Lurker > Ruvan22

kbelfisBACK posted...

im dying ce pls send help

*sends the undertaker*

apolloooo posted...

She looks fat in this pic. I swear she's only 3.9 kg lol

A chonky Rivel means lots of free heat when it gets cold!

monkmith posted...

friend i grew up with was batshit crazy off his adderall. piss in bottles, throw chairs at teachers crazy. got kicked out of public school a few times for it, and even then i stayed in contact since i'd known him since pre-school and i helped suppress his worse habits when i was around. he finally got his act together when they balanced his meds and he made it to my highschool... and then he started drinking...

i dont like alcohol. my dad was an abusive drunk and i got to watch him die from liver failure because of his issues. almost died in a car accident with him when he paired his drinking with some valium and got into a road rage accident that almost ejected me from the car (shit old car with busted seat belts, only thing that saved me was the fact i was in the back and the front seats were bench seats). so its safe to say i dislike alcohol and hate alcoholism.

well my friend started drinking, heavily, and pairing it with high speed driving in the sports car he got from a dad overcompensating for being a shit father. and i made the mistake of driving with him once. we almost hit a kid because he was going 80 in a neighborhood, he thought it was funny... next time he stopped i snagged his keys, popped him in the mouth, and walked home with them. ended up mailing them to his mother. haven't talked to him since.

Wow that's quite a story - I'm glad you are okay after your dad and friend

skermac posted...

I didnt like it much kinda boring and no character to cheer for

The fighter plane pilot? (Tom Hardy I believe)

onedarksoul posted...

No, I'm saying that these social mores are illogical. Thats all. Just because convention encoded it in everyday usage, doesn't take away from that. Secondly, there are no nuances to consider when anyone who doesn't have dark skin is being shuttered regardless of context. Thats a fact, this is happening now. re: Noam. I'm aware of Chomsky. I studied some linguistics in school and know his pedigree. First class mind.

I'm not sure why you keep choosing to respond to only parts of my post, but:
A) You can claim they are illogical you want, but as people like Chomsky have stated, context and situations matter. Do you have a reason to state they are illogical?
B) Waving away nuances is never a good look, especially here... when you've defended Trump you've often wanted CE to consider nuances to explain or excuse his actions. What makes this different?
C) For the THIRD time, what is the social friction that you feel would decrease by African American's not using that word/phrase?

DarkRoast posted...

I'd love to hear the mental gymnastics on this one

I do too but don't want my brain to hurt

FWIW, the original Equalizer series from the 80s *was* about a man in his 60s (retired spy) who generally used subterfuge and threats of violence (rather than an actual gun fights) to help people, a bit like Leverage.

VipaGTS posted...

Meanwhile...

<img src="//:0"><img src="//:0">

That's really sad...

dummy420 posted...

Yeah they changed it to live die repeat for some of the home video release but I have a copy with the original name. That was a enjoyable one.

I believe it was based on a manga hence the name change..
And I loved that movie for many reasons but especially for Tom Cruise *not* playing a well trained super soldier etc

Yeah I remember that improbably small number being highlighted in the nitpicker's guide to STTNG

How old are they?

Very much a guilty pleasure for me too but in between the one liners and cheesy jokes (hold my pie or wear it) there were some thoughtful/ touching moments (telling the story of the car accident, drawing the dream)

SauI_Goodman posted...

I would sure hope not. I was closer to 35 and with a 19 year old. Wont make that mistake again tho. 25 and up only plz.

What do you remember going poorly in that relationship?

apolloooo posted...

What's this? Money? Not edible 0/10

Bring something better human!

Rivel looks outright insulted!

MacadamianNut3 posted...

wow making my shy af right now

Mocha is spreading the good word about you!

Beverly Hills Ninja

Gobstoppers12 posted...

I think it's intended more to be an accusation of hypocrisy than it is to be an assignment of blame. A couple of years back, Madonna publicly said that she had "thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House" after Trump got elected, but that never seemed to become a big deal, legally.

Maxine Waters never got a slap on the wrist or a criminal charge for her famous speech, in which she said, and I quote: "Lets make sure we show up wherever we have to show up. If you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them theyre not welcome anymore, anywhere"

Given that the case against Trump hinges on whether or not his violent rhetoric about 'fighting like hell' was the inciting factor for a riot, it makes sense to me that examples of double standards and precedent are being mentioned.

The invasion of the capitol building was a disturbing crime that created fear, disruption, and loss of life, and I will never condone the actions of those who caused the destruction and violence. Those people must be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Literally throw the book at them.

