Discrimination—whether it’s real, perceived, or just a hypothetical concept—could be seen as a sort of filter for capability, one that gets neutralized by sheer competence. For whatever reason, maybe it wasn't about some personal vendetta over awards, like how you could imagine someone obsessing over a double Nobelovk like Marie Curie... who knows what kind of hysteria or delusions some person might have cooked up in a lab where women aren't even supposed to hold much ground. Maybe they were just sending someone out to grab a sandwich for them. Or maybe it was more than that; while facing increased hurdles in a patriarchal setup, she didn't just fight for a seat at the table, she fought to be recognized as an individual who has to smash through a reinforced wall of challenges just to exist within this "everyone is equal" framework...
Which might actually be a good thing. Even if it makes people want to quit, it also sparks the kind of grit you need in a competitive system where you actually have to prove yourself. Honestly, it would be great if everyone had to prove their worth. It would weed out the incompetent people, regardless of gender, from positions they aren't qualified for. Once Marie proved herself—mostly to herself—she’d send scholars, big names and small, men and women alike, out for sandwiches and stuff. If the idea is that a person learns until they physically can't anymore, then maybe change is the only constant? All that knowledge gathered until you hit your limit, regardless of whether it fits the current "normal" narrative or mainstream generalizations, always ends up clashing with existing prejudices...
Prejudices that get dismantled by learning until you're exhausted, replacing "before I knew XYZ, I thought..." with the actual reality living in your head. For individuals, groups, or even entire nations synchronized by ignorance, sometimes you just need that "seeing is believing" moment. You have to use competence to show people the truth behind a hypothesis that's being dismissed as outdated. Nowadays, women have the right to vote for whoever represents the values they personally hold as a female-identifying individual. It’s been proven that women are perfectly capable of thinking for themselves about politics, even if they seem totally apolitical. In this era of supposed equality and human rights, they enjoy the same rights as men—even if those men talking about politics know way less than the women who claim not to care at all...
If we keep up this pace of forced leveling for the next few hundred thousand years, all these inequalities will eventually flatten out. The capable will be proven capable, and the incapable will be proven capable only of being incapable. At that point, future generations will probably wonder if the position held by the incompetent exists because a previous generation treated them as such. This whole mission to equalize every single human life, treating everyone identically regardless of anything, is a never-ending loop. The important thing is just to keep moving forward, slowly...
Harold Anderson3 said:Cases like this really highlight how much schizophrenia is tied to genetics. When you look at identical twins, if one is diagnosed, there’s about a 50% chance the other will be too. In the other 50% of cases, the second twin stays perfectly healthy. Honestly, I don't know who has it harder—the person living with the illness, or the sibling watching their twin go through it.
silvercobra122 said:It isn't just about men being dominant. There are plenty of women who crave control or simply enjoy being in charge too.
I am not entirely sure what the root cause is. Perhaps I am just too passive, which makes it seem like everyone is trying to dominate me. Regardless, I don't accept it, and it truly bothers me. Maybe the mindsets I've been encountering lately just aren't a good fit for me.
So, you're saying there are dominant women? Like, they run the show or just need to be in charge? If you feel inferior, then everyone around you is going to seem dominant regardless, right? And if you're actually accepting that—even if you hate it—then isn't that just you giving in to it? Maybe the people you're dealing with lately just don't click with you. Basically, you're stuck between needing to accept them and being unable to, which leads to you being pissed at yourself... maybe it's just a sign that it's time to go back to the old crowd, the ones who actually fit your personality?
Maybe it doesn't start, maybe it never even gets going, but it’s definitely heading somewhere... All you gotta do is stay patient. Just sit back, watch closely, and wait out the storm to see where, when, and how it all unfolds. Patience saves you, or so they say. This too shall pass.
Andrew Doyle said:Who cares about the cost of living—let the sea, the sun, and the coast take care of you...
I honestly don't see why everyone is making such a massive ordeal out of this. Why on earth can't you just find work in a place where you actually want to live? The way people talk about it makes it sound like they're being held hostage in a city they absolutely despise. Look, sure, maybe shed a few tears on moving day, but dragging out the misery for months on end is just ridiculous. You move, you adapt, you settle into a new rhythm, and you forge new paths. At the end of the day, life is far too short to spend it compromising your happiness or obsessively overanalyzing a checklist of priorities.
