Random Rant of the night.
-
All I'm saying is that if you find yourself in a debate fighting against the people who are trying to support diversity, maybe it's time to take a step back and think about things for a bit.
And what @xaade is trying to say is that the SJWs should either vote with their pocketbooks, or stop trying to couch-warrior folks, because the couch-warrioring is hurting their cause by causing the folks with money and power to start putting earplugs in.
-
spending habits?
!= creating opportunities.
That's only supporting opportunities. Not creating them.
You can send a message that you want diversity, but you aren't hiring someone for that role. You're only waiting for the market to respond.
I didn't do that.
Oh, I'm sure you never will either.
So you admit that all that nonsense about how studios would go bankrupt if they had to hire diverse casts was a lie, then?
If the market didn't support it. That's my entire point. The focus isn't on the problem, but the source of the problem. If you want Hollywood to respond, then you need to drive up enough money for it to happen. Meaning, you need to put your money where your mouth is. Obviously not enough people support diverse casts, or they would exist.
Unless you believe businesses are passing up shit-tonnes of money to keep the hate-machine moving. Oh what a conspiracy!
I don't see why entertainment even needs to be an ‘industry’ in the first place.
Hence why YouTube is such a big success. I mean, there's absolutely no one capitalizing on homegrown channels are they? There's never been a guy on YouTube entire the industry from that homegrown effort. And there's never been an industry women enter the homegrown market. [(The Guild)][1]I can have way more fun just trolling some jerks on a tech forum than I could by consuming anything a corporation ever made.
Still driven by supply and demand.
Now it's just “meh, I can just go online and find something that actually appeals to me”.
Not at all related to the success of YouTube or Netflix.
Good lor man. You're speaking right into my talking points, while trying to argue with them.
You say ‘opportunity creators’ I say ‘worthless chumps pissing away their inheritance just to feel relevant’.
You're just a spiteful person, aren't you.
No one can do anything right without your approval or guidance. Typical SJW.
Don't you get it? Couch-warriors are irrelevant. They make no difference other than to piss people off and create their own circle-jerk interest groups.
All I'm saying is that if you find yourself in a debate fighting against the people who are bitching about, pretending to care, but not actively trying to support diversity, maybe you're actually right.
FTFY
[1]: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1138475/
-
Obviously not enough people support diverse casts, or they would exist.
Maybe. There could be (and I'm fairly sure are) lots of other reasons why any number of things that enough people would be willing to support don't happen. That they don't exist is necessary but not sufficient to prove your point.
-
Obviously not enough people support diverse casts, or they would exist.
If people "supported diverse casts" in the ways you suggest, you're not actually going to successfully get the change you want.Your argument is that the takeaway studios should get by a dramatic uptick in sales of a turd of a product which just happens to have a stereotypical token anti-privileged person is that putting anti-privileged people in starring roles is good. But what about the other messages the studios could get? Like, "the stereotype is funny and in demand; let's start adding (negatively) stereotyped anti-privileged everywhere"? Or, "People really liked this IP; let's ditch the token anti-privileged and focus more on the core story"? Or, it catches a case of sequelitis, perpetuating the negative imagery of the anti-privileged and/or the steady decline in overall quality?
To reify this, take the example of Samus Aran in Metroid: Other M. I feel like I should be smacking Nintendo for taking a strong female character, even if she was a little lackluster in depth, and turning her into a wailing Oedipal waif that's flatter than Paper Fucking Mario. If I were a feminist, I'd consider this game a major setback in the campaign for independence and equality, chaining a character to dependency on Adam and motherhood. I wish to express my disapproval of this turn of events by not purchasing the game. Yet you'd cast me as a terrible person unless I bought the game, despite its faults, just because it starred a woman? That it'd signal to Nintendo that they need to centrally feature more women in games? Isn't it just as likely that they'd take the signal as one to waifify and de-empower the women in their other games, such as making Peach and Rosalina unplayable cheerleaders only? Or that they should set aside Samus entirely and make a Metroid prequel consisting solely of Adam and Anthony? Or make a Metroid: Other M 2: After Fusion that makes no sense at all and is just a Samus-as-waif vehicle? (For a television version, see The Cleveland Show)
Moreover, what happens when sales inevitably decline? Studios could attribute this to the natural falloff effect that happens to almost all productions, or they could attribute it to "unpopularity" of the anti-privileged actors. Which do you think is easier and more cost-effective? (Hint: It's not the one you want it to be.)
