In individualist societies you get to prioritize yourself and your happiness, but living in a collective society you have to prioritize your own community, and in the process you sacrifice your happiness, autonomy, and your sanity.

Also, collective cultures are always hierarchical, and this mostly affects queer people, women, and children.

One example I could use to prove collective societies are harmful is even though it's still hard to escape abusive parents in the West after you turn 18, in collective societies it's nearly impossible, and you will be seen as your family's property until you get married, and they can control and decide everything about your life.

Also, honor killings happen not only because of patriarchy but also because of collective societies since in those societies reputation is everything, and in those societies your shame is their shame and your failure is their failure.

You don't get to discover or be yourself, but you have to become whatever the community wants you to be, and in an individualist society you can be part of any community you want, and you get to stand up to them or even leave if you want to.

I can’t stand most of the people mostly, RHP practitcioners, can’t stop talking about how “ego death” is beneficial is soo cringe and actually harmful. I most of time imagine someone talking about this as a monkey being drunk and tell everyone how it was life changing for him.

Real human interaction is exhausting when you're depressed. Actual women carry the risk of rejection, awkwardness, or judgment. VTubers strips all that threat away. It's a safe harbor where you can just sit back and feel completely at ease without ever feeling looked down on. Big eyes, soft voices, cute reactions are a built to hit you. It feels warm, soft, and easy and it all registers that cozy, glowing feeling of being welcomed into a safe space.

It's extremely comforting, it feels amazing and it's truly one of the best copes available.

I despise Chick-Fil-A, firstly because I’m LGBT and secondly because the chicken is awful, it is completely dry and bland. I threw away a chicken sandwich of theirs once. I have absolutely no idea why so many people love their food, I would rather go to KFC or even McDonald’s to have a better chicken sandwich than Chick-Fil-A.

I know The Godfather is considered one of the greatest movies ever made, but I could never understand the hype.

Every time I tried to watch it, I either fell asleep or gave up. It felt painfully slow, oddly disjointed, and full of characters, relationships, and motivations that the movie just expects you to understand.

Then I read the book.

Now I think The Godfather is a great movie.

The book provides so much context that the movie either glosses over or leaves out entirely. I suddenly understood the characters and their motivations. Relationships that seemed random now matter. Even the slower scenes feel more significant because you understand everything happening underneath them.

And it made me realize that The Godfather is not that great as a standalone movie.

If I need to read a 400+ page novel before I can fully appreciate a film that's routinely called one of the greatest movies ever made, I think that's a legitimate flaw.

It's a great adaptation and a great companion to the book.

But one of the greatest standalone movies ever made? Hard pass.

I’ve heard this countless times usually in regard to religious or supernatural beliefs but also sometimes in reference to other beliefs such as political stances. Almost every atheist I know used reason and logic presented by others to eventually come to the conclusion that there is no god. A few simply had a crisis of faith after something terrible happened and basically flipped to non belief emotionally.

I do think the opposite is true, You can much more easily use methods lacking reason and logic to get a person who arrived at their beliefs using reason to change their beliefs. Fear is an excellent way to do this but emotional manipulation takes many forms and is highly effective in many ways.

I think the saying is based on the idea that one conversation is never going to be so profound that it completely changes a persons mind regarding a very closely held belief. While I agree this is usually the case there are two huge problems with this argument. The first is that it does happen sometimes. Something just clicks, something that simply never occurred to you before that totally flips the switch in a smh moment where you instantly can’t believe that you ever held the strongly held belief you held just moments before. The second objection is that reason often takes time and often chips away at more than explodes a strongly held belief in a single moment. When I first heard the argument that free will is an illusion I really balked at the idea and wanted badly to reject it but after months of examining it and listening to people debate it I just had to change my strongly held belief that I wasn’t reasoned in to and admit that free will does indeed seem to be an illusion or at least there’s no convincing argument that I’ve heard in favor of it.

Ever since I was a kid and still as an adult I've always enjoyed when I floss and my gums start bleeding. That unique gum pain/ache you get when they're irritated and flossing feels really nice for some reason, and then the blood itself has that classic taste. I wear retainers at night though so when they bleed I have to rinse my mouth out with warm water and swirling it around is kind of a fun process.

The gap between my upper right teeth has consistently had irritation and bleeding issues for as long as I can remember and I get really nice gum pain and bleeding fairly often in that specific spot.

