[HN Gopher] The unsettling truth about the 'Mostly Harmless' hiker
___________________________________________________________________
The unsettling truth about the 'Mostly Harmless' hiker
Author : spking
Score : 254 points
Date : 2021-01-15 16:00 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.wired.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.wired.com)
| ChuckMcM wrote:
| Okay, this quote stood out -- _"He was a crazy good coder. Except
| he would always code everything the hardest way possible, kind of
| like you hired Rembrandt to paint your bathroom. You know it is
| going to be lit, but over the top."_
|
| A good read and a good reminder that people are always much more
| complex than we think. I wonder sometimes if by being exposed so
| often to fairly flat depictions of characters in movies and on TV
| if folks forget that. I know I do sometimes.
| KMag wrote:
| It's hard to say from a single quote from a single person. I
| dare say most developers confuse difficult with complex.[0] His
| coding style may have been brutally simple, even if that meant
| very hard. He also could have been a bad programmer.
|
| I often take a look at a problem from multiple perspectives in
| order to try and find ways of minimizing the number of special
| cases or minimizing the number of states in the (perhaps
| implicit) finite state machine. This is often harder than just
| gut-feeling my way through the most intuitive ad-hoc coding
| solution.
|
| For instance, if something has an optional timeout, I strongly
| prefer to write it as a non-optional timeout that defaults to
| something absurdly large (but not so large as to uncover multi-
| billion-year overflow bugs in libraries I'm using), usually 100
| years. Maybe that's the hard way of doing it, but it gets rid
| of special handling of the optionality. I'm sure some
| colleagues would describe this as "the hardest way" to write an
| optional timeout, but it objectively has fewer code paths to
| reason about and test. Some people really hate seeing code that
| doesn't treat the no-timeout case as a special case, because
| they just find it uncomfortable to switch perspectives. They
| really want to code it up as they most naturally think about
| it, not in the way that yields the least twisted code.
|
| In another case, one of my colleagues wrote some minor error
| recovery logic for a distributed system. I politely told him
| that his solution had too many implicit states and would get
| stuck if messages were delayed between systems. I proposed a
| simple 4-state machine: ok, trying_to_resovle, resolved, and
| taking_too_long_to_resolve. But, he was the one originally
| assigned the task, I didn't have any real authority, and it
| wasn't worth a fight. He said the way he wrote it was "easier"
| and "more natural." A few months down the road, his solution
| got stuck and never alerted us that it was taking too long to
| resolve the error, because messages got delayed between
| systems. In an afternoon, I whipped up my original proposal:
| since the recovery action is idempotent, when you go into the
| recovering state, just blindly fire off the recovery action
| every x seconds until you either get confirmation of
| resolution, or after y seconds give up and alert the humans
| that the problem might not be resolved. As far as I know, my
| 4-state FSM solution is still in production years later. I'm
| sure the author of the original felt a 4-state finite state
| machine was "the hardest way to write it."
|
| In a third case, we have a pretty slick internal publish-
| subscribe system, but the error handling is just level-based:
| the subscriber provides a callback taking a boolean that
| indicates if the publisher has just gone from "bad" to "okay"
| (true) or "okay" to "bad" (false). Publishers have an upper
| time limit of inactivity after which they'll publish out a size
| zero message, so if a subscriber doesn't get any messages in
| that maximum idle period plus some configurable leeway, then
| the subscriber needs to assume the publisher has died and go
| into error mitigation/recovery/alerting logic. It's a pretty
| simple two-state FSM. The start state is the "bad" state. Every
| message results in the current time being recorded as the
| latest timestamp, and if the current state is "bad", transition
| to the "ok" state and pass true to the health status callback.
| If there's not an existing timer, create one for transitioning
| back to a "bad" state. When the timer goes off, check the
| latest recorded timestamp, and see if you really should
| transition to a "bad" state and call the health status callback
| with false. Otherwise, calculate the next timeout based on the
| latest heartbeat and reset the timer. The problem is that it
| starts out in the "bad" state, so in order to handle the case
| of publishers being dead at subscription time, all subscribers
| need to implement their own timer logic, and a lot of
| subscribers either don't try to handle the case or handle it
| incorrectly. I spent a while trying to convince the main
| developer for the pub-sub system to switch to a tristate FSM:
| start, bad, and ok. If you use 100 years for the default time
| to transition from the start state to the bad state, you'll get
| backward-compatible behavior for subscribers that just assume
| their first health status callback must be their initial
| notification that the publisher is live. The other state
| transitions were all really easy to work out. I sent him an
| email with a pretty state transition table showing all 4
| possible state transiions, what triggered them, and which
| transitions triggered which health status callbacks. It's
| really dead simple: 3 states, 4 transitions, and it greatly
| simplified code on the subscriber side and stopped forcing all
| subscribers to implement their own poor solutions, and it was
| 100% backward compatible if default parameters were used. He
| kept on pushing for various ad-hoc solutions with more implicit
| states and state transitions because his gut feeling solution
| was easier for him than thinking in terms of a 3-state finite
| state machine. We went through a couple back-and-forths with me
| pointing out flaws in his ad-hoc proposals, and him not
| pointing out any flaws in my FSM, but just complaining that it
| was "complex". But, he didn't really mean "complex", he meant
| "hard"[0] because he wasn't accustomed to thinking in terms of
| state machines. With the extra corner cases and implicit states
| in his ad-hoc proposals, his solutions were more complex by an
| objective complexity metric. But, I'm sure he'd complain that
| my 3-state, 4-transition state machine was writing it "the
| hardest way."
|
| I also strongly prefer to put throttles with very high limits
| in cases where we don't think throttles will ever be necessary.
| When the network admins are yelling at you that you're killing
| the network is no time to have to code up a throttle instead of
| just changing a configuration. I've had people argue that
| putting in throttling logic is too complicated. When some
| middlewear daemon got absurdly slow, I've also had to tell
| those same people "The middlewear admins are screaming. If the
| middlewear daemon's memory usage hits 3.75 GB, we need to kill
| your programs to keep the middlewear from falling over."
| Sometimes a colleague complaining about complexity is really
| trying to simplify things to a dangerous degree.
|
| [0] https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy/
| johnnyb9 wrote:
| This quote stood out for me as well, for the reason that my own
| depiction of a "good coder" has evolved into someone who codes
| a solution in the simplest way possible using the best tools,
| not the "hardest" or most "lit" way.
| CameronNemo wrote:
| Yeah this screams "antisocial coder" to me. Coding with an
| audience of one.
| suzzer99 wrote:
| I was planning to post exactly this. Reminds me of that
| famous anecdote about the guy who was using different
| branches in the same source control repo for different
| functions - who everyone said was a genius but no one could
| figure out how to touch his code.
| tiborsaas wrote:
| I have a similar story, a friend of mine had (and still
| has) a webdev shop and he said he has a slightly autistic
| programmer who is his best employee and he's a genius,
| nobody can understand his code.
|
| One day they called me because at 8PM they were still at
| the office trying to crack a problem. After a short
| discussion, I suggested to use a (.*) regex to solve it,
| without seeing the code, that was the best I could do.
| Another call 30 min later, I suggested the same but on a
| different level. At the third call I told them that if they
| need to keep doing that, something is deeply flawed and
| they should rewrite it. No more calls came :)
|
| I kinda see where this sentiment is coming from and it's
| really hard to convince people otherwise. People see movies
| like Rain Man and they see scientists with huge blackboards
| and they can't understand a thing so it must be a work of a
| genius.
| watwut wrote:
| I think that if you do some bad things and also code
| somewhat, a lot of people will assume that you are
| basically genius. It is as if people felt the need to
| balance and since they said something bad about you, they
| will overcompensate in coding skills department.
|
| But it is unfair to nice good coders who don't get praised
| as crazy good, cause they were not assholes to people.
| watwut wrote:
| Through, honestly, I would not qualify the above a good coder.
| It is more off highly intelligent but not good coder.
| agloeregrets wrote:
| Reading that I felt like I saw myself in it, a bit of my
| earlier self. Perfectionism was required at all costs back then
| and my work would be very much over-considered compared to a
| more elegant simplistic solution scoped for the scale of the
| problem at hand. It's a lonely way to work and generally is
| less collaborative (so less learning once you get to a level).
| It's hard to feel like you are making progress over time when
| your only standard is perfection.
| pengaru wrote:
| If I had to live in a NYC apartment with an ex-girlfriend, I'd
| probably respond by disappearing into the woods, living away from
| civilization too.
| gavreh wrote:
| repost? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25756931
| gavreh wrote:
| also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25786699
| deeeeplearning wrote:
| This stuff is disturbing. These articles read like hit pieces.
| The guy can't even defend himself and you have all these wild
| claims from supposed ex-girlfriends. It's just bizarre. Let the
| guy lie in peace.
