A few people had mentioned that 'Twisters' didn't invoke climate change, so I thought cool -- a few special effects and a fun few hours.
Then it starts -- two white chicks and three pajeets! And... there are, actually, some astonishingly good-looking pajeets, but they chose the weak-chinned losers, of course.
I lasted about five minutes.
I wish we could put pajeets, chicks and (the rule-16 people) on an island, and see what they'd create.
We all know that they'd do nothing but argue.
But hey, Madame Curie was, like, super good at putting samples into a machine that she didn't build.
Sorry, just ranting.
Spoiler, those people die in the prologue, except for one, plus the main chick.
The island thing already happened in Survivor, when they had two groups on two islands, one with all chicks. They sucked at everything.
The ''expert survivalist'' women getting lost walking circles on a tiny island or crying because they saw a snake,
the show.
But wait, there's more!
The producers cheated to help the women, and they still almost died. The producers secretly gave the women a few pigs for food, and the women refused to butcher and eat them, instead opting to keep them as pets...while they starved. If I remember correctly, the producers also gave the women large quantities of fresh water, to prevent them from dying due to dehydration. Then, in a last ditched effort at "equality", the producers stole two of the men and put them on the women's island, and put two of the women on the men's island.
The men who arrived on the women's island were in awe with how bad their situation was, with how the women had been doing nothing to improve their lot the entire time, and had eaten all of their backup rations. Those two men did pretty much all the work while the women bitched and laid around. The two women sent to the men's island did the same, enjoying the labors of the men.
In a "natural" setting, those women wouldn't be doing nothing. They would be caring for babies and young children. If society advanced enough, cleaning, cooking, making clothes and helping with farming.
We can't have a normal functional repartition of labour under feminism. That would be "misoginy".
The women would also be slaughtering/butchering the pigs in a natural setting.
Women are capable of lots of things if they're guided by the patriarchy.
Without the patriarchy... well, they just try to show off their asses and complain.
I haven't seen that as much in the homesteading community. The women mostly garden and take care of the kids. The men are the ones usually handling the animals and doing the butchering. In the older days I'm sure women were tougher and able to handle it, but at least somewhat nowadays, the gender roles have somewhat defined what men and women are doing on a farm/homestead to more align with who is better at what.
I live in Cambodia these days, and the women here are tough.
Real butchers are still usually men, because they have to do it all day long. But if I bought a full pig, some chick would cut it up.
Things aren't perfect here, but if you're looking for a rough 'equality of sexes', then it's basically paradise. I don't think it's the kind of paradise that feminists are looking for, though.
You remind me of something I notice. I will watch some b movie from the 80s or 90s on Tubi or one of the other free streaming and I think it’s brilliant when I probably wouldn’t have liked it back then since blockbusters were being cranked out. My general rule of thumb is to not watch or read anything past 2014. So nowadays it’s really nice to watch something from heck even 20 years ago where there isn’t an obsession with diversity or before they decided that lgbt had to be in everything (or the black/lgbt/girl power trifecta).
Also watching a period piece from the past is great since they made a much better effort of actually looking like the period they are depicting
You know what else isn't in modern action movies these days, boobs. Watch action movies from the 70s to the 90s and you see boobs. Nowadays no boobs
Yes! But they will show topless or naked men. I don’t see anything wrong if they want to appeal to men and women with the opposite sex
Women don't really think about men that way. They might now -- but only because of mass media.
The 'topless men' thing is more of an attempt to turn men gay.
(I know that sounds crazy)
Sydney Sweeney isn't afraid of getting the girls out
My rule of thumb regarding whether to watch something has a scale with "yes" being things before and including Return Of The King in 2003 or Revenge Of The Sith in 2005 falling to "no" with either Obama's first or second term down to "absolutely not" with Gamergate or the 2016 US election.
