Disclaimer: This is all subject to change and nothing but my best guesses; my theories so far. That being said, what are your genuine thoughts and criticisms of this first draft?

"Vanity of vanities; all is vanity." - Solomon (Doing of doings; all is a doing)

"Morality is the basis of things, and truth is the substance of all morality." - Gandhi (Selflessness and selfishness are at the basis of things, and our present reality is the consequence of all mankind’s acting upon this great potential for selflessness and selfishness all throughout the millenniums; the extent we've organized ourselves and manipulated our environment that’s led to our present as we know it.)

If vanity (a desire to do; a striving), born from morality (selflessness and selfishness), is the foundation of human behavior, then what underpins morality itself? Here's a proposed chain of things:

Sense Organs+Present Environment/Consciousness/Imagination/Knowledge/Reason/Truth/Influence/Desire/Morality/Vanity

• Vanity is governed by morality,
• Morality is rooted in desire,
• Desire stems from influence,
• Influence is shaped by truth,
• Truth arises from reason,
• Reason is born from knowledge,
• Knowledge is made possible by our imagination,
• And our imagination depends on the extent of how conscious we are of ourselves and everything else via our sense organ reacting to our present environment.

There's a place for Spirit here but haven't decided where exactly; defined more objectively however: "The nonphysical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character; the soul"; ones "personality." Some cats have even a phobia for water, others will jump right in; some cats love their belly rubbed, others will claw and bite at you for going anywhere near it.

"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination.” - Albert Einstein

Sense Organs + Present Environment: It all begins with our sense organs reacting to whatever our present environment consists of. Without our sense organs, we humans (conscious capable beings on a planet) wouldn't be able to be as aware as we sure seem to be to whatever our present environment consists of; no sense organs, no degree of consciousness. However, without an environment for our sense organs to react to, what good would they be? What would be the outcome of a human that was born into nothing but a small, empty room? Nothing; it wouldn't know squat and wouldn't grow to be anywhere near as conscious as you and I sure seem to be—knowledge being what governs over ones level of consciousness. As we age and gather more knowledge of the experience or simply information for example, the more and more conscious we become; I wouldn't be anywhere near as conscious or aware of the vastness of the universe without gaining that knowledge first, for example. Unfortunately, there's living proof of exactly this—a poor little girl was locked up in a cellar by her father at twenty months old until she was Thirteen: theguardian.com/society/2016/j…

Consciousness: With sense organs reacting to an environment comes the ability to be conscious or aware of either oneself, or anything else; consciousness can be divided into two, I dont know, types? Kinds?—the extent of how much more conscious or aware we are of ourselves, and the extent of how much more conscious we are of everything else. An awareness that gives birth to any degree of selfish awareness or what we call today—"selfishness" and selfless awareness or "selflessness," therefore. Without our ability to be as conscious as we sure seem to be in contrast to any other living thing that's supposedly ever existed, there can't be any knowing of anything. No consciousness, no knowledge; consciousness is what gives life, so to speak, to any degree of knowledge on a planet, and is what keeps it living. Even the knowledge that instinct reveals to both something capable of acknowledging its own instinct, and something not capable of coming anywhere close of being able to do so.

Imagination: Consciousness may be what gives life to any degree of knowledge, but its our imaginations that truly make it possible. With no imagination comes the inability to shape knowledge; knowledge needs to be given the form of something to be given life, so to speak. How would we ever be able to reason that combing two things with another two things makes four things without being able to first give those thoughts shape via our imaginations? Would we even be able to reason at all to begin with? Things like Philosophy simply wouldn't exist. Hell, would any knowing of anything exist? One's imagination and how "big" or detailed it is, is on a spectrum, akin to what we're presently referring to as "Autism Spectrum Disorder." There's what's called "Hyperphantasia," which is the term used to categorize a human with an above average detailed or "big" imagination, "Aphantasia," to categorize those with little to even non-existent detailed imaginations, and of course average imaginations that can be referred to as simply "Phantasia," this being the ancient Greek word for "imagination." The extent of one's inner dialogue or inner thoughts are governed by how detailed ones imagination is, as well as one's ability to empathize—to imagine in our heads the perspectives of other things and subsequently feel the feelings of other things for ourselves; another one of our more profound and unique abilities we humans posses so much more capacity for in contrast to nature.