| stuckindider wrote:
| It's honestly disgusting how people have made it into a game of
| trying to figure out who he was. Cutting him open for bone
| fragments. He died alone in the woods. Was there any reason to
| think it was caused by malace? No. Then fuck off and let him
| be.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Sure, you have a high sanctity moral foundation. Many others
| do not. To me, a dead man with no family ties is just a
| sequence of tissue arranged in a certain way. I will deal
| with it as I deal with bark or fungus. There is no person
| left.
| xsmasher wrote:
| There may have been family waiting for word of him. No one
| knew at the time.
| blakesterz wrote:
| Somehow I read this and I'm not sure what the actual Unsettling
| Truth was, but it still was interesting, I learned a few new
| things, and I've been following this one pretty close.
|
| The more I read about this the more I'm reminded of Chris
| McCandless.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_McCandless
| at-fates-hands wrote:
| I was pretty interested in the McCandless story as well.
| Krakauer uncovering the possibility of him eating the Eskimo
| potato plant which may have ultimately killed him was really
| eye opening.
|
| https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/05/01/403535274/in...
| goodcanadian wrote:
| I think the "unsettling truth" was that he turned out to be a
| flawed human being rather than the person that people who
| didn't even know him built him up to be in their imaginations.
| fortran77 wrote:
| It's even more banal than that. The "unsettling truth" is
| he's got an ex who is willing to spread some unsubstantiated
| dirt about him that may not be true, or may be exaggerated.
| (Was there ever a police report? A restraining order?
| Probably not, or it would be mentioned.)
|
| That's it. It's a non-story.
| mlang23 wrote:
| What an absurd story. Wikipedia lists _one_ travel, in fact the
| first and last one. How sad. And why the heck do you venture
| out into the bushes only to live in a abandoned bus? I mean,
| yeah, how convenient. I can see that. But it is also weird.
| ajkjk wrote:
| What's absurd about it?
| mlang23 wrote:
| I would imagine that someone inclined to live in the bushes
| by themselves would be interested in/wanting to build their
| shelter themselves, or at least use something that has
| natural origin. At least that is how I imagine it. What did
| you achieve if you leave civilisation behind only to use
| something a shelter which wouldnt exist without
| civilisation?
| renewiltord wrote:
| It's clear he was seeking solitude more than he was
| seeking nature. It just so happens the two go together
| frequently. It does not particularly appear any
| 'achievement' was intended.
| sedatk wrote:
| When your goal is to be away from people, not necessarily
| shelter or technology.
| lqet wrote:
| I read the book by Krakauer a few years ago. Tragically, he
| could've crossed the river he thought was blocking his way
| back to civilization by a hand-operated cable car only 800
| meters away from his shelter. He wandered into the wild
| without a good map.
|
| To his credit, though, there is the possibility that he was
| simply unable to walk because he poisoned himself
| accidentally [0]
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_McCandless#Lathyrism_
| due...
| NikolaeVarius wrote:
| By being incredibly stupid mostly.
| fiftyfifty wrote:
| Exactly my thoughts, reminded me very much of Into the Wild.
| bena wrote:
| The unsettling truth was that he was apparently an abusive
| malcontent who decided to run away from the problems he created
| once again.
| f38zf5vdt wrote:
| It's a shame, he could have had a healthy and productive life
| just posting every day to the Linux kernel mailing list.
| nickthemagicman wrote:
| Yep. He just missed finding his people, unfortunate.
| trianglem wrote:
| Based on what? Some ex's word?
| LatteLazy wrote:
| But he told obscure jokes! But yeah, I think the title is
| clickbait, nothing here actually seems unsettling.
| elliekelly wrote:
| > On a Saturday night in September 2016, K was injured
| when a terrorist set off a bomb on West 23rd Street in
| Manhattan. "I had pretty bad PTSD to which he hated
| caring for me, even kept a dated log of every time I
| needed help, to the point where he left me outside in the
| dark--knowing that at that time I couldn't be outside
| alone or be in the dark without panicking," she recalls,
| before adding, "and this is only the light stuff."
|
| You don't find this behavior unsettling? How about this
| anecdote being characterized as "this only the light
| stuff"?
| trianglem wrote:
| Not to diminish her problems, but at the same time this
| is extremely reminiscent of girlfriends that are super
| attention seeking and constantly have "problems" that
| need to be resolved immediately. Sounds like this guy
| wasn't super emotional and was distressed by incessant
| calls for attention.
| [deleted]
| TeaDrunk wrote:
| A person who has such high levels of distress or lack of
| emotional regulation that they cannot manage by
| themselves the level of emotional turmoil they experience
| sounds... like PTSD, which uh, yeah, she has PTSD and
| this was a known behavior that he presumably chose and
| accepted when he was dating her. It makes no sense to
| date someone and then actively neglect their needs, even
| if their needs are greater than people who don't have a
| severe, chronic illness.
| objectivetruth wrote:
| > Not to diminish her problems, but at the same time
|
| _proceeds to diminish her post-terrorist-attack PTSD and
| compare her to his ex-girlfriends_
| LatteLazy wrote:
| Maybe I've become jaded living in a low socioeconomic
| area but this sounds like the people living 2 doors down
| from me. They're forever having screaming matches, both
| diagnosed with mental health issues, they rarely work.
| But they're not that unusual here at the bottom end of
| the income distribution.
|
| I was a little to flippant in my comment, maybe I should
| be more unsettled?
| DeafSquid wrote:
| Sounds like she should have left him sooner
| [deleted]
| bena wrote:
| One person could be an aberration. But when multiple people
| all say similar things, it's a pattern.
|
| It's not just "some ex's" word. It's her word and the words
| of the other people who knew him.
| Exmoor wrote:
| And also that he basically left his life behind with no
| intention of ever coming back and hiked until he literally
| starved to death.
| 3131s wrote:
| It sounds like he was aware enough of these flaws that he
| decided to do something about it. That's a lot better than
| some people who go a lifetime without ever being self-aware.
| lovegoblin wrote:
| > he decided to do something about it
|
| But not, apparently, therapy.
| IfOnlyYouKnew wrote:
| The unsettling truth is that he was deeply troubled, and, at
| times, an abusive asshole who didn't necessarily warrant quite
| as much compassion from strangers as he was given.
|
| I'm open to the idea that it may not really matter, and
| everyone deserves the dignity to not be buried anonymously. But
| there were a lot of resources invested in this case because he
| looked very relatable in photos. He was very different from
| what people thought of him, and what motivated them, and
| therefore the truth is unsettling wrt that effort.
|
| This doesn't mean the effort was wrong, or that he was a
| monster not worthy of compassion. He was clearly fighting some
| demons, sometimes winning, sometimes losing, sometimes
| unleashing them on others. It defies easy moral judgements, and
| I believe the article does an excellent job saying as much.
|
| But meanwhile, thousands die anonymously and unnoticed every
| year, and their photos and circumstances of death are far less
| compelling, but many if not most of them would have life
| stories that do not include multiple episodes of physically and
| psychologically abusing everyone close to them.
|
| Compassionate efforts often cannot be shifted according to
| utilitarian calculations (which is one argument for getting
| together and making them someone's actual job, in a process
| usually called "government"). But stories like this do maybe
| serve to make some people think about the best allocation of
| such efforts.
|
| (The other unsettling truth is that HN can read this story and
| come away asking what people could possibly object to in his
| life story, and why one should believe the spouses (plural)
| that describe his dark side)
| iJohnDoe wrote:
| @IfOnlyYouKnew Very level headed and great comment. It's
| amazing how much victim blaming HN does on almost any topic.
|
| Separately, IMO, previous girlfriends or friends, etc. won't
| go out of their way to spit on someone's grave. I think the
| exception is when someone finally feels safe to speak out
| that they were abused or if the person was a true POS.
|
| Not sure why the default logic in this case is to
| automatically assume the exes are bad mouthing the deceased
| just because they can. Sure, it happens, but in this case
| there were two separate first-hand accounts and from the
| girl's parents.
| throwaway56745 wrote:
| It's a slippery slope (and mildly sociopathic) to start
| judging people's worthiness of being murdered (or sought
| justice for) based on whether they were a good or bad person.
|
| Allocating resources based on how charming someone's photo is
| is also wrong, and worthy of discussion, though presumably
| people at least aren't doing that consciously.
|
| Edit: I'm fairly disturbed that this appears to be
| controversial.
| zerocrates wrote:
| I don't think there's any indication this person was
| murdered, nor that there's anybody to seek justice against.
| throwaway56745 wrote:
| Ah, I guess that's on me for only skimming the article.
| Still, death is death. We shouldn't trivialize it just
| because the person in question wasn't a good person,
| which is what it felt like the GP was suggesting.
| renewiltord wrote:
| This is wholly platitudinous. There are individuals whose
| death is of near zero utility to me and individuals whose
| death is of positive utility to me even accounting for
| any knock-on effects of considering any human death
| trivial.
|
| I know one is usually meant to just nod when people say
| things like "all human life matters" and "no death is
| anything but horrible" and all that, but it's really not
| true.
|
| In fact, if I model people's actions I find that nearly
| everyone will nod along with those things but few people
| act in a manner that is consistent with that action.
