u/CummingInTheNile

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldcup/comments/1uo6mf4/folarin_balogun_available_for_usmnt_vs_belgium_as/

Context: Folarin Balogun is a striker for the USMT in world cup, whose having an exceptional tournament so far. In the US's r32 match against Bosnia and Herzegovina, Balogun received a controversial red card. In football/soccer, when a player receives a red card during the match, they are not only ejected from the game, but suspended from the playing the following game, thus, Balogun would miss the US's round of 16 game against Belgium. Today, Infantino, the head of FIFA, rescinded Baloguns suspension, after a supposed conversation with president Trump.

HIGHLIGHTS

Fuck it, we Ball - FIFA longtimers here acting like corruption is a brand new thing that hasn't been happening for the last 70+ years. Now that the US is a little more heavily involved y'all wanna have a conniption over it. Go USA 🇺🇸 >I despise people like you. Always claiming you're the victim, so it's "your turn" to enjoy the fruits of corruption, and it's only fair. But that's literally what every corrupt person on the planet says to themselves. >>Do you get as salty about the rampant corruption elsewhere, or do you only have a special place in your heart for the US? >>>Oh the "salty" meme, you NPCs are really busting out the classics. Just the corruption that involves Epstein's best friend, actually. Nobody else, ever, you caught me. >>>>What does Epstein have to do with the world cup? If you think that's a "gotcha" moment, you should know the vast majority of Americans want those files released too. Not the burn you think it is. >>>>>Epstein's literal best friend gave you this gift. Enjoy it. >>>>>>Again, mentioning Epstein isnt the flex your think it is. >>>>>>>Maybe if you repeat it a few more times it will become true. Like I said, enjoy the gift of corruption from his best friend. Savor it.

Euros punching air afraid of the team of a country that cares so little about the sport that they had to use a different name because it was already taken. If Belgium can’t beat a country whose best athletes play other sports than that alone is embarrassing. >Who created the term? Tell me who created the term used? Was it the Socceroos? No, it wasn't. Tell me who created the term! >>Are you even literate? That isn’t even relevant to the post. Americans don’t like the sport. I don’t know what a Socerroo even is nor do I care. >>>LMAO! Don't know what a socceroo is, don't care, can't tell me who created the term. Apparently it's you that doesn't care for the sport and you're here why exactly? 🤣 >>>>Your literacy is still subpar. No where in the post does it say who created the term soccer or that America did. It’s entirely irrelevant. The fact the US calls it by a different name than basically the entire world highlights how little Americans care. Try reading again slowly, word by word. Then attempt to process how the words interrelate to form a thought. You can do it! It’s never too late to learn how to read! I’m rooting for you. >>>>>Stfu....YOU obviously don't care and not sure why you're here. Learn who created the term and what a socceroo is, jackass. America hates the sport so much huh? Tell me how it is that this cup has beat the attendance record previously held by the '94 cup? Actually, don't even worry about answering. You clearly know fuck all.

This is incredible. How the hell does this happen? It seems incredibly problematic. Will they be suspending red cards for everyone? For star players only? For WCs only? Jesus. Now the senior players can play however they want. >It’s happened before on questionable red cards, you can’t appeal but FIFA can deem it not suspension worthy, like this one very much was. >>Wasn't really questionable though was it, he could've snapped his ankle. Sets a terrible precedent >>>So all the experienced commentators like Henry, zlatan, Landon Donovan etc called it anywhere from dubious to bullshit. Yet, you in your infinite wisdom disagree with all the experts who said it was a bad call. You don’t even think it’s questionable. >>>>All the ones on American television 😂 who do you think pays their wages... >>>>>Ah so you choose to believe they are lying to feed a conspiracy, rather than simply giving their opinion? Ok.

It was a shitty red card. Now we have precedent for future shit red cards to be removed. People should be happy. >"shitty red card" Balagun already missed 30+ min of the match and USA played with only 10 men. Isn't that enough of a punishment? Instead of banning a player for an additional game why not treat the next match as if the guy already has a yellow? >>Because that would give players a free pass to do stupid shit. Let's say you are playing a team with one stand out star player that they won't win without. With your suggestions someone could commit a red card level offence against him to get him out the game and be back playing in the next one. >>>Sure homie we'll change the rules mid-tournament for the shithole host country only >>>>Such a shithole that visitors for the cup have generally been loving it. >>>>>Man I loved my vacation in Tanzania that doesn't mean.. you know

Screw all of the haters on this sub! I feel pumped that Balogun is able to play tomorrow night and I just want to see us make it to the round of eight! >Thanks to Marc Rubio and Trump, FIFA broke their own rules… >>You could say they broke their own rules by improper in-game use of VAR. >>>No because their var rules allow the use of var if the var referee thinks a red card was missed and they can use sliw motion to determine the point of contact. No rules were broken. You are being fed lies in your corrupted americans media >>>>I looked into this and you’re correct. VAR was invoked properly. I still contend it should not have been ruled a red card offense. >>>>>This started so well with you admitting you didn’t knew the rules but looked it up and i was right. But you think that contact should not be a red… there is not a single football/soccer fan outside of the United States that sees the image and don’t think it’s a red And all we know from the decision is Trump called Infantino and FIFA decided to cancel the red with no explanation. This is a first in world cup history and clear corruption

Eurotards: “Ronaldo ban lifted good. Balogun ban lifted bad.” >Europoors here : Ronaldo ban lifted Bad. Balogun ban lifted bad. >>“Air conditioning bad. Balogun ban lifted bad.” >>>"P*dophile president" good for me said the yankee >>>>Trump is a piece of shit but don't be a bigot. When you talk like you are acting the same way trump supporters do. All bigotry is bad. >>>>>I didn't vote for him so I can sit on my ivory tower with peace of mind. Do better, for the sake of the whole world

So Americans can only win if they cheat, nothing new >It was a terrible card to begin with sit down scrub >>your p*dophile in chief is the only one who called it a "terrible card" >>>Trump knows nothing about sports in general. Don't deflect. This was fifa's decision. >>>>the president literally came out with his opinion on the red card being unjust on twitter. >>>>>That doesn't mean it influenced the decision. And if Trump says he influenced the decision, he definitely did not bc we all know he is a liar.

No, fuck that. Fuck this whole tournament. We’re going to start lifting bans as favours now? Fuck this, fuck Infantino and fuck anyone who supports this. If the US plays him I pray they lose their match in spectacular fashion. >Salty because we have a competitive team for once? >>Any team would be competitive when you have the FIFA president in your back pocket duh. >>>Explain your logic behind your comment. How did Infantino help us score 4 goals against the team that eliminated Germany and France could only muster a PK goal against? >>>>I don't think you need Infantino to help you tie your shoes. >>>>>If beating Paraguay is as easy as tying your shoes then why was it so hard for France and why wasn’t Germany able to win? >>>>>>because group stage is the regular season and knockout is when the actual tournament begins. stomping on 3rd place paraguay in a weak ass group definitely is not the flex you think it is. >>>>>>>You’re saying Paraguay sucks but they eliminated Germany and France struggled. You can’t have it both ways.

Look at the Americans who hadn't watched a "soccer" match in their life until a few weeks ago celebrating blatant corruption. You can't make this shit up. >Why is it corruption? By the rules it sounds like it was a misuse of VAR right? What's the corruption? >>Before Ronaldo’s, it’s never happened that a player’s disqualification was postponed by a year. There’s no reason why it should happen this time. >>>So new rules are always corruption? Seems to be working as intended >>>>There was never a rule change >>>>>The specific text and designation of Article 27 was introduced as part of a massive overhaul in the 2019 edition of the FIFA Disciplinary Code, which officially went into effect on July 15, 2019 Just using the rule as intended >>>>>>"A comprehensive overhaul occurred with the 2019 edition, effective 15 July 2019, which reduced the code's articles from 147 to 72 for conciseness and restructured provisions to streamline disciplinary proceedings, particularly by centralizing authority in the Disciplinary Committee for match manipulation cases and mandating simplified evidence exchange to minimize correspondence." Nothing of relevance to the case. There was no rule change. >>>>>>>I’ve heard they did it with Ronaldo, Caicedo, and otamendi this tourney. So it seems to be used a lot. If this is just the first time they’re implementing the rule it seems new. (15 more comments of these two arguing)

I'm feeding off the tears of all the people crying over this. Was a bullshit red card in the first place due to the VAR, rightfully rescinded. He's hoping it's a good match tomorrow >It was a very unfortunate, yet legitimate red card. Come on. >>It should have been a yellow card. There was no intent, and live commentators (even ones from other countries) agreed it should not have rose to the level of red. There's no dispute that it's a foul. There's dispute to the level at which it was given. >>>This is the world cup of "soccer" fans learning the rules of football, crazy. Do you know the rules? Do you see intend ANYWHERE when it comes to this kind of foul? >>>>Read below in my comment to another response. You have selective reasoning. >>>>>The fact some pundits think it's not a red card means corruption is ok? Don't bring Fox here ... shit media anyway. British media said it was red. Seems like only in the US they contest it. Great job >>>>>>Men in Blazers, a whole bunch of broadcasters, and others dispute that. You only hate that the US got this, not that it was reversed. If this were one of the British teams, you'd rejoice. And again, where was your outrage when Messi did the same action and didn't even get warned? Where was it when Ronaldo got the same treatment to excuse his red card and allow him to play in the first two world cup games?

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/1un7bko/usa_250_flightradar24/

HIGHLIGHTS

Graffiti for rich people, but more damaging for the environment. >Redditors are insufferable. >>Says a Redditor named Trump's Cum My On A Hole >>>No, it's worse than that. The uppercase letters correctly separate the words. >>>>Trumps Cummy Onahole. Not certain how that's worse? What's an "onahole"? Is "cummy" meaningful slang beyond, of or pertaining to cum? >>>>>I'm not sure I can describe an onahole better than Google. Cummy here just means, yes, cum-crusted/stained.

The fact that THIS upsets them is just straight up mental illness >Our world is dying bro, sometimes its hard to crack a smile >>[removed] >>>"Don't be such a fucking pussy" is gonna be a great epitaph for humanity's tombstone. >>>>Doomer gooner. >>>>>We are doomed of we don't do something now broh >>>>>>Get to work fixing it then bud >>>>>>>See that's the real doomer shit. "Oh well what can you do, might as well ruin shit faster before we go." Cowardly and stupid.

This country is such a joke >The fact that this makes you mad just showes how unhinged you are >>You’re right, we should be happy about our country being run by corrupt pdophiles. >>>Lmao bro it's a private plane having fun and look what you're turning it into, are you seriously this miserable? >>>>Just say you like pdophiles, it's less words >>>>>Actual bot >>>>>>Lol, says the hidden post history account P*dophile lover! >>>>>>>lmao, my history isn't hidden at all clanker >>>>>>>>It was at first, maybe reddit just sucks lol I'm not a bot, I don't mindlessly suck off Trump or Israel

Not feeling patriotic this year >There’s nothing to celebrate, unless you’re a fascist, a p*dophile, a r#pist, or stupid rich. >>You live in one of the most prosperous countries in the world celebrating being one of the only governments on the planet to last over a century. Crime is falling, GDP is growing, and there's a line out the door of people who want to enter. But your doom scrolling of your echo chamber has convinced you to be miserable because that's what drives your engagement. >>>do people eat GDP? >>>>Some people eat paint chips. >>>>>i can tell

country of the great epstein files. >In current news DOJ did NOT turn over redacted files when judge ordered them to do so! Fucking great country right?!?!??! >>Schizophrenia detected >>>The fuck? This is legit Google it dipshit. Oo also pdo supporter detected! Gtfo scum bag >>>>Schizophrenia detector goin nuts now, off the charts. >>>>>Lmfao says the person who supports pdophiles.....might want to go check yourself in my friend >>>>>>Who said who I supported? This is why you're schizo. You're making up a reality of your own. Are people chasing you in this world? >>>>>>>Says the person who commented on a comment regarding the DOJ not handing over redacted Epstein file? How is this schizophrenic please explain yourself? >>>>>>>>The post is about a plane celebrating the 250th birthday of the country by flying around in a pattern on radar. You turned it into DOJ EPSTEIN FILES HAHA HAHA P*DOPHILIA WOW GREAT COUNTRY HAHA ... Brother, that's insane. It's the fucking 4th of July, we've celebrated this day for a quarter millennium now. Nothing in the post supported any politician or party.

