When I see a "cock" in a project I'm weighing for my company's use, that decision is a huge negative. If I find two projects with equivalent goals and one is run by assholes, I'll contribute to the other. I also enjoy passive-aggressively forking just to remove the documentation on the "penis" a political activist added, and do nothing else. If they look at their downstream graph and see my commit "extraneous documentation removed" and wonder what I did, my job is complete.
A recent anime, To Your Eternity may scratch that itch a little bit. It's the story of an immortal shape-shifter who very slowly grows and learns (mostly it learns that life is brutal). Season 1 is set in a vaguely Pacific, vaguely ancient era, and touches on multiple types of cultures. I didn't watch season 2 yet though it wrapped a few months ago.
Man, I can't tell and I tried to. Twitter is worse than worthless. Best I can see is that he got into bitch-fight with a DeSantis' campaign aide and started dropping profanities. The tweet in the middle of that screenshot is where the thread begins and ends because he just @'d her without referring to anything specific she'd said that might be construed as a conversation.
Based on how wildly active he's been in just the last day (I count around 100 tweets before I stopped scrolling), he seems terminally online and I'd side with Bee on this one for cutting him loose before he has a meltdown.
I also see he's lined up podcast interviews to 'discuss' his termination already, so this is going to be another one of those personality events for the next few days, I guess.
I'm glad you had fun and appreciate hearing about good times happening out there. Thank's for sharing!
By comparison, and similar to last year when you mentioned this, the ComboBreaker fighting game tournament was this weekend and they are all still in masks. Their rules demanded it, and also included numerous mentions that there were plain-clothes and undercover cops on premises to enforce it.
I couldn't watch it, again. Masks are the least cool and most distracting thing possible to see during a fighting game tournament.
I saw they had an exception in their rules to allow the broadcasters to take theirs off when they were on mic. So reasonable, yet still so far from an acceptable norm.
Surprising to who? Someone who takes the name and assumes it is xenophobic and isolationist? I don't think it is that shocking that even the most idealistic interpretation of the charter of "America First" would have foreign support.
Leftists, who live exclusively in the realm of emotional appeal, have lost the ability to perceive anything outside of their polarizing lenses of racism, jingoism, sexism, and bad vs good. To such a person, I can imagine this is surprising. This childish attempt at creating an incendiary play-field is not a game I am interested in even playing.
Trigun is the standard answer for this. Another of the same author's (Nightow) work is Gungrave which is similar but more of a modern crime/mafia setting. Cowboy Bebop lives up to its name in this respect as well.
A classic show City Hunter (originally made in the 80s, but survived in many forms over the years) has strong elements of a western-cowboy style. Probably best described as an anime version of Miami Vice.
You might also look into the Captain Harlock and related series. Some of those are distinctively western-themed.
One of the inciting incidents of GamerGate was a raid on Wizard.chan at the behest of the 'ladies of the moment' who claimed harassment from there. This was a literal and actual collection of very pitiful incels (accurately, the term came from there) who almost categorically cried to each other about how lonely they were and made random stories up to entertain each other. Their ability to 'harass' anyone was profoundly non-existant. But one of the harpies had been pot-shotting them internally for fun and decided their brand of wild internal fiction could be weaponized by a sympathetic press.
By framing alone, the most helpless, weak, and pathetic people perhaps to imaginarily exist even theoretically on the internet, were categorized as evil and attacked by a mass of white knights who had no business ever knowing they even existed at the direction of an evil opportunist with a platform.
I liken it to going into an orphanage, coming out and saying they were all terrorists and without investigation (except, yes, here is a dirty diaper, that is a bio weapon) vaporizing the building with a missile. Then claiming that what happened, see, was you were stealth attacked by them and had to protect yourself.
So, yes, there is nowhere that cannot be utilized in the culture war, even for such an unrelated reason as 'existing.'
As a non-kangaroo, though, why 'cooker?' What is the term supposed to evoke? I am completely baffled by it's derogatory usefulness in this context. Is it just some meme's phrase with an accidental origin? The article mentions the original appearance was a nobody claiming a group was "Brad and his little cooked pals." Was that a typo of 'crooked,' or is there some other connotation there we're not getting?
