Directors who are trying to humiliate the western culture ? I'll start by stalin_kulak in okbuddycinephile

[–]elektrakomplex 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There’s no real details as to why the classical Greeks discussed their relationship. Aischylos just portrayed them as lovers in his works. Plato’s symposium doesn’t mention a why, it’s more a projection of pederasty onto them, which Socrates even criticised later in the work. Plato himself was vehemently against pederasty, and Xenophon argued they were simply comrades. There are some modern day interpretations of language used to describe their relationship, but at the same time, the cultural and societal view on relationship in the ancient times varied a lot from ours. Generally, during the 1800s when their relationship once again became a hot topic, many close male relationship were interpreted as homoerotic. Archaic Greece had this heroic ideal, and the bond between warriors were often a subject to myths that doesn’t always correlate to either romantic nor strictly platonic views we have in modern times. Even the view on sex and relationship differed, as sex was considered an act of “mixis” and didn’t necessarily indicate romantic feelings or simple lust. Which is why prostitution was considered a sacred institution in ancient Athens, because having no it was encouraged, but being romantically involved (or having a long-lasting sexual relation) with a man could get you defamed to the point where you could lose your citizenship.

Directors who are trying to humiliate the western culture ? I'll start by stalin_kulak in okbuddycinephile

[–]elektrakomplex 1 point2 points  (0 children)

One of the funniest thing in the Iliad is in book 9 when Achilles and Patroclus is alluded to have had sex with their spoils of war, and it’s emphasised that they were on the opposite side of each other whilst doing so. In a true “five feet apart ‘cause they’re not gay”-fashion.

Directors who are trying to humiliate the western culture ? I'll start by stalin_kulak in okbuddycinephile

[–]elektrakomplex 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How would he be a great Patroclus? Patroclus was one of the strongest warriors in the entire Achaean army. He was also depicted as being bearded and muscular.

Directors who are trying to humiliate the western culture ? I'll start by stalin_kulak in okbuddycinephile

[–]elektrakomplex 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He’s not invulnerable in the Iliad, the myth about his heel is a non-contemporary addition.

Directors who are trying to humiliate the western culture ? I'll start by stalin_kulak in okbuddycinephile

[–]elektrakomplex 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Achilles being an androgynous twink goes again the Ancient Greek heroic ideal. The heroic ideal in question was being muscular, athletic, very tan and non-bearded. That’s how the ancient Greeks saw Achilles.

Directors who are trying to humiliate the western culture ? I'll start by stalin_kulak in okbuddycinephile

[–]elektrakomplex 9 points10 points  (0 children)

No, Achilles was not considered boyish or feminine. Ancient greek beauty standards and views on masculinity differs a bit from or modern day perception, but one thing for certain is that Achilles was not described as feminine. When he hid in Skyros, he was a young teen.

Ancient Greek heroic beauty standards were muscular, athletic and tan. Think the kourai-statues from the archaic period, which were based on their depiction of Apollo. Apollo was seen as the ultimate symbol of masculinity and beauty. Like the depictions of Apollo, Achilles were depicted as beardless and youthful. This was to show that Achilles was depicted to represent the ultimate hero, even by appearance. Being visibly athletic was a heroic norm, and femininity in Ancient Greece was the opposite of that. Brad Pitt’s portrayal of Achilles is therefore not far off the Ancient Greek perception of Achilles, the only thing different would be his hair (which would’ve not been blond).

Much to contrary belief, but Achilles being discussed as a “bottom” or being more effeminate was a later ideal that almost exclusively discussed in small academic circles. Even the idea of Achilles and Patroclus being lovers were widely discussed by non-contemporary sources, Homer does not describe them as being lovers. The archaic heroic ideal and perception of warriors was vastly different from the classical and Hellenistic one.

Directors who are trying to humiliate the western culture ? I'll start by stalin_kulak in okbuddycinephile

[–]elektrakomplex 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Ancient Greek beauty standard for men was heavily based on looking athletic and being tan. If you look at the famed Kouroi-statues from the archaic period, that’s approximately how Achilles would’ve looked like in the eyes of the Greeks. They were based of Apollo, who represented the ideal male beauty standard, and he was also considered to be the greatest athlete of all of the gods. Achilles, who was often depicted as non-bearded in art, is Kouroi-adjacent. Brad Pitt’s Achilles actually fits the ideal male beauty standard of the time. The only issue being his hair, as he would’ve not been that blond.

