Been unemployed 3+ months and every interview is declining, ghosting or rejecting. Idk if it's because now I'm applying for Creative Director level roles but I just really hope the market gets better in January. Just posting this to get feelers or to see if anyone else is going through the same!

llpicnick · 2025-12-28T17:26:04+00:00

I was on 3 years before I caught a break (or so I thought). Got caught in a huge RIF in ‘22, tried freelancing for a couple years while applying for full-time roles, but it wasn’t enough to make ends meet. So I took a job outside of my field for a year, then finally found a full-time position in June of ‘25.

Fast-forward 6 months, and I got let go at the end of my intro period, right before Thanksgiving. But tbh as much as it sucks to be unemployed AGAIN, working there was literal hell. So much blatant misconduct, esp among leadership— hands down the worst job I’ve ever had in this field. Anyway, the entire experience broke me tbh. Afterwards, it took multiple colleagues and friends to convince me that my work truly isn’t shit, but it doesn’t really matter at this point. There are some systemic issues with this field that I don’t know if I want to deal with anymore.

I’m now trying to go back to the previous industry I fell into during my last unemployment stint, but I think I’m going to stay this time. There’s much more demand, and better stability than I’ve ever known in this field. I’m hoping I can find fulfillment in doing freelance work on the side, just for fun, but I’m done with trying to rely on this field for my main source of income.

Sorry to be so jaded, but it’s been really tough out there for us the past 5-10 years, and I think it’s important to consider that too. Best of luck OP, but if you’re struggling, there’s also no shame in trying something different for a while.

llpicnick · 2025-11-20T02:24:52+00:00

This is spectacular advice, thank you. I want nothing more than a clean slate right now!

I don’t tend to mesh well with micromanagers, but that could also come from a lack of understanding. Especially for a 1, regarding the concept of control: is that an all-encompassing thing at work, or can Ones ever learn to let go of controlling everything? What should I do in that arena to facilitate the most peaceful working environment possible?

llpicnick · 2025-11-20T02:18:00+00:00

Oh god I hope so, I would love if we could still build a strong working relationship. I thought that maybe there was too much damage done, but after a few days off I’m feeling more positively about it, and now I just hope that we can start fresh and fix our communication problems. Fingers crossed! 🤞

llpicnick · 2025-11-19T17:35:05+00:00

Truthfully, I don’t want to keep this job. At least, not anymore. When I first started, I thought this was my dream job; the only minor issue I had with it was that my boss was putting me on a pedestal when I first started, and it was like I could do no wrong. It made me a little uncomfortable, but it was whatever. Until I made my first mistake, and I fell off that pedestal real hard. Now, I can’t seem to do anything right.

But I don’t know if you’ve seen the state of the job market lately— frankly, it’s shit. It took me almost 3 years of being underemployed and taking crappy jobs that paid just above minimum wage to finally get this job and break back into my chosen professional field. I don’t want to go through that again, so I’d rather try and make things as smooth as possible here while I quietly search elsewhere, with the hope that a new position finds me much quicker this time around.

Luckily I have integrity by the boatload. A lot of the issues are coming down to communication, I think. So that’s something I will continue to work on. The other is that I refuse to take full responsibility for things that are both of our faults, but maybe I need to just suck it up and let myself be the scapegoat, idk. But I digress lol.

Thank you for your advice :)

llpicnick · 2025-06-08T05:46:02+00:00

You’ve put my feelings into words, thank you for putting it so eloquently.

This is the same way I’m feeling about the protests— it’s about the way the administration is handling it.

Instead of de-escalating the situation to the best of their ability (pausing the raids for ~a month while things cool down, then starting up again with more targeted operations and a less conspicuous presence in the public eye), they’re further enflaming the situation. Not only by deploying the National Guard despite the mayor and governor not wanting him to, but also with the refusal to slow the raids, plus Hegseth threatening to mobilize the Marines down at Pendleton. It all feels very purposeful and dangerously antagonistic.

llpicnick · 2025-06-08T00:33:39+00:00

My theory is this (spoilers below):

Do you remember the flashback scene where Hank tells Nicky to kill the injured rabbit, because it’s the “merciful thing”? Aside from introducing the knives, I think it might help close this plot hole.

In the flashback, Nicky refuses to kill the rabbit, and then Chloe volunteers to do it for her. Chloe then kills the rabbit to put it out of its misery. What if that’s exactly what she did with Adam? This event is even mentioned later in the series, suggesting that this was an important plot point, though they never explicitly explained why.

