Chat Thread

Glen Miller wrote:Fair enough.  Still, it's not exactly relevant to me considering I won't even legally be able to drink until just before I graduate, so if my future employers are kicking up a fuss about my refusal to buy a fake ID during a third-year interview, then that's just tough.  I'm under the impression that moderate drinkers are the ones who earn more on average-doesn't that make people who are too hung over to attend a class at 5 in the afternoon just as vulnerable?

ResurrectionRooney wrote:One for all you Teetotal boring bastards to consider

http://www.cracked.com/article_19464_6-things-they-say-hurt-careers-that-statistics-say-help.html

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Glen Miller wrote:That article also tells you to "be a jerk," "be more sexist," and to "get fat."  I don't want to be any of those things.  I think I'll just take my chances, even if it means I earn a wee bit less.

The other things comes with costs - being less liked, being less healthy, dying sooner - having a nice drink in a bar is a cost well worth paying.  It's not a "wee bit" less, it's thousands of pounds per year, over your career that's a frightening amount of money.  It'll also make you more liked and strengthen any friendships you have that are worth strengthening.

Yrael wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:One for all you Teetotal boring bastards to consider

http://www.cracked.com/article_19464_6-things-they-say-hurt-careers-that-statistics-say-help.html

You don't necessarily have to drink to socialise with people at a bar. Sure it might be a bit weird at first but if you actually like the people you work with then it'd be fine.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

The other things comes with costs - being less liked, being less healthy, dying sooner - having a nice drink in a bar is a cost well worth paying.  It's not a "wee bit" less, it's thousands of pounds per year, over your career that's a frightening amount of money.  It'll also make you more liked and strengthen any friendships you have that are worth strengthening.

That doesn't make any sense. How does drinking strengthen friendships that are ''worth strengthening'' over actually sharing things in common with that person?

ResurrectionRooney wrote:It marks you out as an oddball and you'll be putting yourself at an advantage over them.  Part of the reason that people drink to socialise is the implicit understanding that it makes everyone more honest, more vulnerable, it's a demonstration of trust.  If you refuse to partake in it you're breaking a social rule.

They'll strengthen the friendships because you'll open up more with people and enjoy their company more.  You'll associate their company with the mildly euphoric feelings that alcohol gives you and vice versa.  It shocks me that I'm having to explain this, have you ever drank?

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Glen Miller wrote:Fair enough.  Still, it's not exactly relevant to me considering I won't even legally be able to drink until just before I graduate, so if my future employers are kicking up a fuss about my refusal to buy a fake ID during a third-year interview, then that's just tough.  I'm under the impression that moderate drinkers are the ones who earn more on average-doesn't that make people who are too hung over to attend a class at 5 in the afternoon just as vulnerable?

It hasn't done me too much harm, at just 23 years of age I'm earning more than the average British household.  Getting wasted on a Thursday night and missing a single seminar the next day isn't too harmful.

Yrael wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:It marks you out as an oddball and you'll be putting yourself at an advantage over them.  Part of the reason that people drink to socialise is the implicit understanding that it makes everyone more honest, more vulnerable, it's a demonstration of trust.  If you refuse to partake in it you're breaking a social rule.

They'll strengthen the friendships because you'll open up more with people and enjoy their company more.  You'll associate their company with the mildly euphoric feelings that alcohol gives you and vice versa.  It shocks me that I'm having to explain this, have you ever drank?

If you need to drink to open up to people then I don't see how that's a friendship that's worth strengthening. And that last point seems like a total copout. The person you're with could be boring as fuck but because you drink with them you associate their company with feeling good?

And no, I'm completely teetotal.

Glen Miller wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

It hasn't done me too much harm, at just 23 years of age I'm earning more than the average British household.  Getting wasted on a Thursday night and missing a single seminar the next day isn't too harmful.

That's wonderful to hear.  Being teetotal might not end up not doing me any harm, but I know for a fact that I couldn't justify living that kind of life-my parents are paying far too much for me to mess about and take risks like that.  I didn't realise it was just a single seminar, I only assumed that when you said you were "regularly missing 5PM starts because you were too hungover" you missed more than the single seminar.

Yrael is also right about the friendships part.  If you are teetotal, the chances are some of your best friends will drink little or not at all.  These people didn't need alcohol (for you or them) to come to like you, why should you change that after already growing close?

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Glen Miller wrote:
That's wonderful to hear.  Being teetotal might not end up not doing me any harm, but I know for a fact that I couldn't justify living that kind of life-my parents are paying far too much for me to mess about and take risks like that.  I didn't realise it was just a single seminar, I only assumed that when you said you were "regularly missing 5PM starts because you were too hungover" you missed more than the single seminar.

Yrael is also right about the friendships part.  If you are teetotal, the chances are some of your best friends will drink little or not at all.  These people didn't need alcohol (for you or them) to come to like you, why should you change that after already growing close?

I did, it was the same subject's seminar though and the tutor wasn't very good so I skipped it.  If I'd seen it as valuable I obviously would have drank a bit less and made it in.

I'd expect teetotal friendships to be harder and slower to make and likely less close than friendships among people who are happy to frequently lower their guards by drinking together.

Glen Miller wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

I did, it was the same subject's seminar though and the tutor wasn't very good so I skipped it.  If I'd seen it as valuable I obviously would have drank a bit less and made it in.

I'd expect teetotal friendships to be harder and slower to make and likely less close than friendships among people who are happy to frequently lower their guards by drinking together.

So you skipped because it wasn't worth your time, not because you were hungover.

