Worked through my obsessions a bit and let go of them. In the following weeks I asked three women out and got shot down each time instead of thinking about doing so for a month and being a creep.
Unironically, good on you. That’s character progress and it takes a lot of courage and self-confidence to accept rejection in a mature way and keep trying regardless. For what it’s worth I as an Internet stranger think we should help more people do the same sort of things.
Her name is [kept to myself because I’m a gentleman who doesn’t kiss and tell]. I hope I, in turn, am not someone’s most alarming thing but it’s possible :P
I’d say it’s sometimes ok, sometimes necessary for brevity, and sometimes accurate. Accurate = “All people need oxygen, water, and calories to survive.” Brevity = “Generally speaking, people enjoy good food and good company so those situations work well for forming relationships.”
Consequences of generalizations have a lot to do with how tolerable they are. If I say, “most people like pizza” there’s not much harm if several million people don’t. If I say, “all or most people of this gender/ethnicity/religion/whatever have X problem” that’s a lot more problematic because it can easily lead to a consequence of harmful prejudice. When it comes to matters of ethics, beliefs, accusations etc. it becomes very important to handle cases individually as much as humanly possible.
I’m really hoping that’s an Office Space reference.
I can think of two fairly active potential homes for that content: Showerthoughts, which is for random trains of thought that you think others might relate to. Lemmy Be Wholesome is for content that you feel elevates people’s moods, is supportive, shares good vibes and so on.
It isn’t too much to ask. According to Dr. K of HealthyGamerGG (Harvard Psychiatrist/Instructor), research shows that the release of non-consensual porn makes the unwilling subjects suicidal over half the time. Non-consensual porn = deepfakes, revenge porn, etc. It’s seriously harmful, and there are other effects like depression, shame, PTSD, anxiety, and so on. There is functionally unlimited porn out there that is made with consent, and if someone doesn’t want to be publicly sexually explicit then that’s their choice.
I’m not against AI porn in general (I consider it the modern version of dirty drawings/cartoons), but when it comes to specific likenesses as with deepfakes then there’s clear proof of harm and that’s enough for me to oppose it. I don’t believe there’s some inherent right to see specific people naked against their will.
You’re probably right :) I have this compulsion where I always want to know WHY something is wrong, so when I hear something like this I run off to look it up.
Only if time travel is somehow involved. Here’s a National Library of Medicine article/book review on the history of HIV/AIDS.
“The earliest identified isolate of HIV-1 comes from an unknown male in Kinshasa, Congo, in 1959. The first identified patient with HIV infection and AIDS was a Scandinavian man in the 1960s, who had visited west-central Africa. Then came sporadic cases among gay men in the United States and among Haitians in the 1970s, leading to the global explosion in the '80s and '90s and the literal decimation of peoples in several tropical countries.”
I’d say don’t source the history of diseases from NFL players, but those who would take my advice seriously probably don’t need it.
There’s this really entertaining forensic psychiatrist named Eric Bender who does multiple analyses videos of pop culture “insane” characters using real scientific/medical knowledge.
So the movie versions of Joker aren’t insane in the sense that they’re lost in hallucinations and unable to discern reality from make-believe. The Joker likely wouldn’t be sent to an asylum in the real world. The Jokers of the movies are psychopathic, evil, uncaring, manipulative, etc. For the most part, to them the world is a game and it’s all about the Joker being the main character with everyone else being pawns to be used for evil amusement.
You may just have a bad hairdresser. I put up with “ok” haircuts for months when I moved into a new area, then one month I decided to try a 2nd shop instead. I brought the same pictures to both places but the 2nd place was immediately better and fixed the problems. She even remarked that my issue was something the 1st shop should have recognized immediately because it was a) obvious and b) not hard to remedy. Don’t be afraid to visit another place if you have one available.
Sometimes, and I think that’s normal, but usually upon reflection there aren’t many things that are truly worthless. I totally sound like a bad motivational poster but I really believe that even poor uses of time can teach you things - even if only how to be patient, forgiving to yourself, or wiser. It’s a life philosophy of mine that you should always be pushing yourself enough that you might fail (research shows that failing about 15% of the time is the sweet spot for motivation and learning). Plus sometimes just passing the time is a goal in and of itself, especially if you’re doing something you enjoy. Playing a video game, listening to music, etc doesn’t “accomplish” a lot but makes life better.
