Posts by ironrider11

Steven Brown5 said:@briskbison47
Look, I get that you’re trying to be a decent human being here, and honestly, your intentions toward me are noble enough, but I’m just not the type to play the victim card.
Everything I’ve posted on this Forum comes from someone who was already out there living their life long before any tragedy hit.
I know exactly what I need and when I need it.
Right now, I’m looking for actual assistance, not a shoulder to cry on or a bunch of pity.

If you really want to step up and help, why don't you start a thread that actually brings together a crowd of people dealing with the same stuff I am—something meant for the long haul, not just a quick vent session.

I need that kind of engagement because, frankly, I tend to stay productive even when everything feels like it's falling apart.

Steven Brown5, what kind of "help" are you actually looking for, wanting, or planning to fish for? I'm not offering pity, just asking. Are you really looking for help? Do you actually need it? Whose idea was it, or who convinced you that you did? "Actual help" being... blablabla... a massive group of people with your specific problems, who had the chance and maybe managed to turn it into some sort of system to handle it? Seriously? A huge crowd of people with your exact issues? Nobody has them. No one could have your exact issues, because the slightest shift in variables guarantees a different problem or a different solution entirely. And are you really "productive" specifically when you're "wrecked"? Just circling back to wrap this up and stop the endless annoyance of this hellscape... just asking...

briskbison47 said:Hey everyone, let's dive into a little bit of reductionism or maybe just drift into some philosophy

And what about it? Isn't psychology basically just overpriced philosophy repackaged for the high-end, credit-worthy consumer who's willing to drop $200, $300, or $500 an hour? You want us to switch to spirituality instead? NLP? Or maybe just pivot to some student hangout corner on the fringes of science? Magic and mysticism? Thank God it's all under the corporate umbrella... (yeah, yeah, we're making it rain... come to me...) so whether you're blowing smoke here or there, it's all the same—just more smoke...

Andrew Doyle said:Not me—quite the opposite, actually. If I had my way, I’d demand an IQ test and a full competency exam before anyone gets granted the privilege of "free speech." We are currently drowning in a world overflowing with idiots and their mindless nonsense, cluttering up every single corner of our lives. They are nothing more than societal pests. Honestly, I’d strip them of their right to vote too. That’s my take on freedom. ☕

As for the other stuff you mentioned in your opening post, life has thrown its fair share of curveballs at me (I've basically been getting pelted by meteors on more than one occasion), but I simply don't have the luxury of being "unproductive." I'll rest when I'm dead.

+1. Exactly. As long as the ratio of idiots to smart people doesn't become the only thing defining a truly progressive, high-functioning society. Once the eugenics program finishes its job—where those tasked with cleaning out this toxic human stupidity work hard to ensure everyone involved in the Suicide Squad successfully wipes out the rot—and we hit a population of zero, then maybe we can finally see it. Only after we've liberated ourselves from these pests and stopped the exponential spread of their damage will some lucky observers be able to actually admire a group of smart people who live by practice, not just theory...

Being productive just for the sake of it—because idling around is basically a slow death—is a totally different beast than grinding just to hit some goal. It’s more about losing yourself in the work, surrendering to something bigger than you, something built "for generations to come." If you need to trick yourself into believing that actually exists (hey, autosuggestion works, right?), then go for it. At that point, you're doing it for yourself, but at least it looks polished and artsy. It’s wrapped up in a pretty little package. And let's face it, everyone loves opening free gifts, especially when they look flashy. Even if there's nothing inside—or if what's inside is actually nothing—the whole rush of anticipation and dreaming while you tear into it is worth something. Regardless of whether your imagination sets you up for disappointment, that act of waiting is a gift in itself. You can at least respect the sheer effort, the attention to detail, and that weirdly selfless urge to just give something away for nothing...

cosmicdriver42 said:Look, you can go after whatever you want if that’s what drives you. Just make sure you don't lose even a shred of who you are in the process. I've noticed you've been getting into a lot of debates lately—and hey, I address everyone here as "you," so don't take that personally—but don't let those arguments get under your skin. Keep a cool head...

