I’ve never seen a “refactor” create substantially more lines of code.

Peeping poltergeists ain’t nothing to poke fun at

If they aren’t “bad”, they’re at best “okay.” And that’s disappointing after a long hiatus in movies that had been filled with a shared universe (with its own peaks and troughs) full of interesting and pretty-much accepted expansions to the lore. [Edit: Especially when the new movies went to the lengths of invalidating all of that beloved content. It gives the feeling of “they killed the EU for this?”]

And, this is entirely unsubstantiated, but I feel like much of the design of the new story was shaped by trying to skirt around copyright/“inspiration” issues by avoiding easily attributable ideas from the old expanded universe. Basically constructing a story around what was left in a “legally safe concepts” bucket.

Well, recreational drugs include alcohol but I see your stance.

Are you against recreational drugs? Or just alcohol?

Overheard by an LG TV

This is why you should always lead with cunnilingus: to bait out their reverses and +4s.

Subscribe to my Substack for my self-help series: “Uno Sex, Please.”

I wouldn’t call those “counterexamples” as I understand counterexamples (namely an example that counters a statement or belief). That would mean the examples would have to show that killing the villain did make the protagonist just as bad.

Like, in your Overwatch example, they didn’t become morally bad from killing the bomber. They were disbanded; the worsening situation was as a result of other bad people choosing to disband them. It’d be weird to lay it at their feet for killing a villian with political(?) connections.

I’ve been trying a new thing where I outright insult people less, especially when it seems like they are trying to do/be good in a way I’m not grokking [it was a word before Musk, and I still like it].

Man, I miss calling people “fucking stupid” off the rip, sometimes.

It’s fine if it is the rapist, who hasn’t been raped, is being made fun of for maybe getting raped

Who the hell said anything about Clavicular getting raped?!

Rape culture is a setting, as described by some sociological theories, in which rape is pervasive and normalized due to that setting’s attitudes about gender and sexuality. Behaviors commonly associated with rape culture include victim blaming, slut-shaming, sexual objectification, trivialization of rape, denial of widespread rape, refusal to acknowledge the harm caused by sexual violence, or some combination of these.

I don’t see how their comment would be described as any of these. Perhaps one could read the joke as listing “rape” as a some simple, necessary credential for politics and, in doing so, trivializing rape.

However, the subject of the joke isn’t the rape nor the victim, but the rapist Clavicular and the administration, referencing how many of the current administration have sexual assault accusations against them. The joke doesn’t downsize what he did or apologize for it.

I am genuinely not seeing how that bolsters or perpetuates rape culture.

Edit: and you just tried to insult me instead of answering my question about what you meant by this

Yeah, we all know that the manosphere is closely related to the fascist cultural moment we’re in, but you know that isn’t what you were referring to.

What is offensive about this, in your opinion?

It doesn’t trivialize, or even speak on, who this guy raped. If you believe all conversation should be about the victim, that is one thing. Although some victims might not want their trauma the center of conversation.

What you say isn’t what they are referring to is the only relation I’m seeing. What else would they be talking about?

first male-to-male transsexual

what are you even talking about?

Without being primed to recognize someone, I would pass her on the street, yeah. But, if you threw her into a lineup of women and told me to find JLo, I’d pick her.

There are a surprising amount of people with dogshit facial recognition.

I believe they were making a joke about different positions of intercourse, not actually answering the question. e.g. “Front” ≈ missionary on a normal day, and “hind” ≈ doggy when frisky.

Racism isn’t based on anything rational.

Racists can laugh alongside members when a comedian makes joke referencing a shared culture. And the only way to differentiate between the appreciative and the mocking is the tone of the laughter. You may not have been making an insult, but that’s why it said it dovetails.

It seems you’re focused on the specifics of “insulting mockery of Chinese speech” being a broad insult when comparing it to your joke. I don’t think the other person was claiming they were exactly the same joke, but were in the same category. Although I could be wrong. “Literally” has unfortunately come to mean both what it means and “not literally, but used for heightening.”

While there are English versions of the joke, like a prolific fucker being named Dick Hammer, it just dovetails with the racist jokes that are simply mocking a name because it’s foreign.

Juice that baby’s lungs up with a succulent Camel.

Not looking to start a debate. But genuinely what would you have them make songs about, if not something they believe in?

Edit: I guess you could listen to only acoustic tracks.