Wednesday's Most Active Threads

The most active thread yesterday was once again the thread in the "Political Discussion" forum about the indictment of former President Donald Trump. But, I've already discussed that thread so I will start with a thread titled, "What Schools Do You Consider ‘Prestigious?’" which was posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. The original poster asks what universities people in the DC metropolitan area consider to be prestigious. Ater reading this thread, it occurred to me that this thread would be great research material for both a psychologist and a sociologist. But, sadly, those are both fields that I suspect are terribly unappreciated by the participants in this thread and, as such, any findings by those professionals would be ignored. Nevertheless, of interest to a psychologist would be the original poster himself. The poster's main interest in the thread appears to be to include Duke University among elite colleges. The poster posted multiple lists of schools he believes to be prestigious, always including Duke. The poster then repeatedly sock puppeted responses to his own posts expressing approval of his own lists. The poster would respond to other posters' lists suggeting that entries on their lists be replaced with Duke. The poster also posted standalone posts arguing that Duke was an elite school. At one point the poster favorably compared Duke to Stanford University. I am not sure if "delusions of grandeur" would be the correct diagnosis here, but probably not too far off. A second participant in the thread with whom a psychologist might be intrigued is a poster whose obsessions is with "ALDC" applicants. That refers to "recruited athletes, legacies, those on the Dean’s interest list, and children of faculty and staff", or those who are often granted advantages in college admissions. This poster posted at least 20 times in the thread, almost always either mentioning "ALDC" or replying to posts that did. The poster seems to consider "ALDC" synonymous with "rich white people" and implies that they are academically weak relative to other students. The poster also argues that the entire concept of "prestigious" universities is an effort by rich white people to make themselves feel good. The poster writes off entire universities due to their perceived popularity with ALDC students and dismisses certain majors as being the choices of ALDC admits. A sociologist might be interested in how this thread illustrates the decreased lack of esteem in which DCUM posters seem to hold traditional liberal arts educations. There is an argument throughout the thread about whether Yale University should be included among elite colleges, apparently due to its perceived weakness in STEM fields. Traditional liberal arts majors such as English are downplayed, even if taken at Harvard. Poster after poster suggests greater prestige for schools with strong STEM programs rather than those that have strong liberal arts offerings.

The next most active thread was posted in the "Off-Topic" forum, though I supposed it could be argued that it really belongs in the "Health and Medicine" forum. Titled, "Do Physicians judge patients based on what they wear? Designer Bags? Casual Clothing?", the original poster wants to know whether people receive different medical care depending on what they are wearing. Those responding don't seem to think that clothing or designer bags make much of a difference. Indeed, one poster says her son is a physician and wouldn't recognize a designer bag if it hit him in the face. But, posters do think other factors might matter. For instance, one poster describes doctors assuming that her Black father did not have insurance despite his having very good insurance. Other posters, who were White, described receiving rude treatment due to their not having insurance. Other posters guessed that weight and grooming might provoke judgement. The one thing that stood out for me in this thread was the broad agreement that doctors are filled with biases upon which they routinely act. There was less agreement on exactly what those biases were, but few posters argued that they didn't exist. Many posters believe that doctors are impressed by wealth and, as such, suggested dressing or behaving in a manner that conveyed that you have money. For some, this meant making sure that they were listening to Bloomberg News on their phone or reading the Economist when the doctor entered the room. Some even described wearing a shirt with the logo of their prestigious university when going to the doctor. For others, the biases were less about being impressed by money, but rather a patient's attitudes towards health in general. The aforementioned weight was repeatedly brought up as a factor with doctors being said to be biased against those who are overweight. But one poster said her husband who is a doctor only disliked those seeking an unnecessary worker's compensation diagnosis, an unneeded prescription, or some other type of scam. The thread eventually moved away from the initial topic and expanded to be a broader discusion of doctor-patient relations and how they can be improved.

The next most active thread was the FCPS start date thread that I mentioned yesterday. Like the Energizer Bunny, that thread keeps on going. Skiping that one brings me to a thread titled, "How do I communicate with someone who can’t?" and posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum. The original poster says that she and her husband have major communication issues. He tends to forget things that she says and, therefore, they have resorted to communicating important things in writing. But, he still manages to misunderstand things and, when confronted by this, blows up and yells. This effectively bullies the original poster into backing down and has caused her to assume responsibility for things rather than trusting her husband to do them correctly. The most recent example involved the original poster texting her husband to pick up pasta shells from the grocery store, but he brought home rotini and penne instead of shells. When she asked where the shells were, he blew up and accused her of trying to make him feel stupid. Choosing this as an example didn't do the original poster any favors. The very first response was to let little things like the type of pasta go and focus on the important issues. Several other posters also thought that the original poster had mishandled the pasta affair. The original poster then provided examples of bigger issues, but even those failed to impress many of those responding. The original poster's husband apparently takes medicine for ADHD and some posters suggested that attention deficit disorder might be more to blame for these problems than communications. A number of posters suggested therapy. Eventually, the discussion broke into two schools of thought. On the one hand were those posters who were probably overly influenced by the pasta example and are convinced that the original poster can do more to communicate better with her husband and do less of the things that he believes are attempts to make him feel stupid. On the other hand are those who don't think the original poster has been unreasonable and who argue that additional concessions to the original poster's husband simply allow him to escape responsibility. Other posters think that the yelling and temper tantrums are the real issue. As one poster writes, "[His] abusive anger outbursts should be the subject line Op, not communication issues."

The next two threads on the most active list have already been discussed in this blog. So that brings me to the 8th most active thread yesterday. That thread was titled, "MIL will only help at her own home" and posted in the "Family Relationships" forum. The original poster says that she must travel for work and her husband invited his mother who lives on the opposite coast to stay with them to help out while the original poster is gone. However, the original poster's mother-in-law says that she has too many commitments to travel and instead suggested that the child fly out and stay with her. The original poster is upset because she doesn't want her child to fly across country alone and wishes her mother-in-law could be more flexible. I didn't read this entire thread but from what I did read, most posters agreed that sending the child to visit the mother-in-law is a bad idea. But, beyond that, very few posters took the original poster's side on this issue. Some posters sympathized with her, but even they were reluctant to blame the mother-in-law. Several posters argued that the original poster should hire someone to assist her husband while others asked why the husband was incapable of caring for a single child himself. A huge debate broke out about whether or not the husband is incompetent. The original poster, who I half suspect might be a troll, never returned to the thread to offer additional information. Instead, the original poster has subsequently started two threads about dating, in one of which she has been very actively participating. If I squint just right and allow plenty of allowances, I can find an explanation for the original poster's seemingly contradictory threads that doesn't lead to the conclusion that she is a troll. So, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt for now.