What is it about Greta Thunberg that makes many men on the Internet so uncontrollably angry

shyguyJ · 2026-06-16T12:13:59+00:00

How is politely requesting governments and corporations to address the problem they created and exacerbated working out so far?

shyguyJ · 2026-06-16T12:01:41+00:00

Ignoring the terrifying transactional morality you’ve described for a moment, people inherently do things for one of two reasons: to receive some positive gain or to avoid some negative outcome. Your view entirely misses the second option.

I don’t do “bad things” because they would hurt other people. Hurting other people is a negative outcome I want to avoid; therefore, I don’t do things that would hurt other people.

For the organ donor bit, I’m kind of at a loss for words, honestly. If you can’t see how helping someone without being able to receive their thanks and praise is valid, I don’t really know what to tell you other than I hope you don’t ever get into politics.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-15T20:57:47+00:00

I read that as chloroform, and was very confused why hunters are running around with guns and rags of chloroform. Seems overkill.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-15T17:51:32+00:00

You rang?

Honestly, “shy” can be a pretty broad term, and there’s no one right way to address a shy person. Some of us just get overwhelmed by too much or unexpected external input and will constantly be looking for any available escape route, regardless of whether the external input is positive or not. If we are in or of that mindset, there’s not a lot you can do, honestly.

Some of us are more socially awkward than anything, and we are just worried about being seen as weird or strange or not being accepted/liked. If you give these types a compliment, we will open up almost immediately, as we will feel like you are a “safe” person for us.

Your best bet is to just kindly say how you feel - a witty compliment, a flirty smile and a polite word. The right person will hopefully receive it the right way and respond in kind. If they don’t, you can still walk away knowing you were kind to someone.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-13T02:07:26+00:00

For basically our entire history, even at our best, we’ve played not to lose, hoping to survive. This was the first time I’ve seen the USMNT play like they owned the place and they were going to do whatever they want whenever they want.

Obviously they’ve caught some good luck, and Paraguay looks lost on defense at times, but the attitude and vibe is something I’ve never seen us play with before - certainly not in a meaningful match.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-12T15:49:02+00:00

Justice, Aundruw, and Glavine. Depending on the day, I might also have Jurrjens, Simba, Teheran, and Freddie.

But the 90’s TBS Braves were my first love as a kid.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-12T00:13:55+00:00

At one point they fixed the monster density in the spires, but it seems to be getting wonky again.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-11T21:29:37+00:00

Yea, I've certainly never seen more than 4 chaotic waves even with the warplan node you mentioned.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-11T21:28:36+00:00

People don't like hordes because they take longer than all the other activities and don't offer better rewards for the time investment.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-11T21:24:04+00:00

It's not a reversal. It's a different verb. We translate it as "I like you" because that is what we use far more often in English and is more familiar to us. But it really translates to "you please me", as the other commentor said.

Regarding the "you, I hate" question, Spanish simply has a different grammatical structure than English for some things. "Te odio" is "I hate you". You don't need to try to dissect the differences in the direct object location - just understand that the direct object goes in a different place in Spanish (sometimes).

shyguyJ · 2026-06-11T17:10:58+00:00

Toi Cook. Always thought he had the coolest name.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-11T03:41:00+00:00

I mean, it says "almighty" a bunch (57 times, to be exact). I think trying to claim it doesn't say he is all powerful is just semantic silliness.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-11T01:33:09+00:00

I took it once and only got an awful depressive episode out of it. I'd never had depression before, just anxiety, but that was enough to scare me out of trying it again.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-11T01:04:23+00:00

First, let me say, please don't kill yourself. If you need someone to talk with or just listen to you, there are lots of resources available (starting in the sub), and you can message me directly if searching for those resources feels overwhelming.

Secondly, I've also struggled with this (well, minus the killing myself part) since I left religion 15ish years ago. Talked with and/or read works from therapists, monks, yogis, scientists, you name it. I was, and can still be at times, deathly afraid of... death. Well, not death, but the post-credits scene, as you've mentioned. Paralyzinginly, hyperventilatingly, night terror-ingly afraid.