Is it even possible to force or design a pattern of opportunity? Maybe things aren't actually that bad... maybe getting lost in something is necessary sometimes. Getting lost in a thing, or maybe someone? Looking back after the fact, wouldn't we conclude that being kept in a state of "coolheadedness" is almost always required, regardless of the situation? If we lived without passion, without losing ourselves, without those self-destructive or self-aggressive types of devotion, life would be pretty damn empty and static. It would just be a bunch of "rational" people sticking to the status quo—a simulation designed to distill a tiny drop of true humanity out of tons of raw meat. And nobody really knows how much of that essence they actually have until they test themselves by losing their grip and stripping away the ego. You test yourself primarily to prove your own hypotheses. Secondarily, it's an irrational gamble or a favor done for someone else. Just a way to validate your own theories. Everyone deserves exactly what they get, based on whether they're willing to invest without calculating everything first, or even just give something away for free. People are social creatures, fundamentally wired to need each other, even though we all live like isolated snowflakes, totally alone in our own heads. We inhabit this shared construct of reality that we build together, piece by piece... rambling, I know...

Nobody would take the risk. Nobody would even try to peek outside the lines in their imagination. No one would irrationally jump into freezing water to save some stray dog, or some useless person who clearly hasn't calmed down yet—some leftover from a failed Suicide Squad attempt... someone who isn't worth risking your life, time, or effort for. And besides, if they actually need help, accidents happen every day. Karma flows constantly. Everyone gets to decide how they want to fail or throw themselves away. "Who am I to step in? To invest myself in trying to fix some broken idea of control, risking everything just to change something that doesn't even matter to me once I think about it clearly..." On the road toward XYZ (where we're all headed from birth), fear is the main engine. It's also the paralyzing force that keeps "coolheaded" people safe within their well-constructed Panopticon—which, like a TARDIS, travels through time toward XYZ (where we started, or where we're going).

Get well soon... big guy.

Just one month without power, water, heat, or even decent grocery stores... it turns every single person into this mindless, uniform blob of routines that only exist because we can grab whatever we need whenever we want. It’s enough to give you a real definition of consumerism. We get so used to the perks of indulgence while being totally submerged in the struggle just to survive. Honestly, what part of life isn't just consumerism at this point? Life is basically nothing but consumption, right? If you aren't spending, you're either a bad citizen or just dead...

3... 2... 1...

mistydrifter55 said:

Ever thought about trying minimalism?

Hell yeah! Minimalism is definitely worth a look... But you gotta do it.

Elizabeth Flores5 said:A friend of mine goes to those family constellation sessions, and honestly, when she talks about it, it sounds like little more than pseudo-shamanism to me. It works wonders for her, though... personally, I find psychodrama to seem a bit more "grounded," but it isn't cheap, and I have no intention of throwing my money down the drain.

"Throwing money away"? Please. People have to find ways to kill time or fill some kind of void, right...? Compare that to some gambler who—instead of actually working—decides to turn a few grand into a fleeting high every week through pure luck. Or look at a coke addict burning hundreds of bucks a day just to feel something for an hour... you really think that's "not much money" for the payoff they get? Investing in yourself is never a waste. Almost never...

Nathan Peterson11 said:ironrider11, look, I wasn’t talking about the genuinely good people who actually want to help. And no, I’m not some junkie who doesn't realize that forced assistance can actually be beneficial... I was talking about those "so-called" good people who force favors on you just to play the martyr and act like they're selfless saints. They shove things down your throat that you didn't ask for and definitely don't need. They do the tiny little tasks you could easily handle yourself... you start doing something and they literally snatch it out of your hands just so they can do it instead. Total control freaks. Usually mothers or mothers-in-law... and heaven forbid you don't immediately jump to satisfy every single ridiculous whim they have—then you're the bad guy!
And there are way too many of these nerve-wracking types out there...😵

The addict thing was just an example. Maybe a better one would be something more extreme. Like a person who is exactly who they claim to be, someone who needs help, and because of that, people try to force it on them—even if that person, whether they're deluded or just being themselves, keeps insisting that this kind of "offered" help isn't what they need or want. The "helper" isn't actually helping the person standing in front of them; they're helping the version of that person they've created in their own head. They expect the external person—just an object for their projection—to sync up with their expectations if they want help. If they can't? Well, screw 'em... if they're going to be that stubborn and consistently self-destructive by rejecting any actual, well-intentioned help...

Nathan Peterson11 said:Go ahead, slap me if you want, but I’ve had it up to here with all these people trying to play the saint with me. It’s always the same thing: someone tries to do you a "favor" that you didn't ask for and definitely don't need. How many times can you politely say, "Thanks, but I'm good," before they just ignore you and keep pushing? To me, this fake kindness is nothing more than pure aggression. Most of them are secretly—maybe even without realizing it—calculating how to corner you so you won't be able to say NO when they eventually come asking for some vague, ridiculous favor. And then they have the nerve to brag out loud about what wonderful people they are, how much they care, and how they're always there to help... yet the second you don't call them back within thirty seconds of their ringtone stopping, they act like you personally insulted their entire lineage. They're incredibly thin-skinned.
Honestly, God save me from these "good" people and their unsolicited favors... there are way too many of them out there. Total vampires.

