The inability to distinguish between creation and creator. It is completely fine to like Harry Potter and still think that J.K.Rowling is nuts. You can dislike Dolly Parton's songs and still appreciate her for the awesome human being she is.
The vast majority of people obviously can't do that for some reason. It's either "both creation and creator are shit" or "both are awesome" and nothing inbetween, to the point that some folks automatically assume you're a climate change denier because you listen to Meatloaf, or do a 180° turn about liking/disliking movies, arts, novels etc. depending on what their authors did IRL. And don't get me started on Nintendo fanboys .... if you tell them you love the Zelda franchise but dislike Nintendo as a company, they'll rip you apart because you're obviously not allowed to have anything else but a single-track blanket opinion about literally everything they ever did.
If you like someone, you are not obligated to support each and every one of their actions, decisions or world views, and if you dislike someone you can (and should IMHO) still appreciate it if they do something good.
Someone else more less touched on this but I think you're missing the point.
I don't know a single person who thinks you can't like someone's art because you dislike the artist. Using your example, I have plenty of friends who grew up with Harry Potter and still absolutely love the series in many ways. However they also think JK Rowling is a piece of shit.
The problem lies in giving a platform to people who, at the very least outspokenly, espouse harmful views, and/or engage in harmful activities. So generally speaking, they tend to take some amount of issue (how much varies person to person) with people continuing to support works from them without some demonstration of change or betterment. In turn, most of us stop consuming their content wholesale, as we don't want to support their actions or views by contributing to their platform and would prefer others do the same.
People like what you're talking about exist, sure. I also think that demographic is nearly exclusively terminally online people, who tend to be quite a bit louder than your average person. Which in turn can skew how commonly held of an opinion something can seem to be.
I donât know a single person who thinks you canât like someoneâs art because you dislike the artist
I know plenty of people like this.
terminally online
Mind if I steal that description? It's perfect â„
As for your comment; I am completely fine with people deciding for themselves that they no longer wish to engage with some creation because its creator sucks - that's a personal choice and I can respect that decision easily.
What I don't get are people who try to force that decision onto others, like going "...but the author is shit, so you HAVE to now hate literally everything they ever did, and if you don't then you're just as bad as them". No, I don't have to do anything of the sort - and that does not mean that I support the world views of the author. It only means that the world view of the creator hasn't ruined the creation for me.
Oh I certainly did not coin that term, so steal away lol
But yeah I definitely get your point. I suppose my only real contention is that I don't personally feel it's as ubiquitous of an opinion as it sounds like you do.
That said, in the case of someone like Jk Rowling I will absolutely bring up the topic should she come up. I have quite a few trans friends, and she has and continues to actively take steps to attack and harm the trans community. Liking the art she has created is one thing, but supporting someone who seeks to invalidate the existence of people, particularly those I care about, and take away essential care is another. I probably won't start a fight about it, unless you're a real shit head, but I take no qualms with standing up about it either.
Quick edit to note that's not directed at you, to be clear. More just continuing to make the distinction I was before.
Quick edit to note thatâs not directed at you, to be clear.
No offense taken, don't worry ;) And I fully agree ... Rowling is a malicious, hateful, spiteful asshole and deserves all the hostility she gets online and IRL for what she said, did and still does. There are no two ways about it.
I don't think you should be upset with someone for liking an artist's work despite their personal life but I've definitely stopped listening to artists for theirs. I'll be half way through the opening verse and remember "oh yeah, this dude's a rapist" and don't want to continue.
On the flip side, I know Jackie Chan has had his fair share of controversy....but I still love his films and on-screen persona.
but Iâve definitely stopped listening to artists for theirs.
That's a personal choice, and I'm completely fine with that. If you can't help but dislike a work of art because it always reminds you of the bad thing its creator did/said, there is no shame in no longer engaging with said art as it won't bring you happiness anymore.
What I don't get are people who go "waaah noo, how DARE you like that song! The singer is an asshole, you have to hate their music now!" ... no, I don't have to. And that does not automatically mean I am okay with what the singer did - it just means that their actions haven't ruined the song for me.
If you pirate their art, I suppose you have a point.
But if you're financially supporting folks who are actively opposed to your existence or the existence of people you care about, that's pretty foolish.
Until JK doesn't make a dime from Harry Potter, your fandom of the IP will financially support her hateful views.
Pretty sure she'd still have those views, even if she was poor. I understand and respect people who decide to boycott certain creators for their political views and statements--I stopped buying Orson Scott Card's books after finding out things he'd said about homosexuality among other things--but I don't think people who oppose a creator's views, but still choose to pay for their work should be shamed for it. When you pay for a product, you're paying for that product and are thus supporting only what went into that product. I think there's more of an issue of hypocrisy in people who have problems with Apple's labor practices in China or their anti-consumer practices, but still buy their products, as those issues are directly linked to said products and therefore their money is inherently rewarding them (but, full disclosure: I'm one of those people, as I own an iPhone). If the Harry Potter books had some anti-trans message in them, that'd be one thing, but I don't think that's the case, is it (I honestly don't know, as I haven't read them)? I think people can still enjoy and financially support the HP IP without tacitly supporting JK Rowling's politics, just as Tesla owners can enjoy their cars without supporting Elon's whacky political views.
--I stopped buying Orson Scott Card's books after finding out things he'd said
I stopped buying new copies of his stuff.
But to my mind, buying used doesn't add support to him nor add to his wealth.
On the other hand, I stopped reading Dilbert because it became unfunny, not because Adams turned out to be a shitty person.
.
I am reminded of people in my parents generation who stopped listening to certain musicians because they were rumored to be gay...
(I honestly donât know, as I havenât read them)
No anti-LGBTIQ content in those books whatsoever. If they did have such a message, then I could understand people hating the author and the books, but as it is, the books do not reflect the world view of the author about this particular topic.
...and on the topic of supporting the author by buying the books (from a different comment); you can buy them secondhand. That way Rowling makes one less sale as secondhand shops, private sellers etc. don't have to pay royalties to her.
Ok? So what If you already bought and read the books, does that mean you'll have to throw them away, burn them, and you're never ever allowed to enjoy the fictional story of Harry Potter ever again because the author is an ass....? Or that by liking the fictional story you automatically support her world view as well, finances aside?
It's the exact thing I described. Yes J.K. Rowling is nuts but that does not mean that you have to hate the Harry Potter books / movies. You can hate the author for what she did and said independendly from the stories she wrote.
Keep the books, cherish 'em. I don't care.
