Posts by electricdriver93

Andrew Cox7:

wirednomad42 As I have previously noted: It seems I was never once told that anyone actually possesses good parents—people who don't make a single mistake or cause any trouble at all. 🤷

I have it.🎉

Jerry Martinez5 said:There’s a massive distinction between being given a suggestion and being pressured. Or even worse, being put in a position where you aren't even allowed to ask questions—where it's just assumed you'll fall in line and study whatever they've decided for you, whether that's med school or law.

It’s fine for a parent to help a kid grasp the actual consequences of their choices. They should probably figure out what they’ll actually study at that university they're so obsessed with, what they can even do with that degree, and what the job market looks like—including specific roles and the kind of income they might expect to see. I guess it's just common sense.

So, once I finally picked my major, my mom tried to talk me into a different track within the same college—something she claimed would offer better job prospects. I shut that down immediately. I mean, I refused her, obviously. Even though, I guess, her suggestion wasn't actually a bad one.

Those are his parents—the father is essentially that guy from Dead Poets Society.
Those are merely outliers. I haven't heard a single person from my circle mention anything of the sort.

Jerry Martinez5 said:Look: I don't know anyone who complains about their parents. But honestly, thank God neither my folks, nor any of my friends' parents, were crazy enough to try and dictate our college majors. I actually asked my parents once why they never pushed me toward anything specific. Their answer? It's too big of a life decision, and they didn't want me blaming them if things went south.

Yet, I know several people whose parents basically forced them into degrees they hated. And none of those people ever actually graduated.

And why on earth would someone shrug at architecture? It's a prestigious, high-impact field. It's definitely the most useful path if it's the one you chose yourself, because you actually have an interest in it. Especially nowadays, with how fast jobs change, you really need to study something you care about. You have to keep the joy of learning alive, since you'll probably be learning new things until you retire.

Architecture was just an example.😉
My parents did suggest a major for me (I wouldn't call them crazy, by the way), but they backed off immediately once I rolled my eyes at the idea of med school.😁
Edit: Oh, right, it just came back to me. They basically said, "Fine, if that's what you want, go for it. Just don't expect us to pay for your apartment in New York if you can't stay on top of your credits."

wirednomad42 said:Sometimes you just have to pick the lesser of two evils. 🤷
Look, a teenager probably hasn't a clue what they want before heading off to college—so parents just push them into *anything* just to get them enrolled and out of high school. Let's be real here—how many people actually take a gap year and then come back to actually finish a degree?
To me, it feels better to force a direction than to just throw up your hands and give up entirely 🤷
I mean, if they enroll in something, they can always switch majors later—or decide to become a garbage man—but at least the kid got a shot. They were encouraged. Someone cared.
Or am I totally off base? 😁

It is entirely possible that some parents act this way precisely because their children aren't mature enough yet to know their own minds. It’s plausible. It’s also possible that the child will eventually grow to love whatever path they were pushed onto. Of course.

But this idea of "encouragement" and "caring"—hmmm. From what I’ve observed, most people who prematurely "encourage" and "oversee the education" of their children starting from preschool, end up writing their kids' term papers and pulling strings just to PAY for their tuition. Personally, I have zero desire to go back to school or write another assignment, thank you very much.

Jerry Martinez5 said:Those aren't really the same thing. The kid could still end up being an architect even if he learns violin. We'll just have to wait and see if she tries to force him into whatever mold she's already built for him.

That first story happens way too often, and honestly, it's pretty messed up. I don't get why parents would be so intentional about making their kids miserable. When I talk to people who dropped out during their senior year of college, that's usually the underlying issue: parents forcing a path they didn't want. You end up meeting forty-somethings who are still fighting their parents instead of having dealt with it back in high school.😢

It seems to me that you need to be raised in such a way—though I'm not sure how one actually achieves that😳—that when they GENTLY SUGGEST a specific major, you already possess enough self-awareness to say firmly: "No thanks, I'm going into architecture. That's what I want."
And then they just shrug grumpily and leave it at that.🤷

wirednomad42 said:Look, I can just let the kid loose in the backyard to play while I catch up on some reading in the other room. Just toss her out there with a bucket and a shovel—let her figure out the fun on her own.
Or, I could actually go out there and show her the ropes—teach her how to build stuff in the sand or what kind of treasures we can stash in that bucket.
Once I’m done reading, I could just rinse off some canned beans for a quick lunch. Or, if I'm feeling ambitious, I could whip up a proper beef and veggie stew. 🤷
Am I not obligated to give it my all?

