Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)KA
Posts
0
Comments
177
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Totally! You explained it really well.

    My partner and I are the lookie-loo shoppers. We often cover stores aisle by aisle. It's entertaining for us for different reasons. We like to see what people are buying, especially things like books, clothes, etc. We like to talk about the products and the things that follow; for example, we start by noticing the variety of flavors in pets food and end up talking about animals, foods, etc. We like to learn about new products, as we are often out of the loop and it's nice to find new gadgets or kitchen accessories this way. We try new things, like "try me" lotions or whatever. Overall, it is a fun experience.

  • I'm not an expert, but I believe it's more of a North American thing (Canada, U.S.A., Mexico) due to the mountain systems along the three countries. The Rocky Mountains, the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Velt, etc. are all part of the North American Cordillera. This, and the occasional deserts.

    I'd guess ponchos, jorongos, and similar pieces of clothing were adopted by non-native settlers (Spanish, English, etc.), including non-native cowboys, because they are good against the changing weather during the day and the cold nights, as you said.

    I mean, Central America must have cold spots along their own mountains and South America has the Andean Mountain Range (enormous system), but I do not know about their traditional clothing, except they share the poncho, and I do not know which of their clothing we still wear to this day.

  • From Wikipedia:

    Polysexuality has been defined as "encompassing or characterized by many different kinds of sexuality", and as sexual attraction to many, but not all, genders. [...] Polysexuality is also considered to be another word for bisexuality however unlike bisexuals, polysexuals are not necessarily attracted to people of the same gender.

    I think 'polysexual' fits. You like some genders (cis women, trans women, feminine-presenting people, AFAB NBs, etc.), but not all.

  • Unfortunately, women tend to want partners, men want caregivers.

    Thank you. Nobody's seeing that. All the comments saying the woman is mean, instead of talking about how irresponsible the man must be that he needs a reward system to do what he should be doing on his own for his family.

    I'm not sure if it's the right expression. I mean by his own volition and out of responsibility.

    Edit: I won't acknowledge the rest of your comment because, honestly, it got confusing.

  • Sure, the spouse that has to create a reward system so that the other person does their chores is the one in the wrong, not the spouse that apparently needs parenting. Also, marriage is a favor to the former, not something both want and benefit from (/sarcasm).

  • I use TikTok (I know...). There, when there's rivalry, it is frequently 'gen Z' the one bullying 'millennials'. They criticize the way they use technology, their fashion sense, their attitudes, their musical tastes, etc. Studies are noticing that 'gen Z' tend more to the right-wing, so I guess there's a part of them also criticizing previous generations for being too leftists or whatever.

    I use the quotation marks because this whole generational thing seems to me arbitrary and U.S.-centric. I'm in the years that are considered the transition between these two generations and I share characteristics with both. It's silly how serious we've taken this thing.

  • I haven't noticed, but some people say they are feeling political tensions, and...

    The year 2024 is notable for the large number of elections, with 7 of world's 10 most populous nations (Bangladesh, India, United States, Indonesia, Pakistan, Russia, Mexico) voting; countries that are home to nearly half of the world's people will hold elections in 2024.

    From the Wikipedia complete list.

    I guess everyone is just a little worried about national and international elections.

  • I think that if the age of consent is gradual, the age difference allowed should too.

    First scenario, two 15 year olds decide to start their sexual life together. They're fully informed. Nobody is taking advantage. It's very different to a second scenario where a 17 year old is dating a 36 year old.

    It's funny because the problem is usually described with terms these specific French philosophers used: power dynamics. It is too unbalanced. The adult has way more power than the teenager and that's not healthy, it can even be dangerous.

    I would argue that we should be careful with age differences until our early-mid twenties, even if the law gives us a free pass from our 18th birthday. But, anyway, yeah, in the second scenario the teenager is older than the first ones, so we'd assume that if the first ones were okay the second too, but the age difference matters IMHO.

  • Sorry, I'm answering myself because I forgot to post my own opinion.

    I clearly have problems with any metaphysical explanation, because every one of them tells us to accept this Universe as it is, which seems arbitrary and, depending on the ideology, even cruel, and because we have no good reason to prefer an idea over the others. Do I believe in a god, gods, only matter; reincarnation, ascension, definitive death; simulation, real thing...? I do not know. Why would I pick one at random? If there's something more to this existence, I'll perhaps know when I die, and I will fight for our right to be better than we are right now because, come on, here on Lemmy we tend to be leftists, right? We do not like bigotry, exploitation, or unhappiness. We fight in our own ways against this. Then why would I stop when I die? If the ones controlling this reality are messed up, are we to accept the status quo and thank the tyrants that, at least, we were to experience smelling flowers although children were literally bombed next door? No. If they're tyrants, heads must roll. Let's be fucking spiritual punks! Not yet, just if we confirm this suspicion, lol.

    Oh! Reincarnation, right. If reincarnation was real and it would make us cycle at random from one life to another, without anything else (no merits, no punishments, no learning, just cycling), I guess some lives would be better than others, yeah? But then, why? Is there a purpose? If not, what happens to souls that are tired of cycling? Can we opt out? If not, who or what is holding us against our will? Can we escape? Again, many questions, lol. But I finally answered!