I'm just saying knowingly giving money to hateful people is where folks tend to draw the line. Some folks can still enjoy the art, some folks have their perception of the art tainted by the hateful ideologies of the artist.
You're free to do as you wish, but some folks have trouble separating the art from the artist, and have valid concerns around consuming of art from hateful artists.
I always hated those books when I was a kid before any of the shit about JK came to light - and its cause she's a fucking hack.
Troll, the film from 1986 is a story about Harry Potter and the Potter family where he ends up training along side a witch to defeat evil.
She's a hack and her story blows.
Completely fine with me. shrugs ... in that case you don't like the creation because it's not your cup of tea, and that the author also happens to be an ass is a separate issue. Dfferent people, different preferences.
To me, she was awful for ripping someone off and then the icing on the shit cake is that she's a terf as well.
So I feel very validated in knowing that I was always right about what a piece of absolute trash she is. And always was. Don't know why anyone would want to read some rip off hack book lol
No offense, but just no. If you don't like the art, but the artist that's fine, absolutely no problem here, but supporting a person like J. K. Rowling financially by consuming their creation is actually a problem and should be opposed.
This view is enabling horrible people and not okay.
supporting a person like J. K. Rowling financially
If I already own the books, I'm not going to toss them away just because the author is an ass. It doesn't hurt her anyway. And you can buy books, movies etc. secondhand, as secondhand stores, private sellers and the like don't have to pay royalties to the author. There are plenty of ways to consume their creations without supporting the creator.
That's fine. The problem lies in talking about their works which might encourage others to buy the books or merchandise etc. Unfortunately the best result would be if the work and the author would be forgotten, but that's unlikely to happen. So at least when talking about the works it should never be omitted that the author is a horrible person who abuses her influence to hurt other people.
Hence I disagree with the take. This way around the work should not be separated from the creator, because popularizing it is enabling even if you won't consume any more than what you already have, others might.
We're all so bad at communicating and it is the bottleneck in most relationships, workplaces, and in politics.
We talk past each others when we argue. We're bad at definining the stuff we argue and talk about. We're bad at ignoring the pedantic stuff and focusing on the "spirit" of the argument.
At the workplace I feel the ability to share information to all the relevant parties without it being noisy has never been solved in big corporations. It is either a free-for-all situation where you're expected to read hundred of emails, answer anyone anytime, go in tons of meeting, OR to work in complete silos where you only talk to a supervisor once in a blue moon.
In friendships you have people who talk but don't listen and people who listen and don't talk. Oversharers, bullshiters, people who can't get to the point, people who gives 5 minutes of context and disordered information for every little things. Friends who mumble, or who don't finish half their sentences.
In relationships we let unresolved issues become taboos, and we let petty stuff buildup because we can't addresss it without anyone feeling attacked.
Communication is important, as you've already been told by a poster or an HR person, but I rarely see people actively try to better themselves in that area, nor the corporations I worked at. You won't have anything durable without it, or anything capable of scaling efficiently.
I am probably very bad at it too, for the simple reason that virtually all the people I know are ever good at best at a few aspects of it. I am self-conscious about communicating properly but I too probably suck at it and I have my blind spots just like everyone else. For this reason, this is the thing I hate about everyone, we can't communicate for shit and we don't even realize it most of the time.
What's most frustrating about it is that even when I try to help others see that this is the real cause of friction between us - that poor communication or misunderstanding is the real cause of our arguments, many if not most would still fight me that I'm wrong and they're right and it's like nobody wants to reach a solution, they'd rather forever spin in the accusations
When I ask them a simple question and they answer with at least ten-sentences-long answer.
Jes, I do it too.
I totally get where you're coming from! It can be frustrating when you just want a quick answer to a straightforward question, and instead, you're bombarded with a seemingly endless stream of words. It's like trying to take a sip from a water fountain and getting hit by a firehose, right?
But here's the thing, sometimes those long answers are necessary. Think of it like this: Simple questions might have complex answers hiding beneath the surface. So, when someone provides a lengthy response, they might be trying to give you a complete picture.
Sure, not everyone's a fan of reading a novella in response to "What's the weather like today?" But consider that some people are genuinely passionate about sharing their knowledge or experiences. They might want to make sure you understand the topic thoroughly or provide you with additional context that could be helpful down the line.
It's like when your grandma starts telling you a story about her pet hamster from 30 years ago when all you asked was if she wanted a cup of tea. Annoying at times, sure, but she's just excited to share a piece of her life with you.
The key here is balance. If someone's giving a longer answer than necessary, it might be polite to gently remind them that you were just looking for a quick tidbit of information. But remember, on the other side, there's a real person trying to be helpful or connect with you in some way. So, maybe next time you see a long response to a simple question, take a deep breath, skim through it, and you might just find a hidden gem of knowledge or a new perspective you hadn't considered before!
case in point :)
Didn't even need to ask them a question. They just started talking.
But here's the thing, sometimes those long answers are necessary. Think of it like this: Simple questions might have complex answers hiding beneath the surface.
That's the biggest problem I had with Twitter since day one. It was designed to not allow for nuance or detailed explanations.
âGiving a simple answerâ can get a person yelled at for âlying by omission.â Or yelled at for âwhy didnât you tell me this other detail?!â
On that note, I hate question dodgers. Especially since I work online chatting with customers, and I'll ask them something direct, like "when were you meant to receive this check" and they fucking come back with "So my check is missing"
Like damn, fuckhead. I am already aware your check is missing. Definitely not what I asked. And I can't tell if they are just that brand of dumb or if they're being difficult on purpose.
I had a gf who would answer half my questions with something completely irrelevant. Or if I told her anything remotely like criticism, she'd respond by criticizing or attacking me about something completely irrelevant, and never address what I said, ever, no matter how fair or important it was. Drove me nuts.
I'm impressed that you managed to reach gf level with someone like that.
If I can't get through a conversation with a person it's just like, too frustrating for me. Makes me feel crazy too. Like I know I'm being coherent but talking to someone like that makes me feel like I have to try extra hard to understand them even though they're the ones not making sense.
I'm not sure what it was like when we were first together, though we did drink wine and have some frustrating conversations even then.
Something less pernicious she does is just say things that are really vague, like not using enough words or specific enough words for me to have any idea what she's talking about. For example she'd might ask me "hey, will we have time today to do the other?" and i'd just be like what?? The other WHAT? And it would be something we were talking about the day before. With no context, there's no way at all I could ever have figured out what she meant. Or she'd tell me about news, like "Did you see what happened to him today? They're going to court!" And I'd just be ... WHAT? And it would turn out it wasn't something we were talking about or I was thinking about at all.
