ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]

The reason stuff gets inflamed and sensitive with soap and water is because it’s healing the damage, rather than just destroying everything in the damaged area and hoping it grows back right. Your body will generally do fine if you’re young and healthy, but as you get older it becomes more of a risk.

It’s not guaranteed to do more harm than good, but because it destroys healthy cells too it creates a risk that just doesn’t need to be taken. It’s not more effective at preventing infection than soap and water, and it’s not as effective as medical super glue for stopping bleeding, so there just isn’t a place for it any more.

New answer for the specific context:

You did your best with the 2 year old. Toddlers are difficult because they just make noises and expect you to work out what’s wrong for them. Small snack and something to drink are always good starting points, followed by a distraction (like the nursery rhymes video) to get their attention off what was upsetting them.

With the 5 year old, you escalated by increasing the punishment to 15 minutes, and now your brother-in-law pushed it back down she knows you can be overruled. Talk to your sister and her husband to make sure you’re both clear on what limits your comfortable with and what specific punishments to give for breaching them, in line with what they’d normally give, so you can both be sure you’re giving out punishments they feel are appropriate, so there’s no room for her to get you overruled - if she goes to her dad you should both be confident he will back you up. She’s of an age where she is going to test what rules and limitations really exist, so you need to make sure she’s not getting mixed messages about it. You’ll have an easier time distracting her with something interesting than telling her not to do stuff.

Make sure to use vocabulary they understand, but don’t be condescending with it. They’d rather you speak to them like they’re older than they are than younger.

Don’t be overly restrictive of their freedom, but be clear about the limits and make sure to enforce them. Explain the reasons for the restrictions rather than just telling them they’re not allowed and they’ll generally listen.

Give them small jobs to make them feel more responsible and patient about other things.

Do your best to answer their questions properly instead of dismissing them, even if the only answer you can give is “I don’t know”. They’ll listen to adults that they feel listen to them.

How many people do you think are working in computer graphics? It’s specialised knowledge, exactly the kind of thing that should be taught at university to the people it’s relevent to.

you can explain the solution in natural language pretty easily

It’s not about how you phrase the solution, it’s about needing the solution at all.

We use plenty of simple geometry everyday, sure, but you don’t need to be able to even understand what OP’s example says to engage with the world. Like you don’t need to provide a mathematical proof to put a shelf up properly.

So Don’t we need more education about the 3D space in highschools really?

How often do you think most people need to know the advanced mathmatical properties of 3d space?

Yeah honestly this is like the Tesla “bomb” - until more information comes out to show otherwise it just did that.

Admittedly the Tesla didn’t just do that, but still…

Absolutely it is, and it even seems to be hard coded in many non communal species, like the wombats that open their burrows to other animals during Australian wildfires, but empathy isn’t powered by the idea of reciprocation. It’s an inherently selfless feeling that doesn’t consider either direct or indirect benefits for the self, and it doesn’t make sense to say that acting on those selfless feelings, against your self interest, is itself selfish.

It deeply upsets and enrages me

But why? It doesn’t affect you. It isn’t in your self interest to be upset by those things, it just makes you feel bad. Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to say that you are simply able to feel and act selflessly rather than invent a form of self interest that involves caring about other people?

and if everyone does the same, some sort of proper balance will be achieved.

What makes you think that logically follows? Why would it not create competing self-interests that can’t coexist?

Even if you broaden it to acting for indirect reciprocal benefit plenty of people act in ways that don’t have a reciprocal benefit. Just look at the Madleen flotilla, everyone there is putting themselves at personal risk for no personal tangible benefit - the position of self interest would be to stay safely away from the war at home. Look at all the local charities that help vulnerable members of their communities for no personal benefit. Look at people acting against their self interest just within their own families, like supporting elderly parents despite the costs and even though their death would speed their inheritance. There is a huge range of actions that fall outside of both direct and indirect self interest that people take every day.

because of everything they did.

DID YOU FIGHT THE TURKS OR NAZIS?

Nothing you’ve listed was accomplished by you, or currently living people generally. You stand amid your ancestors achievements and are proclaiming they make you superior to to someone whose ancestors were criminals. You’re a nazi. Fuck off.

Ok, now relate that to linguistics.