Knowledge: With our imaginations come knowledge. This one is the most important in my opinion. Knowledge is what separates us the most from nature. Yes, we may be mammals, but its our unique and profound ability for knowledge—to retain and transfer it—that allows us to take what our instincts would demand of us otherwise, inherently, and not only deny the more barbaric thoughts and behaviors that are born out of instinct, but even "suffer" to pierce past them, in favor of where a knowledge takes us. There's nothing that comes anywhere close to this unique and profound ability we humans posses; to not only be able to acknowledge our instincts and any more "barbaric" thoughts and subsequent behaviors born out of it, but to even consider, not to mention the great lengths we can push past ourselves in favor of the exact opposite. Instincts (selfishness) demand retaliation, knowledge (selflessness) reveals alternatives that we wouldn't be able to even begin to consider being otherwise absent knowledge. Without knowledge, instincts would completely rule over us as it does lesser conscious, capable beings; knowledge is what makes us free—free from the government of instinct, that is.

Reason: With this unique and profound capacity for knowledge comes our ability to reason with it; to weigh it; quantify (measure) it; to choose it. Reason takes the knowledge we form or shape via our imaginations and rounds it out, so to speak. We may be able to imagine knowledge, but its reason that gives us the ability to take these more simple shapes and make them into triangles and unto decagons; to evolve two plus two is four into rocket science; to take knowledge and turn it into a book, even of our knowledge of morality; to lead one to stop and think when met with someone who offers their other cheek in return after slapping them on the other. It's the very creator of what we now call "logic." With our ability to reason, comes the ability to shape knowledge into a truth.

Truth: To reason is to be able to comprehend what presently reveals itself to be more or less rational and thus, what's subjectively "right" and with that, true. It's by this ability that allows us to take the shapes of knowledge we conjure via our imaginations and ability to reason and turn them into a truth; the truth of wearing clothes for example. It's our ability to reason or "wrestle" with the truth and subsequently live by or deny the outcomes that determines who or what we ultimately become the product of; we are what we've been surrounded with, however, we are also what we repeatedly choose to think, and therefore, do. If I either knowingly or unknowingly have decided that becoming a manager of a clothes store is what's presently revealing itself to be the most rational decision, and subsequently live by it, I will ultimately become a product of that doing; of that knowledge. It's truth to whatever degree (questionable or unquestionable; absolutely or not so absolutely true) that's always guided mankind throughout the ages and into our present as we know it. But what would truth be without the overwhelming influence of other people? To what degree would we believe this or that as true without the influence of our contemporaries? Would we even be able to consider anything as true without all those that have come before us, rounding it out into what we as a species know to be true to whatever degree today? We wouldn't even be able to communicate without all the knowledge of the influence of all those that have come before us, that we take for granted today.

Influence: Would you know all that you know now without the knowledge of the influence of all those that have ever surrounded you? What would you know of even tying your shoes? Truth may be what governs over what or who we ultimately become the product of, but without influence, well, there wouldn't be a whole lot to know would there? If you were the only human on Earth that's ever existed, you'd be absent the knowledge of all that we presently know and have ever presently known, you and I presently at the pinnacle of the "present." Without influence, Plato wouldn't ever have known all that he knew; he wouldn't have possessed the faculty to express what he knew and he wouldn't ever have gained the knowledge of what Socrates had to share without his influence; Peter or Mary Magdalene would've just kept living there lives without the influence of Jesus. Would we know all that we know now of the relevance and logic of loves ability to overcome hate if it wasn't for people like Jesus or Gandhi going to the great lengths they did to point it out? If someone hadn't yelled "watch out!" How would the group of people be aware of what's about to fall unto them and destroy them? How would they be able to save themselves (from the inherency of themselves in Jesus' or Gandhi's case)? To become a "sign" (Luke 11:29) or an influence upon their contemporaries to even be able to consider love and selflessness over hate and selfishness; to walk the more difficult, less convenient, narrower path that knowledge reveals to us over the more inherent, far more convenient, wider path that instinct demands of us, that we're otherwise more inherently drawn to? Without the influence of your parents for example, would you value what you presently do as much as you would without their influence? Would one simply become a racist along with their families and/or contemporaries as another example? How could one know of the woes of racism and the woes of not questioning or wrestling with the truth as its presented to them via the overwhelming influence of our contemporaries, without knowing of the value of doing so beforehand?