Ha ha, a great example just happened yesterday - we're talking about how she's getting her paintings to a show or something and out of nowhere she says "the numbers are looking really good". I was "what numbers?" She says "My numbers!" as if I'd know what that means. Sometimes I just ignore the bizarre out of context statements, but it's also really frustrating so I asked "WHAT NUMBERS? What does that mean??" "Oh, my social media views". Okay... maybe just say that in the first place.
Trying to do projects together was pure hell, or if she needed help with her computer, she'd say something like "the files all doubled up!" A lot of people are pretty bad at describing software issues though.
Some people are better/worse with this than others.
I remember when I was training for something in school, I dreaded asking my professor a question even though I really needed to. He would go into 10 minute long tirades and never really answer the question.
Every single time...
If you want someone to give you a simple answer ask them a close ended question.
For example, "Should I do A or B?" If you ask for "this or that" it is clear to the listener that you considered your options already and have invested sufficient thought to your question. Therefore they can just offer you their opinion as it is asked.
If you ask "What should I do?" The listener has no idea where your head is at so it feels like their job to justify their answer.
Alternatively if you ask A or B and the correct answer is C then the listener may feel the need to correct your understanding because you asked for their assistance. The same teach a man to fish vs give a man a fish analogy applies here. Noone wants to repeatedly fish for the peraon too lazy to learn.
For example, âShould I do A or B?â If you ask for âthis or thatâ it is clear to the listener that you considered your options already and have invested sufficient thought to your question. Therefore they can just offer you their opinion as it is asked.
Ask customer if it's this or that - they respond with just "yes"
You underestimate how stupid the general public truly is.
Exceptions exist to every rule.
If someone responds like that they've said a lot (about themseleves)in very few words. It is still helpful.
Who would ever do something like that?
Me? I totally don't! I'm a paragon of succinctness, here's why: [insert 40 sentences explanation filled with 20 examples]
When I ask a simple question and get a ten-paragraph answer that has nothing to do with the actual question.
How easily it is to normalize hate and violence to almost any human.
Because that's the default. We have to learn to be better.
I'd argue the opposite. Kids aren't born hating anyone different from them. They are taught "anyone with that skin color/gender/sexuality/religion/etc is inferior to you and you should hate them."
The big problem is that hatred can be passed down. My father's racist. Not in a "hang all black people" way, but more in a "I can't be racist because I have a black friend but black people should act more like white people" way. Growing up, I started taking on his beliefs (as young kids often do).
At one point, I made a very insensitive joke in class about a religion and the kid sitting behind me said that he was in that religion. Now, I don't know if he was or wasn't, but it was eye opening to me. I realized what I was doing and didn't like it. I took the time and effort to root out my prejudices.
It wasn't easy. Even now, over 30 years later, I'll occasionally realize that some action I'm taking is driven by prejudice. Still, I've rooted out many prejudices that otherwise would have made me into just as big of a bigot as my father. And my kids go even further than my at being accepting of others. One of many reasons I'm proud of them.
Hatred doesn't come naturally. It is taught. Luckily, it can be "unlearned" if the person is willing to do the work and acceptance can be taught/reinforced also.
Racism is artificial, sure, because race is artificial.
But violence? Violence is the state of nature. You can see it in small children, and in those that are poorly socialized. Cooperation is natural for us, but true eusicial behavior? It's an ongoing project.
Nothing indicates thatâs the default⊠we had less war and violence before the emergence of the nation state and hierarchical power structures.
Ah, the old "noble savage" canard.
What..? The ânoble savagesâ are indigenous peoples and itâs a modern idea.
What the fuck what I said has anything to do with that?
Are you saying all non-statist and hierarchical societies are like American indigenous peoples? Or that all American indigenous peoples were stateless or egalitarian? Both are extremely wrong.
Just so you know, I was referring to civilisations like the Indus Valley Civilisation and Cucateni Trypillia. Not ânoble savagesâ AT ALLâŠ
Noise.
This one really gets me. Makes me feel like a cranky old asshole, but I find myself regularly thinking (all directed at my neighbors):
âDo you really need to slam the front door on your way out every day?â
âDo you really need to slam the car door every time you get in and out?â
âDoes your meaningless 3 hour phone conversation really need to be on speaker for the whole neighborhood to hear?â
âAre you an elephant? Or is there a reason you canât walk across the apartment without banging each foot like you have a vendetta against the floor?â
I could go on and on.
Me, I'm hard of hearing and probably have undiagnosed ADHD. You may have heard of auditory stimming: basically, that the ability to make noise that one can hear helps regulate dopamine production. I need to hear the door close to feel like I closed it. Hearing my own footsteps allows me to take my concentration off walking without falling over. I sing more-or-less constantly.
I stopped living in apartments ASAP because I didn't want to inconvenience those around me, but I can't just "be quiet" unless I'm actively concentrating on it the whole time.
People who use speakerphone in public were raised wrong, though.
I totally understand this, and it makes a lot of sense. But your type of behavior is not the problem. You are aware of this fact about yourself, so you avoid living in apartments. That makes you a considerate and thoughtful human being. I appreciate you, and wish my neighbors were like you (by leaving lol).
The shit Iâm dealing with is at all times of day and night and is from all my neighbors, all of whom are very different people. The sounds are extreme, startlingly loud, and are clearly because of their lack of consideration. Iâm continually dismayed that theyâre so oblivious of their surroundings.
Mate, now I want you as my neighbor.
Can you be my neighbor? Let's buy a lot somewhere lmao
We would be like ninjas (almost)
I had a girlfriend who would slam the fuck out of the toilet lid every time she used it. Not like, extra force, as far as i could tell, just let it drop from vertical to close. Super loud. It was ruining the hinges... I asked her over and over to please stop doing that. No change... I was set to install cork bumpers and she insisted NO, can't do that. Okay... so stop slamming it? A year later, still every single time.
Especially when it's comes from their mouth from chewing food.
Dualistic thinking. The idea that things must be either good or bad, true or false, normal or perverse.
False dichotomy is humanity's favorite logical fallacy.
It is the fuel of religion.
I hate that many people idolise other people.
It's possible to like some of the work of somebody without idolising them and blindly listening to or following absolutely everything they do.
Elon Musk is the best example: SpaceX has some really cool ideas (Falcon 9, Starship, Starlink) and Tesla made EVs palatable to car enthusiasts, which is an important step.
But on the whole he is an absolute piece of shit with a fragile ego.