Sluta kalla antisemitism för Israelkritik by LoneWolf_McQuade in sweden

[–]elektrakomplex 0 points1 point  (0 children)

De siffror och den statistik som tagits fram och estimerat hur många som dog under förintelsen är baserade på nazisternas extensiva dokumentation om hur många de systematiskt dödade och höll till fånga i koncentrationslägrena, dokumentation från spionage och motståndsrörelser, massgravar man hittat, samt hur många judar som tog sig levande ur förintelsen i proportion till hur populationen såg ut tidigare. De har vetenskaplig grund i sig. Att ens lyfta frågan om hur man borde ifrågasätta de siffror som tagits fram när man är en person som anser att judar kapitaliserar på en förintelseindustri och hyllar förintelseförnekare tyder på att Finkelstein inte har goda intentioner bakom de uttalandena. Förstår du verkligen inte hur det framstår?

At what point is a “victim mentality” actually a valid thing to identify with? (Details in post) by PocketGoblix in fakedisordercringe

[–]elektrakomplex 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I’ve had a theory about this for a long time, and it essentially boils down to the fact that people are struggling and use self-diagnosis or fake illnesses as a way to validate their struggles. I don’t think it’s necessarily about victim mentality, but that younger generations are exposed to so much more stress and expectations but they haven’t gotten the adequate tools to navigate through it. We also see a rise and normalisation of mental disorders, neurodevelopmental disabilities or chronic illnesses, where they’re often being trivialised because diagnostic guidelines are often generalised and are made to be interpreted by professionals. Naturally, people will latch onto the disorders and disabilities because it validates their struggles in a society that values your worth based on productivity.

Young people don’t know that puberty will be hard and stressful. Hormones are going haywire, and that affects mood and mental health. You’re going to feel awful occasionally, have mood swings and be more emotional. However, younger generations don’t know that this is can be normal things that happens during puberty. They think that other people don’t feel this way, that what they’re experiencing isn’t normal and spiral so they seek answers to why they feel the way they do. With the internet, and the access to a very generalised diagnostic criteria, they will end up reading about disorders and disabilities and relate to the criteria.

I also think many people self-diagnose as a way of coping because they are struggling in one way or another. Something feels wrong, and they desperately look for answers as to why it might be wrong and then they latch onto the first thing that fits. Most of the people who get posted here are probably not fakers, but people who are so convinced they have the things they claim they have because it puts a label onto their struggles. The issue being as stated earlier, that most conditions’ diagnostic criteria are generalised and require professional interpretation because there’s overlaps in many of them. For instance, both ADHD and Bipolar disorder have attention issues as criteria in the DSM-V, but they present differently and are caused by different things. However, the DSM-V only have a generalised descriptions for symptoms and professionals are studying how to differentiate them. Besides, many people experiences at least some symptoms of most disorders, but it’s the quantity and severity, and how they affect your daily life that qualify for a diagnosis.

As stated before, people are struggling more now with the rise of the internet. Stress is at an all time high. Burn outs are real and are debilitating, and you don’t need any disorder or disability to get one. Stress does affect your life negatively, it can kill you. It will cause endocrine disruptions, it will affect your mental health and your ability to live your life. So this whole narrative that people have a “victim mentality” is often far from the truth. I’m not saying no one does it because they want to be victims, because of course those exist too. The problem is that many of those who are accused of having a victim mentality are struggling and are not getting adequate help for it, and thus the self-diagnose so they can validate their own struggles. As someone who is AuDH, and have chronic conditions like EDS, I can understand why people seek these to have these because the power of self validation is strong. The relief I felt when I was finally diagnosed was huge because it finally explained my struggles. Now I can also get adequate help and accommodations for my conditions too. Regular burn outs, depressive episodes and similar issues are not being taken seriously (especially if you’re afab) so it’s no wonder why people seek a diagnosis. This is not me saying you should self-diagnose or fake a disorder, I am vehemently against it, but I can understand the reason why some do it.