  • If that's true, will his next life inevitably be a little worse than now? Average, perhaps? Even bad? Then it would not be about reincarnating for the better each time but a lottery, in which eventually you'll get a relatively better life than the others, right?

    Or is the best life the last one before crossing to somewhere else? Will Earth become emptier and emptier then, as we all cross? Then why the number of beings keeps increasing instead of decreasing? Who are these new souls?

    Do you believe his humbleness is part of why he has those circumstances? Will he keep the good life because he deserves it? Some systems talk about merits, about reincarnating into what one deserves. Then, every orphan and every Palestinian and every pig deserve what they have suffered? If so, those systems often invite us to compassion, but is there space to absolute compassion when the Universe itself is punishing them for terrible deeds in the past? It would be similar to watching children being spanked; on one hand, you feel bad for them because they need to learn this painful lesson; on the other, you feel good because they deserve them, especially if the harm was against you, you may even feel a spark of joy from something similar to revenge. So are we supposed to feel this mix of feelings for beings who have it worse than us? Happy that they're getting to learn, happy that they're been punished, happy that they won't be doing it again? Because that's not how I feel, and I would feel sadistic to feel it based only on this theory we're imagining. Then there's the question: is this kind of cruel punishing the only way for souls to learn? If so, why such a primitive system? We do not even use it for our children anymore, and psychologists have found it is detrimental instead of constructive. Is this the best way the Universe can help us grow? If it is, it seems suspicious, who is behind? If it is not, then it is needlessly cruel as there would be more peaceful ways, and we should be questioning this instead of embracing it just because it is the thing we've been given.

    On a similar line, do you believe we somehow learn virtues that we inherit for the next life? If so, are we all collectively better people than in the 19th century (because some of us would have surely learnt something)? Is humanity walking towards an utopia then? How do we explain the centuries in which we seem to devolve, in which irrationality, wars, hate, and more increased? Today, are we really that advanced and far away from Ancient Rome or Ancient Egypt?

    The person you were talking with was happy you have a mind that lets you consider things from positive sides, and said that many do not have that chance. If reincarnation has a purpose in each life, how are we supposed to learn, grow, change, or whatever we are supposed to do (in case there is something to do) if we are partially limited by our brains and many other things? Why would we judge those negative thinkers as if they decided their current life?

    ...Unless we decide our current life, as some systems propose. Then many things we do are determined already because we knew which were our limits and which were our base characteristics (e.g. our temperament, which is innate). This contradicts a lot of the things we were thinking and makes the scenario more similar to a game than to a learning path. But it poses a lot of new questions such as who or what are we when we're not humans but beings deciding where to be born? Why do we do this? Is it ethical to embrace an identity who has no memory of the deal and impose a life onto it full of things that identity did not consent to? Because maybe the being decided to live as a woman who would be hurt, develop PTSD and learn to live through it all. It sounds dramatic and interesting. But the woman is a new consciousness, a new identity, then is it right to make her suffer all that just because another consciousness, a previous consciousness agreed to? The same question might be asked for whatever case of reincarnation in which we reincarnate in very different identities. If it is possible and a cruel murderer reincarnates in a sweet person, why should a sweet person pay for the crimes of a cruel murderer?

    So many questions still in the air that I haven't written down... But all different variations of reincarnation seem problematic at some point already. Do you agree? Because many people who find these metaphysical problems in different postulates (not necessarily reincarnation) tend to say that we are judging high ideas with mundane ideas. How can I say it is an unfair system if whoever designed it is much wiser than us, so it knows better to be fair and good, and we cannot understand such elevated balance so we think it is unfair. Yet, at the same time, the system that they propose is full of explanations, promises, and consequences based on our human values and morality, not higher ones. The Universe gives 'good' things for 'good' deeds or 'good' personality, then it does work with our frames at some point, huh? Then, all our questions are indeed valid. All this paragraph to say that, if you agree that indeed there are things that seem weird, suspicious, or wrong when thinking about reincarnation (or metaphysical beliefs in general), how do we keep our belief in reincarnation?

    I'm not saying it does not exist just because it does not entirely "click". I'm asking why to believe in it when we realize this, instead of taking a more skeptical and distant approach, maybe curious, maybe excited, but cautious?

  • Yes. In my case, my mood disorder was causing irritability. Many disorders can cause it (e.g., MDD, BPD, IED).

    OP, I'd suggest an appointment with a specialist if everything else has been ruled out; everything else includes bad sleep habits, bad eating habits, physical illnesses, etc.

  • A recent comment of mine:

    In an old interview, Mr. Narcissus [Elon Musk] said he may have bipolar disorder; he said he experiences "great highs, terrible lows, and unrelenting stress".

    He has doubts because his highs and lows follow events in his life, whereas episodes from bipolar disorder often appear without triggers. [...]

    We'd know if he went for an evaluation/possible diagnosis, but I cannot even imagine him doing it.

    Kanye West is usually manic when he acts this way. I guess this supports Musk's suspicion.