Yes, assuming, because you never got an EEG that measured which parts of your brain were active while you slept. Which, wait… Scientists have actually done! Wow, surprise 😐. Who could’ve known it.

Fucking dumbass.

E: Hey that’s new, getting downvoted for correcting unscientific wishful thinking magical xmas-land-mumbo-jumbo. Enjoy your minerals and tarot cards, you litany of buffoons 🙄…

I don’t need to read stupid questions like yours anymore, it’s bliss.

There’s something in data science that you learn at the very beginning, which is that you can’t observe the counterfactual.

That means you can’t base your data on the possibility of what would have happened had you chosen differently.

What you’re doing is assuming that your (and other people’s) lives would have been better had they been open about their sexuality.

I don’t know where you live, but there is no country with a 0% chance of being assaulted/discriminated against for being LGBT+.

So your assumption that things would have been better is a misguided nostalgia at best, fallaciously wrong at worst.

Edit: gotta love the Reddit brainless downvote bandwagon that’s going on. Nice hive mind.

“Yeah so for this unmeasurable and ephemeral thing that I myself just called ‘fleeting’ you should totally act non-het and potentially put yourself in mortal danger because I, an internet stranger, said so.”

Definitely a pet killer.

Good job with the mental gymnastics while your pets die of protein deficiency.

Ah so you’re one of the pet-killers. Gotcha. Tagged as such.