I think it tends to happen later in the night. I could be listening to the same song on the radio or at the gym and not feel those same things, just feeling pumped instead

Baggy pants and chunky white sneakers. Ugh I’m so done with then. When can we get back to straight cut? I’m so sick of the skinny-baggy jeans back and forth

Punjabi drinking. Party hard or don’t party at all, I say!

Finally, a half-decent meme about something I agree with. Thank you for making a not dogshit meme like half of the communists on this forum lmao

you carry a person on your person at all times?

I agree with the sentiment but by god the pacing of the joke in this meme is awful

Yeah it really splits the crowd. There were three case studies from the course but I can’t find my offering’s outline and I forget the third case study. The first one was: “A woman signs a form saying that if she gets dementia she wants euthanasia in the late/developed stages of the illness. Later, she gets there, but this ‘version’ of her has a really high quality of life and is quite contented. Do you follow through?”

In between there were discussions of frameworks like Aristotelian/Kantian/utilitarian ethics. There were also some medical specific stuff, like the biopsychosocial model of disability. Pretty neat overall, though tbh I wish I took an ethics class more relevant to my current academic pursuits (math)

I remember discussing this in an undergrad biomedical ethics class. Pls don’t ask us to do ur homework lmao

Jury was still out by the end of class discussion btw. This one was complicated lol

Girl, go read some Enlightenment philosophy, why’re you askin us 😭😭😭

Ok I do understand this, but if we look at the discussion as it has unfolded in this comment section, the evidence shows that people are willing to share their positive opinions on the finale (in fact, most people have more positive perceptions than I do). It doesn’t seem like what I said has scared away people who hold different opinions (which I’m glad ofc).

Even if we say that this particular phrase scared away like 90% of positive commenters from commenting (which I feel like, even with the opinion you hold about it, is a gross exaggeration), the fact that the ensuing discussion has been mostly positive and non-judgemental of that positivity aside from this thread of meta-conversation would serve as reassurance for more people with positive opinions to participate. If anything, my take is the only one that’s actually on trial lmao (even if it’s just the wording of the take and not the actual sentiment, which I acknowledge is the main issue and I don’t wanna distract from the wording part being the actual discussion piece).

I also find that interpretation of what I said to not really square with the rest of what I said. Like you mentioned, context matters, and I give the show a “7/10” and am indeed recommending that people watch it (with particular audiences in mind). So, if one interpreted my comment as “you’d only like this show if you’re inexperienced and like baby things,” I’m also saying that I am inexperienced and like baby things. My review would be insulting my own sensibility. And I’m not above insulting my own sensibility ofc, there’s some shitty media (not TADC to be clear, mainly “two people talking about nothing” podcasts) that I love. But then I would be positioning myself within the group I am insulting, so even in this more negative reading I’m not casting judgement but being self-deprecating.

I think we may just not be able to see eye to eye on this, unfortunately. BUT, you’ve worn me down enough that I’ll make an edit. I’m kind of like a stone in water where I’m really hard-headed but you chip away at me enough and I become smooth and then sand.

To be clear, I will continue using this turn of phrase in future media reviews, as it comes up in my everyday speech and writing.

This was really good but…

Tyty

Doing a “this you” on the internet is peak condescension. There are more constructive ways to bring up what one takes umbrage with, and by far this one is one of the most demeaning. Especially when one stands by your quote that the person is viewing negatively (and I indeed stand by it, and spoiler, I will not be changing my post).

I think the quotation marks already existing within my post make it crystal clear that “baby’s first psychological horror” is entirely self-contained with its levity. The only way that someone would take personal offense at this is: A. if they view their age as a point of shame such that they read undue subtext in my post, or B. if they view their ability with the subject as a point of shame that they read undue subtext. In both of these instances, one has to take a very specific, bad faith reading of my post. In other words, I feel that this is a “bean soup” situation, which is not something I will change my post for.

I have made many versions of “baby’s first [difficult thing]” jokes in my real life, in a variety of groups (and in one-on-one contexts), with a variety of ages. Not once has anyone pulled me aside for a serious conversation about this in any casual context.