| astura wrote:
| The article says one thing the investigators are sure of
| from the beginning is he died of "natural causes."
|
| Toward the end it seems like he might have starved to death
| or maybe of dehydration.
| f38zf5vdt wrote:
| I think the most unsettling truth is about how titles are
| being assembled in search of ad revenue, since "Formerly
| anonymous hitchhiker who died alone lived troubled life" gets
| a lot less clicks -- since that seems almost like a non-
| story.
|
| Assembling dialogue around the divisive narrative of a
| misleading title is just something that plays into it and I
| think something we all need to avoid.
| IfOnlyYouKnew wrote:
| _yawn_
| deeeeplearning wrote:
| >The other unsettling truth is that HN can read this story
| and come away asking what people could possibly object to in
| his life story, and why one should believe the spouses
| (plural) that describe his dark side
|
| What's unsettling about thinking that hit pieces on a dead
| man with quotes from supposed "ex girlfriends" is obnoxious?
| ryandrake wrote:
| Yea that's the first thing I thought. If I wanted to write
| an honest and fair assessment on someone, I probably would
| take the stories from ex-girlfriends (or anyone else with a
| potential ax to grind) with a grain of salt. A lot of us
| wouldn't want our biographies to be written by ex's.
|
| Unfortunately the author really didn't have many more
| people to interview as the guy was a bit of a loner.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Sure, but how many of us have exes that would say we beat
| them? I would be very surprised if even the more
| acrimonious breakups of mine claimed that I hit them.
| Pretty sure most of us have never laid a hand in anger on
| our partners.
| deeeeplearning wrote:
| Were there any police reports? Was he arrested for
| battery? Honestly it's pure hearsay otherwise. We can't
| really be expected to take the word of jilted ex lovers
| at face value, sorry.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Believe what you want. No one is really trying to
| convince you, specifically. It's just a human interest
| story at the end of it.
|
| For my part, I find it sufficient for me to conclude this
| guy hit his girlfriend.
| StrictDabbler wrote:
| We are all chimpanzees of varying temperament.
|
| The internet finds a story like this and spends a month on
| it.
|
| "Good chimp killed? Good chimp killed on hike? Hiking good,
| hikers good. Must be good victim chimp. How can good chimp
| have bad thing happen?"
|
| Then somebody finds out who the chimp is, and somebody gets
| a thousand bucks to write
|
| "Good chimp not so good. Fought with other chimps. Shouted,
| got quiet, not share food. Not good chimp die on trail. Bad
| chimp wander off to die because bad. Sad but ok."
|
| That's the natural cycle of news, it's been going on since
| the press was invented and it's mostly ok.
|
| What's frustrating is the internet adding the layer of
|
| "Bad chimp? Bad Chimp?! What kind bad chimp? Bad chimp have
| excuse to be bad? No? Put on list of Villain Chimps!
| Vvvvvvvvillllainous chimp."
|
| Dysfunctional dude didn't do so well with his personal
| relationships on his way to an early grave. Ok-doke.
| rriepe wrote:
| The unsettling truth is that society really, really despises
| people with schizoid personality disorder.
|
| (EDIT: People with SPD are _averse_ to violence and prone to
| all kinds of abuse. The he-said /she-said stuff is particularly
| useless here.)
| IfOnlyYouKnew wrote:
| You're not doing people with the disease any favors by
| equating it with spousal abuse.
| TeaDrunk wrote:
| IME Society rarely _notices_ people with schizoid personality
| disorder- most people with schizoid don 't even go to a
| doctor and never get formally diagnosed. This is especially
| true compared to schizoid's siblings in the personality
| disorder categories (Category A), paranoid and schizotypal.
|
| (Minor edit: Also, committing spousal abuse is distinctly not
| a trait of schizoid personality disorder.)
| shrimp_emoji wrote:
| SPD is fine when you're just a loner, but it's naturally less
| appealing for society when you're incapable of forming
| connections and reciprocating basic social contracts (some
| people even use the latter as the sole criterion of
| "personhood").
| ed25519FUUU wrote:
| > _Nothing Else Matters" by Metallica on the piano. "I could be
| quiet around him," she wrote, "and it never felt awkward."_
|
| Listen to a piano cover while you read the story:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmL12NRE4hQ
|
| And if you liked this story, you will probably also like "The
| Hunt for the Death Valley Germans"
| https://www.otherhand.org/home-page/search-and-rescue/the-hu...
| anonAndOn wrote:
| AIUI, being shot in the gut is a long (it can take hours) and
| incredibly agonizing way to die. It appears he was not merciful
| on any substantive relationships, including with himself.
| dkarl wrote:
| _Maybe Rodriguez's story is similar to Cody's. He was alone in a
| vast, unfamiliar city. He'd destroyed his relationships. He left
| his apartment in anger. And then, as he traversed the mountains,
| walking through sugar maple and oak, hickory and poplar, stepping
| over roots and rocks, he tamed his demons too. The many people
| who met him didn't sense the dark, brooding, sometimes dangerous
| person who left Brooklyn._
|
| People who decide to commit suicide sometimes appear to others to
| be feeling a lot better in the time between the decision and the
| final act. It can look externally like an upswing, like they've
| gained a new perspective and things aren't weighing on them as
| heavily. It sounds like he was conscious that his behavior was
| bad for other people, and he didn't believe he could change.
| That's a terrible position to be in: to feel you can't fully
| function in the presence of others but to feel their absence
| keenly as well, to be incapable of being with others without
| hurting them, but also incapable of being alone. I can't imagine
| how bad it would have to be to starve yourself to death, but I
| can't help wondering if that's what he did.
| op03 wrote:
| >sugar maple and oak, hickory and poplar
|
| I feel the trees mentioned are somehow involved too.
| ska wrote:
| > People who decide to commit suicide sometimes appear to
| others to be feeling a lot better in the time between the
| decision and the final act.
|
| I suspect this is just an instance of the pretty common
| response to having made a decision that was weighing on you. If
| it's a big one (divorce, career change, etc.) I'm sure most of
| us have experienced this at least 2nd hand.
| cmehdy wrote:
| Anecdotally, I can confirm that it's similar in essence and
| just overwhelmingly stronger in effect. It's a bit like
| having finally decided every single one of the big decisions
| of life in the same split second (because that's what it is
| in the moment).
|
| It's also stronger than that because the very likely "normal
| state" of your brain up to that point is severe depression,
| so you're not anywhere near what people might consider an
| average state of mind, and you're getting that strong of a
| kick.
|
| You can ride that euphoria for quite a while even through
| some of the nagging doubts clawing their way back between the
| initial feeling and the last action. I doubt much research
| can be done for what I'm about to say (and I might be very
| wrong), but I have the feeling that when you're alone
| (mentally) you can ride that wave for a decent amount of time
| yet with just a very brief REAL interaction with another
| human being you can snap out of it. It might not fully
| dissipate but still break the trance-like state.
|
| Not a lot of interactions might feel real like that, but when
| they do they can be life-changing (for obvious reasons) even
| when the subject matter is frivolous.
|
| You'll likely never know just how many you changed, nor why.
|
| We often notice how "easy"/quick it is to hurt somebody by
| saying something even light-hearted, but when it comes to
| that extreme you'd be surprised how very few words about
| mundane things can prevent a collapse (at least that time).
| eitland wrote:
| You made it to my quotes file, which is a somewhat high bar
| even if it doesn't help for anything ;-)
|
| > We often notice how "easy"/quick it is to hurt somebody
| by saying something even light-hearted,
|
| I've been very aware of this for the last ten years after
| realizing that despite my good intentions I could sometimes
| hurt others.
|
| > but when it comes to that extreme you'd be surprised how
| very few words about mundane things can prevent a collapse
| (at least that time).
|
| I think this will be important to keep in mind too going
| forward.
|
| Thanks!
| ska wrote:
| This is a thoughtful comment. I do think it is incredibly
| hard to gauge "relative effect" between people, so I don't
| think we can really rank them (except for ourselves, of
| course). There is some nuance here.
|
| I've also experienced a lot of variance in my social group
| in terms of what things have really seemed to set them
| back.
|
| I really like your point that seemingly "small" things can
| make a huge difference in someone else's state of mind.
| It's a strong argument for being as kind as you can by
| default, because you really have no idea what those around
| you are going through.
| cmehdy wrote:
| I initially thought about writing what you're concluding,
| but after giving it more thought my conclusion wasn't
| that one has to strive to be kind but instead to be
| sincere. Kindness for its own sake might even be
| upsetting to me, instead of kindness "happening"
| alongside sincerity. But I realized that this was due to
| my own preferences (having more interactions that don't
| feel scripted, a human connection even with all the not-
| so-good parts), so I decided to leave it out of the
| message. Because I have no way to really prescribe
| anything to anybody, I don't know what is "best" if being
| kind and being sincere ever conflict, and I don't know
| what other people in such a vulnerable situation might
| react to or want. For all I know it might be
| diametrically opposed in a significant subset of people
| having gone through the same process.
