Lurker > Hinakuluiau

Sad_Face posted...

No shit he feels horribly embarrassed (an understatement at the very least) by the situation. He's desperate for closure. Honestly that girl is awful in that she doesn't even consider him human with how she treated him. "I had a great time! Let's meet up again!" -> *ghosts him* -> "You're horrible and made me feel like I was raped".

We're getting one persons biased view of how it went down who admitted he stalked her. Who says she wasn't wrong for feeling assaulted?

Gobstoppers12 posted...

lol fucking what

DeadBankerDream posted...

Seems unlikely.

What are your explanations for why Depp would agree to a settlement that benefits her much more than him?

DeadBankerDream posted...

Her truth is that pledged and donated are synonyms.

I don't understand why Depp would settle with her without an obligation to not immediately (or ever) repeat the same thing he successfully won a defamation case over her saying.

It's typical for wealthy and famous people to force exes to have NDAs, Depp has a history of this as well. Her insurance company pays $1m to Johnny Derp and she is granted the right to do the very thing he sued her for in the first place? Think about that. Depp agreed to this, approved it, signed it.
Something tells me Depp was scared her mounted appeal was too strong. If there was even a chance of it being overturned, the headlines "Johnny Depp loses to Amber Heard in appeal" would destroy all support he managed to get.
Clearly he was informed that she would win the next court case.

Henry gets a pass because he's a neckbeard in the body of a Greek God, the mans problematic but everyone online wants to be him or fuck him so he's safe

WingsOfGood posted...

CEman: "I do, I return them. I just hate cart narc and don't want people to return their cart! I totally do return my cart!"

Well yeah, it's possible to think people should return their carts while also thinking it's douchey to get in strangers faces and record them

NeonTentacles posted...

Why do they sentence people to death but keep them going for decades >_> Why dont they just end it in a few weeks or something?

The idea is that you need to prove beyond normal doubt to kill them. Obviously since 200 people were innocent who were killed this isn't perfect, which is why the death penalty is bad

I don't get how people feel that strong about it

Ignoring glitches, is this a good Pokemon game? I want to buy it but I wasn't that impressed with SW/SH

yusiko posted...

seth always underuses the daughter character

Seth and his writing teams have always been misogynistic so that's no surprise

This doesnt mean overweight people dont deserve to be treated well. I think people tend to treat you better when you give the impression that you treat yourself better. That could be through weight, mental health, attire, hygiene, etc.
Its also easier to do a lot of those things maintaining a healthy weight. Clothing is easier and looks better, you have more energy to do things for yourself, exercise and good nutrition are good for mental health, etc. .

Remember when Sweden fucked up and doubled down on herd immunity

Does it bother you/them?

-BrokenSpiral- posted...

Tf?

It's fairly well known that straight men don't share their vulnerabilities with their friends and will typically hold onto their feelings and bottle them up in an unhealthy manner. When they start dating they tend to push much of their emotional labor onto the partner who has other people she can share with.
This isn't a novel concept, a lot of women talk about how their ex's would offload all kinds of trauma and other personal experiences onto them instead of therapy and their friends

Many of them do want to get married, the reality is that relationships are hard and they don't want to settle.

ClockworkHare posted...

Just like successful men don't really gain much from marriage today, period.

Heterosexual cis men typically don't have friends they form strong emotional bonds with and often offload emotional burdens onto their female partners. Women usually have stronger connections with people who they can discuss heavier topics and spread out onto multiple people.
Additionally even in households with similar income levels and work hours, the woman is usually doing more housework and scheduling tasks. Even successful men benefit from a marriage better than successful women.

Obviously you shouldn't eat a donut every morning. However, it's one of the only things that satiates me without making me snack throughout the day (I've tried yogurt, hard boiled eggs, fruit, etc).
What's something else that's kind of heavy and dense without being overloaded with sugar? I don't mind buying or cooking.

Eramir posted...

COVID still kills hundreds of people everyday, why is the stock market crashing?

Yeah. Someone made a topic the other day that was essentially "how come everywhere is short staffed but unemployment is low?" and it's a complicated answer but a big part of it is millions of people died

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

I apologize if that's how you were defining basic. To me basic is something either intuitive or something you could be taught in less than an hour. If you were defining basic as something that most people do every day or whatever, then yeah these aren't basic skills.

inloveanddeath0 posted...

