this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2026
62 points (97.0% liked)
Science
23780 readers
278 users here now
Welcome to Hexbear's science community!
Subscribe to see posts about research and scientific coverage of current events
No distasteful shitposting, pseudoscience, or COVID-19 misinformation.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As someone who has abused both alcohol and cannabis, I can say cannabis is much less harmful. However, it's pretty easy to go overboard with it. Like most things in life, it's best in moderation. I enjoy it once or twice a week now, sometimes even less. I think if you're getting drunk or high every day there are probably some other issues at play.
Yeah like being cool
I was being serious and opening up about my struggles. I don't really appreciate this response. The upvotes on this compared to mine makes me think my reservations about coming back here were correct.
I'm sorry for this other person's comment. totally bad taste.
I'm reading over the thread and getting a vibe that a lot of people are having strong reactions to the paper - maybe because some people feel invalidated by the paper? idk. threads like these have particularly bad vibes, and the detached/dismissive irony that is common here can be especially jarring
The site is dominated by juvenile freaks who will say or sign on to anything that they can interpret as being an affirmation of them, personally. If you understandably find that repulsive, then having reservations makes sense.
Nah it was fine. The original post doesn't read like someone "opening up about their struggles" so much as someone who added a bit of personal context within their response to the article.
That may have been their intent, but it wasn't clear. Many people could have made similar remarks about having "abused" alcoholc and cannabis without it having been as detrimental of an addiction in their lives as it now seems that it was for this person.
I'm sorry this Comrade went through it. Really. And I'm glad moderation is working out for them, but damn.... y'all overreacting.
This site features a pig shitting on its own balls. Someone CAN for sure open up about addiction here, but they would need to make that context clear within its own post or a dedicated thread.
And this wasn't that. And so pig-shitting-on-balls mentality is to be expected imo.
Awesome job, no notes.
You've commented how this site is juvenile. It can be for sure. I gave a response detailing when to expect that. Pretty calmly, clearly, and respectfully.
You then give this response, not engaging with the main point. Jesus, again...y'all overreacting.
The quoted "abused" isn't meant in a negative manner. Not hard to see.
If I felt compelled to debate every time someone used silly motivated reasoning to justify whatever lets them diffuse criticism, I would never do anything else, and I can't tell you how many times I've seen the same dogshit arguments about how it's a shitposting website so of course it's backwards in this and that way.
What are the quotation marks accomplishing?
Edit: if someone talks about how they struggled with drug abuse and then says that they think someone using those drugs daily probably has a problem, saying such a behavior is "being cool :dance-emote:" is obviously inappropriate and insensitive and you are just giving meaningless sophistry deflecting away from that fact.
The same thing they were meant to do when quoting "opening up about their struggles"....literally just quoting the OP's words.
You're thinking about it too much.
This isn't a case of blindly defending shitposting. This is a case of: if leftists want to be taken seriously and change the world...stop getting so damn butthurt about everything.
I'd agree with you if the OP made a dedicated post about his struggles and then had someone respond like this.
But his post does NOT read like that. It just doesn't.
Either you communicated in a seriously incompetent manner or this is horseshit. If use of a recreational drug has no ill effects, it's not abuse, so there is no point in quoting "abused" to describe non-abuse in this context.
Socialism necessitates the ruthless criticism of everything that exists, but I don't think we need a point so extreme in order to just say that when someone is speaking earnestly about their addiction you don't trivialize it in this manner, and your made up rules about how it needs its own thread or whatever is nonsense when the OP is about a study on the effects of pot posted in the science comm.
My main point is that his post did not read like someone speaking earnestly about their addiction! It read like someone who was giving slightly more context to their main point by alerting the reader that they're very familiar with alcohol and cannabis.
Had it read as you're suggesting it does, I'm arguing that the response he got with the emoji would never have happened.
But it wasn't clear. And so he got that response...
The dude's first point is about everything in moderation, and if that's not the case then there's probabaly something wrong underying it all.