|
| From the other side of things, I have had decent outcomes
| attempting to be both at once when someone is in crisis.
| Using my better judgment to figure out what to prioritize
| if conflict arises between the two - often based on what
| I perceived from the other person. There's time for
| advice, there's time for being heard, there's time to be.
|
| I'd hardly call that an exact science, but I remind
| myself and anyone who I think should hear it that you
| shouldn't beat yourself up for trying to help and not
| "succeeding". That it's not your fault, nor is it the
| fault of the person in pain to do something so violent
| because they want to stop feeling that pain. Faulting
| leads nowhere constructive, even though later on I could
| find strength to figure out (and own up to) my own part
| of responsibility in life - which can be constructive. I
| guess the HN-equivalent discussion is all the debate
| around the naming of "git blame" :)
|
| We just simply don't have enough information about the
| universe to really know better most of the time, and as a
| consequence of that you can't reliably predict much of it
| all even with the best and most genuine attempts to help.
| (I realize I am saying obvious things, but I'll leave it
| there)
| Tade0 wrote:
| Thanks to this stack of comments I finally understood why
| my college friend appeared to feel better days before he
| took his life - he made his decision and was at peace with
| it.
| UI_at_80x24 wrote:
| > People who decide to commit suicide sometimes appear to
| others to be feeling a lot better in the time between the
| decision and the final act.
|
| To misquote a line from a favorite TV show;
|
| "Fear accompanies the possibility of death. Calm shepherds its
| certainty." -Ka D'Argo, Farscape
|
| I have attempted suicide, and that line fits for me. As another
| reader has pointed out there is also peace that comes from
| making a choice and knowing that your pain will be ending soon.
| helmholtz wrote:
| Christ, I can't imagine what it feels like to be in a place
| where the only choice one sees is out. Hope you're feeling
| better.
| UI_at_80x24 wrote:
| Thank-you.
|
| I am. I'm not.
|
| Major Depressive Disorder is a bitch with a long memory.
| agloeregrets wrote:
| Having been on that edge and (luckily) not having the guts, I
| found that the moment when you can't give yourself the
| certainty to just do it is somehow even darker than
| contemplating it.
|
| I hope you have that certainty in hope for a better future
| with you in it and that things are better for you now.
| UI_at_80x24 wrote:
| >not having the guts
|
| This is the point that nobody understands. It's HARD to do!
| The easy thing to do is let the momentum of living bring
| you to the next day. It's very difficult to over-ride
| instinct and cause life-threatening injury to oneself.
|
| So I laugh when I hear "it takes more courage to live", or
| "they took the cowards way out".
|
| Thank-you for your gentle words. To once again misquote
| (from a movie): "I'm not dead yet."
| JeremyNT wrote:
| I would like to mention that Mostly Harmless's identity and
| history were first reported by Jason Nark of Adventure Journal
| way back in December (and discussed on HN _[0]_ at that time).
| His piece _[1]_ is now fully updated to include the original
| article as well as the updates.
|
| Nark isn't credited in this particular Wired article (although he
| was credited in Thomson's first article for Wired _[2]_ ). This
| is the despite the fact that Nark, as far as I can tell, wrote
| the first mainstream article about Mostly Harmless and also was
| the first reporter to determine his identity.
|
| I suppose Nicholas Thomson must have researched it independently
| for this new wired piece, explaining why it's being released so
| much later and with no mention of the reporter who "broke" the
| story.
|
| [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25526104
|
| [1] https://www.adventure-journal.com/2020/12/the-mystery-of-
| dec...
|
| [2] https://www.wired.com/story/nameless-hiker-mostly-
| harmless-i...
| Geminidog wrote:
| The more unsettling truth is how the world became interested in
| someone like him even though he was mostly an asshole. This
| article says more about human nature and our tendencies to make
| unwarranted assumptions based off of superficial qualities then
| it does about him.
|
| Would he garner the same amount of attention if he wasn't white
| or good looking?
| as1mov wrote:
| This was my observation as well. I don't think this case
| would've gotten the same amount of attention if the person
| wasn't good looking. There are countless Doe's missing for whom
| an army of online strangers hasn't sprung up and made their
| mission to identify the person (and some unwarranted
| expectations based just on a bunch of photographs).
| [deleted]
| 34679 wrote:
| The graphic designer in me wants to flog whoever is responsible
| for that graphic at the top. The drop shadows go 3 different
| directions and the one on the taped paper has way too much
| offset.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Sounds like he was HFA (High-Functioning Autistic), with some
| extra Trauma Sauce.
|
| It can be quite difficult for folks like this _(Disclaimer: IR1)_
| to find happiness. Crowds, high-stimulus environments, external
| expectations can be quite chafing.
|
| It can also be tempting to latch onto external things and people,
| to try to heal something that can't really be healed; but only
| mitigated (long story, but I went through that kind of thing,
| myself). I can understand anger, when they don't "fix" us.
|
| I can also relate to the "sleep it off" thing. It would be sort
| of like Miranda, in _Serenity_.
|
| It's a really sad story. There are quite a few people like that.
| 11235813213455 wrote:
| Yes, that's what I hoped the conclusion would be more about.
|
| I'm quite similar to this guy, some of us find a way to adapt
| to their environment, their differences, accepting the fact
| they can't "fix" that real-world environment, but.. that's a
| harmful experience, mostly for yourself
| lwigo wrote:
| How is it like Miranda (just trying to figure out your
| metaphor)? One possible response to extreme over stimulation or
| aggression is to completely shutdown?
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| If you remember, the Parliament added some kind of stuff in
| the atmosphere, and everyone just lay down and died.
|
| When I was working through my stuff, I often would have
| _loved_ to do that.
|
| It's really a special kind of hell. We can't stand being
| ourselves. I grew a beard, because I couldn't stand looking
| in the mirror. Shaving it was actually a watershed, for me.
| [deleted]
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| > Sounds like he was HFA (High-Functioning Autistic), with some
| extra Trauma Sauce.
|
| Or he could have bipolar, schizophrenia, anxiety, C-PTSD or a
| number of other things.
|
| All of those would explain what I'm seeing.
|
| Personally, I'm bipolar and I share an a lot of traits with
| autism. You can't know what's happening in a person's head
| unless you take time to talk to them or they've left a detailed
| journal.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Absolutely. I can only speak to what I know, and this, I
| happen to know, all too well.
|
| I just found that I could relate to pretty much everything he
| was about (check out my code for some truly anal coding),
| with the exception of the abuse, but I could also easily see
| myself getting into that, if I had the trauma background
| (although I don't have that, exactly, I am _quite_ familiar
| with what trauma can do to even neurotypicals).
| freetime2 wrote:
| Whenever I read a biography about some person I admire, I always
| end up disliking that person. Failed relationships and abandoned
| responsibilities are exceedingly common (especially among artists
| and people who are highly driven to success). I think that most
| of us have some "unsettling" details in our past. People are
| imperfect.
|
| The allegations of physical and mental abuse here are
| particularly bad, and I'm not trying to make any excuses for
| Rodriguez. But they aren't exactly uncommon in this world,
| either.
|
| The tone of this article feels a little too judgmental to me.
| Like Rodriguez somehow had an obligation to all the people who
| were interested in his story, and has let them down. But is it
| really surprising that someone who died in such unusual
| conditions, with no friends or family to report him as missing,
| would have had a rough past?
|
| The author also says at one point "maybe that's the prettiest bow
| you can put on the box that contains this strange story". But why
| should we as interested observers feel the need or be entitled to
| "put a bow" on this other man's life?
| ianai wrote:
| Well, the guy's dead. People should probably back off. An
| inability to change is almost a functional definition of death.
| If anything, those judging him could look in the mirror. Why
| the need to seek answers about someone? Why the need to judge
| whatever you find out? As someone who has only ever read a few
| comments on HN about this story - because I have no interest in
| this sort of thing - I'm judging society for how they handle
| this person. Harshly.
|
| Edit-Why not check your egos and ids for once and let it go?
| thefurman wrote:
| Was he abused by his father or something? Sounds like it should
| be investigated further. People usually don't just become like
| this without a good reason.
| stuckindider wrote:
| Sounds like it none of your business. Speculating about the
| metal state of others and playing internet doctor is insulting.
| oh_sigh wrote:
| Dead people generally don't have the need for a doctor.
| code_duck wrote:
| The history in the article strongly suggests he was abused by
| his father.
| lisper wrote:
| TL;DR: This is about a hiker who went by the name Mostly Harmless
| who was found dead in his tent. No one knows how he died. That's
| it. But for the unusual name, it seems safe to say that this
| would not be on the front page of HN.
| notfbi wrote:
| The mystery was well covered on HN before due to him being a
| programmer and plausibly active in coding/gaming online
| communities:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24981786
| robbyt wrote:
| His photo gets posted to /r/brooklyn every few months. I really
| don't know what this story resonates so well with people.
|
| Every day there are reports of many new missing/homeless/dead
| people, why is this man more important than all the others?
