Facepalm

2655 readers

2 users here now

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Anticorp@lemmy.world

527

The future is now (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 month ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world to c/facepalm@lemmy.world

153 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Some people's relationships are literally built around arguments and competition and they last decades.

Not every relationship has to fit into your mold.

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Idk if you saw my expansion in my comment to chicken in a different subthread.

If you have and this is still your answer, then whatever that'll be your opinion and I'll have mine. Some people smoke multiple packs a day and live to 80 but that doesn't make smoking a healthy thing to do either.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Arguments don't have to be angry, neither do competitions. Why is arguing and competing with each other unhealthy if it is friendly?

Two married Olympians both competed in women's volleyball for different countries this year. Obviously they have a competitive marriage. It apparently is working for them.

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I've never said a single word about competitions in relationships.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Correct. I did:

Some people’s relationships are literally built around arguments and competition and they last decades.

Then you said in reply:

If you have and this is still your answer, then whatever that’ll be your opinion and I’ll have mine. Some people smoke multiple packs a day and live to 80 but that doesn’t make smoking a healthy thing to do either.

So no, you didn't. You just suggested that what I said was equivalent to smoking multiple packs a day.

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Sorry, I didn't sanitize my output, assuming this would forestalled by the redirect to my other comment explaining I see how I was applying my implicit biases and connotations to what "argument" means.

I didn't call out the addition of competitions then because I didn't think this would sprawl as long as it did. I will do so now:

I never said a word about competitions and that, in my mind, has no inherent bearing on the healthiness of a relationship as there can be different types of competition. So we can immediately excise that from further discussion.

Addressing the sole part that is relevant now: I now agree arguments aren't necessarily angry, by everyone's definition. But that was the tone and definition with which I made the original comments up until that first reply to chicken.

You can see that segment as a revision of my first reply to you. Have a good whatever.