Desire: Without the influence of knowledge to whatever degree, what would we desire? How can one desire ice cream without first gaining the knowledge of the experience of its profound taste? Way back when we weren't aware of sex, to what degree did we desire it? If the influence of our contemporaries didn't consist of sex in any way whatsoever, would we desire it as much as we do today? Obviously, instinct would say the desire would still persist, but to what degree in this context in contrast to our present conditions? Where sex is not only encouraged, but it's even "cool" and culturally "adults" participate in it in droves, so therefore, you being an adult too means that of course you should desire it to the same degrees right? Wrong. We may very well be what we are surrounded with, but we are of course what we repeatedly choose to think and therefore, do. Desire stems from our sense organs reacting to our environment; without this reaction, what would sex be but simply procreation? Just a side note, if sex didn't feel as good as it does, would anyone be led to "want" to procreate? Of would it fade away as walking to our destinations has in favor of vehicles today for example? It's desire that leads one to act or do for the sake of itself (selfishness), or anything else (selflessness), and that potentially leads to a level of passion that has the potential to "undo" or "defile" a humans mind, to even lead one to murder or commit suicide, via the passions that are flamed by both hate and love.

Morality: With desire comes our inherency to measure the good or evil within any doing born out of desire. Morality may be subjective, but just like time for example, via our ability to acknowledge, measure, and organize it, we've always been able to find degrees of objectivity within our knowing of anything, like the laws of physics for example, we've come to find "laws of love" - Tolstoy, or whatever any group of humans have come up with to measure and organize time at any point throughout mankind’s history. Through our inherency to empathize, (the law and the prophets as a whole that were meant to be fulfilled, in my opinion of course - Matt 5:17, 22:40), we're able to make the most accurate measurement to determine what most people would agree to be "good" or "bad," just as we're able to determine what time it presently is for most people. Of course it would still be very circumstantial and dependent on the situation, person, culture, and day in age, but generally, using the most accurate tool at our disposal, we can find degrees of objectively within the sea of subjectivity that is our knowledge of morality. Any doing born out of desire—by considering its origins, or what’s at the core of it—can be categorized as a doing for the sake of oneself (selfishness), or for the sake of anything else (selflessness).

Vanity: With our ability to acknowledge, measure, and give life to morality on an Earth comes the doing of any desire, thus, the vanity of it; if we didn't desire anything, what would we aspire to do? If nothing was good or bad, right (and therefore rational) or wrong, good or evil, then why desire anything? Is it, what we call today, "instinct" that demands we quench our thirst when suffering from the lack of it? Or is it that inherent demand for ourselves born out of consciousness and our knowing of morality coupled with our inherency to measure it in relation to ourselves specifically? Just as most nature is conscious enough to share that inherent demand for itself, so we humans just can't help but do the same. The difference being how much more conscious we are of ourselves and morality in contrast, hence the extent of how much more angry we become, or sad (its very difficult to lead a pet to gain a grudge towards its owner), to the point of even "crippling" ourselves. With desire comes the ability to act for the sake of oneself (selfishness), or anything else (selflessness). Upon this inevitable choice lays the foundation of human behavior and subsequently the extent we've ever and presently manipulated our environment and organized ourselves up until now as a species, and what will, objectively—God or not, forever govern over the future of the tomorrow of the most conscious, capable species on this planet; the ones with the most potential for either itself, or anything else.

Disclaimer: This is all subject to change and nothing but my best guesses; my theories so far. That being said, what are your genuine thoughts and criticisms of this first draft?

"Vanity of vanities; all is vanity." - Solomon (Doing of doings; all is a doing)

"Morality is the basis of things, and truth is the substance of all morality." - Gandhi (Selflessness and selfishness are at the basis of things, and our present reality is the consequence of all mankind’s acting upon this great potential for selflessness and selfishness all throughout the millenniums; the extent we've organized ourselves and manipulated our environment that’s led to our present as we know it.)