However, I don't think Trump's political rhetoric--rhetoric that's fairly common in rally speeches--is the main cause. The invaders made their own choices. They weren't told to attack the building. They weren't told to overtake the barricades. They weren't told to hurt, or destroy, or kill. What they were told, in honest truth, just prior to marching to the capitol building, was to, and I quote Trump: "Peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

Those aren't the words of somebody who's trying to start a riot. Holding Trump criminally liable for what happened is wrong, in my opinion. Yes, it's fair to say that the rally's existence was a contributing factor; yes, his supporters were angry based on his claims of election fraud. I freely admit that he played a role in the rioters'/terrorists' decision making, but his role, in my opinion, doesn't rise to the level of criminality. He said nothing egregiously violent, nor anything particularly inciting, when compared to any other politician giving a speech about 'fighting' an opposing side.

Preemptive Note to the Mod who is inevitably going to review this post for trolling: I am not defending the attackers. I am not making any attempt to justify their actions. I am not denying the fact that Trump contributed to the unrest. I am not blaming any Democrats nor any Media personalities for causing the attack. I am not suggesting that the recent claims of voter fraud are true or realistic. I am not trolling. I am not insulting anyone. I am merely saying, in the most reasonable and factual way that I can, that I do not personally believe that Trump's words rise to the level of an incitement to violence. To support that argument, I have made comparisons to some exact words that have been used by other individuals; words which have been treated with different standards. For the love of God, please do not suspend me again for trying to participate reasonably in a discussion.

How do you feel his refusal to call in the national guard and expressing glee while watching the riot reflect on his role?
(I know neither of those are what he's on trial for today)

Aeriis posted...

imo it depends on the dog, i'm not sure about what any other girls think. but I know a lot of ladies that love guys with cats!

edit: wait nevermind =/

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/single-men-with-cats-less-likely-dating-app-relationship-121121521.html

It sounds funny, but a friend that had just a cat got a dog after hearing that article's point repeated on a few podcasts run by late 20s girls. He didn't get rid of the cat or anything but profile pictures were changed to include the puppy.

I wonder what dp's take on this ruling is..

Well McConnell did say they were coordinating defense step by step with the White House during the last trial, so it's really not that surprising

Are you making enough mac and cheese for everyone in CE?

onedarksoul posted...

A) Why are age restrictions/expectations okay but not racial ones?
Because the ideal is, we're all supposed to be equal. I thought thats what people wanted. Am I wrong here? Or should they be "equal, but separate"?

Are you saying we should be equal in everything? Because currently you pay different taxes that the person next to you, you start life with different advantages and disadvantages, etc. Why is THIS the one instance in which you want people to be equal? I remember previous topics where you were opposed to greater social services for those who needed it..

B) Those are differences pertaining to professional vernacular. I'm more referring to informal social mores and how illogical they are.

A) So why are professional vernaculars allowed a pass here?
B) If we look at social mores, do we expect the same language from 19 year old and grandmother?

C) I'm not complaining about not being able to use it. I'm saying that if some groups aren't allowed to say it because of how utterly "offensive" it is, even if its done innocuously or in a teaching context, than logic dictates that none should be able to use it. A top reporter at NYT just got fired for using it in a teaching context. Its getting worse.

A) It seems he wasn't using it in a teaching context, so it doesn't seem to quite apply
B) Yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater has the same universal understanding regardless of who hears it. The word (or phrase) we are discussing doesn't by nature of the origin of the word, the context varies by the speaker, audience, and message. Noam Chomsky has written quite a bit about these nuances in language, feel free to read the wiki on him to start.
C) You never explained what "social friction" you are trying to reduce by getting everyone to stop using the word?

mft1 posted...

No, that's definitely not an okay reason to take pleasure in the suffering of other people. Her grandfathers were probably drafted to go fight in a war on the other side of the world and saw all the horrors of war you can imagine. Everyone suffers, and that seemed to be her whole point, when you trivialize the suffering of others it becomes easier to excuse worse abuses later.

For the record this is nothing that anti-hate experts haven't said before either.

A) I didn't say take pleasure, I said satisfaction. If someone with a loudspeaker minimizes your culture is it not okay to be satisfied when they face a consequence for it? (Again, satisfaction NOT pleasure)
B) I'm not clear what you are getting at with the statement "minimize the suffering of others" - that's exactly what she did? So you agree it's dangerous?
C) Look very closely at the bottom row of the pyramid (how it all starts). Bias is an irrational belief, while saying politicians that vehemently advocated falsehoods about the election should face consequences is based on the *rational* belief that elections should be verifiable after countless audits.

mft1 posted...

