this post was submitted on 05 May 2025
1405 points (98.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

7558 readers
2692 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Alt-text:
I think a lot about how we as a culture have turned “forever” into the only acceptable definition of success.

Like... if you open a coffee shop and run it for a while and it makes you happy but then stuff gets too expensive and stressful and you want to do something else so you close it, it’s a “failed” business. If you write a book or two, then decide that you don’t actually want to keep doing that, you're a “failed” writer. If you marry someone, and that marriage is good for a while, and then stops working and you get divorced, it’s a “failed” marriage.

The only acceptable “win condition” is “you keep doing that thing forever”. A friendship that lasts for a few years but then its time is done and you move on is considered less valuable or not a “real” friendship. A hobby that you do for a while and then are done with is a “phase” - or, alternatively, a “pity” that you don’t do that thing any more. A fandom is “dying” because people have had a lot of fun with it but are now moving on to other things.

| just think that something can be good, and also end, and that thing was still good. And it’s okay to be sad that it ended, too. But the idea that anything that ends is automatically less than this hypothetical eternal state of success... I don’t think that’s doing us any good at all.

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago

The best definition of success I heard was from Earl Nightingale -

Success is the progressive realization of a worthwhile goal.

Doing something because you want to do it--and it betters yourself, your family, or your community--makes you successful.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Seems to me a logical extension from our capitalist (line must go up) and Christian (stay in line or go to hell) cultural shit pile of a country.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

Nah that's wrong, this is pervasive in every culture and throughout history. Every generation complains about the next because they don't do the same things the same way as the previous one. Entire countries did this, a kingdom that was less prosperous or lost territory was failing and in decline.

I think the root cause is an innate human fear of change and loss.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 day ago (14 children)

This reminds me of a friend who opened a bakery. The business was successful, and the food was good, but she decided to give it up after a few years when she and her husband started a family.

I don’t consider that a “failure” by any definition. For her, it was a great experience that had run its course.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 day ago

But she didn't make infinity+1 dollars so what was even the point

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What happened to the bakery? Did she sell it or transfer ownership to someone else?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

She didn’t own the building. Last I saw, there was an ice cream shop in the space. It was a good one, too. I think that location is lucky.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 23 hours ago

This.

I would rather have things to end and turn into good memories, rather than having it turn to shit.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Isn't this more about things falling apart when the person wanted to continue doing it? If I want to run a shop but it doesn't work financially, then my plan has failed.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago

Yeah, I think you're right here: it's all about intent. If someone starts a business, it does well, but then they end it because they want to do something else, is not a failure. If they wanted the business to keep going, but people weren't buying enough of their product to keep the doors open, that's a failure.

You could do the same with any of the examples. It's not a failure if the people are happy to stop or it lasted as long as could reasonably be expected, but if it ends before the people wanted it to, that's a failure. The rocket that lifts its payload to orbit, then shuts off and falls back to earth is a success. But no one says "Well, the rocket ran great halfway to the planned orbit, so even though it and the payload fell back to earth, it was successful."

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Yeah, the OOP is a serious cope. They are basically saying "nothing is ever a failure in the world of unicorn sprinkles, weeeeee!" They are invalidating people's negative emotions about failure by trying to reframe it - but this is the behavior of narcissists who never want to admit they have failed at anything.

It's okay to fail. It sucks. It hurts. It happens. That's life. Accept it, learn from it, and move on.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago

Yeah, most of his examples really don't work. As long as you make more money than you put in, any business is successful, and if you terminate it without going bankrupt or accruing debt, it's not failed, it's just closed. Same for a writer, you write a couple of books, they sell enough to cover the costs, then stop because you don't care anymore, nobody's gonna call you failed.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago

This reminds me of Sand Mandala

Once complete, the sand mandala's ritualistic dismantling is accompanied by ceremonies and viewing to symbolize Buddhist doctrinal belief in the transitory nature of material life.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

This feels like moving the goalposts.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 day ago (3 children)

we as a culture have turned “forever” into the only acceptable definition of success.

I really don't agree with the premise, and would encourage others to reject that worldview if it starts creeping into how they think about things.

In the sports world, everything is always changing, and careers are very short. But what people do will be recorded forever, so those snapshots in time are part of one's legacy after they're done with their careers. We can look back fondly at certain athletes or coaches or specific games or plays, even if (or especially if) that was just a particular moment in time that the sport has since moved on from. Longevity is regarded as valuable, and maybe relevant to greatness in the sport, but it is by no means necessary or even expected. Michael Jordan isn't a failed basketball player just because he wasn't able to stay in the league, or even that his last few years in the league weren't as legendary as his prime years. Barry Sanders isn't a failed American football player just because he retired young, either.

Same with entertainment. Nobody really treats past stars as "failed" artists.

If you write a book or two, then decide that you don’t actually want to keep doing that, you're a “failed” writer.

That is a foreign concept to me, and I question the extent to which this happens. I don't know anyone who treats these authors (or actors or directors or musicians) as failures, just because they've moved onto something else. Take, for example, young actors who just don't continue in the career. Jack Gleeson, famous for playing Joffrey in the Game of Thrones series, is an actor who took a hiatus, might not come back to full time acting. And that's fine, and it doesn't take away from his amazing performance in that role.

The circumstances of how things end matter. Sometimes the ending actually does indicate failure. But ending, in itself, doesn't change the value of that thing's run when it was going on.

| just think that something can be good, and also end, and that thing was still good.

Exactly. I would think that most people agree, and question the extent to which people feel that the culture values permanence. If anything, I'd argue that modern culture values the opposite, that we tend to want new things always changing, with new fresh faces and trends taking over for the old guard.

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

But what people do will be recorded forever, so those snapshots in time are part of one's legacy after they're done with their careers.

That's just the same with extra steps. Rather, you should ask "But was it fun?".

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago (6 children)

On Wikipedia, an article for a deceased person reads, “[The deceased] was,” while an article for a TV show that has ended reads, “The Office is

Feels kinda related in some way

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

I need a thousand more accounts just to upvote this

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Zink 6 points 1 day ago

Such a good way to put it. And I have focused on something similar for myself. Literally everything is temporary.

I tend to be a planner, a saver, the person who never uses consumable items in games, and the person who will avoid using an item they like so that it will last longer.

It’s helped me allow myself to enjoy today more, and spend more of my time doing things I want to be doing.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yup. And god forbid you start a small business that's successful and decide to pay your employees a good wage and set aside a fair amount of profit for yourself. That's loser talk. You need to go public or sell the business for a giant payout at the expense of your employees, and then you have to keep making more money every year for shareholders, or else they'll consider you a failure and jump ship

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Idk, being sad about and grappling with the impermanent nature of things is kinda a fundamental part of being human.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

When I was young I used to like sculpting in modeling clay. After I had made whatever it was and shown it to my friends, I'd smush it up and make something else. I had a constant stream of people trying to get me to change my medium so that stuff could be made permanent, but I didn't like the feel and I was fine with the pieces being temporary.

There are a lot of things like that. People make ice sculptures or do performance art. People enjoy an experience, sometimes as simple as a sunset. Yes, some of those people will try to capture the moment, say with a photograph, but lots of people are okay with the ephemeral.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Maybe it’s not fundamental and it’s just a phase that doesn’t last forever :P

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago

I think in some cases it's driven by capitalism. Your business didn't make you money forever? Failed. Your books stopped selling and you didn't make millions from what you published? Failed. Your show was good for a couple of seasons, but outlived it's hype? Failed

There are other scenarios line you mentioned, marriage or hobbies, that AREN'T about money. But the ones that involve profit follow that.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›