Oh you're Rod

No, my signature is quoting him on some dumb post he made years ago

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

There are nine things on the list. More than half would mean five of them.
Hanging a TV and caulking do not require any level of expertise or instruction. I would expect a child to be capable of those two (assuming the TV is light enough).
Turning off the water to your house is more an issue of locating the shut off, again a child could do this so long as they are told where it is.
The last two easiest ones would be changing a tire and changing oil. You need to be shown how to do both but I know plenty of teenagers capable of this. I would also say patching a hole in drywall is easy to learn.

The other three are not difficult but I wouldn't call basic either. Where do you disagree?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

An adult should be able to do more than half the list tbh

Male privilege is deciding an orgasm is required to say you've had sex

NeonOctopuses posted...

You gotta face the truth. It's just a hood on a dick. Nothing more

I guess my thing is that fine, 90% of circumcised guys are fine with no foreskin. 90% of uncircumcised guys are also fine with their foreskin.
But that small minority who wish it were the other way around? The one with foreskin can cut it off, the one without can't grow it back. A parent should make decisions for their child that are best, why insist they don't get a choice?

NeonOctopuses posted...

It's just a dick hood. It's not like the fate of their destiny hangs in the balance of their foreskin >_>

Straw man

NeonOctopuses posted...

If my parents let me do what I wanted as a kid and didn't force me to do stuff against my will, I'd probably be calling sick from school everyday, playing Mario 64 until 3am every night, dumping trash all over the house, not getting any vaccines cuz I was super scared of needles, and worst of all, I would have an gross uncut dick >_>

The difference is that it's universally accepted that children should go to school, go to bed early, live in a clean environment, and get vaccines. There are numerous arguments for why parents should go against the child's wishes here.
With circumcision the benefits (mild at most) are basically nullified by wearing condoms and showering properly.

You're removing their ability to choose and sticking them with an irreversible change.

Lairen posted...

My day sucked and was long so i would have continued cussing at her if she had not walked away. I was about to cuss more but once she turned to walk away i immediately dropped it and went back to the phone call.

lmfao get your honky tonk ass back in line, you're in no place to get mad at trashy people

haloiscoolisbak posted...

I've had a girl literally admit to me the physical attractiveness of the guy can dictate whether the exact same sentence is creepy or smooth

She's only one person but still. I sometimes wish I didn't have that knowledge in my brain lol

Hot people can still say and do creepy things
But don't pretend like this doesn't happen to guys. If you're straight and a hot girl comes up and acts sexually aggressive, you'll totally be into it. But if a gay guy said the same thing, you would be concerned. Or if a 90lb meth addict was saying those things you wouldn't be down to fuck her

Such a good person who beat Angelina

masterpug53 posted...

I will say that I would very much resent being written off as someone who doesn't value human life simply because I also value the preservation of art history.

I don't think you don't value life. I just think that the overall point, that climate change will end humanity, is so much more important than preserving art history.
Now whether the protest is effective in stopping climate change, idk. But something needs to be done and I can't blame people for stirring up controversy in a way that grabs peoples attention.

I get the idea that you care so much about history and culture that you immediately shut off, but maybe it isn't supposed to speak to you. Just like when people chain themselves to trees, there are people who don't care. Or anytime protestors block traffic there are people who want to run them over.
Protests are supposed to be in your face. Protests are supposed to make you angry. Protests are supposed to be inconvenient. For you this act is unforgiveable but to someone else it may help bring awareness. Just like how the destruction of property in BLM riots may not bother you but it will cause others to be even angrier

Baha05 posted...

Yet wasting perfectly good food that could feed someone is good how?

If it brings attention to the issue then it wasn't a waste.
I like art, I like Van Gogh. But I find people are really weird when it comes to the significance of art. There are literally people in this topic saying that the painting is worth more than human lives or that the damaging of art is one of the greatest sins a person can commit.

I don't know if the protest will be effective, but I can understand what they're going for.

Strider102 posted...

Now explain what a painting has to do with fossil fuels and how throwing soup on a painting is going to make people stop extracting and using said fossil fuels.

It's not going to do shit.

We preserve and venerate these paintings of nature and beauty but do nothing to protect the nature and beauty - in fact we actively and passively let companies destroy it slowly. And everything they say is right. People are going hungry, and their houses are cold, and looking for more oil is stupid. Their view is that it is the fault of the people because we do nothing to hold these companies accountable.

Honestly if someone is annoyed that glass had soup poured on it I'm not sure their worth the energy. Personally, I think they're on the right side of history.

s0nicfan posted...

As someone who believes in climate change, "We will continue to escalate our violence until our demands are met" isn't protesting. It's terrorism. Now, if you want to argue that terrorism is necessary here you go ahead and do that, but let's not mince words.