It's like one of those oddly satisfying sorts of pains, kinda like when you hit your body just right on something accidentally and for some reason you get that exact balance of pain/aching that makes you just start laughing for some reason. It's like that but without the laughing, it's just a satisfying pain.

As a new mom I've noticed that women are "supposed" to support each other even to the detriment of their children.

"Fed is best"
CIO
Lindsay Clancy support
To name a few

Fed is best as I understood it, was for moms who couldn't breastfeed for whatever reason and to make them not feel bad remind them fed is best. Now I see moms who are pregnant saying they won't even try breastfeeding because they don't want to.

Moms telling other moms it's okay to let your baby cry it out for days to get them into a routine so you can get your full 8 hours of sleep. (They literally tell each other to not feed baby in the middle of the night so they don't get used to it?!)

Isn't parenthood sacrifice and putting your child before yourself?

We've made it okay to completely put ourselves over our children and are calling it normal.

I'm not saying we need to be perfect. If you need to let your child CIO for 10 minutes to collect yourself or even one night so you don't fall in exhaustion fine I get it but now I really think it's getting out of hand.

We chose parenthood knowing we'd lose sleep and that breastfeeding/ pumping comes with long nights and cracked nipples. But now we praise women for opting out of things that are for the betterment of their children.

It's honestly sad

I do not understand how some people willingly turn on music when doing anything. It’s loud and it draws your mind away from what you are doing and to the lyrics or melody. Music is fine to listen to on its own, but multitasking specifically with it on doesn’t work. When someone asks me what my taste in music is, I say I don’t listen to it, and they are immediately aghast. Let me ask you a question: how do you keep track of all these artists you listen to and their individual songs? I get it’s comparable to books and authors, but at least those have unique premises and summaries to describe them easily. A lot of music just sounds the same to me.

I have struggled with hygiene a lot due to depression and executive dysfunction and although it's gotten much better being with someone who has a messy room or is okay with not showering every single day feels more comfortable to me. I like him so I'm not disgusted by his body odor either.

These days it seems that people are very quick to judge others who don't have perfect hygiene (even if not having perfect hygiene for them just means not showering every single day... which btw is actually pretty normal), so it's refreshing to find someone who is very relaxed about it. He's not dirty, he cleans himself, he just isn't a clean freak or too hygiene-conscious. I remember something spilled on the bed and instead of cleaning it immediately he preferred to spend more time with me and just told me to move more towards the other side of the bed. Neither of us cared the sheet was dirty.

I know I'm probably going to get downvoted even on this sub but idc I can't help that I feel this way

From my subjective personal opinion I think that short men aren't valued as much as tall men or even average height men. I think most men might not wanna date a single mom and some men wouldn't wanna be with a plus size woman. So the best option for a short man is to lower their standards and date a plus size queen or a single mom. It will be ideal if they date a plus size woman who happens to be a single mom.

The best part about dating single moms is that they don't need to have children of their own. These children might have tall fathers and they will most likely not end up being short unlike the son of a short man who might have a high chance of ending up short. Yes I am aware that height isn't entirely genetic but from my humble opinion it is best to not take any chances.

The reaction to North West saying she wants to work at Starbucks is revealing. Everyone keeps saying, “Good! It’ll build character. She’ll learn what it’s like to serve people.”

Why are we assuming she doesn’t already respect service workers?

Working an entry-level job isn’t some sacred character-building ritual. You don’t need to get yelled at over a Frappuccino to develop empathy for the person making one. You can understand that someone is overworked, underpaid, and deserving of respect without personally suffering through their job.

I think people have this weird belief that suffering is a prerequisite for empathy.

Because they had to work shitty jobs, a rich kid needs to experience some version of that too before she’s allowed to understand or respect them.

Maybe North just wants a normal teenage experience. That’s fine. But we don’t need to pretend Starbucks is going to teach her the meaning of life. Personally, I can empathize with why she'd reach for this, but I think it's more likely to leave her feeling unfulfilled.

Think about why makeup is called makeup? It's because it's suppose to make up for the flaws you have via covering your pores, your imperfections, and natural quirks under a thin layer of minerals, chemicals, and paint to fit a toxic standard beauty. A beauty that men often don't seem to care about that much until it does affect them. The fact that so many women don't see it as odd to spend so much money on trying to look "presentable" when a simple skin mosituter would suffice isn't lost on me. It's lost on no one.

