[HN Gopher] Dull Men's Club
___________________________________________________________________
Dull Men's Club
Author : herbertl
Score : 224 points
Date : 2025-06-16 18:07 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
| zh3 wrote:
| I will exclude myself from this club by finding it interesting
| enough to comment on.
| andyjohnson0 wrote:
| > I will exclude myself from this club by finding it
| interesting enough to comment on.
|
| I immediately thought of the interesting number paradox
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interesting_number_paradox
| kergonath wrote:
| I find some posts interesting, but most comments utterly stupid
| and a huge waste of time, although there is an occasional gem.
| romanhn wrote:
| Reminds me of the Dullest Blog in the World
| (https://dullestblog.com), which I frequently checked out more
| than 20 years ago. Hilarious to see a new entry just a couple
| years back.
| agnishom wrote:
| Fascinating. The blog claims to be dull, and I am sure it is:
| but, it is no different from 'influencer content' except that
| those come with audiovisuals.
| silisili wrote:
| Aw man, this sounded like just my kind of place. But...
|
| > It's a sentiment eagerly embraced by The Dull Men's Club.
| Several million members in a number of connected Facebook groups
| strive to cause dullness in others on a daily basis.
|
| Apparently I'm too dull to even have a FB account. I know it's a
| bit tongue in cheek, but in the name of maximum dullness,
| something with UX closer to this site seems much more appropriate
| than a Facebook group.
| reg_dunlop wrote:
| I guess this explains my affinity for nocss.club
| jayemar wrote:
| There's a Lemmy community: https://lemmy.world/c/dull_mens_club
| sandworm101 wrote:
| I think once you are features in a guardian article, you arent
| dull anymore. Building model airplanes in a shed is dull. Being
| so good at building them that journalists take time to visit you
| is not.
| chubot wrote:
| I don't think building model airplanes is dull. I'd say doom
| scrolling and para-social behavior are the modern dull things
| BizarroLand wrote:
| This is pretty true. Brilliance is marked at many levels by
| not doing what everyone else does, after all.
|
| It's also marked by doing what other people do better than
| they do.
|
| Lonerly contrarianism is not a cornerstone of brilliance.
| kergonath wrote:
| > I think once you are features in a guardian article, you
| arent dull anymore.
|
| Come on, the Graun is the epitome of dull middle class.
| HamsterDan wrote:
| Your standard for dull is too high. Most of the world does not
| create anything. The mere fact that you're creating something,
| even if it is an amateurish model airplane, is already cooler
| than what most of the world does with their free time.
| ecshafer wrote:
| The Dull Men's Club group of facebook is actually oddly
| interesting. I would classify it more as a group who point out
| the very small oddities of every day life that are not very
| interesting. There is a post where someone saw two geese with 42
| bay geese, another where the rental company fixed a door with a
| piece of pool noodle. Its more like a "huh that's kind of weird I
| guess" group.
| RajT88 wrote:
| It's a bit like reading this site...
|
| Gentlemen, have you heard The curious tale of Bhutan's playable
| record postage stamps (2015)?
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44054775
| deepfriedchokes wrote:
| That's not dull that's fascinating.
| RajT88 wrote:
| Hello, fellow dull traveler.
| gambiting wrote:
| I had to block it because I realized it just completely
| overtook my feed and 99% of it was in that "interesting but
| ultimately forgettable within 30 seconds of reading it" zone
| that's filling up social media. I mean it lived up to its name
| - it's very "dull" if vaguely interesting.
| skeeter2020 wrote:
| this is the part of the internet that everyone would be
| better off avoiding: not bad but no long-term value. When the
| internet was novel and your engagement limited these were
| rarer, cool things to share (often face to face!). Now this
| content is internet sugar that will be the health crisis of a
| generation.
| kalleboo wrote:
| Isn't that most of Hacker News as well? "Oh that's an
| interesting technical solution - which is completely
| irrelevant to the work I'm doing"
| brudgers wrote:
| The standard on Hacker News is _intellectually
| interesting_.
|
| "I saw geese," ordinarily wouldn't meet it (though in
| imagined contexts it would, of course).
|
| Or as described in _The New Yorker_ , HN is often about
| performative erudition, as perhaps is the case with this
| GEB'ish sentence.
| nottorp wrote:
| Nothing is completely irrelevant. It's just very hard to
| point out when and where some post on HN about properly
| frobnicating a wickie [1] server in a data center in
| South Baluchistan will subtly help your development
| decisions at your current or future job.
|
| [1] What is a wickie server? Damned if i know. But I'm
| sure there is someone on HN who has done one.
| strken wrote:
| The neat thing about HN is that I can nearly always find
| at least one thing on the front page that's useful to me,
| especially if I read the discussion.
