Look man, I’m not saying there’s a conspiracy here, but I’m not exactly expecting a quacking duck-shaped car to roll out of the fucking Duck Factory.

Yeah, I appreciate it. It’s so aggravating seeing silly baby shit like this that only serves to hold any actual progress back. It’s not only eyeroll-inducing to hear things like “hUmAn BaD” or “America bad”, it’s just entirely unhelpful for how childishly oversimplified it is. I appreciate the passion many leftists have that talk like this, but it does so much damage when it misses the point just so very hard.

Removed for “civility”. What a fucking joke. People get bent out of shape over the most ridiculous shit.

Removed by mod

Oh hey, I appreciate you engaging with my absurd and irrationally earnest beef with this idiom.

So I hear what you’re saying about salt helping with bitter flavors, but I don’t think the flavor of poison is the primary issue with why you wouldn’t want to ingest it. I think my point still stands that if we’re doing this weird eating information thing, you still just don’t eat it if it’s poison, regardless of whether you do or don’t have an antidote. Or a way to flavor it.

I was actually aware of the Latin word translated as salt for this idiom also meaning wit, and I’m actually glad you brought it up. “Consider this with a grain of wit” would be a fantastic idiom and I’d be all for it. All the more reason “take it with a grain of salt” makes no sense if it’s a bad translation.

I understand the idiom stands as it does in our language because language standards are more about usage than rigid systemic rules, but COME ON! There’s gotta be a line, right? I get that trying to standardize language is real tricky and historically has been very problematic (looking at you, rich Victorian British fucks), but man, some of these things are so useless that they couldn’t even qualify as filler words. I know it’s weird how hard I hate this fucking idiom, but also fuck this idiom.

Not trying to throw shade your way, just to be clear. I appreciate your engagement. All shade reserved for this damn idiom, though.

Man, to this day the phrase “take it with a grain of salt” makes no sense to me. For one, I see people use the phrase(as above) as adding a singular grain of salt… which wouldn’t do anything. But if, as suggested here, it’s more to point out that further seasoning and/or flavoring isn’t required, then what… what? Are we eating information? What does that even mean? If it’s seasoned, then why does that mean I should be skeptical? If someone makes something I would be skeptical of, why tf would I eat it?

I actually looked this up because it was(still is) driving me crazy. A possible origin of the phrase goes back to Pliny the Elder adding a grain of salt to a poisin antidote. Maybe it was to make the antidote easier to ingest(which, once again, a singular grain wouldn’t make a difference, so it’s possible that it’s a pinch)? So we’re skeptical of the antidote when we’re calling the info given poisin??? But it could also be the case that a popular myth was that a pinch of salt neutralized poison, possibly referring to a misunderstanding of Pliny the Elder’s recipe. But if something is poisoned, don’t fucking eat/drink it? Like seriously, if someone you don’t trust gives you food/drink that you think could be poisoned, and we even temporarily grant that a grain/pinch of salt neutralizes the pain, it STILL doesn’t make sense, because why would you accept anything from that person at all if you think they’re trying to kill you??? ALSO ONCE AGAIN, ARE WE EATING INFORMATION IN THIS HYPOTHETICAL??? WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?

And then I’ve seen the camp of using salt as a currency, leaning into the value aspect of it, suggesting adding a singular grain of salt finally gives it value(which, like… is that what you mean?). Since the phrase is supposed to invoke skepticism, I’d imagine the value measured is truth? So if the salt you take the information with is skepticism, then how does the skepticism alter the truth value? And, again, if the information is worthless don’t buy it for any price, same as don’t eat the fucking poisin. At least in this scenario we’re not eating information.

In any case, and even aside from whether or not the idiom even makes sense, I don’t understand why the phrase is even used at all to advise skepticism since any usage I’ve ever heard or read of it is clearly(to me) redundant and/or unwarranted. “This comment comes from [unreliable source], so take it with a grain of salt.” Yeah? It’s an unreliable source. If someone already knew, the added idiom is kinda insulting. If someone didn’t know or disagreed(that it’s unreliable), then the added idiom only serves to add confusion. “The numbers may look promising, but take it with a grain of salt.” Okay? Yeah, obviously don’t draw conclusions from just “the numbers” as there’s always more to whatever form of statistical analysis this hypothetical is, but it’s totally unclear what the idiom is even trying to say. The numbers lie? The numbers are an anomaly? The source is unreliable? It actually looks bad if you look closer? And if it’s to point out that it could be any of those things and more, well no shit, bro. Once again, if someone already knows to be skeptical, it’s insulting and unwarranted, if someone doesn’t know to be skeptical, they need to be informed of the reason to be skeptical before “be skeptical” makes any sense. It’s functionally useless.

