People really use the "the creator's vision" argument against 3rd person mods? So are they just opposed to mods in general? If something wasn't originally in the game then how dare anyone add it! I remember seeing "creator's vision" as an argument against emulators, too. I remember seeing shit like "If Miyamoto san had meant for people to play Super Mario Bros. on their computers it wouldn't have been a Nintendo game" on usenet back in the day. I wonder how those people felt about Nintendo putting out Super Mario Bros. on handheld devices. Must've blown their minds.
A part of me wants to trawl Reddit to see what the true believers say about this. Do they go “Wow, that Algerian woman sure trained hard to be so tough! Good for her!” Or “That Italian boxer was clearly not cut out for this competition. Maybe she can try again in four year.” Or do they understand the optics of this and simply won’t discuss it at all?
I wish liberals weren’t such awful excuses for people. In a world where being a Democrat was simply another political perspective, rather than an all-encompassing cult, even they would push back on reform a branch of the government just because it didn’t agree with the party.
You lucky bastard. The theater where I saw Long Legs, a place that has tampons in the men’s room, felt the need to place a segment before the movie which explained that THIS MOVIE IS TOTALLY ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY because the director, Osgood Perkins, is the son of Psycho’s Anthony Perkins, WHO WAS A HOMOSEXUAL AND SUFFERED CONVERSION THERAPY TO UNDO HIS HOMOSEXALITY AND SO THIS MOVIE IS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY.
I’m sure they’re being careful. They’re not saying there wasn’t a legitimate attempt on his life (which would mean the dead dad was a “crisis actor.”). They’re just saying he wasn’t actually hit by a bullet. Probably that broken teleprompter bullshit.
She (or whatever it is) didn’t say anything about being raped.