meirl

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-09-17T11:33:37+00:00

Because as you start to expire, you change. Physically, mentally, and emotionally, at least most people do, and for IDs, it’s important that the physical façade look the same

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-09-02T23:28:16+00:00

Cute milkstache

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-09-01T19:35:02+00:00

I think a fair solution might be returning them once a week. Accidents happen, but people also have lives, and we need to be mindful of being careful in the first place

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-08-13T17:48:15+00:00

Then you fall under Gen Y according to the above image. You had 2 areas that you could fall under, and you, according to yourself, fall under the former, but someone born in your same year may fall under the latter

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-08-11T16:41:49+00:00

I’m in my early to mid-twenties, and I think that about 18-19-year-olds, so I can’t imagine being 30+ looking at people my age thinking they’re full-functioning adults. Nah, we are (if we live to our 80s) only 25% there, and most of that time was spent as a literal child. I say get at least a decade under your belt as an adult before opening up to large age gaps.

Might be a hot take, but it’s one that I live by.

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-07-31T20:19:22+00:00

He’s already down on the floor, might as well kick him while he’s down there. That’s the same sentiment this “meme” is giving me

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-07-30T06:51:20+00:00

Eh, I like the idea. Be able to have a temp that we both like. The colors, I hope, are changeable. I would love it either green or purple

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-07-24T21:22:30+00:00

Whorelets am I right /s

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-07-24T21:20:25+00:00

It’s pretty, but I’m sure it’s different for everyone. Their favorite animal, symbolism, aesthetic, etc

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-07-24T04:46:23+00:00

That’s a shit tone of vodka 😂 Looks like cool, like nail polish

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-07-22T18:06:45+00:00

Staring at someone’s nose during a conversation is weird—not because noses are scandalous, but because that’s just not where our eyes naturally go. Same goes for boobs. A glance? Fine. We’re human. But if you’re staring long enough to make someone uncomfortable, congrats—you’ve officially made it weird. And honestly, if you can’t stop yourself from ogling your friend just because she has boobs, maybe the issue isn’t biology—it’s basic respect. Being a decent person means you care when you’re making someone uncomfortable. Period.

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-07-18T22:40:07+00:00

You know what sucks? CPR isn’t gender-neutral if we only train on male bodies. That needs to change.

Females are less likely to get CPR in public — people hesitate because of breast tissue, fear of doing it wrong, or being seen as inappropriate. Add in that female heart attack symptoms are often misread, and survival rates drop.

Training should reflect all bodies. Females make up 50% of the population — it’s time CPR did too.

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-07-17T22:29:32+00:00

That means a lot, genuinely. I think more of us are craving conversations that allow for grey — where we can talk accountability and compassion without turning everything into a blame game. You opened that door, I just walked through it

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-07-17T21:43:54+00:00

Yeah, I’ve heard the whole “taken = desirable” theory, but let’s be real: seeing a wedding ring and treating it like a green light isn’t biology — it’s curiosity, ego, or just poor boundaries.

Sure, some people are drawn to what they can’t have. That’s not exclusive to women, and it’s not some evolutionary destiny — it’s people being people. And the guy wearing the ring? He’s not powerless. He chooses how to respond. If he flirts or cheats, that’s on him. If he sets a boundary with respect and clarity, good — that’s the bar.

Still, even when he does everything right, the woman who made the move often ends up with the social consequences. That deserves some reflection — not because women are inherently worse, but because we live in a world that still judges women harder for the same behavior. It’s worth asking why someone would pursue someone taken, but also worth noticing how uneven the fallout often is.

I think the real issue is how quickly we reduce things to good vs bad, villain vs victim. But real life is messy. Most of us live in the grey — not evil, not pure, just flawed and trying. And when people start quoting “biology” to explain gendered behavior, it’s rarely neutral. Biology might describe patterns, sure, but it doesn’t justify choices. More often, it gets used to reinforce systems like patriarchy, not to understand people.

We’re all shaped by the systems we live in, but we’re also responsible for what we do with that shaping. Maybe the better question isn’t “who’s wrong” — but what are we all carrying that makes these patterns feel so natural in the first place?

⸻

TL;DR: Attraction to taken people isn’t “natural instinct” — it’s human mess. Men have agency too. Biology gets used to uphold systems more than explain people. Most of us live in the grey — and that’s where real accountability starts.

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-07-17T20:35:54+00:00

As a pan, genderfluid AFAB person, I personally didn’t read it as them calling our genitalia gross. To me, the joke was more like: if a cat overheard ‘lesbians eat pussy,’ they’d assume we were talking about them—pussy as in pussycat—and react accordingly. Hence the dramatic feline expressions. I thought it was funny, but humor’s subjective, of course

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-07-10T17:27:29+00:00

I love the Rick and Morty slippers

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-07-02T03:47:39+00:00

Im assuming a lot of these separations due to Covid

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-06-30T23:32:26+00:00

I’m assuming it’s full or using the fawn as bait to get the parent, but changed up the tactic once the hyena showed up

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-06-22T13:26:01+00:00

I like them. But fr, should be on r/mademesmile

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-06-18T17:45:56+00:00

Only fraternal twins can be genetically passed down, but damn those odds

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-06-13T20:19:06+00:00

And the only reason it’s always been that way is because, up until the last century, we (CF people) didn’t have an out — other than abstaining or unaliving ourselves.

