I know you don’t want to hear “it depends,” but there is no one rule that would cover all art. Some art is made to communicate specific ideas. Some art is made simply out of self-expression, without intent for any particular audience. Both are valid.

If I doodle in my notebook, it’s for the artist (me.) However, I also draw and paint to communicate specific emotions. I made a painting while listening to “September” by Earth, Wind and Fire, with the intent to capture the energy and joy the song sends through me. I don’t expect anyone to immediately connect the image with the specific song, but since it’s a lively concert scene, my hope is that the emotion that inspired the art comes across to an audience.

Sometimes I’ll make something more abstract, intentionally left open to interpretation. I may have my own thoughts about such pieces, but ultimately I want the viewer to find their own meaning.

In reality, everything is up to the audience. There will always be people who interpret things in their own way, independent of the artist’s intentions. We can’t control what others will think, but learning to tolerate and/or accept people who “don’t get it” is a stage all artists have to go through. I’ve come to accept that there is no one perfect mode of communication, so if I intend to communicate something specific, it’s on me as the artist to put effort into making that message clear.

One of the things I saw, was that if a baby doesn’t seek eye contact with a stranger holding it, it should be a sign that the mother doesn’t give the baby enough attention!

That’s so messed up. Newborns are born with poor vision. “At birth, an infant is very sensitive to bright light. You may notice how small their pupils look, limiting how much light enters their eyes. A newborn baby can see something next to them with their peripheral (side) vision, but their central vision is still developing.”

It takes time for their vision to develop. From that same source, “At about 1 month, your baby may focus briefly on you, but may still prefer brightly colored objects up to 3 feet away. Infants are able to see across a room even at birth, but they are mostly interested in objects very close to them.”

As soon as the consequences become apparent interest in project 2025 is going to drop off a cliff.

I want to believe

Just gotta dig up grandpa’s old Atomic Energy Lab play set and experiment a bit.

Weird thing for people to downvote. Acknowledging a painful truth ≠ endorsing it.

I don’t know about that, I’ll be fine until someone with no comprehension of “right of way” nearly kills me. Those moments usually create a string of angry swears that would make a sailor proud.

I feel you. I have to keep reminding myself that a lot of my anxiety isn’t mine - it’s my mom’s. I just inherited the behaviors that she picked up, that in turn were created in reaction to my (long-gone) toxic grandfather’s abuse.

Generational trauma probably lurks behind all of us, deeprooted and insidious, propping up maladaptive behaviors that go unexamined simply because they are considered “normal” in our families.

My sapphic brain wasn’t tuned to understand that quote properly at first. Instead of seeing an insult, I thought, “Wow, that sounds like a busy, but amazing, morning.”

Epidurals, in which labor pain is reduced, are expected to remain outside coverage under the proposals.

So what, pain relief is an optional upcharge, like choosing to add avocado to your sandwich?

Don’t get me wrong, I’d be ecstatic if the US went this far to help new parents, but fuck whoever decided that it’s acceptable to omit epidurals from the covered costs.

I’ve heard it called Earth’s twin, but never specifically an evil twin.

I’m relieved I’m not the only one that saw a drink. I was wondering what a nearly-overflowing mug of iced coffee had to do with space.

If we’re going to rename it anyway, can we pick someone better to honor? Hernán Cortés was a narcissistic conquistador who destroyed the Aztec empire.

Fishing, a hobby reliant on both skill and luck, where practioners must be patient for long periods of time…

Yeah, I just don’t see Trump doing that. Even if somehow he were roped into a fishing event, he’d probably make someone else hold his fishing rod and do all the work. He’d still take credit if that person made an impressive catch, of course. But if they didn’t catch the absolute Biggliest fish? He could simply deny having taken part in the activity.

Now that I’m thinking about it, I wonder how many Trump voters would change their mind if Trump joined regular, working class people for a day of fishing. No, seriously. Although I don’t fish, my dad’s an outgoing fisherman, who chats up everyone with a rod out at the lake. I can imagine lots of fishers being excited to have Trump around - at first. But his boasting, his impatience, and his loud voice scaring fish could become very grating very fast. He’d probably have no idea how to hold a flopping fish, a skill that most fishers figure out while still kids, sometimes through the peer pressure of laughter… Which makes it easy to imagine Trump’s illusion of “strong masculinity” shattering the moment a slimy fish tail flails across his orange face (go ahead - take a moment to picture it. You deserve a treat.) People would laugh, Trump would feel his ego bruise, and he’d react the way we all know he would - like a toddler.

Yeah, some voters would walk away with their opinions unchanged, but it would be very eye-opening for many.

there were several congressional acts which pushed for independent analysis to get to the truth of these matters.