The job is in New York City. But obviously, that’s not the issue here. It’s about the parents—they aren't nearby. It's tough navigating this massive, cold world without having Mom and Dad around to lean on. This gray, empty world doesn't offer much besides salt water... there's nothing left for us to grab onto...
Brenda Perez11 said:Even if it's wrapped in layers of self-criticism and politeness, the core thought remains: "No one else is quite as special as I am, right?" How much truth is actually in that? You'll have to decide for yourself.
How much truth is there really? If it's true, then it's just true, right? To compare, is it impossible to notice anyone else being great? You can only spot them and judge them based on your own more-or-less "great" self. It's basically creating and clinging to a reality where either nobody is as good as me, or everyone is better than my mediocre self. Or maybe finding some middle ground to park yourself in... if that's even an option. Either way, when you're just doing your own solo interpretation of the same thing, is it always going to be the "truth"...?
So he’s obsessed with keeping his place spotless? A dog just isn't an option. No matter how much you scrub, animals are still animals. They're four-legged chaos agents. Sure, you can have a pet—a companion that’s trained enough to handle basic hygiene, maybe even one that helps out with cleaning or cooking... but honestly, that sounds more like something a total perfectionist would need. Love don't judge.
jadeowl2 said:I don't know. Some of the best parents I've ever met are the ones who totally messed up at first. And quite often, the good parents are the young folks who don't make everything a huge drama and just live their lives. Then you have the ones who were completely overwhelmed, and suddenly, overnight, those spoiled brats turn into incredibly dedicated parents.
I mean, in some perfect, utopian world where everything is accounted for and things work exactly like you described... sure, maybe. But that’s never gonna happen.
On the flip side, birth rates are tanking everywhere across the globe, so maybe none of this will even matter in the long run 😁.
Birth rates are dropping, microplastics are wrecking everything, lazy sperm cells are procrastinating on their jobs, and all these current and upcoming crises keep telling potential parents to just wait for things to "stabilize"... while eighteen-year-olds struggle to survive in poverty but are somehow still supposedly happy in their "nuclear family units." Meanwhile, the math doesn't lie—there aren't enough finite resources to go around to satisfy billions of hungry people...
In a world heading toward major wars, where superpowers will fight tooth and nail for total control over resources and prosperity under one global roof, obsessing over the politics of a single "test case" child makes zero sense. A smart leader needs plenty of cannon fodder to win a massive conflict between massive interests. Here in the States, we've got nothing to worry about. Our future—the future of our precious little "wealth" children—is totally secure. We're basically just a small territory that's always been owned by someone else...
Since we can't even come up with a basic plan ourselves because we export all our smart people, we just sit back and let whoever owns us tell us what to do and how to live... and of course, we listen. Being small, we just want to be part of a bigger, stronger family. We want a better tomorrow for our kids. We just hope the people planning our lives actually have decent plans for us. They say hope is the last thing to die. They say we should stay optimistic. They say nothing matters, not even something like the Holodomor... they say. They say life isn't planned, it's just lived impulsively or survived... they say. The main thing is just existing. "Go out there and multiply, fill the earth... with tumors!" Life is a miracle, they say...
jadeowl2 said:Honestly, when you look at those permits, it might look all fine and tidy on paper, but if you ask me? It’s a straight shot toward fascism and total authoritarianism. Plus, it’s not like we can just sit there and decide who qualifies as a "good" parent and who doesn't. That's just not how life works. Besides, one person could be an amazing parent to one kid and a complete disaster to another... for a million different reasons.
Look, it's not exactly easy to predict which career a kid will actually love and commit to for the rest of their life. But still... just imagine if we took all that money spent on fighter jets and other social nonsense and redirected it toward an educational system run by people who actually give a damn—psychologists, sociologists, etc.—who aren't just working for some massive corporate credit line. Imagine parents wanting actual training on how to raise kids, rather than just winging it, within a system that provides meaningful guidance. By the time these twenty-somethings hit that two-year mark after they can finally buy a beer, they might realize they weren't steered in the right direction. As for "fascism and totalitarianism"... maybe that's just the only rational fix for the whole "toxic parenting" mess caused by this broken idea of treating children like private property...
