We even do this to kids through the story of Santa Claus and his naughty or nice list.
And we’re all just trucking along like this is okay.
Why are we so afraid of wants and needs? Why do we frame it in terms of this moral currency? It’s weird.
Neatly phrased, Miss Erynn! But I think if we look back we\u2019d find that it was ever so. The feudal system from the Middle Ages and even unto the 20th century in Czarist Russia saw societies based on your observations.— Edward M. Cook (@edcook111) November 1, 2018
The answer, in the current system, depends on what others might think. Not only at a political level but at a social level. That’s fucking weird.
More from Erynn Brook
Most of us were not taught to manage or communicate our emotions well, we bottle them up until they twist our insides. That’s something we can work on now.
Most of us were taught that emotions are shameful, especially if we’re not in control of them. That shame is something we can start to unravel now.
Let’s not demand stoicism, that everyone carry their own burden without revealing it to the rest of us when just seeing each other will make half that burden go away.
We fear emotions, we think they’re infectious. “Don’t be weak around me, I might catch weakness.”
If you’re feeling not okay right now, that’s normal. If you see someone who’s not feeling okay right now, maybe give them permission to not feel okay.
Here’s a thread of tips!
1. Is the person you want to compliment a stranger? Are they alone? Are they more than 10 feet away? Would you need to raise your voice so they can hear your awesome compliment?
2. Is the person you want to compliment a stranger? Are you in a public place? Are they in a service position or otherwise working in a scenario where you are a customer, coworker or their boss?
Compliment their taste. IE: “Nice shoes!”
2. b) Refrain from complimenting their physical features or things that they cannot change about themselves until you know them better. These are “friend zone” compliments.
3. Is the person you want to compliment a stranger, acquaintance or coworker and would you hold back your compliment if their significant other were present and/or if you knew they had a significant other?
More from Society
No not Piers Morgan, I give no shits about him.
I mean this thing of criticizing women’s sensuality and then saying that they should get by on just their talent. Cause we see it everywhere...
Hi Joan, my mother taught me to speak my mind & never be afraid to express honestly held opinion.— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) November 21, 2018
Ellen's a hypocrite - and as for Little Mix, I'd just prefer they use their talent to sell records rather than their nudity.
As your own daughter does...! https://t.co/nCQAsIgoVG
And it comes up in a lot of different spaces:
And it comes up in a lot of different ways:
It’s interesting because we know that psychologically speaking, conventionally attractive people are better received.
Attraction can shift as you get to know someone on an individual level, but overall our society privileges people who look good.
I don’t understand the question?
This is a survival mechanism. I'm not saying it's not an issue, I'm just asking how do you fix it? Or can you fix it? If not are you just complaining to complain?— JustUnderReality (@under_just) November 21, 2018
Hey folks, have you ever wondered why trans people face constant accusations of fetishism, sexual predation and child abuse/grooming? Well, today let's talk about stochastic terrorism.
So, first we have to talk about what stochastic terrorism actually is. Remember when there was a conspiracy that there was a pedophile ring operating out of a pizza parlour basement, and a crazed gunman showed up? It's that sort of incitement that stochastic terrorism describes.
It's the demonisation or incitement against a group of people or individuals with the intent that other, unaffiliated parties will act upon it; it's the releasing doctored footage and a shooter show up at Planned Parenthood as a direct result of what he's been led to believe.
So with that in mind, let's talk about Russia's extreme anti-LGBT laws that banned the "promotion" of LGBT lifestyles to children. A move that specifically marked LGBT people as a threat to children, and resulted in neo-nazis meting out vigilante "justice" against gay men.
Groups such as this would lure unsuspecting gay men via dating sites, and brutalise and humiliate them on camera. They did so under the guise of combating child abusers, one group calling themselves "Occupy
You May Also Like
Czego w artykule brakuje, to informacji, że SMP prawdopodobnie przekazało Williamsowi część środków na sfinansowanie sezonu 2019. W przypadku zakończenia współpracy ekipa z Grove będzie musiała zwrócić te środki. #F1pl
To tłumaczy wysokie kwoty jakich Williams ma oczekiwać za fotel od nowego kierowcy. Jest pewnie próg opłacalności i dopóki nie zostanie osiągnięty, to zmiana z finansowego punktu widzenia nie będzie się zwyczajnie opłacała. #F1pl
Tyle można znaleźć w oświadczeniach prasowych... 😂😂😂
We're basically fucked.
The tech world has gotten so huge, self-reinforcing, and insulated from reality they can no longer even vaguely look at themselves (and their actions) as others do. They just live on a different planet than most people.
Conversely, the average tech consumer doesn't understand the technology that has slowly taken over their lives, and their designated emissaries to figure it out--politicians, pundits, regulators, journalists--understand it barely better than they do, and have their own agendas.
To say more than generalities for a moment, here's what I think is likely the core problem.
Techies take weird, improbable visions, and make them realities: some BS pitch deck to a VC, mixed with money and people, really does turn into some novel thing.
Most people work inside a legacy industry that's evolved that way over time (usually for good reasons), and they think about the future via some analogy with their present (which is a function of a long-ago past). The interruption that tech will introduce is often hard to grasp.
When I was sexually harassed by the director of the area I was working in, I was afraid to report it because I was worried that "getting him in trouble" would result in the subtle retaliation of missed leadership opportunities.
I wanted to continue working on the team I was on, because I'd gained a lot of very deep knowledge and expertise in that area, as well as reputation and camaraderie with the other folks working in that area. I didn't want to make the situation more "difficult."
To get promoted at Google, several need to happen: 1. you need opportunities for ownership and leadership above your current level (basically, opportunities to show you're working at the next level you're trying to get promoted to). The work you're "assigned" has a big impact.
2. You need glowing reviews from peers, *at or particularly above the level you're hoping to get promoted to.* Basically, you need people a lot more senior than you to say you're doing awesome work.
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".