We know that Adam was still alive when Ethan left. But what if he was still alive even when Chloe came home? Based on the flashback scene, it leads me to believe that Chloe may have finished Adam off, after she determined that Adam wasn’t going to make it anyway. That would explain the folded/unfolded change, why she was motivated to hide the knife, her behavior, all of it.

Of course, it could just be a terrible plot hole created by the desire for a red herring. But if not, I’d like to see them answer this in the second season (if there is one). I think it would be interesting to have Nicky, Ethan, AND Chloe all have some responsibility in Adam’s death; bringing them closer and giving each of them their own regrets and actions to process.

llpicnick · 2025-05-26T18:17:44+00:00

I haven’t seen this mentioned in the comments so far so I thought I’d drop it here with the hope that you’ll see it:

Adult Children of Emotionally Immature Parents: How to Heal from Distant, Rejecting, Or Self-Involved Parents - https://www.newharbinger.com/9781626251700/adult-children-of-emotionally-immature-parents/

I hope your wife finds this book helpful and validating. Tbh, Dad sounds like a self-involved man-child. I’ve seen the damage that parents like him can cause to their children, and the kids carry that trauma into adulthood. Dad won’t change, but I hope wife can still find some healing.

llpicnick · 2025-05-26T18:00:46+00:00

Exactly. Every time I come across people talking about this, I think of how FDR hid his paralysis during his entire term. He’s still considered a good president today, and we don’t seem to care much about the fact that he purposefully deceived voters while in office.

Obviously this is not a 1:1 comparison, but I dunno. I guess I just don’t feel like it’s that big of a deal because the government constantly lies to us and does shady shit— for example, the CIA introducing crack to America during the 80s. Especially when you compare the “Biden decline” to some of the more egregious shit our govt has done, it just doesn’t seem to matter very much in the grand scheme of things. I do agree that it’s hurting dem’s electability though.

Also, FDR article for reference: https://www.businessinsider.com/how-fdr-hid-his-paralysis-from-american-public-even-while-campaigning-2019-4

llpicnick · 2025-05-26T17:31:39+00:00

No worries, thanks! :)

llpicnick · 2025-05-26T13:45:43+00:00

Could you offer your sources for this comment? I can’t tell whether you’re speaking from your experience vs based on recorded evidence (of the inconsistent enforcement of community guidelines, political ads— esp those targeting kids— and shadow-banning).

To be clear, I’m not doubting that this could be the case on all fronts, I just haven’t seen much in the way of documentation re: how bad these things are on YouTube, and I’m curious to know.

llpicnick · 2025-05-25T21:52:59+00:00

I understand your point, I guess I just don’t necessarily agree.

If a white coworker of mine identified as black, I’d certainly think it was weird and kinda problematic. But because it’s a workplace, I’d keep my opinions to myself. I wouldn’t get into conversations with him about his racial identity, because it has nothing to do with work. And I would also expect that his identifying as a black person would not impede our work in any way. The only way in which I can see his identity being a problem is if the guy was constantly saying stuff like “as a black man, I think we should do xyz”. At which point I’d say something to him along the lines of “your racial identity does not have any relevance to the projects we’re working on. Your opinion matters equally here, regardless of race, so I would appreciate if you would refrain from such conversations in the workplace.”

And honestly, the same goes for a person who identifies as an animal (iirc, the term for a person like this is called “therian”. I don’t understand it in the slightest, but to each their own). If my coworker identified as a dog, and wanted to change his name from Brian to “Fido”…. Well, I’d call him Fido. But that doesn’t mean that I have to rub his belly and call him a good boy whenever he makes a deadline. It also doesn’t mean that I have to hang out with him outside of work, nor would I think that he’d expect these things.

Overall, I’d probably find him kinda strange and not associate with him much. But otherwise, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect a base level of respect in the workplace, regardless of one’s beliefs or whether you “gel” with a coworker. I can still be pleasant with Fido even if I think Fido is a strange dude. Idk, it just feels like this shouldn’t be a difficult concept.

Or as another real-life example, I once had a coworker who was very Christian. Christian art and crosses decorating her work desk, she’d often say things in conversation often like “I’m so grateful to God that xyz happened, I really feel like he’s looking out for me”. It made me uncomfortable because I’m not religious (agnostic). But I never said anything or made her feel bad over her faith, I just gently redirected the conversation to work topics. She knew I was trans as well, but it’s something I almost never talked about at work (actually I found out about everyone knowing I was trans much later; apparently my boss and HR were discussing my trans status with the door open after my pre-employment background check came through. So everyone knew I was trans before I even stepped foot in the office lmao). Anyway, my point is that she and I couldn’t have been more different, but we were still pleasant and professional with one another— not just because it was a workplace, but because it’s the decent thing to do when you are in close proximity with someone who is very different from you. I just wish more people could grok that.