| edmundsauto wrote:
| For fans of the hitch hikers guide series, the name isn't
| unusual. It's the name of one of the books.
| Dig1t wrote:
| (and the entire entry for the planet Earth inside the
| Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy book) ;)
| c22 wrote:
| It's an unusual name for a person.
| guerrilla wrote:
| Much like c22. It was just a trail name.
| [deleted]
| NikolaeVarius wrote:
| Many communities have nicknames that are unusual
| [deleted]
| 542458 wrote:
| I think the way they ID'ed this John Doe (trawling forum posts,
| DNA testing and advertising) is pretty interesting and I
| upvoted on that basis. It's also a partial answer to a mystery
| that was pretty widely shared around the internet, so is
| interesting on that basis as well.
| rootsudo wrote:
| How is it unsettling? Everything in that article is, average for
| Americans. People just applied romantic notions to something they
| didn't know, in attempt to understand. It got popular, people
| joined in, and the mystery was the thrill, the chase.
|
| I don't think it's any different from when you ask a person to
| describe their pet, they describe themselves.
|
| The fearful part is, how, everyone, decided that in good faith,
| they should work together, to unlock this past vs just leaving it
| to the government.
|
| This is a case where it seemed he didn't like his parents, and
| probably didn't want/care to let them know of his demise.
|
| His romantic life, same, probably didn't care to know either.
|
| But, Mystery solved? We did it Reddit! /s
| 99_00 wrote:
| I see this story as extremely positive. Technology can bring
| closure to unknown number of families. Many cold cases will be
| solved. This is just the start.
|
| >A genomics company, Othram, had taken his DNA and started to do
| cutting-edge genetic analysis to identify him. Collier County had
| sent them a bone fragment; they had extracted the hiker's DNA and
| then begun searching for genetic similarities among people in a
| database called GEDmatch to build a tree of potential relatives.
| They learned that the hiker had Cajun roots; that his family had
| come from Assumption Parish, Louisiana; and that there were
| family members with the name Rodriguez. The founder of the
| company, David Mittelman, went on Facebook to talk about the
| case. I bought Facebook ads on my personal page to promote my
| story in the region of Louisiana where I thought his relatives
| likely lived.
| dickbar wrote:
| In this thread: It's Friday. We do the usual and judge someone we
| know nothing about, whom we have never met, and begin by call
| them an asshole and a psychopath. This is the top story on Hacker
| News. Brought to you by Wired, Inc.
| [deleted]
| deeeeplearning wrote:
| bbbut 2 whole ex girlfriends said he was meeaaaan!! /s
| [deleted]
| johncessna wrote:
| From the article
|
| > It reminded everyone that it is still possible to disappear.
|
| Actually, it did the opposite
|
| > No, she said. "I don't think I was committed to Vance as a
| human. I detached myself as a person to Vance, in that I didn't
| want to get too attached to a dead stranger. But I was committed
| to solving the case with others because it would be a great way
| to prove that people can do great things together."
|
| This sums up what I thought about the whole thing. The unsettling
| truth is that a man went off grid and strangers, looking for
| nothing more than a selfish desire to know, put him right back on
| it.
| cjohnson318 wrote:
| Is there an official term for people that appear to be charming
| and outgoing to strangers, but often moody and/or distant to
| people they know well?
| tsjq wrote:
| This sub thread here goes into some detail. I'm also very
| curious about the same.
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25793526
| ogre_codes wrote:
| > It reminded everyone that it is still possible to disappear.
|
| It's possible to disappear if nobody is looking for you and you
| have enough cash. Even the latter is somewhat optional, it just
| means you are much less comfortable.
|
| Fundamentally in this world, many (most?) of us are redundant. A
| person missing here or there is only missed if their social web
| is wide enough.
| jasonv wrote:
| Does anyone remember a Wired (?) story from the earliest days
| about a teenager who got mixed up in a geek subculture and
| disappeared into sewers under the city? A quick search on their
| site didn't really yield what I think I remember.
| bart_spoon wrote:
| Perhaps its about the DnD kid? I vaguely remember hearing about
| that, in the early days of DnD there was a college kid in
| Michigan who disappeared, and it was thought he had been in the
| steam tunnels under the campus as part of a DnD campaign or
| something. I don't remember all of the details, or if it ended
| up being true, but I think it kind of became a trope
| surrounding DnD for a while, and there was a Tom Hanks movie
| about it.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > I don't remember all of the details, or if it ended up
| being true
|
| Not as far as any link between the disappearance and D&D, no:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Dallas_Egbert_III#Disapp.
| ..
|
| > and there was a Tom Hanks movie about it.
|
| _Mazes and Monsters_ , the novel and the movie, were
| inspired by the (false) story of the event.
| jasonv wrote:
| Thanks! This sounds like what I had in mind.
|
| Had no idea the movie even existed.
| lqet wrote:
| > disappeared into sewers under the city
|
| This might interest you: I watched the quite disturbing
| documentary "Dark Days" a few years ago about homeless people
| living in subway and sewage tunnels under New York. They had
| built small apartments down there and even had electricity.
|
| Here are the first 10 minutes on YouTube:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dh4s78Db5OQ
| tessierashpool wrote:
| there's an excellent book about this called _Mole People_ by
| Jennifer Toth.
| me_me_me wrote:
| Suddenly Futurama is a little bit less funny for me.
| gonzus wrote:
| This rings a bell. I remember reading a book that sounds like
| this, some 35 years ago... It was my gateway to discover The
| Hobbit, since one sentence in this book (which wasn't that
| good) mentioned these geeks getting together to play "Tolkian"
| (maybe "Tolkienian") games. It may have been this:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dungeon_Master
| bpodgursky wrote:
| It's only unsettling if you don't believe in redemption.
| tppiotrowski wrote:
| The article talks about his ability to be friendly to strangers
| but abusive to his long term acquaintances. I have observed this
| pattern and curious if anyone knows what drives this?
|
| My personal theory is that you have some sort of obligations to
| long term acquaintances but you owe nothing to strangers on the
| trail. It's this feeling of obligation that leads you to resent
| people over time.
| ksdale wrote:
| I think there may be an element of survivorship bias at play.
| There's kind of a 2x2 you can draw where people can be
| publicly/privately kind/abusive. People who are kind all the
| time (or at least, not abusive all the time) are unremarkable,
| I'm not sure there are many people who are publicly abusive and
| privately kind, and people who are both publicly and privately
| abusive are way more likely to end up in prison, or homeless,
| or otherwise away from people. So that leaves us noticing the
| strange pattern of people who are publicly kind and privately
| abusive. It's like, the most remarkable pattern that's actually
| present for us to remark upon.
| throwaway713 wrote:
| > I'm not sure there are many people who are publicly abusive
| and privately kind
|
| Gordon Ramsay perhaps?
| tekromancr wrote:
| I think you can find people who are publicly abusive and
| privately kind in online communities.
|
| I just finished listening to a podcast called My Year in
| Mensa, which centers around an unmoderated Mensa facebook
| group, and the author's interactions with them. As you can
| imagine from an unmoderated community, it sucks and a lot of
| people say shitty things there.
|
| A common refrain the author heard from people defending the
| group is "They're the nicest people in real life!", which may
| absolutely be the case, but publicly, they are presenting
| abusive versions of themselves.
| ksdale wrote:
| Ooh, that's a great example.
| adrianmonk wrote:
| There could also be a survivorship bias of relationships. The
| friends you still have are the ones who are willing and able
| to put up with your shit. The others are no longer in your
| life.
|
| So when you're around them, you know you can let out your bad
| side to some extent. You don't know that with random
| strangers.
| alfl wrote:
| Could be politeness as a response to social uncertainty
| followed by aggression once things are more clear. Like how
| some people fight with loved ones because they can't just walk.
| rel-throwaway wrote:
| I struggle with this in my personal life. To most friends and
| acquaintances I can be friendly, personable, interesting, and
| engaging when we meet. But at home, with close family, and
| especially with my wife I struggle to be that person. My
| default state is that I mostly want to be left alone. All the
| people closest to me seem to want something -- time, attention,
| help, emotional support etc. none of which I seem to need from
| anybody else and leads to annoyance and resentment on my part.
| It doesn't help that I have a particularly stressful job
| managing a large team with silly interpersonal issues and
| politics that I have to deal with.
|
| My wife and I have our good moments, are good parents (I
| think), but day to day is such a struggle. It is constant cycle
| of me wanting to be left alone and her wanting something or the
| other from me and getting annoyed that I show reluctance to do
| it leading to resentment on both sides. Not sure how to fix it
| or where to turn to for help. I am not an angry person and I
| don't physically yell or hurt her but she has said that me
| being reluctant with most things is a form of emotional abuse,
| which after reading this concerns me and is cause for
| introspection.
| throwaway6299 wrote:
| How strange, just created an account to say that I am the
| same way and was thinking about this a lot last night.
