I don’t know you but my advice is that you talk to a therapist before you condemn yourself to a life of unhappiness. What you’re thinking about yourself is not always objective, even if you think it is. Being self-critical is not the same as being realistic
Thing is, sex is not a privilege. If you - as someone in such a situation as OP - can’t accept that, you are in danger of growing… hateful views.
No one is entitled to sex, I agree. But in a relationship, you are allowed to make clear what your needs are and move on if those needs aren’t being met. It’s not entitlement to know what you want. Having a ‘dead bedroom’ is why a lot of relationships end.
I don’t want to become such a person, and it’s clear that it’s not their fault that they are not attracted to me. Realizing this helped me accept it.
If I may ask, was there any physical attraction between you two when you met?
I’m not denying that ace spectrum people have relationships and settle down as well. But OP is asking about the normative (read allosexual) experience and explicitly mentions physical attraction.
The vast majority of relationships will involve physical attraction and sex. It’s highly unusual for that to not be the case for allosexual people. That’s not a value judgement—if a minority of allo people find something else works for them, then that’s great. But if OP is asking if this is normal, then no it’s not. Even ‘less attractive’ people, as OP put it, find people they’re attracted to enough to enjoy a lifetime of intimacy and sex with.
Overcoming a lack of physical attraction is a pretty big barrier and I can’t see most people overcoming that barrier just to ‘settle down.’ Not being your physical ideal is one thing, most of us settle down with people who don’t look like models or actors, but finding someone physically unattractive is a tough sell in most cases.
If you don’t find someone physically attractive, how do you settle down with them? Do you just accept getting into bed with someone you’re physically repulsed by every night?
Amazing tagline. You should pitch this to their marketing team
The relatively low level of plastic in our testicles
They have 2 robots so far. I believe they can make it to 5 by next year and the other 995 will just be people in spandex suits like the first time he announced these things
Fun fact: for non-Americans, who are most of the world and the biggest contributors to box office take for MCU films, this character and premise is just goofy. The films are fun to watch in a campy sort of way, but I was surprised to hear Americans talk about them as a serious spy thriller series
Unfortunately the MCU model is that director vision is cast aside in favour of producer input. It’s why Eternals looks like an artistic Chloe Zhao film, but is a muddled mess of a story. We were deprived of an Edgar Wright Ant-Man film for the same reason
Eternals. Too many characters, not enough story. It’s also sinfully boring. Not to mention the random Harry Styles cameo that feels like an outtake
They wasted Christian Bale. What a compelling villain he could’ve been if they had actually written a good story
No. I had no idea about this instance’s reputation when I joined Lemmy but it’s nothing like the other instance you mentioned.
It gets very tiring trying to have a conversation with contrarians who think everything Western is bad and anything Chinese/USSR is good. Or worse, that their highly suspicious news sources (some random blog usually) are telling you the real truth, while using any mainstream news media source makes you a deluded Lib
English is the current lingua francia because the dominant nation has been speaking English for the past two hundred years and created a pop culture market
Cute that you think it’s the U.S. and it’s little movies that are responsible for English being widely spoken, and not the bloody history of British imperialism being forced on half the planet
The people who are disproving the hypotheses are doing so through peer-reviewed studies in a research setting. They are not doing it on podcasts.
No, I mostly just think it’s horrible in Huberman’s case. Most of the people you listed aren’t prolific liars who prey on young men to sell a no-fap, buy-my-supplements lifestyle to. I’ve literally never seen a Brian Cox fan expend as much energy in defence of the man as you Huberman listeners. He’s more akin to grifters like Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson who trade on their PhD credentials to make claims that go behind their area of expertise and talk almost exclusively to lost and lonely young men who are looking for guidance.
Science is not about “finding contradicting science.” It’s not about spouting off on subjects that are not within your research expertise and waiting to be proven wrong. It’s not a ‘debate me bro’ your facts vs mine endeavour.
The worst thing this guy has done is convince a bunch of people, primarily young men, that they too can spout off about scientific matters they barely understand. See also: Sam Harris, Jordan Peterson and all the other PhD-turned-grifter figures
deleted by creator
The article is based on interviews and quotes from people who actually know him. Journalism is based on interviewing sources and reporting what they said. I don’t know why you think it’s equivalent to a Reddit comment but I suspect it’s because you’re blinded by your admiration for this man.
You linked to a review paper of existing research in the area and its conclusion is: we don’t know enough to speak authoritatively about this, more research is needed. From the paper:
Although most studies reviewed in this paper reported adverse neurotoxic effects of UV filters at concentrations substantially higher that those observed in environment and human tissues, these studies should not be disregarded, as they afford potential pathomechanisms which might occur in other conditions or sensitive populations.
Aka, these studies only found that it’s toxic in doses no human would use as sunscreen.
Unfortunately, the effects of repeated, long-term and low-dose exposures to single compounds and mixtures of various UV filters is also poorly studied.
Aka we don’t actually know what the effects are for regular use.
But we do know that skin cancer is a real concern for people, and sunscreen has been proven to help. Until there is actual research showing sunscreen is toxic at normal usage volumes, it’s deeply irresponsible of Huberman to advocate against it. Or make claims that haven’t been proven in the literature.
His personal life is relevant because it proves he’s a pathological liar. He’s also lying on podcast appearances when he talks about his upbringing. If you want to take life advice from a proven and prolific fabricator that’s your prerogative, but he is not someone that should be promoted in a public forum like this
The difficulty is asking people to get started with this. People want to get to work/navigate as quickly as possible to where they need to be, they don’t want to be figuring it out. Social media can be janky and you’ll be patient, but if you’re late for something because you’re struggling to adjust to an app you’re more likely to go back to Google/Apple Maps