As a fan of teen comedies, I do think about this. If everyone’s going to look 25 and talk in this mature way, why is it even set in a high-school? The two factors I see are:

Once upon a time : by setting a story in a non-realistic / mythic setting, it’s easier to enter into the fiction of it. For adults, it has a nostalgia for a time before responsibilities when everything was possible, but that would be ruined if you had to face up to how akward and useless most teens really are. And for kids these ‘teens’ who look perfect and always know what to say are wish fulfillment. Everyone knows it’s not really like high-school, but peasants and the aristocracy knew that knights were nothing like those dipicted in chavalric ballads, but they both like to imagine that they were for different reasons.

Bottle episode : High school is a super convient writing drvixe, because you have these characters who have freedom and independence enough to move the story forward, but it’s also super easy to restrict any option that makes things difficult. There’s no need to worry about too many social circles, or why the characters don’t just do x or y. If you want a group of friends, who basically only interact with each other, it’s plausible enough. Even in college that’s harder to do, unless it’s a very small, exclusive group (like The Secret History) and even then it feels intentionally insular and incestuous in a way that a high-school clique doesn’t.

This should be the most upvoted post in this community.

Alcohol works pretty well

Anyone know where to find the answer to the mystery theme last week? I couldn’t get it!

Decipher #472
deciphered in ⏱️ 5m 23s
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
https://decipher.wtf/

Just got into this game this week, and it’s my first success without any hints!

It’s basically the opposite of addictive. Addictive stuff is easy, because it quickly becomes a “need” not just something you theoretically want to do but can’t really be bothered right now.

Even ‘fun’ stuff like TV shows, I can ‘want’ to catch up on shows, or finish the series I was loving, but if its down to choosing and making myself get round to it, I won’t. But when suddenly I get a hyper focus on some old show and I binge forty episodes in a weekend it’s ‘easy’. What’s hard is stopping, which I guess means I’m kinda in addict mode (until I overdo it and get board and abandon the watchthrough a few episodes from the end).

Decipher #470
deciphered in ⏱️ 2m 3s
⭐⭐⭐⭐
https://decipher.wtf/

Yeah, that’s the thing. It’s perfectly possible to have botfree communities, but not without giving up an amount of anonymity and privacy.

But I do have hope that bot-hating privacy-loving lemmy community will be able to come up with a solution!

Don’t look back!

It’s not crazy to be concerned or even feel anxiety about not being able to tell if a post is a bot or a person. But being wildly hyperbolic isn’t helping anyone.

I’ve been chatting on the Internet since the days of usenet, and back then there was no algorithm, or advertising or any motivation to drive engagement beyond our natural human desire to communicate. And it really wasn’t that different than lemmy. You still got trolls, bullshit and unreasonable political takes, as well as genuine questions, thoughtful answers and useful information.

Real world personal development and action are important, and you should definitely prioritise that over chatting to strangers on the Internet. But “scribo ergo sum”, I know I’m here asking questions and appreciating answers and discussions, and I know other humans irl who use lemmy, so it would seem logical that some (perhaps most) of the users here are humans and they too may appreciate my answers and discussion.

Sure, movies pay more than panel shows, but you get lots of women working as extras, even though it really doesn’t pay well and involves of lot of hassle.

But more importantly, why do you think that women are more sensitive or opposed to waiting around? Not sure it’s a trait or stereotype that aligns with my experience. Guys can be plenty impatient and think they’re too important to wait around like a pleb.

Can I someone who’s read it expand on “palingenetic ultranationalism” for those who lack the time and/or motivation to read a chapter of a book?

Edit: doh

I doubt it’s a big factor. Pretty much any big event or any TV stuff is going to involve a bunch of dicking about. Hollywood is full of actresses, and lots of them have to turn up on set at 5am to get into makeup and wait around for six hours before getting told the shooting schedule has changed and they won’t be needed til tomorrow.

Wordle 1,555 4/6

🟩⬛🟨⬛⬛
⬛⬛⬛⬛🟨
⬛🟩🟩🟩⬛
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

I’ve struggled with that dilemma before, but in the end I think it’s not really an either/or. Sure, it’s easy to ‘stay informed’ by reading about upsetting shit on social media but it’s not the only or the best way.

Encountering upsetting and infuriating headlines and news stories at random among more ‘fun’ content adds to the background stress of modern life “don’t relax, a horrible thing is just sound the corner!”. And memes or posts about stuff often simplify complex events and emphasises the emotional horror of the events.

I don’t always suceeed, but I’ve tried to keep away from communities and sites that share politics / world events, but then spend a specific time each week actually reading articles and deeper dives on these issues. When I read a real article, that adds nuance and historical context I’m not less horrified or angry, but it’s in a calmer and more productive sense than just “aaaa the world is fire and everything is awful”.

There are no stories! We made them all up!

That’s very interesting. It’s not an area of history I’ve studied much, but even my brief reading this morning came across some pretty reasonable statements from Chamberlain. Basically, “no one had any complaints when I went off to Germany to reach a deal with Herr Hitler. But now with hindsight everyone’s blaming me for something we all wanted.” and from what your saying, even with hindsight it was the right decision at the time to give Britain time to get on a war footing.

Well, first, I’m not sure that they do have a right to exist, and certainly not without some serious steps in acknowledging the issue and making meaningful reparations.

But more specifically, Churchill is saying that he doesn’t even see that a “great wrong has been done” in the first place. Whether the benefits outweigh the harms or whether it’s too late to fix historic wrongs are very different debates from “do you think it is wrong to genocide a people to colonise their land?”.

And the reason it’s important to acknowledge that historic wrongs were wrong, even if you can’t do anything to change them, is because you are less likely to argue in favor of repeating the exact wrong again, as Big C is doing in that speech.

My ‘favourite’ of those kinds of quotes is"I do not admit … that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place".

Not only is that full-on “racial hierarchy as justification for genocide” but it was in a speech arguing in favor of allowing the creation of the state of Isreal even though those pesky Palestinians were living in the proposed terrority. Thanks for your statesmanship Winny, that worked out great for everyone…

Perhaps I should have included a disclaimer, I’m certainly not quoting Churchill because I like him. As your quote demonstrates, he’s a fucking racist asshole (among many other flaws) but gifted at the ol’ soundbite.