Not a bad system. Where I live a lot of free digital channels have popped up with shows from 50s to early 00s. Then you have free western channels. They keep popping up. Should be an indicator to someone
I know someone who only watches Bonanza, F Troop etc on Tubi and Youtube - literally nothing else
F Troop? I need to find that. Haven’t seen it since it was on Nick at nite when I was a kid in the 80s. Love Bonanza as well. Don’t blame that person
In Australia as a kid we had F Troop followed by Greenacres at about 6am - but I used to get up at 5am and watch the test pattern for 30 minutes. Oh and we also got the old Black and White Lone Ranger as well. Haven't seen them in the 40 years since. my fave F Troop scene was when Cpl Agarn taught the Indians how to do a War Dance
I need to binge it. I can watch Green Acres all day every day. My dad loved the Lone Ranger as a kid and he passed that down to me. My DVR almost always has a few episodes recorded
Based on your comment, I went back and watched it. I skipped the first 20 minutes... and then it became a decent 80s/90s flick. Flashes of brilliance, even.
I was going to post a retraction, but I don't want to inundate the board.
The interracial relationship is a dead give-away, though.
Fr poojeet's sloppy seconds. Yum
Doesn't matter. It was still included, wherein lies the propaganda value.
That movie is an example why the right loses. Too many conservatives are just chomping at the bit to throw money at Hollywood. They'll take any excuse like "See, no climate change! It's only woke in some areas!".
It's a great grift the left has got going: run an ad campaign how some movie "isn't woke", rake in conservative money, then launder that money into Democrat campaigns. Conservatives are literally funding their opponents.
But hot white chick!
The gaming industry is an even better example. This board will be filled with idiots making posts about how disappointed they are in AC Shadows after they buy it come November. Mark my words.
Normies don't pay attention to the culture war, so they have an excuse for paying people who hate them for their movies. It's a bad excuse, but it's an excuse. "Real" gamers have had the culture war waged directly against them, so they have no excuse. Yet a tiny bit of FOMO is all it takes for them to crumple like a cheap suit. It's infuriating, and makes it very difficult to not just say fuck it and take the black pill.
Last ubi game I bought was Blood Dragon.
ACIII. Get on my level bitch
I mean, not really, considering she died of cancer while her contemporaries like Becquerel did not.
I took one look at the poster and said lol yeah right
The entire soundtrack was country and western
It's interesting that if you base a movie in the midwest including all the dumb shit turns into a chore.
I watched a movie called "The Union" it was fucking terrible.
CGI in this was actually alright - it's from Spielbergs production company
That movie sucked ass.
Literally everyone is a Rule 16 person. Again, saying 'jews' is not an issue.
Then how did you know he was talking about jews?
Edit: since I don't want to wait for a week for you to log in again to reply, I will just answer my own question. You knew because everyone here, including you, knows that the way the rule is written and the way it is enforced are two very different things. I'm glad my use of "rule16" as a euphemism is catching on. I knew it would drive you nuts.
I wonder if I can say "Gas the rule16's", or if DoM will delete this post?
Being that he is a weasel, I would bet his reason for removing it would be for rule 2.
Yeah, because it would be a Rule 2 violation anyway. (ModsAreAIDS was correct. I'm not a weasel though. I'm clearly a dragon. rawr.)
I can also reasonably guess which group is being meant based on context clues. Nobody goes around screaming 'gas the hindi'.
Strictly speaking, I think the Hindus are gassing us.
Just post it. Dont be scared.
Because you are obsessed with jews. It's really quite easy. You insist on using euphemisms when, for the past 5 years, no one in KiA has removed comments based on euphemism. It's the only group you would use a euphemism for in the first place. If he meant black, he would have just said "nog" or some variant.
You assumed he was talking about jews because I "am obsessed with them"? I'm sure that sounded great in your head.
You're collectivists, I treat you as a collective.
Dom uses projection.
It's not very effective.
Oddly, I actually really did mean 'jews'.
I'd love to see a bunch of women, pajeets and jews on an island, trying to grift off each other while nobody does any work.
#NotAllGrifters.