electricscout15 said:I honestly feel that if someone doesn't feel an enthusiastic, resounding "yes!" when it comes to having kids, they probably shouldn't be parents. Even for those who desperately want them, I think it’s worth pausing to ask why—is it truly out of love, or is it driven by loneliness, a sense of obligation, tradition, or just the desire to have a "mini-me"? A child's psychology is incredibly fragile. I don't see why people who aren't ready for that lifelong responsibility—and there is absolutely nothing shameful about not being ready—or those who aren't aware of a child's emotional and intellectual needs should have children at all. Why is this treated as a universal necessity? Just because we can, doesn't mean we should.🤷
There are plenty of neglected children out there, and let's face it, most of us grow up carrying some level of trauma, insecurity, or mental health struggles stemming from mistakes our parents made. Maybe they meant well, but perhaps they simply didn't know any better.
I really don't get that "just try it, what's the worst that could happen?" mindset when it involves children. We wouldn't approach other high-stakes professions where you hold someone else's life and future in your hands with that kind of recklessness, so why is it considered acceptable when it comes to parenting? 🤔 🤷
Maybe some kind of school or at least a course for future parents? Like a certification of competency required to actually have a kid? During this training—both theory and practice—you might realize if you're actually cut out for the role or not. Neglected kids could serve as the test subjects. Every parent, single or coupled, during their training would get a child on loan, since nobody's getting their own "real" kid until they pass. Just like a purebred dog, not some random mutt from a local animal shelter. If you need a license to drive and a medical exam to prove you're fit for the road, wouldn't a permit to have a kid make sense? But hey, in a country where you can bypass just about any regulation, it probably wouldn't matter anyway...
fadedrider17 said:"It isn’t the coldness of the world that keeps you up at night—it’s the coldness growing inside people. It’s that gut-punch feeling when someone who used to be your closest confidant walks right past you like you’re a complete stranger. You aren't afraid of the elements; you aren't worried about a storm or a blizzard. What actually terrifies you is seeing how everything around you—the people, the objects, the very events we call life—has become nothing more than a hollow, artificial facade.
The world's chill isn't the real enemy here. No, what you're actually terrified of are the missed opportunities from your past—the tenderness you failed to show, the love you didn't return when it mattered. You fear the deafening silence that settles in once you're left alone. You fear a society of people who have forgotten how to speak kindly, who don't understand the weight of a genuine smile or the simple necessity of a heartfelt hug. It isn't the climate you're scared of; it's the total erosion of respect and basic humanity. It's the frost settling in the human soul."
- Mario Žuvela
A quote from an educator I follow quite closely—he always seems to hit the nail on the head, at least in my book.
Yeah, the whole "finding yourself" thing is a mess. You look at the world around you—this society that constantly expects you to be perfect, friendly, or just whatever version of "normal" they've cooked up—and you realize how much you actually fall short. It forces you to face who you really are, which is pretty terrifying. Honestly, it makes sense to be scared of what else is out there. Who knows what kind of people you'll run into once you step outside that tiny little bubble of people you already know and use to get by...
Yeah, but if you ask me... not much to say... Honestly... how long has it been since we all lost our grip? Back when I actually had some solid convictions rooted in those "good old days"—you know, back when life actually felt like it had some spark left in it. Now that the fire’s gone out, everything just feels like a massive step backward. Everything looks cheap, broken, or just plain wrong... Every single generation ends up chewing on the exact same complaints, just dressing them up in new, modern ways. It’s kind of expected, really. Just part of the cycle. That whole process of mourning the loss of that old energy, of chasing that lost spark... it's just how it goes... low-key... Trying to figure out if you actually lived a meaningful life—or even if that "meaning" was just something you spent years overthinking into existence—usually goes down in stages...
Grief isn't some checklist you complete... it's more like six messy stages: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance, and finally, finding meaning. Don't get it twisted though—these aren't tasks you need to "finish" to feel better. They’re just frameworks to help make sense of the chaos. Nobody hits them in a perfect line, and honestly, some people skip half of them entirely. It's all pretty individual... everyone deals with it differently. Denial is usually where it starts. It’s basically survival mode. Everything feels meaningless and life just stops making sense. You're stuck in this numb, shocked state, wondering how you're even supposed to keep going or why you should bother. You're just trying to scrape through one day at a time. In a weird way, that denial and shock actually protect you... it's like your brain only lets you feel what you can actually handle without breaking. But once that reality finally sinks in and the questions start hitting, the healing process kicks in, whether you want it to or not. You start getting stronger, the denial fades, and all those suppressed feelings start bubbling up to the surface...
