ABrokenMan
Well-known member
I tend to agree for the most part with the analysis brought forth in the article:
www.thelastbrokenhome.com/loser-at-20/
www.thelastbrokenhome.com/loser-at-20/
The main point I was reading was that "Losers" doom themselves because they refuse to think differently about themselves, leading to the very problem that causes them to be "losers". And that 'acting' to change one's viewpoint is the only 'cure'.ABrokenMan said:The writer's syntax and tone is certainly pompous, but his underlying theme: 'there is not someone for everyone' rings true.
His "literal hammering" style stems from his editor, I'll bet, being instructed to cut through the typical platitudes and euphemisms expressed by society. The writer makes an example of someone implied as socially weak to overstate his point. Bringing in the attractive girl is so painfully obvious. And you have to be honest: the majority of people would agree about the guy profiled in the article. Whether or not it is right to agree, or wrong is not the point. Getting by in society won't work that way.
Every viewpoint can be challenged, such is the nature of opinion. I find it mentally refreshing when opinions that are expressed clash with oversaturated and theoretical beliefs; i.e. "There's someone for everyone" in regards to human relationships. There simply can't be. There will always be people who find their partner or partners, and there will always be people who will fail to find any partner. Such is life. That's the main gist I read from the article.
Enter your email address to join: