@kevinofsolmira The reference photos of the “before” are basically peak limit whilst balding. They probably reach a point where it just looks better shaved off
When George Washington was inaugurated in 1789, he wore a relatively plain brown frock coat. To the modern eye, the garment may look fancy, but it was relatively constrained for a man of Washington's position.
Affluent Americans at the time tended to wear European fabrics, as centuries of textile tradition on that side of the Atlantic meant that their materials were finer, silkier, and more luxurious. Those who could afford to wear such materials often did, not just because they were more comfortable, but because they signaled status.
Washington rejected this convention for his inauguration, opting instead for a plain brown frock coat made from an American-made material, specifically one produced by a relatively new upstart in Connecticut. It's also notable that his outfit for that day was considerably more restrained than those of leaders in other Western nations.
For instance, check out this outfit on George III (slide one). In this 1762 coronation painting, we can see the British monarch wearing a gold damask coat with a velvet mantle lined and edged with ermine and trimmed in gold. Even his shoes featured solid gold buckles.
Washington opted for something simpler because he wanted to send two political messages. First, he wanted to support domestic industry (hence his request that the garment be made from American woolen broadcloth).
Second, he understood that the US was supposed to be a democratic republic, not a monarchy. Back in Europe, monarchs wore fancy ceremonial attire to reinforce their position in society. Washington, by contrast, chose something more restrained, signaling that he was not governing through divine right but rather through consent of the people.
Irish-born architect James Holban also understood this when he designed the White House in the Neoclassical style, drawing from Georgian and Palladian architecture. Neoclassicism was a rejection of Rococo, which had been fashionable among European monarchs and aristocrats in the preceding decades.
Most people will know Rococo from the photos of the lavish French palaces erected during the reign of Louis XV. Much like the elaborate ceremonial attire of European monarchs, these interiors were meant to impress upon people the wealth and power of European leaders. The visual grandeur reinforced the idea that these people fundamentally occupied a different social station from those they governed.
To be sure, the White House was much nicer than what ordinary Americans at the time would have occupied. But much like Washington's inauguration outfit, Hoban's design was meant to balance the dignity of the office with the republican ideal that political authority ultimately comes from the people. Our leaders are not above us; they are here to serve us.
That is why the White House was decorated in this relatively restrained way for almost 250 years, changing only recently. I have seen some on here suggest that glorifying the White House is meant to glorify the state, and thus the citizens. But this logic was historically used by dictators abroad, not US presidents.
They will not know the joys of your utopian high IQ paradise. They will not procreate and preserve their race for the future. They will put a corgi into a baby stroller when they are cold and need the warmth of a creature for their little souls. They will inject botox into their rotund cheeks to numb the pain of existence. They will shove shio pan buns down their throats from a 24 hour bakery on a high trust street as they check their stock portfolios through thick myopic glasses. They will will eat ramyun with loud, boisterous slurps as their only friend becomes a humanoid robot.
Fuck this Chinese job market.
Young people are getting absolutely fucked. No real opportunities, shit pay that barely covers rent, and you're expected to grind 996 like a dog. Overtime is mandatory, weekends are optional, and if you complain you get replaced by the next desperate grad.
Everyone's killing each other for scraps. Involution is out of control — 300 people fighting for one mediocre position, then the winner gets paid like shit and worked to death. Graduates with master's degrees delivering food or sitting on their parents' couch.
Companies treat you like disposable labor. No raises, no promotions, just more work and the constant threat of being laid off. The economy's trash, private sector is dying, and the only "stable" path is fighting millions for a government job that might not even exist by the time you get it.
It's a fucking meat grinder. Opportunity? What opportunity. Just endless competition and poverty wages.
Malaysia like every other Asian country at the moment has two worlds at the moment.
There is an export oriented class, especially in electronics that are making more dollars than ever before, and are primed as fuck for the future.
Penang is a huge semiconductor hub now and is constantly scaling up the value chain.
And then there is the normal mainstream economy that is totally fucked and stagnant.
Super K shaped world,
lock in and get into capital or STFU.
one thing i've recently learned is that women don't stop competing with other women once they get married and have children, they just start competing for something else
intrasexual competition never ends and instead of trying to secure the best man for themselves, they're now trying to secure the best possible future for their children, which means competing with other mothers for resources, attention, opportunities, etc.
and i wonder how much of the constant complaining about marriage and motherhood is actually part of this
even when happily married, loving their children and with a good life, every time they talk to other women they make sure to tell them how exhausting motherhood is, how useless their husband is, how much they miss their freedom or how having kids ruined their body
the reason is that they are competing for attention for themselves and that the fewer women who decide to have children, the fewer children theirs will have to compete with
they don't even consciously realize what they're doing
we've spent hundreds of thousands of years competing for resources to keep our offspring alive and all those instincts didn't magically disappear the moment a woman becomes a mother
obviously some women are genuinely miserable. but MANY of them are making their lives sound worse than they actually are (especially on social media) to make other women more miserable
and what's fucking terrifying is that until very recently this sort of behaviour could only influence the handful of women around them. now a single mother complaining about how much she regrets having children can reach millions of young women who haven't even started their families yet
i wonder how much this has contributed to making an entire generation terrified of marriage and motherhood
and how much damage it's doing