Built on slavery >Pretty hard to find a country older than 200 years that didn’t benefit from slavery in some way or another. Not justifying it, just saying calling out one country for something almost all had a hand in is a little insincere. >>Pretty hard to find a country older than 200 years, period. Folks don't realize the US is actually one of the longest standing continuous governments in the world at this point, an impressive feat for a legal system. >>>"Pretty hard to find a country older than 200 years, period" Not terrible hard. Russia, Scotland, England, Wales, Sweden, France, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Spain, China, Japan, Mongolia, Vietnam, Siam, Brazil, Portugal, Argentina, Mexico, Chile, Peru, Egypt, Canada (not independent until about 60 years ago), Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Paraguay, Bolivia (just hitting the 200 year mark I believe), Uruguay, Haiti (second independent country in the Americas after the USA), coasta Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicraugua. And that's just the easy ones for me. Most of those are old colonial powers or former Spanish empire released by Napoleons wars. Of course the reality is that your comparing governments to countries. Countries can end up with many governments like France and Germany. The country is old though. Well France is, Germany is 150ish. In that case, the US is probably somewhat lucky but it's also not 250. The US constitution wasn't made in 1776. >>>>Few of these qualify. In the 20th century, China went through a dynastic transition and then a revolution, Russia saw a revolution and a state collapse, Japan had its constitution rewritten by a foreign power. Etc. I'm not talking about countries with militaries strong enough to prevent loss of territorial independence (though the US would be first in that as well). I was commenting on having a legal system well-designed enough to ensure a continuous system of government.

Do better in your next 250 America. Way things are headed I doubt you will >America is the best, so we'll see >>You a fan of America’s history/ Mr “wipe out a whole civilization” today? >>>Bow down or bow out muh fucka >>>>??ok😂 So that was a yes or no question btw, is that a yes? You like slavery and trump etc >>>>>He loves pdophiles >>>>>>Stop telling on yourself. >>>>>>>Yawn, you done here? >>>>>>>>No one was talking about pdophiles, yet you brought them up. That's because you're always thinking about p#dophiles. Pretty telling (11 more comments of these two arguing)

I am a pilot and can assure you I am not rich. Also we need to build a lot of hours just doing shit randomly so if this was time building it’s awesome >this was not a student pilot in training. News reports and flight tracking organizations confirmed the flight was completed by a licensed private pilot. So your comment doesnt even make sense for this so its a stupid stunt that wasted fuel and impacted the environment for nothing and didn't even help trainees get logged flight hours Literally took 3 minutes to look this up and write this comment >>Just because you have your PPL doesn’t mean you aren’t working for more certifications or ratings that require a ton of logged hours. >>>Great point except the pilot who conducted this specific flight, Eric Genier, is a highly advanced aviator who serves as a Chief Pilot already so again no pilot is being benefited from this to advance their training/certification but here will come the next comment of well you have to keep your skills sharp >>>>You're not making the compelling point you think you are, why do you think he's so good? And as a chief pilot you're expected to fly and maintain proficiency. God these reddit commenters wear me out. >>>>>He did not do this merely to maintain basic FAA proficiency. Eric Genier is a highly active professional pilot who flies commercially and serves as a Chief Pilot, his regulatory currency is already heavily maintained through his daily career operations. Instead, this was done as a highly deliberate, promotional, and patriotic passion project. His business, the Ohio Flight Center, is known for pulling off these massive holiday sky-art demonstrations, having previously spent 10 hours flying a "Merry Christmas" script over the state. Yawn you just dont like that it's a waste to the point others are literally comparing it to people traveling to see their families. You redditors are insufferable >>>>>>Why do you give a fuck? >>>>>>>Wasteful idiots 🙄 looking at random writings in the sky you will never see while the great lakes get devastated

why is everyone hating lmao >America Bad is really big right now >>[deleted] >>>It’s funny how the really young accounts complain the most about the people on Reddit >>>>What's my excuse? At least 4 comments everyday for 9 years is crazy work my guy >>>>>Youre trying to clown on me for using the same social media you’re using. It’s pretty pathetic. Go enjoy the 4th of July. >>>>>>Its not using it that's the problem, its the frequency of which you're using it >>>>>>>Oh is that not allowed?

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N4936T/history/20260703/1007Z/5A1/5A1 It’s real. >Gps signals can be spoofed and upload yo any flight tracking app. >>Brother, spoofing ADSB is very illegal. No way someone would risk that for a dumb july 4th celebration. >>>How does a plane turn at such a sharp angle as in the top left of the shape? Is this person doing maneuvers in a single prop Cessna like that? >>>>The route stretches horizontally from Cleveland to Toledo... over 100 miles. You're looking at a zoomed out map that shows the entire image. Zoom in on the "corner" and youll see the plane's actual turn. tight angle turn

(OP) Proof : https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n4936t#407bf3fc >Cool, what a fucking waste of money >>It was a hobbyist in a small private plane. Flying for fun.. >>>Exactly, fucking people here have a stick in their ass. What this guy did is hardly any different from someone driving a hummer just because they can. >>>>Yes, use another vehicle that is terrible for the environment, terrible for the safety of pedestrians and a waste of fucking money lol. >>>>>Anyone in this comment section that does not drive the most fuel efficient sedan is just being a huge fucking hypocrite.

America Bad is so hot right now >America is bad, why should i celebrate them being bad? >>Then either leave if you are here, or don't come here lol. Life in America is great if you have more than 2 braincells. >>>I don't expect you to understand by the phrasing of my comment that I'm clearly not American. Education isn't exactly your strong suit over there is it? >>>>I make at least 5x more here than I would in any other country and have a nice home/yard. Why would I want to live in Europe or anywhere else? You have nothing to offer me but an accent lol There's a reason higher salaried employees from Canada try to work in the US. It's actually a big problem for Canada in the tech sector. >>>>>Congrats. >>>>>>Unfortunate your country doesn't provide value for high level employees

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/dankindianmemes/comments/1ulel5z/btw_according_to_lore_she_was_supposed_to_be

HIGHLIGHTS

Aint no way an indian subreddit is making racist comments and jokes on a black woman's appearance aint no way. >Gets Woke/NPC >>Went through your history. Racism, classism and misogyny. You will never peace. You will be alone mentally and emotionally. Even if your folks manage to do arranged marriages for you, you'll never be happy. Amen. >>>Are you r*tarded or what and what you know about my relationship. What are you saying is incoherent verbal diarrhoea >>>>Lmao suuure small Indian man. Suuuure >>>>>They always say when they don't have any argument they will crash out 🥀 and call you anything just to feel good 💀 >>>>>>Lmao no crash out here. You're the ultimate crash. I mean look all the nasty posts and comments you make.

Cry more. Lupita is pretty. Grabbing a random screenshot is pathetic. Edit: I absolutely love that Nolan has managed to rage bait all the losers across the planet. Keep crying 😁 Helen is a mythical character and she can be played by anyone. Of course I can’t expect any better from a country like ours that still cannot manage to depict Krishna as neela megha shyama (dark like storm cloud) >Would you be okay if a pretty white person acted in Moana ? Would you be okay if a pretty white person acted in African epics, what about indian Epic would you be okay to race swap them? The problem is not being pretty or not the problem is cultural appropriation, Greeks are anyway minority in the world and in Hollywood and why would you take their stories and replace their characters with different ethnic groups what is good about it? >>It's a false equivalence brother >>>Why so? epics from other native culture are correct comparison isn't it? Do you think Greek and western epics are not as important as other native Epics? >>>>You talked about moana but don't know that moana is literally about representation of a culture whereas helen of Troy is nothing of sort, she is not representing her culture, she is just a character in a story >>>>>Why? how can that be ? when we read about Greek culture isn't these stories the first to be mentioned? I don't know muxh about Greek I know they through these stories , their places , their way of life , sea, war , what not why is it not important? To me Moana is also a character in a story and to Greeks may be Helen of Troy is also represents their culture who are you and me to stop that? >>>>>>So if for you moana is also a character in a story then why does it matter to you if she is white or black >>>>>>>That story is based on a region and I would prefer them represented by natives. It's their money and choice to produce but I feel it difficult to support rich countries trying to sideline natives . That's all

While Lupita in the role is indeed questionable the same way a German actress portrayed the role earlier, OP is just a cherry-picking racist lol. He's comparing one of the best shots with one of the worst shots of the two actors >Lupita is questionable “in the same way” as Diane. Nahh bruh your woke sh!t ain’t gonna fly lol >>It's not woke to say that a Greek character wasn't portrayed by a Greek actor. But it's fine though, I don't expect you to think too much, can't afford to lose your last brain cell too, amirite? >>>At least she was a blonde. Buttt it’s a lot to process especially for someone has already lost the last brain cell lol >>>>"At least she was blonde" Since when is that the criteria, you ignoramus? Shifting the goalposts just to win online arguments lol >>>>>lol better compared to your POS woke criteria which says Lupita and Diane are EQUALLY wrong casting lol >>>>>>Bro just say you're racist, it would be less pathetic than this display >>>>>>>lol you are the actual racist here >>>>>>>>Why can't you just admit it? We'll stop roasting you, pinky promise

Greek people weren't blonde. Both castings are inaccurate, but of course you'll simp for the white one because your ideology is hollow and superficial >Supporting References in Lyric Poetry Beyond Sappho, other ancient lyric poets used the same adjective (xanthos) to describe her hair: Stesichorus (Fragment S103): Reconstructs the phrase ⁠[ξ]α̣νθὰ δ' ῾Ελένα̣⁠ (blonde/golden Helen). Ibycus (Fragment 1a.5): Refers to ⁠ξα]νθᾶς ῾Ελένας⁠ (of blonde/golden Helen). Yeah right your woke ideology is vapid and pathetic >>Homer's Iliad mentioned only that Helen had "lovely hair." And xanthe/xanthos also means "radiant." Aegeans didn't have blonde hair, they had dark hair and olive skin, so there's absolutely nothing to suggest Helen was blonde. Lol, braindead imbecile >>>Yeah Menelaus, Achilles, Agamemnon, Rhadamanthys, Athena (in disguise) are explicitly described as blonde. Hardly any with African curly black hair. Take a bath this year at least woke trash lol >>>>All of them were described as "xanthos" or "xanthe" you low IQ inc*l tourist. Which, again, means "radiant" not blonde. Of course tourists and larpers like you won't know that (12 more comments of these two arguing)

Greek women are not blonde and blue eyed either. Diane Kruger is a German actress. >Blonde and blue eyed is lore accurate lol. Sorry if it didn’t meet your woke agenda. >>Lore accurate? The word blue wasn't even in the Greek vocabulary at the time the odessey was written. You are an idiot. >>>The exact textual reference for Helen having "blue eyes" comes from ancient Greek lyric poetry fragments, where she is given a specific, recurring description. The Word: Kyanōpis (\kappa\upsilon\alpha\nu\tilde{\omega}\pi\iota\varsigma) While Homer left her appearance completely blank, later lyric poets and writers of the Epic Cycle used the compound epithet ⁠κυανῶπις⁠ (kyanōpis) to describe Helen's face and eyes. This is the direct source of the modern "blue-eyed" translation. Stfu lol >>>>You serious? Your own comment literally states that Homer ,the literal creator of the Epic, didn't write have a definite eye colour and it was an added by later poets and writers and somehow this is supposed to support your point? Of course, I shouldn't expect too much from a person who copypasted an AI prompt and couldn't use basic comprehension to actually read the prompt. >>>>>Yeah how about African features for Helen. Is that from Odessey lol Ofcourse can’t expect logic from a woke freak lol >>>>>>I never said that was "lore accurate". I didn't even say anything to support the Nolan film. I personally think that the film is not an accurate representation of the actual Epic and is worse for it. All I said against you was about the blue eyes. Of course, you are too inept to actually argue like a normal person and too illiterate to read your own arguement. Which is why you are resorting to insults because critical thinking is too hard.

Nobody gonna fight a war for this. Men will be like you take it for free. No no I will pay you to keep her , take her away from my sight. >Idk what th you white washers get by being racist, the actress is gorgeous, lemme click your pic from a hideous angle, heck, even a good angle can't hide that disgusting racist personality of yours, fyi, the casting wasn't directed by her. image >>She looks okay, I have seen better looking black actresses >>>Tfym? So you get the right to insult random people? U all have no empathy or humility. Don't be shy, share your pic. >>>>If anyone is insulting and being a bully here that's you. What I shared is my opinion, which not necessarily attack anyone, I said she looks okay but I have also seen better looking black black actresses. It's not a blanket statement, it's an opinion >>>>>Well you were def defending op who is def being rude as f.

r/blackpeopleofreddit is going to ban you for this >Why. >>because they are racist >>>My criticism was for the movie , it's casting choice and authenticity. I did not said anything which is racist. If they try to do something, they are on the wrong side. >>>>you completely missed the joke >>>>>I was going to type a paragraph, but you saved it.