Hollywood isn't going to respond to consumers. Period. So "putting our money where our mouth is" in the way you suggest won't work, and in fact works against you by perpetuating the very same problems you seek to overcome.
-
I wish to express my disapproval of this turn of events by not purchasing the game
Good so far...
Yet you'd cast me as a terrible person unless I bought the game, despite its faults, just because it starred a woman?
And fail...
false dilemma.
Studios could attribute this to the natural falloff effect that happens to almost all productions, or they could attribute it to "unpopularity" of the anti-privileged actors. Which do you think is easier and more cost-effective?
Until they remove what they think is the defective part, only for the next game to fail as well.
Now they need to rethink how they misunderstood.
Or once again you go back to conspiracy where they just want to throw their money away.I'm not saying these conspiracies don't happen. But they do manage to fail after a while. See sonic waffling on who he wants to be in the 3d realm, only to re-enter 2d after countless failures to spice up the source material.
See the ever increasing bustline of a certain soul caliber character eventually collapse under its own weight.
See the new Laura Croft.
Stylized graphics lead much to the imagination, but when the graphics get more realistic you have to tone it down or it doesn't look right.
This had nothing to do with SJW pushing their agenda, and everything to do with a change in the market.
-
There could be (and I'm fairly sure are) lots of other reasons why any number of things that enough people would be willing to support don't happen.
Which eventually fail.
Look, if enough of your market refuses to buy because of social injustice, it will fail the business.
Not enough people care.
So the SJW need to stop attacking businesses because they will get zero distance on that.
-
Liberal hollywood who say they want more diversity isn't going to respond to consumers who want more diversity.
Don't you see a problem with this picture?
-
Not quite what I meant. @TwelveBaud said:
Institutional Hollywood that promotes PR but never takes risks isn't going to respond to consumers who have actual opinions.
They don't care what we say we want; they have a market research team that tells them that. They don't care why a project is profitable as long as it is; they don't care why a project isn't profitable as long as they have something to blame.
-
To reify this, take the example of Samus Aran in Metroid: Other M.
Fuck that game.
I feel like I should be smacking Nintendo for taking a strong female character, even if she was a little lackluster in depth, and turning her into a wailing Oedipal waif that's flatter than Paper Fucking Mario.
You should. So should everybody.
If I were a feminist, I'd consider this game a major setback in the campaign for independence and equality, chaining a character to dependency on Adam and motherhood.
It is.
I wish to express my disapproval of this turn of events by not purchasing the game.
Correct.
Yet you'd cast me as a terrible person unless I bought the game, despite its faults, just because it starred a woman?
None of this works for Nintendo specifically, because Nintendo fans buy EVERY shitty product they come out with. Because Nintendo fans are the worst.
Or make a Metroid: Other M 2: After Fusion that makes no sense at all and is just a Samus-as-waif vehicle?
Considering Other M gave her a bra size of something like FFF, a waif would be a nice change.
Moreover, what happens when sales inevitably decline?
Hopefully Nintendo will start making some GOOD games. But don't hold your breath-- they have enough stupid nostalgia fans to cruise along for decades.
-
they don't care why a project isn't profitable as long as they have something to blame.
No one can control that.
Everyone wants to say what they want to do, but never use their money to back their political correctness. They want to force someone else to pay for it.
This is the inherent problem with EVERYTHING.
-
Fuck that game.
Good
You should
Great
So should everybody.
Not really.
They turned her into "Company Woman", because they wanted to expand the universe, but they failed to understand why the fans liked her.
I don't think it was an attempt to oppress her because she was a woman. The same thing could have happened if she was a man.
But nevertheless, I don't think anyone has an obligation to share my view on it.
If someone wants Samus to be the military commanded type, then that's their choice. She's a fictional character.
Nintendo fans buy EVERY shitty product they come out with
Again, all you can do is vote with your money.
Other M gave her a bra size of something like FFF
Or, Prime gave her a D cup size. We have no other source of truth on this. There is no consistency in her human design.
And besides, push up bra + armor + etc could easily put her at a DD realistically (which isn't all that hard to obtain these days)
start making some GOOD games
They have. It's just that not all of their games can transition to 3d easily. And it is a hard transition to make.
There have been many games that have lost their franchise with the switch to 3d.
-
There's never been a guy on YouTube entire the industry from that homegrown effort.
