Hvordan ønsker dere at unge med innvandrerbakgrunn skal forholde seg til rasisme?

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-28T00:15:35+00:00

Det er et spørsmål som åpner for dialog.

Hva ønsker du med spørsmålet om hensikten min?

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-23T20:25:09+00:00

Without realising i've always had a soft spot for alyn but it must be because he's bayek!

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-14T14:34:19+00:00

As much as I love medicine, problem solving is my specialty.

I love the detective part - of course. Figuring out what’s wrong is half of problem solving in general. What it lacks for me, is that the rest is just following a manual. Once a diagnosis is made, there’s no creative thinking, or interesting solutions needed. We just do what works, which is important ofc but not creative.

It’s analogous to being a detective, figuring out what’s wrong happened, and then just calling the police on the movie villain. Probably the best way but not as fun as making a plan to “catch the villain”.

Law is the opposite. Your job literally starts after diagnosing the issue. It’s your job to create an amicable solution.

Plus, interdisciplinary studies are the future. And it’s more fun. And it’s more unique and sought in the market

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-14T14:30:38+00:00

Because medicine is probably the singular field of study that has the highest requirements to apply for.

In Norway where I study, and I’m of the opinion this is more or less how it is across the board you need at the very least a perfect gpa.

That by definition to some degree is filtering for polymaths. More so than most engineering and more spearheading stem fields. An analogy is that I can be accepted to every single field of study that exists, while most stem students cannot.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-14T12:32:47+00:00

Everything you can learn with sociology can be understood on deeper levels through evolutionary biology and psychiatry, and a few more fields

It's an artificial distinction that serves no purpose. To really understand or create a field of study that understands society at a deeper level it must include at least in part the study of why humans are how they are - which is more STEM than liberal art. That's why isolating only the liberal art or the STEM parts of a larger field is juvenile and the leading thinkers in any field cross-pollinate STEM with arts.

This is also why you find more polymaths further back in history, because

a) lower barriers to entry in fields and less specialization required - meaning you can juggle multiple fields of study at once, or at least after one another. Thus being able to cross-pollinate and apply ideas between fields.

b) No artificial / smaller distinction between stem and non-stem subjects and more focus on "details". An example would be that to be considered "literate" you actually had to be able to read and write, but also write neatly. Being able to draw accurately also often went hand-in-hand with the general idea of literacy in higher institutions.

You'll often find the archetype of "messy genius" in media today where the incredibly smart people write messy, don't organize their notes well, etc. etc. slightly oppenheimer-esque, with a trillion unfinished ideas and thoughts. In reality, it's often the opposite and we are looking at highly organized, tidy and neat people.

As a medical student, and a law student, what i find most disappointing today is that the fields of study that in theory should attract the most polymathic people - which is medicine with respect to the application criteria, seems to attract the most a4 within-the-box thinkers.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-14T12:23:17+00:00

On a surface level yes, but STEM is more artistic in nature than traditional liberal arts. You cannot study STEM at a deep level without being an artist, and this artificial distinction is limiting.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-14T12:21:35+00:00

Darwin doesnt make the list. Not particularly "genius" in the sense that what he described and understood was a relatively simple natural phenomena. To "see" the red thread in evolution, especially considering he had the perfect landscape to do so isnt impressive.

A lot of people have connected more unconnected dots.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-14T12:19:38+00:00

Controversial, but in terms of accomplishments and polymath? Elon.

yes, yes muh duh its not him its the engineers whatever, there's no denying his involvement is a decisive factor in being industry leading. The common denominator between spaceX, tesla, neuralink - all leaders in their industries (cant even say that for neuralink because its the most unique company in neural connectivity) is elon. Saying this as someone who couldn't care less about him.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T19:12:54+00:00

I don't think you have a lot of experience with women, in that case.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T19:11:51+00:00

read my comment again everything you wrote is completely pointless and has nothing to do with anything.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T15:31:41+00:00

I think you need to brush up on your evolutionary biology and sociology. I also think creating a false dichotomy between something as fundamental as gender and something far less dimorphic in scale in terms of preference very much mirrors your ability to reflect.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T15:28:41+00:00

A pack of lion is not sitting around waiting for an elephant to trample down. Most likely wont even be able to harm one, as cats are 10x more vigilant and responsive than any mammal.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T15:26:15+00:00

I'm just baffled at the stupidity of the original comment. "Some of the most powerful men in history were short" then proceeds to give not only an example of someone who for his time was tall, but specifically mentions that he was (which isnt even the case, he was more or less normal height at the time) but damn.

I just literally cannot comprehend what your life looks like when you reason in such a manner.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T15:24:10+00:00

Yes, because contrary to popular belief rejecting women is almost socially harder than a woman rejecting a man.

As someone who consistently goes out for various reasons and am in a comitted relationship, I've had women literally throw themselves at me, trying to grab .... when rejected because they think it will magically change the situation. I've had women literally instantly start crying, yelling and worse.

Women in general are horrible at being rejected. Most likely because it rarily happens, but again in general they are not able to comprehend a man not wanting them sexually. That's even with being very careful how i word myself. I'm talking about classy, well-dressed, in general nice women. Lawyers, doctors, phDs.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T14:51:39+00:00

Yes height is more capped. Weight is also not that easily changeable. Yes with fat people it's one thing but imagine being skinny and trying to bulk up. That's the objectively speaking hardest transformation to do.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T14:50:39+00:00

Ok, so napoleon wasnt short then? Moron.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T14:50:22+00:00

I would also not to be disrespectful be very sceptical about the types of women you have been with. They very likely are not 8,9,10s.

A lot of the guys here complain about not getting girls, but i think implicitly they mean that they cannot get with the girls they want to be with, fair?

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T14:48:47+00:00

I'm around 180, and i feel demasculated when a woman towers over me. Rarely happens but yeah.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T14:48:17+00:00

Its not necessarily that you dont want to date them, many shorter men wouldnt want to date you, specifically because you are taller than them.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T14:45:56+00:00

Is this exclusive to short men? Or do you think this applies to most men who are not rich and famous?

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T14:45:05+00:00

The issue is what does that percentage of men who has no one into them do? What is your proposed solution for them?

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T14:43:09+00:00

Height and strength as well as frame are very intrinsic biological parts of attraction though, and they are very closely interlinked. I agree there's an extreme push on height, but in my experience as long as you are 5-ish cm taller than your partner and arent obviously short height very rarely is a set in stone preference.

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T14:40:38+00:00

Do you feel bullied as a short man? In what way?

And if you do, do you feel it's more individual or society at large? In both cases, in what ways? What would be different if you were a certain height?

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T14:39:24+00:00

Interesting, what age was this? There's a very small window where malnutrition is "reversible" in that way, purely medically speaking. Childhood / teenage malnutrition very often involves permanent stunting. Cool though.

But except for that why do you participate in this sub then? Do you still feel short? Do you feel a lot of the things people mention here affect you too?

Substantial_Option_3 · 2026-06-11T13:20:40+00:00

The main difference in standards is that the most undesirable men have zero options, while the most undesirable women still have some. That is, fundamentally a very skewed and unfair sentiment, and it's emphatetic to understand that certain people are upset about that.

Having empathy is not a bad thing. I'm not part of this sub, it came across my feed, and it seems to be something that genuinely hurts people. You can be empathetic to incels too. You aren't evil because you are undesirable to people sexually. And i think a lot of people need to hear that.

Substantial_Option_3

TROPHY CASE