If vanity (a desire to do; a striving), born from morality (selflessness and selfishness), is the foundation of human behavior, then what underpins morality itself? Here's a proposed chain of things:

Sense Organs+Present Environment/Consciousness/Imagination/Knowledge/Reason/Truth/Influence/Desire/Morality/Vanity

• Vanity is governed by morality,
• Morality is rooted in desire,
• Desire stems from influence,
• Influence is shaped by truth,
• Truth arises from reason,
• Reason is born from knowledge,
• Knowledge is made possible by our imagination,
• And our imagination depends on the extent of how conscious we are of ourselves and everything else via our sense organ reacting to our present environment.

There's a place for Spirit here but haven't decided where exactly; defined more objectively however: "The nonphysical part of a person which is the seat of emotions and character; the soul"; ones "personality." Some cats have even a phobia for water, others will jump right in; some cats love their belly rubbed, others will claw and bite at you for going anywhere near it.

"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination.” - Albert Einstein

Sense Organs + Present Environment: It all begins with our sense organs reacting to whatever our present environment consists of. Without our sense organs, we humans (conscious capable beings on a planet) wouldn't be able to be as aware as we sure seem to be to whatever our present environment consists of; no sense organs, no degree of consciousness. However, without an environment for our sense organs to react to, what good would they be? What would be the outcome of a human that was born into nothing but a small, empty room? Nothing; it wouldn't know squat and wouldn't grow to be anywhere near as conscious as you and I sure seem to be—knowledge being what governs over ones level of consciousness. As we age and gather more knowledge of the experience or simply information for example, the more and more conscious we become; I wouldn't be anywhere near as conscious or aware of the vastness of the universe without gaining that knowledge first, for example. Unfortunately, there's living proof of exactly this—a poor little girl was locked up in a cellar by her father at twenty months old until she was Thirteen: theguardian.com/society/2016/j…

Consciousness: With sense organs reacting to an environment comes the ability to be conscious or aware of either oneself, or anything else; consciousness can be divided into two, I dont know, types? Kinds?—the extent of how much more conscious or aware we are of ourselves, and the extent of how much more conscious we are of everything else. An awareness that gives birth to any degree of selfish awareness or what we call today—"selfishness" and selfless awareness or "selflessness," therefore. Without our ability to be as conscious as we sure seem to be in contrast to any other living thing that's supposedly ever existed, there can't be any knowing of anything. No consciousness, no knowledge; consciousness is what gives life, so to speak, to any degree of knowledge on a planet, and is what keeps it living. Even the knowledge that instinct reveals to both something capable of acknowledging its own instinct, and something not capable of coming anywhere close of being able to do so.

Imagination: Consciousness may be what gives life to any degree of knowledge, but its our imaginations that truly make it possible. With no imagination comes the inability to shape knowledge; knowledge needs to be given the form of something to be given life, so to speak. How would we ever be able to reason that combing two things with another two things makes four things without being able to first give those thoughts shape via our imaginations? Would we even be able to reason at all to begin with? Things like Philosophy simply wouldn't exist. Hell, would any knowing of anything exist? One's imagination and how "big" or detailed it is, is on a spectrum, akin to what we're presently referring to as "Autism Spectrum Disorder." There's what's called "Hyperphantasia," which is the term used to categorize a human with an above average detailed or "big" imagination, "Aphantasia," to categorize those with little to even non-existent detailed imaginations, and of course average imaginations that can be referred to as simply "Phantasia," this being the ancient Greek word for "imagination." The extent of one's inner dialogue or inner thoughts are governed by how detailed ones imagination is, as well as one's ability to empathize—to imagine in our heads the perspectives of other things and subsequently feel the feelings of other things for ourselves; another one of our more profound and unique abilities we humans posses so much more capacity for in contrast to nature.

