this post was submitted on 05 May 2025
1470 points (100.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

7576 readers
1094 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
 

SOURCE - https://brightwanderer.tumblr.com/post/681806049845608448

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Working in medicine, especially emergency medicine, I have to hold on to this kind of mindset very tightly. I see death frequently. I have had infants die in my care, and there is nothing I could have done to save them. I have had frail, miserable, elderly people in my care that have been kept alive through titanic and terrible measures, and their lives would have been so much better overall if they had been allowed to pass peacefully a few years earlier.

I saw another post yesterday about the old and infirm lying in nursing homes, staring at the ceiling, coding, then being dragged back to life by the heroic efforts of the staff and the ER....just to go back to staring at the ceiling for another year.

It seems counterintuitive as a physician (in training), particularly in emergency medicine where our whole job is to steal from the reaper, to advocate for sooner, more peaceful, more autonomous deaths. I have always been a proponent of physician-assisted suicide because I have seen too many people whose lives would have been better if they had been shorter.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

saw another post yesterday about the old and infirm lying in nursing homes, staring at the ceiling, coding, then being dragged back to life by the heroic efforts of the staff and the ER....just to go back to staring at the ceiling for another year.

That explains a lot about the state of software these days.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

I believe you are making a joke, but I realize that I should explain the terminology.

Someone "coding" means that their heart or breathing stopped and "calling a code" means getting all the relevant equipment and personnel to do CPR to make them not dead anymore. (CPR is quite literally necromancy and you cannot convince me otherwise.)

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

What feels weird is just how much of fictional media fights in favor of this concept. A hundred evil rich people wanting to live forever, not realizing the terrible consequences behind their immortality elixirs.

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

The immortality elixirs usually come with some amount of eternal youth or prevention of illness. If someone is healthy and able to interact with the world, that's one thing. But someone with lung metastases or emphysema who is just lying there, drowning in their own lungs for however long....that is a life not worth living. If you could stay healthy forever, then being alive forever would just be a test of your tolerance for loss.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

Misses the point of marriage, but other than that it's an awesome glimpse into a more sane future

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

We also don't need to see failure as a wholly bad thing. If your hypothetical business closes down because you couldn't afford to keep it open, it DID fail, but if it ended up making your mental health better to not have all that stress, then it lead to a good thing.

Maybe I'm too realist and literal.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago

Very good perspective and this is actually similar to some of the ideas of Buddhism. Everything in this life is temporary, enjoy it while it lasts.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

At the hill's foot foot Frodo found Aragorn, standing still and silent as a tree; but in his hand was a small golden bloom of elanor, and a light was in his eyes. He was wrapped in some fair memory: and as Frodo looked at him he knew that he beheld things as they once had been in this same place. For the grim years were removed from the face of Aragorn, and he seemed clothed in white, a young lord tall and fair; and he spoke words in the Elvish tongue to one whom Frodo would not see. Arwen vanimelda, namarië! he said, and then he drew a breath, and returning out of his thought he looked at Frodo and smiled.

'Here is the heart of Elvendom on earth,' he said, 'and here my heart dwells ever, unless there be a light beyond the dark roads that we still must tread, you and I. Come with me!' And taking Frodo's hand in his, he left the hill of Cerin Amroth and came there never again as living man.

J.R.R. Tolkien, The Lord of The Rings, The Fellowship of the Ring, Book 2, last paragraph of Chapter VI: Lothlórien. I bolded the last 8 words.

Aragorn knows to let go, while deeply, profoundly, cherishing what was. Be like Aragorn.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 days ago (12 children)

About marriage: the whole concept reside in the mutual promise of a "forever after". If that's not your thing, totally fine. But then you wouldn't engage in it in the first place? In that sense, the marriage would indeed have failed (to deliver on its core premise).

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

Putting aside an afterlife, common wedding vows have "for better, for worse, ... in sickness and in health, until death do us part." So at least for people using those vows, they are committing to stay together until one of them dies. A divorce would mean a failure to follow through with that commitment.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This translates to tv shows too to prove the point.

Tv shows that only have a few seasons that are high quality start to finish are so much better than tv shows that go on and on and on and on.

For example, the simpsons, whilst an excellent show, should have ended many seasons ago. It's 30 odd seasons in, and it's stale. It's a little funnier recently, but i dont think it will ever be as big as it was.

I would consider it a failed show now but a successful show back when it was popular.

So it's pretty much proof of the point that forever is not the definition of success.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Open ended and no another season planned? Fuck em.

Great TV show that ended well? Sign me up.

This post wasn't sponsored by Good Place (seriously, go watch it, and watch The Selection right after).

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

The good place is such a motherforking good show

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Don't be afraid to enter the water knowing that you are not going to swim forever.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I think the fear isn't simply exiting the pool, its drowning.

The "coffee shop" analogy breaks down when you look at the before - assuming debt, developing skills, building business relationships - and after - owing more than you earn, filling for bankruptcy, hemorrhaging staff, going back to being a wage earner rather than an owner-operator.

Same with marriage. You get older and slower and tireder, you have this shared history that doesn't exist between anyone else, you have shared assets that can't easily be divided up, you have a shared family.

These aren't just whims, they're economic events and deeply psychological ones, too. Bad ones. They are describing a material decline in your quality of life.

