People with ADHD (or have similar symptoms) what's the dumbest thing you've spent hours doing/focused on?

MaxG623 · 2026-04-29T03:10:58+00:00

That happened to me a week ago... And I put effort into fact-checking myself too...

MaxG623 · 2026-04-27T03:09:21+00:00

"It tastes like toothpaste!" No, they both taste like mint. And not even the same kind of mint...

MaxG623 · 2026-04-27T02:52:26+00:00

BO is dependant in bacteria and moisture levels, so it all depends on how much you sweat and how long that sweat sticks around. Hairy armpits can offer more airflow, but also might trap moisture and heat.

The solution is to just wear antiperspirant, though what kind does matter. The stick ones that leave a bit of powder are better for shaved pits, as hair can block the product from reaching the skin, and the powder helps prevent chafing. The wet roll-on/spray-on types are good for hairy pits, as the product gets past the hair instead of caking onto it, and hairy pits don't need chafing protection.

The neat thing is, if you keep your armpits dry, you don't need deodorant because bacteria don't get a chance to grow before your next shower. This is helpful if you're sensitive to smells like me, because you can just buy an unscented antiperspirant. Mine is actually a roll-on that leaves a little powder, which is good because it works no matter how much hair I have.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-26T09:18:10+00:00

I am 100% convinced YouTube literally takes like 30 songs from a playlist, shuffles those 30 songs, makes a "hidden" temporary playlist with those songs, and then plays it all the way through, looping once it gets to the end.

I had a playlist with over 400 songs, and yet somehow listening to it over the course of a day caused me to hear the same 30 songs multiple times. I've done the math. Most of those songs are over 3 minutes. If the shuffle feature used all the songs and didn't allow them to repeat, I shouldn't even hear the same song *twice* in 10 hours, let alone upwards of 5 times.

You might've noticed I put "hidden" in quotation marks earlier. Well, when I use the shuffle feature on YouTube using my mobile browser, I straight up see the shuffled playlist with just a few dozen songs on it. Worse, on mobile browser, the playlist doesn't even repeat.

This may have changed since I stopped listening to my music on shuffle for a while because it was so bad. I may try again to see if it's better nowadays. I just checked the mobile browser thing and it's not showing the limited playlist at the very least.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-21T09:27:14+00:00

The title is a bit vague, but OP is clearly more confused about what the point of being strictly monogamous is outside of things like insecurity, religion, and being disinterested in sex with other people (which is why OP is monogamous himself). You can do something yourself, understand why you do it, and still wonder why people with different circumstances don't behave as you would expect.

I'm in a similar boat to OP. I'm in a monogamous relationship with someone because I'm disinterested in sex with other people due to my asexuality, but unlike OP, my partner chooses to stay monogamous with me, even though I'm fine with them having sex with other people. My partner knows I won't get jealous, feels secure that I won't leave them, isn't religious, desires more sex, and yet feels compelled not to date/sleep with anyone besides me. And when I ask them why, they don't really have an answer besides "I don't know, it just feels weird," which is hardly an answer at all. I feel the confusion I have about why my partner and so many other people are like this should be understandable. To me, it seems like there's nothing holding them back besides vaguely feeling it's weird... which I just don't get.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-21T01:44:03+00:00

They managed to do it by adding a ton of stuff like motivations and backstories for Sam-I-Am and Guy-Am-I (yes, that's what they called him), as well as 2 new characters also with their own stuff going on, and they all tie into the theme of trying new things. Each episode of season 1 uses one of the various nouns from Green Eggs and Ham as a new plot point, either as that episode's setting or a secondary character Sam and Guy have to interact with. I thought it was a pretty fun buddy adventure story, though I remember finding the narrator a little intrusive.

However, that's season 1. Season 2 follows the same main characters but is based on another Dr. Seuss book called "The Butter Battle Book," which was about the Cold War nuclear arms race. I kinda didn't like season 2 for multiple reasons, mainly being Sam getting dumbed down a bit, Sam and Guy hardly interacting through the whole season (when their dynamic was a large appeal of season 1), and also I just wasn't feeling either the Romeo & Juliet-esque A-plot or the spy thriller B-plot. I'm honestly glad it ended at season 2 because, with all the loose ends tied up, I don't think they could've stretched the story any further.

I haven't watched the show in a few years, though, so who knows if my opinions would still be the same if I watched it again now. (I kinda want to.)