That's a great example, I was prompted by the Fluke Skywalker stuff going on, But there are plenty of times when people who are famous for something are found to fall short. Then you get this outpouring of grief and disappointment, It happens enough that people should know better really.
That we all think we're far more in control of ourselves than we are. Yes, including me. A person isn't in charge of the self, even a majority. Not by a long shot. We're the smartest monkeys in the room, but we're still monkeys. None of us are fully rational robots, but a lot of us pretend we are.
I think irrationality is evidence of our control if anything. Animals are generally more rational than us (I say this as someone who hates people who worship rationality.)
I don't think animals are completely emotionless, but a lot more of what other animals do can be explained by survival instinct than humans.
We do not keep planets very well.
Mass hysteria/idiocy, like how easy it is for a crowd to drop logic and reason and be worked up into a frenzy because some populist/talking head/anonymous online account is telling them what to think or manipulating them with a bunch of half truths.
This is why we can't have nice things.
That in times of conflict, human nature, the default mindset of humans, is often used as a crutch like a medical condition would be, and that we simultaneously still consider ourselves persons as we define persons as members of the moral community, the same one we use human nature to excuse ourselves for violating.
The fallacy of the middle ground. This is where most 'centrists' fall.
That's interesting, because I was going to say I hate how a lot of people are very susceptible to extremism and binary thinking.
Agreed, but some solutions have a fairly binary answer. Extremism is a huge problem, but that is part on centrists tolerating intolerance and not taking a stance. There is no middle ground for racist ideology. There is no room for it in society. The answer to "I believe the Jews should be exterminated" is simply opposing it, "Jewish people have a right to maintain and cultivate themselves and their culture. To put it simply, for someone who wishes complete death for the Jews, the answer is not the middle ground. You cannot compromise and say "how about we kill half a Jew only?". This example is stupid and has lots of flaws, but I just came off of night shift.
There is no middle ground for racist ideology.
Perhaps, but what counts as an expression of âracist ideology?â Itâs usually not as simple as the true extremists make it. Is a comedian making that tired old joke about how Black people fought to be able to sit at the front of the bus and now they all sit at the back racist? Howâs about when a Black person cals a White person a cracker? What about when White people say the word removed when talking about the word historically? I work with the poor and mentally ill (therapist), and I have plenty of clients who have made generalized statements about the other racial groups they share their neighborhoods with, but they wouldnât consider those statements racist, because in their experience theyâre true, and they canât be racist if theyâre factual, right?
95% of the racist content out there is not so easy to discern and we as a society agree far less on it than our academics and news organizations suggest.
Their snot
The inefficiency.
Why the fuck are we walking so goddamn slow?
Why can't you eat faster?
Oh god, don't make me watch you not use keyboard shortcuts.
Why is everyone living like they want to be here in this goddamned line more than anything else in life?
Why the fuck are we walking so goddamn slow?
I also walk fast all the time but I am trying to be a little slower so I don't get sweaty while going places. Maybe it's like that for other people as well. What I don't understand is why so many people seem to be completely oblivious to their surroundings and the way they block the path for other people.
Why canât you eat faster?
Some people like to enjoy their food.
Oh god, donât make me watch you not use keyboard shortcuts.
I can actually get behind this one.
Why is everyone living like they want to be here in this goddamned line more than anything else in life?
I'm unable to decypher what exactly you are complaining about here. What line are you talking about?
People slowly going about their lives in every manner instead of doing everything as quick as possible so you can get back home and be alone for longer.
Yes. This.
for some folks that's full power / max speed.
other folks are just happy to be out and about.
not my preferred way but I get that for some people it's their reality.
Some calendar days were created by companies out to make money, others by organizations trying desperately to raise awareness for their worthwhile cause.
The end result is often the same, jump on the bandwagon for one day to be seen as doing good or being good, then hop off and return to business as usual.
There's a calendar day coming up that every year makes my life worse. For one day a year, acquaintances ask me a question, don't care about or listen to my answer, and then go back to ignoring me for another year. Oh but hurrah for them, they did the thing they normally wouldn't because social media gives them warm fuzzies for announcing they did the thing. They don't even remember the questions or answers, for them, it was a thing to do, instead of being a better caring person for the other 364 days.
Saturday, September 16th is Batman Day. And everyone asks "wouldn't a billionaire help more by using his wealth than his fists?" right before they get the smack.
Apologies are always forced or insincere. Nobody finds themselves in the wrong on their own anymore.
Well there are those of us who just feel we've done the wrong thing all the time and practically apologise just for existing. Not that that's better.
100%
I immediately gain respect for people who matter-of-factly admit when theyâre wrong and apologize for doing or saying something that warrants an apology. I think itâs a sign of an emotionally mature and self-confident person. You donât lose anything by admitting an error or fault, it fact you gain perspective and knowledge that helps you develop as a person, while giving credit to the person who knew the right thing. Everybody wins.
Not always, but most from the majority of public figures tend to be.
Can't they just fucking read AND comprehend.
If people would not just read things but also use some brain power to comprehend the words they just read, then the world would be a few percentage points smarter overall.
Also while they are at it, observe the world you are living in. People ask stupid questions all the time because they don't open their eyes and take in the world for a few seconds. "where is the bathroom?" As they ignore the sign. "What time does the bus come?" As they ignore the printed schedule. "How do you open this hatch?" As the arrows point to the handle.
I've honestly been astounded at how much of the population appears to be functionally illiterate. You tell them how to spell a url and they're more likely to just hand you the phone because that's hard.
I sometimes wonder if that'll be what's left - illiterate masses cared for by a few not-quite-dumb bastards that can work a can opener or read the instructions on the pump.
That they're people....
At the end of the day, we're all just out for ourselves. There aren't any (or many) truly selfless acts.
Every favor comes with some sort of price. Which is why I never ask of anything from anyone and I hate when people ask anything of me.
Weâre out for ourselves, yea. But weâre also out for each other, because we like or need each other. Thinking about things transactionally, that cynicism to avoid getting tricked or hurt⊠I donât think thatâs conducive to good relationships or a happy life.
Every favor comes with some sort of price.
This isn't a bad thing. Psychology has shown us that doing favors for someone makes us feel closer to them. Not the asker towards the doer, the other way around. And it's only natural for the doer to balance their own needs against what's being asked, and to expect some sort of reciprocity in the future. This is how trust and relationships are built, at least in primates.
Damn humans, they ruined humanity!
Culture is generally very low, look how people use their fucking smartphones.