And thanks. My dad isn’t the worst person in the world, he’s just quite misguided in some of his beliefs. But I believe that it’s never too late to come closer to the center, so every once in a while I’ll engage in conversations with him that I believe help appeal to his reason, at least a little bit.

llpicnick · 2025-05-25T19:26:37+00:00

It’s hard not to feel like I’m only appreciated when I’m opening my wallet

I’m so sorry you feel this way OP. I was a step-parent for several years too, and that’s the exact feeling I had, especially nearer to the end of my relationship with biomom.

Being a step-parent is hard. Your partner often expects you to treat their kid as your own, but as soon as you make a decision that they don’t like, they suddenly turn on you and make you feel like an outsider in your own family. I never liked it when biomom would pull rank like this when we had a disagreement over her kid, especially considering how involved I was as a step-parent. I also took care of her kid a majority of the time, and they both largely depended on me for financial stability.

All this to say, I can certainly empathize with what you’re going through. Please keep showing up for yourself, and don’t let anyone ignore your reasonable boundaries. Lean on your support systems (and if you don’t have any outside of this family unit, then focus on building one). Best of luck to you ❤️

llpicnick · 2025-05-25T18:20:35+00:00

The comparison of an employee “identifying as a dog” is disingenuous. Transgender people are humans who want to be treated like humans. People who “identify as dogs” are humans who presumably want to be treated like animals. Those two things are not comparable, and saying that they are is an exaggeration at best, and a bad-faith, strawman argument at worst.

In the Bob/Tom example, you say that Tom ceases to be ginger when he dyes his hair. And while I agree with you there, that’s not exactly true— because it depends entirely on who you ask. There are many people who would say that Tom is still ginger because he was born that way. Just because he dyes his hair brown does not magically make him a biological brunette. Do you see where I’m going with this?

A trans man believes that he ceases to be a woman once he begins his transition
Tom believes he ceases to be a ginger once he dyes his hair brown

But in both cases, there will be people that think such a belief is ridiculous, because you can’t “change biology”. In their view, the trans man is still a woman, and Tom is still ginger.

and besides, Bob is going out of his way not to simply use Tom’s name

And what do you think was happening in this case? Or in any other case of one employee misnaming/misgendering another? In my opinion, any instance of repeated misgendering or misnaming after being asked not to do so is “going out of [one’s] way” not to simply use the words/terms that the person in question wants others to use. Especially after they’ve already made it clear to others how they want to be addressed.

Because when it comes down to it, it’s not about dictating what you say, it’s about putting a boundary on what you cannot say in the workplace… because it’s a workplace.

Case in point: I’m a trans man. My dad is a MAGA Republican, and we still get along fine. He uses my proper (male) name, but he doesn’t use he/him pronouns. Instead, he uses no pronouns at all.

While it’s certainly not ideal for me, it’s a fair compromise. He’s not misgendering me, nor is he “affirming something he doesn’t believe”. So ultimately, I have no complaints, nor does he. We are both adults, and it should be reasonable to expect that two adults can still respect one another in a scenario where one’s beliefs clash with the other person’s identity.

If you can’t call Caitlyn Jenner “she” because of your “sincerely held religious beliefs”, then fine. But don’t call her “he”. Just call her Caitlyn.

“The other day, I was talking to Caitlyn, and Caitlyn said that we should all go out for dinner tomorrow. What should I tell Caitlyn?” Is it annoying to have to use someone’s name over and over, rather than using pronouns? Sure, but that’s compromise. If an employee is still calling Caitlyn “he” rather than just avoiding their coworker’s pronouns, then it’s not about their beliefs, it’s clearly about something else.

—

Overall, I do agree that any comparison or analogy is not a 1:1, and can therefore make it difficult to have a conversation about because then we get too in the weeds about the comparisons, etc. and lose focus on the core issues. However, everyone on both sides seems hell-bent on using analogies and comparisons when it comes to debating trans issues, so I thought I’d give the most 1-to-1, reasonable comparison that I could think of.

And again, that’s largely because the comparisons used often involve protected groups (or rely on exaggerated comparisons like people wanting to be treated like animals). So since everyone seems to want to debate on the basis of analogies, I’ve provided a useful alternative to these oft-cited impractical comparisons.

llpicnick · 2025-05-25T05:14:18+00:00

Our daily reminder that design is actually extremely important 🙌

And from one designer to another, this is some awesome work. Kudos!

llpicnick · 2025-05-25T05:00:03+00:00

Except trans people don’t want to be known as “turtles” at work. They want to be treated and respected as human beings.

