• 5 Posts
  • 11 Comments
Joined 2Y ago
cake
Cake day: Aug 06, 2023

help-circle
rss

No, I don’t crave it, it’s an unpleasant experience for me personally. So I feel like dreaming about it is less about “I miss this feeling” and more like if you had some traumatic thing happen and then kept reliving it in your dreams. Thats what it seems like anyway.


I see… does the non concrete contain perception of sensations which are usually physical but can be simulated (like pain, nausea, queaziness, etc)?


That could all be true, but I should clarify when I said I felt like crap I meant physically (mentally as well, sure). As in, how you feel if you’re really sick and unwell. Nausea, queaziness, headache, pain, lightheaded, etc.



I should have probably mentioned I have tactile dreaming, meaning I feel physical sensations including pain in dreams, and my main reason why I feel “tormented” (or even tortured) by these dreams is not so much from a psychological or philosophical point of view (although there is that as well), but because in addition to feeling anxious, depressed, confused & disoriented in these dreams, which are all unpleasant experiences for me, I also feel “physically” unwell, nauseous/ill/sick, and in bodily pain as well in some cases. These are all things I felt when I had these experiences IRL, and yes I am possibly negatively affected more physically by substances than other people, which is part of why I decided it wasn’t for me.

I can deal with it if I have to, but since it happens quite often and makes going to sleep something I dread, I would rather prevent it happening if possible (and maybe that just takes a lot of time, I don’t know).


I have tactile dreaming, meaning I experience physical sensations including pain in dreams, and in dreams like this I feel really physically unwell/nauseous and uncomfortable. It also happens recurringly, not just once, so I’d like to get to the bottom of how to stop it happening.


Had a dream about drinking alcohol again and feeling like shit. Why is this happening to me? I hate drinking alcohol. I don't know why my dreams keep punishing me.
I blame society for telling me to use drugs. I went along with it to fit in. I don't care about fitting in anymore, but I don't think it was my fault for partaking given the social atmosphere. So why do I have to suffer these dreams that torment me about it? Do I have unresolved trauma related to it or some shit? PS. I am straight edge now, I haven't used drugs in a long time and don't think about them while I'm awake at all. I prefer to be sober minded. The only part they play in my life is in occasional dreams apparently, which are usually negative and unpleasant.
fedilink

What does "Free Palestine 'til it's backwards" mean?
Is this a satirical statement mocking the free Palestine movement or a genuinely pro Palestine slogan?
fedilink

Why isn’t it clear that DID exists? I thought it was accepted as a scientific consensus that “enacted” identities were genuinely perceived by the individuals experiencing & reporting them, which is why DID is still included in the DSM to this day.🤔



Maybe the pronoun “they” works? “I’m wondering if they can…”


I use “they/them” for any animal/sentient being (whether or not they’re human) rather than “it” in order to avoid objectifying them, but I recognise this is not standard English. I also use “who” instead of “which” (A monkey/dolphin/dog/goat who (…) rather than a monkey which (…), etc) and basically any of the personal pronouns or words you would use for a human rather than an object (or I guess typically nonhuman animals). It’s a deliberate deviation from grammatical rules/traditional language for the sake of aligning with my personal beliefs & ethics about animal rights/vegan stuff. You can just ignore that part though because it’s just a force of habit, I actually forgot that would seem weird since it’s normal to me, the real confusion I had was with the overall sentence structure & how to phrase it; it still doesn’t sound right to me whether you use “it” or “they”.


I use “they/them” for any animal/sentient being (whether or not they’re human) rather than “it” in order to avoid objectifying them, but I recognise this is not standard English. I also use “who” instead of “which” (A monkey/dolphin/dog/goat who (…) rather than a monkey which (…), etc) and basically any of the personal pronouns or words you would use for a human rather than an object (or I guess typically nonhuman animals). It’s a deliberate deviation from grammatical rules/traditional language for the sake of aligning with my personal beliefs & ethics about animal rights/vegan stuff. You can just ignore that part though because it’s just a force of habit, I actually forgot that would seem weird since it’s normal to me, the real confusion I had was with the overall sentence structure & how to phrase it; it still doesn’t sound right to me whether you use “it” or “they”.


Is this grammatically correct: "The monkey who I'm wondering if can see my ears."
Or is it "The monkey for whom I'm wondering if they can see my ears." or "The monkey, regarding whom, I'm wondering if they can see my ears." or "The monkey who I'm wondering if they can see my ears." All of them sound stupid.
fedilink

Is there any evidence of a difference in healthfulness between having fruit vs having added sugar along with fibre foods?
All of the info about why added sugar is unhealthy compared to fruits seems to be that the sugar in fruit comes with fibre and nutrients that offset the negative health impacts of sugar to a degree by delaying its absorption and preventing a blood sugar spike. However, by this reasoning alone, wouldn't it be possible to infer that if added sugar was paired with the same amount of fibre and nutrients, its effects could be mitigated in the same way as they are in fruit? Well I haven't found any evidence either supporting or negating this idea or anyone even talking about that question specifically aside from a few other people asking the same thing, and random people replying without citing any evidence. For example someone suggested that indeed taking this approach may work a little bit, but it still won't be as healthy as eating fruit due to the "fibre-infused food matrix" of fruit or that sugar that is found naturally in fruits is "complexed" with fiber that slows down the absorption more, whereas the added sugar is more freely available to absorb quickly because it's separate from the fibre even if eaten together with it (though the separate fibre will still do some of the same job but not as well)? "It can slow the absorption of sugar slightly but won't make a huge difference. Sugar from wholefruit and veg will always be processed differently due to the food matrix the sugars contained in that must be vroken down resulting in a slow and gradual release, when u eat added sugar but just have some fiber all that sugar is still there readily available to absorb. Overall it would be better to just stick to fruit and eat mixed macro meals with healthy unsaturated fats and proteins" Well if possible I would like to see some scientific evidence/studies talking specifically about the difference on the body between consuming whole fruits containing their natural sugar and fibre + nutrients, compared to consuming added sugar along with foods containing fibre and nutrients in equivalent amounts (such as bircher muesli with added palm sugar, or another example if necessary for the sake of equalizing the fibre+nutrients content), and ideally health outcome data showing there is actually a difference between these... And just more information in general about the idea of naturally occurring sugar and fibre contained together in a single food matrix being different/more healthy than added sugar taken together with separate fibre foods. Thanks
fedilink

If 'carbon negative' and 'carbon positive' are terms used interchangeably to mean completely opposite things, what are alternative terms that clarify the difference without confusion?
For example, could alternative terms like "carbon reducing" and "carbon increasing" make it more clear and avoid misinterpreting which means which?
fedilink