Anger is a necessary part of the healing process. You’ve gotta be ready to actually feel it, even when it feels like it'll never end... The more you truly lean into it, the more it fades, and the more you actually start to mend. There's a whole mess of other feelings buried under that anger, and eventually, you'll get to them too. Most of us are just used to suppressing anger rather than actually feeling it. But the truth is, there's no limit to it. It can expand. Underneath all that rage is pain—our own deep-seated pain. It's totally natural to feel abandoned or left behind, especially since we live in a society that's terrified of anyone being angry. But honestly? Anger is strength. It can act like an anchor, giving some kind of temporary structure to the absolute nothingness of loss. At first, that massive grief makes you feel like you're just lost at sea, but then the anger kicks in and suddenly you have some kind of footing. It becomes a bridge over the abyss. In the end, anger is just another sign of how much we loved...
When you're stuck in the bargaining phase, you just get lost in this endless loop of "if only..." or "what if..." We're all just desperate to turn back the clock, fix the mistakes, or stop some tragedy from happening in the first place. Guilt usually hitches a ride right along with it. All those "if I had just done this" thoughts make us spiral, constantly obsessing over how we could've changed things. Sometimes, we even try to bargain with the pain itself... doing anything just to avoid feeling the sting of loss. We stay trapped in the past, trying to negotiate our way out of being hurt using logic that doesn't even make sense anymore. Once the bargaining ends, you hit reality hard. The emptiness kicks in, and grief settles into your life much deeper than you ever imagined. It feels like this phase is going to last forever... It's important to realize that this depression isn't necessarily a sign of mental illness. It’s a totally normal response to a massive loss. You withdraw from everything, lost in this heavy fog of sadness, wondering if there's even any point in moving forward. Why bother? People often treat post-loss depression like it's something unnatural—like a glitch that needs to be fixed or something you need to snap out of immediately. But the first thing you gotta ask yourself is whether your situation actually warrants feeling depressed. Honestly, it would be weird *not* to feel depressed given what happened. Just like grieving is part of healing, depression is just one of the necessary steps on that path...
People always mistake acceptance for being "okay" with what happened. Most folks never actually feel good or "fine" about losing someone they love. This stage isn't about liking the situation; it's just accepting the reality that our loved one is gone and this new, harsh reality is permanent. We’re never gonna like it, and it’s never gonna feel okay, but eventually, we accept it. Maybe. It’s just the new normal we have to deal with. At first, people fight it because they want things to stay exactly how they were before the loss. But as you move through acceptance, you realize you can't freeze time. Everything is changed and we have to adapt. We have to shuffle roles around, pass them to others, or step up ourselves. You can't replace what's lost, but you can build new, meaningful connections. Instead of burying how we feel, we need to listen to what we need—move, change, grow, evolve. If we don't give ourselves space to grieve, we'll never truly feel alive again...
Loss just happens. Meaning is something we have to build for ourselves. Meaning comes from finding a way to hold onto the love for someone who isn't here anymore while we keep moving toward Death, toward where they went... into the scrapheap of forgotten history. Finding some kind of purpose doesn't erase the sadness or the numbness, but it definitely takes the edge off the suffering of living in a world that feels like it doesn't belong to us anymore. Because it doesn't. It never did. Seems to me like we live in an American society that just wants you to move on like nothing even happened. That just shows how alienated people have become from their own feelings, treating them like they're some useless byproduct. Like an evolutionary glitch. Our hearts know how to mourn; it's the brain that works against us. Sigh... wouldn't it be nice if we actually showed ourselves more love and compassion during all this...