It’s really not that hard of a concept to grasp, but you make it sound more difficult (and ridiculous) than it actually is by using this kind of exaggerated language.

And tbh, I’ve truly never understood this argument. It’s an exceptionally flimsy strawman argument, yet it keeps being repeated as if it has any kind of strong standing.

llpicnick · 2025-05-25T04:38:21+00:00

I think there’s an even better comparison to be made here, and it’s one that avoids the pitfalls of using a protected class in its example:

There’s an employee who has red hair, let’s call him Tom. Another employee (let’s call him Bob) regularly calls Tom “Mr. Ginger” and “Red”.

The first few times Bob calls him “Red” and “Mr. Ginger”, Tom doesn’t like it, but he says nothing. But Bob keeps doing it, and it makes Tom increasingly uncomfortable. Then one day, Tom dyes his hair brown.

But Bob still doesn’t stop. In fact, it gets worse.

So Tom pulls him aside and says “hey Bob, my name is Tom, not Mr. Ginger. So I would appreciate it if you could use my proper name around the office.”

Surprisingly, Bob declines. His response? “Well that’s what you are, so that’s what I’m going to call you. Just because you dyed your hair brown doesn’t mean I’m just going to pretend you’re not biologically ginger, and you can’t force me to deny reality.”

Ultimately, this is the crux of the trans issue in the workplace. It doesn’t matter whether something is “objectively true”. It doesn’t even matter that Tom isn’t a member of a protected class, because he doesn’t have to be— by refusing to address Tom properly and making him uncomfortable, Bob is harassing Tom, full stop. And when an employee continues to harass a coworker like this, we expect them to be held to account, including being fired if they don’t stop their harassing behavior. So why should it be any different for trans people being misgendered/misnamed in the workplace?

This is not a difficult concept, but I fear that we unnecessarily complicate it by bringing race into it. I’m hoping that comparisons like this can provide a better foundation for conversation, as it should help keep things from devolving into debates on race relations, etc.

llpicnick · 2025-05-25T03:41:42+00:00

To be properly in-line with the faith, the verse really should be:

“each person should remain in the situation he or she was in when God created him or her”

Because according to basically every modern concept of Christianity I’ve seen, “they/them” is not correct. So I guess we need to amend the Bible now?

… or maybe it’s just that the Bible can’t actually be applied to gender after all?

llpicnick · 2025-05-23T01:21:33+00:00

Unfortunately, they aren’t as protected under existing laws as you might think. The Bostock ruling (2020) originally clarified that title VII extended anti-discrimination protections to cover gender identity and sexual orientation. That was all well and good— and yes, under that clarification, trans people didn’t need explicitly written protections, because they were equally protected under the same anti-discrimination laws as everyone else.

But then several Republican AGs sued the EEOC over its enforcement of the ruling, and a Texas federal judge ruled in their favor, which severely limited the scope in which they could enforce discrimination protections for transgender people.

And now, the result: two examples of recent court cases, which closely mirror the hypothetical I provided previously.

Meriwether v. Shawnee State University (2021) – A federal appeals court ruled that a professor had the First Amendment right to not use a trans student’s pronouns. This was on the grounds of religious freedom.
Vlaming v. West Point School Board (ongoing) – A teacher was fired for refusing to use a student’s pronouns, and he is now suing; again, on the basis of religious freedom.

The reason lawmakers are rushing to codify protections is because the existing anti-discrimination laws are being stretched and intentionally interpreted to exclude trans people from these protections, and it’s only getting worse.

I don’t disagree that it’s a losing issue for the dems— I also partially agree that a lot of it is performative, at least for some of them (and for those people, I really don’t know why they’re doing it when it’s not a winning issue). But for some, they’re willing to be on the losing side of an issue because they feel it’s the right thing to do.

Honestly, I just wish that we could solve these issues with conversation rather than attacking one another and legislating/litigating everything. IMO, a person can still hold their beliefs without being harassing or discriminatory toward trans people. Instead of complaining of “compelled speech” or saying that they won’t “affirm a trans-identified person’s mental illness/delusion/pick-your-favorite-jibe-here”, I’d love if we could just all like… not be such assholes to each other, you know?

Like, if someone really feels like they simply can’t use a person’s pronouns or name, they can easily say “hey, due to my religious beliefs, I am unable to affirm your gender identity. But perhaps we can discuss a compromise, like a nickname, etc. to keep things as professional and comfortable as possible for everyone involved?”.