Unless you put "not being used" before "being good," maybe that calculated, subconscious trade-off—that whole compensation thing—isn't actually the main driver for maintaining this "good person" persona. How is a "good" person supposed to help an addict who doesn't even know what's good for them in that moment? Except by forcing it on them. No, "no" doesn't always mean no. Sometimes it's for their own good...

Maybe that same logic applies to everyone else stuck in a state where they don't know what's best for themselves. These "good" people, sitting at the center of their own ego, always think they know better than anyone else. They don't bother actually looking at who people really are instead of just seeing what they want to see...

"Goodness begets goodness"—it's just a vicious cycle fueled by these "limitlessly selfless" people. You can spot them a mile away because they're always talking about how pure their intentions are. Usually, they aren't busy whining about how everyone takes advantage of them, or acting annoyed when someone refuses to accept "free goodness" handed to them on a silver platter. Even if a "bad" person doesn't have any actual issues, having a fancy decorative cane as a fashion statement might still come in handy...

James Miller2 said:I have to admit, this is the first time I've heard about this specific fear.
But based on your explanation, there is definitely something to it.

It is all happening in your head.

For instance, I never run through scenarios where someone might reject my request when dealing with an organization. I don't think about it at all.
Perhaps you should try viewing them differently. They are paid professionals. They are there to serve you. They should be at your disposal.

What actually frustrates me is when I need something from a company and they just transfer me to three different numbers because nobody has the answer. 🙏

If it were actually happening, we'd be worried. But it isn't.

It really depends on what kind of job you're talking about when you suggest swapping to a "call center" to fix some phone anxiety. Take a software engineer, for example. Most of their day is spent typing away, maybe hopping on a quick Zoom call here and there. Telling someone like that to take a massive pay cut just to avoid picking up a phone doesn't exactly feel like "advice"...

Especially if you actually sit down and look at the math. If you follow this logic, you aren't just fixing one problem; you're creating a whole new mess. You solve the fear of calling people, but then you're stuck in a dead-end role where you're losing your edge. Suddenly, you’re worried about your skills getting rusty or being totally unqualified to ever get back into those high-paying tech roles. At that point, your "solution" just becomes a whole different set of anxieties. It's a cycle. Priorities, priorities, priorities...

Eric Gray2 said:Back then, people were even more clueless. 🤔

But in all seriousness: this whole debate about internet slang is honestly ancient—it doesn't make much sense to keep arguing over posts that are 15 years old, but I think the issue is actually hitting harder with the younger generations (kids born in 2005 are basically growing up with smartphones and social media already baked into their lives—let that sink in 😬) so the topic still feels relevant.

Mobile phones... yeah, mobile phones. Just a bunch of dumb nomads who were barely learning how to walk at the time.
"When I grow up, I'll infiltrate necessity, just like the necessity of every social human being."

Eric Gray2 said:Back then, people were even more clueless. 🤔

But in all seriousness: this whole debate about internet slang is honestly ancient—it doesn't make much sense to keep arguing over posts that are 15 years old, but I think the issue is actually hitting harder with the younger generations (kids born in 2005 are basically growing up with smartphones and social media already baked into their lives—let that sink in 😬) so the topic still feels relevant.

A topic is a topic. It’s rarely bad or outdated on a forum. It's about communication and interaction. Or maybe it isn't. Maybe, just like those stupid early cell phones, this forum morphed into a "micro-blogging" style of chatting. You tell someone what you think from fifteen years ago and don't even wait for a reply. Especially if the response is to a post from over a decade ago. Next time you feel the urge to lecture someone with fancy words, remember that principle...

So it’s not really that weird that kids born in 2005—who spend way more time typing away than actually talking face-to-face—are dealing with "phone anxiety." As technology evolves to serve us, we adapt to the tech. We went from 160 characters in a text to huge threads where "pidgin xyz" abbreviations aren't even needed anymore.