Look, it’s not like you were forced to put up with partners or friends who didn't fit your vibe back in the 70s, 80s, or 90s either. A truly mature, well-adjusted person wouldn't have settled for that kind of nonsense then, and they certainly wouldn't now. Not once. We have more ways to kill time than ever before, but none of them come close to the actual joy of being around people. You just can't replicate the feeling of hanging out with friends by sitting on the couch watching Netflix; it’s not even a fair comparison. Back in the day, people actually spent time together, which meant they gave relationships a real chance to develop into something meaningful. Nowadays, those deep connections seem much harder to find. Maybe there would be more of them if we actually gave people a shot. I don't see it as "distancing ourselves from things that don't suit us." To me, it looks more like we're distancing ourselves before we even give a relationship a fighting chance. Our standards for what we'll tolerate have climbed to an impossible level—everyone is hunting for perfection in someone else without ever stopping to ask what they actually have to offer in return.
Quote : dark side
Jamie Adams6 As requested by ironrider11: Let’s be real here: the only reason this thread even exists is because the OP ended up on a side of the argument they never intended to visit. Take that group of people who actually managed to pair up and maintain long-term friendships while living in the same community—they are the perfect counterargument to everything being said here. It’s honestly naive to assume everyone else is miserable or lonely just because they didn't adopt the exact set of habits being idealized in this sub. In fact, a lot of people are actually thriving right now simply because their personalities happen to align better with the current era than with whatever outdated standard is being pushed here.
I find myself in a position that’s the exact polar opposite of what the author described, yet I can say with total certainty that I get where they're coming from.
Quote : dark side
We can’t exactly frame disrespect as "progress," no matter how much people try to spin it that way. It’s especially problematic when you see this blatant disregard for newcomers being thrown in the faces of those who have actually put in the years and earned their stripes. Just because a tradition or a method feels outdated doesn't mean it lacks value or should be tossed out. Take something as simple as manners, for instance. Acknowledging someone you know—especially an elder—isn't just some old-fashioned formality; it's a fundamental sign of basic decency. Failing to do so isn't "disruptive" or "modern"; it's just plain rude. At the end of the day, culture is about choosing behaviors that build respect, while a lack of it is just a downward slide into bad manners.
If you take a look at the general vibe of people lately, the clinical picture is pretty bleak. There’s just less joy, less genuine enthusiasm, and far fewer smiles—you see it every single day just walking down the street in any major US city. Everyone seems to be getting increasingly sour and irritable. To me, that alone is enough evidence to suggest that we are clearly doing something wrong.
Is this actual firsthand experience from knowing the 70s, or just "they say" nonsense?
Look, it’s not like you were forced to put up with partners or friends who didn't fit your vibe back in the 70s, 80s, or 90s either. A truly mature, well-adjusted person wouldn't have settled for that kind of nonsense then, and they certainly wouldn't now. Not once. We have more ways to kill time than ever before, but none of them come close to the actual joy of being around people. You just can't replicate the feeling of hanging out with friends by sitting on the couch watching Netflix; it’s not even a fair comparison. Back in the day, people actually spent time together, which meant they gave relationships a real chance to develop into something meaningful. Nowadays, those deep connections seem much harder to find. Maybe there would be more of them if we actually gave people a shot. I don't see it as "distancing ourselves from things that don't suit us." To me, it looks more like we're distancing ourselves before we even give a relationship a fighting chance. Our standards for what we'll tolerate have climbed to an impossible level—everyone is hunting for perfection in someone else without ever stopping to ask what they actually have to offer in return.
Quote : dark side
Jamie Adams6 As requested by ironrider11: Let’s be real here: the only reason this thread even exists is because the OP ended up on a side of the argument they never intended to visit. Take that group of people who actually managed to pair up and maintain long-term friendships while living in the same community—they are the perfect counterargument to everything being said here. It’s honestly naive to assume everyone else is miserable or lonely just because they didn't adopt the exact set of habits being idealized in this sub. In fact, a lot of people are actually thriving right now simply because their personalities happen to align better with the current era than with whatever outdated standard is being pushed here.
I find myself in a position that’s the exact polar opposite of what the author described, yet I can say with total certainty that I get where they're coming from.
Quote : dark side
We can’t exactly frame disrespect as "progress," no matter how much people try to spin it that way. It’s especially problematic when you see this blatant disregard for newcomers being thrown in the faces of those who have actually put in the years and earned their stripes. Just because a tradition or a method feels outdated doesn't mean it lacks value or should be tossed out. Take something as simple as manners, for instance. Acknowledging someone you know—especially an elder—isn't just some old-fashioned formality; it's a fundamental sign of basic decency. Failing to do so isn't "disruptive" or "modern"; it's just plain rude. At the end of the day, culture is about choosing behaviors that build respect, while a lack of it is just a downward slide into bad manners.