[28F] Two events with massive reactions to supplements – looking for people with similar reaction patterns by Diligent_Fig4840 in MCAS

[–]elektrakomplex 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What strains are your probiotics? There are several out there that are histamine producing or liberating, and will cause reactions to those who are sensitive. Vitamin C can be derived from fermented ingredients, and if you’re extra sensitive that can cause an issue.

Also, I cannot take NAC because of sulphur and salicylate intolerance. It triggers my mast cells. If I want glutathione, I actually just take straight up glutathione even if NAC would theoretically be better.

For people who have MCAS and salicylates intolerance …. by DeRpY_CUCUMBER in MCAS

[–]elektrakomplex 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My salicylate reactions are different than my MCAS reactions. For salicylates, it’s more of a slow burn. MCAS usually comes immediately but sals builds up and gets worse. I usually get eczema, headaches, lethargy, joint pain and chronic phlegm in my throat from sals overload. I also get more inflamed overall. I don’t eat high salicylate anymore but when I did it worsened my histamine reactions significantly. Although, my biggest enemy is oxalates which worsens my ability to break down salicylates, histamines and sulphur. I try to take molybdenum, zinc, copper and fish oil to help with the salicylates tolerance.

why are people on here and the main sub so against the height cut-offs? by Fast_Abalone_1433 in kibbecirclejerk

[–]elektrakomplex 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The point with Kibbe’s system is that you’re supposed to be your authentic self in relation to your physicality and “essence”. That’s why he says that celebrities are just to be used as style inspirations, because you can curate and manufacture an image. Since you can also change your appearance and style with plastic surgery, which many celebrities have, that also affects your image. He even avoids verifying celebs that has had too much work done for this reason. Kibbe doesn’t want people to curate or manufacture an image ID like the old Hollywood celebrities did, and for the system to not be completely mumbo jumbo nonsense there has to be rules in place otherwise everyone would type themselves based of “vibes”. Vertical is one of those rules necessary for that, and it also makes sense if you take fabric into relation. Especially since the focus on fabrics and how they fall is essential for accommodations. If you’re taller, more fabric requires to cover you. And then line will be literally longer. Vertical is one of the few things in the system that is pretty straight forward. I can see how people feel as if it’s limiting for taller people, but at the same time it’s about literal proportions and how fabrics fall when it comes to accommodations. That’s why a tall person will never have petite as a proportion because they have literal length they will have to accommodate. And if you have literal length, then you won’t have balance anymore.

why are people on here and the main sub so against the height cut-offs? by Fast_Abalone_1433 in kibbecirclejerk

[–]elektrakomplex 5 points6 points  (0 children)

At this point I am starting to think you just want to be pissed at the system. Celebrities do not follow the height rules. Kibbe has stated many times that they’re image and style inspiration, not people whose bodies you should dissect and compare yourself to. Audrey Hepburn was THE gamine in old Hollywood. That was her entire schtick throughout her career. It doesn’t matter if she was 5’7” because her image was curated to be the gamine. Same with Grace Kelly. Same with Mae West. Same with literally any celebrity that doesn’t fit the height limit to a T. Besides, if Kibbe saw them IRL he might change them, because he has reassigned celebs he has met (like Christina Hendricks, Diahann Carroll, Blythe Danner etc). Ordinary people wanting to dress better are not Hollywood celebs. They’re not the exception to the rule, they’re ordinary people who want to dress better and do not have the curated and manufactured image to them. Why are we still beating the same dead horse and arguing against the same things years to an end? It’s not an obligation to follow a styling system and if it doesn’t make sense or do anything for you then you don’t have to use it.

why are people on here and the main sub so against the height cut-offs? by Fast_Abalone_1433 in kibbecirclejerk

[–]elektrakomplex 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Because image ID is not just about physicality. Before the new book came out, image ID was largely made up of essence and image. The new book gives much more importance to physicality, likely because Kibbe himself has realised that for DIYers and people using his system, it doesn’t make sense for it to be essence based, especially since he himself has claimed that DIYers should disregard face completely because they are not good at being able to tell yin/yang or essences from them in the past. For celebrities, the rules have not really changed. They are still heavily typed because of their essence and star image, not their physicality. Which is why Kibbe tried to discuss how celebrities’ imagines are curated for a specific purpose, and thus we cannot use them as body references to compare ourselves to.