They're deliberately creating a vector of complaint for anyone in a 'lower' jurisdiction (state, local) to raise suit over such policy there because it will be 'out of compliance' with the federal 'standard.' This is an obvious attempt to make criminals harder to control and accelerate the degradation of bad neighborhoods. They want blood in the streets + helpless law enforcement because only then will there be an appetite for the revolution they openly peddle.
It's hard to follow this guy's slang-filled stream of consciousness diatribe and the article does it no favors by breaking it into pieces, but I THINK he is asserting that black QB's are more athletic and that rules that protect QB's are not for them but for the white players. He additionally thinks that the league has it in its best interest to make even more strong QB protections to enable more white players to be viable in the position, for the express purpose of having them be successful and marketable enough to replace the black QB's as the 'face' of the league.
Let's express his points more clearly:
- blacks are more athletic than whites
- blacks are bad for league advertising
- a winning black quarterback is the face of the league
- the new crop of drafted players are black quarterbacks
- the league must curb this if it wants to survive
- the mechanism will be a rule change to enable whites to be competitive
- the rule change will be something to encourage QBs to be sedentary, passive, and untouchable (because whites are such bad athletes)
- the league will use any excuse to promote a white quarterback to save itself
This is funny because he tries to place racism at the 3rd degree of separation. He doesn't think he is racist, nor are the league owners racist, he thinks they (the owners, not him) think the average American consumer is racist and will only buy tickets if the quarterback is white. His opinion is that racism will apply not because he is racist, not because the employers are racist, but because the employers believe (mistakenly? he never says) the audience of their product is racist.
The innocent non-racist commentator comes up with the speculative case for racially motivated rule changes that take the form of protecting the bad athletes whom are white so the non-racist league owners can cater their product to the optionally-imaginary racists in their audience.
ESPN: "Racism is so powerful it can bend reality to its whim by only POSSIBLY existing in a vague collection of unnamed plebs."
It gets high praise because it was marketed 'correctly.' The critic apparatus is just an automatic endorsement for insiders. I knew something was badly wrong when I saw they managed to make a Tiefling look frumpy. Then the director opened his big fat mouth.
I don't recall the specific Olympics, but NBC was the American affiliate and it was wall to wall Green everything. "Green" as a type of thing was introduced to the collective culture and pushed obsessively starting then. During the opening ceremonies the news anchor in charge had the gall to stage them 'dimming' the lights in their studio to save energy to be more Green. He also had the complete lack of self-awareness to declare that the saved wattage by just dimming those studio lights for the (only 10 minute!) segment was the equivalent of an entire year of a normal American household electricity usage saved. Begging the question of what in hell "Green" is if it would take a mortal man a year of living like a Luddite to compare to 10 minutes of the lights being on in a TV studio.
I did a little searching but came up empty for a clip of this, but I would really appreciate anyone who could find it.
To my memory "Green" as a product category label was not widespread and certainly not a synonym for "Carbon Offset" as it came to mean rapidly thereafter. It was an institutional media blitz that lasted years and I watched it progress through everything. Grocery store items, car accessories, fucking bedsheets. From that point and for many years after "Green" had to be on the box somewhere or you were part of the problem.
There have been a number of mass global mask-off watersheds in media in the last few decades. The early 2000's Olympics (suddenly the color Green was political). The 2008 Election (not Democrat? RACIST). The 2014 GamerGate scandal (no parenthesis needed). These were all accelerating and building from each other. But the beginning of the current peak of frothing, savage, unhinged political carpet bombing was the 2016 Election.
They built directly on the 2008 Democrat election tactic of creating a victim class, creating a golden icon of that class, raising it on a standard and demanding your worship and deference under pain of the sword. Their victory was a fait accompli and their defeat shook them right down to their shoes. They became "deranged" as we often point out and worked tirelessly and illogically with cultish single-mindedness to reassert their domination of culture and themselves as rightful determiners of human civilization's destiny.