Parse error.
-
They turned her into "Company Woman", because they wanted to expand the universe, but they failed to understand why the fans liked her.
They took fucking Ripley from Aliens and turned her into Aunt Bee.
Not to mention all the RETARDED ideas: oh the Chozo armor? It's not a suit anymore, it's MAGIC powered by CONCENTRATION! Didn't you know?! Why not have magic in Metroid!
Not to mention the fucking terrible writing. Adam sacrifices himself to do the self-destruct thing because he thinks the metroids have been generically-engineered to be invulnerable to the freeze guns. He thinks they have. It's never established whether they have or not. He literally kills himself over an ass-pull. This "perfect military mind" who gets his entire squad killed.
"The Deleter"... really? The Deleter? That's the name you're going with? His plot thread doesn't even fucking go anywhere.
Even the acting is atrocious.
Watching that Retsupurae video was like playing Halo 4 all over again. Except Halo 4 has some good ideas in it. ... not many. But more than zero.
I don't think it was an attempt to oppress her because she was a woman. The same thing could have happened if she was a man.
I think you're 100% wrong; the game was written by Japanese men.
If someone wants Samus to be the military commanded type, then that's their choice. She's a fictional character.
Nobody wanted that.
Or, Prime gave her a D cup size. We have no other source of truth on this. There is no consistency in her human design.
And besides, push up bra + armor + etc could easily put her at a DD realistically (which isn't all that hard to obtain these days)
At least DD is within the realm of human possibility. Her design in Other M puts mid-90s Lara Croft to shame, it's ridiculous.
They have.
Lies.
-
Japanese men
You can't compare Japanese culture and sexuality to Europe and America.
Good luck reconciling all that.
Japanese women are going to look at modern western feminism and go
all over that.case in point
In any East Asian culture you will find that women have a very tangible power within the household. This is often rejected by non-Asian feminists who argue that it is not real power, but ... Japanese women look at the low status attributed to the domestic labor of housewives in North America and feel that this amounts to a denigration of a fundamental social role—whether it is performed by a man or a woman.
But go ahead and white knight all over their ass, and tell them that the oppression is so deep that they don't have free will. And that it's up to a man to save them from their lack of free will by imposing his own free will disjoint from the traditional imposition of free will historically by men.
"Trust me, my form of oppression is different. It's for your own good."
Nobody wanted that.
Omniscient Blakey is omniscient!
Her design in Other M puts mid-90s Lara Croft to shame, it's ridiculous.
From what I've seen of their culture, women have no problem with large breast sizes.
Again, you can't compare the two cultures. Just like you can't compare our modern culture with our culture 100 years ago.
And it would be wrong for westerners to come in and tell them they have it all wrong. Let their women decide that for themselves.
Eastern women have summarily rejected modern feminism.
-
You can't compare Japanese culture and sexuality to Europe and America.
Yeah I can. I can, for example, say:
Japanese men are sexist misogynist pedophile assholes, and men from Europe and the Americas generally aren't.
Japanese women look at the low status attributed to the domestic labor of housewives in North America
Wha...? That isn't a thing that exists.
But go ahead and white knight all over their ass, and tell them that the oppression is so deep that they don't have free will. And that it's up to a man to save them from their lack of free will by imposing his own free will disjoint from the traditional imposition of free will historically by men.
I have no idea what that paragraph means, so I'm going to reply with the word "fungus".
Fungus.
Omniscient Blakey is omniscient!
Duh.
Eastern women have summarily rejected modern feminism.
Ok; but we're talking about a game that was released in the US, so I don't see the relevance.
-
so I don't see the relevance
Ok, so we need culture filters when Japanese games are imported?
Yeah I can
Not without making an attempt to understand it.
Look at dating sims. One might say that this is Japanese men exerting control because this represents their fantasies.
Except that it neglects the fact that the games are so popular because men are so wrapped up in work that they can't support a real relationship with a real woman, so they create these games as shortcuts to relationship. And that in no way does this idolize what a woman should be.
So it's unfair to say that Japanese men want their women to be like girls in dating sims.
-
Ok, so we need culture filters when Japanese games are imported?
It was localized, right?
Samus isn't Japanes herself, right? (Neither are any of the characters, are they?)
No, you don't need "culture filters" (whatever the fuck that means.) But if Nintendo's going to localize the game, they should localize the game.
Not without making an attempt to understand it.