I don’t get it. I don’t get the appeal, I don’t understand how’s it’s supposed to mean what it’s supposed to mean, even granting that language and phrases evolve in strange ways. I don’t understand how and why people use it. I don’t understand how people see logic in it. I dunno, maybe I’m the idiot here.

TL;DR: Please stop eating information, thank you. I don’t understand the phrase, so take it with a grain of salt(?).

So their god has some kinda electromagnetic properties? Is that why iron chariots are his weakness?

ADHD is a neurodevelopmental disorder, either you’re born with it or you’re not. Sure, lots of things fight for our attention and that probably affects us in some way, but distractability isn’t the same thing as ADHD. It’s primarily a regulation disorder rather than ‘can’t focus disease’. Where I think you bring up a good point in a mechanism that probably reveals ADHD in some people, I would definitely give pushback on what appears to be a suggestion that the advertising industry as it exists causes ADHD. I don’t think any serious psychological professional would make that assertion.

This is the correct answer and I feel it’s very important to emphasize this point. You can have “symptoms” of whatever the fuck, but in order for it to be considered a disorder, it must disrupt your life in some way. I usually lean more into the camp of just trying to be supportive of people when they speak about mental health disorders, but there are definitely those kids out there self-diagnosing disorders like they’re collecting pokemon. As someone who legitimately has been diagnosed with multiple disorders by actual licensed psychological professionals, it’s aggravating to see those kids infantilize mental health in that capacity, where it perpetuates the already uphill battle for many of us to be taken seriously in the first place. ADHD has absolutely ruined my life and I would absolutely(in a hypothetical) take a relatively high chance of death at “curing” my ADHD without a single hesitation. Life is hard enough with all these fucking disorders, definitely don’t need the added burden of always feeling like I have to prove that I really am that fucked up.

Imagine being so much of a piece of shit that you ban people for talking about the genocide in Ukraine right now. Like, it’s even more wild because they claim to be a communist, yet they’re simping for a literal fascist state doing an old-school imperialist invasion.

Yup. It seems that whenever you stop being quite as inconvenient to neurotypicals, suddenly “you’re fine, you just need to apply yourself”.

Man, that’s exactly how I got diagnosed again as an adult. I was taken off of medication and all that when I was 12, so I thought I didn’t really have ADHD. Years later, I’m watching a video of “you might have ADHD if…” for laughs and it went something like:

“LAWL.”

“LOL”

“lol”

“… ah, beans.”

To call America a fascist state is just dishonest. To call the EU fascist is unhinged. Where America is certainly struggling internally with a legitimate attempt at a fascist takeover, too many fundamental principles of the republic remain intact to honestly define the country as a fascist state. There are plenty of things to criticize about the US government, it being fascist isn’t one of them.

Russia, however, is literally doing an old school imperialist invasion right now. Like, shaky casus belli and everything. They’re even throwing in a whole host of red flags indicating a genocide. Their “elections” are consistently used as textbook examples of rigged elections using statistical analysis. Political enemies of Putin are assassinated, jailed, and suppressed. The state sponsors a narrative campaign of a fictitious idealized Russian ethno-state. Public dissent is actively and harshly suppressed by the state. There are re-education camps to indoctrinate certain demographics with Russian supremacist propaganda. Russia is a fascist state. The tankies that rush to defend Russia online are defending a fascist state. That is directly contradictory to leftist principles and is, quite frankly, fucking stupid.

So to reply to someone pointing out how ridiculous it is for tankies to support a fascist state like Russia with “hurrdurr libs support fascist usa/eu” is yet another dishonest strawman wrapped in a red herring. And, certainly no surprise to anyone paying attention, just serves as another example of a tankie talking point that refuses to engage the actual argument.

Yeah, the support of a blatantly fascist/imperialist state like Putin’s Russia by self-described leftists is absolutely wild to me. I’m not convinced they’re serious people. Like, yeah, there’s some silly infighting between leftists online, but from my experience, it’s usually tankies saying some smug bullshit blanket statements and defending authoritarian douchecanoes.

That’s it exactly. I’m so sick of these dickheads jumping online and talking all the way out of their ass ‘just refuse unlawful orders, bro’. Like their COC isn’t gonna fuck them every kind of sideways for refusing orders via the UCMJ. Like, this isn’t spending a weekend in jail and then it’s over kinda shit, this will absolutely ruin your life. You could be spending years in the brig, reduced rank, reduced pay, possible dishonorable discharge while trying to fight the charges if you manage to win the case. On top of that, you want these soldiers/airmen to directly bring a legal fight to a federal administration that is likely to fuck them despite any legitimate grounds to refuse unlawful orders/conscientiously object? Get fucking real. Military personnel have the regular law AND the UCMJ to fucking deal with. These bros are fucking trapped.

