this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2025

1076 points (98.9% liked)

2meirl4meirl

1227 readers

18 users here now

Memes that are too meirl for /c/meirl.

Rules:

Respect the community. If you're not into self-deprecating/dark/suicidal humor then this place isn't for you. Kindly just block and move on. This is just how some of us cope.
Respect one another.
All titles must begin with 2meirl4meirl. This is for multiple reasons. One is just so you can be lazy with titles but another is so people who aren't into this kind of humor can avoid it.
Otherwise just the general no bigotry, no dickishness, no spam, no malice, etc stuff.

Sidebar will be updated when I feel like and considering I'm Sadboi extraordinaire we'll see when that will be.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1076

2meirl4meirl (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

171 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 23 points 6 days ago

We keep asking why the average individuals mental health is on the decline and this is a big part of it.

Some of us have been doing this since we were children, replacing work with school. The only way you can manage all of this is by multitasking everywhere possible. You only socialize while at work or school, and all the while you're probably either working on something or you're on your phone. You clean and tidy at the same time as you cook. You speedrun your showers, a time that should be somewhat relaxing.

Even assuming you do actually get those full precious 8 hours of sleep, your brain isn't going to be rested enough.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Who's Hoover? Why do you have to do them?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Under US labor laws, it is more difficult to maintain one's sanity.

[–] [email protected] 94 points 1 week ago (3 children)

You can chose two. Any two, but only two.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Sleep and buy food, those are my picks.

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 72 points 1 week ago (14 children)

I think we should get better at budgeting our work time.

It may sound daunting at first but when you want to work eight hours, first think : "can I afford this eight hours of work? Shouldn't I rather be playing Monster Hunter?" and take good habits from there.

Maybe in the beginning try working 5 or 6 hours. Don't rush it, but keep your determination.

You'll slowly begin to perceive more opportunities as you grow in focus : "Instead of working another hour for my boss, I'll write my own TTRPG setting or hit that solo queue".

It's hard at first but others made it. Why wouldn't you?

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Why are people responding to your post like it's serious? It couldn't be more obvious satire if it had a blinking neon sign that said 'THIS IS SATIRE' next to it. Sometimes satire needs the '/s', but not when it is super obvious like this.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

One must consider that irony is lost in text, I do suggest a THIS IS SATIRE indeed. Remember we are at the internet and X exists so, you can find the wildest shit my man

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (13 replies)

[–] [email protected] 49 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Something has to give. It’s not possible to do everything every day.

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

I commute to work on foot while meditating.
Buy food on the walk home, and cook it while I socialize with my hoover.
I eat in the shower with my clothes on to avoid laundry, and I get 8 hours of sleep at work.

That way I can squeeze 2 full time jobs into one day and don't need a car, so I can afford to pay rent.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Dermatologists have confirmed many, many times that a daily shower is unnecessary for healthy skin. Hair experts also don't recommend a daily shampoo for most people.

That said... it can be hard to tell when you stink (olfactory saturation / incrementalism)... so I don't actually have a shower schedule recommendation.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 week ago (5 children)

No, you misread. They said shower once. Total. Not per day.

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 week ago (9 children)

The joys of living alone... I can live like a raccoon at a trash dump without anyone to judge.

My self-expectations go waaaaaay up as soon as someone is planning to visit/stayover. Laundry once every 3 weeks vs. twice a week, vacuum once a week versus every other day, wash up once or twice a week (by hand) vs. 3 times a day, throw out trash and recycling as infrequently as twice monthly (I do not produce that much waste at home) vs. every day (because of getting takeout more often). I do shower daily, before anyone accuses me of being filthy around other people.

load more comments (9 replies)

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Let's see. Earn a living, take care of yourself, take care of your household, and add in taking care of other people. That is only like four full time jobs.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 week ago (3 children)

This is because domestic labor, which allows for social reproduction, is unvalued and not compensated.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Rich people do in fact pay people to do that stuff. Really one salary needs to be able to support two people, or this society thing just doesn't work.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

An alternative is to compensate people for domestic labor performed in their own homes.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Free housing, free food, and a monthly allowance covers that, doesn’t it?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I’m gonna go out on a limb and assume you mean the housing, food and allowance provided by the breadwinner to the homemaker.