Knowledge: With our imaginations come knowledge. This one is the most important in my opinion. Knowledge is what separates us the most from nature. Yes, we may be mammals, but its our unique and profound ability for knowledge—to retain and transfer it—that allows us to take what our instincts would demand of us otherwise, inherently, and not only deny the more barbaric thoughts and behaviors that are born out of instinct, but even "suffer" to pierce past them, in favor of where a knowledge takes us. There's nothing that comes anywhere close to this unique and profound ability we humans posses; to not only be able to acknowledge our instincts and any more "barbaric" thoughts and subsequent behaviors born out of it, but to even consider, not to mention the great lengths we can push past ourselves in favor of the exact opposite. Instincts (selfishness) demand retaliation, knowledge (selflessness) reveals alternatives that we wouldn't be able to even begin to consider being otherwise absent knowledge. Without knowledge, instincts would completely rule over us as it does lesser conscious, capable beings; knowledge is what makes us free—free from the government of instinct, that is.

Reason: With this unique and profound capacity for knowledge comes our ability to reason with it; to weigh it; quantify (measure) it; to choose it. Reason takes the knowledge we form or shape via our imaginations and rounds it out, so to speak. We may be able to imagine knowledge, but its reason that gives us the ability to take these more simple shapes and make them into triangles and unto decagons; to evolve two plus two is four into rocket science; to take knowledge and turn it into a book, even of our knowledge of morality; to lead one to stop and think when met with someone who offers their other cheek in return after slapping them on the other. It's the very creator of what we now call "logic." With our ability to reason, comes the ability to shape knowledge into a truth.

Truth: To reason is to be able to comprehend what presently reveals itself to be more or less rational and thus, what's subjectively "right" and with that, true. It's by this ability that allows us to take the shapes of knowledge we conjure via our imaginations and ability to reason and turn them into a truth; the truth of wearing clothes for example. It's our ability to reason or "wrestle" with the truth and subsequently live by or deny the outcomes that determines who or what we ultimately become the product of; we are what we've been surrounded with, however, we are also what we repeatedly choose to think, and therefore, do. If I either knowingly or unknowingly have decided that becoming a manager of a clothes store is what's presently revealing itself to be the most rational decision, and subsequently live by it, I will ultimately become a product of that doing; of that knowledge. It's truth to whatever degree (questionable or unquestionable; absolutely or not so absolutely true) that's always guided mankind throughout the ages and into our present as we know it. But what would truth be without the overwhelming influence of other people? To what degree would we believe this or that as true without the influence of our contemporaries? Would we even be able to consider anything as true without all those that have come before us, rounding it out into what we as a species know to be true to whatever degree today? We wouldn't even be able to communicate without all the knowledge of the influence of all those that have come before us, that we take for granted today.

Influence: Would you know all that you know now without the knowledge of the influence of all those that have ever surrounded you? What would you know of even tying your shoes? Truth may be what governs over what or who we ultimately become the product of, but without influence, well, there wouldn't be a whole lot to know would there? If you were the only human on Earth that's ever existed, you'd be absent the knowledge of all that we presently know and have ever presently known, you and I presently at the pinnacle of the "present." Without influence, Plato wouldn't ever have known all that he knew; he wouldn't have possessed the faculty to express what he knew and he wouldn't ever have gained the knowledge of what Socrates had to share without his influence; Peter or Mary Magdalene would've just kept living there lives without the influence of Jesus. Would we know all that we know now of the relevance and logic of loves ability to overcome hate if it wasn't for people like Jesus or Gandhi going to the great lengths they did to point it out? If someone hadn't yelled "watch out!" How would the group of people be aware of what's about to fall unto them and destroy them? How would they be able to save themselves (from the inherency of themselves in Jesus' or Gandhi's case)? To become a "sign" (Luke 11:29) or an influence upon their contemporaries to even be able to consider love and selflessness over hate and selfishness; to walk the more difficult, less convenient, narrower path that knowledge reveals to us over the more inherent, far more convenient, wider path that instinct demands of us, that we're otherwise more inherently drawn to? Without the influence of your parents for example, would you value what you presently do as much as you would without their influence? Would one simply become a racist along with their families and/or contemporaries as another example? How could one know of the woes of racism and the woes of not questioning or wrestling with the truth as its presented to them via the overwhelming influence of our contemporaries, without knowing of the value of doing so beforehand?