This enabled them any measure and abolished any restraint. The "flyover" class stopped being rabble beneath them, but instead became their enemy to be crushed and paved over. Their friends in every form of media dutifully joined the holy crusade and self-righteously converted their entertainment channels into propaganda chutes.
Shitty Woke media has always been with us. But after 2018 it was literally all that was allowed to exist at any level, and all concerns of profit or viability vanished before the righteousness of their cause.
Ctrl+Alt+Del ? My impression from, goodness, 10 years ago, was that he was already insane then. He'd fight with his audience, his co-creators, himself. Loss itself was a meme largely because of the creator's ego telling him he was a narrative genius and trying to subvert his own comedic comic for poorly executed drama shit nobody wanted to see.
I never liked it, so I never followed the creator too closely, but I have a vague sense in my memory that he was annoyingly political too (I have no specific fact for this and I didn't look into it before replying here). With the name, you should be able to check into it (some also shorten it as CAD).
This seems like very standard and expected Oglaf material. Though I haven't kept up in the last many years. I think it seems based because webcomics have become personal diatribes of extremely shitty politics and attempts to win the twitter arguments they lost yesterday in comic form. Like watching any movie before 2018 now, it's all so shockingly alien in its normalcy.
When you associate that closely, you're accepting common guilt for your members' behavior. Projecting strength isn't the only thing 'solidarity' gets you. It means you are all guilty of the offenses of your most criminal member because you refuse to police it and you use your projected group strength to protect them from consequences.
There should be a fifth panel that replaces the scissors with a flame thrower.
I think the main aspect of the joke is supposed to be that the villain is imaginary. But as we always point out, why not accept the imaginary pretext as a Leftist? Yeah, we want to make it illegal to entrap children and eat them. What is the basis of your opposition? That we made up that it is happening? Are you afraid there won't be enough laws for your real problems later because we used them all up on this? Is that how laws work in your head?
Fair enough, that's how 'wealth' works to a Keynesian, so, maybe you do think laws work that way too.
But let's get to the real level. Leftists oppose these measures via deflection alone. "That's not really happening, that's just rabble rousing!" By making a law that says "witches can't eat children" they say we're just creating "anti-witch sentiment" on purpose so we can kill witches for any reason by asserting that they eat children too. This is an understandable fear because this is how they use the 'racist,' 'sexist,' and 'pedo' cards always. "It's not the degree of evidence, it's the nature of the charge" has been the Leftist go-to political kill-move for 50 years. Their favorite attack has been off-topic aspersion and zero-basis slander for 2 full generations.
Cancel Culture is a Leftist invention, they thought they could ride Weinstein all the way to Trump and manufactured a social movement to do it. They haven't had total control of it at any point, and it was a stupid idea to begin with as evidenced by every single big target ending up being a Donor Class Democrat. Doubling down on failure, they selectively reversed the cancellations of the Democrats they liked, showing it all to be a hypocritical sham.
So let's just be clear. Protecting children (pre-teens, infants, unborn) from exploitation, mutilation, and murder is now an exclusively Right position. And the best defense a Leftist can muster is "Let them do what they want" right after "You made that up."
"They're attacking the fans" = "We can't stand criticism. How dare they call us out on our harassment and bullshit?"
"Woke Media!" = "People who criticize us."
Criticism goes one way. Consumers, purchasers, buyers. They get to criticize the thing they are considering for their investment. Producers? They do not get to criticize their audience. They don't. That IS an attack, that IS 'Woke' entitlement.
The attempt to normalize the state of 'choosing your audience' is why you will perpetually fail to understand why you even fail.
Who, indeed.
The move we see here is to wag the ass before taking a dump in your lap and then dare you to respond. It is done from a position of absolute safety and power. You can't even complain.
This was easy to see coming as soon as we had journaled papers in the social sciences based entirely on the author's own opinion. There were already no standards, the imaginary wall was going to be pushed to the sea by nothing more than people attempting to lean against it.
Academia is garbage. The entire industry and all supporting frameworks. I am happy to hear them cry "Improper! Impolite!" as they are drawn and quartered by their own children.
I'm archiving all of this offline (will tag it properly later) so if anyone wants something from this collection in the future, let me know.