It’s wild to imagine the U.S. congress actually promoting independent scientific research. I wish I lived in a world like that.

And if you went around distributing it without clearly informing of it’s THC/CBD ratio and the implications thereof?

Say you’ve never been to a legal dispensary without saying you’ve never been to a legal dispensary.

I’ve been to cannabis dispensaries in five different states. Never have I ever seen anything sold without clear labeling of the THC/CBD ratio (as well as listing percentages of various other terpenes), but also every container features a warning about health risks. The high potency products I’ve bought all contain labels that specifically highlight their strength, and warn about an increased risk of psychosis.

Yeah, it would be nice if there could be more specific information on the labels, or a unified authority across the US to enforce standards across states. Unfortunately, anti-cannabis zealots have done well to hold back research by keeping cannabis illegal, while simultaneously using lack of research as a reason for keeping it illegal.

I second your position. I’m a recreational user, but my girlfriend has chronic pain and a medical card. If we take the same dosage, I can be halfway to my limit while she’s only just starting to feel a high. If only low-potency cannabis were available, I can’t imagine the dosages she’d have to consume. If it were too weak, it wouldn’t be an option for her at all.

At least with high-potency cannabis, she is able to avoid opioids, which would be far more dangerous for her.

Did you date my former coworker? I used to use a chartreuse coathanger because it was the only one of that color, which made it easy for me to spot. One day, as I was putting my coat away, this coworker started talking as if we were already mid-way through an argument. “It’s so green. I don’t know why you said it’s yellow.” Huh? I had no idea what he was talking about at first. I asked if he meant my coathanger, and I responded that I didn’t know what color it was. (I didn’t know what “chartreuse” meant yet.) He ranted on, claiming we fought about it once before, even though this was the first time he’d even talked about my coathanger. It was bizarre.

I think that guy had something psychologically troubling going on. I’d also seen him: ask a question, make up an answer for that question, then immediately proceed to believe the answer he made up with 100% certainty. The question? “How do those Magic Eraser cleaning sponges work?” His answer? “They use paint.” I asked how it could possibly match the color of every surface it’s used on, but he insisted his answer must be right. Truly magical thinking.

I also saw him watch an ad for a random product, then promptly declare that he needed that product. I had always thought of ads as something to tune out, but he legit followed them as if they were friends giving advice. I had never seen anything like that.

I felt like I understood your original post, so I hope you’re okay if I try to bridge the misunderstandings? If at any point I misunderstood, let me know.

They aren’t going outside and saying these things where at least one man would smack him upside the head in order to correct bad behavior.

Expecting men to beat the shit out of people doing the “wrong” things is also a really big problem and isn’t a solution either.

I feel like this boils down to: having men use physical violence to coerce other men into “proper” behavior isn’t the solution. The scare-quotes around “wrong” imply the term being potentially misused.

I remember in the late 80s when i was really young hearing about gay bashing as if it was a perfectly okay thing to group to and go do.

You note that groups used violence against gay people in the 80s, and that it was considered acceptable. I read this and the next sentence as being an example, provided to support your first sentence.

I remember people talking about Freddie Mercury coming out as gay and not feeling comfortable asking why that is a problem for fear of being targeted myself.

The fear of violence was such a severe deterrent, that even questioning why being gay was “wrong” could have led the group to assume you were gay and thus become violent against you.

I don’t have any answers

Although you don’t believe in corporal punishment, you don’t know what the answer would be. (Which is totally fair, IMO.)

Is that the gist of what you meant?

If so, I suspect people lost track of your point around the term “gay bashing.” Most people these days probably associate that term with someone speaking poorly of gay people, which sucks, but is relatively tame compared to what I thought you meant - which was, groups that went around literally bashing, as in physically attacking, gay people. (Which was, and still is in some places, an absolutely real thing.) It’s possible that this misunderstanding derailed the rest of your comment, leading readers away from your point.

If it makes you feel any better, I can ping you next time I encounter misogyny on Lemmy? It’s far less toxic than a lot of online places, but it’s definitely got corners where offensive takes get upvoted.

As a Millennial whose teen years were filled with adults pushing me to gO To cOLleGe constantly, I’m pretty pissed. I could make and fill a Bingo card of bullshit reasons people repeated ad nauseum, yet in retrospect there is one critical reason that nobody mentioned - that if you want to emigrate, other countries only want you if you’re “educated.” (Or “skilled.”)

I can’t imagine most adults I knew were even aware of the requirements for becoming a citizen in another country. I had dreams of moving to Canada at that age, so if somebody had known, it would’ve been a very convincing argument on me. For those that don’t know - the system is set up to prevent most people from going anywhere, but having a specialized degree makes you desirable internationally. It’s one of the few ways that ordinary (read: non-wealthy) people have that allows them to move to a new country.