I witnessed people watching tok tok shorts with their speakers blasting low quality audio on repeat in the following situations:
when hanging out with a group of friends
in the bus/tram/commuter train
THE FUCKING CINEMA
Why can't people just use headphones?
Narcissism. I donât give a fuck about your vacation. Or your dinner. Or that your kid won the spelling bee. No, I donât want to see your facetube or insta or whatever the fuck. Go find your validation in something real.
The inability to distinguish between creation and creator. It is completely fine to like Harry Potter and still think that J.K.Rowling is nuts. You can dislike Dolly Parton's songs and still appreciate her for the awesome human being she is.
The vast majority of people obviously can't do that for some reason. It's either "both creation and creator are shit" or "both are awesome" and nothing inbetween, to the point that some folks automatically assume you're a climate change denier because you listen to Meatloaf, or do a 180° turn about liking/disliking movies, arts, novels etc. depending on what their authors did IRL. And don't get me started on Nintendo fanboys .... if you tell them you love the Zelda franchise but dislike Nintendo as a company, they'll rip you apart because you're obviously not allowed to have anything else but a single-track blanket opinion about literally everything they ever did.
If you like someone, you are not obligated to support each and every one of their actions, decisions or world views, and if you dislike someone you can (and should IMHO) still appreciate it if they do something good.
Someone else more less touched on this but I think you're missing the point.
I don't know a single person who thinks you can't like someone's art because you dislike the artist. Using your example, I have plenty of friends who grew up with Harry Potter and still absolutely love the series in many ways. However they also think JK Rowling is a piece of shit.
The problem lies in giving a platform to people who, at the very least outspokenly, espouse harmful views, and/or engage in harmful activities. So generally speaking, they tend to take some amount of issue (how much varies person to person) with people continuing to support works from them without some demonstration of change or betterment. In turn, most of us stop consuming their content wholesale, as we don't want to support their actions or views by contributing to their platform and would prefer others do the same.
People like what you're talking about exist, sure. I also think that demographic is nearly exclusively terminally online people, who tend to be quite a bit louder than your average person. Which in turn can skew how commonly held of an opinion something can seem to be.
I know plenty of people like this.
Mind if I steal that description? It's perfect â„
As for your comment; I am completely fine with people deciding for themselves that they no longer wish to engage with some creation because its creator sucks - that's a personal choice and I can respect that decision easily.
What I don't get are people who try to force that decision onto others, like going "...but the author is shit, so you HAVE to now hate literally everything they ever did, and if you don't then you're just as bad as them". No, I don't have to do anything of the sort - and that does not mean that I support the world views of the author. It only means that the world view of the creator hasn't ruined the creation for me.
Oh I certainly did not coin that term, so steal away lol
But yeah I definitely get your point. I suppose my only real contention is that I don't personally feel it's as ubiquitous of an opinion as it sounds like you do.
That said, in the case of someone like Jk Rowling I will absolutely bring up the topic should she come up. I have quite a few trans friends, and she has and continues to actively take steps to attack and harm the trans community. Liking the art she has created is one thing, but supporting someone who seeks to invalidate the existence of people, particularly those I care about, and take away essential care is another. I probably won't start a fight about it, unless you're a real shit head, but I take no qualms with standing up about it either.
Quick edit to note that's not directed at you, to be clear. More just continuing to make the distinction I was before.
No offense taken, don't worry ;) And I fully agree ... Rowling is a malicious, hateful, spiteful asshole and deserves all the hostility she gets online and IRL for what she said, did and still does. There are no two ways about it.
I don't think you should be upset with someone for liking an artist's work despite their personal life but I've definitely stopped listening to artists for theirs. I'll be half way through the opening verse and remember "oh yeah, this dude's a rapist" and don't want to continue.
On the flip side, I know Jackie Chan has had his fair share of controversy....but I still love his films and on-screen persona.
That's a personal choice, and I'm completely fine with that. If you can't help but dislike a work of art because it always reminds you of the bad thing its creator did/said, there is no shame in no longer engaging with said art as it won't bring you happiness anymore.
What I don't get are people who go "waaah noo, how DARE you like that song! The singer is an asshole, you have to hate their music now!" ... no, I don't have to. And that does not automatically mean I am okay with what the singer did - it just means that their actions haven't ruined the song for me.
If you pirate their art, I suppose you have a point.
But if you're financially supporting folks who are actively opposed to your existence or the existence of people you care about, that's pretty foolish.
Harry Potter is the only reason folks care about J.K. Rowling. However, her words outside of her books have influenced politics and have hurt marginalized folks.
Because she's making money, she doesn't care.
Until JK doesn't make a dime from Harry Potter, your fandom of the IP will financially support her hateful views.
Pretty sure she'd still have those views, even if she was poor. I understand and respect people who decide to boycott certain creators for their political views and statements--I stopped buying Orson Scott Card's books after finding out things he'd said about homosexuality among other things--but I don't think people who oppose a creator's views, but still choose to pay for their work should be shamed for it. When you pay for a product, you're paying for that product and are thus supporting only what went into that product. I think there's more of an issue of hypocrisy in people who have problems with Apple's labor practices in China or their anti-consumer practices, but still buy their products, as those issues are directly linked to said products and therefore their money is inherently rewarding them (but, full disclosure: I'm one of those people, as I own an iPhone). If the Harry Potter books had some anti-trans message in them, that'd be one thing, but I don't think that's the case, is it (I honestly don't know, as I haven't read them)? I think people can still enjoy and financially support the HP IP without tacitly supporting JK Rowling's politics, just as Tesla owners can enjoy their cars without supporting Elon's whacky political views.
I stopped buying new copies of his stuff.
But to my mind, buying used doesn't add support to him nor add to his wealth.
On the other hand, I stopped reading Dilbert because it became unfunny, not because Adams turned out to be a shitty person.
.
I am reminded of people in my parents generation who stopped listening to certain musicians because they were rumored to be gay...
No anti-LGBTIQ content in those books whatsoever. If they did have such a message, then I could understand people hating the author and the books, but as it is, the books do not reflect the world view of the author about this particular topic.
...and on the topic of supporting the author by buying the books (from a different comment); you can buy them secondhand. That way Rowling makes one less sale as secondhand shops, private sellers etc. don't have to pay royalties to her.
Ok? So what If you already bought and read the books, does that mean you'll have to throw them away, burn them, and you're never ever allowed to enjoy the fictional story of Harry Potter ever again because the author is an ass....? Or that by liking the fictional story you automatically support her world view as well, finances aside?