DEI stuff is getting pretty wild. I wonder how far it will go ? >Clear already rewriting science to feel good. Like retrospectively changing things and publishing research paper and getting them cited and peer review with each other. Like female were as good as hunting in Big game as men and prehistoric era, what not b******* to show gender rules were equal even back then. But in reality today 90% of men to hunting in USA and 10% of women when there is no external force >>Actually embarrassing that your proof to go against peer reviewed papers is "in the modern day women don't like hunting for a leisure activity" wow that's so similar to hunting to survive as a prehistoric human. Dropped this big guy 🤡 >>>This is a funny one but people who are inside academia all over the world. Are aware of,all the systemic issues along with a lot of things they are not able to say. https://youtu.be/bekDq_Ebi2I?si=tyilCQrFBmk5acL6 >>>>Crowder?! Thats your reference po- Oh honey >>>>>See go through the content not the person. See the substance >>>>>>The only substance coming out of Crowder is bullshit.

Felon of Detroit The face that turned a thousand ships >Your racism only encourages people to be racist against Indians as well. >>People are and still going to be racist towards Indians regardless, don't try to justify your Nolan dickriding with the facade of social justice and go have a look what these blacks even write about Indians Now go away lick those boots harder sepoy, your masters ain't gonna be pleased with just that >>>Brainless. You seem to be reflecting. I don't consider Nolan to be in th top 50 directors nor are his movies the best or anything, but a lot of respect to him. >>>>Sure buddy...Sure Take it even deeper now >>>>>Grow up. >>>>>>Sure unc just like you did rn after your previous comment got removed 🤣🤣 I triggered all the lameass Nolan fanbois smh

Lupita nyongo is objectively one of the prettiest women. I find her extremely attractive but art is subjective >“Objectively” prettiest. Next line “subjective”. Don’t use fancy words if don’t know sh!t. >>Why are you such an asshole while being wrong abt what i said? I said the actress herself is objectively good looking on a scale of what humans find attractive. But art itself as in the movie and how it should be cast or how accurate it should be can be subjective. How about a have a normal discussion instead of being an asshole >>>"objectively good looking on a scale of what humans find attractive" Aren't human opinions subjective? >>>>You can create a objective scale based on subjective opinions. It's just aggregating opinions. >>>>>A scale based on subjective opinions cannot be objective lol

Woke kinda Wakanda nonsense is this meme >It is like , some white dude playing black panther >>Ohh it doesn’t work that way. Hate it when wokeism ruin such good movies and shows. >>>Wtf did you just said??? Like how is a movie destroyed if a black actress is playing helen?? >>>>Helen of Troy wasn't Black or african by any means so that representation is inaccurate people will call it out >>>>>That's not how history works.We don't know what Helen of Troy actually looked like because she's a figure from Greek mythology,not a documented historical person.She wasn't Black by any means is a claim you can't prove any more than someone can prove she was. The Odyssey is an adaptation of a myth,not a documentary >>>>>>So you would be okay with Timothee Chalamet playing Lord Ram? And Zendaya playing Sita? No right? You don't care because it isn't your culture that's being affected. The Greeks care about this. >>>>>>>Nice false equivalence.Lord Ram is a living deity worshipped by millions today.Helen is a mythological literary character who's been reimagined for over 2,500 years.Those are completely different contexts. According to you every adaptation has to be frame for frame identical to ancient depictions.Better get rid of modern English dialogue,Hollywood accents, clean teeth and half the costumes too. For you guys historical accuracy only wakes up when skin colour changes

They definitely made lupita look chopped, with right makeup and styling lupita looks etheral, I feel like nolan hates black people and want them to fail, cause even zendayas styling looks atrocious >Yeah right for Wokanda not for Greece lol

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/fivethirtyeight/comments/1ukub7i/53_of_likely_battleground_voters_say_dems_are_too/

Context: R/fivethirtyeight is a sub for fans of the now defunct 538 website founded by Nate Silver

HIGHLIGHTS

The DSA doing what they do best: sandbagging the Democrats, helping Republicans win, then complaining elected Democrats don't do more >It’s been really awesome living in this new world the last few weeks where the DSA has suddenly become a powerful political force responsible for republican victories >>Guess you missed the Genocide Joe crowd taking down Kamala in 2024. As soon as Trump won, we have seen zero "Genocide Don" protests and Jill Stein immediately disappeared again. >>>Yes there have famously been no protests against Donald Trump and his continued genocide in gaza Are you alright? Why do you keep talking about jill fucking stein? Jill Stein is abhorred by the left. Her base of support is crystal mommies >>>>Please show me protests against Trump over Gaza from the DSA. I never see them ever mention Republicans. All I hear from the DSA is about how Chuck Schumer and the other Jewish Democrats are "Zios". Mamdani just took down three accomplished liberal members of Congress simply because they don't hate Israel enough >>>>>they would have been fine if they hadn't defended genocide and taken all that corporate and aipac money >>>>>>The phantom "genocide" and the antisemitic theories about secretJewish money puppet masters are why the DSA continue to be misguided loons with no interest in actually addressing the real issues in our democracy right now

The centrist Democrats doing what they do best, absolutely nothing and making everyone apathetic to the republicans destroying the government >I'm sure that approach will do wonders for helping enact change >>What change? The centrists do nothing >>>You really need to look into what Biden did in his first two years, it was significant and impactful. Then the DSA Jill Stein "Genocide Joe" crowd showed up after October 7. And what did they accomplish? >>>>Genuinely, are you ok? Jill Stein is hated by the DSA. Sorry, all the people you don’t like aren’t a simple story for you to tell.

Looking forward to national level Marxist struggle sessions and raising your hand and saying “point of privilege” before speaking. Rubio/DeSantis have this in the bag. >Oh look, nonsense >>You haven't seen this before? >>>A video with 4 thousand views posted by Joe Rogan? No. Most people haven’t. >>>>LOL what a joke. You do realise this is just a random reupload and the first result I found on youtube right? This was a very popular meme. Here is one with 1M+ views from 6 years ago. Are you gonna take back your comment about it being nonsense now? >>>>>So we’re going back to 2019? I was being generous assuming that the clip you posted was even remotely relevant by being post-covid. But it wasn’t. >>>>>>The guy referenced this very popular meme mocking the DSA. You, not being aware, said it's nonsense. You have now been proven wrong. End of story. Pre or post covid is completely irrelevant lmao I actually laughed at how hard you're grasping at straws.

This is so expected. For some reason the far left refuses to accept this reality. >Now do individual policies and talk about accepting reality. >>Why? You’re acting like voters are sifting through policy and making informed decisions. They are not. It’s all vibes. The vibe is you guys are too far to the left. >>>The vibe is also apparently the Republicans are too far to the right. So what’s the point? >>>>In my opinion, republicans don’t seem to be undergoing an existing rightward shift. The party appears to be as right as it’ll get in the foreseeable future. None of trump’s potential successors are further right than him. Democrats on the other hand, are currently being pulled to the left by the DSA. So if overall voter perception is currently “they’re both extreme”, it’ll soon turn to “wait one just got a lot more extreme than the other.” >>>>>You don’t think that MAGA primarying out incumbent republicans is a rightward shift? >>>>>>MAGA has everything to do with what Trump wants at that moment, so no.

Let me guess they didn't ask for if the Republicans are too far right? >They did, and it was basically the same result. But OP chose not to post that. >>This was posted because Galen posted it on Twitter. But it’s not “basically the same result” it is measurably more favorable to the GOP. >>>No, it really isn’t. It’s literally margin of error differences >>>>Ok you can believe that but it’s just cope, I don’t know what else to say to you. >>>>>Can you share what the margin of error was and what the GOP results are? It either is or isn't inside the margin of error, it's not really worth debating, just show the numbers. >>>>>>It’s variable on the states but about 5%

As usual, this is a meaningless “statistic” because nobody defines their own politics as extreme. >It’s hilarious. Every single time data like this comes out there’s also plenty of other data contradicting that shows the median voter has no clue what terms mean and defines “moderate” as “whatever I personally think is good.” >>Seems like a messaging issue. >>>I mean, yes, progressives do have a messaging issue, especially with statements like “defund the police;” however, I’d argue that’s unfortunately a side effect of grassroots organizing - all slogans and statements aren’t going to be PR or focus group-tested. >>>>I mean we can throw our hands up and say the voters are stupid, but ultimately politics is about convincing people and messaging. Dems and progressives need to work on messaging. >>>>>Can’t disagree with you there, though I do think there have improvements at least with folks like Mamdani.

The median voter has no real clue what constitutes far-left and far-right. Are the democrats too far-left or too far-right? “Too far-left!” Would you support the democrats if they fought for universal healthcare and childcare, went after big corporations, and enacted better labor protections? “Of course! Those things are great!” >But the Mamdani era isn't about building coalitions to pass legislation to do those things. It's about Israel and AIPAC controlling the world through hidden cabals >>Mamdani has collaborated with and even endorsed Hochul, a more moderate Dem. He constantly redirects questions that seek to make him attack fellow Dems back to New York. Sure, some DSA folks have taken a combative stance. But if anyone is being hostile currently? Moderates haven’t exactly been friendly. >>>Moderates have been far more friendly than the DSA folks get serious lmao. Do you wanna compare the statements of the DSA leadership to those of Jeffries? >>>>“DSA leadership,” isn’t in office. They even released a statement condemning Mamdani’s actions on the police, and yet I don’t think anyone’s going to call him “not DSA.” Would you like to compare the statements of former DNC chair Jaime Harrison or Democratic strategist James Carville? Mamdani, who was name dropped in the aforementioned comment, has certainly not been combative. Folks like AOC have near-integrated with the establishment. Lmao. Get serious. >>>>>DSA leadership is in office. Just not elected office. Neither are Harrison or Carville (who's been out of it for 2 decades lmao). If you wanna compare electeds, I'll gladly listen to you talk about Gottheimer and Suozzi or whoever and compare that to all the shit anyone in the elected DSA caucus have said. >>>>>>And electeds like AOC are far more kind to moderates than individuals in the new centrist group. We could cherry-pick individuals all day. Gottheimer stated, despite fairly winning primaries, socialists have no place in the Dem party. Mamdani responded by saying they can fit in the tent together. There’s a microcosm of the larger issue. (35 more comments of these two arguing)

I always wish they would ask follow up questions to define why they feel this way. I sense some of the responses will be things like they are too "woke" without explaining what that means. >I don’t think it really matters though. Voters going off of vibes these days shouldn’t be surprising. I don’t even think they know. All that matters is that the reputation of democrats is woke and extreme while republicans is somehow still centrist but corrupt. >>Probably because Republicans talk about being proud of America, while the DSA talks about burning it all down. The Democrats have so many amazing centrist politicians but the idiocy of the Squad ruins all their good work. Tlaib and Omar spent last week simping for Hezbollah in Lebanon. I mean what is the average American supposed to think Democrats are doing? It certainly isn't about making American lives better. >>>Ah more FETTERMAN!!!!!!!!!! CENTRISTS WOOO!!! >>>>I was thinking more Bashear, Shapiro, Pritzker, Whitmer, Newsom, Buttigieg, Mark Kelly, Ossoff, etc, but go off >>>>>Oh, you want to claim some progressives now? >>>>>>Yes. I believe in real progressivism, not Antisemitic hate mobs >>>>>>>It’s a genocide, btw 😊 >>>>>>>>Actually it isn't, it was a war that ended six months ago, but keep clinging to that word like Republicans clung to "WMDs" for years after the facts showed they were wrong. I get it. Sunk cost fallacy.

I doubt most Americans would consider the Dems “too far to the right.” >I wonder if the question was surrounded by social policy questions or economic policy questions. Democrats being right wing is a tough sell for social policy. For many, its an eassssyyyy sell for economic policy. Edit: no framing, up to the individual >>Outside of leftist internet bubbles it is actually also a tough sell that Democrats are “center right” economically. They support raising the minimum wage wage, universal healthcare, raising taxes on the wealthy, increasing the child tax credit, etc. >>>Yeah they do support it in speeches! >>>>Well and legislation. >>>>>Yeah, thats why we have a $15 minimum wage and universal healthcare. >>>>>>Filibuster + Republicans usually controlling the senate is why we don’t have those. If you can’t characterise Dems by their leftmost flank, you can’t characterise them by Manchin and Lieberman either >>>>>>>Is the filibuster a permanent unbreakable force? Also in states that are majority Dem, how do plans like Calcare go? >>>>>>>>The filibuster isn't a right or left belief, it's procedural with arguments for and against it by either party's members. It's significantly harder to implement a universal healthcare program at the State level compared to a national level. You are allowed to support a national healthcare program but not a state healthcare program without being right wing.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/GetNoted/comments/1ujprdn/%20/

HIGHLIGHTS

Antifa literally allied with nazis to try to overthrow liberals. The creator of antifa literally stayed Hitler must come to power. Fun fact hitler had him executed after Hitler gained power Italy fascist party was literally socialist (corporatist) and nazis are syndicalists which is a type of socialism. >You're right that fascism and Nazism come from socialism, hence why they incorporate syndicalism, but I've never heard of antifa in Nazi Germany. If anything, the anti fascists there were open communists who weren't any better and tried to murder their opposition. They just failed at it. >>Fascism and Nazism do not come from socialism If you know anything about history, you would know how absurd it is to accuse the German communists of wanting to murder their opposition. You should look at what the liberals did during the civil war! >>>"Fascism and Nazism do not come from socialism" They absolutely do. They reject Marx's "workers" aspect and instead jump to the people of the nation. The father's of fascism were themselves socialists who saw how Marx's predictions were wrong and changed their philosophy They write about this in their philosophy books.The notion that fascism didn't come from socialism is socialists themselves trying to do damage control. If you know anything about history, you would know how absurd it is to accuse the German communists of wanting to murder their opposition. You should look at what the liberals did during the civil war! Oh, you're one of those trying to do damage control, huh? >>>>No, the fathers of fascism were not communists. Do you want me to quote Mussolini’s opinion on the topic? What? >>>>>You said socialism now you changed phrase. Communism is socialism. Marxism is socialosm Syndication is socialism. Socialism is a broad cover that encompasses hundreds of ideologies and predates Marx. Some Frenchman wrote the manifesto of democracy which Marx stole ideas from for his. >>>>>>How does this show that fascists were socialist? >>>>>>>Came from socialism.* They weren't "socialists", they were fascists.

