I don’t read enough to consider myself a nerd; I’m kind of ignorant. But… I do like nerd topics.

Huh? I explicitly said I would separate self defense for both sexes, because I believe those aren’t what we are talking about. I wasn’t defending or excusing “women”.

Also, both women and men kill because of serious mental disorders (‘insanity’ in legal terms in the U.S.). How many of those maternal infanticides can be explained by post-partum psychosis or similar conditions? I wouldn’t count murders by insane people (from neither sex).

I suspect you’re not as unbiased as you’d think…

How many of those were self-defense (from either sex)? I wouldn’t mix them for this discussion.

My battery usage says I spend around half my time on TikTok. I also spend some considerable time here on Lemmy and chatting on Discord, Signal, etc. The third place is for reading. Sadly, I spend more time than I would like on shopping apps, and the rest are usually in the ‘< 1%’ (phone settings, e-mails, etc.).

I guess the only healthy suggestion is reading.

Definitely the lunar effect, but that is still under study. There’s a documentary called “The Shark Side of the Moon” which follows a scientist trying to prove a lunar effect on sharks. There’s also some inconclusive evidence of a lunar effect on people with bipolar disorder; the full moon might trigger mania, probably due to excess light during nighttime. Context: >!People with bipolar disorder (known as ‘manic depression’ years ago) are very sensitive to light, substances, and many other things that can trigger manic or depressive episodes for them. The possible mania under the full moon may be a reason behind myths like werewolves and terms like ‘lunatic’.!<

I’ll edit if I find more.

Edit: I found another one which I would easily try or suggest to others if evidence-based therapies have failed.

Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) is a form of psychotherapy in which the person being treated is asked to recall distressing images; the therapist then directs the person in one type of bilateral sensory input, such as side-to-side eye movements or hand tapping. It is included in several guidelines for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Some clinical psychologists have argued that the eye movements do not add anything above imagery exposure and characterize its promotion and use as pseudoscience.

The moon haunts you.

I just commented this to some other person here. I’ll paste my answer; I hope that’s okay.

China, India, Peru, and Mexico, to name a few, have deeper and larger canyons. A similar one to the Grand Canyon is the Copper Canyon. It is located in Chihuahua, Mexico. It is four times larger and almost twice as deep as the Grand Canyon. It has many tourists’ activities, and you can even add other destinations to your journey if you visit it by train. It is a nice option while we all wait for the end of the almost-fascist/probably-fascist situation in the U.S.

China, India, Peru, and Mexico, to name a few, have deeper and larger canyons. A similar one to the Grand Canyon is the Copper Canyon. It is located in Chihuahua, Mexico. It is four times larger and almost twice as deep as the Grand Canyon. It has many tourists’ activities, and you can even add other destinations to your journey if you visit it by train. It is a nice option while we all wait for the end of the almost-fascist/probably-fascist situation in the U.S.

Important article about bats.

You reminded me of something I think no one has mentioned yet:

In philosophy and rhetoric, the principle of charity or charitable interpretation requires interpreting a speaker’s statements in the most rational way possible and, in the case of any argument, considering its best, strongest possible interpretation. In its narrowest sense, the goal of this methodological principle is to avoid attributing irrationality, logical fallacies, or falsehoods to the others’ statements, when a coherent, rational interpretation of the statements is available.

From: Principle of charity.

Applying this, I think we can interpret the *independent thinking" not as thinking without conditioning factors but as what is known as “critical thinking”.

Although some feelings are malleable through thinking, but yeah, others come from (and can only be worked by) different places (including the health of our body).

I believe ignorance is a common reason even among professionals. They only think of the grandiose traits; they confuse the vulnerable traits with BPD or MDD; and they think it has to be close to ASPD to be diagnosable.

My loved one developed NPD by having a terrible childhood and early teenage years with undiagnosed AuDHD. Bullying, rejection, isolation, school failures, etc. The solution was to start lying, manipulating, trying to get something (anything) going their way, seeking validation… They received a depression diagnosis only at first 🫥.

Did you know people with ASD score higher in vulnerable narcissism traits? That means this story could be common. Traumatized neurodivergent children are already at higher risk of developing mental disorders.

But no, nobody talks about NPD this way. It’s always about grandiose traits being dangerous for others (which can be part of the experience, but there’s so much more). I hope it changes someday.