No, that's definitely not an okay reason to take pleasure in the suffering of other people. Her grandfathers were probably drafted to go fight in a war on the other side of the world and saw all the horrors of war you can imagine. Everyone suffers, and that seemed to be her whole point, when you trivialize the suffering of others it becomes easier to excuse worse abuses later.

For the record this is nothing that anti-hate experts haven't said before either.

Were you addressing me?

onedarksoul posted...

A) Age limits =/= racial restrictions.
B) What gave them the authority? This is all informal mores, and I'm merely recommending best practice, to lessen friction.

A) Why are age restrictions/expectations okay but not racial ones?
B) Would you expect a preacher to use the same vocabulary as a construction worker?
C) How exactly would that "lessen social friction"? The people in this like yourself that complain about not being able to use the word have found other things to complain about

mft1 posted...

And if you read the Carano quote she didn't say anything except "be nicer to other people".

So she didn't say that Republicans in the same way Jews were treated?

totalnerdken posted...

I'm not saying cheer lol. I'm just saying it's kinda weird to relish in someone's suffering. I mean, for some people, sure. Like murders or pedos. But for this? It's just kinda weird to be so happy at her being cancelled.

Is it okay to take satisfaction if I'm Jewish since she minimized my people's horror?

Duncanwii posted...

BLM have literally murdered people. Hard to take your cause seriously when your cause has donr the same thing you're fighting against.

Who did BLM murder?

J03can posted...

Winston having a nice afternoon on his chair
That blanket came home with him from the Humane Society where i adopted him

Does Winston like to keep eye contact with you?

Flauros posted...

yeah. you know, how some races are off limits to make jokes about without drawing a lot of hate. And others seem to get a free pass to go ham on.

Which races are off limits and which are "free pass"?

TheRealDill2024 posted...

Is it wrong to defend a family member? She's innocent here.

It depends on what you are defending them for...

Got my second last Friday definitely had more of a reactor the next day (very slight fever, a fair bit of exhaustion)

YugiNoob posted...

I like this picture of my bird lol

He looks quite dignified! Is it common for birds to sit with their legs spread like that?

apolloooo posted...

Do they fight over it if there is just 1?

Sometimes- I've noticed Aster tends to be a bit possessive with a lot of things (even if Obie is playing/using it first). Obie just lets himself be pushed around.

I'm really sorry you are having to go something that feels so surreal but in your face. I'm glad you are planning to see your therapy again (a lot of people would pull further away) though I wonder if medication would be more helpful (as it is generally more effective at changing overrall mood and decreasing these type of intrusive thoughts). I don't know all the particulars of your life right now but it could be the product of lots of smaller stresses/ traumas...
Either way I'm glad you are being honest about it!

She filmed it?!?

SiO4 posted...

At least the dildo went unscathed!!

Sorry

You know with my luck they'd find a dildo somewhere and bring it into my apartment to add to insults

coh posted...

She's not wrong

History says she is..

coolcono posted...

I did as well.

I thought TC was referring to the chick from Transporter 3

Conker posted...

JL sucked but if this has Joker in it and is nearly 4hrs long it is practically an entirely different movie. I mean, I dont even recall any point in JL where there was anything about Joker or how hed fit in the plot.

The last third of the movie was absolute garbage and a different tone. It got really comical and over-the-top cheesy. Up to that point it wasnt great but it wasnt infuriating, either.

I doubt itll be amazing or anything but Ill watch it and hope its as decent as BvS UE.

I voted 6 on the poll.

That's a good point about pacing - the first half really did feel more tense/serious (not grimdark). I was really hoping Alfred's line in the trailer (He said you'd come.. let's hope it's not too late) was foreshadowing a different character

I'm not sure *which* of the two decided my roll of paper towels would be better on the floor...and shredded to pieces

I really don't want to watch the whole thing (even though it's under two minutes), what exactly does he claim happened on the 6th?

Are Mulder Scully and Desi helping with the paper?

MacadamianNut3 posted...

Happy right now but someone is going to the vet tomorrow :o

Does she let you do the coveted cat belly rub?

vigorm0rtis posted...

Are libertarians known for arguing this?

onedarksoul posted...

No reason for them to use it if no one else can.

A) How did you come up with that rule? We have lots of examples where it's okay for one person to use language and for another not to - for example what a first grader can say versus what a college student can say.
B) You didn't answer my question - what gives you the authority to dictate language groups can and can't use?

Rhylos posted...

I mean, we need private companies to control speech on the internet. They need to decide what is wrongthink and kick everyone out of the clubhouse who dares speak it.

Well unfortunately for you we don't have that

That's definitely an awesome pose