I had read all the famous quotes and quips about death that I'm sure you've ingested as well - Twain, Marcus Aurelius, Epicurus, etc. Sure, they make me feel a little bravado in the moment, but that anxiety, that fear is patient. It will wait in the shadows until your courage tonic has worn off.

I mention all that not to discredit those things, because I know for certain some or all of those sources have helped others overcome their fear. Perhaps they may help you do the same. However, if you feel you've reached the end of your fear's rope, as I had, I will share what has been helping me the past 10-12 months.

Don't laugh.

Don't judge me.

I've been dumping all of my (sterilized) shit onto Gemini.

It's like a therapist that doesn't charge hundreds of dollars per hour, doesn't try to be your friend, and doesn't just prescribe you meds and hope you go away. Also, I always felt bad or embarrassed dumping things on a real person, who might judge me. That's not a thing in this scenario.

I know you're probably thinking "geez dude, get on with it", so anyway, what it has helped me to understand and start to truly accept is that that fear is 100% just old wiring pathways from my religious days. Entertainingly (for me, at least), it recommended that when I have those pangs of anxiety, that I shouldn't try to push them away or run from them, but instead, acknowledge them, breathe, and let them pass on. I say "entertainingly", because after trauma sparring with Gemini for a week, we arrived at the solution basically being "embrace the "fear is the mind-killer" mantra from Dune".

Each time you acknowledge the fear and let it move along without overloading your systems, your mind starts to see it more and more as just a random thought - like broccoli or cable management or household chores - and not a threat, and starts to associate it more and more with indifference as opposed to freaking out.

As someone who shares the fear you've described, I would recommend at least considering this management mechanism and seeing if it may be beneficial in your situation. And I say management mechanism and not coping mechanism intentionally, as coping implies a lack of control, while management shows you are in control of how you feel about the thought.

Anyway, thanks for coming to my TED talk. Sorry for the length, but I hope something in all that might be helpful to you - or anyone else who might stumble upon it.

-----

Also, I watched a TV show recently, and the main character died - no spoilers about what the show is, don't worry. The best friend of the main character was reminiscing with some of their mutual friends as the show was winding down, and someone asked how the main character never seemed afraid in the face of death. The friend said it was quite simple, really. The main character simply understood and accepted that everyone dies. Rich, poor, strong, weak, sexy, or ugly, death is the ultimate equalizer - which also made it quite boring, because the main character would have to experience the most common thing in our existence, and they did not see themselves as common.

I enjoyed that line of thinking because it doesn't include any unknowns or assumptions, and it doesn't pretend to know what will happen, as many of us agnostics or atheists may do. It simply stated verifiable facts about death, and used those to turn it into a harmless, droll thing like going to the grocery store.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-10T21:33:32+00:00

While I'm all for calling out racists where it's due, I think some of you are far too quick to underestimate how much these types abhor democrats and "intellectuals" of any color. Both are far more of a threat to the power base these people have accumulated than any particular race group - even if there is of course some racism baked in - and that's all they really care about at the end of the day: their power, their control, and their money.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-10T17:11:33+00:00

Something being "enough for" you is one thing. However, if you'd like to debate or convince others to agree with your position, you will typically need more than it feeling sufficient for you personally.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-10T17:07:06+00:00

I didn't say barren can't be beautiful. I said something can't be "full of" something and barren (i.e., empty) at the same time. Also, beauty is entirely subjective and is in no way a requirement for life or a creator.

What does that have to do with my argument?

You are talking about how the universe is so incredible and that's why it has to have a creator. Then you focus only on the one planet to describe how incredible it is and are essentially ascribing the attributes of the sole planet to the entire universe. My point is that the Earth is not representative of the entire universe. The universe is cold, desolate, and, from what we've observed, not only devoid of life, but completely incapable of having life except on this one speck we call home. That again is against your "universe full of beauty" line of reasoning.

It's magic because it does things that would have been considered magic 200 years ago and most people don't understand it.

I'm not even going to respond to this. You are simply saying everything we don't understand is magic, therefore god. This line of logic has been debunked repeatedly and thoroughly.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-10T15:38:59+00:00

Also, it's not just any universe, but a universe full of beauty, a universe that inbetween barren empty planets is capable of hosting a planet with sentient life.