It's the exact thing I described. Yes J.K. Rowling is nuts but that does not mean that you have to hate the Harry Potter books / movies. You can hate the author for what she did and said independendly from the stories she wrote.
Keep the books, cherish 'em. I don't care.
I'm just saying knowingly giving money to hateful people is where folks tend to draw the line. Some folks can still enjoy the art, some folks have their perception of the art tainted by the hateful ideologies of the artist.
You're free to do as you wish, but some folks have trouble separating the art from the artist, and have valid concerns around consuming of art from hateful artists.
I always hated those books when I was a kid before any of the shit about JK came to light - and its cause she's a fucking hack.
Troll, the film from 1986 is a story about Harry Potter and the Potter family where he ends up training along side a witch to defeat evil.
She's a hack and her story blows.
Completely fine with me. shrugs ... in that case you don't like the creation because it's not your cup of tea, and that the author also happens to be an ass is a separate issue. Dfferent people, different preferences.
To me, she was awful for ripping someone off and then the icing on the shit cake is that she's a terf as well.
So I feel very validated in knowing that I was always right about what a piece of absolute trash she is. And always was. Don't know why anyone would want to read some rip off hack book lol
No offense, but just no. If you don't like the art, but the artist that's fine, absolutely no problem here, but supporting a person like J. K. Rowling financially by consuming their creation is actually a problem and should be opposed.
This view is enabling horrible people and not okay.
If I already own the books, I'm not going to toss them away just because the author is an ass. It doesn't hurt her anyway. And you can buy books, movies etc. secondhand, as secondhand stores, private sellers and the like don't have to pay royalties to the author. There are plenty of ways to consume their creations without supporting the creator.
That's fine. The problem lies in talking about their works which might encourage others to buy the books or merchandise etc. Unfortunately the best result would be if the work and the author would be forgotten, but that's unlikely to happen. So at least when talking about the works it should never be omitted that the author is a horrible person who abuses her influence to hurt other people.
Hence I disagree with the take. This way around the work should not be separated from the creator, because popularizing it is enabling even if you won't consume any more than what you already have, others might.
We're all so bad at communicating and it is the bottleneck in most relationships, workplaces, and in politics.
We talk past each others when we argue. We're bad at definining the stuff we argue and talk about. We're bad at ignoring the pedantic stuff and focusing on the "spirit" of the argument.
At the workplace I feel the ability to share information to all the relevant parties without it being noisy has never been solved in big corporations. It is either a free-for-all situation where you're expected to read hundred of emails, answer anyone anytime, go in tons of meeting, OR to work in complete silos where you only talk to a supervisor once in a blue moon.
In friendships you have people who talk but don't listen and people who listen and don't talk. Oversharers, bullshiters, people who can't get to the point, people who gives 5 minutes of context and disordered information for every little things. Friends who mumble, or who don't finish half their sentences.
In relationships we let unresolved issues become taboos, and we let petty stuff buildup because we can't addresss it without anyone feeling attacked.
Communication is important, as you've already been told by a poster or an HR person, but I rarely see people actively try to better themselves in that area, nor the corporations I worked at. You won't have anything durable without it, or anything capable of scaling efficiently.
I am probably very bad at it too, for the simple reason that virtually all the people I know are ever good at best at a few aspects of it. I am self-conscious about communicating properly but I too probably suck at it and I have my blind spots just like everyone else. For this reason, this is the thing I hate about everyone, we can't communicate for shit and we don't even realize it most of the time.
What's most frustrating about it is that even when I try to help others see that this is the real cause of friction between us - that poor communication or misunderstanding is the real cause of our arguments, many if not most would still fight me that I'm wrong and they're right and it's like nobody wants to reach a solution, they'd rather forever spin in the accusations
When I ask them a simple question and they answer with at least ten-sentences-long answer.
Jes, I do it too.
I totally get where you're coming from! It can be frustrating when you just want a quick answer to a straightforward question, and instead, you're bombarded with a seemingly endless stream of words. It's like trying to take a sip from a water fountain and getting hit by a firehose, right?
But here's the thing, sometimes those long answers are necessary. Think of it like this: Simple questions might have complex answers hiding beneath the surface. So, when someone provides a lengthy response, they might be trying to give you a complete picture.
Sure, not everyone's a fan of reading a novella in response to "What's the weather like today?" But consider that some people are genuinely passionate about sharing their knowledge or experiences. They might want to make sure you understand the topic thoroughly or provide you with additional context that could be helpful down the line.
It's like when your grandma starts telling you a story about her pet hamster from 30 years ago when all you asked was if she wanted a cup of tea. Annoying at times, sure, but she's just excited to share a piece of her life with you.
The key here is balance. If someone's giving a longer answer than necessary, it might be polite to gently remind them that you were just looking for a quick tidbit of information. But remember, on the other side, there's a real person trying to be helpful or connect with you in some way. So, maybe next time you see a long response to a simple question, take a deep breath, skim through it, and you might just find a hidden gem of knowledge or a new perspective you hadn't considered before!
case in point :)
Didn't even need to ask them a question. They just started talking.
That's the biggest problem I had with Twitter since day one. It was designed to not allow for nuance or detailed explanations.
âGiving a simple answerâ can get a person yelled at for âlying by omission.â Or yelled at for âwhy didnât you tell me this other detail?!â
On that note, I hate question dodgers. Especially since I work online chatting with customers, and I'll ask them something direct, like "when were you meant to receive this check" and they fucking come back with "So my check is missing"
Like damn, fuckhead. I am already aware your check is missing. Definitely not what I asked. And I can't tell if they are just that brand of dumb or if they're being difficult on purpose.
I had a gf who would answer half my questions with something completely irrelevant. Or if I told her anything remotely like criticism, she'd respond by criticizing or attacking me about something completely irrelevant, and never address what I said, ever, no matter how fair or important it was. Drove me nuts.
I'm impressed that you managed to reach gf level with someone like that.
If I can't get through a conversation with a person it's just like, too frustrating for me. Makes me feel crazy too. Like I know I'm being coherent but talking to someone like that makes me feel like I have to try extra hard to understand them even though they're the ones not making sense.
I'm not sure what it was like when we were first together, though we did drink wine and have some frustrating conversations even then.
Something less pernicious she does is just say things that are really vague, like not using enough words or specific enough words for me to have any idea what she's talking about. For example she'd might ask me "hey, will we have time today to do the other?" and i'd just be like what?? The other WHAT? And it would be something we were talking about the day before. With no context, there's no way at all I could ever have figured out what she meant. Or she'd tell me about news, like "Did you see what happened to him today? They're going to court!" And I'd just be ... WHAT? And it would turn out it wasn't something we were talking about or I was thinking about at all.
