Intervention and Action?

First of all, I’m impressed you’re reaching out for other perspectives. It’s far too easy to get stuck with your thoughts beating down on yourself.

Something therapists often train you to ask is “are there external reasons for those thoughts?”, as thoughts come and go much of their own volition, that’s just how brains do. Sometimes there’s good reason for thoughts, a lot of the time it’s just “what-ifs”.

It sounds to me that there are multiple layers to your story. Saying you feel like you don’t deserve someone as well as the ruminating self doubt sounds over such a long time sounds like Major Depression. It’s a nasty thing that makes a lot of other things harder, medication and therapy usually make things easier so that you have the resources to affect whatever else you’d like to affect.

If medical attention isn’t available where you’re at, you’re still gonna have to adress those issues, it’s just going to be harder. You will need a way to get out of ruts, set strengthening habits, build and use a support network, and learn to manage the depression. Again, all to free up resources to address the rest.

A lot happens within us when we lose a partner, and even more when we survive one. Maybe some of the self doubt comes from that, maybe from how you were coping, maybe from feeling down for an extended time, maybe something else. Therapists are trained in talking through these things, but journalling and talking to friends can also help. One tool is to aim to understand your feelings and with compassion accept that you felt and did as best you could, you can easily find others.

As for the sexuality thing - depression does weird things both to self image, libido, and sexuality. I had a bit similar experience to your’s where I found no attraction or lust, but as I got better a lot came back (and some things changed).

On the off chance that it’s actually not just depression messing, I’ll mention that sexuality is a complex thing and it’s common to have thoughts and feelings about it, just as it changes and develops with time, people, situations, etc.

It’s entirely possible to be attracted and sexrepulsed, sometimes it’s helpful to split attraction for different aspects. You could be aesthetically attracted to someone who appeals on looks, or you could be romantically attracted to someone you’d like to court (or be courted by), beyond sexually attracted by someone you want to share bodyparts with you, some people will tick multiple attractions (including ones not mentioned here). With some forethought and clear communication, it’s entirely possible to build long term relationships around all combinations of these, and crucially without one or more of these.

I would agree that genitals are gross and weird, but then again I like doing stuff to them on people I’d like to share pleasure with. As someone else mentioned, I would never enjoy handling my own genitals the way others seem to enjoy immensely, and vice versa. Beyond basic hygiene (wash with water, let dry, keep clean of litter), that’s just how genitals are.

Then there’s also contrasts between being repulsed by the thought, not understanding, and not wanting to stimulate such genitals. All are valid, and with a little insight you might live happily with where you’re comfortable. If the thought of someone handling your genitals repulses you, maybe don’t do that and make sure to choose a partner that accepts that. If you don’t want to stimulate someone with similar genitals, you’re encouraged not to, it’s common enough to be called “straight”. If you don’t understand but you’re fine with someone enjoying your genitals, choose someone you enjoy enjoying you.

In the spirit of pride month you might have access to resources for the terms ace/asexual, aro/aromantic, gray/graysexual, RA/relationship anarchy, heterosexuality, situational sexuality, reproductive health.

Could it be vitamin D from the sun?

Yes, let’s go back to the company who’d sack me and loads of my colleagues on the whim that an untested notion of a tool might work.

I’m sure they’ll value me this time

Putins declaring ceasefire because he can’t assault if the Ukrainians fire back

deleted by creator

I often recommend Spain for US emigrants, quality of life and cultural norms are similar, and Spanish is easier to pick up when you’ve heard it as much as you do from US media.

Netherlands and Scandies have a great reputation, but there’s significant culture shock and you risk feeling more alienated for longer.

Raising water temperature from 10 to 500 degrees requires about 500 calories/mm3. That’s 2 MJ/litre, meaning if you want to heat 1 liter/second you need 2 MW with perfect insulation, so a power plant of say 10 MW.

A post industrial world citizen could probably get by on 200 l/day (US averages about 300/day). That needs 2 kW/person/day.

Total global energy production is about 630 EJ which averages out at about 12 TW.