You’re obviously aware that Anglos have real crimes to be criticised for because you reach for all of them immediately when you feel your hatred of them is being attacked, but you’re viewing it through a reactionary lens of chauvinism and nationalism, assigning cultures as inferior and superior, rather than looking at the material conditions that caused them, and taking a vibes based “Anglo bad” stance towards everything rather than doing any examination of their contexts. You say you’re a communist, but the idea that bad acts make an entire culture inferior is just base racism, and that good acts make an entire culture superior chauvinism. The idea that English should be pronounced like Slavic languages despite the material differences in their development is completely incoherent. Your ideological basis for what you’re saying is just fascism.

Look at it this way: did you fight the Turks or Nazis?

What do you think radical means in political contexts?

Of course I’m communist, like my entire family.

It’s politics, not a football team, your family’s support shouldn’t have any effect on yours.

since when is believing that Global South is superior to Anglos wrong?

Are you actually serious? Do you genuinely think you can be a communist and believe in the inherent racial superiority or inferiority of certain people?

I’ve literally seen comments that say stuff like nuke whole England/France etc, ‘‘kill all white Westerners’’

How have you survived 38 years on this godsforsaken earth and you can’t tell the difference between “I hate x country for its actions” and “these people are literally genetically inferior to me”?

sjw is sh.itjust.works, an instance for nazis like you.

So do they not give a shit or only sometimes give a shit? Can you really not tell how incoherent your views have been as we’ve gone along this stupid, stupid little trip?

Eastern Europe IS superior to Angols, they always constantly portrayed us the way they did

Why are you on Lemmygrad? You don’t believe in any of the theoretical underpinning of communism, you don’t believe in materialism, you decided to share that you subscribed to racial theory because your feelings were hurt completely unprompted - why are you here? Shouldn’t you be on sjw or one of the other fascist instances?

You said u isn’t silent however it pronounced, I pointed out that in English, the language were discussing, it can be silent. Not being a Slavic word is completely irrelevant.

Literally none of that is chauvinism - they are actions resulting from chauvinism, but chauvinism itself is fanatical nationalism and belief in the superiority of your culture. You believe that foreigners should magically know how to pronounce Slavic words without ever encountering a Slavic speaker, and refusing to look at the material differences in languages that cause different pronunciations. Theres no actual analysis, you’re just coming up with post-hoc justifications for why you hate Anglos and sticking your fingers in your ears when that’s pointed out. There are real reasons to hate Anglos, you don’t have to act like a child.

it’s not completely silent either way however it’s pronounced.

Queue has 2 u’s and neither is pronounced. It’s also silent in enough and bout. You are just proving yourself profoundly ignorant about language.

I literally never did or encouraged stuff which they’re doing.

Please just look up chauvinism. It does not mean “Anglo”, it’s just something Anglos also do.

U for example exists in most languages

And is it pronounced the same in them? No.

You’re not wrong to criticise Anglos for not trying with other languages, but by complaining about their pronunciation of written words you’re actually criticising them for the times they do actually try. They get it wrong, but they are actually trying when they make those specific mistakes, because of how the English language works.

and same as Anglos portraying every part of the world they don’t like in that way, changing the other cultures they way they like and wanting to insert their bullshit in other countries

Oh stop being melodramatic, you inserted all of that yourself. If you don’t know what chauvinism is you can just say.

You read most Eastern European languages languages the exact way they’re written, which means no shortening of the letters and no French-ifying or Anglo-fying the names.

“You say it how it’s written (no, not like that)”
Did you really type that out and feel it contributes to the conversation?
“you just say it how it’s written, but make sure you don’t say it how it’s written in another lanaguge. Some of the letters literally don’t exist in your language, but don’t worry, you just say it how it’s written.”

someone who spoke Arabic and French and is not and has never been english

I said good for him because I literally don’t care about the non-Anglo non-Slav in the conversation about Anglos pronouncing Slavic names

Ultimately this rounds back to my first comment where I said you’re a chauvinist - you’re a fairly bog standard reactionary with a leftward bias who hasn’t bothered with any critical analysis of their own views before trying to change everyone else’s. You have the soul of an Anglo.

It’s written “u”, so is assumed to be pronounced “ʌ” - the “skʌ” at the end gets shortened to “sk” with a glottel stop replacing the “ʌ”. To get the “uː” sound in english it would be expected to be spelt “ue”.

Btw my stepfather from North Africa pronounces Slavic names better than 99% Anglos without any issue even if he didn’t hear a single Slavic word in his life beforehand.

Good for him.