Heavy drinking is a massive part of British culture. Foreigners think we are weird and disgusting.
I remember when I was 18 I didn’t like drinking. I got very drunk on beer and brandy on my own once in my bedroom when I turned 18 because I wanted to know what it was like. My memory was blurry. I had a headache in the morning. Did not care particularly for the experience but I was glad I did it to know what being drunk was like.
When I was strong armed into university, my parents were furious and upset that I didn’t plan to drink. I gave my reasons and said why I personally didn’t like it. My mum got upset and angry saying everyone else would be drinking. My dad full on shouted saying I shouldn’t go round judging people. I said I have never judged anyone and I think people can drink whatever they want I just don’t like it that much. My parents kept coming back to this point they everyone drinks. They were angry at me for not conforming and confused why I wasn’t upset by not being seen as normal.
My parents saw my behaviour as autistic and weird. The fact I was not bothered by non-conformity bothered them.
Thing is, Italians, French and even Americans think British drinking culture is weird and low-key fucked up. My parents know this. A lot of people know this. In fact, the issue was never really about drinking. It’s about conformity. It’s about ‘you should do as everyone else does regardless of whether or no it is logical’. You disagree? Then you are autistic.
Autism is just a label people often smack on someone who is not too concerned with conformity.
>>285892>Italians, French and even Americans think British drinking culture is weird and low-key fucked up
It's same in France.
You're seen as weird if you don't drink.
I am a wagie and, during the lunch break, I enjoy walking around for an hour more than eating with colleagues. So they see me as a weird guy and that bothers them, which leads to mockery or bullying.
I guess since we are a social species whose main survival asset is bonding and benefiting from others, going against conformity means few people would be willing to help you. Consequently, a hypothetical low probability of survival.
The French drinking culture is completely different to the British drinking culture. The French drinking culture is more normal and sane: a glass or two of wine with a meal.
British drinking culture is about going out on a Saturday night and downing beer and shots of vodka until you vomit or pass out. Go to any British bar street on a Saturday night; you will see people passed out. Vomit stains. Fights and shouting. Nobody behaves as badly as the British do when drunk.
Other cultures is more about quietly destroying your liver in the bar.
This is why I dislike all social media. I have a really low tolerance for groupthink, and yet it's the single thing you can't escape in any community, real life or online.
In places like this too, you'll notice people using the same buzzwords and spouting the same ideas, and it's obvious most of them don't even know what the words they're saying mean. They just say them because they see others in the group do it.
I got laughed at by people irl when I say I don’t drink and I’m American, I think it’s a thing everywhere. My parents have screamed at me for much more trivial things though, I vividly remember my mom yelling so loud at me because I was left handed and she would violently grab my hand and make me use me right hand, her reason was so I would be like the other kids
Maybe deep inside, she knew that if you acted differently from the others kids, you'll end up bullied.
>>285898> I got laughed at by people irl when I say I don’t drink and I’m American, I think it’s a thing everywhere.
Every foreigner here has commented on the drinking culture here. The expectation is to get black out drunk and off your head. If you are ever in the British Isles on a Saturday night you will find out what I mean.
But yeah conformity in general is a thing everywhere. I was just talking about how it manifests strongly in the U.K. with drinking.
Violent discrimination against left handed kids used to be weirdly common. Kids would get beaten for writing with their left hand. It was seen as demonic by some cultures. Only because of a minor difference that literally has zero negative consequences. >>285899
Then the issue is bullying. Imagine an Asian kid being told you have to have eye and nose surgery so you will not be bullied. That shit is horrible. Why dont people just mind their own business. I realise I sound like a bit of a fucking pansy here but ffs why cannot people just accept difference.
Yup, it's like humans have some fucked up built in mechanism to kill everything that's not exactly like them. Racism will literally never be eradicated, it's too much to handle if kids can barely tolerate lefties. Even in ethnostates bullying is very rampant for all the other perceived differences.
left handers seem to be more individual and autistic on avg anyways, not sure y
most of the behavioral 'symptoms' of autism are aspects of how the brain degrades when subjected to social abjection, a reason why even though succubi with autism tend to have more severe neurostructural, developmental, and physiological signs (including tendon attachments promoting toe-walking etc) they do not manifest said behaviorisms, and why autistic behaviors have such crossover with other disorders including maladjusted and unhappy neurotypicals.
I used to think of myself as a hero for rejecting peer pressure. But in fact its incredibly easy to do and no one is going to stop you. But I've learned there are real heavy costs you've imposed on yourself by going that route. And the end of the road for me is being a complete hermit misanthrope.
>seemingly otherwise reasonably intelligent people just reciting IRL the commonly held view they see plastered on social media. Same phrases. Same ideas.[…]Push them on why they believe something and they get irritated because they don’t know why.
They're smart enough to hold their tongues and blend in, like chameleons. Any further request for clarification requires them to elaborate and defend views which they do not actually hold, nor understand with any great depth. It is a taxing activity with little reward beyond maintaining their farce, hence their incensed reaction.
In a private setting away from the social arena, they'll loosen up and express their real personal views to family, longtime friends, trusted confidantes. Not strangers.
There it is common etiquette, and then there is normalshit paradigm.
