Lurker > bfslick50

Prestoff posted...

With that said, it's pretty obvious that the next episode is going to have Loki and Ravonna save the day...erh time...timelines...I'm fucking confused on what they're trying to save. But since both of them got prunned, it makes sense they would be the ones not killed from that explosion.

That was a past pruning for Loki, in the first episode this season when he needed to get pruned so Morbius could extract him from the timeline

I teach at a Catholic school. Pay is even lower than public schools in my area but outside of that I dont have remotely same problems in scale as whats described here. Theres pressure from guidance to not fail kids but hold your ground and grade stands. Discipline is worse than 10 years ago but mainly cause current assistant principal in charge of discipline is lazy as fuck. Im still hopeful that can improve with new personnel.

Laserion posted...

I was also confused for a time. "Isn't that the name of the guy in Wayne's World"?

Me too!

CyricZ posted...

And then we're like "oh is this how Ravonna and Kang get together, referential to the comics?" and then one episode later "Nah, turns out she doesn't like him, she's pissed and now just wants to use him, and then it turns out their actual relationship was in the past with the He Who Remains variant and you think that does something but the Loki has X-5 just prune her bye".

Yeah, that whole bit accomplished nothing. Ravonna is back at end of time, where she was at the start of the episode. Ms. Time is rebooted and effectively killed, but small tweaks to the previous episode could've accomplished that when Victor disabled her. The prisoners are dead but whether they are in prison or dead, they aren't interacting with the plot anymore so it's not much of a plot difference. Same result would've been achieved by only X5 accepting the deal to work together. The sounds of their death did invoke strong reaction so there's that. Victor was delayed but he died so quickly that starting 10 minutes earlier would not have made a difference.

Brilliant, I support that teacher

DanHaren4Ringz posted...

In some cultures, funerals are actually celebrations of the persons life, so there will be food, some small forms of entertainment, wear colorful clothing, etc. This idea that everyone had to wear black and cry and be depressed at funerals is a culture specific thing.

I once went to a Muslim funeral. They wore white instead of black and I was told by a Muslim friend before I went that someone hysterically crying would be inappropriate. Still, it was a coworker that lost 2 of her 3 kids in a car accident. I can't imagine any culture making that shit not sad af.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


A 90 minute commute is rough. I did 75 min for a year and it was the most exhausting experience. Now I have a 15 min commute and its so much better.

This will be underreported by the liberal media

Lol

Smackems posted...

Also maybe have the long night last longer than ... one night

Turned out they weren't such a big threat after all

That was the biggest letdown of all. A season long war instead one battle wouldve made a lot of other things forgivable.

furb posted...

Gerrymandering would only impact the electoral college if the college failed and selection reverted to Congress. The reason being gerrymandering would impact the actual reps serving and the districts that selected them in that scenario.

Electoral college is based on the amount of reps and senators states are allotted which is not directly related to their districts within a state- which is a concern of gerrymandering.

The issue of the allotment of reps is a separate issue but gerrymandering is related to it downstream.

But rejecting the vote and sending the election to the House is the Republican plan for 2024.

Probably every presidential losers has said some version of "I'm going to win."

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


That was a fine place to subvert expectations, a lot of unexpected things can happen in the chaos of a battle, but their execution sucked. Arya killing the Night's King once you set him up as the final overarching antagonist works fine, but she needed to do it like a faceless assassin not a random action hero. Instead of leaping over his army to get to him it would've made more sense for her to wait in the tree like an assassin and let him come to her.

Trump constantly reminds me of this scene.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gnsyS0fLKx0&pp=ygUqSXRzIGFsbCBhIGNvbnNwaXJhY3kgc2hhd3NoYW5rIHJlZGVtcHRpb24g

sabin017 posted...

I think TFA alone is better than the PT even though the other ST films have major problems.

TFA as a stand alone film is good, and would be great as the first film, but as the next installment of the series it derailed everything. They blatantly copied New Hope, put zero thought into how we got here or where we were going. People assumed watching TFA there was a plan and the other films are hated more because that's when you realized there was no plan.

AloneIBreak posted...

The inclusion of the word toxic renders the phrase unserious and relegates it to armchair psychologists, but I dont think theres any denying that men can formulate their ideas of masculinity in ways that are both personally and socially harmful.

Im not sure masculinity is a valid concept at all though.

So you want a word that describes exactly what toxic means but sounds more academic to you? That's a pretty trivial complaint. Usually when academia has an uncommon complicated word it's because it's using multiple root words combined to describe a complicated topic or it's a very old word that was a simple word in the language it was first proposed in.

King_Rial posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com./user.php?db=.12.user=%21/badges/54-tagger

So...apparently I have the most users tagged out of anyone on Gamfaqs.

Well done, sir. I'm just happy to be on the list.

Lil_Bit83 posted...

You know what we called toxic masculinity and toxic femininity back in my day? Sexists. That's all the word really means. Simple, concise and to the point. Not all manly men are sexist. Not all girly girls are sexist. Some are.

Yep, it's a more specific term for a more specific scenario.

bfslick50 posted...