Desire: Without the influence of knowledge to whatever degree, what would we desire? How can one desire ice cream without first gaining the knowledge of the experience of its profound taste? Way back when we weren't aware of sex, to what degree did we desire it? If the influence of our contemporaries didn't consist of sex in any way whatsoever, would we desire it as much as we do today? Obviously, instinct would say the desire would still persist, but to what degree in this context in contrast to our present conditions? Where sex is not only encouraged, but it's even "cool" and culturally "adults" participate in it in droves, so therefore, you being an adult too means that of course you should desire it to the same degrees right? Wrong. We may very well be what we are surrounded with, but we are of course what we repeatedly choose to think and therefore, do. Desire stems from our sense organs reacting to our environment; without this reaction, what would sex be but simply procreation? Just a side note, if sex didn't feel as good as it does, would anyone be led to "want" to procreate? Of would it fade away as walking to our destinations has in favor of vehicles today for example? It's desire that leads one to act or do for the sake of itself (selfishness), or anything else (selflessness), and that potentially leads to a level of passion that has the potential to "undo" or "defile" a humans mind, to even lead one to murder or commit suicide, via the passions that are flamed by both hate and love.

Morality: With desire comes our inherency to measure the good or evil within any doing born out of desire. Morality may be subjective, but just like time for example, via our ability to acknowledge, measure, and organize it, we've always been able to find degrees of objectivity within our knowing of anything, like the laws of physics for example, we've come to find "laws of love" - Tolstoy, or whatever any group of humans have come up with to measure and organize time at any point throughout mankind’s history. Through our inherency to empathize, (the law and the prophets as a whole that were meant to be fulfilled, in my opinion of course - Matt 5:17, 22:40), we're able to make the most accurate measurement to determine what most people would agree to be "good" or "bad," just as we're able to determine what time it presently is for most people. Of course it would still be very circumstantial and dependent on the situation, person, culture, and day in age, but generally, using the most accurate tool at our disposal, we can find degrees of objectively within the sea of subjectivity that is our knowledge of morality. Any doing born out of desire—by considering its origins, or what’s at the core of it—can be categorized as a doing for the sake of oneself (selfishness), or for the sake of anything else (selflessness).

Vanity: With our ability to acknowledge, measure, and give life to morality on an Earth comes the doing of any desire, thus, the vanity of it; if we didn't desire anything, what would we aspire to do? If nothing was good or bad, right (and therefore rational) or wrong, good or evil, then why desire anything? Is it, what we call today, "instinct" that demands we quench our thirst when suffering from the lack of it? Or is it that inherent demand for ourselves born out of consciousness and our knowing of morality coupled with our inherency to measure it in relation to ourselves specifically? Just as most nature is conscious enough to share that inherent demand for itself, so we humans just can't help but do the same. The difference being how much more conscious we are of ourselves and morality in contrast, hence the extent of how much more angry we become, or sad (its very difficult to lead a pet to gain a grudge towards its owner), to the point of even "crippling" ourselves. With desire comes the ability to act for the sake of oneself (selfishness), or anything else (selflessness). Upon this inevitable choice lays the foundation of human behavior and subsequently the extent we've ever and presently manipulated our environment and organized ourselves up until now as a species, and what will, objectively—God or not, forever govern over the future of the tomorrow of the most conscious, capable species on this planet; the ones with the most potential for either itself, or anything else.

I have always thought that I have felt emotions much more strongly than others. At baseline, I don't feel a whole lot of positive or negative, but a stimulus easily puts me into overdrive, like the volume knob on the stereo suddenly gets maxed out and the gas pedal gets stuck down.

I bet a lot of you can relate to this. Everyone has things that make them different than others. This is one of mine. Sometimes, it can make it different to function in life. But it also has good things...the highs feel really high and I think it makes me very empathetic and much more inclined to be kind. Things are pathologized when we don't fit nearly I do the functional box that society wants us to. Nothing has ever changed this quality about me...not therapy or medications. It is who I am and it bothers a lot of people and even myself.

But I think our brains are just wired differently than some. And that's ok. It what makes you authentically you. It's what makes you empathetic.

I will give you a quote by Pearl S. Buck that I really resonated with...

A human creature born abnormally, inhumanly sensitive.
To him... a touch is a blow
A sound is a noise
A misfortune is a tragedy
A joy is an ecstasy
Afriend is a lover
A lover is a god
And failure is death.