|
| Just looking through now, Canine is interesting because
| it's similar to Dokku, which I already use. I might
| consider using Canine in a similar role in the future if
| I want k8s with buildpacks.
|
| The Dull Men's Club groups aren't like that. The needle
| to hay ratio is far worse. It's all "huh, cool"
| coincidences and mysterious objects, but nobody really
| intends to show the world anything useful.
| colechristensen wrote:
| I'd agree with you if there was anything else of value on my
| facebook feed.
| AuthorizedCust wrote:
| I cannot think of anything better than a 99% dull feed.
|
| Part of the point of DMC content is a solace from everyday
| stressors. That's a factor in why divisive topics--politics,
| religion, etc.--are discouraged when "main points" of a post.
| xelxebar wrote:
| One of my favorite books is The Mezzanine[0], which takes place
| entirely as a man ascends a single elevator but spins off onto
| all kinds of tangents that comment on and express exuberance
| about the most mundane things.
|
| There's an entire thread on the evolution of stapler design,
| elaborations on the invention of perforations, and abundant
| self-reflection. It's almost like a hybrid of Leonard Read's
| "I, Pencil" and Hegel.
|
| There's something magical about paying close attention to the
| mundane, IMHO.
|
| Praise dullness!
|
| [0]:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mezzanine
| stiglitz wrote:
| Speaking of paying close attention to the mundane, it's an
| escalator.
| ThisNameIsTaken wrote:
| Wow, that book sounds like a mix of Johan Harstad's footnote
| riddled Forsaken/The Red Handler (and who's Max, Mischa &
| Tetoffensiven even is about 'idling') and George Perec's An
| Attempt at Exhausting a Place in Paris[1]. As you say, the
| almost childlike fascination with the mundane is really
| valuable, it helps to guide my own eyes when wandering the
| city.
|
| [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Attempt_at_Exhausting_a
| _Pla...
| jenny91 wrote:
| This is my favourite book, it's hilarious and it kind of
| mirrors how I go about my life: pondering every little detail
| and how everything fits together.
|
| I'm not sure if it's the same thing as dullness though?
| freetime2 wrote:
| Recently some spinoff/copycat groups have also sprouted up.
| There's a "Dull Men's Forum", and a "Dull Men's Fun Club", for
| example, which post similar memes. And a "Dull Women's Club" as
| well (even though I also often see women posting in the Dull
| Men's Club, I suppose women on average have different
| sensibilities about where to draw the line between dull and
| interesting).
|
| I view this as a sign that the group has become too popular and
| lots its "edge" (which in this case was its authentic
| dullness), and now is just a place for farming likes and
| impressions from the broader FB community. A lot of it is quite
| derivative of other popular posts - "what is the purpose of
| this thing I found in my hotel/new house/grandma's house" posts
| seems to be a really common theme, for example.
| AuthorizedCust wrote:
| Some of these are _pages_ that post content stolen from
| "dull" groups or from other groups that are thematically not
| far off, like Aldi fan groups. As your view includes pages
| that are just mass-theft operations seeking Facebook payouts,
| you have selection bias.
| __alias wrote:
| My fave I remember seeing years ago was one where a man - over
| some long period of time - managed to park in every single
| parking space of a supermarket.
|
| I feel like this energy perfectly encapsulates what dull mans
| club is all about
| failingslowly wrote:
| I think that's fantastic. The dedication to such a trivial
| accomplishment!
|
| I suppose it's no different to people that grind computer
| games to get 100% completion. A little dopamine hit each time
| that number edges up, followed by the satisfaction of having
| finally completed a long-sought goal.
| kerrsclyde wrote:
| https://x.com/GarethWild/status/1386965962214289408
|
| Legendary.
| altacc wrote:
| It's the facebook version of r/mildlyinteresting on Reddit,
| which is also very popular. I think it's because this is the
| kind of thing that fills our days: small oddities and
| observations that spark our brain but aren't exceptional.
| AlecSchueler wrote:
| Except this one is gendered, so somewhat more exclusive?
| altacc wrote:
| I don't think it's exclusive. There is no gate keeping and
| there seems to be a high ratio of female post creators and
| commentators. Reddit is 60/40 male dominated, so is also
| skewered towards male content.
|
| Personally I see the name as more a jokey play on the
| stereotype of boring middle aged men who find such things
| interesting.
| AuthorizedCust wrote:
| > Personally I see the name as more a jokey play on the
| stereotype of boring middle aged men who find such things
| interesting.
|
| #nailedit
| potato3732842 wrote:
| If your demographic information is important to your
| contributions to a group like that you're doing it very
| wrong.
| AlecSchueler wrote:
| Would you say the same if it were the Dull Women's Club?