Toxic masculinity is those that define some abusive behavior as masculine

cjsdowg posted...

Why do you link abuse to masculinity ?

I don't. But some people define controlling their woman as masculine. That's abusive. That's a toxic definition of masculinity. What word would you like to use to describe people who view physical and emotional abuse as manly? Toxic masculinity seems to fit the bill for me.

Prismsblade posted...

What counts as abusive behavior? That can be very subjective, and

I have to define abusive behavior for you? Sealioning

there really are certain stereotypes men are expected to uphold whether they like it or not in society. So shaming guys for it does nothing but confuses them mostly.

So I said don't shame guys for not living up to a stereotype, and you're saying those stereotypes are expected whether I like it or not and it's confusing for me to shame the men that are shaming others? What?

As for the alpha male thing I dont really know what else to call such guys. So until an alternative is created I dont really care.

Dipshit already works as an alternative to a guy that likes to call himself an alpha male.

LearntoRead posted...

Plus, in reality a GOP speaker doesn't guarantee a functioning Congress anyway. This might be a lot of effort for little reward.

This. A Republican Speaker is what every government shutdown has in common.

Prismsblade posted...

Its a pretty vague term

Not that vague. Toxic masculinity is those that define some abusive behavior as masculine and those who gate keep masculinity by saying men have to live up to certain stereotypes.

And tbh I havent seen anyone online or irl that used the word who were even a semi likable person.

How do you feel about the group that likes to use the term alpha male?

Jeffries is consistently getting the plurality of votes. Until that changes they should be helping us out.

ViewtifulGrave posted...

Whats so bad about Antman?

Relies way too heavily on characters hiding information because audience isnt ready to learn. The mom very blatantly withholding information is frustrating. The daughter waiting until the 3rd brush with death to use her suit makes rewatch worse.

The infinite Scotts was cool but outside of that they didnt lean hard enough into weird quantum physics. Most of movie just felt like an alien planet.

Modoks change of heart was the cringiest dialogue, served no necessary plot point, and was inconsistent with character history. Scott lampshading that its bad scene isnt funny. Write better scenes.

If you set up the climatic turning point to be a sacrifice then its unsatisfying when in the end nothing was sacrificed.

Kang losing really hurts his threat level. Thanos had minions lose but he didnt lose himself for several movies.

So when do they just nominate Trump as Speaker?

No_U_L7 posted...

no because it turned out to not be necessary

The number of things that are necessary is inversely proportional to how much money you have.

Is the man turning down the dessert cause hes on a diet? If so then my have gender stereotypes changed.

If money got tight, could you prepare something edible and reasonably healthy on your own instead of paying someone else to do it? Thats cooking as a basic life skill. Going beyond that to more elaborate and more delicious is getting beyond the basics.

Xenogears15 posted...

Thank you

GIVE ME MOAR

Seconded, their tears taste so sweet

GranolaPanic posted...

Republicans want a shutdown. Matt Gaetzs entire reason for removing McCarthy was over his working with Democrats to make a deal.

The GOP thinks the public will blame the Democrats for a shutdown. And unfortunately theyre probably right.

None of their past shutdowns has resulted in any sort of win for them.

I did jury duty once, it wasnt that bad. Got full day off from work but we were done at noon each day.

The Tea Party and Trump are the model for how you take over a party. You dont sit out until a good enough candidate comes along, you aggressively participate at primary level so youre the vote new candidates need to court.

Zwijn posted...

My complaints also arent just about the primaries, with straight winners and losers. Your entire system is way too focused on winner takes all, even within parties themselves.US voters barely have any choice in politics. My country is governed by 21 parties and it goes well enough, 2 is absurd. I dont get why this is seen as some attack with all the defensive takes, as if wanting some place to have a better system is haughty in itself.

But you were asked how Bidens primary win was unfair. Because the Democrat primary isnt winner takes all. There were 20 options in 2020 when Biden won. Its a Republican (GQP) talking point that Biden stole the primary and election. You specifically said Bidens primary win was unfair but you cant name how. The Democrats are a coalition party, multiple parties under one name. Our primaries do have choice but then you get kind of stuck when facing off the absurd Republican Party but you specifically took issue with the primary. So far your only specific complaint about the primary is your preferred candidate Bernie/Yang lost.

FortuneCookie posted...

Mechanical showcases his intelligence though and allows for those plot convenient "I'm out of web cartridges!" moments. It doesn't work the same for him to shout "I'm out of bodily fluids!"

I mean your body can definitely underperform when stressed, tired, and over exerted. Weve all had moments where your mouth was dry because your body wasnt producing enough fluids. The plot point can work either way but its easy to make it gross when dealing with organic, so those writers are more likely to avoid it.

Inohira posted...

That's the one big exception, because nobody really "won" that ST. There was a less than 100 delegate difference between the frontrunners afterwards.

Lol, you seem to have missed the point where it would've been a 500 delegate difference in Clinton's favor without proportional assignment. Splitting California 204 to 166 in favor of Clinton is VERY different than giving them all to Clinton. It would've been a Clinton/establishment landslide without proportional assignment.

