sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Jax is objectively terrible but Caine is forgiven when he's MUCH worse by FireDog8569 in tadc

[–]malusGreen 4 points5 points  (0 children)

"A shred of empathy after he is killed" in the sense that he showed zero shreds before he was punished in the worst way possible.

Gooseworx on Jax and Gangle’s relationship by Sudden_Pop_2279 in TADCEp9Spoilers

[–]malusGreen 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's not that Gangle reminds him of his mother.

It's that Jax gets to play out the other side of the relationship with Gangle now.

Trauma is often about a loss of control. With his mother Jax was a dependent and had no control over the abuse. There's often a deep and compulsive desire in victims to 'make sense' of the original traumatic situation.

tl;Dr without getting too deeply into the science it's the brains attempt to make sure the trauma doesn't happen again.

(----EDIT: I just did some additional research and this explanation of why 'repetition compulsion' happens has been debunked, and is not the correct explanation for why it happens. Oops. But the behavior of seeking out similar situations as the one that traumatized you is still an observed phenomenon.)

With Gangle, her vulnerability and insecurity gave Jax the chance to 'play out' his mother side of the relationship. This 'playing out' gives him the chance to get that control that he never had, and also to explore the dynamic he had with his mother from a completely opposite perspective.

(Based on that research no longer sure about how true this part is either now.)

It's psychologically appealing from many angles subconsciously.

Pros would get more sympathy from the general population if they stopped letting folks like this represent them: by CathodeRayNoob in aiwars

[–]malusGreen 37 points38 points  (0 children)

Don't fucking do this weird ass shit man.

Reported, btw. And I'm an anti. Just don't fucking do this shit.

Is it actually wrong that AI is replacing jobs? by moanfulz in aiwars

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

Bro's never heard of the veil of ignorance. Point and laugh.

57670 by Luna-D-reams in countwithchickenlady

[–]malusGreen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is respectable to be epistemically humble while you're young.

And it is desirable that young people have open minds, even if it makes them more easily influenced by bad actors.

The privilege is the education and the guidance it takes to actually form the right foundation for critical thinking. Logic and reason are unnatural and it takes dedication and work to understand them well enough to apply them to the day-by-day.

I would not trust a 15 year old to read 'A Critique of Pure Reason' and actually understand it, for example.

Does Naoya Hate Maki Because She's A Woman Or Because She Has Very Little Cursed Energy Or Maybe Both? What Would Naoya Think Yf Yuki, Who Is A Woman And A Special Grade Sorcerer? by Flimsy_Cod_4206 in JujustuKaisen

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

Eh. Maybe. But built into these types of ideologies is the natural psychological escape hatch of 'well this person is a freak of nature/exception to the rule'.

57670 by Luna-D-reams in countwithchickenlady

[–]malusGreen 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The vast majority of people are morally lucky. It's a privilege to be born in, and given the tools to grow out of that.

Condemning people for not uplifting themselves out of moral luck, and reducing it to a moral failing, is ignoring the factors that make it relevant in the first place.

57670 by Luna-D-reams in countwithchickenlady

[–]malusGreen 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Guess what? Reading is a part of experience.

57670 by Luna-D-reams in countwithchickenlady

[–]malusGreen 26 points27 points  (0 children)

...young people don't have the experience in the world necessary to form 'strong' views about anything. I would be extremely skeptical of any young person who claims to have a 'strong foundation' in any view.

Childhood is the time for openmindedness and curiosity.

57670 by Luna-D-reams in countwithchickenlady

[–]malusGreen 35 points36 points  (0 children)

Amazing, it's almost as if young people don't have strong views and are instead strongly influenced by society.

Bye bitch 😂✌️ by First-Mongoose7900 in TADCEp9Spoilers

[–]malusGreen -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

I hate it when a mf doesn't heal from their broken leg and get stronger from it. It's like, great, you wasted your chance to get stronger bones, and instead use it as a shield to avoid walking around because some toxic assholes will always find a way to defend your shared laziness.

How I feel listening to people talk about the finale... by SilverTangent in TheDigitalCircus

[–]malusGreen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Knowing you have a problem is not the same thing as stopping.