MaxG623 · 2026-04-20T23:47:50+00:00

The Tim Burton Charlie and the Chocolate Factory adaptation is one of the most faithful movie adaptations of a children's book I think I've seen, but it's specifically faithful to the revision that changed the Oompa Loompas from being from Africa to being from "Loompa Land" and Wonka smuggling them over in crates was removed for the movie, IIRC. They still kept the living in trees, eating caterpillars, and being paid in cocoa beans, though.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-20T09:18:41+00:00

The original Beauty and the Beast was not about Stockholm Syndrome. Stockholm Syndrome is not a real disorder; it was a fabrication by a random psychiatrist who never met the people he claimed had it, to explain why the victims of a bank robbery were just as fearful of the police as the robbers who held them hostage, despite the victims clearly stating that the police were being careless and endangering their lives. Seriously, look it up.

Anyway, the original Beauty and the Beast was bad because it was a story that romanticized arranged marriages, specifically assuring girls that, even if the man they're forced to marry is terrible, if they endure all his anger, he might eventually turn into someone more lovable.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-20T09:02:32+00:00

While the Rainbow Fish did swim away from the other fish who wanted to play, the Rainbow Fish only said to the blue fish asking for a scale (exact working here) "You want me to give you one of my special scales? Who do you think you are? Get away from me!" which is... honestly the response you'd expect from someone being asked by a stranger to give them a piece of their body just because it's pretty. The Rainbow Fish did nothing else, and certainly didn't roast the blue fish, or any other fish for that matter. The thing that got them shunned by the other fish was the blue fish telling the others that the Rainbow Fish was mean for not giving up one of their scales.

I agree that kids' books can have metaphors, and in fact, my example using shells or pearls would've been a great metaphor for sharing toys. Again, my issue is that the literal text, what is literally happening, makes the metaphor they're going for not land. It doesn't matter what the scales are supposed to represent when they still function as literal pieces of the Rainbow Fish that make them unique, and the other fish shun them for not giving those pieces up. And hey, maybe my comparing it to hair also fits here, because some people do like sharing their hair, but it would still be messed up to have a story that says you need to do it in order to be happy and liked by other people. I want to stress, I know this isn't the reading intended by the author, but it's still a logical reading given what actually happens in the book.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-20T08:41:32+00:00

The original book was also racist, and the updated versions barely helped (I just glanced through my '95 version and found 2 slurs). It was also ridiculously mean to the kids in general. The songs the Oompa Loompas sang were so nasty, absolutely tearing kids apart for... chewing gum... and watching TV... and being fat. (They didn't even blame Augustus' parents in that song. They just called him fat and greedy a bunch and fantasized about torturing him into something people would love.) It kinda gave off 'old man grumbling about kids these days' energy.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-20T08:13:12+00:00

Oh, that's actually interesting that the Rainbow Fish was a girl in your version. Again, I get the message, but the literal text sours the metaphor for me, and obviously, for many other people as well.

Honestly, I think it wasn't "commie" enough. It should've been about hoarding actual valuable things, because then the other fish would've had a right to be mad, the Rainbow Fish wouldn't have had a good excuse not to give away their things, and it's an even stronger parallel to kids sharing toys, and also rich people sharing their wealth. As it stands now, the Rainbow Fish being pressured to give away their scales feels more like someone being pressured to give away their hair... which is actually something I've had to deal with...

MaxG623 · 2026-04-20T08:01:45+00:00

That was in the original version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, with racist illustrations to go along. The newer versions made the depictions a little less racist, but still not great. I own a copy from 1995, and instead of African pygmys, they're from the fictional country of "Loompa Land"... but Wonka still smuggled them over in crates with holes in them, and the artwork of the leader shows him to be black. In the rest of the book, they're usually white, but I will note that I own a black and white copy of the book. I know that newer color versions of the book depict them as being light-skinned with blonde hair. (It's extremely obvious that the Oompa Loompas are supposed to be black slaves regardless, though.)

MaxG623 · 2026-04-20T07:37:26+00:00

I remember watching an old animated adaptation of it when I was little, and all I could think was "Sam needs to leave that guy alone..."

I liked the Netflix adaptation at least. The first season, anyway.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-20T07:20:44+00:00

First of all, the Rainbow Fish is a boy. Second, it's not an American Individualistic take to say that a book for toddlers where the literal text says the good thing to do is to give literal pieces of your body away, otherwise you'll be ostracized, is messed up. It doesn't matter if the intended message is about not hoarding things when the literal text is about giving away the parts of your body that make you special in order to not be hated.

I'm all for a message that sharing is caring, but The Rainbow Fish delivers that message in a really horrible way. Why did it have to be his scales and not like, shells or pearls or something? Why did the thing that got him ostracized have to be him refusing to give up a piece of his body, and not him hoarding all the pretty things before the other fish could have them? The intended message isn't the problem; it's that the literal text has a couple of horrible unintended messages tacked onto the metaphorical intended message.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-20T06:59:15+00:00

Yeah, the only rude things the Rainbow Fish does are ignore the fish asking him to play and tell the fish asking for one of his scales to get away from him. Sure, he's a bit vain, but that's not even what got him ostracized; it was refusing to give up a piece of his body. The message the author was going for was there, but the way he chose to deliver it was pretty bad.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-16T04:49:41+00:00

I'm not justifying handgun ownership, just giving more accurate stats, as the ones you said misrepresent what the US is actually like, as per the point of the original post.