| potato3732842 wrote:
| >It's the facebook version of r/mildlyinteresting on Reddit,
| which is also very popular.
|
| By virtue of the implied difference in demographics that's
| still a categorical change.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| There's high praise in some movies or animation where they
| depict the mundane; the long sequence in Ghost in the Shell
| just showing the city as it is, away from the main story
| (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARTLckN9e7I), most of Studio
| Ghibli's films, a lot of Breaking Bad and especially Better
| Call Saul, where there's a lot of scenes of people just going
| about their day, John Travolta getting a can of paint and a
| pizza in the opening of Saturday Night Fever
| (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfwQ_7xqO7Y), etc.
| thinkingtoilet wrote:
| I laughed out loud at this line. It feels like something out of
| Futurama:
|
| >Australian member Andrew McKean, 85, had dullness thrust upon
| him.
| dalmo3 wrote:
| No banana for scale?
| smj-edison wrote:
| And no shoe size!
| danielodievich wrote:
| One of my most favorite places in nearby oregon is the community
| of Boring, OR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boring,_Oregon.
| Exceptionally lovely place. I've yet to visit it's sister town of
| Dull in Scotland, but I hope someday to remedy that, albeit with
| measured levels of excitement
| ahazred8ta wrote:
| Bland, Australia (NSW) joined the group in 2017.
| frakt0x90 wrote:
| Reminds me of the proof that all natural numbers are interesting.
| If there is some set of uninteresting natural numbers, there must
| be a minimal element of that set. It being the smallest
| uninteresting number is interesting which is a contradiction.
| rzzzt wrote:
| Why aren't all numbers in the set uninteresting? Did someone
| make a mistake when defining it?
|
| Perhaps the minimal element should be removed from the set;
| there will be plenty of members that still remain.
| Cerium wrote:
| Serious response? In that case the set still has a smallest
| member which can then be removed, if we keep going eventually
| there will be no uninteresting numbers remaining.
| leereeves wrote:
| The problem with that is the explanation of why each number
| is interesting becomes:
|
| the smallest member of the original set of uninteresting
| numbers
|
| the second smallest member of the original set of
| uninteresting numbers
|
| the third ...
|
| ...
|
| That version of "interesting" quickly becomes "not
| interesting". The concept simply defies mathematical logic.
| kbelder wrote:
| It reminds me about the logic puzzle of the criminal
| sentenced to death, where the judge says "you will be
| executed on or before Sunday, and you won't know what day
| it will be until we come for you."
|
| The criminal knows it can't be Sunday, because he would
| wake up on Sunday and know he was going to be executed
| that day. But if Sunday isn't possible, on Saturday he
| would know he was being executed that day; so Saturday
| wasn't possible either. The same reasoning can be
| repeatedly applied to every day between now and Sunday.
|
| It's obviously flawed reasoning (Surprise! they execute
| you on Thursday), but the flaw is difficult to
| articulate.
| jameshart wrote:
| This isn't how math works.
|
| When you get to the point in a proof of the irrationality
| of root two where you've demonstrated that if it is
| expressible as a fraction p/q, then both p and q have to
| be even, you don't then need to proceed to prove that if
| they're both even, then they both have to be divisible by
| four, and then if they're both divisible by four, that
| means they're both divisible by eight...
|
| I mean, you can, but you don't have to.
|
| You can just say 'if it's a rational number then it has a
| reduced form where p and q have gcf of 1, so if p and q
| would both have to be even, that is a contradiction'.
|
| Same with the 'set of uninteresting numbers'. If 'being
| uninteresting' is a property numbers can have, then the
| 'set of uninteresting numbers' exists, and it has a least
| member. Being the least member of the set of
| uninteresting numbers is interesting.
|
| You don't have to infinitely regress from here and get
| tied up in knots saying that surely there is some 'first
| truly uninteresting number' to prove that the set is
| actually empty - you can just see that you must have gone
| wrong somewhere. Either:
|
| 1) Being the least member of the set of uninteresting
| numbers isn't as interesting as we assume.
|
| or
|
| 2) 'Being uninteresting' is not a property numbers can
| have
|
| I think actually of the two, 1) is more likely the case.
|
| But that doesn't _defy_ mathematical logic. It is a
| _consequence of_ mathematical logic.
| leereeves wrote:
| There's a third option. The definition of uninteresting
| we're using may be flawed. Here's a quick stab at a more
| rigorous approach:
|
| We could start by defining a set of "all numbers that are
| uninteresting other than by membership or position in
| this set".
|
| That describes the set the proof naively called
| "interesting numbers" without the contradiction.