Meaning if the whole global energy production went to treat water in that way, we have enough clean water for about 6 million people.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I think the correct question here is:

“Why? They couldn’t before you were in charge.”

“Russia owes an answer to the United State that has worked very hard to come up with a mediation effort,” French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot told reporters.

Hahaha, I couldn’t read this without the most patronising tone.

Sexuality is often treated as more complex a topic than emotions, but I found a similar meta-study The role of conditioning, learning and dopamine in sexual behavior: A narrative review of animal and human studies, 2014 concluding that conditioning and associative learning does occur around sexuality and can be used as basis for treatment.

From other sources I’ve read, there’s so many influences going into sexuality that it’s impossible to see how it develops, but from a layman’s perspective I’d agree that not reinforcing child abuse probably makes it more rare.

My remaining issue is that with such a simplistic view, any non-normative sexuality can/should be conditioned away. We already have the abusive gay conversion camps, should we go back to do the same with polygamy, bdsm, porn? How much should fashion dictate what sexuality is allowed?

(Roman style orgies seem to have faded in popularity, but tantra and swinging seems to have risen lately, which should we be conditioning away? Who decides?)

Nuanced take coming, take a breath:

I agree that Child Sexual Abuse is a horrible practice along with all other violence and oppression, sexual or not. But the attraction de facto exists and has done for thousands of years, even through intense taboos. It seems our current strategy of shaming and ignoring it has been ineffective. The definition of insanity being repeating the same thing expecting different results and all that.

Short of eugenics (and from previous trials maybe not even then) we might not be able to get rid of it.

So when do we try other ways of dealing with it?

I’m not saying generative AI is the solution, but I’m pretty sure denying harder isn’t it.

This worked, thank you.

Article only says doubly efficient, and H2 to He3 reaction.

To get to .9c we still need a couple million kg of fuel.

Even .1c needs about 40 000 kg of fuel, which is doable, but probably unfeasible.

Still blocked, but thank you

Article is capped at 18 views/day so can’t see numbers.

But theoretical cap of energy would be something like E_kin = (\gamma -1)mc². Without knowing anything about the mission or engine, a 50 kg probe at a velocity of .9 c means an energy requirement of about 1,0e19 J.

Fusion of H2 to H3 yields about 340e9 J/g meaning we need about 3 million kg of fuel at 100% conversion rate, or a third if we manage He3 reaction.

Realistically heating, engine efficiency, deceleration, vibrational damping and such would probably lower efficiency to at most 40% and we end up at 8 million kg of fuel to propel a 50 kg payload (not counting the fuel mass).

Seems unfeasible.

Edit as @i_have_no_enemies@lemmy.world kindly provided an alternative link.

Article only says doubly efficient, and H2 to He3 reaction.

To get to .9c we still need a couple million kg of fuel.

Even .1c needs about 40 000 kg of fuel, which is doable, but probably unfeasible.

0,05c should be in kgs range, and is probably plenty (100 km/s).

Seems like you’re running in to the same problems the rest of the world has, only slower. You don’t even have to come up with a solution, just steal one.

Besides, the state retirement fund is only structured that way as a cash buffer, borrowing the retirement fund of a whole generation. You could just as well go back to how it was done in the 70ies with the retirement fund actually built from people’s taxes, and not from the next generation’s - boom, no more problems with uneven generation populations.

Why doesn’t the working class, the larger of the two, simply not eat the owning class?

Jokes aside; seems to me the problem is that policy is set on feelings rather than reality, and then the argument of “not sustainable” gets irrelevant (which is why the policy carries on even though demonstrably wrong).That I can understand, cutting off one’s nose to spite the face kinda deal. But if you’re spiteful, it might be a reasonable (although not rational) choice.

If you’re looking for efficient and/or rational policy, you need more mature representatives, simple as.

Let’s give you the benefit of the doubt. What is it that’s unsustainable with social security?

Benefits increase GDP growth, cushions impact on performance of market upheavals, increases political stability, reduces poverty, increases health and productivity and of course increases happiness.

It would seem to me that it’s a sound investment for both economic, societal, moral and selfish reasons. Please tell me where my analysis or the data doesn’t support my conclusion.