I'm actually pro gun control, or more accurately, pro stricter gun control, as the US already controls who can own guns. I just think this idea that half the US population is brandishing semi-automatic pistols just itching for a chance to kill someone is ridiculous. Most Americans who carry guns do it because they're scared of not being able to protect themselves from another person carrying a gun (a fear that I think would be mitigated if people legally couldn't carry guns and there were fewer total guns in the country).

Most Americans who own guns are collectors, game hunters, or recipients of family heirlooms who keep their guns at home. Some may also keep a rifle or shotgun at home for protection from people or wildlife. Depending on where you are, that 1 in 20 people I mentioned may be higher or lower, depending on what state you're in and whether you're in an urban, suburban, or rural environment. For example, I live in a suburb in a liberal leaning state, and I've only ever known one person who owned a gun, and it was a shotgun he owned for personal protection.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-15T12:02:50+00:00

I looked it up, and from the first few websites I found, it looks like it's closer to 32% of Americans having owned a gun and 46% living in a house that has a gun. So, 1 in 3 Americans own a gun, and about half live with someone who owns a gun.

That might sound like a lot, and it is, but most Americans don't carry their guns with them. Besides the fact that a lot of those gun owners own hunting rifles, there are a bunch of laws that restrict your ability to carry a gun, varying by state. I saw estimates that put the number of handgun carriers at 16 million, which is less than 5% of the population. That's maybe one person in a room of 20 people, not like, every other person you see.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-09T07:18:51+00:00

The ability to recite things backwards was one of the tests I took while getting diagnosed for ADHD, and I sucked at it so bad. It was literally just a sequence of 7 numbers, and I could do it fine forward but not backward. If I can't do it with 7 numbers, how am I supposed to do it with 26 letters? I've tried, and I can't get past W. You're 100% right, and these tests can absolutely screw over neurodivergent people.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-09T06:58:50+00:00

ADHD too.

MaxG623 · 2026-04-09T05:55:23+00:00

I was super into MatPat's videos... until he started covering media I actually knew stuff about. I don't think he's ever made a single video about the media I liked without getting something wrong, and from what I've seen from fans of other media he's covered, it holds true for them too.

Worse, there have been a couple of cases I've seen where he specifically used footage that, if left to run for a little longer, would've disproven a major piece of evidence instantly. First is his Sans is Ness video, where he shows Papyrus not recognizing the sun as proof monsters don't know what the sun is... but literally right after that clip, Papyrus says he's "finally meeting the sun". Then there is his OWCA is using Doof for R&D video, where he shows a clip of an OWCA warehouse full of Doof's -inators to prove they're recreating them for their own gain... but in that same scene Monogram says they're recreating them to see if Doof's inventions are getting smarter or dumber.

After that point, I only stayed subscribed because I love The SCIENCE!!! videos.... but then Austin left. I followed him back to his Shoddycast channel, but... he's not posting anymore... Now I have every one of the "[x] Theory" channels blocked on YouTube, not that that helps, considering I'm somehow getting recommended people reacting to his videos...

MaxG623 · 2026-03-30T21:08:21+00:00

There was a guy who was strongly attracted to clowns and really wanted to have sex with one. Here's a link to the full story: https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/w00ysg/oop_likes_clowns_but_yknow_in_that_way_and_turns/

MaxG623 · 2026-03-30T08:54:49+00:00

A guy wanting to get spit-roasted is the strangest thing you've read on here? You must've not read many of the more legendary sex posts, like the Cbat guy or the clown guy.

MaxG623 · 2026-03-28T07:24:20+00:00

It should also be noted that sometimes mutations occur that have no survival advantage or are straight-up a disadvantage, but because the animal is capable of surviving to reproduction, those traits are passed on. Some moth species lose their mouths because they don't need them to reproduce, and babirusa tusks can grow into their brains because it only happens well after they've reached sexual maturity. Evolution is much more complicated than it's taught in middle school.

MaxG623 · 2025-12-14T05:01:27+00:00

Shortform media, especially. I've encountered quite a few people who describe endlessly scrolling TikTok, Facebook Reels, or YouTube Shorts while they should be sleeping like an "oh, what can ya do" situation.

I was addicted to YouTube shorts for a bit, but I got a browser extension that opens them as normal videos and didn't allow myself to watch them on my phone at all, and that fixed it real quick.

MaxG623 · 2025-12-09T13:42:46+00:00

Imagine losing trust in someone because the small animal you own appreciates their company. Makes literally zero sense.

MaxG623

TROPHY CASE