u/nonamerandomfatman

In the sense that despite the absence of legal homosexual marriage,the late 19th century’s homophobia was more casual and focused on satirizations and being considered a laugh source or just looked at as inferior,but in the sense that in the early 20th this changed to actively hostile instances and socially accepted hate speech.

Is this true or false?And what is the more complex detail to avoid oversimplifications?

This quote has so many surgically precise analogies to the point it’s a memorable one. Driving is one of the examples it’s useful for. In the US,women driving used to he heavily stigmatized,through time,the stigma was slowly fading away. Unfortunally,there are still “leftovers” on present day about this such as the stereotype of “oumen bad drivers”. Even if the statistics point towards being the other way around.

This stereotype is likely originated from the mid 20th century. One of the things a lot of people don’t realize is how much experience benefits performance of whatever action you are doing. If women driving wasn’t stigmatized in the first place,they would have acquired experience on operating vehicles since the very beginning on late 19th century just like men did instead of the experience being forcefully delayed.

And now in present day since the experience gap is mostly closed,things are getting curious because turns out men are more prone to accidents than women due to lower risk aversion. Whether risk aversion is good or bad depends on the context. But in this one,risk aversion is definitely positive when you are operating +2000lbs machinery in a public space. And what does this has to do with adultism?Because it DOES rhyme and not only on the driving example.

It’s factual that until at least the 2030’s and 40’s the adultism about how “young adults are naive and stupid” will actually get worse because they will eventually fall for scams in the virtual world at much higher rates compared to present day,not because they are genetically less intelligent,but because these people literally weren’t allowed by their parents and other adults to get experienced with the virtual world.

The young adults of these decades are the current young target demographic of the social media panic. They are children and teens today,but when they join the workforce,the complaints about their technological illiteracy will get so much worse. Don’t forget the countless workplace environments where even SOCIAL MEDIA is basically mandatory. And the problem is this social media illiteracy will be blamed on them instead of being blamed on their parents who swallowed the entire moral panic just like everyone else and sabotaged these people’s road to experience.

If you don’t let your least favorite demographic to get experienced on new technologies,sooner or later the natural consequences will arrive. Whether on the form of less experienced drivers putting more people in danger or being turned into online scammer’s wet dream while they are secretly laughing at your parents for doing half of the work for them.

I have absolutely no idea why,but they remind me of each other.

Round 1: They fight in an average large city place like Manhattan. The citizens magically disappeared with all other objects such as cars,buildings and more remaining. The 2 are all alone.

Qwark has his standard weapons and equipment while Mr Incredible has his suit,but can use the environment around him in Manhattan or throw large objects at Qwark.

Round 2: Qwark replaces Mr Incredible in the island,he has his standard equipment and weapons,can Qwark destroy the Omnidroid 8?

Edit: I mean have something wrong.

It’s interesting how cultural biases can affect even the self-preservation of some people. A carnist will start whining about “but them vegans unnatural” and “but them lions” and a few minutes later this same person is already with their ass on a horse’s back. It’s like they don’t understand basic carnivore behaviour and think lions ride zebras to see who crosses a finish line first and wear zebra’s skin shoes.

Not only this together with dairy is an example of them only remembering nature whenever it’s convenient,but horse riding is such a reckless action that make you genuinely wonder “what goes on this person’s mind?” Some months ago,I traveled for a baby cousin’s 1st birthday and stayed at my aunt’s country house. It was a fun weekend,people wanted me to pet a relatively small adult pony they had there who probably less than 200lbs,but I refused and ignored the social pressure without thinking twice,I’m not going anywhere near an animal bigger than 80lbs let alone pet them in the head.

They have several horses and my other cousin is the one who rides them not only as a hobby through the week but also in some competitions in the city. Of course,it’s an animal who doesn’t consent to that situation being exploited,as I see people do this,I just keep replaying in my head a billion ways things can go horribly wrong in just a few seconds and these people feel completely safe when they shouldn’t.

The risk vs reward assessement in this situation is just so painfully obvious,it’s not like a magical fairy is offering you 100 omnipotent wishes under the condition that you sit your ass in that animal’s back and survive for a few minutes,again,instead of this fairy scenario,these people do this as a hobby and all of this because they want to feel like Sonic the Heghegog:”YEEEEAAAAAAH!I’M SO TALL RIGHT HERE!GUTTA GU FAST!YEEEEAAAAH!”

If the horse gets startled by something or just takes a single misstep,horrible accidents can happen in just a few seconds. These people casually risk having an awful injury for life,get paralysed or even dying just because they want to feel like Sonic the Hedgehog for a few minutes. Sure,not caring whether you live or die doesn’t prove that you are stupid by itself,but these are people who have so many long term dreams for their future and they casually risk throwing everything away all because they think they are a videogame character.

I remembered a question I saw on youth rights subreddit last year about movies or books with interesting youth rights related messages. But this week,I ended up hitting myself with a complete showerthought about that same question and noticed a curious pattern on a specific 2000’s cartoon.