| (Although, I don't think I am emotionally abusive, as I feel
| my spouse demands things that are entirely unreasonable, like
| frequently asking me to leave work in the middle of the day
| to come help with something or buying a house and dog when we
| had less than $1,000 in our account).
|
| All I wanted my whole life was a happy family with a happy
| relationship like my parents had. That didn't happen and now
| all I want is to be left alone, and it's like everyone wants
| something from me but I don't need or want anything from
| them. I have a great job now, so the only thing I look
| forward to each day is hopefully reaching financial
| independence before I'm 40. At least then I can "buy" some
| alone time.
| rel-throwaway wrote:
| There has been plenty of unreasonable stuff over the years.
| Early in our marriage she spent close to 1000$ at the mall
| which left us short of funds to pay _her_ grad school
| tuition that I had been saving to pay for her. Till date
| she refuses to understand our financial picture and will be
| completely lost if I were to get hit by a bus tomorrow.
| Also, she has not worked for >90% of our ~10 year marriage
| to follow her passion for art which has made ->$0 so far. I
| am fine with that because we don't need 2 incomes and I am
| happy she has the freedom to pursue her passions.
| Thankfully, like you, I have done pretty well in my career
| and could probably retire in a cheaper country or some
| midwestern town tomorrow. This is in addition to all the
| other things she has anxiety about doing -- driving the car
| to new places, walking the dog when it is dark outside etc.
|
| I had the exact same wish. I just wanted a happy family
| like my parents had. I adore my child. Now I just wish we
| could both get out of this without damaging him too much
| and I can be left alone.
| 08-15 wrote:
| > she has said that me being reluctant [...] is a form of
| emotional abuse
|
| > her grad school tuition that I had been saving to pay
| for her
|
| > she has not worked for >90% of our ~10 year marriage
|
| My friend, you are not abusing your wife. _She_ is
| abusing _you_. She is also gaslighting you into thinking
| you are the problem. You 're not. And she is using your
| child to blackmail you emotionally.
|
| > things she has anxiety about doing -- driving the car
| to new places, walking the dog when it is dark outside
|
| This isn't anxiety, it's laziness. But if you're merely
| reluctant about the exact same things, she calls it "a
| form of emotional abuse." Brilliant.
|
| Unfortunately, the way the law is currently applied,
| there is nothing you can do without violating it.
| ColdSolo wrote:
| This is extremely similar to my situation. When I finish
| my workday I often find myself just sitting with her and
| watching Netflix but if I get up and go to the other room
| to do something I'm interested in she'll get upset.
|
| I think a lot of the issues come from the fact that I
| don't feel I "need" anything from her. It makes it hard
| to relate to her when she "needs" something from me. I
| actually think not needing anything from other people is
| the root of the issue. I'm very independent and always
| trying to be self-sufficient (stock piling money, etc) so
| that I don't need to rely on other people.
|
| I think this independence is a fault as it keeps from
| from "being vulnerable" and opening up more which is what
| leads to deeper connections with other humans. I'm trying
| to work on it a bit and have found that when I genuinely
| open up to my wife it actually frees up more time for me.
| Rather than spending 3 hours watching netflix we can
| spend 30 minutes having a deep conversation and then her
| needs are met and I can go do my own thing. Trying to do
| this regularly is really difficult though.
| number6 wrote:
| Do you feel that she doesn't hold up her side of the
| deal? Did you ever talk about what you expect her to do?
|
| Why are you still together?
| demadog wrote:
| She's likely wanting your presence and testing your loyalty
| or something? Definitely would help to see a couples
| therapist but if not, I think setting clear boundaries -
| like work time is work time - but also scheduling time
| together would put her at ease and prevent random requests.
| 0_____0 wrote:
| 100% this. I've been working through similar issues in my
| personal life (complicated by COVID, natch) and what I've
| come to is that I need to get way better about setting
| clear boundaries and expectations with people I care
| about. This can be done in a compassionate way, and
| relationships will be better in the long run even if
| doing the boundary setting feels hard or mean in the
| short term.
| trianglem wrote:
| I'm going to get downvoted for this but here goes. For a
| marriage to be successful, one partner has to be dominant.
| A marriage of equals doesn't work and your parents (and
| mine) have happy relationships because this principle was
| followed. I converted to Islam around 8 years ago and
| married a Muslim woman and I could not be more happy. For
| the last 6 years, everyday is bliss and I've never
| performed better at work.
| mafuy wrote:
| Well you're certainly right that it's easy to want to
| downvote your statement. I'd like to learn:
|
| Can you explain what the advantages of the dominant
| marriages are? Since you mention Islam, I assume you're
| the dominant one. I'm going to assume your wife is happy
| in her role. Do you think the female can be the dominant
| one in a relationship, too, or how is that decided?
| ibn_khaldun wrote:
| Not my post, but if I may I'd like to offer my input,
| please.
|
| The word "dominance" seems to carry a negative
| connotation in the context of interpersonal
| relationships. There a lot of historical factors that are
| the cause of this and it's beyond the scope of this
| conversation to delve deeply into that.
|
| Nonetheless, as far as Islam is concerned, it is the role
| of the man to wield the influence/be dominant in his
| household. This is by virtue of his responsibilities --
| his attachment to the Masjid (or "Mosque" in the West),
| his duty to earn a living for the household and his duty
| as an educator and paragon of good character, not just in
| the home but in his community as well.
|
| The word "dominance" may suggest a sense of oppression in
| modern times. But in the scope of Islam, that husband who
| is "dominant" in reality eschews all reprehensible
| conduct that could be associated with the word.
|
| As I mentioned before, yes, in Islam there are
| expectations on the Muslim wife. But likewise there are
| expectations (if not more) on the Muslim husband. Again,
| that Muslim man assumes dominance in the household out of
| the necessity that is to submit himself both internally
| and externally to the conduct of the Prophet Muhammad
| (peace and prayers be upon him).
|
| The advantages of this lie in the husband assuming his
| natural role as prescribed by Allah and exemplified by
| the Messenger of Allah (peace and prayers be upon him).
| If the situation were to be reversed, then this could not
| be the case. If anything, the man would not just be
| neglecting his duties as a husband, but as a Muslim as
| well. If the situation were to be reversed, it would
| behove the woman to instead leverage this dominance in
| order to encourage her husband to fulfill the rights he
| owes to her and to humanity. If he accepts this, then the
| natural order as described above would inevitably fall
| into place.
| 08-15 wrote:
| His marriage already has a dominant partner: his wife.
| [deleted]
| ibn_khaldun wrote:
| As salaamu alaikum. I love you. Thank you for sharing
| this post and making the most profound comment that I
| have read on this site, bar none.
|
| It is strange to assume that two people who are different
| by their very nature can be "equal". The sense of
| equality between a man and a woman can only come about by
| the fulfillment of the rights that exist between the two
| of them, which are different but have to be observed
| reciprocally.
|
| The problem is that we (meaning humanity at large) are
| totally unaware of the rights that we owe to each other.
| Not just in the household, but outside of it as well.
| Worst of all, we are unaware of the rights that are due
| to our Creator.
|
| May Allah, the One who is Most Gracious, strengthen you
| and your wife. Ameen.
| demadog wrote:
| Just a thought, but what if you set a daily time limit of
| being fully engaged and present with your wife, say for an
| hour or two, but then it is understood that you need ~3 hrs
| of alone time.
|
| Sounds like you're an introvert and need time to recharge
| from managing a team and you're burnt out from that.
|
| I think she'd be delighted with an hour a day of full
| presence, perhaps more on the weekend.
| rel-throwaway wrote:
| This is a good suggestion and something I am going to
| attempt to negotiate. I think part of the problem is
| something a person called out below -- we are fundamentally
| different. She does not need the same amount of time alone
| and may resent me for wanting that. But something to try.
| joshspankit wrote:
| If she resents you for something that is your nature,
| that's (as you know) unsustainable. Resentments like that
| may need to be dealt with with the help of a neutral
| therapist.
| Pet_Ant wrote:
| I'm not sure how I would feel if my partner wanted to spend
| 3 times as much time alone as with me. That's kind of
| degrading unless you are both into that.
|
| What are you getting out of the relationship at all? Sounds
| like they should leave and be alone.
| anotherman554 wrote:
| In the TV show Six Feet Under one of the couples found
| happiness when they realized they shouldn't live together
| but they were happy to date each other and see each other
| regularly, just not all the time, because the boyfriend
| went through cycles when he enjoyed socializing and
| cycles when he wanted to be alone.
|
| That strikes me as fine if both people are happy with the
| arrangement, but if kids are in the picture or one of the
| partners is unhappy with this arrangement I don't know if
| it will work.
| alsetmusic wrote:
| Have you considered getting a psych evaluation? I'm not
| trying to swipe at you, I'm approaching this with the most
| positive of intent.
|
| What you're describing sounds like a personality disorder of
| some sort. Identifying such may help surface strategies for
| lessening those feelings. Disclaimer: not a mental health
| professional, but have had a couple in my personal life.
| throwstranger wrote:
| From experience, I would explain it by an inability to accept
| others, which could be traced to perfectionism and low self-
| esteem.