I can compare all kinds of things. I'm a wizard that way. Want me to compare this pair of noise-cancelling headphones on my desk to the concept of indentured servitude? I can do it.
Look at dating sims. One might say that this is Japanese men exerting control because this represents their fantasies.
Except that it neglects the fact that the games are so popular because men are so wrapped up in work that they can't support a real relationship with a real woman, so they create these games as shortcuts to relationship. And that in no way does this idolize what a woman should be.
So it's unfair to say that Japanese men want their women to be like girls in dating sims.
I think it say their entire society is sick.
-
@xaade said:
Japanese women look at the low status attributed to the domestic labor of housewives in North America
That isn't a thing that exists.I disagree. To be a traditional housewife in modern America is looked down on. Feminists tell women that they must have a career to be valuable. Those who chose the traditional role of motherhood and housewifery are perpetuating the patriarchy and oppressing other wymyn, blah, blah.
That's not to say that all, or even most, of our society views women that way, but the feminazis are visible and vocal.
-
No, you don't need "culture filters" (whatever the fuck that means.) But if Nintendo's going to localize the game, they should localize the game.
Holy hell.... you want them to replace the entire plot?
-
Feminists
want choice, as long as you choose correctly.
By choose correctly, I mean validate their existence.
Choose incorrectly and obsolete them, means certain death threats.
-
And localization that just means censorship of material because we're too sensitive and spineless to accept that there may be material we don't agree with....
... is just fucking bullshit, and I can't support that at all.
That's fine if you want material that challenges social structures, but to say that all material needs to fit your very narrow world view is just as bad as the people you fundamentally disagree with.
You're basically Fahrenheit 451 all over again, just with a new social standard.
-
Wha...? That isn't a thing that exists.
I call bullshit. My wife often gets told off for being a stay at home mom and "wasting" her degree in Food Science. Never mind that (most days) she enjoys staying home with our children and watching them explore. Never mind that she gets to have all sorts of fun learning experiences with them.
And then there's the "employment status" fields that is asked for on many different kinds of forms. Some will accept "homemaker", which is reasonably close. But most of the time if you try to put that they laugh and tell you "Nope, you're unemployed."
My personal experience when I was a stay-at-home dad made me feel like shit. I had people constantly telling me to go get a job and stop leeching off my wife. Never mind that the jobs they were telling me to get wouldn't have paid enough to cover the child care that would have been necessary. Despite that, I still count myself lucky for the nearly three years I spent with my oldest while she was just starting to explore the world. There are many experiences I wouldn't give up for anything.
Western society, as a whole, does not value stay-at-home parents.
-
I don't think these guys understand that there are two extremes here.
There's the extreme that says a woman stays at home, and that the money is the man's money.
That extreme doesn't understand servant-leadership. If they want to insist that "it's my money", then they need to start back-paying their wives for all the housework and 24/7 service.
Then there's this new extreme that thinks that women can't have free-will because they are oppressed into some brainwashed state, and need the feminists to free their minds. That somehow this "enlightenment" is something more than just the same oppression with a new role for women.
Get me a sandwhich becomes give us your kid.
-
Holy hell.... you want them to replace the entire plot?
I doubt that's feasible, but they could have at least attempted to give Samus SOME agency. Even if it was just a few throwaway lines.
I mean, you're talking about a game in which the final boss battle is done by some man protecting your poor fragile female protagonist. It's frankly beyond hope.
-
I disagree. To be a traditional housewife in modern America is looked down on. Feminists tell women that they must have a career to be valuable. Those who chose the traditional role of motherhood and housewifery are perpetuating the patriarchy and oppressing other wymyn, blah, blah.
This. My wife has experienced this, and I've experienced her anger (directed at the bitches who condescend to her) regarding it.
That's not to say that all, or even most, of our society views women that way, but the feminazis are visible and vocal.
It's not all hyper-angry. But there's a lot of it out there.
-
My wife has experienced this
I don't know how much my ex-wife experienced. Most of our friends were either couples in which the wife was a stay-at-home mom, or genuinely respected that choice. If she got much condescension, she never let it bother her very much, AFAICR. It was her choice. Ever since her sister's first kid was born, a couple of years before I met her, she decided that's what she wanted more than anything.
Frankly, I do not understand people who think that nurturing the next generation of humans, and raising them to become (one hopes) happy and productive adults, is less important than sitting in an office shuffling papers.