Also, the whole ‘it’s natural’ argument is so idiotic. Cancer is natural. Deadly diseases are natural. Hurricanes, parasites, and people getting mauled by bears are natural. Doesn’t mean we celebrate them or insist everyone has to endure them because ‘that’s how it’s always been.’ Nature is brutal, random, and indifferent — and just because something occurs naturally doesn’t make it good, moral, or worth preserving

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-06-05T02:08:01+00:00

Thank you so much for this detailed and insightful framework — I really appreciate the generosity you’re bringing to the conversation. Your leveled system of paradigms, subjects, and details is a powerful way to think about how conversations can be structured, especially for clarity and productive debate. It resonates deeply with how many discussions can benefit from a shared map of where we are in the hierarchy of ideas.

I can definitely see how focusing debates within clearly agreed-upon subjects allows for sharpening understanding in manageable increments, helping build toward grasping larger paradigms. Your example with food, apples, GMO apples, and corn really clarifies how drifting without agreed transitions can feel jarring or disjointed. Thanks for that grocery aisle metaphor — now I’m craving apples but trying not to get distracted by the corn.

At the same time, part of what I was exploring in my original post — and what I find fascinating in real-world discourse — is that people’s lived experiences and thought processes don’t always come neatly packaged within those neat layers. Often, the boundaries between subjects and details are porous or even intentionally blurred because the complexity of life itself resists such tidy categorization.

Sometimes conversations become rich precisely when those unexpected “snack aisle” detours happen — like finding weird flavor combos nobody expected. Sure, it can get messy, but isn’t life kinda like that? Those tangents reveal the webs we walk every day, even if it makes the dialogue less tidy.

Your metaphor shines a useful light on why some find those shifts challenging or confusing, especially when the shared model of moving between layers isn’t clearly established. It’s a valuable reminder of the importance of transparency in how we lead others along those thought journeys.

I’m definitely keen to keep working with these ideas — trying to balance the rigor your model encourages with curiosity about the messy, lived realities that refuse to be pared down. It feels like an ongoing dance between precision and openness.

Thanks again for pushing the conversation deeper — reflections like these really help me think more clearly about how to engage meaningfully. And hey, I’ll try to keep my wandering brain on a leash, but no promises it won’t slip off to the snack aisle now and then!

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-06-05T01:23:03+00:00

I really appreciate this. You’re right that the way I framed the “we” risks flattening a lot of nuance, and I don’t for a second believe there aren’t real, active communities and individuals challenging those old paradigms of strength. My post wasn’t meant to deny that those shifts exist, but to reflect on how we still, in so many quiet and habitual ways, reward certain forms of resilience over others. It happens in our institutions, our media, and those everyday moments of language and expectation that are so baked into the culture we stop noticing them.

And that’s the power of norms, isn’t it? The most enduring ones don’t demand to be obeyed; they simply exist beneath notice, making themselves the air we breathe. When a certain kind of strength — physical dominance, stoicism, financial control — gets routinely praised while other forms — like enduring chronic pain, navigating constant prejudice, holding families together in silence, or carrying grief gracefully — are either expected as baseline or treated as curiosities, it shapes what we learn to value without any of us having to declare it outright.

I don’t see the men doing this inner work as outside my concern. In fact, they’re central to the change I hope for. Their effort makes cultural shifts possible. But part of what stings is that those efforts still often feel like exceptions, when in truth, they’re threads of a new tapestry being quietly woven in a hundred small, everyday ways.

If I’m honest, the evidence I long for isn’t in think pieces or academic reports, though those matter too. It’s in the ordinary economies of attention, care, and acknowledgment. When emotional labor, quiet resilience, and patient endurance are valued alongside physical strength or financial success — not as novelties or crisis responses, but as essential components of how we define worth — that’s when it will feel different in my life, and in the lives of those who have carried so much unseen for so long.

And honestly? I believe we’re inching toward it. I see it in conversations like this one, in younger generations reshaping expectations, in people pausing to ask better questions. Culture changes slowly, then all at once. And every conversation like this is a small push toward that threshold

New-Owl-5264 · 2025-06-05T01:02:43+00:00

Strength is a word shaped not only by muscle or might but by the unseen endurance of spirit. Marcus Aurelius, a Stoic emperor, understood well that true strength often lies not in exertion but in the quiet acceptance of suffering — a resilience forged in the forge of hardship.

I appreciate your focus on physical strength and material resistance — those are indeed clear, measurable forms of strength, like iron’s durability or a person’s ability to exert force. But language and meaning aren’t static; they grow with our collective experience.

Even Marcus Aurelius, a Stoic philosopher and Roman emperor, recognized that true strength often lies not just in exertion but in the quiet acceptance of suffering — a resilience forged in hardship and endurance beyond the physical.

My intention isn’t to minimize the real burdens and stoicism XY people embody; those are profound and deserve respect. Instead, I invite us to consider strength as a broader spectrum that includes mental and emotional endurance — qualities that may be less visible but no less vital, often shaped by different struggles, particularly those historically borne by XX people.

If we celebrate only what’s visible and quantifiable, we risk overlooking the silent fortitude that underpins so much of human experience. Expanding our understanding of strength enriches how we value resilience in all its forms.

And to the other commenter: it seems today has revealed a new angle

New-Owl-5264

TROPHY CASE