|
| Then we could create a second set with all members of the
| first set except those that are interesting because of
| where they are in that set (smallest, whatever). This is
| a new version of "interesting numbers" that approaches
| the version in the original proof but is, in human terms,
| less interesting. As you said, "Being the least member of
| the set of uninteresting numbers isn't as interesting as
| we assume."
|
| We could repeat that, making a sequence of sets that
| approach the definition of interesting in the original
| proof, but the definition of each set is progressively
| less interesting in human terms.
|
| Then if we really want to be rigorous, we could talk
| about "first degree interesting" (what most people mean),
| "nth degree interesting", or "asymptotically
| interesting", but the last one is an empty set.
| Dylan16807 wrote:
| 3) Numbers can be uninteresting, but the property is not
| binary.
| rzzzt wrote:
| If someone tasks me to create a set of
| even/prime/blue/rectangular/crunchy/uninteresting numbers
| I have two options:
|
| 1) I list each and every number that is part of the set.
| It is OK if the set is countably infinite, we can wait.
|
| 2a) I grab my special black box that receives a number
| and lights up a red or a green LED depending on whether
| the input is a member of my conjured up set or not;
|
| 2b) I grab the other special black box, this one has a
| single LED (to indicate it is switched on) and a push
| button which prints out the next member of the set on
| infinite 7-segment displays. The box is a bit wider than
| the 2a) unit.
|
| These are mostly traversable, e.g. my 2b) generator could
| be built from a counter and a 2a) tester, or my 2a)
| tester could use a table lookup backed by a 1) list for
| all I know.
|
| What they can/should not do is retroactively change their
| mind on the membership of a particular number:
|
| - It is either in the 1) list or not, no erasers, no
| backsies;
|
| - 2a) should always respond with the same LED for a given
| number, no moon phase lookups, no RNG, no checking of
| previous LED responses;
|
| - 2b) can not even be rewound so it is impossible to tell
| if it would produce or skip the number, should we coerce
| it somehow to start again (we can't).
|
| So using any of the two and a half mechanisms lead us to
| a set where the minimal element should have the same
| property as any other element: it is exactly as
| even/prime/blue/rectangular/crunchy or uninteresting as
| the rest of the set.
| Tade0 wrote:
| My algebra 101 professor made this exact argument.
| bee_rider wrote:
| Of course, it sort of a joke, and so having an element of
| surprise helps it. But really, the properties that make a
| number "interesting" should probably be defined from the
| outset. By including "the smallest member of any set is
| interesting," at the start, the joke is kind of blown because
| the result becomes obvious, right?
|
| Edit: oh, are there uninteresting reals?
| notnmeyer wrote:
| > The over or under toilet paper debate raged (politely) for two
| and a half weeks.
|
| i found this particularly confusing because we all know that
| "over" is the only sane choice.
| wccrawford wrote:
| Only if you don't have cats. If you have cats, "under" is the
| only sane choice.
| dgfitz wrote:
| If you have cats you've willing given up your sanity.
| GianFabien wrote:
| ouch! that is a catty comment.
| GianFabien wrote:
| Don't you love all the punctures in the paper?
| shiroiuma wrote:
| It depends on the cat, and how your home is set up. In my
| lifetime, I've only had one cat that played with the toilet
| paper. In my current place, the toilet is in a separate room
| by itself, and the door is kept closed, so the cat can't even
| get in there.
| robocat wrote:
| There must be a confounding variable: are you an engineer-type?
|
| What traits are correlated with overing?
|
| Do underers look at the world differently?
|
| And it is a false dichotomy. Some people just don't care what
| direction when they replace the roll - what's a suitable name
| for that clade? And then there's the people who use the floor
| and ignore the holder.
| notnmeyer wrote:
| overers see the world as it is and live to solve problems.
|
| underers are frantically trying to fix their broken lives.
|
| nihilists lacking opinions are empty shells.
| Volundr wrote:
| Mine is in the under configuration, due to being near an AC
| vent that will sometimes unspool the whole roll in the over
| configuration.
| bee_rider wrote:
| Vertical seems to tear better.
| calvinmorrison wrote:
| if you're interested in the opposite, finding the intrigue or
| fascinating in the seemingly mundane, you might be a candidate
| for the RR&R. The most recent topic was an elaborate history of a
| Oklahoma state senator based on some old telegrams found in a
| junk shop.
|
| https://www.ephorate.org/
| _fat_santa wrote:
| This is a cool concept but I have an issue with one being "dull"
| on a conceptual level. Personally I think that every single
| person on earth is both the dullest person you have ever met and
| the most interesting person on earth, it just depends on your
| perspective.