Everything mentioned here is perfectly fine—the first option, the second, or the third. But it shouldn't be limited to just one approach. Though, if I were choosing, I’d probably be reading my book out in the yard myself, just to be safe.🙂

Once I've finished my chapter, I could just rinse some canned beans and serve those for lunch. Or, I could put in the effort to cook a proper soup with meat and vegetables. 🤷
Am I not obligated to give it my all?

It's the same sentiment as the first response. Generally, you'll cook something nutritious and decent. Occasionally you won't, simply because you forgot to pick up meat at the grocery store, you're short on time, or you'd rather finish your book. 😉

wirednomad42 said:Maybe I’m just a total control freak—honestly, I hate leaving anything to chance. I feel responsible for everything from what my daughter eats today to what she wears tomorrow, but it goes deeper than that; I feel accountable for her happiness and her health, too. It’s my job to guide her toward whatever path she chooses—sports, hobbies, you name it—and to make sure she stays active, eats right, and keeps a positive mindset. Plus, I feel this massive pressure to leave her some real estate in her inheritance. Am I overthinking this?
And look, if she ends up unhappy, what am I supposed to blame? Some random outside factors that happened regardless of my efforts? Shouldn't I have kept all that under wraps? I mean, she didn't exactly ask to be born into this mess 🤷
If I can't hand her a perfect head start in life, was I even supposed to bring her here in the first place? 😕

Take my parents, for example—they think their duty is basically just feeding us (whatever that looks like, really 🙄), dressing us, and getting us through high school. After that, they say their responsibility to us is done. I just don't get it 🤷—what's the point then? Why have us at all?
I remember Legion had a thread once about why people even have kids. Personally, I don't know why I wanted one; I guess it's just some primal, biological, chemical urge. But we actually have brains, dammit—(and we can always just use protection 😉)—so we can actually stop and think about the whole concept: what are we going to do with these kids, what can we actually provide, and do we even have the time, the willpower, the health, or the cash to pull it off? I can't stomach the idea of just having kids "just because." Everything needs a reason 😁

I mean, think about it—we bring them into the world, then we struggle with breastfeeding, we spend a year totally isolated from society, and suddenly there's no money left for dinners out, clothes, or even a salon trip. We end up killing ourselves working jobs we hate just to pay off mortgages and stuff like that 🙄
And all of that trickles down to the kids. They grow up and become adults, carrying all this frustration and various traumas or shortcomings. Then they have kids of their own. And the cycle repeats. Where does it all lead? Is that getting too deep for a Tuesday? ☕

So... am I making any sense now? 😍

You are overdoing it.

And what will I blame myself for if she isn't happy? Some external factors beyond my influence? Am I not obligated to have all of that under my control? After all, she didn't ask to be born. 🤷
If I can't provide her with the perfect head start, was I even supposed to have her at all? 😕

You are going way too far. Total control, a "perfect start"? That doesn't exist.

My parents, for instance, believe their duty is to feed their children (with whatever is available, essentially 🙄), clothe them, and ensure they finish high school. Beyond that, they say their obligation ends. I don't understand that 🤷—what is the point then? Why have us at all?

Well, look, that's reasonable. It wouldn't be a bad thing to support them through college if they have the drive and the aptitude, but parents aren't monsters if they simply can't afford it.

Legion had a thread somewhere about why people have children. Personally, I don't know why I wanted them; I suspect it's just an instinctive, biological, or chemical urge in humans. But we also have brains, damn it, (and we can always practice safe sex 😉), so we can actually think about the idea of having kids—what will we do with them, what can we provide, and do we truly have enough time, energy, health, or money for them in the long run? I can't reconcile with the idea that just having kids for no reason is sufficient. There should be a purpose for everything. 😁

I have children for no reason at all. 🤷 And I have no issue with that.