|
| With long term acquaintances, you start to notice
| imperfections. If you have a low self-esteem, you could develop
| this peronality where you are constantly judging others, and
| trying to control and make them perfect, because they are part
| of _your_ life.
|
| This could have been caused by constant criticism received
| during childhood, or abusive parents who were themselves
| perfectionist in treating you, and didn't show enough
| acceptance, pride and love.
| bagacrap wrote:
| It's a trademark of sociopathy to be superficially charming.
| a2tech wrote:
| I think its easy to lice in a shell you create for yourself
| 10-12 hours a day. Its harder to live that life with people
| you're around all the time. My Dad for instance was well liked
| at his job and in the community. As soon as he left work and
| those people behind the smiles and jokes stopped and he was
| just mean and quiet with a temper that was never far from
| reach. I think the person he was at work was the person he
| wanted to be, but the person he was with us was his true self.
|
| Its either that or he truly hated my mother, my brother, and
| myself.
| lolbrels wrote:
| I think introverts have a tendency to shut down when
| relationships get too involved and outside of their comfort
| zone. Shallow acquaintances are usually just to make an
| impression and there are no pre-conceived notions so it's
| easier to be more comfortable having a quick interaction with
| someone you'll never see again. Maybe because it feels fresh
| and there isn't any baggage.
|
| I didn't particularly like the ex-girlfriends responses
| regarding him because I think speaking ill of the dead is lame
| when they aren't there to give their side of the story. Also,
| it sounded like she has issues of her own - which for someone
| who is already suffering with mental illness, trying to care
| for another person who also has mental illness is just a fool's
| errand. But often time these sort of relationships happen where
| there is so much negativity but due to illness both parties
| continue with it despite that.
| at-fates-hands wrote:
| Agreed.
|
| Its the idea that the more you learn about people and have to
| be around them, you start to judge them and then realize they
| aren't like you, so you push them away and crater relationships
| on purpose so you can be alone and unencumbered by other
| people's problems. It sounds to me like he did just that.
| Easier to have short-term relationships and human contact when
| you need it, but not long enough where you start to get bitter
| about having to continue being around people you don't like.
|
| He created a world that seemed to fit his personality better
| than what he had been doing most of his life. It must have been
| beneficial in some way if he continued doing it for so long.
| tppiotrowski wrote:
| > But soon he started to clam up and shut her out. "If
| something upset him, he would stop talking to me completely.
| Which can be lonely when you share a 500-square-foot
| apartment," she says.
|
| You definitely get the sense that he just wanted to be alone
| at times. Hard to do that when you're in a long term
| relationships because you have to adjust to some else's
| schedule. Easier when your acquaintances are short-term.
| hef19898 wrote:
| And still no reason to treat people like crap, as he
| apparently did.
| adamredwoods wrote:
| There could also have been some trauma/abuse with
| parents/family. The author of the story seemed to suggest
| something happened between him and the father.
| nemonemo wrote:
| My theory about what might have governed his behavior: boredom.
| He was designing a game, which is a system designed to mitigate
| the boredom issue. Knowing people better could make them boring
| to one's eye -- there are familiar patterns, and not much
| interesting new patterns developed. Nature has a lot of
| interesting new patterns.. but maybe he eventually got bored
| out of that too.
| IfOnlyYouKnew wrote:
| He wasn't abusive to his roommate or coworkers, so the divide
| wasn't stranger/close acquaintance.
|
| Sorry to spell it out, and I don't expect any sympathy for it,
| but the pattern was man/woman.
| tartoran wrote:
| I highly doubt the pattern was as you put it man/woman. That
| pattern seems to indicate that he was more abusive to people
| who were closer to him.
| nineplay wrote:
| It is sadly typical and can result in something a friend of
| mine experienced. She left her husband, told friends that he
| was abusive, and the general response was "Him? But he's such a
| great guy! You must be lying."
|
| ( Fortunately for her, the friends who attempted to console him
| pretty soon noticed how violent he got when he talked about
| her. When he threw a glass at the wall at a friend's apartment,
| she started getting a lot of apologies. )
|
| It's almost an adaptive behavior. If they were violent to
| strangers, they wouldn't have long term acquaintances.
| polishdude20 wrote:
| Could be the fact that strangers don't know you so they can't
| judge you. Your long term friends and family know you possibly
| better than you do. Being around friends and family can be a
| great way to learn about yourself. The problem is, some people
| see themselves and hate it.
| Neil44 wrote:
| Need for approval maybe. Skilled at getting approval from
| strangers. Once in a relationship that disappears.
| typefourpd wrote:
| This is indicative of a personality disorder. My father had BPD
| and behaved this way. My mother was borderline and behaved this
| way.
|
| People like this do not behave abusively towards their loved
| ones all the time, it's pretty on-and-off. The loved one is
| typically a dependent or avoidant. They remain in the
| relationship because they need the positive affirmations, and
| healthy people do not want to be with a dependent or avoidant.
| So, no choice but to suffer the negativity also.
|
| It's clear that this man developed a personality disorder as
| the result of suffering abuse as a child.
| TeaDrunk wrote:
| This is indicative only of specific personality disorders.
| There are several other personality disorders that don't
| behave this way and are defined by other actions entirely,
| eg. schizotypal personality disorder is mostly being defined
| by distorted perceptions and belief systems.
| jandrese wrote:
| > It's clear that this man developed a personality disorder
| as the result of suffering abuse as a child.
|
| I don't think the causality is clear at all. If he treated
| his parents the way he treated his girlfriends then his
| childhood would have been rough no matter how loving they
| were.
|
| If he behaves like he did in the article: polite at first but
| increasingly hostile the longer the relationship lasted then
| he must have been a hellish teenager to wrangle. One part of
| the article mentions that his anger at his father may have
| been the result of putting him in an institution.
| tartoran wrote:
| > It's clear that this man developed a personality disorder
| as the result of suffering abuse as a child.
|
| I'd say that is pretty hard to tell from the hearsay and all
| these are just speculations, which are okay. We're learning
| more from these conversations anyway.
| typefourpd wrote:
| Thank you for your gentle and respectful method of
| disagreement.
|
| I agree that my assumption was based on hearsay.
| Fundamentally, I don't believe that children who are loved
| and protected by their primary caregivers shoot themselves
| in the stomach in an attempt to die.
| tartoran wrote:
| You're welcome. Mental health is a very misunderstood
| topic because it is something we cannot directly peer
| into and the stigma associated with mental health makes
| people hide it very well.
|
| It is possible to have a who child goes off the rails in
| a very nurturing and a generally normal family. I've seen
| cases where one of the many siblings gets to become a
| sociopath and the family never understands why and they
| continue to be normal and consistently try to get their
| sibling back on track. It is clear that abuse in the
| family doesn't always play a role. But quite often it
| does and while mental health has a hereditary component,
| a bad environment only makes things worse.
|
| I recommend Ramsay's movie 'We need to talk about Kevin'
| to make an idea of how wrong it could go. Surely, it is a
| movie but it's not too far from reality.
| dspillett wrote:
| Or it could be novelty in the new people overpowering any more
| negative thoughts. The novelty falls off leaving the other to
| show through.
| fsckboy wrote:
| there is a broad class of psychological problems called
| "personality disorders" and they're basically "spectrum"
| disorders, there's no one size fits all diagnosis for anybody,
| and even skilled practitioners go through a tricky and time
| consuming process of diagnosing patients directly, i.e. we
| can't diagnose him from here based on 2nd hand information, and
| especially because we are not skilled practitioners.
|
| wrt your "personal theory" (sense of obligation leads to
| resentment), that's too simplistic, but for the sake of
| argument, let's say you are on the right track, here's how to
| improve your understanding of personality disorders: all people
| feel the resentment of obligations to those close to them. That
| part is actually the normal part. The question is, why doesn't
| the person with this disorder (we are hypothesizing) feel the
| other positive parts of a close relationship that help a better
| adjusted person feel in balance, and then take the normal
| resentment of obligations in stride.
| TeaDrunk wrote:
| This doesn't apply to all personality disorders. Schizotypal
| and paranoid personality disorders do not have this behavior
| at all.
| brobinson wrote:
| "Familiarity breeds contempt"?
| josepmdc wrote:
| I think it's because when you spend a lot of time with someone,
| you start to notice all of their annoying quirks you don't
| usually see when you just met them. So after a while you start
| to get tired and annoyed of them, and the way to deal with it
| is with anger.
| losteric wrote:
| Perhaps some form of social anxiety or avoidant attachment?
| It's easy to be friendly (or an asshole) in brief superficial
| interactions, but longer interactions lead people to intimacy
| that some find undesirable... fear of rejection can present as
| hostility (essentially proactive rejection).
| elmomle wrote:
| I think it comes from liking people a priori, but having a
| habituated expectation that the people we know will take from
| us (our happiness, our time, etc.)--so that one can't feel safe
| to be oneself with those one knows. IMO this expectation
| typically comes from childhood and can best be mitigated via
| mindfulness.