Ha ha, a great example just happened yesterday - we're talking about how she's getting her paintings to a show or something and out of nowhere she says "the numbers are looking really good". I was "what numbers?" She says "My numbers!" as if I'd know what that means. Sometimes I just ignore the bizarre out of context statements, but it's also really frustrating so I asked "WHAT NUMBERS? What does that mean??" "Oh, my social media views". Okay... maybe just say that in the first place.
Trying to do projects together was pure hell, or if she needed help with her computer, she'd say something like "the files all doubled up!" A lot of people are pretty bad at describing software issues though.
Some people are better/worse with this than others.
I remember when I was training for something in school, I dreaded asking my professor a question even though I really needed to. He would go into 10 minute long tirades and never really answer the question.
Every single time...
If you want someone to give you a simple answer ask them a close ended question.
For example, "Should I do A or B?" If you ask for "this or that" it is clear to the listener that you considered your options already and have invested sufficient thought to your question. Therefore they can just offer you their opinion as it is asked.
If you ask "What should I do?" The listener has no idea where your head is at so it feels like their job to justify their answer.
Alternatively if you ask A or B and the correct answer is C then the listener may feel the need to correct your understanding because you asked for their assistance. The same teach a man to fish vs give a man a fish analogy applies here. Noone wants to repeatedly fish for the peraon too lazy to learn.
Ask customer if it's this or that - they respond with just "yes"
You underestimate how stupid the general public truly is.
Exceptions exist to every rule.
If someone responds like that they've said a lot (about themseleves)in very few words. It is still helpful.
Who would ever do something like that?
Me? I totally don't! I'm a paragon of succinctness, here's why: [insert 40 sentences explanation filled with 20 examples]
When I ask a simple question and get a ten-paragraph answer that has nothing to do with the actual question.
How easily it is to normalize hate and violence to almost any human.
Because that's the default. We have to learn to be better.
I'd argue the opposite. Kids aren't born hating anyone different from them. They are taught "anyone with that skin color/gender/sexuality/religion/etc is inferior to you and you should hate them."
The big problem is that hatred can be passed down. My father's racist. Not in a "hang all black people" way, but more in a "I can't be racist because I have a black friend but black people should act more like white people" way. Growing up, I started taking on his beliefs (as young kids often do).
At one point, I made a very insensitive joke in class about a religion and the kid sitting behind me said that he was in that religion. Now, I don't know if he was or wasn't, but it was eye opening to me. I realized what I was doing and didn't like it. I took the time and effort to root out my prejudices.
It wasn't easy. Even now, over 30 years later, I'll occasionally realize that some action I'm taking is driven by prejudice. Still, I've rooted out many prejudices that otherwise would have made me into just as big of a bigot as my father. And my kids go even further than my at being accepting of others. One of many reasons I'm proud of them.
Hatred doesn't come naturally. It is taught. Luckily, it can be "unlearned" if the person is willing to do the work and acceptance can be taught/reinforced also.
Racism is artificial, sure, because race is artificial.
But violence? Violence is the state of nature. You can see it in small children, and in those that are poorly socialized. Cooperation is natural for us, but true eusicial behavior? It's an ongoing project.
Nothing indicates thatâs the default⊠we had less war and violence before the emergence of the nation state and hierarchical power structures.
Ah, the old "noble savage" canard.
What..? The ânoble savagesâ are indigenous peoples and itâs a modern idea.
What the fuck what I said has anything to do with that?
Are you saying all non-statist and hierarchical societies are like American indigenous peoples? Or that all American indigenous peoples were stateless or egalitarian? Both are extremely wrong.
Just so you know, I was referring to civilisations like the Indus Valley Civilisation and Cucateni Trypillia. Not ânoble savagesâ AT ALLâŠ
Noise.
This one really gets me. Makes me feel like a cranky old asshole, but I find myself regularly thinking (all directed at my neighbors):
âDo you really need to slam the front door on your way out every day?â
âDo you really need to slam the car door every time you get in and out?â
âDoes your meaningless 3 hour phone conversation really need to be on speaker for the whole neighborhood to hear?â
âAre you an elephant? Or is there a reason you canât walk across the apartment without banging each foot like you have a vendetta against the floor?â
I could go on and on.
Me, I'm hard of hearing and probably have undiagnosed ADHD. You may have heard of auditory stimming: basically, that the ability to make noise that one can hear helps regulate dopamine production. I need to hear the door close to feel like I closed it. Hearing my own footsteps allows me to take my concentration off walking without falling over. I sing more-or-less constantly.
I stopped living in apartments ASAP because I didn't want to inconvenience those around me, but I can't just "be quiet" unless I'm actively concentrating on it the whole time.
People who use speakerphone in public were raised wrong, though.
I totally understand this, and it makes a lot of sense. But your type of behavior is not the problem. You are aware of this fact about yourself, so you avoid living in apartments. That makes you a considerate and thoughtful human being. I appreciate you, and wish my neighbors were like you (by leaving lol).
The shit Iâm dealing with is at all times of day and night and is from all my neighbors, all of whom are very different people. The sounds are extreme, startlingly loud, and are clearly because of their lack of consideration. Iâm continually dismayed that theyâre so oblivious of their surroundings.
Mate, now I want you as my neighbor.
Can you be my neighbor? Let's buy a lot somewhere lmao
We would be like ninjas (almost)
I had a girlfriend who would slam the fuck out of the toilet lid every time she used it. Not like, extra force, as far as i could tell, just let it drop from vertical to close. Super loud. It was ruining the hinges... I asked her over and over to please stop doing that. No change... I was set to install cork bumpers and she insisted NO, can't do that. Okay... so stop slamming it? A year later, still every single time.
Especially when it's comes from their mouth from chewing food.
Dualistic thinking. The idea that things must be either good or bad, true or false, normal or perverse.
False dichotomy is humanity's favorite logical fallacy.
It is the fuel of religion.
I hate that many people idolise other people.
It's possible to like some of the work of somebody without idolising them and blindly listening to or following absolutely everything they do.
Elon Musk is the best example: SpaceX has some really cool ideas (Falcon 9, Starship, Starlink) and Tesla made EVs palatable to car enthusiasts, which is an important step.
But on the whole he is an absolute piece of shit with a fragile ego.
That's a great example, I was prompted by the Fluke Skywalker stuff going on, But there are plenty of times when people who are famous for something are found to fall short. Then you get this outpouring of grief and disappointment, It happens enough that people should know better really.