Regarding the opening up bit, doesn't the fact that the opening is entirely gradual and natural as opposed to artificially-induced by alcohol make the connection more personal and important?  That's my view, at least.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Glen Miller wrote:
So you skipped because it wasn't worth your time, not because you were hungover.

Regarding the opening up bit, doesn't the fact that the opening is entirely gradual and natural as opposed to artificially-induced by alcohol make the connection more personal and important?  That's my view, at least.

When you drink with someone it's a mutual demonstration of trust, a demonstration that you trust that person enough not to take advantage of you while you're pissed, that you don't mind speaking your mind to them more than you would in normal circumstances and you trust them not to use what you might say against you.  You're revealing the "real you" to the person you're drinking with because you're deactivating all your inhibitions.   If I'm friends with you and you never engage in that, you never remove your inhibitions, I'm going to be a lot less likely to trust you regardless of how often we see each other.

Glen Miller wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

When you drink with someone it's a mutual demonstration of trust, a demonstration that you trust that person enough not to take advantage of you while you're pissed, that you don't mind speaking your mind to them more than you would in normal circumstances and you trust them not to use what you might say against you.  You're revealing the "real you" to the person you're drinking with because you're deactivating all your inhibitions.   If I'm friends with you and you never engage in that, you never remove your inhibitions, I'm going to be a lot less likely to trust you regardless of how often we see each other.

If they trust you so much, why don't they just open up without alcohol?

Rei Andros wrote:The key to the first point of that article is networking, not drinking. Drinking with someone is an easy way to network, I suppose, but it's hardly the only way.

I like how they just say being fat leads to one making more money. You'd think these people would know about correlation not being causation - or maybe they're just ignoring it. Another graph worth of the spurious correlations website. 

What's with drinking being served up as the only way to gain someone's trust? I have people I trust who I've never shared a drink with, because we just grown to speak candidly with each other. That being the way you built your relationships doesn't mean it's the only way. 

And from what you've wrote, you cross the line from drinking into being drunk. I'm no expert, but decisions made/things said as a result taking leave of your senses don't look like they have high ratings on the actions scale. What does it say about two people only being able to develop a bond when they're not themselves?

Again with the boring comment. What is it about drinking alcohol that makes drinkers so incredibly more interesting than non-drinkers?

Rei Andros wrote:What I meant by not being you is that you aren't removing your inhibitions yourself. I think there's a big difference between choosing to conquer/ignore a block you have have, and having it done involuntarily by a chemical. Saying something or behaving a certain way of your own accord is being yourself. Doing the same action only because alcohol is in your system isn't you in that it removes the act of making the decision. Of course, that brings up the issue of one's drinking with the ultimate aim being the relaxing of mental guards, but that's second order compulsion. 

I think you will understand why just saying that something is true without any reasons to support your claim is not a statement I'm going to buy. Let's look at it this at it this way. Is it: 

1. The act of drinking itself: No. Everyone drinks (water, fruit juice etc.), not everyone is interesting.

2. Alcohol: No. Being interesting with alcohol in you (whatever that means) is not the same as being innately interesting.

3. The social aspect of drinking: No. Socializing can take place without drinking, so the act of going out vs going out for a drink isn't an indicator of whether someone is interesting or not.

Are non-interesting people more likely to not drink than interesting people? An interesting question that is impossible to answer given the variables and level of subjectivity in play.

SBSP wrote:I'm ok with being boring.

Glen Miller wrote:Do you still live in Canada?

vel wrote:

Glen Miller wrote:Do you still live in Canada?

bruh i rep the 416 since time

42 division are a certain class of police officers in scarborough that you normal wouldnt want to run into for the folowing reasons

1. they are assholes 2. they are poor assholes 3. they are usualy rookies with something to proove 4. the dont know how to handle any situation they just arrest you

dont get me wrong i am not saying that toronto police are bad imm just saying that this divition are fucking assholes that cannot do there job well i have witnessed 3 fat bellamy road white kids steal some pumpkins from loblaws and then smash them in the parking lot with many people around staring mabee the kids were on drugs mabee there just stupid all imm saying is if a brown any brown person did that people would definatley call the police and 42 division would probly end up geting shot or arrested. if the police force wants some respect from comunities mabee they should not treat every person they see as a potential terrorist and stop this tamil terrorist crap police are stoping and harrasing high school kids and members of the tamil comunity for wearing/displaying the tamil tiger flag or logo because some white people in ottawa have decided to classify tamils as terrorist even thow they have been fighting there own war in there own country for years but all of a sudden the canadian goverment wants to dissrespect and harrass a majority of torontos population for celebrating there culture and supporting there troops nobody critisizes white canadians for supporting there troops in afganistan on a stupid ass mision.

basicly thats why alot of people say "fuck 42 division" because they are assholes dont expect cooperation and respect from scarborough parents and youth when u treat them like shit and harass them. remember new white people are scared of what they dont understand, Culture sadly falls into that catagory these people in charge and who are running this city are not from scarbrough they dont know what goes on here they didnt grow up i dont even theink they went to public school so think about how they would respond to seeing what goes on at town center on a friday.... BASTARDS!!!!!

vel wrote:lmao canada isn't all maple syrup and aboot and happy people lol

i don't know much about murica apart from Ann Arbor/DC - you should know obviously, since you're murican - but some of the spots here are lite versions of the murican hoods

gun squads everywhere

El_indian wrote:brink back the chicks sektion...i have a lovely lass in mind.

SBSP wrote:That midterm I just took gave me Ebola.