I mean, look at it this way—we bring children into this world only to struggle through the exhaustion of breastfeeding, trapped in social isolation for that first year. We lose our financial freedom and the ability to just go out, buy clothes, or visit a salon. Instead, we grind away at jobs we despise just to service the debt, and all of 🙄
all of this takes a toll on the children. They grow up to become adults shaped by these frustrations, carrying various traumas and deficits into their own lives. Then they have children of their own, and the cycle repeats. Where does it actually end? Or am I getting too philosophical here? ☕

What do I know. I suppose that's just what they call life.

wirednomad42 said:Quincy:

I don't even know where to start with this—just total nonsense. Honestly, I’m exhausted just reading it. (No content provided to rewrite.) wirednomad42, please—just take my sincere apologies if I offended you.

Sounds terrible—and I'm definitely feeling it. 😳
Just apologize tomorrow—it’s not like anyone’s actually listening anyway. 🙂 😁
Quincy:

I guess I'm just here to watch the circus—honestly, it’s getting exhausting. kaže: So he watches over him, only to hand him off to someone else to deal with later? Great plan—really top-tier logic there. 😁

😁

electricdriver93 actually has a point—for once. 👍
Parenting—what a joke.
If you aren't actually raising them—then you're just a parent who doesn't give a damn.
If you're raising kids—you’re always pushing too hard—it’s just how it goes.
No matter how you slice it—you just didn't nail this one.

I just want to be a decent parent—you know, give them everything they actually need without overdoing it and turning them into spoiled brats. And if I mess up—because let’s face it, I will—I just want to make sure it isn't some life-altering catastrophe that nukes their self-esteem. Is that really too much to ask? 🤷
Look, maybe I'm just having a midlife identity crisis—who knows? Just tell me... how do you guys handle it? Raising them up... yeah, good luck with that. My own kids!

Aha, it's difficult. Actually, it isn't, provided you don't overthink it too much. Overthinking is a far more reliable path to failure than being too hands-off.

I want to be a good parent.

Of course you do.🙂

I want to give them exactly what they need—not a single ounce more.

Look, forget it. That scale doesn't exist. Accept that reality as soon as possible.

And if I do screw up somewhere, I want to make sure it isn't fatal and that it doesn't shatter their self-esteem. Is that asking too much? 🤷

It isn't asking too much; it's just the reality of the situation. Providing a sense of self-worth—the fundamental awareness that the child is a valuable individual who is loved—is perhaps the greatest gift a parent can offer, alongside fostering empathy for others.

The concept of a "magic potion" is a persistent delusion. People are constantly searching for that one miraculous solution—a single pill, a secret ritual, or a sudden stroke of luck—that will instantly fix their lives or solve systemic issues. It’s a tired fantasy. In reality, progress is usually just a series of tedious, incremental adjustments and hard truths. There are no shortcuts. kaže:
Despite all the character redesigns and stylistic shifts, they’re only doing it because they think they're doing the kids a favor.☕

Precisely. That’s what we call upbringing.☕

wirednomad42 said:Look, we’ve all had crappy parents. Everyone missed the mark on something—it's a given—but at the same time, they were doing their absolute best for us, even if we spent our whole childhood feeling totally neglected or misunderstood... 😵
So, who's actually the crazy one here??? 🤷
I also notice this toxic cycle just keeps repeating from one generation to the next. Honestly, my biggest fear is screwing up my own kid—making them some anxious mess who’s constantly starving for attention 😢
How do I actually pull this off? Please hit me with your tips, tricks, or whatever life lessons you've learned 😁

I wouldn't go so far as to say my parents were bad, though I'll admit they didn't exactly succeed in raising a flawless, perfectly functional brood. 😁

