Come back when you have something substantial to contribute.
Come back when you have something substantial to contribute.
No, it gets people talking about people who glue themselves to paintings. And that’s as far as the conversation goes because it has no connection whatsoever to environmental issues. It’s pure uncut narcissism.
When you vaguely tell somebody to read more it’s because you have no actual argument.
There is no connection to environmental issues. They are doing this to look cool to their friends.
No, but they should be coherent and meaningful. These fools (or possibly goons for oil companies) who attack paintings are only making environmentalism look utterly stupid. They are openly mocked by everybody because they’re lashing out incoherently.
They’re actively working against environmentalism. I really think they’re bad, selfish, narcissistic, and stupid people. They don’t care about the environment.
There is absolutely no reason to think their ridiculous behavior could possibly help the environment.
Can you offer some examples of where “being vulnerable” led a man out of depression?
I do agree that there is a culture of masculine shame around mental health, and it can be unhealthy. But I’ve also seen that those who share their feelings don’t get the promotion, tend to make coworkers uncomfortable, drive women away. Life is still a competition and vulnerability is genuinely risky.
I’ve seen bullies strategically share false vulnerability to garner sympathy. Genuine vulnerability often looks gross from a man, and is unlikely to lead to positive outcomes.
Most importantly, this new wave of mental health problems is not caused by a new wave of “not being vulnerable.” It’s a societal issue and must be confronted there, not shunted onto each individual man.