Wojak (Discord ID: 144608464331603968), page 1

.agree

No fight pangolin

Only pet pangolin

Heh, I get invited to a server that lists "gay" in the same category as "vore" under "disgusting". Hilarity. Also hello.

Did I miss how roles work? Usually servers have a role bot.

I didn't see it in the rules channel.

I found it just as you @'d me

I'm a dum

Guess I wait 24 hours then.

Thanks.

No idea. Someone on Gab.

Watches my stuff I guess.

Figured I'd poke my head in.

Science related videos on human behavior. Psychology mainly so far, but I do have a very diverse array of interests. Just no time. So mostly psychology as yet.

I rather rigorously delve in to the science, publications, etc. Actually read the literature.

Something most people don't do.

So far, also, a lot to do on loneliness, incel related (in that incels are lonely), things like that.

My boyfriend says I take too many words to say things >:I

Fix me I'm broken :p

If I'm a tourist can I wear a Hawaiian shirt?

Well, that's infinitely better than a lot of "criticism" I receive. So far only from people who seem to think the very _idea_ of trying to investigate whether something is true is a heresy.

Lots of them came out of the woodwork concerning corporal punishment.

Feeling a bit slow on a subject is always preferable to giving up and assuming superiority.

I mean, yeesh.

That's iffy. I've always read more than anyone else I've ever known. From fiction, to history, and so forth. I don't know how to "cultivate" it without a natural sense of obsession for learning. I read because I have to. Or I won't figure out how to know what's true or false. More information means more to work with. Means less mistakes. It means the best possible chance of seeing as much of the world as possible - and definitely do not discount fiction for this. Far better philosophy is written in fiction than in university.

Adolescent development isn't "kool" since they found out none of their studies on interventions validated. Buuut they still do on young children. Tabula Rasa springs eternal.

Hence why all those intervention studies try reaaaaaaaaaal hard to never longitudinally check beyond childhood.

And anyone who does realizes interventions do nothing.

Also, it's my general sense that people _hate_ teenagers.

Any wonder teenagers hate the world. Everyone hates them by default.

It's pretty despicable how we treat adolescents.

Anyone would, treated with such neglect or, even worse, dismissal.

"Oh, you're learning how to figure out the world? Fuck off until you do"

_So helpful_

Well, that and the rape.

Lots of that going on.

But as long as men are the ones being raped, who cares?

Highest rape stats in the nation aren't prison. It's Juvie.

That's the sick thing: Prisoners have recourse to the law.

The law rolls its eyes at teenagers.

I suspect more than several mysterious shank implements have been introduced to rape victims by someone's under-the-table idea of "fixing" the problem without reporting it.

Fixes two problems, right? Who cares if the criminal gets more time, right?

I know how this shit works. And there's a reason I have zero respect for the law.

You also see a lot of victims of Munchausen's by proxy.

"He's crazy. No really."

And how does a _not_ crazy teenager prove his _mother_ is the insane one? He doesn't.

He's never given the chance.

If he tries, well, he's a narcissist who thinks he's superior to his poor innocent mother.

Lots of very bad "psychiatrists" on government pay.

I do. And I want to burn the industry to the ground.

HELL no. I saw the product, I talked to them, I _listened_ and investigated.

And NOPED right the fuck off that idea.

I do not think, one instant, that any fucker who works in those facilities is a good person.

They're all power craving lunatics who want easy ways to abuse power and justify their superiority.

It _attracts_ narcissists.

It _attracts_ people who abuse authority.

Because teenagers are the single most vulnerable population - and they know it.

Hooooly shit no.

It's no better.

Once upon a time I almost did university with the intent of working to help people like that. Good for me I was smart enough to do investigating first. A lot of it.

Chose to major in mathematics instead.

But spent all my time doing psychology anyway.

Psychology has sort of rotted to the core. Lack of control and filtering.

There's no checks and balances against abuses of power and authority.

It's hideous how that occurs in a field where it should be MOST prevalent. MOST cautious.

To be fair, Kragt, you often do have to exercise and force social interaction. inasmuch as you can stand it.

A good psychologist would help you figure out how.

Just being told "do this" doesn't help.

>Seminary

oooooh

I was a jehovah's witness until I turned 14. Got out of that one in a hurry.

Well, yes and no. Researchers absolutely are trying to figure out how to help people. But there's a sort of detachment between academia and the session-culture with the research and intent of the science.

Often the best way to help is introspection. Which, yes Kragt, often means researching it yourself.

To help introspective people that's what you should foster.

That gives you a sense of self efficacy - agency.

Power and control and ability to make your life better.

It's helping people with BAD introspection that you need to really direct thoroughly and carefully.

Tons of clinical tools given to people, like mood charts, are exactly for people with bad introspection.

People who cannot really think about their mental states or remember them reliably.

No. 5. And that's personality assessment. I'm talking about mood.

"16" is the sort of myers-briggs pseudoscience astrology.

There are a lot of useful tools in psychology but also a lot of bad psychologists who don't know how to use them.

🗡

572, can I steb?