In addition, I work (part-time) at a tutoring centre, where I have a “tough love” manager and am highly accountable to parent feedback (i.e. on childrens’ behalfs but also somewhat their own whims); I have maybe been written up for tardiness once and never have been seriously reprimanded in relation to either my ability nor my conduct with students, from any avenue. If anything, my flaw as an instructor is my leniency (as commented in passing by my manager and other instructors). I also have never encountered issue as a university TA during office hours. I do make this joke, along with similar kinds of jokes (e.g. to a calculus learner: “this is now trigonometry, which you learned in preschool, so it should be super easy”). Notably, these audiences encompass teenagers and young adults.

If strangers on a text-based forum are saying “there are hypothetical teenagers/young adults that could be hurt by this,” I have yet to encounter this once, let alone in significant numbers or enough to cause issues (until now).

Basically: why change something that causes no problems ever except to you (btw I think you’re generally rather nice, we just have an issue here but other than this we’re chill) and then one other person who can’t help but actually and consciously deliver their feedback in a highly condescending way?

Ok, I understand your perspective now, and I sincerely thank you for elaborating. It’s important to hear people out in full and really understand them before you cast judgement, and you gave me this opportunity to evaluate your stance.

I could not disagree with with your opinion more, and find it appalling that you would employ the condescension that you so loathe in your response.

When I say “baby’s first [complicated subject]” the implicit joke is that the complicated subject is indeed not for babies. To Kill a Mockingbird is “baby’s first systemic racism” but that should not be read in a pre-school. Linear algebra is “baby’s first abstract math” but there’s a reason it is taught at the 100-level. I find it extremely hard to believe that anyone would actually feel demeaned by “baby’s first psychological horror,” and if they do, I encourage them to evaluate why being a total novice to a subject gives them such intense feelings of inadequacy that they cannot find levity in their inexperience. The fact that I have to seriously acknowledge that “baby’s first [difficult thing]” is in any way not lighthearted is ridiculous.

I don’t think the lore dump was necessarily bad. But I think that stories should try to not meander.

This is a really mean thing to say out of the blue. You’ve assumed malintent when there wasn’t any. I just wanted to give a measured spoiler-free review.

Why did you say something? Like, what was your objective by leaving this comment alongside the downvote instead of just downvoting? I want to understand your perspective but I’m a bit wounded since I’ve been so misinterpreted

I don’t have pets. Why would I have pets when I can save up for children, who actually matter?

I didn’t tell you to speak. Bad dog.

Dumbass can’t read and expects me to believe their stances 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣 hit the books kid

Well it’s not. Every development in human quality of life has involved some level of mastery over nature. The creation of fire for nutrient bioavailability. The advent of agriculture for food stability. The subconscious use of genetics and breeding to make better food for ourselves. The transport of food across water to create cities. The freedom from hunting and gathering afforded to some to allow for technological specialization. With the industrial revolution came the green revolution shortly thereafter that made agriculture more efficient with tractors and other powered tools. Using bacteria, C. Elegans, fruit flies, rats, and dogs as model species has advanced our understandings of genetics and of medicine. Speaking of medicine, our mastery over plants and fungi cannot be neglected.

Moreover, none of these avenues are dead ends of development, at least, at the moment. Plant science, agricultural science, medicine, microbiology, and many other fields are active areas of study where we continue to advance our understanding of nature.

Now, in improving our own circumstance, we indeed have run into some quite disastrous issues. Climate change is far and away the largest (which is a consequence of capitalism). Within our drive for self-preservation and improving circumstance, however, we have already concocted some of the solutions. At the very least, power and transportation are both solved through a combination of nuclear and renewable energy.

Moreover, conservation is a necessarily paternal field. We tend to cause the problems that conservation needs to solve, yes, but we’re the only species that is capable of identifying there is a problem, finding causes, and trying to solve them. The species that are going extinct don’t exactly know that.

To summarize, we are a part of the biosphere, and also masters of it. It gives us sustenance and life but without our intervention it does so in an unstable manner. When we direct it, we ascend beyond mere participants. And when we screw it over (or very rarely, when it screws itself over), we have to be the ones to fix it.

Anyway, I think this is the best I can reasonably treat the onlookers to this conversation. As for you, I’m done talking to you. If you want to be no better than the plants and animals, I’ll treat you as such.