If you take a look at the general vibe of people lately, the clinical picture is pretty bleak. There’s just less joy, less genuine enthusiasm, and far fewer smiles—you see it every single day just walking down the street in any major US city. Everyone seems to be getting increasingly sour and irritable. To me, that alone is enough evidence to suggest that we are clearly doing something wrong.
"Clinical picture"? LOL. Maybe it's just time to sour? This planet (a glowing ball with a scarred crust inhabited by tiny parasites) is natural, and it exists through various cycles over looooong periods of time. Parasites—which are just part of its skin during brief eras of growth or slow decay—could easily be dependent on those changes. Maybe it's just time for them to turn sour, doing whatever they have to do to adapt to the conditions forced upon them?
It’s not just hard, it feels damn near impossible in today’s world to actually run into an angel. Why would someone sent by Death—someone totally results-driven, goal-oriented, and hungry—bother trying to find an angel a few times during their "great journey"? To seek out encounters based on Mary, out of Love. as some kind of life purpose? It’s like looking for comfort in eating Styrofoam—it might trick your brain into feeling okay for a second, but you're basically just training yourself to live on trash. There's no logic to it. I guess when you're desperate, you'll eat anything, even flies. They say... we're all just starving for angels, getting more desperate by the day. Maybe beggars don't get a choice. A few scraps of angelic crap (which aren't even angelic, they're just crap) might be enough to keep you going, and since "modesty is a virtue," surviving is the only thing that matters.
As long as you’ve got that lucky mix of God, Jesus, Irud, your mother, or just plain old luck on your side, you can pattern things however you want. No big deal. There are certain ways to express your character, your views, your intellect, or even just how you carry yourself—some are considered "acceptable" and others aren't. But as long as you don't cross the line into being unseemly, there's no issue. It's not that being "unseemly" is illegal; it's just that people will call you out for "whining" if you touch that nerve. Besides, we have this traditional heritage—the kind protected by the Library of Congress for future generations—that needs to be preserved. Once those kids grow up and become capable, free adults, they won't just walk away...
I could use a woman to hang out with virtually too... someone who’s basically doing "pro bono" humanitarian work as a psychotherapist. Needs to be fully licensed and have years of experience under her belt, obviously. Not some rookie...
It all starts with the first spoonful, I’m with you there. Just like I agree that if it’s true—if it really is possible—then every single feeling, no matter how much it sucks or how painful the processing might be, can actually serve a purpose. But what about those feelings that *do* have a purpose, or even those that don't? What about the user who just sits there enjoying them, essentially serving the emotions instead of the other way around? It's an old mystery, but maybe it doesn't hurt to revisit something we missed or overlooked... if it exists, what would that topic even be? Avoiding any personal suggestions of what I've personally found useful, quoting Dr. House, what exactly is Thor suggesting to whom?
Unlike the people who non-selectively gorge themselves on pure kitsch until they hit morbid obesity, people talk about these highly deficient chimpanzees—maybe even totally incapable of feeling anything—who lack the ability or the knowledge to constructively process emotions, the ones who...? How does anyone satisfy the intense necessity of living a deeply constructive, creative life when they're out here "chimpanzee-ing" it? 6 principles for constructive living, 12 rules for life, 7 habits of highly effective people, 40 rules of love, 4 agreements with yourself... what, are we surrounded by idiots? Does the sheer number of rules, methods, habits, or insights in a book title actually guarantee any level of quality or universal applicability for this kind of self-help garbage?
George Wood2 said:There is—through constructive recapitulation. I am talking about avoiding those passive yet "active" circular repetitions that only serve to trigger various repetitive bouts of nausea and mental fatigue. It isn't some mystical, meta, theta-wave, or xyq philosophy.
Just stick to the concrete facts.
Constructively recapitulary? Memory is pretty much unreliable anyway. Especially when you're looking back later at stuff written by someone with an overactive imagination—someone who avoids minimalism and just leans into the kitsch for the emotional rush...