Dr. Mike from Renaissance Periodization has a video you may find useful, and he’s legitimately a PhD sports scientist and trainer. It’s not a full program but it’s a good start from a reputable source.
Usually one of the first steps is dehumanization - make your targets “less than human” in the eyes of the population. Nazis famously did it by comparing Jews to rats. You’ll notice in a lot of recent Israeli press releases and media Palestinians are referred to as “inhuman animals” or some variation of that. By creating that disconnect between your targets and “normal, healthy” humans you reduce empathy and make harsher treatment seem acceptable.
Another step is to make your audience disgusted or angry. Studies show there’s a link between those two emotions and harsher judgments (although degree/method is still very much an area of research). To invoke disgust you may use words like “filthy, wretched, diseased, mindless” etc. Using the Nazi example again, they made cartoons that showed Jews as dirty, greasy and generally disgusting. To make people angry convince them your targets are “immoral, violent, bloodthirsty” and so on. Nazis leaned heavily into blaming Jews for society’s ills and calling them thieves. Both effects can be made greater if your audience is conditioned to be sensitive to anger/disgust, i.e. being raised to believe in strict definitions of purity and so on. For Nazis it was the idea that Aryans were racially superior. For Zionism it often involves teaching people they are “God’s chosen” with other races not having the same rights (like rights to dwell in territory claimed by Israel) because of religion.
So if you can make your victims seem less than human and enrage or disgust your audience you convince people to do horrible things. They won’t feel like they are doing it to valuable humans and often think it’s a form of justice or necessary cleansing. Using the above psychological “levers” can shift perceptions so large populations view some other group as different to relatable, valid people.
The defining characteristic is usually direct oversight/power. Can the person reward/punish/fire you? If so then there are ethical concerns involved in a relationship (although a relationship may not be strictly forbidden). Is the person an authority figure like a police officer? Same deal.
Relationships are complex enough that judgments should be, and to the best of my knowledge often are, made on a case-by-case basis. E.g. of course police officers can still have relationships, but they can’t say “Date me if you don’t want a ticket”. For bosses working every day with employees it’s also tricky. In the professional circles I know of it’s considered risky for a boss to be sleeping with an employee but not forbidden. What is outright illegal is pressuring an employee into a relationship of any kind. Sexual/romantic relationships can still happen, but consent has to be clearly stated and unforced.
From the American Medical Association (and many other countries have similar guidelines): "In general, physicians should not treat themselves or members of their own families. However, it may be acceptable to do so in limited circumstances:
deleted by creator
The Count is going to start teaching kids about corporate profits. “One billion extra dollars untaxed! Ha ha hah! 2 billion…”
Oscar the Grouch is going to be a working homeless who is forced to move his can every week by police.
My bad. Sometimes it’s hard to tell when you’re having a discussion via message board because nuance can get lost. I’ll edit that assumption out. Sounds like we’re on the same side.
I don’t entirely disagree. I’m not going to completely deny consumer responsibility, but I think it’s important to hold corporations much more accountable. My reasons are: sabotaging alternatives (this is huge), tons corporate money in politics (actively preventing change even if people want it), climate denial and false research (lying), and making sure everyone but themselves gets blamed when problems can no longer be hidden.
In the case of manufacturing, when environmental controls are implemented the corporations affected often just ship the work abroad. So even if citizens manage to make change in their own country the corporations just export the damage. You may say that people could just stop buying, and there is that aspect of consumer responsibility I’ve acknowledged. However, when all the options are bad it’s not realistic to say everyone should have forgone all cars, phones, or electricity produced by fossil fuels.
The general population has been deliberately denied information and agency to enact change. This latest statement in OP’s article is just a continuation of decades of corporate greed over truth and the environment.
Serious answer: I remind myself it’s normal to be shocked by some stuff people do/create. I check the content against my ethics, and try to decide if I’m being uptight or if it really is messed up. If it’s something that isn’t unethical/harmful but I just don’t like, then I remind myself that not everyone needs to share my tastes.
If it’s genuinely terrible I allow myself to feel the anger/sorrow for a bit, try not to let it become excessive, and congratulate myself on having limits that fit my ethics. I remind myself that good people exist and they are the ones I want to support, emulate, and engage with. As others have mentioned, distraction can also help. Video games, music, socializing - whatever will move your train of thought along.