<:batman:532079386946568193>

Meditation helped me considerably.

More than anything else before or since.

Well, meditation and buddhism helped. Learn to let go.

Like most things given to you fast and cheap, it's fattening and bad for you.

I just recommend everyone to Ajahn Brahm. Decades of videos of his talks, very simple, somewhat repetitive, but strictly original buddhism.

Theravadan buddhism works, and with none of the highly religious ritualistic gobbledeegook other cultures added on to it.

Learn to let go, and to be mindful.

Simple is what works.

It does have some ritualistic gobbledegook, but any sensible person can see the point isn't the ritual. In fact _the first listed stage of enlightenment is to accept that_.

Yes, over a disagreement. I forget about what.

Basically the council or whatever wouldn't back him over what he thought was essential and important. Being that was the case, he stepped down from it as the only viable solution.

Since he could not, _especially_ not as head monk, do otherwise.

You cannot be a buddhist and go "Well I'll just ignore this then"

You develop introspection by meditating.

Hence the whole development of it.

Nah, he wanted to make things less of a workload by expanding committees with people he trusts. Apparently it got vetoed by the use of some proxy or other legalese.

He thinks that was unethical, as the people who vetoed didn't even (according to him) know what was going on.

I'd link buuut no link.

So google ajahn brahm resignation

it's a very short letter.

brb

I was.

>Got home
>Not tired at all

sigh

EVERY TIME

<:ree:480188470942498827>

Sure.

Today was "I'm falling asleep on my feet"
>Get home
>.... FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF <:ree:480188470942498827>

Hard drive.

I can't exactly upload them.

I got them legit from all the fuckers I bilk who have subscriptions to Nature et al.

:V And nobody say otherwise.

Very often authors upload their own papers on their own website, if they have one.

Usually googling a title will also list a PDF from a university portal, or even a public available full version elsewhere.

If _everything_ fails there are other means. Either use a university or public library (which can get the study from the university on loan per request) or various pirate platforms.

I use all available legal means.

Also, when googling, use search flags and options properly.

"This in quotes" searches EXACTLY what is in quotes.

filetype:X where X is the type (filetype:pdf) will only return that file type.

Look up google's search settings or flags or such.

Your first attempt should be an exact search of the title.

If you do not have the title, try the author and year with general keywords about the topic summarized.

Often newspapers and others will intentionally NOT cite the source directly.

The fuckers.

I say intentionally because I HAVE NOT YET SEEN A SINGLE JOURNALIST NOT LIE ABOUT THE CONTENTS OF A STUDY

_EVER!_

_NOT ONCE EVER_

<:ree:480188470942498827>

If a journalist ever wants to interview me I have only one answer.

"Go fuck yourself"

An honest journalist is like an honest prosecutor. They play cards with Jesus and Santa on Thanksgiving.

see ya

Disturb's cover is one of the worst covers I've ever heard.

Fiteme <:ree:480188470942498827>

It misses the point, all the points and all possible points, and radically alters the song to unrecognizability in a manner that renders the lyrics useless.

Ramping up to pointless screaming (comparatively so) doesn't deliver the message, it does the _opposite_.

_The song was presented monotonously for a reason_

You're allowed to have a wrong opinion.

;p

I'm just being a shit.

Though I honestly don't like Disturbed's cover.

Uh, no.

If you're going to claim that you reaaaaaaaaally don't know Simon and Garfunkel.

And so did mine, and my grandmother.

Yes, they did typically sing in a basic harmonic style, but it's not monotonous as this song is on average.

Yes.

I am.

No and that's a really stupid idea most famous for how stupid it is.

:P

I meant I am that wojak @The-Free-Monk mentions

I look away for five minutes

What's going on?

what

Raaaace isn't akin to breeds either no.

But that's irrelevant to the first point.

Xychotic, relating to "race prefer their own kind", this is actually not true. To be clear, not _necessarily_ true by any means we've devised to determine "preference". For example, cross-cultural validations of attractiveness find no variance in what races find attractive. But there are variances in what they _will admit_ is attractive (hence you have to be careful in how you go about studying this to avoid that racism bias).

To be absolutely clear, if and only if the person in question is highly tribalistic with a strong ingroup preference, then they prefer members they perceive of as their own group.

And, to be absolutely clear, that _isn't_ a majority in most societies or groups.

Highly tribalistic highly ingroup-driven people are almost always a minority.

Furthermore, this preference _is not_ based on race most of the time, but rather perceived group affiliation of which race may only play a small or incidental part.

As in the case of highly tribalistic left-wing blacks who call right-wing blacks "uncle tom" or "race traitor" in spite of sharing the group "black".

@Lilu Using a condom during masturbation as well as a silicone masturbator can help.

Sex researchers deal with sexual dysfunctions like low stimuli on the regular.

The general treatment for sexual anhedonia is a slow acclimation toward less sensation while still achieving orgasm.

Ideally, to be able to achieve low stimulation orgasm without porn.

That usually helps sexual functioning for people with sexual anhedonia or delayed orgasm.

Delayed orgasm is a considerable problem for some - far moreso than "premature" ejaculation in many cases.