Yeah, the fixation on nostalgia and fandoms is bad for us as a society. No, you shouldn't feel leashed to your hobbies... or your job or your relationships. But there's also feelings of stability and reliability and security that comes with an enduring institution in your life. Knowing you can substitute experience for raw energy and you don't have to relearn a trade or another person or rules to a new game from scratch has value. It pays dividends.

You don't want to get into the water and find out you need to relearn how to swim. Especially when you've so far from shore.

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

This is actually rather poignant.

By this standard, "successful" companies simply haven't failed yet.

It's standard that in human experience, we will fail at things. It happens, it happens often, and it will continue to happen. Failing at something is the first step. Without failure, how would we ever know how to "succeed"?

This doesn't, and shouldn't, imply that we are bad at a thing, or that we can't become good at it, or that we should give up and stop trying. It also doesn't and shouldn't imply that we should continue to try. "Failure" is just an outcome, whether that is good or bad is entirely up to the viewer to decide.

I would argue that failure is simply a mental/social concept. Things simply happen. "Success" or "failure" is entirely dependent on those who had some interest in what specifically happened. Even if you're trying to achieve a specific outcome, whether you do or not is entirely inconsequential. You tried to achieve an outcome by doing x, y, or z, and then a, b, and c occurred. Whether a, b, and c are the outcome that was desired or not is not a consequence that the universe cares about.

So much of this is simply social constructs.

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

I agree with you that failure can be viewed as something natural and even positive in many cases. But the text was more about branding anything that doesn't last as a failure. It suggests that the fact that something has an ending doesn't necessarily mean it was a failure, even though it is often labled as such.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, I kinda went off on a tangent there....

My brain is weird

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Yeah, brains do that.

[–] [email protected] 125 points 2 days ago (25 children)

Agree with most of these I guess, but marriage specifically is the one thing that's intended to be forever. Til death do us part and all that jazz.

[–] [email protected] 66 points 2 days ago

There’s nothing wrong with forever, but it shouldn’t be some sort of “standard” we hold everything to.

[–] [email protected] 54 points 2 days ago

The "death do us part" thing is a tradition, but marriage is a legal status. Not everyone is going to follow that tradition, and surely you wouldn't argue this ought to bar them from the legal status

[–] [email protected] 43 points 2 days ago (12 children)

I think it definitely applies to relationships. It does you and any of your partners a disservice to say your relationship was only a success if one of you died.

A person isn't a thing you possess. They have needs that grow and change with them. If those needs ever stop being compatible with the relationship, then the relationship should end. That's not failure. It's wanting the person you love to be happy.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Depends on the situation, marriage is something I would see as for life so that absolutely is a failure. The business it would depend, if you are bankrupt that is a failure but if you choose to sell it as you are not enjoying it any more than that is more comparable to retirement.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

Depends on the situation

I would say rather it depends on the mode of "failure".

marriage is something I would see as for life so that absolutely is a failure

Nah, people can change a lot even within a couple of years, let alone their entire lives. Sometimes it just so happens that people are no longer compatible, or grow bored of each other, whatever. What I would consider a failed marriage is if it was abusive from the start or otherwise made one of the spouses unhappy, or if it ended because of some gross misconduct (cheating, domestic violence, etc). If a marriage was fun for a while and ends amicably I'd say it's a success overall. Consider the alternative: the marriage becomes a chore, spouses start to hate each other and be miserable, but continue living together just because "marriage is for life"? That's exactly what I call a failed marriage, not one which ended on good terms.

if you are bankrupt that is a failure

If you are bankrupt because you did some stupid/illegal shit, then yeah. If the circumstances changed to the point that the business couldn't continue being profitable, it's totally fine to downsize or even close the business. If you performed some services or sold some goods that made people happy for a while it is a success. Once again, consider the alternative: the business is no longer profitable but you continue running it, paying out of pocket?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

I don’t think it’s personal failure if it entails people/places/things you cannot control. You cannot control the economy, so if it goes belly up and you file for bankruptcy it isn’t your personal failure. You cannot control your partner, so if they start being abusive, it’s not your personal failure to leave them. I think success is being able to adapt to what you can’t control, and failure is not living in reality and trying to make fetch happen.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

"If you're not growing. You're dying "

[–] [email protected] 64 points 2 days ago (15 children)

Reminds me of last week when everyone was talking about how Bluesky is worthless because it's just going to go the way of Twitter. And I'm like, Twitter was a good thing for like 15 years.

If Bluesky follows that same pattern, great.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 hours ago

I don't like the pattern of having to pay a search cost, then finally getting everything set up, and then they gradually enshittify until the process repeats. I'd rather just have stable infrastructure, like email.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago (7 children)

I think you are looking into things in a non healthy way.

You are right that success and failure are not binary. Furthermore, every system, be it physical, living, or social, fails sooner or later.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to not fail for as long as possible, for if something brings joy or safety it's continued success is important. It follows that if something that's important to someone fails it's healthy to morn it and to try to learn from it to not repeat the same failure.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 71 points 2 days ago
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

"Something isn's beautiful because it lasts forever." - some robot

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 days ago

Happily Ever After only exists if you happen to die at the happiest moment of your life.

[–] [email protected] 51 points 2 days ago (15 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.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I do think it betrays society's lack of present-focused mindfulness. I've had a handful of friendships that I thought would go on to be quite strong and longlasting, but they fizzled out after a while. That's not to say they were bad or failed friendships. I'm grateful for the time I experienced with them.

load more comments
view more: next ›