The first line that I omitted is about creativity but I don't think this necessarily correlates with that. For me it doesn't, anyway.

Want to wade into the sandy surf of the abyss? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned soo many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this.)

BlueMonday1984

2025-11-03 00:00:10

Stubsack: weekly thread for sneers not worth an entire post, week ending 9th November 2025

Want to wade into the sandy surf of the abyss? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned soo many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this.)

“That was a line that was something else, and I can’t remember what it was,” Elizabeth Olsen says during a panel at Space Con 2025. “Paul was like, ‘I think we really need to figure out this line. I feel like there’s something we’re missing.’ And then he and the showrunner’s assistant really landed on that line.”

“[Jac Schaeffer’s] assistant walked in with a coffee, and I can’t remember what I had got to,” Paul Bettany says. “It was like, ‘What is grief, if not love, something.’ And she came in and said, ‘Persevering.’ And we were like, ‘That’s it.’ I get lots of love for that line, but when you watch it, you’ll see that the entire thing actually plays on Lizzie’s face.”

It would certainly shine a light on why people almost exclusively talk about meat when talking to vegans. If "meat" is being used to mean any and all dietary animal products, or even just including dairy and eggs, not just animal flesh, then it would explain a lot of behavior I've experienced.

I think vegans know, that all you hear from non-vegans is talk about meat. Trying to provoke us by saying they like/love meat, or meat is tasty, or that they're eating meat, or in cases of the internet, people (farmers, homesteaders) informing us that they'll be personally slaughtering animals in our name and attributing blame to us for that action. But even in less hostile cases, talking about how much they would struggle to give up meat, or debating the ethics, environmentalism, health & other factors purely related to meat production & consumption, defending their own consumption of meat or others', while seemingly ignoring what a vegan is and treating us as if we're vegetarians.

Ever since being vegan, it's been a weird notable experience for me that everyone talks to me about "meat". When I was vegetarian (by my understanding of the definition at that time, which just meant no consumption of animal flesh/bodies), no one ever talked about it. As soon as I'm vegan? "Oh, a vegan. Meat, meat, meat." It would make more sense to me if people said that when I was vegetarian, and then started talking about dairy, eggs or leather to me all the time when I went vegan. But I digress. I do have theories, like maybe the existence of people who don't use any animals with an ethical association triggers them more, and maybe that causes them to default to asserting their defiant attitude to continue consuming the "product" they're most attracted to, meat (though you also hear very frequently "I could never give up cheese").

Btw- "meat" isn't what I would rather say. I don't even like that word anymore, at least when used for animal flesh, because it feels like a euphemism & helps distance consumers from what "it" is. Plus, it denies the existence of plant-based meat or its meat status (nvm how meat just meant food originally, including plants). But I'll call it meat for these purposes or clarity and because we're discussing how language is used.

Im 21. back when i was 16 i got into a really abusive relationship with my ex who was the same age, it lasted 2 and a half years. Back then i had lots of close friends that I could talk to about anything. My ex ended up cheating on me and had a lot of mental issues she had undiagnosed, she tried to explain her abuse of me as caused by bpd. I loved her so much and i thought i cant leave and lose the love of my life. The relationship continued to break down, she would yell at me for hours and break up with me then ask me to get back together within the same week and say she never meant any of it and that its her bpd. I was so confused and i slowly isolated from people because she would say if i talked about the relationship people would hate her and i would tell her they wouldn't but I still felt the pressure to protect her. keep in mind bpd doesn't cause behaviours like hers at all necessarily and its very likely she had commorbidities like narcissistic personality disorder looking back especially since she denies having any issues now and refuses to see a psychiatrist or therapist, she eventually started projecting that I have bpd and i thought i may at that point because of how insane everything made me but ive seen professionals and talked about all of this stuff and they dont seem to think i do. and i research these things a lot and based on my own research i think its less than likely that i do.