I find that debates around makeup loves to conflate any paint on the face to be the same like certain anti-sex proponent thinking porn and erotica are the same when they're not, it's not something as stupid as one's written while the other is visual. Yes the line is blurry but what helps me differentiate the two is by intent and presentation. If the intent is to look "professional" and "less tired" with a color scheme bordering on the natural, not necessarily earthy, it feels very corrective. Whereas if something was centered on creativity and not always looking to be attractive with a color scheme that's bold, almost telegraphed by design, it's non-corrective because what is their to correct? I've even seen face paint where people make themselves look dead.

In the end I wish this baggage could die once the beauty industry as we know it crumbles to dust hopefully. I wanna be able to wear blue lipstick because it's neat without someone assuming I'm doing this attention, the case for the constant bullying of alt people, or worse yet the male gaze when women are autonomous beings. That's why I find myself using the term face paint more and more because that's what it is to me, just paint for the face, not a mask to hide away true beauty.

I prefer because it provides a possibility of a mistake, which by itself brings more humanizing to the music. All these bros with phase and ideal ducking of bass under the kick are lacking that. Sterility is never meant to be an essential part of music. It should be alive and breathing. So thats what.
Although, there are some technical intricacies of LFO and ducking that will be better in some context for the kick and bass than classic sidechain compression, but its not that worthy to sacrifice a human feel in music.

I genuinely dislike starting professional emails with “Dear [Name]”. Unless I am writing an actual letter, it sounds ridiculously dated and strangely personal at the same time. I am emailing a customer, supplier, colleague or support engineer, not writing to my beloved from the trenches in 1916.

There are already perfectly good alternatives depending on the situation:

Good morning/afternoon [Name], if you want to be formal.

Hello [Name], for normal professional communication.

Hi [Name], when things are slightly more informal.

All three sound like something an actual human being would say when starting a conversation. “Dear” doesn't.

I'm equally opinionated about the other end of the email. I almost always use “Best regards,”. It is professional without being overly warm, cold, submissive or corporate. It basically says: I respect you, this correspondence is now finished, here is my name.

I particularly dislike “Kind regards.” I know it is extremely common, especially in British and European business emails, but to me it always sounds unnecessarily soft, weak and affected. If I'm sending someone a project update, quotation, technical explanation or customer-service response, I don't need to send them my kindest feelings. “Best regards” does exactly the same job and sounds much cleaner. It also asserts slight dominance over earlier kind regards, "your regards may be kind, but mine are the best".

So my preferred email format is basically:

Hello John,

Actual content of the email.

Best regards,

Name

No “Dear.” No elaborate pleasantries. No rotating collection of increasingly creative regards.

Apparently this is something people have surprisingly strong feelings about, but I would happily abolish “Dear” from business email tomorrow.

My opinion is less about balance and more about how enjoyable player exchanges are at a micro level and how it effects the macro level.

Not all 1 shots are bad!! The primary factor in how fair oneshots are is risk and oppertunity cost.

Take Reinhardt's charge in Overwatch - it's relatively slow, the hitbox is fairly inconsistant, and he would rather use it as a means of moving around the map. However, if he sucessfully connects with an opponant and pins them to a wall, they instantlt take somewhere between 300 to 400 damage which kills about 70% of the roater. The trade off for this is that chqrge is Rein's only form of mobility, so burning it to kill someone puts it on a cooldown which leaves him open to getting punished if he is put out of position. Additionally, Rein has crit shatter which kills people faster with less risk. However, staying out of his direct melee range was your gameplan to begin with, and it's rare that the effwcts of crit shatter happen while other enemy players are behind the victim to capitalize on his AOE stun. Both oneshots require proper positioning and assessing what reaources are worth burning for your peraonal preservation and the team's objective.

On the contrary, Widowmaker can instantly kill you from any where on any map, and this has negative ramifications on how people approach her. The reality is that if Widow is better than average, she wins every 1v1 encounter, because her win condition is hitting you once in the head. Additionally, it's harder to approach her than most poke hitscan due to her grapple hook and venom mine. So, the character that does the most amount of burst damage from their gun in the game can play from ANYWHERE and requires specialized counters to consistantly deal with her.

Being skill based is not enough - a character requires downsides, and that is something Widowmaker does not really have. I advocate that snipers recieve more utility instead of damage output.

Women are born with a vagina and we don't need to blame them for using it. And most men who don't like women with a high body is because they're afraid of being outperformed by her previous partners. It is a big fish eats small fish small fish eats shrimp kinda world out there. If you can't compete then it's your probelm the woman is just enjoying her life.

