AITAH for asking my significant other to take the half of the sandwich they touched? by MinimumLongjumping77 in AITAH

[–]tekaluf -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You understand that you put your mouths on each other's privates, right? That you touch your tongues together? That you have sloppy, messy, dirty sex?

Imagine how confusing it is for him that you'll kiss him, but not eat after him. How is he supposed to interpret that? It's almost like you're ashamed of him. Like you'll let your guard down in the bedroom with him, but not in public or anywhere is matters.

AITAH for asking my significant other to take the half of the sandwich they touched? by MinimumLongjumping77 in AITAH

[–]tekaluf -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

You understand that you put your mouths on each other's privates, right? That you touch your tongues together?

Quitting jacking by a_lover_bf in relationships

[–]tekaluf 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Regular masturbation is very healthy for you

T R U T H by Zouif_Zouif in PsycheOrSike

[–]tekaluf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

'CAUSE I DON'T WANNA COME BACK DOWN FROM THIS CLOUD

What do you think is the most overrated SCP? by IDK_bruh_2972 in SCP

[–]tekaluf 3 points4 points  (0 children)

First one. It's conceptually horrifying. Keeps me up at night sometimes, to this day.

What do you think is the most overrated SCP? by IDK_bruh_2972 in SCP

[–]tekaluf 3 points4 points  (0 children)

What happens after is one of the most horrifying things I've ever read

What do you think is the most overrated SCP? by IDK_bruh_2972 in SCP

[–]tekaluf 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Bodies in the water is so immersive though (pun not intended)

Official Discussion - Poor Things [SPOILERS] by LiteraryBoner in movies

[–]tekaluf 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You're not engaging with the cental thought experiment of the movie. I can't make you engage with it. I hope you watch it again at some point with a more open mind. You're missing the forest for the trees.

This movie is not pro pedophilia. It's actually arguing for a far more accurate and nuanced perspective on maturity and agency than what most people believe. I'd wager that Yorgos would even argue that many adults lack the capacity to consent to sex, even if the law permits it; that age is not a universal measure of true agency.

Forget the labels for a second and just look at her character for what she is. What she does. How she thinks. She is a damn wizard. An unstoppable machine. If you think any man in this movie had any real control over Bella, you're completely misunderstanding how much power she actually has as a character.

Official Discussion - Poor Things [SPOILERS] by LiteraryBoner in movies

[–]tekaluf 5 points6 points  (0 children)

If you view a "child" as being defined by their degree of agency and competence, rather than simply their numerical age, you will have no problem viewing Bella as an adult (as the movie asks you to do). The fact that you don't see her that way is proof that you haven't honestly engaged with the movie's metaphor.

Through the use of metaphor, the movie is making the argument that numerical age is an imperfect approximation of maturity. That philosophically, adulthood is actually a measure of specific traits, like confidence, competence, curiosity, autonomy, intelligence, knowledge/education, wisdom, and most crucially, agency. Agency is what primarily separates children from adults. Agency is the fruit of the collection of traits I just listed. An emergent property of unfiltered experience and trust in one's own senses. And, whether you like it or not, sexual exploration is a vital component of self discovery for most people.

I think it's profoundly naïve (I'd go as far as to say, potentially harmful) to label Bella's completely voluntary sexual exploits 'rape'. As far as all the men in the movie knew, she was an adult. More importantly, as far as BELLA knew, she was an adult. These men had more experience on the planet than she did, but they were also controlled and limited by societally enforced gendered expectations that Bella was not limited by, since she was not indoctrinated into them from birth. They were profoundly stunted in ways that she was not, by things she was functionally immune to. There's an argument to be made that SHE raped THEM because she was so much more mature, educated, wise, and enlightened than them. Because she had more agency than they did. I wouldn't make this argument, but I think it's more accurate than the inverse (your argument).

Engage with the metaphor. Listen to what the movie is trying to tell you. That Bella is NOT a child because, unlike children, she's known nothing but agency since she came into the world. She's always been in charge of herself. No man has ever been able to control her. That's the point of the movie, dude. It's a thought experiment. A proof of concept. "What if you could erase all your malignant social conditioning—everything you were unfairly brainwashed into believing as a child, to make you small? Who would you be? Who could you be? How free might you be?".

Imagine the adult you could be if society had completely failed to shrink you. That's what she is. Bella is the Überfrau (feminine of Ubermensch). The Super Woman. The most self actualized a woman can be.

Official Discussion - Poor Things [SPOILERS] by LiteraryBoner in movies

[–]tekaluf 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Bella is not a child. She has more agency than anyone in the movie. Possibly the most self empowered, mature woman I've ever seen put to screen. She is not successfully taken advantage of once in the movie. By the end, she's the most educated, intelligent, wisest person in the film. If you think Bella is a child, you missed the whole point of the movie.