Inohira posted...

While his campaign continued it wasn't actually competitive past ST. Naturally a candidate can run for as long as they want, but they don't necessarily have a chance.

I don't think that's true for 2016, but I'd have to relook at the data.

Inohira posted...

He won a plurality of votes, though. If it's not a 1 on 1 election I don't see why the candidate needs a majority, instead of just more votes than everyone else.

Meanwhile in the Democratic primary if Bernie went into the 2020 convention with only a plurality of delegates, a contested convention would start and the superdelegates would be freed from being locked to their state's vote and allowed to just pledge themselves to whatever candidate they wanted instead; I think that's more unnerving than anything possible in the GOP primaries.

Youre conflating two things. Trump won a majority of delegates by having a plurality in many states. Its harder for an outsider candidate to stay in it if they dont get at least SOME of the delegates from each election. The winner take all system makes those early states king makers.

Problem is due to the Democratic party's modern focus on "unity" the Super Tuesday primaries basically decide the winner anyway. Once a candidate wins on ST, the voters coalesce behind them. You're doomed if you lose ST, realistically.

Obama/Clinton went well past ST. As did Bernie both times. The proportional assignment of delegates makes it easier for 2nd place to survive.

Inohira posted...

And then Dems have the audacity to say their #1 priority is protecting democracy, when their primaries are handled less democratically than the GOP's (superdelegates, pushing kingmaker states like South Carolina earlier and earlier in the process, etc.) and they'd rather go with a weaker establishment nominee than a stronger grassroots nominee despite the risk it presents of a Republican winning. They use the external problem of fascism to deflect from their internal corporate problems.

Whoa. GOP primary is winner take all system is way worse than anything the Democrats do. This is how Trump was able to amass so many delegates in 2016 despite winning around 30% of the vote. Meanwhile the Democrats dole things out proportionally so the election isn't decided as quickly, leaving those other candidates a better chance to amass a following.

Intro2Logic posted...

I can't speak for that guy's concerns, but the staggering of primaries lends outsized weight to some states at the expense of others, much like the Electoral College.

I really wish the primaries were followed a geometric series in that every week the number of delegates up for grabs was double the total number of delegates decided so far.

Week 1: small state
Week 2: medium state
Week 3: large state
Week 4: a couple states
and so on. You technically never completely without hope but you have to show some level of momentum to stay in it. Also make sure each week is in a different geographical location.

Zwijn posted...

You Americans should have chosen Yang or Bernie.

Zwijn posted...

Bro I dont even know what a GQP is

So let me get this straight. You follow American politics to know who Yang is, to jump into Trump/Biden political topic, but you haven't heard the term GQP, especially during political decisions on this board? You have vague complaints about the primary process that you thus far haven't elaborated on.

Zwijn posted...

All I did was mention your system isnt the best and would like better candidates for you. What the fuck dude.

But what specifically is nonsense about the primary process? What specific improvements do you have in mind?

I thought they had a plan, but this is embarrassing

Lol, of course they dont have a plan. None of their government shutdowns had a plan. They just throw a tantrum when they dont get their way but theres never a plan as to what comes next.

Zwijn posted...

I never said there was trickery. Just meant that the whole nominee shit is nonsense in the first place.

So youre not repeating the GQP narrative that Biden stole the primary just like he stole the election?

creativerealms posted...

It just amazes me that we so divided that are choices are between two old men who both seem to be losing their grip on reality and one of them can commit every crime under the sun and people will ignore it, hell praise him for it, and he can actually win.

We need better candidates and rules that you can't run after you try to steal an election. Yet here we are.

Nah. Democrats had 20 choices and half a dozen of them got solid media coverage. But the choice was in 2020 because everyone knew itd be an 8 year choice if the Republicans didnt get their shit together. The Republican Party needs to be defeated handily like the Federalists and then the Democrats can split like we did before.

NPC posted...

dumb meme

Google historical gas prices. They were lower in Obamas last year. With Trump they only rose slightly but the the huge rise started on his watch during the pandemic.

If everything was the exact same conditions were in place and Trump was president youd be bragging bout the unemployment rate.

There was a guy that freaked out. He punched and broke a cafeteria window looking out into the hallway. I missed the lead up but saw the punch. Afterwards we joked hed be in less trouble if he just punched the student that angered him.

Zwijn posted...

You Americans should have chosen Yang or Bernie. Not that it was directly within your power with all the nominee shit, but thats what revolutions are for.

There was no conspiracy nominee shit. The vast majority of Dems in the primary voted for Biden. It wasnt a trick. Even the media has turned against him because he lost the first 3 primaries pretty handily but in the end thats who the people wanted.

ScazarMeltex posted...

Have you considered spending more time with them and less here than? Because I would like to suggest that strongly.

Wow, you suggested it'd be best for him to just leave and it just worked.

lol, Alchemist_Emil just blocked me because I noticed he's a Trumper with 51 karma.

Alchemist_Emil posted...

Not Biden

Finally got back onto CE with your new account to post this?