Well, Fascism was invented to combat rising communism. So it is very much anti-communism. However. You don't need to be a fascist to be against an extreme ideology like communism. Edit: I can't believe I have to say this. Nazism is an Off shoot of Fascism. It is not Socialism. Please, read a book. >A classless society where everyone's basic needs are met, so extreme..... >>Yeah because it strips ownership and individualism. State controlled media, state controlled speech and mass restrictions on religion. Suppression of any kind of opposition. Most things you take for granted would either be illegal or taken from you. Yes, Communism is an extreme ideology. So is Fascism as it is, essentially, the polar opposite. >>>Tell me you don't know what communism is without telling me...... >>>>There has never been a communist state which protected an individual's rights. >>>>>In Cuba people have a constitutional right to have their sexuality and religious beliefs protected. >>>>>>meanwhile the insane international human rights violations in Cuba: >>>>>>>Oh, yes, don't let me forget about the human rights violations in Cuba. >>>>>>>>you haven't addressed my point at all

communism is a horrendous ideology and over a 100 million have died in pursuit of it. don't exactly have to be a fascist to oppose that. edit: the correct number is gazilliongazillion >How many have died in under capitalism? >>Capitalism isn't an ideology that locks people up and commits genocide >>>please please please please please learn a single fucking thing about history >>>>Capitalism isn’t an ideology. It’s a system. Open a book. >>>>>oh my god lmao >>>>>>I’m correct. A simple Google search will help ya >>>>>>>"capitalism isn't an ideology" is approaching "the nazis were socialists" levels of historical ignorance. even if we accept the tedious semantic argument you're making, the sentence "capitalism never locked anyone up or committed genocide" is still factually wrong, and trying to get out of that through sophistry is bullshit >>>>>>>>It’s objectively not an ideology. It’s a system… learn the difference

"Im going to call fascist and a Nazi to whoever disagrees with me, because i don't know what fascism is" Edit: This also works with any ideology. Calling someone like commie, red, tankie, etc. Is common amongst ignorant people who will use these connotations against someone that disagrees with them, and they most probably don't know what they mean, but they'll still use these connotations or the name of the ideology that they refer to. >I find it much more common to accuse anyone who disagrees with capitalism a communist. It's even often portrayed as if capitalism and communism are the only two options. >>That has to be a joke. Fearmongering about supposed fascism is all over mainstream media as well being pushed by governments and public institutions. Also, capitalism is not a single ideology or system, it's a buzzword invented by socialists to lump a wide variety of systems together. So that's why unironically using that term might lead to you being read as a socialist or commie. >>>Trump and his ilk adhere fairly closely to the tenets of fascism. There’s no one in power who is even close to actual communism. And have you seen Fox News? Everything is communism to them. >>>>Give me a break. Under Trump, America has still had higher annual immigration rates than any other country in the world. He also hasn't imposed heavy regulations on corporations to do the state's bidding. And his pathetic flip-flopping about wars cannot possibly be described as militarism. He is, or was, a populist, nothing more. As for Fox News, do you have an example of someone or something they unreasonably called communist recently? >>>>>The nazis didn't impose heavy regulation on corporations, in fact the nazis privatised so much of german state ownership that market-liberal countries like the UK and USA had more state ownership. Here's a paper on the subject by a professor in economics: https://diposit.ub.edu/items/17dc2107-48c7-45c1-a915-f0d011fa8484 So why would Trump not putting heavy regulations on corporations have anything to do with him being fascist or not? >>>>>>The Nazis were Nazis. We're talking about fascism

That said, a surprising number of anti-communists have turned out to be fascists. >A surprising number of communists support authoritarianism. Well any who subscribe to Marxism and the idea of a dictatorship of the proletariat and seizing control of production. That concept is why I can never take people who advocate for communism too seriously. Plus, when has a government ever willingly “withered away”, especially one with total economic control with huge bureaucratic apparatuses. A lot of issues and concerns people have with the current system are remediable >>Dictatorship of the proletariat is not authoritarian >>>Yes it is >>>>How? >>>>>Because a dictatorship of the proletariat doesnt exist, its always just an authoritarian dictatorship bc thats all communism is, far left authoritarianism >>>>>>How does it not exist? >>>>>>>Because everytime it is tried it fails, miserably

Yeah but post WWII the US supported fascist groups in other countries to destabilize or prevent the spread of communism. Even regarding WWII, there was a fair amount of pro German sentiment before the US got involved and the US only went to war with Germany because declaring war on Japan made Germany declare wars in the US >so many people conveniently forget that the US was slowly cozying up to Germany until Japan hit us in Pearl Harbor. >>Me when I make things up >>>The MSG rally and the German-American Bund didn't exist. Got it. Man, I hate it when history changes itself on me. Sure, our governments were a little frosty to each other, but there was some public sentiment that was terrifyingly okay with their ideology. >>>>The Germans were attacking Yank shipping before Pearl HarbOr and the Yanks were carrying out anti-submarine warfare to counter this. >>>>>Not to mention lend/lease and the incredible amount of military aid being given to the UK, USSR, and China, as well as the US/UK nuclear collaboration starting in 1940 that precipitated the Manhattan project and nuclear bomb development.

I cant be both anticommunist/ antifascist apparently. Since being a “centrist” for seeing the horrible aspects on both sides makes me a far right extremist according to some people. >being a centrist means not advocating for significant reform of the current system. As the current system is mercilessly right wing, that would mean you second-handedly support the right, yes. >>So if I dont like the other options I have in voting I'm Hitler's right hand man? >>>thats actually whats called the reductio ad absurdum fallacy. If you dont like the other options, you porbably should like them MORE than the alternative, at least if your moral compass or knowledge of politics is working >>>>When you're paraphrasing Stalin's "social democrats are objectively fascists" rhetoric I don't think you can really claim they're making a reductio ad absurdum >>>>>i absolutely can, whatever you choose to wrongly interpret and/or strawman my position as does not affect my consideration of your position. This is now an Ad Hominem inside a Strawman Fallacy inside a Reductio Ad Absurdum >>>>>>You can rattle off fallacies all you want, doesn't make it true and rattling them off isn't an "I win" button. I'm misinterpreting nothing here in any case, you're pretty clearly saying anything outside far left is fascism and using a misunderstanding of the Overton window to justify it. Hell you aren't even using those fallacies correctly. Ad hominem would be a direct attack on your person not merely pointing out that you were misusing absurdum because your point actually was close to what they said. And the centre is actually far right is simply factually an old comintern argument and one that completely sabotaged any early united fronts against fascism.

To a lot of communists anything but communism is fascism because (insert wildly unsupported chain of word salad). Because they're extremists, and like most extremists they can neither see the nuances of any argument nor will accept any solution but the one they're clinging to. >I feel like dismissing their arguments as “unsupported word salad” instead of addressing them is silly. I’m unsure how pointing to the murder of Rosa Luxembourg is “word salad” >>How does that murder support "anything anticommunist is fascist"? >>>Because the liberals, who had previously worked with the communists to overthrow the monarchy, got power they immediately brought in fascists to murder communists without a trial. They then agreed to compromise with the fascists to try and stomp out the communists. When there were calls to punish those murders, the liberal government gave a them a slap on the wrist. If you are adopting fascist policies and courting fascists, I don’t think it’s a stretch for people to call you a fascist. I’m not saying I agree, but it is a legitimate argument >>>>Yes very legitimate, some liberals, over a hundred years ago did a thing, so obviously that supports the argument that anything anticommunist is fascist, makes total sense. Of course it only makes sense to me because I was kicked in the head by a horse, but still >>>>>The fact that they continued to do it afterwards is the bigger issue >>>>>>Poor woman, how many times can one person be murdered before we just stand up and say enough is enough

Bro doesn’t know the definition of communism yet speaks like a professional on the subject. Typical Edit: A system of government where workers hold the means to production. >You can go ahead and quote the part of my statement that includes a definition of Communism. Stalin would send you straight to a gulag for being so illiterate. >>Okay, here you go. "To a lot of communists anything but communism is fascism" Literally no communist says this. There has never been a communist state because there cannot be a communist state by DEFINITION. Marxists advocate for SOCIALISM as a means to achieve communism sometime in the far future. As the other poster said, you don't know the definition of the word and I would bet based on the Gulag comment that you haven't read a lot on the subject either. >>>"Literally no communist says this. There has never been a communist state because there cannot be a communist state by DEFINITION. Marxists advocate for SOCIALISM as a means to achieve communism sometime in the far future." The famous 'Socialism or Barbarism' retort is very old, very famous, and well-used by communists and socialists all over. And what constitutes 'barbarism' is contextual, but definitely has been used to refer to Fascism. I think even Bernie has said some variation of it... >>>>Barbarism and fascism are literally two different things with completely different definitions. Not all barbarism is fascism, but all fascism is barbaric. I did not say, "Literally no communist says 'socialism or barbarism.'" Even communism and socialism have radically different definitions. Socialism or barbarism is a factually accurate saying, though. And as was said Bernie is not a socialist. >>>>>"Barbarism and fascism are literally two different things with completely different definitions." '...And what constitutes 'barbarism' is contextual, but definitely has been used to refer to Fascism...

All fascists are anticommunist but not all anticommunist are fascist >I maintain that both fascists and communists deserve the wall >>By a broad definition Communism does not inherently seek to oppress people and expand. Fascism kind of does >>>the Baltics Finnish, Polish, Hungarian, etc.... would disagree and call communism horrifically oppressive. >>>>So the government that made Kerala the Indian state with the second highest HDI, one of the highest literacy rates, life expectancy, and lowest poverty rate, should be shot for being oppressive? Edit: Good old reply and block. That scared of a single sentence? >>>>>The Marxist parties of India are a exception to the rule, chiefly because they are some of the only Communist parties that actually abide by the rule of democracy. Look at almost any other group, from the Eastern bloc to East Asia to the Colombian rebels to the Maoists in Eastern India and you will find would-be dictators in all of them. They might make gestures towards equality, but these could take place under any kind of government, as they have across the democratic western world with significantly less oppression involved. >>>>>>Why did you block him? Do you think this will show you winning the discussion? No, it only showed you to be a cowardly asshole

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/SipsTea/comments/1u3z90y/the_ratio_was_so_hard_it_left_a_mark/

HIGHLIGHTS

gay people don't need to go door to door... gay isn't considered a religion, so they're basically no restrictions to pushing it in school when compared to religion ie, public school teachers regularly have gay flags up, where they don't regularly have up crucifixes according to my teacher gf, it's like every other class from kindergarten up that has a gay flag >Religion is a choice, being gay isn't. >>Yes, that's the belief of liberals. Liberal things are born that way. Conservative things are choices. >>>If you think being gay is a choice it makes me think you are gay and in the closet. At no point did I have an internal debate over liking dicks or tits more. >>>>Yes, I'm familiar with this shitty liberal catch 22. It's very clever, no I won't participate. >>>>>Never heard logic being referred to as a catch 22. I'm an independent which is nice because liberals are way to stuffy and would be reluctant to point out that u/Shadruh is gayer than aids.