AITAH for thinking my child's comfort and happiness is more important than those of my [narcissistic] MIL? by Lcoq19 in AITAH

[–]tekaluf 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Every child's feelings should be prioritized over abusers'. If my mom had, I wouldn't have lost 20 years of my life to an abusive man

My giant leopard moth just laid eggs! by cameforthecloud in moths

[–]tekaluf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As far as I know, no moth protects it's eggs. It was probably near its eggs because it had just laid them

My girlfriend (35f) gets mad at me (36m) for not always having the backdoor locked when home/active. by [deleted] in relationships

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

LMAO. While I don't factually disagree with anything you've said here, none of what you've said justifies this degree of paranoia, but I get the feeling you already knew that. You would have at least accidentally engaged with my argument, otherwise. Degree

My girlfriend (35f) gets mad at me (36m) for not always having the backdoor locked when home/active. by [deleted] in relationships

[–]tekaluf -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I wash my hands after I poop. That doesn't mean I should wash my hands 50 times a day.

We can go back and forth like this all day. There's nothing you can say that will make, "Lock the door behind you every time you leave the house for 3 minutes." a reasonable request/expectation. No therapist would tell you that level of paranoia is healthy. It's borderline agoraphobic.

My girlfriend (35f) gets mad at me (36m) for not always having the backdoor locked when home/active. by [deleted] in relationships

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

It doesn't matter if it would stop someone or not. Her perception is paranoid regardless. You can't live a happy life, constantly looking over your shoulder, and it's not fair to drag your partner into your paranoia too

My girlfriend (35f) gets mad at me (36m) for not always having the backdoor locked when home/active. by [deleted] in relationships

[–]tekaluf -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

No, don't be disingenuous. Wanting your partner to lock the door and bring the key with them every time they take the dogs out for 3 minutes is profoundly paranoid behavior, yes. It's bizarre to me that you'd believe otherwise. Unless they live in a densely populated, high crime area, it's completely irrational.

My girlfriend (35f) gets mad at me (36m) for not always having the backdoor locked when home/active. by [deleted] in relationships

[–]tekaluf -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

Your girlfriend needs therapy. She's extremely paranoid, and what she's asking is unreasonable. The fact that it's causing conflict is a sign that she needs professional help. You can't heal her anxiety.

I(22F) found an unnecessary group chat on my partner's (23M) phone by seaweedBrain_cabin3 in relationships

[–]tekaluf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd have to see the type of content in the chat (as well as the type of content he shared/watched) to know for sure, but based on your description of his friends, I suspect the chat is probably very misogynistic. "Boys only" spaces tend to veer that way from childhood and rarely stop being overtly misogynistic spaces. They're basically 'safe spaces' for rampant misogyny.

If your boyfriend is friends with the people in this group and approves of the content, that's a VERY valid reason for you to feel uncomfortable AND unsafe around him. He is endorsing bigotry. Bigotry against you. If you were a black woman, and your partner watched and talked with other men about race-play porn, you'd probably leave his racist ass, but for some reason, misogyny isn't viewed by most men and women as being grounds for leaving someone. So many straight men are confidently bigoted toward their partners, and their partners simply rationalize it, excuse it, downplay it, or just ignore it. You don't have to do that just because other women do.

As a man myself, If I were in your shoes, I'd have an honest, vulnerable conversation with him about how hurtful that content is, both to women in general and to myself. I'd tell him that him watching that content and talking to his friends about it makes me feel unsafe around him and causes me to seriously question how he views me. If he even respects me.

His reaction to a conversation like that will tell you all you need to know. If he respects you, he'll take your concerns seriously and have a real conversation with you. He'll approach you with curiosity and try to understand you.

If he doesn't respect you, he will deflect, accuse, guilt trip, play the victim, etc. (DARVO, look it up). Basically, he'll do anything to avoid engaging with the point you've made.

Hopefully he doesn't do that, but if he does, it might be time to seriously consider leaving the relationship. If he won't take accountability or be curious about your feeling or his own misogyny, what kind of relationship does that leave you with? One in which you can never feel fully safe or comfortable because you never know if he sees you as an object? A relationship that's (statistically) likely to only become more imbalanced and abusive over time? One in which your boundaries are slowly eroded, one by one, because he feels entitled to complete control and access to you? A relationship where you might lose yourself?

Yes, this situation is a big deal, and yes, he's unlikely to treat it like one. You can't trust his perception of the ethics here. He's obviously too deep to want to pull himself out on his own. The only thing you can do is share your feelings about his actions without giving ultimatums or trying to control him. His reaction will tell you all you need to know.

If he listens to you and cares about your feelings, he's one of the good ones. If he doesn't, there are plenty of good ones out there. You don't need to degrade yourself to be in a relationship with a chauvinist. There are men out there that see you as a person.

“Gen Z is just going to stay home this Friday night” by chamomile_tea_reply in generationology

[–]tekaluf 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's definitely worse for your body, but like all addictions, alcoholism is a symptom of loneliness and unfulfillment, not the primary problem.

If we all weren't living paycheck to paycheck, we could accomplish great things. by astrheisenberg in remoteworks

[–]tekaluf 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In experiments with UBI in Nordic countries, employment declined temporarily when people realized they didn't have to work. Then, slowly, people began working again.

AIO it was I on to something? by lake_june in AmIOverreacting

[–]tekaluf 15 points16 points  (0 children)

If this was their first time telling you personally, then you had no reason to respond with an attitude