Furthermore, I believe we see it far too often these days—and please, let’s be clear, I am not referring to cases of actual parental abuse—but adult children simply taking advantage of their elderly parents. Honestly, if I hadn't been taken for a ride myself, where would I be today?
Even if they are—and let’s be honest, they almost certainly are, because every parent eventually messes up somewhere along the line—I don't think it's something we should hold against them. In my humble opinion, why on earth should parents be expected to be perfect? Nobody is. So why demand that they be?

silentpilot6 said:Reading through that famous controversial thread on Reddit, one question really stuck with me. Is Love actually blind? It probably is deaf and foolish, too...
Initially, I intended to write about women who consciously enter relationships with married men and end up getting burned every single time. They waste years of their lives on some idiot who feeds them lines and promises the moon and stars—promises he almost never keeps. But seeing all the stories posted there, I can't help but wonder if it's just blindness or if people are simply... I'd rather just say they're fools. 😬
I should probably make this personal and reflect on my own past experiences... at one point, I was involved with a married woman. The thing was, she was actually a great person; I genuinely liked her. But the moment I realized this "crush" might turn into something more serious, I walked away. I had no desire to get tangled up in those kinds of situations that almost never have a happy ending.

To get to the point... why do some people allow their partners (and I don't just mean married ones) to treat them like complete fools? Like they're totally blind despite having perfectly good eyesight... essentially, just pushovers.
Where is their logic? Where is their pride? Where is their common sense? Is Love truly blind, deaf, and foolish...
Do people honestly believe that Love conquers all? It doesn't. And even that version of Love (at least the kind we see in these threads) is almost always one-sided.
It’s sad—people suffer, endure pain, and humiliate themselves... they push away friends and family and fall into financial or other messes, all for the sake of people who clearly don't love them back.

I suppose that's one way to put it.
Some people claim it is, but I don't find that to be the case. Not really.
Even before now, it wasn't exactly "blind"—more like it was slightly dim-witted.
But lately, even that's gone.
Perhaps it's just because I'm far too old to be wandering around with a blindfold on, mumbling nonsense to myself.

Edward Flores4 said:I honestly don't get how you expect to just pivot your entire worldview based on what everyone else thinks.

I mean, who even has the authority to sit there and decide whether someone can be both a patriot and a socialist at the same time?

Regardless, if we’re looking at this through a philosophical lens, you really can't be both. You can try to follow certain ideologies—if you absolutely have to—but calling discrimination against outsiders "patriotism" is just using Orwellian doublethink.

Personally, I’m not a fan of socialism, mostly because let's face it: we aren't all equal. To me, socialism acts as a shield for those who contribute nothing, while basically slapping hardworking people in the face by devaluing their effort under the guise of "equality." In my view, lazy people, the ignorant, the crude, and the aggressive *must* be properly identified and held accountable—that's the only way a society can actually be "fair."

And that brings us right back to the issue of patriotism and this weird concept of "respecting" the slackers, the fools, and the criminals just because we happen to share the same nationality. Real respect should be earned on an individual basis, not handed out based on where you were born. I’d swap ten local idiots for one hardworking, honest person from a different country in a heartbeat. I know, I know—it's a caricature, but you get my point.

At the end of the day, patriotism and nationalism are just symptoms of a broken society; they tend to flare up when things aren't functioning correctly. Nationality is the one thing you're stuck with from birth... everything else requires actual effort.

Wrong.
There is quite a lot of other things we acquire just by being born, whereas nationality, as far as I am aware, is something we acquire through choice.
Isn't that right?

I find myself increasingly skeptical of the prevailing sentiment surrounding this topic. While many seem eager to embrace these changes with unbridled optimism, a more seasoned perspective suggests we should proceed with significant caution. History has a way of repeating itself, and those who ignore past failures are often the first to suffer their consequences. We would do well to look closer at the underlying data before committing ourselves so fully to this direction. kaže:
Having options isn't the same thing as having freedom. When you're presented with only two choices, you aren't actually free; you're just being managed. Someone, or some entity, has pre-selected those paths for you. True freedom would be the absence of imposed choices altogether.

