Dunno how you define “good”. But it is really easy to become a stagehand. Like, unbelievably easy. You can be a meth addicted felon with bad face tattoos and get that job - and even keep it as long as you just show up on time! The job can be physical, but the work isn’t super repetitive so it tends to make you stronger rather than weaker over time. Because of the non-standard schedule, you are paid well for what is essentially menial labor. Spend most of your workday kinda bullshitting with coworkers while you move something from A to B or turn a wrench or whatever.

In the trades that are hard on your body, learn the trade, then start your own company or work your way into management at a corporate outfit.

Forklift certified like a boss

And those guys on the island who murder anyone who comes close to them

They hate 'em cause they ain’t 'em. Most cosmetic surgery looks good, and you just don’t notice it. And then these people get treated nicer and go farther in life, because good looking people garner more support and sympathy than less good looking people.

Some cosmetic procedures are covered. Eg, reconstructive surgery after a car crash.

Hence why I said “in all likelihood”. There are always exceptions to the rule. Apparently you are one of them.

This is really a huge oversimplification of a complex and nuanced topic. But the main thing worth mentioning is that your utility bills, in all likelihood, are already insanely cheap if you compare what you get to any other time in history. Like, keeping your home temperature at a perfectly pleasant temperature 24 hours per day probably costs you only a couple hours of labor each month. Compare this to gathering sticks in the forest and lighting a fire inside a mud hut - which, btw, also gives you lung cancer faster than cigarettes.

Should the government invest more in renewables? Yes, obviously. They should also fund the infrastructure necessary to make renewables work at scale, and research to improve renewable generation, transmission, and storage tech in order to close the gap between what is practical now and what we need to achieve. And while they are at it, they should introduce improved pricing schemes to head off increased wasteful usage. But will any of this actually have a direct impact on consumer pricing…? Probably not, since almost all utilities are already state owned or else heavily regulated. The cost of electricity is determined more by committee and political maneuvering than the actual price of, say, coal or solar on a day to day basis. The actual mechanism of paying for power to be generated and delivered to your house on demand is a combination of the price you pay per kwh, property taxes, government revenue in general, debt taken on by the government or utility, investments made in the past, etc. If you actually want a cheaper price per kwh, the solution is simply petitioning whatever regulatory body is in charge to lower it.

Of course, the problem with lower prices is that they encourage wasteful usage. If electricity becomes free, then aunt Ethel will start blasting the AC while leaving the windows open, because she likes to be comfortable while listening to the birds chirp. Without appropriate pricing schemes, people and companies will use up as much additional renewable capacity as is built as soon as you finish building it.

I’d recommend researching quality of life metrics and cross referencing with nations’ gini coefficients.

One more thing that hasn’t been mentioned - the pope is the figurehead of the church, and needs to look the part. Why does the pope have grey hair? Because people expect the pope to have grey hair. Stable symbolism is important in an institution like the church, as much for followers as leaders. Electing a pope who doesn’t “look the part” could cause defections and schisms.

You are suffering from selection bias, being the sort of person who is here on Lemmy. The vast majority of people who are making content are still posting to legacy platforms.

He would probably react by finding a relative of one of his long-dead rich friends or family, and try to convince them to fund his next treatise on the stage that happens after communism (aka, buy him more beer)

Always was

I think part of the reason that this sort of content is less prevalent to men is simply that men find this kind of content less interesting intrinsically. “I want to deeply understand my emotions” is not a theme that many men find resonant. Instead, I think most of the content men consume relating to their mental and emotional lives exists as a subset of achieving some sort of external goal. They want to learn about their minds and emotions because they see these things limiting them in getting to the place they want to be - getting a hot body, getting a higher salary, knowing how to overhaul an engine, living a particular lifestyle, meeting a certain standard they have set for themselves, etc.

I think this also leads to less naval-gazing. When men interact with their emotional lives, there isn’t a ton of idle contemplation, which is what a lot of resources on these topics amounts to - men are interacting with their emotions just enough to take the next step forward in whatever their actual goal is. And so the men giving the best advice in this space are almost always not seen as experts on emotions, but are rather seen as experts in other things - their emotional / psychological teachings more often come through in being a good role model.

That said, here are some people/sources that I’ve read/listened to which I think contributed to my emotional development as a man:

General life/philosophy/emotional health:

• Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance - Robert Pirsig
• The collected works of Carlos Castenada
• The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fuck - Mark Manson
• The Art of Manliness blog
• The writing of David Wong/ Jason Pargin. In particular, this piece

Health, fitness, and sport:

• The books, articles, and podcast of Dan John
• The books and youtube channel of Dave Macleod

Sex and Dating:

• Models - Mark Manson

But people of certain skin colors often live in certain cultural spheres, which have particular norms, which are often interesting and funny to observe. Hence why ScottishPeopleTwitter was always equally valid.

I mean, the problem isn’t that OP’s question was stupid. The problem is that it is rude to question people’s religious practices.

Roll the bill into the fabric. Forms a crescent moon shape. Shove it under your belt

what some of the more useful resources are for men to learn about their bodies

idk, I just started playing with my dick one day and that was the extent of it.

hormones,

Testosterone good, rawr!

brains,

I know I shouldn’t try to poke it through my nose…

emotions,

What are those?

support networks,

What, like a jock strap?

Really, most of these things I learned about through some innumerable number of sources I can’t possibly remember now, which were not particularly gendered. Idk, just read shit?

Most philosophy, psychology, sociology, emotional intelligence training, etc. is not served by framing it based on sex

I imagine that the reason OP framed it this way is because they are (guessing?) a woman, and most things discussing these topics from a practical perspective are created by women, aimed at women, and have a female perspective (implicit or explicit).

Lots of people like to use things like antlers or skulls as decorations