I'm so glad to hear that, I'm happy that I might have helped even just a little bit. You've got this. And even if it's not today, or it takes more than a few tries, you've still got this.
I hope you rediscover a whole bunch of wonderful memories along the way. If a lamp can bring you so much comfort, I'm sure there are many other things you'll find on your journey that will help resurface other happy memories too.
I very much understand this feeling. There's plenty of things I do for the same safety of nostalgia reason. It's not altogether a bad coping mechanism, but like every coping mechanism, it has its limits, and you have found them.
I do have some good news for you though:
and realise that ever since that day years ago where I finally made it back to a normal life, I’ve only made 2 new core memories really.
This may not be true at all. People have trouble recalling memories of feeling differently to however they're currently feeling, especially with depression. Good memories are still being created and are in there though, you just can't access them in long storage right now. Another person in the thread said therapy and the right medication, and that is how I've largely managed to get depression mostly under control. When I'm doing well, the good memories are much easier to relive. Memory is complicated like that.
I still eat a diet of mostly instant noodles and other cheap shit
I recommend starting here though. Even if it's just adding in a daily multivitamin at first instead of really being healthy and eating right. The cheap nostalgic food is not something you need to completely give up, but it needs to be a treat instead of your staple. Nutrition has a huge impact on depression, like, an annoying amount of impact. If you can get some better nutrition in you, and a little real sunlight, and even just a short walk, your body is much more likely to generate and circulate the good feeling hormones. It's hard at first, but it does get easier.
You've been through a lot. There's nothing pathetic about how you feel or your life. There is no such thing as "behind". New friends are everywhere, and many have been through similar hard times and depression. But it does sound a lot like you would benefit from a little more balance with the things you already know are good for you.
Good luck. The past is comfortable, but there are new things out there that will bring you comfort too, and they're worth looking for.
I'm going to hope this is some ChatGPT template response bullshit, because the other option is that someone chose to write this.
Even if they were an adult who might recognise an illuminated spy camera, it's not like you have enough choice in bathrooms at 30000 ft to infer something resembling consent.
It starts before birth. Low socio-economic status affects the health of pregnant people, which in turn has consequences for foetal development. Stress is a big trigger for various latent congenital issues, and that's one reason climate change is going to result in increased rates of disease.
Not just a defense witness, a former federal prosecutor. A judge had to tell a former federal prosecutor “And then if you don’t like my ruling, you don’t give me side eye and you don’t roll your eyes.” like he was a pouty teenager.
It's nice to know we have looped back to the point in history where we casually consider which people should have agency over their reproductive rights. Oh wait, no it's not nice at all, but somehow still totally acceptable and commonplace.
As has medicine and most other technologies. And yet... the question is never asked about the long term threats posed by people who aren't personally hunting and tracking and foraging.
And miss out on the reminder that my existence is precarious and dependent on the good-will of the able-bodied? Nah, that's head-in-sand stuff. I prefer to remind everyone of what this line of questioning has led to in the past and the human consequences of discussing the rights of a group of people in the abstract.
Exactly, and yet the question is never "is agriculture a long-term threat to humanity?". It's always the people with medical issues who are acceptable first choices as society's sacrificial MacGuffin, long before we question any technology that benefits the person who is "just asking questions".
It's like we didn't already do Social Darwinism the first time. Super frustrating.
Even if we ignored the entire history of the word cripple, it still would be remarkable to not consider hunchback or dwarf as physical descriptions. Given that your next question references video games and then we fall down Godwin's slippery slope, I'm not convinced you're honestly engaging with the concept of connotation.
the words only have deragatory meaning to those who have decided they are such.
Yes, and when the people who have to live with the consequences of discrimination tell you that you're speaking in the same way as those who have discriminated against them, it's worth considering. Even momentarily.
Have a great day, I'm going to go be a cripple elsewhere now. Nah, just kidding, it will still be my couch. Just not this thread.
If you wanted to emphasise the challenges he dealt with, adjectives for his physical appearance were not a good choice. The challenges he would have dealt with may have included chronic pain, limited mobility and discrimination. You could even have said he suffered from kyphosis. But words which have been frequently intended to be derogatory don't do much to create a sense of empathy.
could be applied to anyone.
And it's nice to see disability being normalised, even if that wasn't your intent.
I never want to hear anyone say again that "nobody calls someone a 'cripple' anymore". Perhaps consider this somewhat less grotesque alternate phrasing: "Steinmetz was a person who experienced significant and debilitating disability".
natural selection does not choose whats best overall, just those that can reproduce.
That's not only an incorrect understanding of natural selection, i'd add that Steinmetz chose not to reproduce. If he hadn't been the topic of your next sentence, I wouldn't have felt the need to emphasise his personal agency. Or his existence as a person