-
Frankly, I do not understand people who think that nurturing the next generation of humans, and raising them to become (one hopes) happy and productive adults, is less important than sitting in an office shuffling papers.
Because feminists think it validates the ideology of the patriarchy.
How they came to the deduction that having a few women use their faculty to choose to stay home to raise children is a threat to the feminists careers, is probably due to the fact that they already use faulty logic, and the other fact that many of these couch warriors don't have productive jobs anyway.
"By choosing to stay home, you're demonstrating that my couch ranting really isn't needed in an era where women have a higher degree of freedom than they have ever had. No, the march must go on, I must stay relevant and oppressed in order to earn thousands from speech engagements and editorials and my youtube channel."
-
And what @xaade is trying to say is that the SJWs should either vote with their pocketbooks, or stop trying to couch-warrior folks, because the couch-warrioring is hurting their cause by causing the folks with money and power to start putting earplugs in.
What I'm saying is, that's not hurting their cause as much as you might think, considering
a) they were already not being listened to
b) a rich person that doesn't listen to consumers is a poor person waiting to happen!= creating opportunities.
That's only supporting opportunities. Not creating them.
You can send a message that you want diversity, but you aren't hiring someone for that role. You're only waiting for the market to respond.
Fuck you, ok. Maybe I don't have a million dollars, but I work hard, I do a good job, my contribution to society is just as valid as anybody's.
Oh, I'm sure you never will either.
If we're going to be doing personal attacks, I might bow out pretty soon. Not because I'm sensitive, understand, I just don't want to end up hurting you.
If the market didn't support it. That's my entire point. The focus isn't on the problem, but the source of the problem. If you want Hollywood to respond, then you need to drive up enough money for it to happen. Meaning, you need to put your money where your mouth is. Obviously not enough people support diverse casts, or they would exist.
Expect Hollywood to respond? No, Mr Wolf, I expect Hollywood to die.
Haha, get it? I'm referencing a line from a famous movie in a post where I criticize the movie industry. Omg so meta lol
Unless you believe businesses are passing up shit-tonnes of money to keep the hate-machine moving. Oh what a conspiracy!
They're just big and dumb and out of touch.
Hence why YouTube is such a big success. I mean, there's absolutely no one capitalizing on homegrown channels are they? There's never been a guy on YouTube entire the industry from that homegrown effort. And there's never been an industry women enter the homegrown market. [(The Guild)][1]
Still driven by supply and demand.
Sure, but it's like agile vs waterfall; real human interaction vs focus-group design-by-committee.
You're just a spiteful person, aren't you.
If calling things like I see them is spite then sure, I'm full of that.
No one can do anything right without your approval or guidance. Typical SJW.
People can do what they want idgaf. I'm not gonna respect them unless they do something worthy of respect though.
Don't you get it? Couch-warriors are irrelevant. They make no difference other than to piss people off and create their own circle-jerk interest groups.
Still better than couch potatoes.
-
Frankly, I do not understand people who think that nurturing the next generation of humans, and raising them to become (one hopes) happy and productive adults, is less important than sitting in an office shuffling papers.
QFT
-
-
Frankly, I do not understand people who think that nurturing the next generation of humans, and raising them to become (one hopes) happy and productive adults, is less important than sitting in an office shuffling papers.
QFT
-
-
I don't know how much my ex-wife experienced. Most of our friends were either couples in which the wife was a stay-at-home mom, or genuinely respected that choice.
I'm not trying to get on your lawn, but a lot of this stuff is what my wife has seen on, e.g., facebook. Not all even directed at her.
Frankly, I do not understand people who think that nurturing the next generation of humans, and raising them to become (one hopes) happy and productive adults, is less important than sitting in an office shuffling papers.
+°
This is one of the reasons that I love working from home. My kids basically have two stay at home parents.
-
Haha, get it? I'm referencing a line from a famous movie in a post where I criticize the movie industry. Omg so meta lol
Man...I was with you until you ruined it with this.
If calling things like I see them is spite then sure, I'm full of that.
When I umpired Little League games I learned that in that job, you have to see 'em like you call 'em.
-
Man...I was with you until you ruined it with this.
Yeah, that was pretty terrible. I should have known better.
-
All I'm saying is that if you find yourself in a debate fighting against the people who are trying to support diversity, maybe it's time to take a step back and think about things for a bit.