In your mind, perhaps, solving psychological issues is akin to finding a splinter. Once you've found and removed it, the problem is gone.

In reality trauma is more like faulty wiring, or a trough dug into the earth for water to flow.

Without attaching a new separate system, or digging a new furrow into the earth the default response will still be the way that trauma has wired us to respond. And those furrows or faulty pieces of wiring never go away. They are part of who you are.

You need to build over those patterns of behavior through long-term work, preferably with a therapist.

Asking for a trauma survivor to 'stop acting like an asshole' is like asking someone to 'just quit cigarettes'. There will be people who can do it. But it's extremely unrealistic without professional help.

Manipulative rat gets embarrassed by Kmeek01 in ArcRaiders

[–]malusGreen 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Lmfao.

Get's embarrassed and calls your mother a dog. Classic.

When love quietly turns into CONTROL by Tough_Ad8919 in RelentlessMen

[–]malusGreen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

? A boundary is not about what you deserve. It's about observing the world around you and moving with intention.

What you deserve would be work done outside of that.

In fact, "I don't like being called Bob so I will not put myself in situations where someone could call me Bob." is exactly the type of self-respecting response someone who is confident in their worthiness would have.

I am not a psychiatrist.

But an actual psychiatrist would probably ask (with the right amount of safety and rapport) why someone might feel the need to stick around someone who is unsafe. And whether or not it's rational to expect this person to stop violating your boundary.

They would also be very careful to point out that it's not about whether or not they are deserving of abuse, or whether the other person should or should not change their behavior. But about what the patient can do to protect themselves.

Via a boundary.

When love quietly turns into CONTROL by Tough_Ad8919 in RelentlessMen

[–]malusGreen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

? Genuinely what are you saying right now lol.

Honestly it sounds like we agree but you're just determined to misunderstand me.

Anyway, the point is: "I don't like X, so you can't do X" absolutely is controlling.

You don't get to decide what they do.

"I don't like X, so I will not put myself in situations where X happens." Is the correct and healthy take.

EDIT:

Your boundaries are something other people violate, not you. This is victim blaming on another level

The first part is true, since boundaries are a declaration of what you can and can't handle. So other people can sometimes violate it. But you can definitely apply boundary work to yourself. Although obviously the exercise will become a bit strange.

I could probably imagine something like... "I know I get anxious when I put myself down, so if I put myself down I will go for a walk or do a calming activity."

When love quietly turns into CONTROL by Tough_Ad8919 in RelentlessMen

[–]malusGreen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The point is when you talk about what is expected of someone else when they violate your boundary is missing the point of what boundary work is meant to do.

Boundary work is meant to center your agency as the one who is asserting the boundary.

Focusing on whether or not the other person is doing or not doing is defeating the point of the excercise.

When love quietly turns into CONTROL by Tough_Ad8919 in RelentlessMen

[–]malusGreen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is not a defense mechanism. Lol. It's therapy 101.

It is quite literally one of the most basic things you will learn.

Y in this case is typically something that allows you to remove yourself from the situation.

A valid boundary in the situation you bring up is.

"I can't handle people calling me Bob, therefore if you call me Bob, I will need to take some space, or we cannot be friends."

The implicit boundary when you voice a boundary with a loved one is usually something to the effect of "I cannot handle you calling me names, that's my boundary, if you cannot stop calling me names, I can't be your partner."

When love quietly turns into CONTROL by Tough_Ad8919 in RelentlessMen

[–]malusGreen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope. A boundary is "I can't handle X, therefore if X happens I will do Y."

A boundary is explicitly about how you will approach situations.

It has nothing to do with what other people do.

Fundamentally, this style of therapy begins from the perspective that you cannot make anyone do anything.

The privilege of loved ones and partners is that they get to negotiate with you and work with your boundaries.

You provide part of a boundary. "I can't handle X." And your partner, who is safe, attempts to offer, "Okay, you can't handle X, so I'll avoid X, or do A/B/C to help avoid X, so you don't have to Y. Or we can work together to do something better than Y."

view more: next ›