Later on it eventually culminated in her hitting me one day much later on in the relationship nearer to the end. after i moved slightly further away a smear campaign was started. she started claiming I was abusive and that i was insane. I had proof otherwise since i always screenshotted abusive situations and confusing times because they made me feel so confused and heartbroken. But the people who harassed me for her openly said they dont care about anything i have because im not trustworthy and must just be making things up. The people who harassed me were already people that hated me mainly with a few of my old friends too. one of the people listened to me explain everything and even said its believable and makes sense before saying they dont care because they were only listening so they could say it doesn't matter and fuck with me anyway because that guy specifically hated me a lot for a long time because i called out his fucked up behaviours a long time ago. sorry i feel like im writing so much right now my mental is fucked right now.

i got stalked and harassed on new accounts for years, someone made an account named after an account only my ex knew about and then dm'd me on it saying they were me and that they know everything about me and just trying to fuck with my head. The guy my ex was into near breaking up with me also made a new account just to reference that she probably cheated on me and to dox me online. Ive still not recovered from everything i get night terrors most days and im scared to get close to people. i have friends but im always worried about being an annoyance or a burden or that they secretly hate me and it makes me scared to talk about things i need help with or just need someone to talk to about. i used to talk to friends about these things. now im so desperate that even though i dont even like ai or think its very good at it I'll talk to ai about these things just to at least talk about things because it drives me insane and i get to the point of self harm when I'm isolated in these thoughts. i cant call hotlines they never help and just make me feel even more fucked and alone.

I've talked to a lot of psychs and they think i have severe cptsd, something i had been suspecting before I talked to any professionals. Ive done a lot of work with reorganizing my thoughts and trying to think healthier but i also have severe adhd and autism which gets in the way of doing therapy work as much as id like because i dont have adhd medication yet despite my diagnosis. I've still tried though and i know things have gotten better but at the same time im still so isolated. I have a friend i care about a lot and i cant even tell them anything i feel or think because all my brain can go to is that I don't matter to them like they matter to me and that i should just isolate and cut everyone off.

a few months ago my pet rabbit died, he was all i had through this all, i had some mice too that passed away, and he was all i had left. He emotionally regulated me a lot and since his death I feel all over the place, i deactivated my discord in fear of not mattering and because my brain is telling me i just need to cut everyone off and die. I know it wont actually solve anything but at the same time everything feels so meaningless i matter so little and i feel so alone i just don't wanna be here anymore i can't take it. All i do is harm those around me by being mentally unwell and im not happy or loved im just better off gone. i haven't felt this in a long time but everything feels so stagnant and I just feel so hopeless it feels like itll never get better and that ill just watch as i get worse and worse.

I think part of it comes from attachment issues i have now. That friend i have matters a lot to me they're the closest ive been to someone in so long and everything about them can affect me. all i can ever think about is how ill never matter to them like they matter to me and it makes me feel so alone and hopeless. we were working on something for their school together until recently and after it finished they got very distant and stopped talking as much, it already affected me before when i felt like i didn't really matter but this has made me feel a lot more insane than ever. i know shes not ignoring me though and things are hard with her own issues. but i still get in my head, before it was about the fact that i feel like i ask about a lot and care a lot about how shes doing but that it feels like shes never all that interested back in how im doing or feeling. now it feels like I just don't matter at all even if i know i do. she never seems that interested in speaking to me and has ignored me for so long since the project ended it makes me feel so worthless and like that's all that i ever mattered for, especially since before when i did ask for reassurance that i mattered she framed my importance by saying that she doesn't know how she'd get through this year without me, which just felt like all i bring to the table is helping her get through the school year by helping with work.

i self harmed yesterday for the first time in i dont know how long and it felt really relieving. at the end of my abuse i smashed my head into things until it bled and i may have given myself concussions i dont know since i never got anything checked out after but I'm afraid of getting to that point I'm afraid to feel like this and I'm afraid because all my breakdowns do is ultimately push people further away reinforcing the cycle. the more im like this obviously she wouldn't want anything to do with me im just ruining everything and I'm gonna end up all alone and part of me thinks thats better because then i can kill myself but at the same time i know im so scared to and that if i dont ill just be completely alone while i rot.

i dont know what to do anymore i dont even really know why im posting this i guess im getting to a breaking point i just cant handle it anymore i hate feeling this way I hate feeling so alone i want to just feel like im not invisible and like i dont matter
it says i need a picture so I attached a picture of my rabbit buster. i wish he was here