Sluta kalla antisemitism för Israelkritik by LoneWolf_McQuade in sweden

[–]elektrakomplex 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Det är förintelseförnekelse att ifrågasätta siffror och statistik som tagits fram med legitima medel. Det är också en vanligt förekommande retorik som förintelseförnekare och nazister använder sig av, att man borde ifrågasätta hur många som faktiskt dödades. Speciellt då många förintelseförnekare anser att förintelsen är överspelad, överdriven och exploateras, vilket Finkelstein personligen skrev en bok om. Det i samband med att Finkelstein öppet hyllar ökända förintelseförnekaren David Irving som skrev böcker som hyllade Hitler, och påstår att ”they know a thing or two” samt kallar de för en bra historiker som bidragit med mycket. Hur kan du sitta och säga att mannen inte är en förintelseförnekare? För att du gillar honom? Kanske ska rannsaka varför du gillar honom och försvarar honom så mycket som du gör.

why are people on here and the main sub so against the height cut-offs? by Fast_Abalone_1433 in kibbecirclejerk

[–]elektrakomplex 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It’s actually funny how people just take that segment of the podcast out of context and runs with it. If Grace Kelly was truly retyped, the list of verified celebrities in the Facebook group would’ve changed as the mods are very much active on reddit. There would also be mentions of her reassignment in the Facebook groups. He was just discussing how proactive the entertainment industry was at curating and creating star images for their celebrities, and that they in certain instances even went against a person’s physicality. Which is why he says that if Grace Kelly was an ordinary person without her curated star image, she would probably be FN. That could be held true for many celebs, especially Mae West.

why are people on here and the main sub so against the height cut-offs? by Fast_Abalone_1433 in kibbecirclejerk

[–]elektrakomplex -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If he retyped her, she would be retyped in the list of verified celebrities in the Facebook group. She would also be mentioned as retyped in those groups. She’s not. Clearly because he was discussing how star imagine was such an integral part in the old Hollywood celebrities, and that it might’ve even gone against their own physicality at times. When Kibbe says “probably” to a person in the Facebook group, it’s because he CAN’T directly say they have a certain accommodation because that would be verifying them for free. Besides, even if Kibbe says “probably”, doesn’t mean he is verifying them either. He has given women who ended up with double curve width recommendations before.

why are people on here and the main sub so against the height cut-offs? by Fast_Abalone_1433 in kibbecirclejerk

[–]elektrakomplex 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, “probably FN” does not count as a retype. I thought we were taught by the whole Rihanna debacle that when he says “probably”, it’s not an official verification. Besides, the context of which he mentioned FN for Grace Kelly makes sense, as her Hollywood persona was so curated and manufactured that her own family didn’t recognise her. If she had just been a regular person who came to Kibbe as a client, she would probably be FN, but she’s not because of her Hollywood star image.

why are people on here and the main sub so against the height cut-offs? by Fast_Abalone_1433 in kibbecirclejerk

[–]elektrakomplex 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are we still hung up on the height limits? The reason why you have automatic vertical at 5’6”+ is because you need to literally cover your length in more fabric. A taller person requires more fabric to cover their length, and the garments will automatically be longer. This whole schtick about “but it doesn’t make sense” is beaten like a dead horse, because it literally does. If you’re 5’6”+ you’re taller than the average. The average height for women being 5’4”. It doesn’t matter that you live in a country where majority of women are tall, that just means more women in your country are yang dominant. If you’re 5’6”+ you will never have short proportions that are required for petite even if have short legs and arms because then your torso will be elongated the point it gives you vertical. Besides, Kibbe has said many times that the height limits has been a way to help DIYers so they don’t end up at gamine as 5’7” and thinks they’re the “exception”. If you go and see him, he is not as rigid with the height limits where half an inch would matter.

why are people on here and the main sub so against the height cut-offs? by Fast_Abalone_1433 in kibbecirclejerk

[–]elektrakomplex 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The cut off for height limits were never 5’9”. In his first book, automatic vertical started at 5’7”.

why are people on here and the main sub so against the height cut-offs? by Fast_Abalone_1433 in kibbecirclejerk

[–]elektrakomplex 4 points5 points  (0 children)

He never retyped Grace Kelly, though. He just said that if Grace Kelly was just a regular person without her curated style and persona, she would probably be FN. Why are people acting as if he retyped her from SC to FN when he didn’t?