They dont have to, they have it syndicated into media. Movies, tv shows, comics, literature. I mean they have a whole month dedicated to it. At work i see it, signs everywhere. >As opposed to Christianity which never appears in any of those things >>Lol idk what world you live in but only time I see Christianity represented in any modern media is to mock it >>>You live in a bubble then, there's a reason the Trinity Broadcasting Network or Pure Flix exist to this day. Stop watching content that mocks your beliefs and extrapolating that to a worldview, there is PLENTY of Christian media. >>>>What is it with you people? Did i say there is no Christian media at all? Obviously there will be christian movies and such that have a christian target demographic - that doesn't disprove my point and thats not even what I'm talking about, you're just deflecting the argument. The content meant for the masses, the ones that almost everyone in general watches (ie Netflix, Prime, HBO), rarely if ever show Christians in a flattering way. They're always portrayed as antagonists, bigots, corrupt, etc >>>>>Oh you mean content like the House of David (Prime) or The Chosen (also on Prime)? You're cherrypicking human variety for the sake of a victim narrative. My point is that there does exist content that is consumed by the masses that shows Christians in a flattering light.

Only in the classrooms. >We had religion as mandatory subject, the teacher was the pastor. He taught us jack shit about religion as a concept, but we had to memorize all the books in the bible. >>My school would have exams that would ask: What is your OPINION on [Homosexuality/Other religions/ETC] and if it wasn't abject hatred it'd be marked wrong. >>>So the current college classroom except the religion is leftism >>>>It's hilarious what people who have never been to college imagine it's like. The only people who ever tried to influence my personal politics or religion on campus were holding big signs saying I was going to burn in hell and that gay people and women were evil. Edit: the people downvoting this have obviously never been to college... >>>>>That reads like you never went to college, lol. Multiple professors actively tried to influence students political beliefs on campus and in my classrooms. My political theory class was 90% Marx. Occasionally there would be science classes with professors who weren’t overtly political. >>>>>>Bull-fucking-shit. If you even actually attended college, that was probably your excuse for poor performance. Maybe what you told your parents when you flunked/dropped out. My political science professor wouldn't even disclose his personal politics.

I went to catholic school for years and we had to do several prayers a day, in addition to mandatory bible study. My public highschool had a Gay Straight Alliance with optional membership. >Times have changed, public schools are secular nowadays and they start exposing kids to MMIWGLGBTQQ2IA+ content in elementary school, before they even learn Sex Ed. >>Oh no, not kids learning that gay people exist and that’s fine. >>>The problem is pushing it on kids that still think Santa Claus is real, no one cares your gay but why are you so interested in pushing it onto kids who aren’t even fully coherent. There going to get exposed to classmates who are gay later in life, middle school, high school but bro just keep it out the elementary school. >>>>I learned about World War II in grade school. I didn’t feel I was pushed into invading Poland though. Maybe not everyone is that stupid? >>>>>Wow you learned history, what does that have to do with teaching sexuality and more delicate subjects. Why are you so interested in pushing it on little kids. I said middle school is fine but what’s your obsession with the little ones… >>>>>>I think kids should learn about different cultures and people they will encounter at some point in life, so they don’t grow up to be afraid of them.

Almost like people exist and finally not demonized by crazy religions. >I mean, the fuck does all those letters mean? I thought it was just lgbt😭😭 >>Www.google.com >>>No thanks, I don’t have the patience to do that when I’m just scrolling before sleeping after my night shift >>>>Whelp, that explains a lot. >>>>>Yea, I’m feeling pretty fucked up right now, I just got back after a twelve hour shift >>>>>>Then why did you start talking on the first place? What a dumb way to exit a argument you started. Total defeat after the first challenge. "Oh I am so tired I need my blanky" >>>>>>>Ok

Nah it’s just forced upon you by an entire month of observance, it’s in every form of media, it’s at your job when you apply, it’s in your kids school, it’s in your face when trying to choose a bathroom. I’d say it’s just as fucking annoying as religion. >Why wouldn't it be in schools? Gay people need an education too, so they're present in places of education. What's the problem? >>Because if you like buttholes or not has nothing to do with academics in my opinion but some of these teachers are taking it upon themselves to use that time to try and force their sexual beliefs on people as well as gender identities >>>Existing is not forcing beliefs on anyone. >>>>You’re right but injecting it into every social behavior or media is. When you have to jot down what pronouns you identify as during the intro to a course I’d say it’s pretty forced >>>>>Heterosexuality is already depicted in almost all forms of media, do you object to that? >>>>>>You mean how your parents were for you to even be here typing this? No I don’t have a problem with it. >>>>>>>So why object to depictions of other orientations? >>>>>>>>Because they do it in every form of media and it’s forced just to check a box and make people feel included, it has nothing to do with advancing a story or deepening a plot or teaching a lesson just “gay” I think one of the easiest examples was the downfall of the marvel movies. Awesome in the beginning then they started making everything about characters having dimensional time traveling lesbian moms and hoping “there is a black Spider-Man somewhere” it stopped being about stories and started being about subliminal messaging

No but I've seen men in their underwear dance in front of minors in a pride parade. >And therefore what? >>I don't see Christian men trying to convert others by hosting parades and dancing sexualy in their underwear in front of kids... It's one thing to raise awareness to children. But when I see parents trying to promote their own young kids to be gay/trans when they don't even know how to be a man/women in the first place, then I think you're negatively impacting kids at that point. >>>Pride parades aren't to "convert" anyone. And no parent is trying to make their kid gay or trans. Don't be stupid. >>>>I know. It's to raise awareness. You sure about that? I can send you like a dozen clips showing otherwise. Even this is from way back in 2018: https://cbn.com/news/us/video-shows-parents-trying-brainwash-kids-gender-fluidity-kids-appear-know-better >>>>>Lets pretend it's possible to "make someone gay". Why is that an issue? >>>>>>It's fine if they're a consenting adults...You don't think that's an issue when it's involving young kids?

No, but they take over schools and kids cartoons and try and convert your kids! >You know what’s weird, I grew up with only heterosexual relationships in schools and cartoons… still gay! Wild. Almost like your point is total dog water. >>Ya know what, you're right! Propaganda is OKAY! >>>So you don’t think ANY relationship should be featured in any media ever? I mean, it’s weird to get rid of Romeo and Juliette from literary records, but go for it my dude. >>>>Wow, definitely never said that! Please go on, what other outrageously fictitious statements did I make? I've forgotten all the other imaginary things I said. >>>>>lol okay, enlighten me, what straight propaganda would you do away with?

Christianity isn't a sexual preference orientation, and being gay isn't a religion, although they both sometimes act like it. EDIT: I'm old and I grew up with the term "sexual preference". It's just muscle memory; I meant no disrespect. I do not believe that one's sexuality is a choice. I just used the term that came to mind, I think most people knew what I meant. >Being gay isn’t a “preference” >>I mean, it is? You can't control your preferences. >>>In the context of sexuality preference is used to insuate that being gay is a choice. That your choosing to be gay, and in their minds if your choosing to be gay, you can also not. Which is not how that works at all. >>>>I mean, if my preference is for big booty black girls, it's not like I am choosing for that to be my preference. It's just how I feel >>>>>Yeah, I understand. Being gay isn't a choice but becuase of how dog whisles work when people say sexuality is a preference in the context of homosexuality. People are going to think that your saying being gay is a choice. It's just a thing started and has been used again gay people. Again it's in the context. >>>>>>Yeah idk. I'm not going to walk on eggshells because some people think that being gay is evil or whatever. It's not fair to try to censor or change the speech of the general public just because some people suck

Guess you got a taste of what women have to go through. >Yeah, maybe if he smiled more he wouldn't deal with that. >>So you’re pro sexual harassment? >>>It was a joke. 'You should smile more' is a phrase that is often repeated to women. >>>>That doesn’t mean it’s funny, do you laugh at rpe jokes too? >>>>>No and the joke wasn't rpe, it was about how fucked up that sentence is >>>>>>Dude is trying to ragebait us. Just don't engage. He's throwing out things I didn't even say.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/whoathatsinteresting/comments/1u1h0p6/stunned_karmelo_anthony_supporters_react_to_the/l

HIGHLIGHTS

He dindo nuffin, he wuz a good boy >I wrote this on another subreddit and immediately got banned, the duality of reddit in full swing >>You got banned just because you parroted a racist caricature? Oh, you poor thing... >>>Some people need to be talked to in a racist way so they understand they are in the wrong >>>>See this is exactly what I need. I need this comment to be the first thing that everyone sees when joining a sub, and if I see the upvotes anywhere in the positive, I know it's a chud breeding ground and to unsubscribe. It could literally be that easy, idky Reddit doesn't implement something like this. >>>>>God forbid there are even centrist takes on this leftist hellhole. “Everyone must behave like hive mind 🤪”

Is this sub actually like whoathatsracist? Always pops up in my feed and always nasty lil fucks like this in the comments >Yeah, I think being a low IQ xenophobe is the new popular thing right now. >>Or it could be one culture is tired of being labeled an -ist or a -phobe >>>Hm. Yeah. -ist or -phobe speak for sure. You sound like you're like 16 so there's probably still time to get your head right. Work on that, will ya? >>>>nahh, I got better things to do >>>>>Sure ya do bb

"You can't walk away no mo!" Ma'am him doing literally that would have prevented this entire situation. >He wouldn't have even had to "walk away" if he first didn't walk into the other teams area. >>With a knife. Ask to fight. Call everyone pussies. Then refuse to leave. Then pull out said knife when pushed out of the tent and stab someone in the chest. Then run away >>>4/5 of her boys will definitely be in the penitentiary. >>>>5/5 of her boys cannot spell penitentiary. >>>>>I mean their dad probably lives there so they should at least know how it’s spelled. >>>>>>Just blatant racism. >>>>>>>Exactly wat it is. This post is just a dogwhistle for racist >>>>>>>>Truths hurts. FInally mother fucker got what he deserved.

How does he have any supporters? >racism and tribalism >>There were zero black people on the jury which is why you had this verdict. I saw a lot of "Karmelo supporters" complaining about this. Sad fact about our democracy but it's very hard to have jury trials when things are so tribal. See also Emmet Till or OJ Simpson (or a thousand other lower profile cases you've never heard of) >>>There were zero black people on the jury because all the black people on the jury admitted that for no reason could they send a black man to prison. They excluded themselves. You have to be objective to be on a jury, or at least smart enough to lie about it. >>>>Ahh the lying... >>>>>Its literally true, very easy to check for yourself, and readily available. You straight up are wrong. >>>>>>"There were zero black people on the jury because all the black people on the jury admitted that for no reason could they send a black man to prison" is a race-baiting claim directly contradicted by the article you linked. >>>>>>>Oh no he made a mistake and said all instead of one. One of the potential jurors absolutely did say they wouldn't send another black man to prison. There weren't no black people because of racism. >>>>>>>>Your last sentence doesn't follow from the second.

Exactly. I don't understand how people are shocked about the verdict. Anyone with a functioning brain could see this coming from a mile away. In no way whatsoever was this "self-defense". If they think that to be true, maybe they need to look up the definition of what self-defense entails. >I mean, it's basically the flip of Trayvon Martin. George Zimmerman ran to and confronted Trayvon. Trayvon told George to stop harassing him, and when things got physical George shot him dead, even though Trayvon was unarmed. Except George was ruled innocent. The only difference seems to be that this kid had a knife, and George had a gun. And in both situations the jury ruled against the black kid. Edit: My point is they are both close cases. I don't think anyone should be surprised one way or the other. Neither was open and shut. A different jury or lawyers could have led to a different outcome. >>There's quite a difference; Zimmerman was on the ground having his head bounced off concrete when he reached for a weapon. Anthony was lightly pushed. >>>He followed and confronted a random person and shot them dead when they were defending themselves. That's the raw fact. People need to mind their business. >>>>That isnt what happened at all. Martin ambushed Zimmerman and had him in a full mount. There was no confrontation before that >>>>>Ambushed the guy who was following him. Hopefully someone comes into your tent during a trackmeet to show you. >>>>>>LMFAO You are littererally the guy being described in thr post.

