worse, I'm seeing 1-2mg recs from Germany, and directly below they refer tp it being fine, citing places like the Paul Ehrich institute.
"we need to start a conversation..."
"at least it started a conversation, doesn't matter that it was untrue, it started a necessary conversation..."
I think its the latter, the way she smugly nods as though she's said something profound, she thinks it is great.
It's something a specific subset of below-average and midwitt minds will do. Come out with fluffy 'profound' sounding nonsense and act all smug like they just dropped something immensely intelligent.
Just to be clear, I'm not a professional "quote maker". I'm just an atheist teenager who greatly values his intelligence and scientific fact over any silly fiction book written 3,500 years ago. That being said, I am open to any and all criticism.
"In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony god's blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my intelligence." - Aalewis
The kind of person who worships science and philosophy but who doesn't understand a lick of it. The kind of person who believes themselves to be far more intelligent than they actually are, and doesn't have the insight to know just how foolish they sound. I've got a family member like that, and it's draining trying to speak to them. They would absolutely come up with catch phrases like that, think they are amazingly profound, and insist it is inserted into everything.
And that is also what we know about kamala, a nightmare to work with, micromanaging, insisting it is all done exactly her way.
This quote though, it does reflect a lot about who Kamala is, and what she believes. It is rank progressivism. A rejection of tradition. A desire to be unburdened by your heritage.
"Let the past die. Kill it, if you have to. That’s the only way to become what you were meant to be”
Modern pop culture expresses many of the same themes and ideas, kamala's version of it just has that pseudo-profound flair to it.
Kirov airship reporting.
There is no escaping globohomo. It's right there in the name. Totalitarians don't stop at borders.
True, but it is wise to retreat out of enemy heartlands. I wouldn't stay to defend Portland or san Francisco.
A sane world would give partial marks for correct working-out, in the event that the answer was wrong, not make full marks dependant on showing all working-out.
Which feeds into the bigger point of "intentionally gimping gifted kids into a schema meant for the drooling retards in their class" that plagues all education.
It really is abominable. Kills their passion, makes them lazy, robs them of ability to pay attention...
this is half of what is wrong in health and academia
Yeah, I also find myself going for slower paced stuff too. Can't be arsed with online chat.
Ever seen one of those women 'twerk'?
Not if I can help it, twerking is quite unattractive. Immediate drop. No class, no thanks.
Muscle tissue doesn't do that. It's fat.
But they are fat women.
Ok bud, sure, whatever you want to believe. Because that's a bodybuilder woman while not on a cut with massive quads. And that's your problem, you're not willing to admit that you're wrong, very few people like that. It's gotta be quite niche.
So long as they actually answer the question that I asked instead of trying to waffle around because they don't want to say it out loud, or they have a vested interest in pretending the answer isn't what it is.
"so long as nobody actually disagrees with my conclusions or premises"
I will go out on a limb and make a guess. It is a guess, I'm not putting words in your mouth, but I'm pretty confident that I'm right. I would be willing to bet that the real crux here is that you find the women in the second set of photos more attractive, and of course you have a negative emotional reaction to being told that you find fat women attractive, so you're trying to talk around the point. You can like what you like. But they are fat women. Just because it's not fat everywhere, does not mean those giant tumors at the top of their legs are not composed of adipose tissue. They absolutely are. Ever seen one of those women 'twerk'? Muscle tissue doesn't do that. It's fat. You like fat chicks. Okay, it's not a big deal. You are probably either brown yourself, or fairly young and you grew up in a culture that was brainwashing you into liking brown culture without even realizing it was happening. And now here you are being attracted to the same stuff that black men are attracted to. If you aren't black, you're not supposed to be. So if you're not black and you are, something was done to you to make that the case. Just as it was done to the white women to make them want to be that. But, I will admit it is just a guess on my part.
"You're either black or with my psychoanalysis, I conclude that you are compromised"
Maybe, just maybe, it's that you is wrong. But you already discounted that possibility:
I am absolutely certain of the answer.
And that's the real crux here.
I'm glad we agree there can only be one.
The one currently controlled by pedophiles, who have used lies to cook up additions to canon and then used those additions to justify killing hundreds of thousands? Or you mean the one which says “think for yourself”?
The one which discourages the degeneracy, rather than like in 114, encouraging it.
The devil encourages you to open your mind too you know.
What’s your definition?
Ask 10 gnostics get 100 answers, but a focus on secret knowledge, loyalty to some other gods (usually thoth/hermes, sophia, some higher god of knowledge/wisdom above the demiurge...), a strong body-spirit duality with the flesh being corrupt, syncretic mishmashes of various other belief systems, and emphasis on alchemy and transformation and attaining the spiritual heaven or godliness through knowledge... It's more a set of beliefs which they'll share some commonalities on.
You are dodging the question, and I highly suspect it's on purpose because you don't want to admit the answer. Throwing up a bullshit smokescreen that is non sequitur to the issue. Women in the 90s and before were just as capable of putting hard work and time as fitness enthusiasts, and did so more than they do now. And the end result wasn't an ass that takes up 1/4 of her body mass. The result was a body like the women in the first set of images. So, ignoring your irrelevant point about how much work it takes to look like a white Shaquanda, women 20 years ago didn't want to. Now they do. Why?
And the moral quality of a white woman trying to look like what black men find attractive is quite simple. It's absolute filth and degeneracy.
All this is in quite the contrast to your OP
My question is, do you think it was deliberately pushed on us by the malicious powers that be, or was it just a natural shift, like as Americans got fatter in general, fatter women who at least kind of wear it better than a blob became the new beauty standard? A bit of both? Any other reasons or factors you might think contributed to it?