| forgetfulness wrote:
| Reading the article he was someone who was prone to neglect
| people close to him. I wouldn't look for an explanation that
| applies to everyone for that behavior.
|
| I've known people closely people like that, there's a
| selfishness to their lack of acknowledgement of others' needs
| and wants, but it's more of a drive to do that than a reaction
| to their existence; if and when they have nobody else to hollow
| out with their negativity and neglect, they'll turn it on
| themselves, and over time there will be just less and less of
| themselves.
|
| Notwithstanding that they can be charming on a superficial
| level.
|
| There's lots of ways people can have that pattern of being a
| completely different beast to strangers than to intimate
| partners in a bad way. Say on the other end the ones that make
| their whole world about you, but that _specially_ means that
| every single bad feeling of theirs will be offloaded or
| straight up blamed on you.
| zajio1am wrote:
| Seems to me that there are two factors:
|
| 1) If you are weird, then you have mismatched expectations
| about relationships (and other social obligations) than
| majority society. Not providing something that is expected
| would be 'neglect', while expecting something that is not
| provided would be 'entitlement'. Social rules with strangers or
| casual acquaintances are much simpler.
|
| 2) Being in some kind of deep relationship means emotional
| stakes are higher. Perceived violations due to (1) causes
| higher emotional damage if they are from someone near than
| someone distant.
| jgilias wrote:
| I believe it's called a mask. People with some personality
| disorders gradually develop a sort of behavioral mask to wear
| in public in order to fit in into the wider society and be able
| to achieve one's goals. However, having it 'on' is apparently
| taxing, so it comes off around people who are in one way or
| another part of some inner circle for whom there's no point to
| pretend.
| holtalanm wrote:
| > However, having it 'on' is apparently taxing
|
| That just sounds like standard introvert, though.
|
| The hiker in the article, on the other hand, seems to be off-
| the-deep-end introvert.
| jgilias wrote:
| It's... Not even close. What I had in mind was what
| clinical narcissists, sociopaths and psychopaths do. Their
| brains are wired completely differently than what is
| regarded as normal, to the point where you can see that on
| CT scans. There was a story about a researcher who figured
| out he's a high-functioning psychopath by looking at his CT
| scans. I'm digressing. So, typically, starting from a very
| early age they'd learn the behaviors they need to do in
| order to not get into trouble. Down to 'make an upward arch
| with your mouth when you see someone who knows you'. Must
| be very hard to live like that, I don't think it's
| comparable to what introverts do. Because introverts simply
| amplify behaviors that they do have, or understand, or are
| at least able to relate to from parts of personal
| experience. Contrast that to literally coming up with an
| artificial persona that you can't even relate to in any way
| and having to always stick to that.
|
| This is why the masks ar pretty much always super charming
| and likeable. If you're acting anyway, might as well act
| like someone that's super likeable. Pretty much how you max
| out a player in some game.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| That's what I call it. I've been hiding being bipolar since I
| was nine years old.
|
| I had a significant personality change after a psychotic
| break and most people don't think I've changed. I know I
| have.
| tartoran wrote:
| How do you know you've changed and it's not just the
| perception of how you see yourself post the event? Did you
| change your thinking patterns as well? If you're
| uncomfortable to share that's more than okay and very
| understandable.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| Love to. I'm a card-carrying member of the Over-sharers
| Club
|
| The way I think and care about people has changed. I no
| longer care what people think about me. At the same time,
| I have a depth of compassion and empathy I couldn't have
| had before.
|
| I have no obligation to anyone. This lets me choose to
| care about someone without getting unnecessarily
| attracted. As a result, I can share my love and support
| freely without worrying about people taking advantage of
| me. I have no guilt showing people the door.
|
| As a result of this, my motivations have changed. To use
| a metaphor, I see myself as a light in a dark world. My
| goal is to make everyone's day a little better. I'm not
| some kind of savior, though I have saved lives. I'm just
| a "good person" trying to do "good things".
|
| My interests have changed in odd ways. I'd never have
| written erotica but sex is far more interesting to me
| now. This isn't a result of me being repressed. I've
| always been asexual and been hypersexual since I was
| nine. But now I'm deeply exploring sexuality in my
| writing.
|
| The last one is both odd and the most fundamental to my
| being. Just take it at face value.
|
| I had a deep, spiritual connection with wolves from six
| years old until my break. That connection was a core part
| of me and without it, I wouldn't have known who I was.
|
| That connection is gone and I really don't care about it.
| As far as I'm concerned, it was delusional thinking.
|
| I no longer have the spirituality that was such a part of
| me. There is only the rational world now. (Side note: My
| faith in God had always been rational, not emotional or
| spiritual.)
|
| If I had to guess, I think sexuality took the place of
| spiritually in my brain.
|
| It's quite possible I haven't changed as much as I think,
| but the world inside my head is so vastly different, I
| can't understand the person I was before.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| Another note on masks. If you've always been known for
| your positive traits and your negative ones can be
| overlooked by people who like you, many people won't
| notice if your positive traits get better and your
| negative ones become smoothed out.
|
| If they do notice, they chalk it up to maturity.
| dspillett wrote:
| _> I believe it 's called a mask ... a sort of behavioral
| mask to wear in public_
|
| It is indeed fairly common. I'm affected (thankfully not
| strongly these days) by bipolar behaviour. I try to present a
| more average me as the mask.
|
| _> in order to fit in into the wider society and be able to
| achieve one 's goals._
|
| It can be more selfless than that. In work life it is about
| fitting in (or at least not standing out in an inconvenient
| way) but in personal life it is more that I don't people to
| worry overly. I have things well managed, I know I can push
| through, I know it will pass, there is no need to cause
| stress in others.
|
| _> However having it 'on' is apparently taxing_
|
| During a bad patch, the extra concentration adds up over time
| if you find yourself having to work at it for a while. I
| don't have many prolonged bad patches, I imagine it can get
| exponentially harder for those more severely affected than
| me. It is why a lot of people experiencing mental health
| issues retreat away from interaction even if they are not
| otherwise particularly introverted.
| cgriswald wrote:
| I had an ex that was sort of like this. She wasn't necessarily
| abusive, but she needed everyone to like her and the people
| that already did she didn't have to do anything to impress. I
| interpreted it as a deep insecurity resulting in really fake
| behavior: a mask as a sibling poster said.
| S_A_P wrote:
| Maybe this is oversharing, but maybe not. I have shades of this
| in myself. I have a much smaller friend group than many folks
| and a cynical take on most peoples motivations. I can say that
| some of why I feel this way is just "how Im bent" and some is
| from childhood experiences of having my trust betrayed or my
| naivety taken advantage of. Throw in a bit of unpredictable mom
| behavior and I generally dont want to owe anything to anyone.
|
| When I first meet people Im more than happy to share, give of
| myself, etc. Usually I will either feel that gestures are not
| reciprocated, or taken for granted, so I pull back. Ive
| wondered if I feel like Im expecting too much of my generosity
| and I think Ive been guilty of that before. At this point
| though I think I have reflected enough and changed to where
| this is not the case.
|
| Long term- I feel like being social requires me to "be on"
| which is exhausting to me. I would rather only see people when
| I can be decent company so I end up seeing people much less
| than more socially adept folks...
| atotic wrote:
| I can relate to some of your quirks. I am now 50+, with 3
| kids, and I've left most of the quirks behind.
|
| I used to always try to please others. My dysfunctional
| family liked it that way. It made their life easier. That was
| one of the last quirks to go. It was only after being forced
| into being assertive to defend my kids, I've realized that it
| is ok to stand up for yourself. Life's been much better
| since, surprisingly, most people appreciate assertiveness.
| And being assertive is not nearly as exhausting as being
| nice.
|
| It was a long journey, started with therapy 25 years ago.
| adamc wrote:
| You might just be an HSP: https://www.amazon.com/Highly-
| Sensitive-Person-Thrive-Overwh...
|
| I've had this problem in many contexts. Some of it stems from
| childhood circumstances, but it's also that I often read
| people better than they seemingly know themselves, i.e.,
| noticing anger that they don't think they have. This can
| cause a lot of stress.
| MeinBlutIstBlau wrote:
| From the about portion of that, it mostly reads like
| symptoms of people with Schizoid Personality Disorder or
| Avoidant Personality Disorder. While it can be a good
| survival trait in the grand scheme of things, culturally in
| the US it's as useful as being born poor.
| adamc wrote:
| It's pretty different. My kid had it, and there were some
| things we did early to help him study, but nothing like
| either of those disorders. It's more tied to very high
| empathy.
|
| However, you do have to learn how to avoid taking on
| other people's emotional burdens.
| MeinBlutIstBlau wrote:
| I have the same issue as well. Often I feel like people are
| taking advantage of me. I feel like I have a good sense of
| people's intentions even before they say them. Also if I
| don't receive reciprocation in any way, it further reinforces
| to me the taking advantage of belief.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-01-15 23:03 UTC)