-
my contribution to society is just as valid as anybody's
I never said it isn't.
I'm just remarking on the reality that creating jobs and opportunities is more effective in producing change in what opportunities are available.
To compare.
Being a couch-warrior is like standing next to a homeless person and demanding someone to feed them.
Supporting job creators is like giving someone a nickel to buy an apple, in the hopes that more people will given an apple.
Being a job creator is like picking up the homeless person and giving them an apple.
If we're going to be doing personal attacks,
It's not a personal attack.
It's natural for a person to look out for their friends. It's just that doing so is equivalent to nepotism.
The idea that we can have a perfectly fair and impartial system is not realistic. The best thing we can do is have a networked system where hopefully everyone has someone looking out for them.
I expect Hollywood to die.
I appreciate the humor.
But I have to remark that this actually fits the narrative of the SJWs. They expect to control and demand industry to die and be reborn as they see fit.
They're just big and dumb and out of touch.
That may very well be possible.
They can fail their analysis of the consumer base when trying to find a product to sell.
That doesn't mean they are performing an analysis and saying, "Fuck they want a strong female lead. Never!"
Sure, but it's like agile vs waterfall; real human interaction vs focus-group design-by-committee
Except that they are still financially bound to the bottom line result of the product.
If calling things like I see them is spite then sure, I'm full of that.
Except that you're wrong.
The reality is somewhere between the ideal as I see it, and the injustice as SJWs see it.
I'm willing to accept this realistic dynamic, but SJWs are intent on proving that everything is a damn conspiracy against them.
The "patriarchy" is of the conspiracy level of the Illuminati control of everything. They can't be seen because they are everyone. Everyone that has power. In the dark, recesses. And the world needs us conspiracy theorists to drag it out into the light.
Yet for some reason many are falling for this new conspiracy.
What's the difference?
Well, both conspiracies are full of bullshit to the nth degree. But the feminist conspiracy is built upon events as people have subjectively experienced with them and can identify with. It also addresses the ability of one to shirk off responsibility for the conditions they live in. So the small amount of truth in their conspiracy is something people actually identify with.
Absolutely no one has ever thought they lost an opportunity because the Illuminati denied it to them.
But a portion of 50% of the population has convinced themselves that they've lost opportunities purely because of their gender or race. Some of which is true, but certainly no where near the numbers that believe it.
-
It's simple.
Leadership isn't containment of followers or collection of power.
It's there to guide the whole toward equal levels of success for everyone with respect to their position.
A good leader unblocks.
A good leader directs people towards their goals.
A good leader protects.A bad leader conserves power.
A bad leader controls people.and so on.
-
>Don't you get it? Couch-warriors are irrelevant. They make no difference other than to piss people off and create their own circle-jerk interest groups.
Still better than couch potatoes.
I prefer the potatoes, if they are the ones who STFU and just get on with it themselves. I've had to block a LOT of people on Facebook who go on rants trying to force others to buy into their views.
-
Have you tried chronological mode? Facebook.com?sk=h_chr iirc. If you let facebook choose what to show you, it's gonna keep surfacing bullshit like that, just waiting for the one that's gonna hook you, because that's the kind of stuff that keeps people playing the facebook game.
-
I noticed too that it seemed to show me things from almost half a year ago like it was a current event.
I've necroed far too many posts Facebook!!!
-
I've been trying to make Facebook use chronological mode all the time, but I can't find a way that sticks. (For some reason, that query string does not stick.) It's why I've stopped using the site and -- until two days from now, when they're nuking that capability from orbit -- use third-party apps instead.
-
I like switching between the views, because I'm not on facebook all the time, so I get interesting stuff that happened while I wasn't there or new stuff when I want to see that.
-
Well it's not from randomers, it's from my friends. I like these people, I just don't want to see their drunken 3AM rants :P
-
Yes, my sober 3 AM rants are so much better.
-
Yes, my sober 3 AM rants are so much better.
Wait, what? You are sober during those rants‽
-
I might be bipolar.
-
... or ambitoxicated, a bit like if Schrödinger's cat would drink a few beers.
Also, check raw of the post you're replying to.
-
It makes total sense that I'm superpositioned with myself.
Explains how I keep feeling like I'm slapping myself all the time.
-
... or ambitoxicated, a bit like if Schrödinger's cat would drink a few beers.
Now that's a concept that I like. Don't usually drink this late though; I end up regretting it too much in the morning.
