They don’t tell you this, but (non-abusive) fighting and rough patches in the context of a committed relationship where neither person is afraid that the other person is going to reject them or leave are SO much better than the serial monogamy dating roller coaster
Looking back I don’t know how anyone gets anything done when they’re spending their 20s and 30s with zero relationship security. Some people are probably wired to tolerate this better than others, but geez, it just consumes so much human compute
I’m pretty convinced that individual personality factors and attachment dynamics are only part of the story, and people just fight and recover differently when they know they’re not going to leave and neither will their partner. The “win” condition is just unavoidably different
If you know that you are NOT going to break up, the core of a fight/recovery is simple: at least one of you is unhappy and unless that gets fixed home life is going to suck. It doesn’t really matter who is at fault or who has leverage, it’s still going to suck until it gets fixed
Once you get enough practice with it, you stop playing all the games that just extend the period where one or both people are unhappy, because there are no bonus points or prizes for anything other than solving the problem. Punishing the other person is just punishing yourself
The big caveat here is that none of this works in a truly abusive relationship or a relationship with a genuinely sociopathic person, because it relies on both people being fundamentally NOT OKAY with the other person’s persistent unhappiness
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Twitter’s moderation game is unreal. If there’s no remotely plausible TOS violation, simply append a “misleading” label (no elaboration necessary) and disable all engagement aside from quote-retweets
I enjoy getting into the weeds re: how misleading this actually is, but frankly I also think it’s fucking important that people are allowed to say things on social media that social media staffers consider misleading
The lab leak hypothesis was a completely baseless conspiracy theory until suddenly it wasn’t, because it turns out that immediate consensus-generation can be completely fucking wrong
I’m struggling to understand how the entire medical & media infrastructure can be so invested in a novel drug with the potentially catastrophic risk profile of molnupiravir when there’s a standard FDA-approved SSRI that performed just as well in a widely lauded large-scale RCT
Molnupiravir caused such significant harm to fetuses in animal models that Merck has suggested ensuring contraceptive use during *and* after treatment, actively generates mutations that could theoretically lead to new variants & has a mechanism of action that may cause cancer
Fluvoxamine is a pretty standard SSRI with a standard SSRI risk profile that’s been FDA-approved to treat depression, OCD and anxiety disorders for nearly 15 years. Both appear to reduce hospitalizations by roughly 30% in rigorous clinical trials.
The media has gone absolutely schizophrenic on omicron, just totally unable to draw a coherent narrative or practice any patience where it’s owed — and even the most forgiving portion of its audience seems to be tired of getting pulled through the panic/blame shredder
A key phrase I’m seeing a lot is “giving ammo to the anti-vaxxers,” which IMO can reasonably be parsed as a frustrated expression of that which cannot be stated plainly: the people committed to following institutional advice are tired of being kept in a coercive state of panic
There continue to be really encouraging signals re: omicron, still room for concern (for example, how will regions compromised by recent delta waves fare?) but the bottom line is that people seem ready to return to a state of affairs where their medical decisions belong to them
Omicron is spreading fast, but no confirmed deaths globally so far. Depending on how long it’s been spreading, that could be a *really* good sign google.com/amp/s/www.alja…
From the beginning we’ve seen COVID hospitalizations lag behind cases and deaths lag behind hospitalizations, so I’m cautiously optimistic, but so far everything still looks like a potential best case scenario
I usually argue a bit with Aella on this stuff, but honestly in a culture with low expected commitment norms she’s right that monogamous defaults basically just lead to serial breakups to trade up or enjoy the perks of novelty
Hesitantly accepting a polyamorous lifestyle so your partner doesn’t “have to” leave you when he or she wants to cheat doesn’t seem like such a big win to me though
And frankly, having a menagerie of partners to meet all current and future “needs” inevitably trades off against the kind of investment that makes two-adult households so useful and inevitably causes instability, since no one can promise those sorts of needs won’t change
To be clear, I think #3 is substantially worse for most people than #1, and #2 is generally benign only because it is almost impossible to maintain by force of will alone
Otherwise bright people believing that their goals/desires are more malleable and subject to rational reconsideration than they actually are probably generates more personal angst and interpersonal drama in these groups than any other single factor
There's been much talk of sexual and cult-style abuse in some of these communities recently, and frankly I think it's really important to consider the role that endorsed goal modification has played with regard to enabling abuse