In no universe is the main point in the original passage (given again below), "i want to earnestly talk about my addiction":
He mentioned having problems with drug abuse and was giving his view on drug abuse in a way that was obviously based on that context. He doesn't need to write a fucking memoir about how drinking ruined his life for the response to be inappropriate, the simple fact alone is enough.
Lol ok. My god.
@Dr_Pepper@hexbear.net stick around, man. Just try to be clearer if you could when looking for serious replies.
Is it really that fucking onerous to be told that it would be better to exercise a baseline level of sensitivity?
Ah, wow. OK. A deeper answer into what the quotes are achieving is that my initial point was this: the exact language OP used is also routinely used in posts by people who did NOT have such a rough addiction, yet did go through a phase where they abused those drugs for a small period in their life. So i quoted the language to highlight it.
Hence my whole point of it not being super clear.
You're grasping here.
Great, I'll mark it as being in the incompetent box then, rather than the horseshit one.
"It" being the commenter talking about struggling with substance abuse? No, I think it's still clear that he was saying it was a bad time and that he doesn't advise doing what he did.
My main point is that his post did not read like someone speaking earnestly about their addiction! It read like someone who was giving slightly more context to their main point by alerting the reader that they're very familiar with alcohol and cannabis.
Had it read as you're suggesting it does, I'm arguing that the response he got with the emoji would never have happened.
But it wasn't clear. And so he got that response...
The dude's first point is about everything in moderation, and if that's not the case then there's probabaly something wrong underying it all.
In no universe is the main point in the original passage (given again below), "i want to earnestly talk about my addiction":
I agree that that's not the main point of the comment, the main point is that overuse in general is bad, but my point isn't what the thesis of the comment is (that's an arbitrary goalpost), it's that you are being given information about this person's background that that, by itself, is enough to tell you that you shouldn't address the subject flippantly to them in response to that very comment.
If no one replied talking about the commenter's history of substance abuse but just the topic of substance abuse generally, those would have been perfectly appropriate, but responding to this person saying getting wasted every day is probably problematic with "it's actually being cool lol" is tactless.
Thank you for acknolwedging that.
I disagree. The information given isn't clear. People talk like this all the time without having experienced--as it turns out was the case--a rough life-altering addiction.
It could've been said by someone referring to how they experienced binge drinking too much one semester away at college, but caught the issue and corrected it before their life was seriously affected. They probabaly wouldnt have minded the response. It just wasn't clear until the guy's follow up post.
Honestly, you should do a bit of self-crit and ask yourself why you communciated with ME in the manner you have.
I love assigning self-crit like homework, it's just abusing "leftist" parlance to say "I'm correct and you should be ashamed of yourself." "Honestly," fuck off with that.
You keep assigning arbitrary goalposts. No, you cannot infer from the original comment that substance abuse was profoundly destructive on his life*, I never said that and that was never my argument. When someone tells you they have had trouble with substance abuse and you don't know how bad it was you shouldn't respond under the assumption that it was borderline trivial and has no emotional valence. That's what I'm saying.
*Not that it was, I'm just giving an example of an extreme characterization.
You've objectively been unable to have a calm discussion about this.
And what I am saying is that to expect this on Hexbear is misguided UNLESS one clarifies their seriousness.
Do people come here for seriousness? Sure. Do people come here to throw around emojis? Yes.
Both are forms of community. Someone got them mixed up in an ubderstandable way. Big whoop.
Edit:
Just because you jumped at me from the get go and failed to comprehend my very consistent point...that doesn't mean goalposts have been changed...
It's like you're usage of quotes around "honestly" just now
you assumed i was using quotes in a similar deragatory way earlier around "abused". I had to clarify for you because you chose to jump on me without seeking to understand.
L reply to someone talking about their own struggles with addiction
i feel this so much. (the issue for me is that i live in a capitalist hellscape in which interacting and forming bonds with other humans is actively discouraged)