The good thing about this situation is it should serve as a reminder to all black people that this country is just never going to be in our corner. >So you’re for stabbing over nothing? As long as it’s a white person? >>lol if thays the way you wanna read my response go ahead. Im not wasting my time having a long back and forth. If the judge ends up making it manslaughter or 3rd degree then justice will have been done. I just cant call this 1st or even 2nd degree murder. 3rd at worst. He was never walking away scott free thougj >>>Is manslaughter different in the US? Where I'm from it means you killed someone without intent. You're saying he stabbed him in the heart but didn't intend to kill him? 🙃 >>>>yeah I am, I dont think he did that thinking he would die. I think he was a scared ass kid who picked the wrong response when it came to fight or flight. Why do so many of you need him to be this cold blooded super predator? He literally asked a coach if he was gonna be alright, that sounds like a kid who acted off of emotion instead of intent >>>>>“Scared ass kid”? lol, he was asked to leave the tent fifteen times. If he was so scared he could have left anytime 😂 >>>>>>Bro I think he should have left so Im not trying to really disagree with you on that, but not everybody responds to fear the same way. His response cost him his freedom >>>>>>>I think the more important thing is that it cost someone their life. Karmelo Anthony can rot for all I care, F his freedom

the 'RIP Trayvon Martin' made me chuckle lol mental gymnastics going all over the place >Trayvon was at his house, and decided to go BACK to start a fight. People always forget this. >>? I’m confused on that one. Please elaborate? From what I remember Trayvon was approached by Zimmerman before he got home. Zimmerman even told 911 these guys always get away. Regardless though it’s apples to oranges with this case. >>>Yes, Zimmerman lost sight of him, and Trayvon was on the phone with his "Friend" who confirms he made it to his house, and then told him maybe Zimmerman was a creep, so Trayvon then went back. Trayvon found Zimmerman standing by his truck talking to 911 and sucker punched him. >>>>Again, false >>>>>He is 100% correct. Whole trial is online. Watch the testimony. TM was on top of GZ beating him. >>>>>>Didn't Zimmerman think he looked suspicious and tried doing a citizens arrest on him >>>>>>>No he followed him while on the phone with the cops. Zimmerman then lost sight of him and sat by his truck on the phone with police. Trayvon then came back and started attacking him. Zimmerman never physically touched him and Trayvon came back to attack Zimmerman. Zimmerman had a bloody nose, two black eyes, and was bleeding from the back of his head. The claim is that Trayvon attacked him, got on top of him, and was slamming his head into the concrete repeatedly. The defense had experts that testified the injuries were consistent with that account.

Austin Metcalf would be alive if he didn’t try to tell other people what to do >He would be alive if he wasn’t stabbed to death by a person who instigated a confrontation. I mean it’s pretty easy to read the case and witness statements. One of his (Karmelo) own witnesses said he was in the wrong and provoked the situation. Pretty easy for anyone with a function brain to draw the same conclusion. >>And another witness said that the Metcalfs instigated the whole thing when Anthony was just talking to a friend >>>Okay let’s assume Metcalf did indeed (physically) instigate, you think deadly force is a reasonable reaction to a shove? FWIW…. That friend you are referring to was the witness who stated he provoked the instigation. He was sitting next to Karmelo when it occurred. Furthermore, do you also then support chud the builders actions, since he was also the one who received physical aggression after verbal provocation? >>>>Is it reasonable to bully someone and kick them out of your tent just because you don’t like their skin color? Why do you keep shifting to Chud? Lol

That verdict was absolute bullshit >Why is it bullshit? >>If you're too slow to keep up , I can't help you >>>The exact response I was expecting. I don’t think you know what you’re talking about. >>>>You must be a child , go back to bed >>>>>Why can’t you just answer why you think the verdict is bullshit?

What actually happened here. Was it a cut and dry case or was the evidence a bit murky? >Cut and dry. 19 witnesses with the same account of events >>All from the same school as the stabbed kid. Idk why they didn’t just let him chill in the tent. Seems super weird. >>>He was saying things to piss people off. Thats why he was asked to leave. >>>>I can’t find anything that says he did anything besides sitting in their tent during a downpour. >>>>>https://courthousenews.com/defense-rests-in-karmelo-anthony-murder-trial-after-student-witness-grilled-over-inconsistent-statements/ “Prosecution witnesses testified last week that Anthony cursed at, provoked and insulted students after being asked to leave the tent. A 16-year-old Memorial High School student testified Saturday that he heard Anthony call the students “a bunch of pussies” who were “not going to do nothing about it” when he refused to leave. Defense attorneys maintain Anthony entered the tent to speak with a friend and acted in self-defense when confronted by Austin Metcalf and his twin brother, Hunter. I guess he got aggressive after being asked to leave. >>>>>>Why didn’t they just let him speak to his friend? >>>>>>>He did speak to his friend. This all happened after he spoke to his friend.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/helldivers2/comments/1ttda4w/happy_pride_month_helldivers/

HIGHLIGHTS

Can I just play a videogame without it being turned into a political playground? >Helldivers is literally a political playground. Like, that’s the whole appeal of the setting, dumbass >>he means contemporary politics. Having a game constantly harken back to contemporary politics breaks the immersion of the in game fantasy politics. Super earth doesnt seem to be obsessed with lgbtqai2s+ issues as it likely doesn't have those issues. >>>The game literally harkens back to contemporary politics. You think what do you think element 017 is? Its oil. We are at war for oil. C.E.C.O.D? Literally a reference to cecot. My god i cant believe I share lobbies with yall >>>>This is exactly the kind of media illiteracy people make fun of. Nobody said Helldivers has no political themes. The argument is about contemporary culture-war politics. You saw "the game contains political satire" and somehow concluded that means every modern political issue is naturally part of the setting. By that logic, because Dune is about politics, it must also be about student loan forgiveness, zoning laws, and gerrymandering. Resource wars aren't some uniquely modern political topic or new to science fiction. Asimov wrote The Gods Themselves over 50 years ago for fuck's sake. Recognizing that Helldivers draws from real-world politics is media literacy. Thinking that means Super Earth must care about every current political controversy is the opposite of media literacy. Let me guess, you think that Ocarina of Time is leftwing? The demonstrably illiterate squawking about media literacy. >>>>>Dune is about politics. It's a metaphor for oil wars in the middle east. Did you not know that?Yes. That's literally the point. Dune contains political themes. Therefore, by your logic, it must also be about student loan forgiveness, zoning regulations, DEI hiring practices, and municipal bike lane policy. The entire point of the analogy was that a work can contain political themes without containing every contemporary political issue. Congratulations on demonstrating the reading comprehension problem I was talking about. >>>>>>Political themes? No, it just is a metaphor for middle eastern oil wars. The rest of that is just something you made up.

Brother we're all under Super Earths Flag, the only flag we should be under. This is not necessary. >All sexualities are equally represented by white yellow and blue >>nothing is represented. it's a game. keep your real life shit out of it. >>>Not even representing America's military and police state? Are you suuuure? >>>>I'm very sure that this Swedish game is not representing anything about the USA. >>>>>Wow, you really don't understand how anything (especially storytelling) works then. It must be really easy being illiterate and unimaginative. You don't know what you're missing out on. image

Hope we get a pride cape to rid chuds from the community tbh >You'll be better with a dead game, than with a living game without lgbt propaganda? >>You do not even have the slightest grasp of what the word “propaganda” means. >>>What If they add MAGA cape, would it be propaganda? >>>>No no, their idea of propaganda isnt propaganda while others are evil and are propaganda >>>>>Visibility is not propaganda you absolute slabhead. Being queer or trans is not a political stance, even though some media and politicians really make it like it is. That is propaganda. On the other hand Epstein's aficionado Steve Bannon manufactured your entire worldview. Real Propaganda with real life consequences

I get the sentiment but this is a game about shooting space shit. Nobody cares what u fuck >I mean, canonically, Super Earth does care. That's why the C-01 Permit exists and must be completed and confirmed before any activity that could result in a child. >>So gay sex is on the table, no permit required? >>>Unless you don't think trans women are women. Gay sex between a cis and a trans woman can result in a child and would thus need a permit for the citizens of super earth. >>>>C-01 permit are only for actions that could result in a child, not for controlling what is inside each person's pants. If it can result in a child, it needs C-01 permit That's it >>>>>glad you agree that a cis woman and a trans woman would need a permit. >>>>>>Iirc. . . Cis woman means someone who is AFAB, and identifies as female, too, right? I don't think that Trans woman, are actually capable of reproduction with cis woman, or any woman from that point on. I'm not saying this against people who are transgender, this is not hate, just to be clear- it's just that biologically speaking, I believe the chances of it being possible is very slim or otherwise non-existent, so the permit would be, sort off useless, right? (Again this is not hate, I myself am part of the community)

Amen!!! (Awesome art and happy pride tho it's a day early for me) >Just wanting to say, can we please end this argument? I had no intention of starting a debate, I simply was wanting clarification and explaining why I wanted it. I truly do not intend to be disrespectful, even though it may not come across like that to some. Just please stop debating, because this is simply a post on the subreddit to a game, a very unserius game that has zero connection to lgbtq+ or religion or anything in the real world >>Love your neighbor brochacho >>>Isn't that what I'm doing? Disagreeing with a belief and nor supporting it isn't hating them... I stated that I have no disrespect toward them and that I simply disagree with a choice they have made. >>>>I suppose your first point of failure is believing there's a choice being made on the subject, youre not disagreeing with a belief your not disagreeing with a choice you're claiming to disagree with a fundamental aspect of a person that was true to them from the moment they were born its like saying you're disagreeing with someone for being black and saying you think they simply shouldn't do that, no aspect of the lgbtq+ is a choice, to put it in terms your people would understand better god made them that way its the way he wanted them to be and you've opted to spit in his face, as there are no well regarded studies that say it is a choice at least none ive seen >>>>>They many not have a choice in how they feel, but they have a choice in how they act. If they do not have any ability to control how they feel, and therefore excuses the choices they make that only leads to moral bankruptcy. If that logic is followed to its end, you are defending any action a that a person has predisposition towards by disregarding any personal agency. An adult attracted to children, serial rapists, or any other act. >>>>>>I'm hoping that I misread your comment, because you cannot seriously be comparing consenting adults having sex with each other to pedophilia and rape

Amen? You christan or just saying it as a woo hoo? >porquesnolesdos gif >>Translate please, I don't speak spanish >>>Why not both? >>>>Because it goes against Christianity. (Unless you are a part of the incorrect churches that welcome that) Edit: incorrect Christian churches >>>>>And that's the kind of church I support. Have a nice day helldiver. >>>>>>Sarcasm? (I can't tell) >>>>>>>Nope, not this time. Have a nice day. And may freedom guide your way helldiver. >>>>>>>>Clarify, do you support it or not?

I am quite simply agreeing I am not religious 👍 >Ok, just wondering. ((Cause the rainbow stuff goes against Christianity) no hate intended) >>It doesn’t go against Christianity >>>I always wonder what these people think Jesus would say Like... in what universe would Jesus Christ, the son of God who sacrificed himself for all of humanity out of unconditional love, suddenly stop and say "well actually idk about the gays, that's kind of yucky" Like come on bro lol how are you gonna take the lords name in vain just because you don't want to be honest about why you are an asshole >>>>I'm not saying that you won't go to heaven... I'm saying that Christianity is against it, but the lord will still welcome you into heaven if you believe in Jesus christ as the savior. Now, that is MY interpretation, not a hard fact. I also personaly don't support the lgbtq+ community, but I have nothing against them. I did not mean to start an argument, I simply wanted clarification why someone said "amen" and then it started all of this. >>>>>LOL christianity is against it but god isn't as long as you say you believe in him? Give me a break. Worry about being a decent person where you're at now instead of fretting over the afterlife >>>>>>I'm not "fretting over the aftherlife", I'm saying it is a sin, but God will forgive you. It's the same as committing a crime and going to jail for God to then forgive you. (Not saying being lgbtq+ is a crime, saying there both sins) And I'm not being disrespectful. Point out where I am please. >>>>>>>Saying people existing while not being straight is a sin is extraordinarily disrespectful and I have nothing to say to you if you are not able to see that

I'm not gay so I don't care if you are I guess have fun with that it should also be stated that all sexualities are equally represented under white yellow and blue you should be expressing your pride in super Earth first >You don't have to be gay to be an ally my man ✊ >>cant you not be an ally if you are gay? Isnt "ally" specifically for people outside of the lgbtqai2s+ who support them? >>>Honest question, what's everything after LGBT stand for and mean? >>>>q generally means queer or questioning a is for asexual or ally generally i usually means intersex 2s means two spirit, its got ties with native americans though im not an expert then the plus is everything else except straight and cis. >>>>>They tried to designate the A for autistics in 2023. Suddenly claimed to represent us. I and several others went around to their pages and told them that they could F'right off the planet. NOBODY ASKED US. And they obviously have severe problems with consent. p.s. - don't forget the M. image >>>>>>Lmfaooooo what, where did you get this dumb ass propaganda

Thank you! Like, nothing against pride or whatever, but I'm tired of seeing it in basically everything. >Thank you! Like, nothing against straights or whatever, but I'm tired of seeing it in basically everything. >>So your tired of seeing what? We don't wave straight flags or go "happy straight day!" It's not the same... >>>You’re right, it’s not the same, we don’t need “straight flags” because straight people haven’t been victims of constant bigotry and oppression for centuries. >>>>Well lgbtq+ isn't really victims of constant bigotry and operation now. I don't see your point >>>>>Great, so they aren’t victims anymore, why are you offended by the post? >>>>>>Im not >>>>>>>You responded to OC saying “thank you,” when you could’ve just scrolled away and forgot about it. You’ve also been responding to other people too, including me, you could’ve just ignored me.

