I haven't experienced what you're describing. Previous experience suggests exposure is the next step for you. If a cooking class isn't feasible right now then start with watching some videos online (best if they're home cooks - you want to watch common cooking of foods you like to eat).

You're not trying to memorize anything or learn hard skills during this time. You're only trying to become more familiar with people working in a kitchen so it doesn't feel as alien and maybe not quite as scary.

Do that regularly for a while. If it's too much for you: dial it back. You do want to push your boundaries but only when you're feeling ok about it. Small wins will turn into more small wins and eventually you might be interested in trying to cook something.

If that happens, and I suspect it will, know that it is OK to start cautiously and take your time learning how to use the oven and stove top. Try turning a burner on with no pan or pot on top. Let it get hot. Turn it off. Let it cool down. Repeat that across a few days if the first one helps you.

Once you're comfortable you should do that practice again and add water to a pan until its half full. Once the burner is hot: place your pan of water on top of the stove burner. Let the water come to a boil. Remove the pan from the stove top. Let the pan and water cool down. Note how much water is missing (some of it will have steamed away while boiling). Add that much water back to the pan and practice this again.

You can build your experiences, step by step, with safe extensions and new footholds, until you're feeling confident about cooking something with the boiling water. You're going to boil an egg!

Complete your practice again but instead of taking the water off right after it boils: leave it on the burner for 6 minutes. Then remove it and let it cool. Success? Do that again using a pot instead of a pan. Pot half full of water. Grab a serving spoon or similar item. Once the water comes to a boil:

1. Lower the burner temperature to half / medium. The water should be moving and steamy but the bubbles should be very gentle or cease. Dropping the egg into actively boiling water may cause the egg to crack prematurely.
2. Use the serving spoon to gently place the egg in the center of the boiling water.
3. Wait six minutes.
4. Remove the pot of water from the burner.
5. Turn the burner off.
6. Use the serving spoon to lift the egg out of the hot water.
7. Run the egg under cold water (this helps it from over cooking and helps make peeling easier).
8. Enjoy your egg.

You can absolutely boil any kind of pasta, lots of vegetables, and almost all starchy foods. Boiling is very safe because the water regulates the temperature for us. So long as there is water in the pot the pot is unable to meaningfully exceed 100 degrees Celsius (the boiling point of water / ~212F). It is very difficult to burn anything or start a fire while boiling water.

Best of luck my friend.

I'm not associated with anyone in this thread or the situation being discussed. I'm interested how we understand and use cultural signals. Here's some Pepe detail for the similarly curious:

The alt-right got wise to new media in the 2010s. They started meme-washing their hate mongering and trying to normalize coded hate speech in internet culture using Pepe memes and other popular formats. It snowballed and the Pepe meme = Nazi user association is a product of lasting trends from that time. It's similar to clocking someone for wearing straight-laced Doc Martens or khakis and a white polo.

For those in the know one of those items is a small red flag. The wearer could be completely ignorant that these are known dog whistles/identifiers for members of hate groups. If someone is wearing a lot of small red flags then it's less likely the wearer is accidentally serving white supremacist. That's the point of stealing and manufacturing these kinds of symbols though: most people don't know they exist or what they intend to mean so the user can feign ignorance with plausible deniability. They're the inverse of modern progressive advocacy symbols. Wearers can hide in plain sight with just enough Nazi showing that other insiders see them. Pride icons for cowards.

The artist who created Pepe has publicly denounced the character's use as a hate symbol and regressivist propaganda tool. Whether or not a community or individual "liberates" Pepe from the prison CHUDs built is up to them.

For what it's worth: I lean toward liberate most of the time (fight against the thieving bigots) but in this situation, even given a permissive setting, adding "posts Pepe" as a mark against is sensible. It's clear the user is either intentionally pushing hate propaganda or else under enough alt-right influence that their intentions aren't relevant to the evaluation.