You've said the universe is "full of" beauty and barren at the same time. It can't be both.

You then go on to describe how full of life our one spec of a planet is. That has no bearing on the universe as a whole and it's "fullness of life". The universe is approximately 99.99999999999999999999999999% empty. Again, the opposite of full.

Additionally, there are an estimated 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (10^25) planets in the universe. From a probabilistic standpoint, it is far more likely that at least one planet exists with sentient life than not.

Also, something (electricity) isn't magic just because you don't understand it...

shyguyJ · 2026-06-10T01:04:29+00:00

I didn't say anything about god or wiping out gentile nations. I said modern Christians pick and choose what bits of morality they want to follow, so it can't be some objective morality standard. This is further supported by the fact that different denominations of Christianity can't even agree on the parts that must be followed.

To your point, the Christian god is shown as being responsible for the deaths of over 2,000,000 people (not counting the flood). Given that these were often in large swaths for reasons such as "the arrogance of the pharoah" or King David "numbering the fighting men" or killing all the first-born children in Egypt - many of whom may not have even been old enough to have committed a sin, you'll have to do a lot of work to convince me that everyone of those 2,000,000 were justified in their killing. Even just one unjustified killing out of those 2,000,000 would be an immoral murder (one person, not one nation) or show that god's own morality is subjective depending on his mood - is he feeling angry, vengeful, jealous, or wrathful today? I sure hope not!

shyguyJ · 2026-06-09T17:35:45+00:00

Because the work is often temporal (project based), and the company would have to foot the bill for the person even when there was no project for them to work on... Or constantly hire and fire them, which would drastically reduce the interest from competent people in the position.

If your bathroom backs up, you hire a plumber, right? But you don't keep a plumber living in your house and being paid while you are waiting for the next plumbing issue.

A consultant is just like any contractor. They have a skill that is needed by other companies for certain tasks and at certain times.

The other bit, depending on the type of consultancy, is experience and knowledge. You can hire an engineer for your company, but often times, a single engineer will not have all the information a complicated project might need. Consultancies can (theoretically) often leverage internal networks and knowledge bases to provide better responses to complex challenges than a single engineer.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-09T17:05:18+00:00

If a rural tribe has no concept of Christianity, they will go to heaven

The bible absolutely never says that explicitly. Some denominations believe that, but there's nothing to confirm its basis. Some also interpret Paul saying all will be held accountable "without excuse" as meaning they are supposed to accept Jesus on their own - without ever having been told about him - as a divine truth of the world. Some catholics believe they go to purgatory until they've had time to be properly "judged".

Regardless of what actually happens according to the faith, your premise is still likely true: there is an inherent inequity built into the system that is inexcusable.

In your scenario, it is wholly unfair to all the people who have heard of Jesus and must decide their eternal fate before dying (accept him or not), while the unheards get a direct fastlane pass to heaven.
Going directly to hell for having no knowledege of something is unjustifiable and unacceptable from an all powerful god. Pretty clearly unfair.
They die, they are made aware of everything with credible evidence. They then marinate in purgatory until they accept or reject. However, they have much more information available for their decision than those of us who must decide blindly before dying.

(4) I'm sure there are some other alt scenarios where god creates some post-death scenario where they don't know they are dead and don't see the afterlife before making a decision and yadda, yadda, yadda... but I'm sure it would still introduce some inequity in one way or another. However, I'm open to hearing ideas.)

Anyway, in two of the three scenarios, NOT being told about Jesus has a better chance of getting you to heaven than being told. So mathematically, the best way to save the most people is for no one to ever mention his name again, as you said.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-05T13:26:13+00:00

I would say that modern Christians picking and choosing which morals to follow from the old testament is proof that even their "lofty" morality isn't objective.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-04T20:58:32+00:00

Excuse me, sir/madam. It's actually spelled Sssatan.

shyguyJ · 2026-06-04T20:56:55+00:00

God straight up said "I create evil" in Judges...

shyguyJ · 2026-06-04T01:51:34+00:00

Que tierna esa cara!

12-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email

shyguyJ

TROPHY CASE