It’s the same with punctuation, or capital letters (which a smartphone, or a smart xyz, could easily auto-fill anyway), or double spacing. Even language localization files that used to be kilobytes can be downloaded instantly to a smartphone—which, let's be honest, can actually be smart. All these things—diacritics, finishing a sentence properly, or using a few "you know what I mean" dots instead of a period.........—are losing their social standing. It's all just part of a cultural mutation, a sociological shift toward whatever the current standard happens to be.

Whether it's because of the tech itself, the adaptation to it, or just a side effect, it's hard to say how this "fear of" will manifest. People are social creatures after all, so they'll probably just settle these "I think you should" or "I'd recommend that" debates through this new micro-blogging style of interaction...

Echo chambers.

cosmicwalker21 said:+1

If I need a favor from someone, I almost never ask over the phone. I prefer to do it in person. Old school.

Plus one for the October 16, 2005 entry? Like you’re calling back fifteen years after a missed call? Just pure arrogance or what...?

Sweet.

Onarha, what even are emotions?

rapidmaker15 said:Look, I'm talking about my own environment—it's a pattern that I personally perceive as being "correct," even if that doesn't necessarily make it objectively true. I'm just noticing that I don't fit into that pattern.

It’s obvious you’re talking about the environment. But what exactly? Or how? You say you don't have this thing—this emotional connection—so it’s just not something you experience or even grasp... everything you're saying is just based on some "correct" assumption of yours. Look, my neighbor just finished renovating his house. He’s got a high-end corporate job, wears the whole suit and tie thing, and seems to be in a happy marriage with a beautiful, sharp woman. He’s got two healthy, adorable kids who also seem smart. From where I'm standing, he's a happy, fulfilled, peaceful... satisfied man. But in my little calculation of "assumptions," I didn't factor in the fact that for the last few months, he's been shoving a gun barrel in his mouth every single night, only unable to pull the trigger yet... so he hasn't exactly been able to tell me how wrong my totally incorrect assumption was.

If I don't fit in with one group or another, and their whole vibe feels too vague to be worth my time, maybe I could just play along... you know, use some mimicry to fake being like them. Since no clique actually welcomes outsiders, it might be a way to test if that "vague but attractive" thing they have going on is actually real in practice. Just act the part, fake emotions that aren't even there... basically testing the pattern. Personally, I probably wouldn't bother. At least not by forcing it. Wouldn't want it to turn into some pointless, self-sustaining cycle of frustration...

rapidmaker15 said:Well, the difference is massive. I just don't trust people I don't know—I don't want them in my personal space at all (I could probably go into more detail there since I've been through it, but let's leave it at that).

Most people would describe me as being social and easy to talk to, but honestly, they don't know a thing about me. I have zero desire to let anyone get deeply involved in my life—just the thought of it makes me incredibly anxious.

Does anyone actually know anything about anyone else? Look at the question above. Does a wife or her kids ever really get it when a grown man—a husband, a father—finally pulls off some deep, secretive scheme he’s been nursing? Especially once a massive debt or a nasty lawsuit from a collector hits him right in the face... Man, that's a hell of a reality check. A whole lot of heavy truths hitting all at once...

So, when you talk about being "connected" to certain people—like, are we talking verified intel or just vibes?—it makes me wonder. Is this whole thing about feeling safe enough to actually let loose with "acquaintances," versus staying guarded around strangers? It feels like someone went through something... maybe a specific set of experiences that basically froze their emotional growth right in its tracks. You end up stuck in this state of emotional stuntedness. Then, any kind of physical contact becomes a massive trigger, whether they realize it or not. It leads straight to that visceral, "get away from me, I can't stand the sight of you" reaction... nothing more, nothing less.

Maybe you can see that some people acting like extroverts aren't even actually like that... it’s probably just a pattern, like mimicry to compensate for a handicap. Since society pushes this idea that being loud is "essential," people end up trying to force themselves into a social construct, using fake emotions as glue to stick to a persona that isn't even real...

What does being alone actually mean? Is emotional connection just some mental construct you've built up—since you're basically an "emotional cripple"—based on the false assumption that things work a certain way? Like, you look at people around you who seem to be winning and you try to manufacture this "permanent, unbreakable, eternal" bond that isn't even there...

Maybe acting extroverted is just a way to compensate for realizing your own "emotional disability." It could just be a precursor to settling into introversion as a long-term "conclusion"... Which, during a transition phase, might feel awkward, like telling yourself "I'm gonna end up alone." But what does being alone actually imply?

What’s the real difference, say, between having quick, athletic sex with someone decent you kind of know, versus someone incredibly hot you’ve never even met before?