That we all think we're far more in control of ourselves than we are. Yes, including me. A person isn't in charge of the self, even a majority. Not by a long shot. We're the smartest monkeys in the room, but we're still monkeys. None of us are fully rational robots, but a lot of us pretend we are.
I think irrationality is evidence of our control if anything. Animals are generally more rational than us (I say this as someone who hates people who worship rationality.)
I don't think animals are completely emotionless, but a lot more of what other animals do can be explained by survival instinct than humans.
We do not keep planets very well.
Mass hysteria/idiocy, like how easy it is for a crowd to drop logic and reason and be worked up into a frenzy because some populist/talking head/anonymous online account is telling them what to think or manipulating them with a bunch of half truths.
This is why we can't have nice things.
That in times of conflict, human nature, the default mindset of humans, is often used as a crutch like a medical condition would be, and that we simultaneously still consider ourselves persons as we define persons as members of the moral community, the same one we use human nature to excuse ourselves for violating.
The fallacy of the middle ground. This is where most 'centrists' fall.
That's interesting, because I was going to say I hate how a lot of people are very susceptible to extremism and binary thinking.
Agreed, but some solutions have a fairly binary answer. Extremism is a huge problem, but that is part on centrists tolerating intolerance and not taking a stance. There is no middle ground for racist ideology. There is no room for it in society. The answer to "I believe the Jews should be exterminated" is simply opposing it, "Jewish people have a right to maintain and cultivate themselves and their culture. To put it simply, for someone who wishes complete death for the Jews, the answer is not the middle ground. You cannot compromise and say "how about we kill half a Jew only?". This example is stupid and has lots of flaws, but I just came off of night shift.
Perhaps, but what counts as an expression of âracist ideology?â Itâs usually not as simple as the true extremists make it. Is a comedian making that tired old joke about how Black people fought to be able to sit at the front of the bus and now they all sit at the back racist? Howâs about when a Black person cals a White person a cracker? What about when White people say the word removed when talking about the word historically? I work with the poor and mentally ill (therapist), and I have plenty of clients who have made generalized statements about the other racial groups they share their neighborhoods with, but they wouldnât consider those statements racist, because in their experience theyâre true, and they canât be racist if theyâre factual, right?
95% of the racist content out there is not so easy to discern and we as a society agree far less on it than our academics and news organizations suggest.
Their snot
The inefficiency. Why the fuck are we walking so goddamn slow? Why can't you eat faster? Oh god, don't make me watch you not use keyboard shortcuts. Why is everyone living like they want to be here in this goddamned line more than anything else in life?
I also walk fast all the time but I am trying to be a little slower so I don't get sweaty while going places. Maybe it's like that for other people as well. What I don't understand is why so many people seem to be completely oblivious to their surroundings and the way they block the path for other people.
Some people like to enjoy their food.
I can actually get behind this one.
I'm unable to decypher what exactly you are complaining about here. What line are you talking about?
People slowly going about their lives in every manner instead of doing everything as quick as possible so you can get back home and be alone for longer.
Yes. This.
for some folks that's full power / max speed.
other folks are just happy to be out and about.
not my preferred way but I get that for some people it's their reality.
The hypocrisy of caring and Hallmark holidays.
Some calendar days were created by companies out to make money, others by organizations trying desperately to raise awareness for their worthwhile cause.
The end result is often the same, jump on the bandwagon for one day to be seen as doing good or being good, then hop off and return to business as usual.
There's a calendar day coming up that every year makes my life worse. For one day a year, acquaintances ask me a question, don't care about or listen to my answer, and then go back to ignoring me for another year. Oh but hurrah for them, they did the thing they normally wouldn't because social media gives them warm fuzzies for announcing they did the thing. They don't even remember the questions or answers, for them, it was a thing to do, instead of being a better caring person for the other 364 days.
Saturday, September 16th is Batman Day. And everyone asks "wouldn't a billionaire help more by using his wealth than his fists?" right before they get the smack.
Apologies are always forced or insincere. Nobody finds themselves in the wrong on their own anymore.
Well there are those of us who just feel we've done the wrong thing all the time and practically apologise just for existing. Not that that's better.
100%
I immediately gain respect for people who matter-of-factly admit when theyâre wrong and apologize for doing or saying something that warrants an apology. I think itâs a sign of an emotionally mature and self-confident person. You donât lose anything by admitting an error or fault, it fact you gain perspective and knowledge that helps you develop as a person, while giving credit to the person who knew the right thing. Everybody wins.
Not always, but most from the majority of public figures tend to be.
Can't they just fucking read AND comprehend.
If people would not just read things but also use some brain power to comprehend the words they just read, then the world would be a few percentage points smarter overall.
Also while they are at it, observe the world you are living in. People ask stupid questions all the time because they don't open their eyes and take in the world for a few seconds. "where is the bathroom?" As they ignore the sign. "What time does the bus come?" As they ignore the printed schedule. "How do you open this hatch?" As the arrows point to the handle.
I've honestly been astounded at how much of the population appears to be functionally illiterate. You tell them how to spell a url and they're more likely to just hand you the phone because that's hard.
I sometimes wonder if that'll be what's left - illiterate masses cared for by a few not-quite-dumb bastards that can work a can opener or read the instructions on the pump.
That they're people....
At the end of the day, we're all just out for ourselves. There aren't any (or many) truly selfless acts.
Every favor comes with some sort of price. Which is why I never ask of anything from anyone and I hate when people ask anything of me.
Weâre out for ourselves, yea. But weâre also out for each other, because we like or need each other. Thinking about things transactionally, that cynicism to avoid getting tricked or hurt⊠I donât think thatâs conducive to good relationships or a happy life.
This isn't a bad thing. Psychology has shown us that doing favors for someone makes us feel closer to them. Not the asker towards the doer, the other way around. And it's only natural for the doer to balance their own needs against what's being asked, and to expect some sort of reciprocity in the future. This is how trust and relationships are built, at least in primates.
Damn humans, they ruined humanity!
Culture is generally very low, look how people use their fucking smartphones.
I witnessed people watching tok tok shorts with their speakers blasting low quality audio on repeat in the following situations:
when hanging out with a group of friends
in the bus/tram/commuter train
THE FUCKING CINEMA
Why can't people just use headphones?
Narcissism. I donât give a fuck about your vacation. Or your dinner. Or that your kid won the spelling bee. No, I donât want to see your facetube or insta or whatever the fuck. Go find your validation in something real.