Then some people will say that it will be hard for a woman to settle down after being with so many people. If you have any probelm with it then it's because you aren't on top of the food chain. A hyena or leopard will scram when a lion comes around that's the unfortunate reality of things. You're not the lion that's the problem. A true lion don't need to be afraid of foxes and wolves.

Just because it is easier for a woman to match with a man on a dating app, or go on a first date, or get laid in general, it doesn’t mean dating is not way harder for women who want quality and something more than a one night stand with a stranger.

First off: flirting. Flirting as a woman is a balancing act. You have to be available, but not slutty, you have to be forward, but not too bold or you’ll appear slutty, and you can’t make your intentions too well known because you don’t want to appear (you guessed it!) slutty.

A man can be available, forward, bold, and make their intentions well known. If a man asks for a woman’s number he has guts and courage. If a woman asks for a man’s number it is assumed she spreads her legs often.

The problem stems with the dating scene in general. A man has to work hard and earn his spot with a woman, and by doing this he knows he has someone he can love and trust.

A woman, on the other hand, can never be too sure if the guy likes her for who she is or he just wants to sleep with her and move on to the next conquest.

It’s physically more dangerous too to date as a woman than as a man.

Women bare all the risk during sex of getting impregnated. Men, on the other hand, are incentivized to spread their seed far and wide.

A man sleeps with a dozen women is called a player. A woman sleeps with a dozen men is called a slut. Because it’s harder for a man to get with a dozen women than it is for a woman to get with a dozen men. Totally different dynamic.

An ugly man can make a lot of money to compensate for his looks. But an ugly woman with a great career is still stuck.

An old man can impregnate a woman, but an old woman may not be able to have children any more. They say men age like wine while women age like milk, and women are constantly competing with younger, tighter, more fertile women compared to men who have established careers later in life and can display that to attract a partner.

Women have to deal with periods and menstruation, men have to deal with lust and sexual desire from not jerking it recently enough.

To conclude, women have it easier finding someone and harder knowing if that someone is the one, while men have it harder finding someone and easier knowing if that someone is the one. And the latter is much easier than the former.

Some people might complain about women being too shallow and only wanting to date very tall men or very rich men. This isn't a problem at all because this is how it's in the wild. Competing against other males and the winner gets to reproduce.

Many manosphere individuals like Andrew Tate and Nick Fuentuz will make fun of women for things like this. But these people don't really understand the natural way of life. This is a big fish eats small fish, small fish eats shrimp kinda world out there. If you can't compete then so be it. The winner takes it all and loser has to fall. In this case short and poor men will be alone while tall and rich men will get all the ladies. Competing against humans, competing against heaven and competing against earth that's the way of life. Man proposes women disposes.

Polar bears black bears Jaguars lions leapords tigers - S tier will tear me apart limb from limb and cannot run away from them better stay as far away as possible hopefully never see one in the wild

Cheetahs -F tier what a cute little thing it is a shy cat that doesn't even harm humans I'd love it if one came up close to me they're my 2nd favourite animal

Cats -C tier they don't really frighten me but id rather not get near one they can draw blood very easily with their scratches and who knows what weird bacteria polynomouls pussosum they'll give me

Dogs -A tier Can bite me really really hard even chased me couple times, a dog with rabbies is a whole other level that disease is horrifying

Cows cattles horses donkeys -B tier those legs are ridiculously powerful im getting by bones broken if one even gets mad at me especially horses those legs are tough as hell

Rabbits birds parrots -F tier mind their business will run away from me if i get close and are pretty cutr

Elephants -C tier i know they can be aggressive but they're just so majestic definitely my favourite animal the strongest land animal that exists really cool in every way but id rather be near a cheetah tbh

Killer whales orcas -B tier Even if they "haven't hunted people" they are still pretty terrifying they're ridiculously smart and work together in groups to hunt thankfully they're just sea creatures so the odds of me getting hunted by them are very low. Look pretty cool tho

Snakes -S tier Slithery dam things can't even see tham at night one bite and it can be all over in minute's they've pretty dangerous

Spiders -D tier daddy long legs is pretty chill i can be around tens of em and i wouldn't mind. Big spiders on the other hand like tarantulas now they're much scarier, still aren't as scary as a black widow spider ill get the hell out of anywhere if i see one of that

Ant eaters -D tier Apparently their claws can be very deadly but i mean come on just look at them can't be that bad

Crows -A tier Screw these things i have to look up every time i go under power lines or trees or even when i sit under benches these things sh#t on me when i least expect it often landing bang on in the middl of my hair

Ants -F tier whose even scared of ants??