Well at least this post is exposing fake freedom lovers (LGBTQ rights are human rights you enemy sympathizers) >"If you don't actively agree with what I say, you are literally taking our freedom away" >>Y-Yes... Good job. You got it perfectly. If you don't agree that LGBT+ people deserve to be treated equally, you are literally taking our freedom away. >>>They say they wanna be treated equally, but what they really want is to be treated "special". I mean what is equal about a man wanna change in the women changing room? >>>>no, we don't want to be treated special. We want to not be fucking murdered for being who we are. >>>>>[removed] >>>>>>"it's your fault that you're beaten to death for being who you are. We don't like you for who you are so its all your fault" fuck you. >>>>>>>Its funny that lgbtq rights this and lgbtq rights that but it trample everyone's rights, like the rights for woman to change clothes without another man in the room with dong hanging. >>>>>>>>Trans women are women!!! and if I feel uncomfortable with the people in the clothing room than is that my problem and no reason to attack someone. Do you really think that people are doing surgery and gender affirming medication just to see naked women?

Is this still a thing? Who cares? Just pick up a gun and pick some call downs and get in the fight. >It still has to be a thing because Queer people still get discriminated against and are the target of a lot of online hate (just look at the comments with lots of downvotes) >>Maybe they shouldnt be posting their agenda in places it doesnt belong you know, not everything has to be about you >>>Is it an agenda to say "this group of people exist and that's ok" is it an agenda every time you see a straight couple holding hands, or only the gay ones? >>>>Then exist without pushing your personal believes and sexuality into the faces of others? Share this kind of stuff with your social circle where they support you, but as you probably have realized posting such things in places like this is never going to bring acceptance, rather the opposite. LGBT people are not opressed and you shouldnt act like you are fighting for anything, idc what you do and who do you do it with and i’d prefer it stays that way. nobody has to be heard more than anyone else. >>>>>but we literally are opressed? There are people getting killed and discriminated just because they're queer >>>>>>Where? Not in any of the commenters countries 100%, maybe in some far away Arábic community yes but not any person you ever came in contact with. And you posting stuff like this wont help out those people.

Wow. Got here before the shrieking of the chuds. >Oh, so it's the "shrieking of the chuds" when people are tired of seeing pride in basically every piece of media? Edit: I've gone to bed, and I will no longer be responding to any replies to this. If you feel the need to scream into the void, knock yourself out. >>Yes because it's not happening and you won't admit you're exaggerating. Anyone can say this about any group of people, you just choose to notice this one and get offended. Cry about it >>>I mean, it is. You're factually wrong. I can't go into a game of, say, Dead By Daylight without seeing someone with one of those charms. Because a horror game is a TOTALLY appropriate venue to showcasw your sexuality, right? >>>>Oh my god you’re using DbD charms as your example? I knew you lot were fucking losers but holy shit >>>>>Can you explain to me why that particular example is so poor in your book? >>>>>>because WHO CARES? >>>>>>>If you don't care, than why is that a big thing if they won't be around? >>>>>>>>Because some people care and it is nice to feel included and welcome in a community.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/lego/comments/1tos7p5/bricks_and_minifigures_drama_megapost/

Context: https://mybricklog.com/blog/bricks-minifigs-corporate-stole-old-mans-200000-lego-collection

HIGHLIGHTS

(MOD) Rough Timeline of events: 1. In Oregon: Lego fan stockpiles sealed collection for years, hoping to sell them later for great profit. He gets old, so his son takes it all to Bricks & Minifigs to get it consigned. 2. Owners of the local B&M store get jobs overseas so they have to give up the store. New owner/the franchiser doesn't honor the original consignment agreement and say they are keeping the sets without giving any money to the consignee. 3. Nobody can afford to just file a lawsuit as you'd normally do in a business dispute. So a prank journalist youtuber takes over and starts harassing the new owners of the local store, the corporate owners, and annoys local police. 4. Pranktuber files lawsuits, B&M corporate ignore it, so they get a default judgement. B&M has a year to appeal judgement, so they don't pay right away. They close the Oregon store. Pranktuber declares victory, puts the viral "We stole Lego" sign that was in the news a month ago. 5. When Pranktuber doesn't get payment from B&M corporate, they travel to Utah (where B&M is headquarted) to harass the company owners in person. After annoying the workers at B&M headquarters in Utah, cops are called. Pranktuber decides to go to the owner's house to harass him in person. Cops are called, eventually arrests are made.............. >Callinh him a pranktuber shows what you really think about all this >>(MOD) It does show what I think about him specifically. That doesn't mean we should disregard everything he does, but it does cast a light on his actions. I didn't want to hide my bias. >>>Since you have time to argue semantics in the comments, can I ask why you aren't using that time to unban users who were wrongfully banned before you made this megathread? Especially since some of those users who respectfully asked why they were banned were muted in mod mail? >>>>(MOD) Anyone who was banned and muted for violating community or sitewide rules will remain banned. If you want to discuss or provide feedback for any other moderator actions, you can do that in modmail. This thread is for the B&M discussion, which we are not a part of. >>>>>Why would anyone trust you about using modmail when you muted everyone who asked for help/context previously?

Funny how the top comment on this thread magically disappeared with no acknowledgment! The response to the community’s rightful frustration with the actions of BAM has been abysmal. Should not be censorship of valid questions (not “mean”) on this thread. >(MOD) The comment you are talking about was from an account evading a ban. As stated in the pinned comment, all subreddit and sitewide rules will be enforced here. Ban evasion is still against the reddit rules. >>There’s probably a lot of accounts here evading bans because there were so many accounts banned by the mods in the last 24 hours. And yet no one has had an answer or an acknowledgment of the blatant censorship here. >>>(MOD) Being unhappy that you were banned is not a sufficient reason for evading a ban on reddit. Anyone who was banned can appeal their bans instead of evading. If they were muted, they can appeal the ban after the mute.

"It has nothing to do with anything but a few individuals and their lawyers." How tone deaf can one mod team be? This has everything to do with the Lego community. The fact that fellow Legoheads are getting abused by a large Lego-adjacent corporation, we have a voice to help. If we're not willing to help community members then what's the point in having a community at all? >Agree, terrible take from u steve626 . The mods should have provided a neutral space for the community to discuss and rally around what is objectively a significant story, with millions of views and, within hours, TWO videos from one of the largest internet personalities, MoistCr1TiKaL. Instead, users were banned indiscriminately, and the eventual megathread seems more focused on downplaying the issue and gaslighting the community than facilitating meaningful discussion. >>(MOD) That's that this is. >>>Can you confirm if users who were banned for discussing this before the megathread were unbanned? EDIT: After posting this comment, I have had several users DM me showing that their bans are not reversed. Even worse, when they were banned, they calmly and respectfully asked the mod mail for clarification on why they were banned, and mods just muted them so they couldn't talk in mod mail anymore. EDIT 2: A moderator provided an answer: Anyone who was banned and muted for violating community or sitewide rules will remain banned. If you want to discuss or provide feedback for any other moderator actions, you can do that in modmail. This thread is for the B&M discussion, which we are not a part of. >>>>"Even worse, when they were banned, they calmly and respectfully asked the mod mail for clarification on why they were banned, and mods just muted them so they couldn't talk in mod mail anymore." Ah, yes, the Reddit mod classic

Hey so I saw the mod team deleted my post. This still doesn’t answer the burning question I have for the moderation team: WHY did you ban so many users and WHY did you try to delete so many posts about the topic? If you cannot come forward with a clear and concise answer about the manner then I cannot acknowledge this megathread in good faith. It reads more as a backpedal to the backlash than it does a genuine attempt at allowing users to discuss the issue at hand. EDIT: I got banned on a technicality. I was writing a post before the megathread came out, and by the time I finished writing it, the megathread came out. My post got deleted and I edited the post acknowledging the megathread, and I presumed the mods would give me some leeway due to the literal minutes gap. After I made this comment on the megathread, I got banned. Mods don't want me to criticize them and won't reply to my mod mail. Editing this cuz it's all I can do, watch yourselves. >(MOD) This thread is for discussing the B&M situation. Take feedback about mod actions to modmail >>"We've investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing" really bro >>>(MOD) Lol >>>>You really make the mod team look good. >>>>>(MOD) Thanks, Mom!

Anyone have a solid TL;DR on the entire situation? >Guy gave 200k worth of Lego to a BAM to sell on consignment. Worked fine for a while till the franchise transferred owners and the sets vanished. Drama! Literally that's it. Something sketchy happened, and it will get worked out in the courts. Nothing worth brigading the sub over. Edit: ooooo noooo, I'm being downvoted by a horde of moistcritical fans, whatever will I do?! LMAO Edit2: absolutely no point in replying to anyone getting aggro with me and/or clearly doesn't understand the legal system. Good luck with the tantrum y'all. At least half the replies are getting caught by automod anyway LMFAO >>They tried to work it out in court. BAM corporate shut down the store instead of honoring the default judgements by the court. >>>And you think the court is going to look kindly on that? Like I said - it will get worked out in the courts. >>>>BAM wants it to go to court because they can drag it out and ruin them. They actually said that to their faces. >>>>>Then start a go fund me or something. Whining about it here isn’t going to help. Most of BAM’s customers have no clue what an AFOL is or that this sub exists >>>>>>There already is and talking about it boost awareness about the situation so others know about the companies shady business practices and don’t get scammed. (10 more comments of these two arguing)

Look at the mods back tracking now after all those bans their just trying to cover their own asses now. >Spamming is against the rules of the community. Breaking those rules can leave to a ban. Take your campaign elsewhere. Nothing will be solved here >>This is a topic that relevant to the community and the Lego hobby. That is the complete opposite of spam. The moderation team was working against the interests of it. >>>So a community should be drowned with thousands of posts about a situation that none of us can rectify because it’s relevant? Come the fuck on >>>>You heard it here first boys nothing will ever change so why try. Truly a pathetic take. >>>>>Have fun convincing all the moms and dads to stop taking their children to their local “Lego store” because they don’t know the difference between official and unofficial stores >>>>>>Have fun lying down and letting everyone walk all over you in life. Not the life I would want but hey you do you.

People kept posting about it because your mods deleted the beginning of them and made it seem like there was a connection between them and BAM. This is all your own fault. This is just a knee jerk reaction. "Each shop are independent franchises that have nothing to do with the LEGO company or any of us mods (who all have very real, very boring jobs that have nothing to do with LEGO)." BAM are authorized aftermarket reseller......... >Bricks and Minifigs has no official authorization for aftermarket reselling. That authorization does not exist. Bricks and Minifigs is a seller of newly released sets. But what do you think that actually entails? They pay Lego a wholesale price for the sets to sell them to the public. There is no magical contract that gives Lego control over Bricks and Minifigs. They are completely separate and u related companies that have a very minor business contract >>Bricks and Minifigs is the original LEGO authorized reseller for buying, selling, and trading new and use LEGO sets, minifigures, and accessories >>>Then call the CEO of Lego and tell him to revoke their authorization. I’m sure he’ll listen to a bunch of random redditors about a problem he doesn’t even know about >>>>Bro, just tell us you work for BAM. >>>>>Are you 12? Because only 12 year olds think anyone who disagrees with their tactics must be employed by the evil men >>>>>>Dude what is your problem.

So ya’ll finally got tired of being put on blast, huh? >Who exactly is getting put on blast? As the post says, this sub has no affiliation with Lego, Bricks and Minifigs, or any other company. Spamming this sub isn’t going to solve anything >>[removed] >>>For doing what exactly? Stopping spam? You understand how Reddit works right? One person makes a post and other people comment on it and upvote it. But it’s clear you people don’t understand that since you think it’s ok to spam the same post relentlessly on some noble crusade. You people are ridiculous >>>>Is it spamming, though, if not a single post sticks. And getting deleted, although no rules were broken? Should have just let the first post up. Problem would have been avoided.