5 years ago,I ended up rewatching many shows from my childhood,not for nostalgia,but for pure curiosity like: “Do I remember everything this way?” But recently,I noticed something curious about the cartoon Robotboy(2005-2008 Cartoon Network).

If you pay close attention,the story seems to have a secret anti spanking message. Pay attention to all the villains who appeared through the show,now count only the ones whose mom’s appeared in the show. Of course,the green short guy who started beating up everyone in sight when he took the “strenght ray” doesn’t count because his parents never appear on any episode. If memory doesn’t fail me,he only has a gorilla as henchman.

There’s Dr Kamlkaze and that boy in a suit with a robot replica of himself who also wears a suit. They are both villains whose mothers appear on the same episodes they do. Dr Kamlkaze for example is a man in his 70’s who is still terrified of his mom hitting him with a spoon even though he could beat her up any day without even needing Constantine. The boy in a suit gets spanked by his mom in front of his enemies and the only reason she delays it through the episode is because she was afraid of the robot replica of her son.

Meanwhile,Tommy is the protagonist,his mom never hits him through the series and he’s a good person. While I suspect it was a narrative coincidence,part of me wonders if this was an intentional hidden pattern. Because it’s a quite curious how all the bad guys in the show with known mothers hit them,meanwhile,Debbie never hits Tommy and he is a good guy.

View Poll

This is my genuine situation. I’m not sure if my mind is just making visual connections about a paper and food because it happens even when I’m not hungry. It also happens in the most random ass contexts,everytime I open my bank app,I suddenly feel the saliva slowly lowering until it reaches my beard…

While it is true that more recent decades are correlated with social progress,it is not a perfect correlation. In fact,even in more common instances like abortion the chronological correlation isn’t perfect. Young women today(Specially if they are american) have less abortion rights than their grandmothers did at the same age even if their grandmothers suffered sexism at higher levels in other contexts.

So,the correlation exists,but it isn’t 1:1. Therefore I would argue that “2026 is the best year to be born as an average child in most western countries” is an extreme oversimplification. Like the abortion example,one of the rights children are losing is related to the screen panic. Think about it: In the last half century,the anti spanking movement did an amazing job,specially in most european countries,but while the decline is steady,it’s still not uncommon to have spanking parents in 2026 even if you live in most western countries.

The decline in spanking is steady,but not very fast. On the other hand,the screen panic happened very fast. I don’t remember it being THAT bad just like 3 years ago. Therefore,if you picture a “suffering equation” in youth at most western countries,I think the mathematical result would probably show some sort of “sweet spot” instead of a straight line/arrow pointing towards the future. Because the problem is: Parents today are probably like 3X less violent than they were 40 years ago at the best of hypothesis,but probably around 6X more insufferable.

Think about it: If a child and teen before 2000’s didn’t like their parents,what could they usually do to at least take a break from them?Play in the street with their friends. Now repeat the same scenario in the 00’s and 10’s,already decades where parents were more restrictive about the outdoors,but not completely insufferable about technology and a bit less violent than in the past. If a child from the 00’s and 10’s didn’t like their parents,they could still usually get a break from them in television or internet while staying in their rooms. Parents in these decades didn’t care much about digital context,and even when did,they were easily tricked because many simply weren’t tech savvy unlike today.

But today?Belts are a bit rare,not only hand spanking is STILL common but now,children can’t get a break from their parents for 5 minutes,the ONLY moment of peace and quiet in mind is when they are taking a dump. Not a single moment of privacy,and if parents could install organic spywares in their children’s brains most probably would and then they would start whining something like:”How dare your underdeveloped adrenal glands produce these stress hormones whenever I’m checking your thoughts!You are ONLY being watched 24/7!Get over it!You will have your entire life to have privacy!”

Another problem is: The ageism about PERCEIVED young adult incompetence will actually get worse in the next decades. Chances are they will be tricked and fall for scams in internet and social media at higher rates compared to present day and then,the media will start complaining about how incompetent they are when the reality is: Who would have thought that people who are inexperienced with the internet are more likely to fall for scams,right Einstein?

And why are they inexperienced with the virtual world in the first place?That’s right,because they literally weren’t ALLOWED to get these experiences and now the result is blamed on them instead of the people who didn’t allow them to get the experiences in the first place.

The point is: Parents got less violent slowly,but became more insufferable REALLY fast. So,time for a poll!Let’s suppose you are magically forced to start your life again being born as a completely random individual in a random western country,but you can ONLY choose the YEAR you will be born. Which of these would you choose?Where do you think this sweet spot would be?

View Poll

View Poll

Your hear it once,it’s indeed 100% indistinguishable from your voice.

Extra Detail: If you don’t do anything and stand still,it will call a 2nd time around 5-8 minutes,now sounding slightly closer from you,but still far in the apartment/house. But you don’t know that will happen the first time,what would you do when you hear it the first time?