Absolute freedom, when applied to the material and physical realms, simply does not exist.
Even if we were to entertain some version of an out-of-body experience—one of those spiritual, enlightened moments that people claim provides a sense of true "freedom"—we still have to ask: is it actually freedom? Or is it just another sensation?😕 It looks like I’m headed back to the first world again. A place where freedom is nothing more than an illusion.

The mere existence of choice, however, serves only to diminish the weight of determined non-freedom.
Ultimately, having an option is always preferable to being left with none at all.

Personally, I don't see much point in chasing absolute definitions. "Better" or "worse" are perfectly adequate categories for me, even if they are—well, perhaps—vague or arbitrary. As long as they make sense to me, that should be enough. I suppose.

Decision-making is an exercise in pure frustration. No matter what path you choose, the moment things inevitably go sideways, you find yourself cursing your own judgment—convinced that if you had only made a different call, everything would have turned out perfectly.

Voting is nothing more than pure frustration. For someone like Jack, it involves a rigorous intellectual process—analyzing potential outcomes, weighing long-term consequences, and evaluating various metrics. Engaging the brain is, as we all know, something most people actively avoid. The same goes for taking responsibility for one's own mistakes; that is an equally unpopular endeavor.

And yet, many people actually enjoy it.
You could argue that it’s because they provide an illusion of freedom. Perhaps that’s part of it. Or maybe, more realistically, it’s because it mitigates their lack of liberty, making it a significantly better option than the alternative.

Beyond that, the capacity to make decisions—even if they are trivial—is one of those fundamental things that makes us human. When I say that, I’m allowing myself the liberty (ha) to be a bit poetic and broad in my phrasing. That is simply how I perceive it. If that ability were taken away, I believe my very sense of humanity would be severely compromised. Of course, one could argue it is all just an illusion. But honestly, I couldn't care less.

One more thing. Regarding this whole business of cursing—no. Of course, that’s the immediate reaction. It's instinctive. However, a rational individual ought to realize that they are always operating with incomplete information, limited knowledge, and restricted capabilities. To put it bluntly, unless one is God, one shouldn't be obsessing over their choices. At best, one might actually learn something from a "bad" decision.

Furthermore, any rational individual ought to be mindful of the concept of "opportunity cost." When you make a choice, you aren't just losing out on that one obvious alternative—the one you inevitably regret later—you are simultaneously forfeiting every other possible path you could have taken and all their subsequent consequences. Given that this is an inescapable reality of existence, it serves as a pragmatic reason to simply accept it rather than wasting energy beating one's head against a wall.

If "freedom of choice" actually exists, then it necessarily must include the freedom to change my mind at any given moment. Picking one car over another before I’ve even had the chance to test drive both isn't a choice—it's just a lottery.

Look, elections have this inconvenient little quirk, as you’ve likely noticed: they aren't infinite, they don't appear whenever we want them to, and—perhaps most frustratingly—we actually know exactly what kind of fallout to expect once we cast our ballots.

But if you take any of those points and dissect their supposedly negative aspects, here is what you find:

a) The "issue" of having a relatively narrow selection (even though it isn't always that limited)—the reality is that people are fundamentally incapable of handling too many options. I recall reading a study—I can't remember the specific figures, but essentially, once you move past a single-digit number of choices, people lose their minds. Their ability to make a rational decision or engage in logical reasoning drops off a cliff. It stands to reason; no one can account for that many variables in an equation filled with so many unknowns.

b) The "issue" of timing. Once an election is over, you can't go back and change your mind. Is that truly a problem? How many of our life decisions would we regret if we had the chance to undo them? Since we can't, does the inability to backtrack actually become a virtue?

c) The "issue" of not knowing where a choice leads. Again, is it really a problem? I think not. That might apply to an isolated choice, but choices are never isolated. Unless, of course, it's your final choice—say, you board a plane that crashes and you die, leaving you unable to make any further decisions. But even then, that specific moment was the result of a long chain of previous choices...

In short, we are dealing with a sequence of daily decisions that lead somewhere, much like an infinitely branching flowchart or the most complex block of code written with an endless string of IF-THEN functions. Where do they lead? Who knows. 😉
You, me, all of us? Certainly not. And besides, who actually wants to know? I certainly don't. What about you?