|
| I have friends that play DnD which I personally find very dull
| but hearing them talk about it, it's clear they do not see it the
| same way. Conversely I love cars and talking about cars and I can
| talk with another gearhead for hours on the topic, but the times
| my wife has listened in on my conversations she said it was the
| most boring thing she has ever heard in her life.
| kergonath wrote:
| > Personally I think that every single person on earth is both
| the dullest person you have ever met and the most interesting
| person on earth, it just depends on your perspective.
|
| You are most certainly right, but I don't think that this is in
| contradiction with how the Club works. Everyone is dull and
| interesting depending on the situation and the audience. The
| Club is for when you found or saw something interesting and
| important to you, but your audience disagree, does not notice,
| or does not care.
|
| Nobody _is_ fundamentally dull, but everybody is being dull at
| some point.
| hug wrote:
| I don't know why this perspective bothers me so much, but it
| does. This idea that people are alternatively dull or
| interesting feels wrong to me, on a kind of visceral level. So
| far so that I'm having trouble marshaling my thoughts enough
| that I can tell you _why_. It 's like there's an intuition gap
| so large I'm getting vertigo. Nothing here is intended to say
| that the way you feel about it is invalid, but I need to write
| out my own feelings in order to put my brain's feet back on
| solid ground.
|
| It feels entirely backwards to me that there is some kind of
| dull/exciting switch that flips and a person becomes dull or
| exciting, depending on whether the observer finds the topic the
| person is speaking about interesting. The one at fault (such
| that there is any) for the lack of interest isn't _usually_ the
| speaker, surely?
|
| I have a friend who works in a field that most people
| absolutely find completely uninteresting (and, to be frank, I
| am also uninterested in the field in general), but when we sit
| and have a pint after work and have a chat, I can't help but be
| engaged because there is more to learn about _everything_ , and
| while the technical minutiae of his trade is unexciting, the
| conversation is not. I know more about turbidity now than I
| ever expected or needed to, but I don't feel like it was time
| wasted.
|
| Swap me out for an analog of your wife, and the guy flips from
| interesting to dull? That seems unfair, for some reason, not
| that fairness should really ever into it. Just because an
| interest isn't shared doesn't mean it should be derided as
| dull, right?
|
| And, y'know, conversely, I know a dull guy. Like, I like to
| think I'm a good conversationalist. I can hold my own in a chat
| with basically anyone. But _this guy_. He sink-holes literally
| anything you try to say. One word answers. You can drag out the
| most maniacal story of the past few years of your life, a story
| that every single person you 've ever talked to about it has
| been engaged and you get a good back and forth and a bit of
| patter, but this guy: "Oh, cool". And he's like that with
| everyone. Play word association, you say salt, I say pepper,
| you say this guy's name, I say dull. All of this seems really
| mean, but I'm pretty sure he's _happy_ being that guy. I mean
| who knows what his actual inner thoughts about the matter might
| be, because you 'll never get him to say anything worth
| listening to about it.
|
| And this, I think, is probably the crux of why I'm so not on
| board with the way you see it. My friend and my boring friend
| are not the same, vis-a-vis in a dullness competition. They're
| not even in the same weight class.
|
| Anyway. Perspectives. Weird, huh?
| somenameforme wrote:
| Ah, but perhaps you're proving the point? Is it not possible,
| if not probable, that the fellow you're referencing simply
| considers _you_ dull? For instance I would, in general, tend
| to have little interest engaging with a good
| conversationalist, because I often find that that that,
| especially in an American context, boils down to inoffensive
| superficiality at length, owing to the nature of banter
| without purpose, which is what most conversation for the sake
| of conversation is.
|
| For one who enjoys engaging in such, I'd certainly appear
| dull, because I'm not going to partake in it, especially if
| one starts overtly using my name repeatedly, because I find
| it dull and artificial. By contrast, express a novel or
| distinct perspective on something I find relevant, mastery of
| some interesting skill or whatever, and we'd certainly be
| having some fun.
| bonoboTP wrote:
| Right. I think it's a different conception of being
| interesting or dull. It's probably the distinction between
| people-oriented and thing-oriented people.
|
| When some people say that a person can make a dull topic be
| interesting, they mean that the person can craft and
| narrate engaging human stories around the activity or
| topic. The payoff is not really learning or discussing the
| details of the topic itself but human failure, overcoming
| of struggle, human connections forming, or betrayal and so
| on. It just happens in the context of that hobby.
|
| On the other hand, thing-oriented people like two car guys
| or computer guys will just discuss that topic itself down
| to the tiny detail, and an outsider truly has very little
| gain from this. I've sat in bars discussing CS, programming
| language features, algorithms, math etc. deep into the
| night over beers with pals throughout college, and I'm
| aware that this is deeply off putting to most people-
| oriented people and would find it extremely dull. But as
| you say, it works the same way backwards. For me it's like,
| okay thanks for telling me what happened in the last days,
| you went to a party where normal party things happened,
| sure, but when do we get to the part where we talk about
| eternal themes that aren't bound to the here and now of
| whatever happened recently? Tall tales, one upmanship and
| namedropping things for street cred just feels so dull. Why
| not talk some substance?