I watched Ben's video and found it to be sloppy and unsatisfying. He has a tendency to make assertions without justifying them (such as when he claimed the police are part of a cover-up in part 1 despite no convincing evidence). His legal and business statements are sketchy, such as claiming it's a loophole for a business owner to claim they aren't liable for a contract signed by a former owner, or when he claimed that B&M avoided debt by closing shop, despite still "having assets" according to their narrative. His use of AI is not the reason the video is sloppy. It's not a substantive video, but it accomplishes it's goal: Harass enough people to make an entertaining video that brings attention to the issue. This video is better. >It’s pretty clear you haven’t seen part 2. You should withdraw your opinion until you do >>I have seen part 2. The behavior of the police is very strange. I don't understand why Ben was swatted for alleged LEGO theft while the original store maintains the consigned collection. I'm not convinced any of his videos show strong evidence of conspiracy. >>>You watched part 2 and still think the police are good guys? Are you fucking blind? They literally swatted his house and pulled him over for a fake drug charge. The police are the ones harassing Ben >>>>"You watched part 2 and still think the police are good guys? I have seen part 2. The behavior of the police is very strange. I don't understand why Ben was swatted for alleged LEGO theft while the original store maintains the consigned collection." I didn't claim the cops are the "good guys". My claim is this: I am not currently convinced that Ben substantiated his claims of conspiracy to cover-up. The exact swatting you're referring to is odd to me and I genuinely don't know what to make of it. It's very odd for Ben to be swatted on accusation of stolen LEGO while the original store didn't face any similar issues. That alone doesn't prove conspiracy. >>>>>... He has videos of the officers admitting they have nothing on him. Despite this 4-5 group of cops go to confront him for the same thing and can't come up with anything, yet the last duo arrests him anyways. They release him and immediately try to pick him up again. They try to refuse bail over alleged stolen Lego. And that's not even bringing up the lack of proof because that alone is insane. It's clearly at the very least misconduct and at the worst intimidation and collaboration of law enforcement to frame an innocent man. >>>>>>One issue I have with the conspiracy angle is that it is actually PERFECT...if we only ignore a few key points. "He has videos of the officers admitting they have nothing on him. They release him They try to refuse bail" The way Ben presented the video definitely makes the police behavior look odd. He does not justify the jump to large scale conspiracy, though. Police can just be bad without being part of a conspiracy.

Here's a good summary: https://mybricklog.com/blog/bricks-minifigs-corporate-stole-old-mans-200000-lego-collection >This is a fucking crazy story, but it really seems like 2 douchebags, took advantage of a family, because they could. TLDR: Guy franchises 1 bam, takes on "against policy" consignment deal, then sells store to 2 shit heels. They steal remaining sets, get another guy in legal trouble, and now the bam was shutdown, and legal action remains. Edit: this is a tldr of the article >>That's a misrepresentation of what happened. The sets were on consignment for a year before the original franchise owner informed corporate they were moving (their husband got a job offer in Spain). Corporate found a new franchise owner, who forced the original owner out of the store and seized the sets despite the original owner telling them they belonged to someone else. The original franchise owner has been trying to help them get their sets back, providing them with all the security footage of the takeover. >>>Understood, again, I read it too, the only shit heels are the 2 new owners Edit: meant to be short and sweet >>>>Corporate aren't helping themselves much either >>>>>Why would they, they have the whole "against policy" line they can tow, and the the family to fuck off at the same time. In all reality, what could they do? They already disenfranchised them from being a BAM, after that it was a contract between individuals, and they don't care, except that they lost some $$ >>>>>>As a small business owner you absolutely understand the value of a contract. Corporation or not >>>>>>>I'm not defending them, I'm just so jaded against corporations, I have no hope or expectation of anything less.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/hatethissmug/comments/1tip2gb/i_hate_the_term_the_male_gaze/

HIGHLIGHTS

This subreddit appears to have entirely transformed into a place for right-wing incels to whine about everything that goes against their political beliefs >M-Maybe if I call them incls they’ll give me some leftover pussy 🥺 >>image >>>Then why do leftists constantly use "Women won't have sex with you" as an insult? >>>>they dont >>>>>That's what "incel" implies, and it's one of the most popular insults used by leftists. >>>>>>incl when used as an insult moreso implies like the pathetic whining associated with those who self identify with the term, at least thats how i always viewed it. “women won’t have sex with you” would be more like using virgin as an insult >>>>>>>And what are they whining about? That women don't have sex with them. To say that there is no implication of "not getting laid" would be incorrect.

Male gaze is not "oh the character is sexy" it's "sexy is all the character is" >But that's rarely the case. Even in video games where the female is extremely sexy, she's usually also a badass proficient in 20 weapons who saves the world a dozen time while doing back flips in high heels. If you want "sexy is all the character is" you don't have to look any further than real-world female Instagram and OF models. >>If that is the norm in that universe (for gameplay related characters) then it doesn’t really matter. Also, look at Quiet from MGSV. Her being in a bikini breaks previously established lore. So characterisation is literally being sacrificed >>>How does that break lore? Did they say she needs to be 100% nude to breathe? >>>>The opposite, actually. There was another character in a previous game that had a similar power (The End), but he was a gross old man so he got to wear a full camo suit instead of a speedo. >>>>>But they don't have the exact same parasite thing if I remember correctly. Dunno I'm a bit rusty on my mgsv retcon lore. >>>>>>Yeah but the fact that both extremely similar and it just so happens that hers is different enough that she has to wear a bikini is an example of the Male Gaze.

It's definitely a thing. But you could just be normal about and say "yes but I still enjoy it." Like by your own admission there's nothing wrong with it, why do you take offense at the term? >It really isn't a thing. Male sexuality is normal and healthy just like female sexuality, there's just been a movement to try and demonize it. It's ok for characters to be sexy and there be fan service, and it's ok to not have those things. Both are ok. >>Fr and as a queer woman I assure you it has nothing to do with being male. I just like seeing other women >>>That’s always my question. If lesbians are enjoying “the male gaze”, is it still problematic? >>>>As a bi woman, I’d 100% rather attract lesbians than straight men. Lesbians in the by large have been far more respectful while I’ve met men who can’t handle the slightest rejection. I’ve never been sexually harassed by a lesbian but I have been sexually assaulted and harassed by men since I was 5. The issues isn’t the sexualization of women, it’s that society doesn’t teach men how to handle rejection well. It’s treating women like objects rather than living beings with their own goals. I do want to say the obvious, none of this applies to all men and I’m friends with some really wonderful awesome dudes. >>>>>Lesbians are far more respectfull? Lmao. Dont look up the domestic violence amongst lesbian couples. >>>>>>This stat is bogus as it counted past abuse, i.e. Including abuse wherein a lesbian tried to force themselves into a relationship with a man due to societal pressure and then were abused in that relationship, all it demonstrates is that lesbians are abused, not that they are abusive.

Male gaze is a problem because of how prevalent it is. And female gaze is not as common. >Neither are a problem >>The problem is that male gaze is the norm. If you look at popular media, you will find the majority of it has male gaze in mind, and only a few examples will have female gaze >>>It is when only caters to men. Like gacha games mostly think about the male gaze, and don't put any effort on the male characters for the women >>>>I think that's because typically women aren't as interested in that kind of fan service (though some are). It would be like me saying "why are these smutty novels always written for women, why do the men always act this way in these novels?" >>>>>Yeah thats completely untrue, you just need to look at the monthly revenue of love and deep space. Game created for the female gaze, on top of the charts ever since it came out. It even beats genshin in some of the months >>>>>>Ok then they do enjoy their female gaze too. And neither "gaze" is wrong

I don't understand why men liking to look at attractive fictional characters is somehow a problem >Men liking attractive fictional characters isn't the problem though. The problem is when female characters exist first and foremost to be ogled at, usually at the cost of characterization or believability of the designs or variety of body types or all of those things combined. Also this view assumes everything should be catered to men first and foremost which, why? It's worth questioning imo. >>None of this is true lol men if you're reading this, it's 100% ok like attractive women and like sex. Don't listen to crazy people like this on the internet, they are not professionals, they do not have authority, and all of these strong opinions they have were formed in seconds without any real thought >>>Time to work on your reading comprehension >>>>"another opinion I don't like that makes me shake with anger. Time to pull out old faithful, the classic reading comprehension insult" >>>>>Buddy you're arguing against things you made up in your head. Nobody said any of that >>>>>>Please go read some other comments, many people are saying that. Again none of what the original comment said is true, it's fine to have sexy women to be ogled at and find to have sexy man to be ogled at. It isn't a problem, and it's fine if people don't like it but the sane thing to do is not watch that stuff rather than rile up an angry mob about the male gaze

Yes. Setting whatever academic theory aside, the common use of the phrase as just an insult is tiresome and pointless. Essentially it boils down to: evolution has made males like to gaze at attractive women. Pointing this out ad nauseam is as silly as constantly pointing out how all food ads are designed for the human gaze of hunger. Like, yes, this pizza advertisement caters to the human gaze, and? So what? Of course it does. They're trying to attract people by using what evolution has programmed them to be attracted to. Sorry about millions of years of evolution and how it is a problem for these people. >The problem is not that it exists but that it is the norm. >>Yup. Evolution made humans obsessed with attractiveness and food and made males more easily swayed into buying things with attractive women in them. >>>Then why isn't female gaze as common in popular media? Male gaze is only a problem because majority of media panders to straight men. >>>>Men are easier to manipulate using this. It's more reliable and predictable. They make more money this way. That's really all there is to it. If all the big bucks were in pandering otherwise they absolutely would. >>>>>Thats not true >>>>>>That's basic economics. They do EVERYTHING they can to make as much money as possible. There are teams of people working on this exact thing 24/7. If pandering otherwise were more profitable that would be the norm.

"•Chris Hemworth as Thor is repeatedly sexually objectified. •Chris Evans as Captain America. Certainly in the first one. •>Hugh Jackman as Wolverine may be the most egregious example in the Marvel films. So much so, I think they even called attention to the fact in "Deadpool & Wolverine"." All those are examples of male gaze. >Which I think is evidence that the "Male gaze" is not a sexist thing. Men like looking at attractive things (and so do women, but that's a side point). I do not think there is anything wrong with that. >>It's wrong because its the most common "gaze". And its not a sexism thing, its a patriarchy thing. Men have had the dominant role in society for so long that pandering to men is the norm. >>>What would you say is a "female gaze"? Or does it even exist? >>>>Look at media created by women for women >>>>>So if it is not made by a woman, then it is not suited towards women and is therefore wrong? That seems widely sexist. Why is it morally wrong for men to have media made for them? >>>>>>No. Male gaze is the norm so basically nobody notices it, even the writers don't notice it. Because of that, if you want to find examples of female gaze you have to look at things made FOR women. The reason i said "by a woman" is because what men think women consider attractive is not usually accurate.

Maybe it’s because most content is made with the male gaze in mind lmao. You’re hating on something that is completely true And I’m guessing you’re a man which is why you’re not too bothered by it even though it’s extremely harmful >Are most romantic fantasy books made with the male gaze in mind? How about rom-coms? Or other types of romance genres. Most anime and japanese video-games are made with the male gaze in mind, i 100% agree. However, i feel like most hollywood movies the last 10 years or so, are not. Also, most western video games are not that either (anymore). >>So, you can name one genre of thing (romance, ironically) that isn't made with the male gaze in mind? I think that still qualifies the other side as "most content". I agree we have gotten better with things like video games though. But the journey isn't done. >>>My issue with the term is that it morphs to apply to almost any fit character. In the Batman "Catwoman looks sexy": Thats the male gaze because men like to look at women as sexual objects; but also "Batman has body builder muscles" is also the male gaze, because men want to be like batman and have body-builder muscles................ >>>>We're not saying that no character can be a sexy woman with curves or that no character can be a fit muscly man. What we're saying is it's a problem when those are the ONLY characters and when even IF other body types are represented, they're turned into a joke. >>>>>When the main examples of "This character is male gaze coded" are main characters...and regardless of the character being male or female, the argument is still "Well this is just the male gaze!" The theory does fall apart some. If you want a wider range of body types in media, don't use "the male gaze" as your rallying cry.

OP is right on the money. It does come from misandry, and it is used to demonize male sexuality. It's 100% ok to have sexy characters, it's 100% to not have them. Both are fine. Men reading this, there is nothing wrong with you. Take all the words of encouragement that women receive about their sexuality - this applies to male sexuality too. It's normal, healthy, ok, and even great to have sexual desire. The male gaze comes from the same place that microaggresions come from. >It doesn't come from misandry. It's the concept, originally from the author Laura Mulvey, that stories often view women only from the perspective of men. What they do, how they act, how they look, everything about them is boiled down to how it affects or is viewed by men. They're often treated as basically objects, with no real autonomy or goals of their own, their only purpose to satisfy male characters emotionally or sexually. It's a very real and common phenomenon, especially in 1975 when the term was originally coined. >>Again, if you want more media written for the female perspective, that's ok. But it doesn't make the male perspective bad. There is nothing wrong with it just like there is nothing wrong with the female perspective >>>It's crazy how "male perspective = bad" is what you gathered from that >>>>It's not even a little bit crazy. Read your comment again and how negatively it portrays the "male gaze". Mine is a completely normal reaction to that >>>>>I could read my comment a second time, but how about you read my comment one time? The problem is not that some stories are from the perspective of men. Nowhere did I say, or imply that. The problem is that media often views women ONLY in their relations to male characters in the story, not as independent characters, just accessories. That's what the entire concept of the "male gaze" ACTUALLY is. It's not rooted in some misandrist view that movies from the perspective of men are inherently wrong, it's the observation that a significant portion of media fails to portray women as actual people with their own goals and ambitions, rather than mere accessories to the male characters. >>>>>>Nice, go read my comment now for the first time where I said if you want more female perspective, that's cool.