What is something that is accepted by society that you find creepy/weird?

[PARROTHEAD]

2 hours ago, Ty21 said:

On the flip side, something that isn’t common practice but should be: fat people should be required by law to announce “nobody better go in there for 15 minutes” every time they’re seen exiting a public restroom. For no other reason than to make me laugh every time. 

[Ty21]

47 minutes ago, PARROTHEAD said:

[beekay414]

On 5/31/2023 at 7:10 PM, Ty21 said:

On the flip side, something that isn’t common practice but should be: fat people should be required by law to announce “nobody better go in there for 15 minutes” every time they’re seen exiting a public restroom. For no other reason than to make me laugh every time. 

Courtesy flush really cuts down that time, my man. As soon as you're done blasting your colon, flush that bad boy. Not only are you not sitting in a cloud of your own destruction, you're sparing the nostrils of those around you and retaining some of your own dignity, what little you may have left.

[Tugboat]

2 hours ago, beekay414 said:

Courtesy flush really cuts down that time, my man. As soon as you're done blasting your colon, flush that bad boy. Not only are you not sitting in a cloud of your own destruction, you're sparing the nostrils of those around you and retaining some of your own dignity, what little you may have left.

The main aspect of the "courtsey flush" for me, is about not creating a plumbing situation.

 

By the time you've tallied up all the toilet paper needed to clean up your butthole, some toilets just don't have the pressures/velocity to get the job done.  So you run it in stages to make sure it'll clear.

 

 

Not that this happens a lot.  But you've always gotta be wary of the pressure of unknown toilets.

[Tetsujin]

Maybe it bothers me way more than others, but I think it’s weird that some people either a) don’t check, or b) don’t care about their protruding nose hair. I’m not sure which is worse. That’s a big pet peeve of mine. 

Edited June 4, 2023 by Tetsujin

[adamq]

I dont like that we have moved away from the shirt pocket. Massively underutilized these days.

[7DnBrnc53]

On 3/3/2023 at 12:26 PM, AkronsWitness said:

There are so many ways around it but unfortunately nothing will change. Retirement should be 50. You had my work/time from 16-50 years old, I want 50-85 years old to live. Even split. We all pay enough money in taxes to make it happen within the budget, but we would rather spend those tax dollars on......other things besides the lives of the people who earned it.

Im desperately trying to get out by the time Im 50-55 (33 now). Ill do anything and go on whatever business venture I have to (Ive already done 2). Walking into a cooperate office building at 60 years old to sit behind a desk for 40hrs a week is just not something I can even think about doing with my life. It aint happening, get me out.

Well, people put up with it (they think it is inevitable and we have to), so they get it. In the humble words of Mike Ditka, you get what you tolerate. 

Another thing I am tired of besides crapitalism: Statism and voting. Nothing ever gets accomplished. They are all on the same side, and they (Trump, Clintons, etc...) get together and laugh at regular people behind the scenes (and they should). 

That is why I am an anarchist/egalitarianist. 

Edited July 4, 2023 by 7DnBrnc53

[JaguarCrazy2832]

Politics in general, whenever its brought up it just leads to alot of hate and crap that is either flat out wrong or ignorant. None of their "sources" are unbiased so its just a pointless loop and I dont think the last person was THAT much different than the current one as far as I can remember the process. you quote sources straight from the side you support as if thats gospel. I just tend to avoid talking about politics for that reason unless you can have an honest discussion that doesnt lead to some ridiculous argument trying to sway someones opinion that'll never change

Gen Ed courses in college. They are a rip off. In HS I wrote papers, took 4 years of history/science, foreign language, turf grass/horticulture courses among other gen-eddy things...why do I need all that if I want to be an accountant?

Healthcare is a joke, and I know that kind of brings in the politic conversation I hate so much but the fact that I have had to turn down scans in the ER because I couldnt afford the $5,000 price tag I paid from the prior time I got one is like I'm rolling the dice on my life. So no, I dont want the CT scan bc I cant afford it so I just hope its not important

Christmas wishlists or rather people who "threaten" for them...I'm a grown arse adult, if I want something I buy it, if its expensive I save for it and if its too expensive then life moves on. Alcohol and golf balls. thats good enough

[minutemancl]

I keep seeing and hearing ads now for Better Help. I know our healthcare system is awful, but we've become so used to it that it is an accepted part of society now. But new advertisements for for-profit therapy, showing people talking about how sad and depressed they are is pretty dystopic to me.

[Tugboat]

On 7/5/2023 at 9:15 AM, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

 

Gen Ed courses in college. They are a rip off. In HS I wrote papers, took 4 years of history/science, foreign language, turf grass/horticulture courses among other gen-eddy things...why do I need all that if I want to be an accountant?

 

 

People always say this, but i don't really get what's so wrong about trying to push people to be more well-rounded individuals, develop critical thinking skills that apply to disciplines outside of their particular "specialty".

 

For me, with an Arts degree it was always a bit the other way around with my undergrad.  My "gen ed" requirements were to fill in some "science" and "math" classes, language classes, etc.  But the whole point of it, is to break you out of the narrowly focused echo chamber of a particular program.  To give you tools to think outside of that.

With going back to a more specific program, it kinda flipped and it was everyone bitching and moaning about why we had to take statistics classes or communications classes or whatever...but again, it was that idea of fostering a more well-rounded student.  The ability to read, write, research properly...the ability to understand statistics and context, the ability to take on topics that might be outside your narrow little interest range, are all hugely valuable skills to making a more well-rounded person who is adaptable, flexible, able to take on new ideas and new roles more readily.

 

Heck, HS i learned a lot of things that i'd otherwise have to be learning how to do badly from youtube or something.  Maybe i had more constructive HS options back in the day, i wasted some money on "easy" credits in university too...but i think the general point is to build a broad base of knowledge and skills.  That's worthwhile imo.