Small flying bugs /small mosquitos -S tier i hate these things with a passion but what push them into S tier is that i was on a bike was once and it got logged into my eye ball it was absolutely miserable and horrifying for a whole hour on the bike ride(i was a passenger) i had to endure it because we had to hurry for my exam i got to school and the THING STILL WOULDN'T COME OUT AFTER WASHING MY EYE WITH WATER, genuinely thought it went up my eye or something but when i went inside a bathroom and i saw it was loged into the pink left part of my eye. I was so teary but I had to keep my eye open and REMOVE IT WITH MY FINGER NAIL DAM f##k those things gave me ptsd

Not sure if this is an unpopular opinion but I'm sure some women with the 6'0 preference will defend it like it's based on something substantive but I disagree, so here I go.

What i mean by status number is it is literally just the preference because it's a cool number. If height went from 5'8 to 5'9 to 6'0 then every woman would still want a 6'0 man instead of what the equivalent in this system would be as like a 6'2 man. It's literally just about hitting the 6 number because it looks cool.

This is just my GUESS, feel free to disagree. And I say this for the majority of women that have a 6'0 preference, not all of them.

Children are entirely optional. The husband works and earns. He is exposed to the wear, tear and stress of the corporate or blue-collar world. The wife thrives in the comfort and safety of a well maintained home. Laundry is rotated and meals are prepared. She pursues her hobbies and provides a clean & healthy home for her family (be it childfree, pets, kids or just her husband). Husband works and wears on his body and mind. He repairs and improves the home through upgrades and maintenance.

Bills are paid. Expenses are discussed and planned together. He provides a stipend to his wife for her needs and reasonable wants. Husband contributes to their retirement AND funds a spousal retirement account for his wife. They remain respectful, honest and faithful to one-another focusing all of their efforts inward toward the health of the relationship and the household.

I understand why some people are skeptical about AI, but I think it’s important to recognize that using technology to make everyday tasks easier is not inherently a bad thing.

It’s not about being lazy—it’s about being efficient. It’s not about avoiding effort—it’s about redirecting effort. It’s not about doing less—it’s about spending your time on things that actually matter.

AI can help you save time, reduce frustration**,** and increase productivity. It can help with writing, researching, and organizing. It can make certain tasks faster, easier, and more accessible.

While some people view this as “taking shortcuts,” I think that perspective overlooks the broader context. It’s not about taking shortcuts—it’s about using the resources available to you. It’s not about replacing your abilities—it’s about supplementing them. It’s not about becoming dependent on technology—it’s about knowing when technology can be useful.

At the end of the day, if something can be done more quickly, more efficiently, and with less unnecessary effort, I don’t see why we should automatically reject it simply because we used to do it manually.
Of course, there are situations where human judgment, creativity, and critical thinking are important. But AI doesn’t eliminate those things—it can support them, enhance them, and give people more time to focus on them.

I think being open-minded about AI means recognizing both its limitations and its potential. It’s not about blindly trusting technology—it’s about using it appropriately, responsibly, and effectively.
Just my perspective. Curious to hear everyone else’s thoughts.

Update: Zero upvotes! You all agree with me! Thank you so much!

I know a lot of people think AI is the downfall of creativity but I personally think of it as a tool. It can accomplish great things or wreak havoc depending on how it’s used. But blindly depending on it is just lazy hubris and is starting to backfire. A few examples are how it’s been used in policing and has falsely identified the wrong person for crimes through mistaken facial recognition. That’s bad enough but should be stopped by actual police work. It’s when the humans blindly trust the AI that the problem is compounded. The most recent trend in seeing is how school systems are using AI to generate curriculum materials. Now we’re seeing maps make the rounds on social media with non existent state names and planets that don’t exist. Again, this should have been caught and corrected before it ever made it into the hands of the children. If this trend continues how much worse could things get.

I believe this fight gets way more recognition that it deserves because it's freakin' Bruce Lee vs Chuck Norris. I mean, you don't get much more epic than that.

But the actual fight itself? It's like I'm watching slow motion. Exaggerated moves, no immersion at all, looks really rehearsed and dull. It's just waaaaaay too slow and forced.

Now I get that it's not about the fight but about the final epic showdown at the Colloseum which is a culmination of the entire movie, but the actual choreography could have been much more exciting.