History says otherwise. The civil rights protestors were called terrorists at the time when they took to the streets and other violent protests.

masterpug53 posted...

I've said before many times that one of the few things that elevates humanity beyond the status of a particularly-successful virus is our shared art history. I'm also of the opinion that when you attempt to deface or destroy that art for the sake of your contemporary drama, you instantly lower yourself back down to 'virus' status (there are of course exceptions to this, but this instance ain't one of them).

I stand by what I said, but in this particular example I don't believe they even sought to destroy it. The painting has a sheet of glass in front of it, it's not as if they did any actual damage. So, as far as protests go, it's not exactly very disruptive or damaging.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Get it in the news because it is obvious nothing else is working.
A young girl expressing herself and begging world leaders to listen to science turned into ridicule and memes.

The protests will get more and more drastic until people listen and things change. That's how protests work.

Sweden deserves this after their fall from grace over the last few years.

People care more about art than the planet

spikethedevil posted...

See my last post and fuck off.

My dude you do this in a thread like every day. Idk, I thought Brits were supposed to be the kings of dry "humour"

Smackems posted...

I think that was sarcasm

Spike struggles with the concept

TotACon posted...

What was wrong with latino in the first place?

Most average people don't care either way. It started in Puerto Rican academic circles and then became sort of a "well it's coming from someone who is well-meaning" kind of thing
A few people feel strongly because they think it's an attack on our language, but eh. Most of my progressive friends prefer to use latine because it actually works in the language

MachineJaipur posted...

You know people who aren't living paycheck to paycheck? Must be nice

I suppose. Most of the people I hang out with are gay DINKs
The way I see it, the kinds of jobs where people are living paycheck to paycheck have already significantly raised their wages. Fast food and retail has gone from like $14/hr a few years ago to over $20/hr. It hasn't seemed to change things, everywhere still has a "now hiring" sign in their windows.
So then we're talking about professional jobs and most people who are making $65k don't jump to a job that pays $75k without already being frustrated at their current job.

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Except that the raises people want or would need to be retained are realistic, the only thing standing in the way is the greed from the people at the top.

I agree that the executives and board members, etc. are greedy and hurting the rest of us.
But I disagree that raises would inherently lead to higher retention. Like I said originally, people typically have other reasons they want to leave their job, salary is just one component.
Imagine you were content with your job. Good boss, great work/life balance, feeling useful and challenged but never overwhelmed, etc. And you get offered to work for a competitor with a 30% bump. If you don't have much left over after bills, this could be a life changing pay raise and probably worth the risk. But at the same time a lot of people wouldn't want to leave a decent job if it meant they end up trading those benefits for higher pay

It's all relative, I guess I am assuming we're talking about people who are in careers that are in a relatively stable financial situation. If you're struggling and only paycheck-to-paycheck then yes, a raise is a good way to keep people. I'm mostly talking about professionals who make enough money that they end up valuing other aspects of the job

IfGodCouldDie posted...

You'd be surprised at what people are willing to do for money.

It's not that I'm surprised, it's that a realistic raise doesn't keep people.
My company did a 10% raise this year across the board, in addition to the regular yearly raises that are tied to metrics, to combat inflation and keep employee retention high. We still have a similar amount of people leaving now as we did before the raise.
Obviously if a company doubled wages it'd be easier to retain employees, but that's not really realistic.

Granted, a ping pong table is not the answer. There are definitely better ways to keep people, but a raise is not an answer that solves the problem in its entirety.

We all want to be paid better.
But it honestly doesn't keep people. People get frustrated with additional responsibilities, mandatory overtime, poor management, being overworked, low staffing, getting bored of their job, etc. Very few people would stick out a job if they got a raise.

I want Cubone and Meowth. Who should be my main and who should be my partner?

imo

FotR: 10/10
TTT: 9/10
RotK: 10/10

AUJ: 7/10
DoS: 6/10
TBotFA: 5/10

RoP: 6/10

IShall_Run_Amok posted...

but your criticisms of the show aren't very compelling.

Her criticisms are compelling to her. Like Doom and others have said, nobody's really interested in having an argument. I find the show's characters to be pretty boring, the writing on a level much lower than expected from LotR, and the editing/pacing to be all over the place (someone on the first page was complaining about how Galadriel showed up so quickly to this episode's battle, clearly they were not happening at the same time but that wasn't made obvious with what we're seeing happen), etc. and of course the departures from the established lore, but that's just my opinions.
I don't want anyone to stop enjoying the show if they already are and I'm not someone who lives angrily, so it's whatever at this point