That's a problem. Absolutely. It's not the problem though. I'm not sure the problem can be summarized so succinctly. This is the way I've been putting it:

These are the top reasons humanity needs successful, decentralized, open social media platforms:

1. Collecting and selling user's private data is dangerous and unethical.
2. Using that data to intentionally and directly manipulate user's thinking is even worse.
3. All of the major centralized social media companies have been proven to either allow these illicit information campaigns or coordinate them directly. TikTok is the focus right now but Sophie Zhang exposed Facebook for doing exactly what TikTok has been exposed for recently. Can you recall any meaningful consequences for Facebook? Do you think Facebook is now safe to use?
4. It's clear that most political leaders are either too ignorant, too corrupt, or too inept to meaningfully legislate against these problems.
5. The concerned public can't shut Pandora's box. No one is coming to save us from big tech or the monied interests and nation-states that wield it.
6. The concerned public can't easily and legally audit the platforms big tech builds because they are closed and proprietary.
7. Personal choice is not enough. Not using centralized social media increases personal safety but does little to curb its influence otherwise.

These are listed by order of intuitive acceptance rather than importance. I find it aids the conversation.

The best reasonable answer to these problems I've seen proposed is for the public to create an open and decentralized alternative that's easier to use and provides a better user experience.

Will that kind of alternative be a force for pure good? I'm not sure. To your point: I'm not convinced social media of any kind can be more than self-medication to cope with modernity. Then again I've had incredible and meaningful conversations with close friends after passing the bong around and spent time on Facebook/Reddit, and now Mastodon/Lemmy/etc, doing the same. Those interactions were uplifting and humanizing in ways that unified and encouraged all involved.

I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. We need to take care of each other, refuse pure hedonism, and protect the vulnerable (and we're all varying degrees of vulnerable). At the same time: humans aren't happy in sterile viceless productivity prisons. Creating spaces for leisure which do no harm in the course of their use isn't just a nice idea... It's necessary for a functional and happy society.

I was taught something different growing up and had to check myself with a quick read. Holy shit. You're right. Thanks for sharing.

My partner has chronic pain. I'm stealing this as a tool for future conversations. Thank you!

The right thing to do is offer a program to replace the battery. Even more right would be not designing anti-repairability into your products. 🙊

Throttling the processor to extend the life of the phone is a reasonable temporary alternative IF it's transparent and opt-in. Effectively forcibly downgrading the hardware spec of a device I own without even telling me is a serious breach of trust at the very least, no?

I agree the decision may have resulted in less e-waste but, even if so (and assuming all is well-intended), that can't justify hijacking consumer's belongings. That's a dangerous precedent to set.

I have a deep appreciate for this level of discernment. Moderating posts and their discussions in good-faith and abiding by the spirit/intention of the rules instead of strict enforcement by letter fosters community trust and makes it more difficult to argue against removals/bans when they do happen.

Thanks for volunteering and keeping the lights on.

How so?

That wasn't the question, was unnecessarily rude, and not something you could possibly know. The only reason to post your comment is to wound a stranger. Your cruelty is obvious and you should be ashamed of yourself. Do better.

A speaker's public record provides context for their current commentary. Trump's tells us he is a bigot. Specifically a white supremacist. His recent rhetoric leans in to this. When pressed to clarify, justify, or recant these statements he either deflects or doubles down.

There is no reason to think he is suddenly well intentioned, operating in good faith, or otherwise deserving of some deference of judgement.

Because the only things the other side of the aisle wants to deliver are stillborn.

Crazy? No. The timing and optics would be wrong since Sanders wouldn't help Harris' campaign play to its advantages. Finding younger candidates with consistent and (hopefully) progressive records, who aren't currently targets for the Right, and who hold little political baggage, is a better play.

By the same reasoning I think Newsom and Buttigieg aren't good picks even though they'd do well in the role. The new Dem Pres campaign should make sure the Right's propagandists have to work hard at effective attack ads. Running any Left-Wing Face misses this initiative.

For context: I'm still bitter about Bernie being pushed out of previous Presidential campaign runs, still think he was the best choice both times, and know he'd make a great VP.