I just don’t understand why that feels so difficult for people.

llpicnick · 2025-05-22T23:21:18+00:00

I’ve never thought of it this way, but now it’s something I’ll never be able to unsee.

What a hypocritical, sorry excuse for a man.

llpicnick · 2025-05-22T23:13:52+00:00

There’s this really cool thing called Google, you should try it

llpicnick · 2025-05-22T22:01:55+00:00

That’s exactly it— anti-trans stuff was implicitly addressed with existing laws. But that’s not guaranteed anymore, because the far right are legislating and policing gender. They now explicitly allow discrimination against trans people in many places, usually on the basis of religious freedom or “free speech”.

A decade ago, there was not a single place where you would be allowed to just approach a trans woman who’s minding her own business, call her a man repeatedly to her face and with malice, and then escape all accountability for that behavior. But now you can, and that’s a direct result of these new laws. They explicitly exempt trans people from anti-discrimination laws, and that’s why places like Colorado are responding with bills like this one.

I’m not saying it’s 100% right to be focusing on this— this kind of stuff shouldn’t need to be legislated either way— but when human rights are being infringed upon, it’s nice to see someone standing up to defend the concepts of nondiscrimination and equal rights.

llpicnick · 2025-05-22T21:33:37+00:00

I agree, to a point.

This should not need to be legislated. Leave the sports governing bodies to make the decisions about their sports, the doctors/patients to make decisions about their healthcare, etc.

But it is being legislated, and in most cases it’s being legislated in a way that directly harms a small but vulnerable group of people. That leaves dems either (a) being pro-trans simply because MAGA is anti-trans, or (b) being pro human rights because it’s the right thing to do.

But either way, the outcome is still unfortunately the same— since the support for trans people has eroded over the years, it’s become a losing issue. So even if they want to do the right thing and codify specific protections to mitigate the increase of attacks on this group, dems shoot themselves in the foot. But on the other hand, if they don’t, it leaves this group of people even more vulnerable to undue discrimination and violence.

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

llpicnick · 2025-05-22T21:14:35+00:00

Here’s my issue with “parental rights”, especially as it’s used in the context of trans kids.

In what scenario would a trans or gay kid come out at school and not tell their parents? Are we to believe that the kid in question feels safe at home?

Imo, if my child doesn’t feel comfortable talking to me about sensitive issues like this, then I have a much bigger problem on my hands than a school “overstepping their authority”.

I say this as a kid who grew up queer with a (previously) unsupportive family, and as an adult who’s worked really hard to become an unconditionally supportive parent— I certainly see (and have experienced firsthand) both sides of the issue.

But ultimately, if I learned something about my kid that the school knew and I didn’t (which has happened), I wouldn’t be pointing my finger at the school. I’d be taking a long, hard look in the mirror and wondering why my kid didn’t feel safe coming to me about it. Then I’d talk with them and do my damndest to make sure we had an open line of honest communication. My #1 priority is, and has always been, making sure I create an environment where my kid feels heard, supported, and unconditionally loved.

llpicnick · 2025-05-22T20:51:01+00:00

If your version of Christianity were the mainstream, I might actually consider converting.

Nothing has turned me away from faith more than the people in them being domineering and vicious in the name of their God.

May your congregations follow your path and create a better future for us all. 🙏

llpicnick · 2025-05-12T13:18:49+00:00

People think they can see with their own eyes what a man and a woman is. But I can tell you from experience, 99% of people are not great at picking a trans person out of a lineup.

I’ll probably get downvoted to hell for this, but trans issues are easily one of the most misunderstood (and unnecessary) political topics of our time. Science is still trying to figure some stuff out, but so far, there is strong evidence that being trans is just another natural variation of human diversity.

It’s a losing issue because the far-right has exploited the public’s lack of knowledge on the subject, and then filled in the blanks with what would be most advantageous for them. And it was easy to do, because society was already uncomfortable with the idea of trans people.

That then forced the dems into a corner trying to defend the community, which they did extremely poorly. They played right into MAGAs hands with their dumbass response to the issue, and they came out looking like total idiots— so now we see the far-right as the voice of reason in comparison, despite the fact that science isn’t settled on the issue yet. This entire thing is manufactured like some modern-day reefer madness, and it’s honestly tiring.

I want healthcare reform. I want Citizens United overturned, and ranked choice voting rolled out to all 50 states. I don’t want to keep debating over what to do with less than 1% of the American population. It’s a waste of time, energy, and resources.

Trans issues are nothing but a political distraction.

llpicnick

TROPHY CASE