| castlecrasher2 wrote:
| You're both saying the same thing. Seemingly dull people
| become interesting depending on the audience, particularly
| when the dullee actively interviews the duller.
| rramadass wrote:
| This seems to be a riff off of the "Diogenes Club" invented by
| Arthur Conan Doyle in his Sherlock Holmes Stories -
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diogenes_Club
|
| _" There are many men in London, you know, who, some from
| shyness, some from misanthropy, have no wish for the company of
| their fellows. Yet they are not averse to comfortable chairs and
| the latest periodicals. It is for the convenience of these that
| the Diogenes Club was started, and it now contains the most
| unsociable and unclubbable men in town. No member is permitted to
| take the least notice of any other one. Save in the Stranger's
| Room, no talking is, under any circumstances, allowed, and three
| offences, if brought to the notice of the committee, render the
| talker liable to expulsion. My brother was one of the founders,
| and I have myself found it a very soothing atmosphere."_
| RyanMathewson wrote:
| James May, former host on Top Gear, now has a show titled "James
| May and the Dull Men" (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt32651187). I
| find it delightfully dull to watch.
| SlowTao wrote:
| Yes, this is were I found out it is NOT a good idea to cook
| your curry in a washing machine.
| b0a04gl wrote:
| there's a kind of quiet intent behind the love for mundaneness.
| it's controlled input. predictable, low-stakes, non-escalating
| moments. in a feed wired for urgency and reaction, these neutral
| observations offer relief. one of way to stay connected without
| overhead. it's kinda not shallow but stable
| guicen wrote:
| There's something oddly comforting about this. In a world where
| everyone's trying to stand out, some people find peace in just
| noticing ordinary things. Maybe being "boring" is underrated. You
| don't always need a big story to feel connected. Sometimes it's
| enough to care about small details nobody else pays attention to.
| yeahwhatever10 wrote:
| https://youtu.be/eDr6_cMtfdA
| fiftyacorn wrote:
| I think its an age thing - you spend your youth thinking its
| important to fit in - but then reach a point where you realise
| you are who you are and just accept it
| TurboHaskal wrote:
| Maybe this is just me and my experiences but when I encounter
| people in the wild that seem dull I often assume they just have
| fringe interests that are kinda problematic to share with
| regular people they haven't built rapport with yet.
|
| Like they're probably into something weird or niche that
| doesn't translate well in casual conversation so they just keep
| it surface level until they figure out if you're their type of
| person.
| mafro wrote:
| One of the few Facebook groups I stayed in over time. It has a
| very British sense of self-deprecating humour. We're all amused
| by our mutual dullness.
| AuthorizedCust wrote:
| Would you believe both Dull Men's Club groups were created by
| Americans?
|
| No kidding.
|
| The one with the registered-trademark symbol--a Nebraskan who
| moved to the UK.
|
| The other one--a Texan.
| rester324 wrote:
| I am a dull man by every measure. I don't have interesting
| hobbies, I am not an influencer, I don't post interesting posts
| on social media and I don't travel a lot, I don't do extreme
| things, I barely have any money at the moment, I bore others, in
| fact when I try to amuse my colleagues or the opposite sex, my
| jokes regularly fall flat and even my voice is dull I believe.
|
| But after my kids were born I noticed something: my kids loved my
| voice, they listened to every sentence I made, they laughed at my
| quirky jokes I made and they loved when I sang to them or I
| brought them to the park or to the nursery and when I sat them on
| my neck. My wife took all that from me though, so now I need to
| fight to get my kids back.
|
| But the moral of the story is: dullness is a matter of
| perspective. Even if you think you are dull, chances are you are
| not. It's just the world such a place now that the bar is raised
| too high that most ordinary people can't cross even by jumping
| over the moon.
|
| So I don't care any more what others think of me. I came to
| accept my dullness and embraced it. If it bores others, I don't
| care.
| bmacho wrote:
| > But after my kids were born I noticed something: my kids
| loved my voice, they listened to every sentence I made, they
| laughed at my quirky jokes I made and they loved when I sang to
| them or I brought them to the park or to the nursery and when I
| sat them on my neck. My wife took all that from me though, so
| now I need to fight to get my kids back.
|
| > But the moral of the story is: dullness is a matter of
| perspective.
