Interesting idea for a site. They have a leaderboard of the academics with the most retractions. The most has 220 retracted papers.
1 Like
That’s so pathetic of him that he wouldn’t just heat up a meal and would rather go hungry because he thought he shouldn’t have to reheat it? You just put it in the dang microwave dude. Your wife already made it for you.
Seems like the wife came up with a good solution to the problem and is trying to be helpful.
Arguably, if a bunch of rich kids have tutors, what it prevents poor kids from having is good schools, because the rich people won’t fund or prioritize good schools since they don’t need it. It clashes with the goals of a public education system when schools suck and the people with options just opt out.
Maybe you don’t know, but like everyone has insurance for therapy in the US due to Obamacare. I don’t know how common it was before that.
“pathetic” is a bit of a mean opinion. I’m not saying it’s wrong, unreasonable, unfair or inappropriate. I’m not saying to change it. But I’d ask: Did you consider other opinions? Can you view it in some other terms? I think it’s a good idea to try to think of alternatives or look at the bigger picture when having adversarial type attitudes.
Its funny(?) to me how common these kinds of stories are yet the world talks a lot about merit.
A previous manager I had has rehired based on name dropping a colleague store managers of there in the interview. I’ve had a few rehires share this with me. They were like, “Yeah I told him I worked under so and so long ago and he went like ok you’re pretty much hired now.”
1 Like
Huh. Sucks to hear how common some racist stuff is and how seemingly unaware people can be about being racist.
Also are these actually microaggressions? I’ll look up the term later but when I was first introduced to the term it was from conservative groups hating on the term. I haven’t kept up with the stuff since. I remember conservative groups making microaggressions ridiculous, but these all seem like legitimate points.
It could be there are many invalid things that are lumped into microaggressions too, but yeah.
1 Like
Neat. Well the sexism isn’t neat, but it kinda ties into the stuff I read from Caffeine Blues and that I shared here: Discussion of Caffeine Blues.
Stuff like how men are typically the test subject for many things. Not surprising to here that its the same for other stuff like safety testing. Sad.
1 Like
Thats really cool she caught that. Maybe its just cause these are the kind of stories that go viral but I feel like I hear a lot of non-professional catches mistake. I wonder how many other buildings have major flaws that just haven’t been analyzed.
Though I am assuming here that part of the reason the building ended up like that is because they trusted an established engineer or something. I could be wrong.
I don’t know what happened, but I bet she wasn’t paid a million dollars for catching a major engineering error in a skyscraper. Seems like she deserves a big pay day though.
Similarly, maybe the best tutors/teachers would prefer to work one on one for longer periods. So they wouldn’t be available for poor kids. Poor kids might get lower quality teachers.
On the other hand, maybe society gets more geniuses. That seems like a big upside.
Aristocratic tutoring wouldn’t be a policy though right, it would be a cultural shift toward that style of education. If it’s a better way to educate a child, then I think it’s a good idea. I don’t think considering it from the collective point of view is right.
I was responding to your strong claim:
Hmm. I did know that. Does my reply seem like it was missing your point?
I suppose I didn’t indicate whether I still thought there was a trade off there.
I didn’t, no. So like everyone has therapy insurance, and so don’t expect to pay out of pocket for therapy, and so basically everyone is required to get a mental illness diagnosis to get access to therapy? That seems bad.
1 Like
Yeah. Did I change your mind about the no tradeoff claim or not?
Okay cool. Yes you did, sorry.
1 Like
Yeah maybe it is a bit mean. Like, unkind? Hmm.
I didn’t take time to consider other options. Only kind of quick intuitive things as I was reading it. I didn’t brainstorm any other options. It was a pretty quick intuitive thing.
When you ask if I “can view it in some other terms”, do you mean the situation, or my judgement of the situation? Like are you asking if I can think of less mean or adversarial terms for my judgement, or if I can find some way to view the situation differently?
Ways to view the situation differently.
There is the possibility that the wife is unreasonable and not putting enough effort into discussing the issue of division of labour in the relationship. Rightly or wrongly, I think the husband thinks that he is pulling a lot of the weight in the relationship, and he’s upset that his wife isn’t doing more to help make his chaotic, stressful and potentially traumatic work life easier:
he complains I’m not doing enough
When she first thought of the idea of premaking meals she said:
His response to this idea is “whatever”.
Which seems to suggest there was already a problem there. He didn’t like the idea, or he saw it as part of a pattern in their relationship that he’s unhappy with?
Also, this is the wife telling the story. The unreliable narrator concept tells us we should expect the story to be skewed towards making her look good, and him unreasonable. We can’t be sure he didn’t say something more elaborate, had a hard time having a productive discussion with his wife, and then dropped the discussion when it was going nowhere. That’s more nuanced than just shrugging of her idea with a “whatever”.
She might also have not have made it clear that she was actually going to do it and change how they do meals and stuff. She may have just mentioned the idea.
What’s not clear whether this happened on the first night that she did the meal prep, or after a couple nights, or more. It’s presented as if this was the first night.
It might have been a shock to him to get home and find that she had done this plan. She does say she did an entire 2 days of meal prep. You would notice someone doing that, though she may be exaggerating. And he might’ve been out the house when she was doing it anyway.
He starts laughing sarcastically which got me mad.
Being indirect about a disagreement like by sarcastically laughing is toxic. That sucks. She admits she got mad.
I start arguing with him after he complains I’m not doing enough and refuse to reheat it then I go back inside the bedroom and shut the door.
She uses the term ‘argument’ and not ‘discussion’ so I imagine that it was kinda heated? She did say she was mad. I think it’s normal to use the term argument in a negative way.
So a way to interpret this is she’s playing more a part in making argument heated and getting mad than she is letting on.
An alternative view is that the husband has problems with the division of labor in the relationship that aren’t being addressed. His wife is changing things and not communicating well. She is playing a role in arguments becoming heated. They are both stressed and sleep deprived from their work and having a 6mo child. They’re not thinking and communicating well. They’re getting upset easily. They’re fighting. It’s complicated.
I think I have a milder opinion than I did initially. But do I think what he did is an order of magnitude worse than what she did? I think so. For example, I think coming home and yelling in the house at night to wake people up when you should know that there is a 6mo baby asleep is really fucked up.
It seems like you’ve done a fresh analysis on the story focusing on trying to view the husband through a more charitable lens, to see if maybe he seems less pathetic that way.
But you could also reevaluate his behavior in a way that is not any more charitable, yet still results in “pathetic” not being a primary judgement/conclusion. I’m going to provide a possible contrasting opinion for you to consider.
When I read the story I didn’t think the guy was pathetic. I do understand why you would think that, I think the narrator frames it that way a bit, like her husband can’t handle reheating a meal. But I think she is not seeing things totally clearly because she is in the relationship.
IMO some more accurate ways to describe the husband could be: abusive, controlling, resentful.
I don’t think he’s pathetic, because IMO the issue isn’t that he actually can’t manage reheating food. The issue is that he doesn’t think he should have to. He believes that it is his wife’s job to do that for him, because she stays at home while he works a hard job and provides for the family.
The way he expresses this belief, and handles her disagreements, are why I picked those three words.
1 Like