 

Frankly...i find it weird that there isn't more cross-pollination in most programs.  There are a lot of programs that just seem to cordon themselves off and barely branch out from there, beyond a few token "easy" general credit electives that are "easy".

Edited July 9, 2023 by Tugboat

[Tugboat]

On 7/7/2023 at 6:27 AM, minutemancl said:

I keep seeing and hearing ads now for Better Help. I know our healthcare system is awful, but we've become so used to it that it is an accepted part of society now. But new advertisements for for-profit therapy, showing people talking about how sad and depressed they are is pretty dystopic to me.

It definitely weirds me out how much has gone into sort of "normalizing" online treatment in place of real life care.  A particularly weird artifact of societal trends in general that this is seen as...valid and an somehow acceptable substitute for proper care.

[43M]

3 hours ago, Tugboat said:

People always say this, but i don't really get what's so wrong about trying to push people to be more well-rounded individuals, develop critical thinking skills that apply to disciplines outside of their particular "specialty".

For me, with an Arts degree it was always a bit the other way around with my undergrad.  My "gen ed" requirements were to fill in some "science" and "math" classes, language classes, etc.  But the whole point of it, is to break you out of the narrowly focused echo chamber of a particular program.  To give you tools to think outside of that.

With going back to a more specific program, it kinda flipped and it was everyone bitching and moaning about why we had to take statistics classes or communications classes or whatever...but again, it was that idea of fostering a more well-rounded student.  The ability to read, write, research properly...the ability to understand statistics and context, the ability to take on topics that might be outside your narrow little interest range, are all hugely valuable skills to making a more well-rounded person who is adaptable, flexible, able to take on new ideas and new roles more readily.

 

Heck, HS i learned a lot of things that i'd otherwise have to be learning how to do badly from youtube or something.  Maybe i had more constructive HS options back in the day, i wasted some money on "easy" credits in university too...but i think the general point is to build a broad base of knowledge and skills.  That's worthwhile imo.

Gen eds do absolutely nothing to make people more "well rounded".     Thats just what is used to justify forcing people to pay more money in school.  The vast majority of people just look for the easiest possible path beyond their required classes, and those who take gen eds that truly interest them aren't typically going to learn enough in a few classes to make them much more knowledgeable in a specific area.

For instance, I have always been extremely interested in WW2 and psychology.    I took 2 or 3 psych classes in college and a few history classes, but I learned SIGNIFICANTLY more reading books, watching documentaries and other outside research than I ever did in those classes. 

Bottom line...there is obviously nothing wrong with people being more well rounded, but they shouldn't be forced to pay thousands of extra dollars in school under the facade that its making them better.    If people want to improve themselves or learn about different things outside of their major, that is great....but it should be on their terms.

Same way foreign language courses are bullshiz.   You can learn more in one year of using Rosetta Stone than 3 years of foreign language in college.

Its just a cash grab.    These colleges don't care one bit how people turn out as long as they are getting their money.

Life experience makes you a more well rounded person.    I know people with masters who know next to nothing outside of their career knowledge, and people with HS diplomas and GEDs who seem to know everything.    My buddys dad had one year of college and dropped out, and he is the smartest well rounded people Ive ever met.    Could probably recite the periodic table and answer a complicated calculus equation while building a new porch and fixing your vehicle.    Certainly more well rounded than I am, and I have alot more formal education than him.

 

[minutemancl]

6 hours ago, Tugboat said:

It definitely weirds me out how much has gone into sort of "normalizing" online treatment in place of real life care.  A particularly weird artifact of societal trends in general that this is seen as...valid and an somehow acceptable substitute for proper care.

I still maintain that my (in-person) therapist from over a decade ago probably literally saved my life. I tried online therapy a few months ago. I lasted about 2 days. The therapist may as well have been a chatbot. It was an awful, awful experience. I actually got anxious at seeing the notification on my phone that I had new messages. I'll never try it again.

[JaguarCrazy2832]

7 hours ago, Tugboat said:

 

People always say this, but i don't really get what's so wrong about trying to push people to be more well-rounded individuals, develop critical thinking skills that apply to disciplines outside of their particular "specialty".

 

For me, with an Arts degree it was always a bit the other way around with my undergrad.  My "gen ed" requirements were to fill in some "science" and "math" classes, language classes, etc.  But the whole point of it, is to break you out of the narrowly focused echo chamber of a particular program.  To give you tools to think outside of that.

With going back to a more specific program, it kinda flipped and it was everyone bitching and moaning about why we had to take statistics classes or communications classes or whatever...but again, it was that idea of fostering a more well-rounded student.  The ability to read, write, research properly...the ability to understand statistics and context, the ability to take on topics that might be outside your narrow little interest range, are all hugely valuable skills to making a more well-rounded person who is adaptable, flexible, able to take on new ideas and new roles more readily.

 

Heck, HS i learned a lot of things that i'd otherwise have to be learning how to do badly from youtube or something.  Maybe i had more constructive HS options back in the day, i wasted some money on "easy" credits in university too...but i think the general point is to build a broad base of knowledge and skills.  That's worthwhile imo.

 

Frankly...i find it weird that there isn't more cross-pollination in most programs.  There are a lot of programs that just seem to cordon themselves off and barely branch out from there, beyond a few token "easy" general credit electives that are "easy".

Really though what is the difference between a HS gen ed course and a college one? 

[beekay414]

3 minutes ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

Really though what is the difference between a HS gen ed course and a college one? 

Outside of specific college gen eds like Psychology and Econ? Nothing really. The main history, math and science gen eds that I took were all **** that I did in HS.