|
| Meh. Kids (or dogs) don't know better, they are just little
| love machines with _literally_ 0 knowledge outside of you. That
| doesn 't mean that dullness is a perspective, or they wouldn't
| benefit from it if you were just smarter, better, more
| interesting.
| rester324 wrote:
| Maybe, but you forgot to write what's the benefit...?!
| wvh wrote:
| Isn't that the whole point though - nobody wants to or has to
| live in a void. Maybe children would prefer different
| parents, and maybe parents would want different children.
| That's not how that works. You keep them alive, love them,
| and give them enough tools and knowledge for them to have a
| fighting chance on their own.
|
| I think the point of the OP was to say that you don't need to
| be the best thing since sliced bread to get some basic love
| and companionship, which is the message modern dating and
| social media are sending to a lot of us.
|
| You are enough, even if somebody in all resentfulness wants
| to have you believe otherwise.
| wvh wrote:
| I think this story sounds familiar to a lot of us, especially
| as men who likely spend less time on social media comparing and
| FOMOing. Let's hope you get your kids back too and somebody new
| will get enchanted by your "boring" voice.
| bonoboTP wrote:
| I obviously don't know anything about you beyond this comment
| but you chose to include a mention of your divorce, so I think
| it's not overstepping to try to connect these themes. To be
| blunt, could it be that being less dull would have improved the
| longevity of the marriage?
| kgwxd wrote:
| > in fact when I try to amuse my colleagues or the opposite
| sex, my jokes regularly fall flat
|
| Even the dullest of innocent jokes, delivered horribly, can
| get a chuckle in decent company. "Falls flat" means the
| "jokes" are inappropriate, mean, gross, *ist, etc. The phrase
| "colleagues or the opposite sex" is a tell.
| jen729w wrote:
| You know nothing about this man. Please don't judge them
| based on a casual comment in a forum. That's cruel.
| xeromal wrote:
| What the hell is this comment?
| lm28469 wrote:
| > I don't have interesting hobbies, I am not an influencer, I
| don't post interesting posts on social media and I don't travel
| a lot, I don't do extreme things, I barely have any money at
| the moment, I bore others, in fact when I try to amuse my
| colleagues or the opposite sex, my jokes regularly fall flat
| and even my voice is dull I believe.
|
| That's everyday life for the vast majority of people, we got
| tricked by smoke and mirrors on social media into thinking life
| has to be something it isn't, most of what you see there is
| fake in part or in whole. People should just enjoy what they
| have/are instead of burning out running after made up things
| other people pretend to be doing to be happy
| roland35 wrote:
| What's funny is when you actually know people who are
| influencers, it turns out their lives actually are nothing
| like what it is online! I think we are all a lot more dull
| than some would like to admit.
| te_chris wrote:
| I think their lives look extremely dull online too.
| Prisoners of the most mediocre algorithms
| everdrive wrote:
| You're both right. Being an influencer seems like the
| worst possible choice: all of the life-deranging
| detriments of fame without and of the prestige or wealth.
| zdragnar wrote:
| Isn't that what is so toxic about social media? You end up
| comparing your real life to the curated, best-possible-
| angle lives of your friends and (subjectively) famous
| people online.
|
| You consume the condensed moments from hours and days of
| time from other people's experiences in real time in your
| own life- you can see cute pets, exotic pets, funny
| moments, beautiful people all in a minute or five of
| boring, slow-ass real-time.
| echelon wrote:
| > other people pretend to be doing
|
| Not everyone works or thinks the same. Some goals and
| passions come from within, and for some people these can be
| the very reason for living.
|
| One infinitesimal, geologically small moment where the
| universe is awake and alive and available for you. The world
| is an infinite blank canvas, and it's full of adventure.
|
| Some people exist to do, build, or explore with their short
| time. Life is full of energy and opportunity to do so.
|
| Some of these people would find the "traditional life"
| inescapably boring.
| lm28469 wrote:
| Sure, but these people are actually "doing, building,
| exploring", not terminally online trying to sell you their
| lifestyle to make money from advertising and partnerships.
|
| For every genuine passioned "influencer" you have 100 000
| wannabes trying to scam you one way or another. And let's
| be generous, even if every single one of them was 100%
| genuine and well intentioned, that's still just a drop in
| the bucket, the extreme vast majority of people would fit
| in the "dull" category, and it's perfectly fine
| tboyd47 wrote:
| > But after my kids were born I noticed something: my kids
| loved my voice, they listened to every sentence I made, they
| laughed at my quirky jokes I made and they loved when I sang to
| them or I brought them to the park or to the nursery and when I
| sat them on my neck. My wife took all that from me though, so
| now I need to fight to get my kids back.
|
| You call yourself dull, but this short comment revealed the
| opposite picture. Kids are a lot more authentic than adults.