"nofap" is not healthy. Ask any doctor, a lack of ejaculation considerably increases risk of prostate problems. Not just cancer.

Or, rather, I'd say _not ejaculating_ isn't healthy.

Those are not sufficiently frequent.

If you're in a relationship with access to regular sex, not masturbating can help if you experience delayed ejaculation.

"optimal" depends on the person.

In terms of maximally reducing prostate, urethral infection, etc, a few times a week or so.

Note I did not mention only prostate cancer, but prostatitis, urethral infections, etc.

Also his concept there is hilariously misleading.

"Prostate cancer has an extremely low mortality"? Um, no. Depends on all the factors. What age you get it at, whether it's caught early, whether you get regular screenings, etc.

Your quote just lied by misusing all of his data to get the lowest possible number.

As the saying goes: Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

The same obsession with fad diets and fad exercises and fad everything else.

A perceived lack of masculinity feeding paranoia and a desire to reassert what is perceived to be lost.

When for most people all they need do is lose weight and exercise.

Case in point: For men where prostate cancer has mestasticized (spread to other parts of the body), survival rate is 30% or less.

Note how he tries to calculate _mortality_ of prostate cancer

not _increased risk of getting it_

Well if you risk _increases_ and you're not getting checked, and it metastasizes, you're boned.

It damn well should be.

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer behind _skin cancer_ for men.

It is VERY common.

Risk factors include low sexual activity, obesity, smoking, alcoholism, etc.

But this is not just about prostate cancer. It's about UTI's, infections, other complications.

Regular ejaculation is simply optimal for maintaining the health of your sexual organs however it is obtained.

They serve the exact same biological purpose, Lilu.

Yes, Lilu.

People who masturbate a few times a week generally have fewer UTI's, less prostate cancer risk, less prostatitis, generally any issue with the genitals they have fewer issues with in the long term.

Though to be clear this is with _any_ ejaculatory activity I am only referring to masturbation as a proxy.

No, Cato, that's actually its own unique condition.

In extremes it's dubbed "post orgasmic illness syndrome"

It's _primarily_ the product of guilt. Not kidding.

You find it overwhelmingly in people with fundamentalist upbringings.

Also, yes, masturbating before bed is a great way to relax and sleep.

Or having sex before bed. Probably an hour or two before.

If you stand up triumphantly just because you had sex, you're probably a narcissist.

Also, there are more domains here than just for men. For women, there are whole domains of other concerns, like external masturbation or vibrators. I keep telling women, never ever ever use vibrators. Any activity that DOES NOT mimic sex as closely as possible reduces the ability to enjoy or achieve orgasm from the act, and in some populations eliminates the possibility of orgasm entirely.

I'm just parroting recommendations by sexual health researchers who deal with these issues clinically.

If possible, yes.

But there are other ways, as I explained, to help this delayed or sexual anhedonia issue.

Like using a condom while masturbating to reduce the friction or overstimulation.

Ideally, using a condom with a penetrative toy would have the best effect if you can train yourself to that point.

@secrite There's not much of a real benefit to fasting beyond 2-4 days.

And the more prolonged the fast the more health risks you incur.

Unless you mean "cessation of masturbation"

Yes.

I'm looking for it.

One guy did a very meticulous analysis of his blood sugar over a prolonged period of fasting I wanted to find.

It's....I have it somewhere?

No, I have tons of publications I save.

And as a result I lose them.

It's irritating as fuck.

Fasting is great for reducing inflammation also related to insulin inflammatory effects - and immune system regulation.

However, there are more risks with prolonged fasting due to cardiovascular stress. If you have any health problems at all, this could be an issue.

Same goes for maintenance of electrolytes. You can induce a stroke in sensitive individuals.

If you fast _without_ maintaining electrolytic balance there are very severe consequences that could arise, including heart arrhythmia that may lead to a heart attack for people with underlying conditions.

I'm still trying to find the one guy who did a meticulous monitoring of his blood sugar.

Fuck me if I can find it

Nnnnnoooot relevant to what I wanted to use it for.

Primarily when I say fasting for prolonged (week+) periods has substantial risk IS related to medical studies.

But I also wanted to mention something else, and I can't find the fucker now.

God damn it.

FOUND HIM

Hunger peaks around day 3-4 (as he also notes) and tapers off - but AFTER the fast your blood glucose goes insane.

The longer the fast the more extreme the insulin-glucose dysregulation.

And this is one datapoint I wanted to share to visually demonstrate it.

Yes, this is also useful to visually see an approximation of the process.

It's not population representative but it's a neat visualization of the general idea.

Anyway, primary medical concern here with prolonged fasts like a week or more is the longer the absence of food the worse the compensatory dysregulation becomes.

Refeeding syndrome is real and very dangerous.

I did link it

Welp

imgur /a/yN4QtU9

But no, seriously, _look up refeeding syndrome_.

Week+ fasts are perfect candidates for the symptoms of it and they can progress, in extremes, to being fatal.

Case in point: hypophosphataemia.

This is what relates to the heart dysfunctions I mentioned.