Theres a couple of problems with that. Number one, how tf do you both cut half the jobs and raise the wage by enough to double its present value? You’d have to be able to actually get rid of half the labor base and not have employers gobble up the money saved as profits.

Number two, how do you avoid the very real class distinctions involved in that arrangement in the past? To put a finer point on it, full time housewife was a descriptor reserved for the upper middle classes and above only.

Not least, but definitely third: how do you avoid, in a racist and misogynistic society, allowing labor and its benefits to become gendered and racialized?

What you said might seem like a fair trade for a specific breadwinner and homemaker pair (at a specific time, things change!), but it’s not a fix for a social problem.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

A loving family distributing workload, responsibility, resources, and money is apparently anathema to you.

racialized

How is race even relevant here?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

I promise you it’s not. Even in what I’m assuming is an idealized one income nuclear family that you’re alluding to, directly compensating the homemaker for the work required to reproduce that structure just gives the household more resources to distribute.

It also legitimizes the work of reproducing the socially necessary family structure without excluding homemakers from conversations of policy regarding workers rights.

Everyone wins.

I don’t think it’s very smart to exclude race from discussion of domestic labor in the western world especially America.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

A loving family distributing workload, responsibility, resources, and money is apparently anathema to you.

racialized

How is race even relevant here?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I don't know man, you figure it out.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Okay, directly compensate people for their domestic labor.

If that’s a bridge too far or if concerns over efficiency come up, provide community services to make that labor easier and cheaper for everyone.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I think you could potentially package that as UBI.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Eh, possibly? The biggest benefit of direct payments comes from people not working as much and instead doing the shit they need to do, weather that’s get the kids handled, do their own laundry and dishes or just go out and take a walk and those are the same benefits as a ubi.

The problem with conflating compensation for domestic labor with ubi is that compensating domestic labor accomplishes more structural goals which is a huge deal because the problems of domestic labor are structural.

One example is that on a fundamental level compensating people for domestic labor values that labor. It can’t just be shit you’re expected to do if someone cares enough about it to pay you for it. That aspect also addresses lots of racial and gendered problems with domestic labor.

Another benefit is that now the state (by dint of its distributing payments) has a stake in social reproduction and families that’s direct and not mediated through the lens of moral or religious values.

The problem with ubi is that it relies on markets to figure out how to fix shit by just giving the currency of markets to people. That works pretty well, because those markets are what’s ultimately causing people to suffer, so giving them resources to not be beaten by the market helps a lot, but it’s acting without direction or state power, effectively fighting with at best one hand tied behind your back. I think it’s more accurate to say it’s like private military contracts, money spent with the hope something happens but no real goal or idea how to actually accomplish what you want.

As I said though: it would be good if people had more money.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I'm thinking more in terms of implementation. I can't imagine a world in which accurately tracking domestic labour would be possible, or desirable. And you can see how giving women more money for domestic labour just because they're "supposed" to do more is very flawed at the individual level, even if seems logically sound at the demographic scale. Honestly it's been years since I gave this much thought. I know making payments to the women in households works better in LEDCs with very strict gender roles.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I don’t think the payment needs to be gendered or even tracked closely but if you’re worried about a lack of means testing you could go full clintonite demon mode, scale it against household size and distribute it as a tax credit.

E: you could also do the Industrial Revolution for housework and provide community laundry service, grocery delivery, hot meal distribution and handyman work instead of cash payments for dealing with all that crap yourself.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Now add to that

dripping and picking up the kids from school
dressing them up for school
cooking dinner for them and coaching after them
giving them a bath
putting them to need and reading them a story
ACTUALLY SPENDING TIME AND PLAY WITH THEM

How is that even possible? No wonder that people are having less kids

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Also handling 2 hour meltdown because you put the wrong thing in their lunchbox.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments