would the suggestion be to have the post title in the URL?
thalamus_reborn
joined 1 year ago
like i said, may have gone too hard on that. but i think the sentiment remains the same. maybe i went at it the wrong way initially because of the "boomer talk" phrase - that makes me think that OP is saying "i don't need to hear anything that will contradict my original premise, i just need for someone to give me a number".
i'm not trying to be rude, i'm just calling it like i see it - if you need a number of months to make yourself feel ok about making a decision, then i see it as looking for validation. we all do it - my point was that if you want to make a big decision like this, you need to feel ok with it. you don't need someone on the internet to say "yep, looks good to me based on arbitrary criteria".
and to reiterate what i already said, i'm just reporting the facts that i'm aware of. i'm not even saying that you shouldn't move in with someone, just saying "you should be aware of the statistics surrounding this issue".
i provide a couple of links below in a response. i've heard this topic debated for years, but those two links were just recent output.
i agree that it makes sense that testing the waters before marriage would be good, but i think that it creates a difference in expectations for the relationship going forward. i think that, at least for some portion of the population, marriage is a true "do-or-die" decision, so once the vows are said, some things might start changing in the relationship dynamic. in terms of cohabitating, it could a difference in how finances are handled before and after marriage, or how household responsibilities are divided in the new era.
so my point is that cohabitating could create a false sense of security within the relationship. and i say that with the expectation that we all struggle with communication, especially in romantic relationships.
apologies, i didn't provide any citation for that. also, i may have misinterpreted the purpose of this community. i spent about 6 years in college learning about psychology and neuroscience, and we commonly discuss topics such as these. it's common to disagree and cite different sources (which again, sorry for not doing that originally), so i figured that in a community such as this, we could continue in the spirit of debate in good faith.
this isn't a primary source, but here's a Psychology Today post from 2021 which supports my claim.
In that article, it mentions a 2019 Stanford study (appears to be a review) which points to benefits of cohabitation, but only within the first year. please take a look at the table on page 36, which i believe shows the overall divorce rate is lower for those who do not cohabitate.
i understand your concern about welcoming people. perhaps the first part of my comment was too harsh. but like i said at the end of comment, it's just my two cents. and i'll add that it's not even advice that i myself follow. i just wanted to provide insight on the data that i was/am aware of. if i'm wrong, i'm happy to be proven wrong. i just want to see the numbers.
damn that's impressive
i believe that you're thinking of confirmation bias, which is more like holding a belief despite being challenged with logical evidence.
cognitive dissonance is more like holding two ideas simultaneously which seem to conflict with one another. the cognitive load (how much you have to think about something) is high because you are trying to square these two competing thoughts/ideas.
a quick and simple example of cognitive dissonance is knowing that smoking is bad for your health, but continuing to do so, using the excuse that you have high stress and the nicotine mitigates that stress.
just to contrast, confirmation bias in the same example would be someone telling you that smoking is bad for you (citing legitimate evidence), but you continue to believe that it's fine to smoke because you like to smoke.
hope this helps to distinguish the two
i checked my stats.fm top 2023 artists vs wrapped, and i'm seeing the same inaccuracies that you mention. my wrapped artists were:
while on stats.fm, it shows:
i think that spotify is definitely strategic with placing certain artists in certain positions. for example, "Artist F" probably was in top 5 last year as well (and is a successful but less-well-known artist), but went unlisted on wrapped this year and was replaced by Artist C, a global top 200 artist. and it worked - i had not listened to Artist C in a while, and when i saw my wrapped results, i started listening to them again.