The issue, I find, is less a question of how much people conform to their kind or type or peers. It's more a matter of how much they expect others to conform to said type. I don't think there are very many people who actually have problems with others being conformists, though it's common to attribute social discomfort to said conformity. The real problem is when there's a critical mass of either intensity or numeric homogeneity such that conformation goes from a personal attribute to a social requirement. This is particularly bad in places where said requirement is not explicit. Everyone knows exactly what to expect regarding how badly-received nonvirgin scum and anti-NEET bait will be received here, because conforming to standards of behavior re:not being a dick to the unemployed and not sneering at virgins is explicitly built into the site's rules, and accepting the authority and legitimacy of said rules and rulership is an intuitively obvious requirement for writing a post on a site holding such rules. Since the requirement is more-or-less explicit, even people who disagree with said rules can find some form of coexistence with them, because the policeman enforcing said rules is obvious and external. You can often tell when someone's adhering to those rules in the sense that the kid who plays the "i'm not touching you" game actually isn't touching you, but just like that brat you still have to wait for him to actually cross an actually existing line before he can be slapped into place, by the actually existing rules police. Vague, ambiguous, non-explicit social rules that 'everybody knows' or that 'just develop,' while inevitable in a society, have the effect of creating an internal policeman inside of everybody who lives in that society, which creates a more unpleasant and more insidious situation of hyper-conformity to try to stay inside of snaking, changing boundaries at all times. And that's how normification sets in. Normies and their social norms.
that's plain old abuse
This is really interesting, both your paragraph and the pic you posted, do you know where i can find more related information?
No, not really. I came across that pic in a more or less unrelated imagedump thread context. Since it jived with something I'd been thinking about for a while, and came back to this thread to post my thoughts.
What it says is indeed truth, but by following that logic then /news/ is also a normalfag place, is okay to talk about politics but those guys are extremists.
If you screencap other peoples' opinions and repost them you are nothing but a mindless sheep who can't think for yourself.
Even if what they say is truth?
I believe Tesla and Nietzsche would have used wizchan.
No matter how much people people talk of the dignity of man or of their unique individuality, their actions speak louder than words. I suspect it would be more prudent to examine the human subject in the same manner as an ant instead.>>287546
Given that the post in the image explicity mentions that they are a leftist I suspect that it was screenshotted from /leftypol/, in which case it is really ironic that they are complaining about /pol/. /leftypol/ is merely the inverse of /pol/, so no matter how much he complains about normalfags, he has not yet managed to leave the circuit of normalfaggotry.
It all began when leftists tried to frame wizardchan for political gain, the rest is /leftypol/'s gaslighting.
Schopenhauer too. Maybe Marx too.
No. Schopenhauer had lots of affairs, some even with men, and even had one child (or was it two?) from those affairs.
Marx was married and had a ton of kids who kept dying off because he didn't have the means to financially support them.
You have to be fool to marry in this century even thats a stupid thing for normals in my opinion, succubi could easily divorce you and take everything
Never heard of Schope having children or being bisex. Where did you read it?
I know he had sex with lower class succs but he was a wizardly individual, I think he would feel right at home on /dep/.
Yes, knew about Marx having family too but again, he was a NEET or so I heard so maybe he would post here too.
You mentioned Nietzsche but he wasn't a virgin either. He visited whores regularly and even got syphilis, that is a sexually transmitted disease. Not to mention he was in love with 2 succs at least from what I remember and he even asked one to marry him but go refused.
>>287730>Never heard of Schope having children or being bisex. Where did you read it?
I think it was in Bryan Magee's book on Schopenhauer.
>he was a wizardly individual
Definitely had a very wizardly perspective on solitude and life, and he did push that succ down the stairs because she wouldn't shut up. But he was still a rather outgoing social person if you read how he lived. At least, that's how I remember him being from that Bryan Magee book.
>Marx was a NEET
That's one way to look at it. I've seen people try to discredit him by saying he never held a job in his life, which is true except for that one newspaper he edited at some point. I wouldn't consider him to have a wizardly outlook, though, like Nietzsche and Schopenhauer did. I guess you could consider his extreme dedication to his late works like Capital somewhat autistic.
>You mentioned Nietzsche
That wasn't me, but I do think he's still one of the most wizardly philosophers because of his views on solitude and his critique of the herd. But yeah, he still would've gotten married to Lou Salomé if things had gone as he'd wanted them to.
I think the most wizardly figure would be Lovecraft. He was a high school dropout, a life-long NEET (literally didn't work a single day of his life despite his poverty), was mostly reclusive, looked with cold disdain at society, didn't care in the slightest about succs (there's literally only three succs in his complete works), looked down on romance and romantic literature, said that sex was something to only be learned from an encyclopedia, etc.
Even when he was married for a bit to that jew (despite being vehemently antisemitic), it was her who very stubbornly kept pushing herself onto him and he was always mostly indifferent and uninterested. He also didn't care when she divorced him due to financial issues. He also would've been a super prolific imageboard poster because he wrote a shitton of correspondence.
I get the impression that a great deal of people living in the romantic era would be regarded as "larpers" nowadays, their thoughts and writings were not aligned with their lifestyles.
I would like to know the source to your image. Thank you.
It's the cover to Mikan Shoujo Lovecraft, apparently a LN about Lovecraft, illustrated by koba (https://danbooru.donmai.us/artists/12543
). It's a parody of the cover of a Japanese edition of Lovecraft's complete works.
Huh, didn't know that about Lovecraft. Thanks.
Nietzsche too had some amount of social life, with fellow intellectuals, he went on trips with others and gave lectures or whatever.
What he wrote can be seen as kind of wizardly I agree but he also writes at parts about sexuality and he praises sex in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, I clearly remember that.
Nietzsche is also full of self-contradictions through his works, he changed his opinions quite often.
I consider them both kind of wizardly but yeah, they were normals in essence.>>287748
I agree, but it isn't just with the romantics. It is usually the case with philosophers, thinkers, politicians or people who created ideologies…they rarely live up to their dream. Hitler for example forced the entire youth of his nation to undergo strict physical training and exercises yet he himself couldn't even ride a bicycle lol
About Hitler, He was too old, he wasn't a soldier anymore, makes sense.
I suppose ancient and Eastern philosophers, maybe most of the medieval ones as well, lived their thoughts, but it may be due to the lack of documentation.