with Americans, unless they're the very curious and open kind.

I like to recite grammar rules or language facts to myself when I'm feeling stressed out, almost like a form of meditation.

I think school/work days would be shorter and more intense. Small talk and chit chat would not be an integrated part of a work/school day, but instead something that happened before or after school/work if you wanted to. A meeting wouldn't start with 10 minutes of "how have you been?" or random jokes, but instead jump right into business. Working from home would also be more common.

Having a niche hobby or working with something niche would be way more common, and hobbies would be viewed as more important than they are today. People without any hobbies or interests would be viewed as really weird.

Practical and comfortable clothes would also be more common, and fashion would be more erratic/varied. Pop culture would be less of a thing.

I think you could argue that this is an example of cognitive dissonance. It is uncomfortable to come face to face with new information that contradicts your beliefs or actions, and it requires energy if you want to integrate that new information into your worldview and adjust your actions. It is much easier to deny that information, even when it is clearly true.

For example, when it came out that aspartame might cause cancer, if you (like me) have eaten/drunk a lot of products containing it or have had a strong belief that it was completely safe, then it may be more comfortable for you to criticize WHO or think "well, it's not really relevant for me because my family isn't predisposed for cancer." If you didn't care about aspartame or artificial sweeteners before, you will probably readily accept that there may or may not be a cancer link.

In Danish we say "endestation" instead, which can be translated as butt-station. Sometimes the endestation is Middelfart, or somewhere on Lolland.

Having your groceries delivered or buying a moped or motorcycle might be an option for you. I don't think anyone on here would begrudge you using a car in that situation, though.

I think the anti-rural sentiment you sometimes see, mostly stems from how unsustainable and car dependent the lifestyles a lot of people who live outside cities are. People who find a job in a city to get a high pay, move out of said city to get a garden and then commute back and forth between their home office and their work office, with very little concern for how they effect the world around them. They take no personal responsibility and don't want to take collective responsibility either, because that could threaten their lifestyle.

People who live in suburbs, villages or rurally because that is where it makes sense for them to live, isn't an issue. It makes sense to move to the countryside when you retire and no longer have to be anywhere. It also makes sense to live in the countryside if that is where you work or if you work from home. Some of these people would benefit greatly from owning a car, while others can get by just fine with a bicycle or their own legs.

You can also do a lot to lessen the dependence on cars outside city centers. You can easily run metros and trams into the suburbs and encourage a higher density (more row houses and smaller apartment complexes). Rurally you can encourage people to build villages (clusters of houses) instead of every house being spaced evenly apart, and you can run bus lines through those villages.

I think some people's self-worth relies on them being "good"/right/perfect, so they can't apologize without also hurting themselves. I don't really get it either, because in my experience being able to apologize when you need to, is a huge strength. People will overlook almost any mistake you've made when they know that you feel bad about it, instead of having it turn into an useless conflict.

Even if you don't feel like apologizing surely you can say "I didn't mean to hurt you and I'll try not to do it again" or even "I didn't mean to hurt you but I don't really care about your feelings/I think you're being unreasonable" so you know where they stand.

I get that, but those were the kind of nuances and perspectives that I was talking about. You can think that drunk driving is a bad thing that should be prevented, without resorting to black/white thinking like: drunk drivers are bad and they should be thrown in jail.

Maybe they should be, but what is the downsides of that policy? What is the reduction in drunk driving and drunk driving accidents expected to be? Who are the drunk drivers and when do they drive drunk? What do they do in other places/countries? Anything about our country/area in particular that causes people to drive drunk? Is there anything else we could do that is more effective and/or less expensive? Could an alternative solution be to run busses through the night? Involve parents? Require alcolocks to be installed in cars?

It's not about whether you are a good or a bad person, or about what your beliefs or values are. In my experience, poorly educated people are just more likely to think in absolutes, which makes sense, because analytical thinking and the ability to view things through different "lenses" and from different perspectives, is something they try to teach you in school.

Understanding that things are nuanced is not the same thing as not having opinions.

You can acknowledge that drinking alcohol can cause addiction, act as a social lubricant, and decide if you want to drink. You can even have an opinion on what you think alcohol's role in society should be and what should be done to prevent drunk driving.