| Clearly they found a lot to enjoy about you.
|
| > My wife took all that from me though, so now I need to fight
| to get my kids back.
|
| There's an intense amount of suffering and courage in this
| statement which you tried to present in such a deadpan,
| flippant way.
|
| > So I don't care any more what others think of me. I came to
| accept my dullness and embraced it. If it bores others, I don't
| care.
|
| That's good, but I don't think you're actually dull or boring.
| Someone put that in your head and you accepted it.
| knowitnone wrote:
| "someone" we all know who but everyone is afraid to say it
| tboyd47 wrote:
| If he doesn't feel comfortable to name his abuser, I won't
| step forward to do it. It's his tale to tell.
| keysdev wrote:
| Much of that comes with age. I guess if you are a vampire or
| some sorta immortal, after a while you will also don't care
| what others think of you.
| johnnyanmac wrote:
| he managed to find a spouse interested enough to marry him.
| That's already 10 steps above many internet dwellers as of
| late. People who want to seem "not dull" for that exact goal.
|
| I also did read the piece and recognize this "Dull man's
| club" is anything but. It's simply a tongue and cheek name
| for niche hobbies. I'm sure the hackers of the 80's/90's
| would have fit right in.
|
| We sadly became more dull overtime in comparison as our
| hobbies all converged into the same few things. And even
| those few things could be interesting, but hobbies became so
| shallow. we watch TV but often don't analyze and critque it.
| We eat food but don't truly taste and savor its flavor. Being
| "dull" in my eyes means not truly interacting nor resonating
| with the things you do in your life.
| dyauspitr wrote:
| Removal of the no fault divorce law can't come fast enough.
| m463 wrote:
| Sort of reminds me of "The Last Lecture" on cliches.
|
| Here's a summary:
|
| Cliches work because they're typically right on the money.
| Plus, kids don't know most of them, so educators should use
| them. They're a new audience and they're inspired by cliches.
| jrgoff wrote:
| This comment reminds me of my own socially anxious belief that
| I am boring, that people don't want to hear what I have to say,
| etc. And I have had plenty of evidence to reinforce those
| beliefs. As I have been working through things in therapy
| though, I have realized that my wounded mind grabs on to those
| things that reinforce that negative belief and tends to be
| dismissive of things that would contradict it. I've also
| realized that because I have those fears/wounds I often
| interact with people in ways that are more likely to elicit
| disinterested responses - I often have a flat affect and emote
| little, display no enthusiasm when communicating about things
| that I care about because I expect that the other person won't
| be interested or care. I wouldn't be surprised if I
| subconsciously have chosen friends who re-inforce those beliefs
| as well, I think I sometimes feel uncomfortable when people do
| respond enthusiastically toward me.
|
| Some of my early experiences as an adult that broke my heart
| open a little were also with children - I don't have any of my
| own, but when my nephew and niece were young they were so open
| and enthusiastic and happy to see me it got past my wounded
| defense mechanisms.
| SunlitCat wrote:
| That's maybe one of the biggest helping things. Having the
| right audience and even if it is only one or two people (or
| kids). This can make a lot of difference.
| Den_VR wrote:
| I've never seen so many comments deserving of Dang's banhammer as
| some mixed into this discussion.
|
| The Dull Men's Club is an interesting curiosity of the world, but
| clearly one that evokes strong feelings in certain people.
| arethuza wrote:
| Worth noting that there is also the village of Dull in Scotland -
| twinned with Boring (Oregon) and Bland (Aus).
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dull,_Perth_and_Kinross
| tempodox wrote:
| In the middle of this wonderfully dull article, The Guardian
| botched it. They embedded a link in the text:
|
| > _Sign up for the fun stuff with our rundown of must-reads, pop
| culture and tips for the weekend, every Saturday morning_
|
| Way too exciting, it totally broke the flow for me.
| modeless wrote:
| Reminds me of /r/notinteresting
| https://old.reddit.com/r/notinteresting/top/?sort=top&t=all
| AuthorizedCust wrote:
| There are two Dull Men's Clubs on Facebook. This article covers
| both.
|
| Both have around 1.8M members. The smaller one features Andrew
| McKean, the main topic of that article. The other one--with the
| registered trademark symbol in the name on FB--appears to be more
| of a commercial enterprise, run by the Grover Click character.
|
| I learned that the article is wrong on a point. All contemporary
| Dull Men's Clubs are copycats. The original is from 1980 and no
| longer exists.
| knowitnone wrote:
| Bet the guardian would never write about the "Dull Women's Club"
| cmpxchg8b wrote:
| There's actually a large amount of women in the DMC FB group.
| Everyone is welcome.
| samirillian wrote:
| Yes.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-17 23:01 UTC)