It looks like you're already certain of the answer.
I'm not the one dodging anything, it's you being disingenuous. I'm rejecting the premise that they (your examples at least) are fat arsed. It's something else entirely, fitness. They don't share much except size.
Why do I think it is? I don't know. The whole thicc black and big booty latina influence might play a part. So might social media accelerating shifts like that, what once took centuries or decades is now only a generation. But then why wouldn't they just eat their way to that 'ideal' then? It's a million times easier. That's why I think something else is going on.
setting aside entirely what it is or isn't,
What it is is fundamental to the morals of it. Is it something hard to attain and which requires work and time for a fitness enthusiast? Or is it something any casual sloth and gluttony fan can get doing nothing.
Forget ratio, look for definition*. That's a massive quad. Freak.
I reverse image searched just now, looks like I was right,, looks like it's Kiri Sokolsky/kirifitness_
Sure, looking like she's in a bulk phase when that photo was taken as compared to her cuts, and remembering that a woman's body fat % should be a bit higher with less definition, but I am right.
Look at where 2 of those 3 pics are.
It's at the gym and going running in tight pants. Even the kitchen one could easily be a fitness picture too (or an attempt at it given her attire, she's got a bit of a muffin top going on hanging over the tight pants).
It's fit not fat.
Thanks for the explanation. I only have time to briefly discus this gospel of thomas today, I need to be off, it's a day of obligation after all.
Hence I’ll look at something like the Gospel of Thomas with an open mind, and see the beauty of the New Testament in the lean form of 114 sayings by the wisest teacher men have known, Jesus
That's a big assumption. That it even is. You seem to object to verse 114 in particular being included. But the issue is that that verse is in alignment with so many other gnostic beliefs on gender, change, transformation and alchemy. It is consistent with all the other gnostic stuff.
is basically just “use your wisdom to interpret scripture, never thinking you already have ‘all the answers’, but instead humbly seeking His wisdom in His word”.
That's a milquetoast motte definition of gnosticism, as is gospel of Thomas itself. That definition isn't all that objectionable on its face, and nor is this one example text. It is not nearly overtly objectionable as their other gnostic materials (that it was found amongst!). It does nevertheless have lines that should raise an eyebrow in the observant and cause deep unease.
The whole thing about damning the flesh that depends on the body, and the body dependant on the flesh, prayer and fasting leading to sin and condemnation, secret knowledge for Thomas, destroying heaven and heavens above (other books refer to the destruction of the heavens meaning sky, but heaven and the heaven above? Should be a bit worrying) And just all through it a load of contradictions. Contradictions internally and with the true gospels, like with James vs Peter leading the church. It's set it opposition. One or the other must be rejected, and I think it's clear which.
Yeah I'll read through that and research it now, but yeah what examples of subversion were you thinking of?
Most Jap media depicting a fight against "God" is really depicting a fight against an imposter
yes, this is classic gnosticism, a fight against a 'demiurge', who depending on the gnostic belief you are dealing with ranges from incompetent to malevolent, ruling over this world, above whom there are other more benevolent gods (or who he has usurped)
rather than a reference to the God of our real world.
no that's the point, it is a reference to God, seen through the lens of gnosticism. The gnostics believe the God of the old testament to be a demiurge. Gnosticism isn't some isolate belief with its own ideas, it is an offshoot and inversion of early Christianity and judaism particularly around the 2nd century, it comes from and inverts those beliefs and it is quite syncretic, incorporating many other beliefs.
Gnosticism is rife in Japanese media. There are a tonne of examples but elden ring and evangelion in particular. This is not a niche thing, it's in a tonne of their stuff but it's not well understood here. It's not that we've not had gnostic media here in the west either by the way, some big ones would be the matrix, his dark materials and the da vinci code, but they aren't quite as widely prevalent, just a few specific ones whose writers read a few gnostic ideas or conspiracies.
they're terrible
"hey, we're making a spiritual successor to the prince of egypt, we're doing samson/the life of the apostles/king david... or something" - would raise 500b in kickstarter, then that would be shut down, but then givesendgo would raise the same.
"here's a lazy rip off of lazy family guy rip off Brickleberry and cheesy 90s dodgeball style comedies, aren't we so good for the culture?"
note the asterix
it sounded more like you were lamenting its fall. Not saying that's the case, that's the impression the other comments gave, as well as the lack of mocking them.
hey ableist.
Lolis are bad
Repent.
everyone has given you the surface level stuff
The missing part is the 'idol culture' shit. Yes it is on the surface just people with an animated avatar rather than showing their face. And for some that's all it is. Just a normal gaming or reaction streamer but with an animated picture. We grew up on png-tubers doing that, fairly static pictures that would maybe light up or have a few expressions. Just take that and make it more animated.
But a lot of it came out of japan. There's a lot of 'idol culture' bullshit that suffuses a lot of vtubing as well. From constant drama about a couple of 'black companies', parasocial behaviour, and just general weebery.
And that is what vtubing is. Take the old anonymous youtubing with pngs, now it's better animated, but for most of it (not all, but a lot) add a load of 'idol culture'
Time for some furries to make some alternate website that paypal and the credit cards shut down, and which gets refused cloud ddos protection, because it only allows some good old fashioned normal traditional furry stuff. Just some wolves and lola bunny and good old sonic inflation shit. None of this new weird stuff. The conservative furry stuff that we had growing up on the internet and old deviant art.
k, but how am I wrong though.
Its for those ethots to funnel you to their OF too