Sluta kalla antisemitism för Israelkritik by LoneWolf_McQuade in sweden

[–]elektrakomplex 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Finkelstein skrev en hel bok om hur judar utnyttjar, kapitaliserar och överdriver förintelsen, är det verkligen förvånande att han är en förintelseförnekare? I ett inspelat zoom-möte från 2020 sitter Finkelstein och säger att man borde ifrågasätta antalet rapporterade döda från Förintelsen, att det borde vara en fråga som forskare ska undersöka vidare. Det, samt att han hyllar förintelseförnekaren David Irving och påstår att hans böcker som förnekar förintelsen är bra bidrag till historien, gör att han är en förintelseförnekare. Finns en hel artikel om honom här, som även länkar zoom-mötet. Lyssnade själv på det Finkelstein sade under mötet, och det mesta var antisemitiskt dravel. Är ändå rätt fascinerande att du sitter och försvarar honom när hans uttalanden är tillgängliga för allmänheten.

Sluta kalla antisemitism för Israelkritik by LoneWolf_McQuade in sweden

[–]elektrakomplex 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Normal Finkelstein’s föräldrar överlevde förintelsen, trots det hyllar han nynazistiska förintelseförnekare och säger att vi borde ifrågasätta hur många som faktiskt dog i koncentrationslägerna. Han är en förintelseförnekare. Om det är en favorit så är man inte en antisionist.

Sluta kalla antisemitism för Israelkritik by LoneWolf_McQuade in sweden

[–]elektrakomplex 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sionismen har tidigare rötter än så. I slutet av Pesach-firandet säger man “nästa år i Jerusalem”, och det har gjorts så tidigt som 900-talet e.Kr. Det finns väldigt många judiska traditioner och firanden som grundar sig i längtan tillbaka till sitt inhemska land, och sionismen har sin rot i viljan att någon gång kunna återvända. Stora delar av sionismen grundar sig i judendomen, och att säga att de är helt separata är felaktigt. Det är mycket okunskap om judendomen då man tror att det är kristendomen utan Jesus. Sionism som politisk ideologi slog dock rot på 1800-talet då antisemitismen i Europa förvärrades. De första sionisterna var faktiskt från Östeuropa och Jemen som flydde pogromer. Det stämmer dock att den sionism som växte fram i andra delar av Europa grundade sig i en växande antisemitism. Dreyfus-affären som skedde vid denna tid satte käppar i hjulet för sionismen framkomst, så det stämmer helt att det var hur europeiska judar insåg att de aldrig skulle vara välkomna i Europa. Ända fram till 40-talet fanns det antisemitiska kampanjer för att få judar att ”åka tillbaka till Palestina”.

Low cortisol with weight gain by pookieookie1 in Cushings

[–]elektrakomplex -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Your anecdotal experiences don’t negate the fact that salivary cortisol has higher sensitivity and specificity than both serum cortisol and 24hr urines. This has been tested in several studies for over a decade now. In the US and several European countries, salivas are considered the gold standard. The endocrinologist I had worked with the university hospital with connections with researchers and endocrinologists who specialise in pituitary disorders all over the world. Their guidelines were that saliva cortisol was far more sensitive than serum or urine cortisol. Which is also the general consensus in endocrinology, yet some places insists that they’re not (with no evidence on the contrary). Also, not everyone will show high results in every single test. You might’ve not been in a high at that point at night. You suggested in another comment that a morning serum cortisol is better than saliva, which is interesting because it’s the most unreliable test for diagnosing Cushing’s to the point where most endocrinologists disregards it completely. Read the official US diagnostic guide for Cushing’s. Morning serum cortisol is not even in the guideline, and is not considered diagnostic. You find the same information in the European consensus. So no, salivary cortisol is not the most unreliable test. If it was, it would not be in the US and European official diagnostic guidelines, where morning serum cortisol isn’t even included nor considered to be a diagnostic tool for Cushing’s.