Anyway, I suppose I am drifting off-topic now. 🤔
Should I perhaps throw the word "culture" into the mix?🤷

edit: I just remembered how to fix this. Language is a value. Period.

Edward Flores4 said:It feels like we’re coming here with a specific mission in mind—that if you aren't actively making an impact, you're basically failing your purpose. Personally, I just can't get on board with that mindset. To me, doing absolutely nothing is actually a much smarter move than rushing blindly into action just because you feel pressured to act... especially when you aren't entirely sure what 😁

I have to disagree.
The reality is that if you are breathing, it is impossible to truly "do nothing."
You are always doing something.
Whether those actions are perceived by yourself or by society as being culturally relevant, intelligent, useful, or purposeful is an entirely different matter altogether.

wearyeagle2 said:That isn't quite the whole story. Balić had a brilliant start and finish yesterday, but he made far too many mistakes in the middle of the game. It was really Lackovic and some very smart defensive schemes while we were shorthanded that kept us in this. The turning point wasn't those final ten minutes; it was when Norway led 11-9 and we had to survive a minute and a half with two men in the penalty box, only to pull it back to 11-11 instead of collapsing. Balić didn't play poorly there either; he was one of the four guys on the floor keeping the formation steady and pulling us through.

Oh, really?
Are you suggesting Balić isn't perfect?
What a revelation.

Look, sure, he’s good... but let's be real—he didn't shoot 100%, nor did he rack up 15 assists with zero turnovers and six steals.
I fail to see why people feel the need to overhype him.😲

But fine, yes, Balić is only human.
It just so happens he's accidentally legendary.
And just by coincidence, the best.
For years now.
And even yesterday.

Christian Wells6 said:I find myself compelled to sign my name to this sentiment. I mean, honestly, where is the room for any semblance of intellect within the confines of nationalism? 🤷

Everywhere, apparently.☕

swiftcobra15 said:😕😕 You can't seriously suggest that nationalists follow the categorical imperative, can you? 😕
Your attempt at relativizing this misses the entire point: the detachment (the liberation) from those "blood and soil" ties.
Of course, most people naturally gravitate toward those similar to them (in terms of interests, worldview, etc.),
but if a person is incapable of distancing themselves from their local community, they remain fundamentally unfree.

So, we achieve freedom from blood and soil, yet remain shackled by our preferences and perspectives?
In what way is this second version any superior?
Is it based on some arbitrary measure of how "significant" this lack of freedom is?
And more importantly, according to whose judgment?

mistyfox812 said:I feel like the people calling themselves cosmopolitans are still stuck in that same old loop: A is A because it isn't B. In their heads, it's like: "I'm a cosmopolitan because I'm not a nationalist."

If you ask me, these cosmopolitans justify themselves way more often by saying, "Hey, I'm not a nationalist," rather than claiming they have some massive, universal love for everyone (including actual nationalists). Actually, I'm kinda worried that this "universal love" is usually reserved mostly for other cosmopolitans, while they just look down on nationalists. If that’s true, they aren't actually that different from nationalists, who also "love their own" (meaning people with the same identity) while looking down on everyone else.

An excellent observation.🙏

The page is in English.😲
Why on earth would they do that?😁

Once the initial shock wears off, I find myself returning to take another look.

The simplicity and functionality are excellent.
The lack of unnecessary clutter is also a plus.
However, the font and line spacing feel slightly too large.
White text on a black background is difficult to read.
It becomes straining after just a minute or two.
That is my humble, non-expert opinion.

cosmicskipper55 said:What is your impression of the page linked above regarding that specific point?

??? What does the Jewish community have to do with this? Their days are identified by sequential numbers and they don't even utilize descriptive names like Tuesday or Wednesday...

Well, for the Jewish community, Saturday is their version of our Sunday, right?
In that case, Sunday would be the first day of the week, making Wednesday the fourth.
And wouldn't it have to be structured that way to actually be called Wednesday?😁

I'll go check out the site and let you know my thoughts.