I think this is a great question because it absolutely gets the point. The enemy is the system, not the people. This informs you both who and how you fight back. So when someone is saying something bigoted for religious reasons, the problem isn’t necessarily that particular person, but the religious system that brainwashed them. In fact, it was a specific flavor of that religious system.

I think a more clear distinction can be found in feminism. Feminism isn’t about fighting men, but fighting patriarchy. So, sure, there are men who are dickhead misogynists, but they are also potential allies that are also hurt by patriarchy. It’s the system and those who specifically aim to perpetuate said system. Social philosophers tend to point to systems rather than people constantly, because it’s so common for people to point out symptoms rather than the cause. So when we know to identify patriarchy rather than misogynists, yeah, we’ll still call out misogynist men for sure, but also women that perpetuate patriarchy.

So if I’m blaming the system rather than the person, maybe I’m recognizing the religious person’s commitment to truth and appealing to that rather than labeling them the enemy and writing them off completely. I think something that gets lost in all the polarizing bullshit as of recent is recognizing that a great way to make another bigot not exist is to persuade them to not be a bigot anymore. The enemy isn’t people, it’s the fucking system. Like the great poets have said: “Don’t blame it on the Needy, don’t blame it on the Poor, don’t blame it on the Jew, blame it on the system. Blame it on the fucking system.”

Well, I appreciate your vote of confidence. I’d like to point out that OP started the post asking for advice and continues to engage with everything despite appearing to only want to rant. It’s possible that what I’ve said is indeed not what they want/need, but it’s also possible that it’s exactly what they want/need. Whether or not they’re receptive isn’t up to me, but whether or not I try is. And that’s exactly my point.

Oh, okay, now you’re just assuming things about what I have or haven’t been through? That’s extremely arrogant of you. I don’t know you and I don’t know what all you’ve been through, so I do my best to not make any assumptions, I’d appreciate it if you’d extend the same courtesy back.

Regardless of what happens to any one person, they have control over their reaction to it. You keep comparing your life to others, but what good is that? You got dealt a shit hand while others do evil and thrive, it happens every day. Hell, story of my life, too. The difference is what you do about it. You know what I do about it? I do my best to help others never have to go through the same bullshit. Whether or not I fail is not up to me, but whether or not I try is.

Can you just stop?

What I find interesting is that you started this post and are free to disengage whenever you want, yet you haven’t. Why is that?

Oh hey, engagement. I’m sorry that I’m unable to think of a way to articulate that without sounding sarcastic, but I do sincerely appreciate actual engagement.

Stop caring

Uh, no. While I believe I didn’t even suggest such a thing, I will also acknowledge that it’s possible I didn’t adequately articulate my primary point. In no way will I ever say to just stop caring, as that’s unrealistic, counterproductive, and just plain silly. My primary point, especially as it relates to the original post, is to accept reality as it is-WITHOUT inserting an opinion. Your feelings will happen no matter what. You can’t let them dictate your response, but you also can’t make them go away. The point isn’t to stop caring, but to redirect what you care about with full cognitive intent. The point is to focus on what you control and to use what you control to influence your desired outcome.

Get therapy

I mean, maybe? I thought my mentioning of therapy was more of a presentation of an option rather than a primary point, but once again I acknowledge that communication is a two way street and I must do my best to clearly articulate my point. To be clear, I don’t think therapy is technically necessary and I didn’t directly suggest it as I had considered a similar point as to what you have made about the monetary cost. Honestly, what they would ultimately be doing in therapy is to try to change the way you frame things by focusing on what you control. There are multiple approaches, but it usually involves figuring out what core beliefs you have that lead you to the targeted bad outcomes and challenging those core beliefs. This is certainly something you can do on your own, but therapy can help build the skills and awareness to do it effectively. But, once again, therapy isn’t technically necessary for such a thing.

I think it’s important for me to reiterate in a manner I believe to be very clear: The point is to engage with reality. The point is to confront your feelings. The point is to self-reflect with honesty. You don’t control what happens to you, but you do have control over your reaction to it. If your focus is on the circumstances, then you will forever be a victim to those circumstances. Yes, things happened to you, just and unjust, but what are you going to do about it?

Okay, it’s obvious you either don’t care about getting better or you’re just the worst troll. You won’t actually engage with a single point I’ve presented. While I certainly wish you would listen, that’s not up to me, is it?