It’s called god’s calibre for a reason, son.

.45 ftmfw

Not in the form of seamen

42

Aight, you asked multiple questions, so you’re going to get some strange answers, possibly including this one.

To your title question, the only time I’ve heard anyone say that, they were being a douche. My response online is mostly of the “down vote, report if appropriate, and move on” variety.

In meat space, my response is usually either an eye roll and walking off, or a “fucking moron” and walking off.

I have big dude privilege in meat space, and roll well armed, so have no need to pretend to be nice to douche nozzles spewing bullshit.

The other questions are harder.

1: for a given value of factual, sure, I guess. But it’s using imprecise language that’s been weaponized, so I would be dubious of someone stating it until there was more context. “Biological” isn’t as definitive and limited in usages as to be without question in that context.

2: don’t matter. If a guy says he’s a guy, he’s a guy. If a gal says she’s a gal, she’s a gal. End of fucking story, and I will gladly tell anyone fucking with my trans homies that they’re a fucking moron and be willing to either walk off, or fuck them up if they insist. IDGAF about sometimes XY or XX status, or any of the other possible combinations (remember when I said “Biological” isn’t that useful or definitive? Yeah, biology ain’t a binary). I care about the person’s expressed self. It’s about basic human decency and respect.

3: I wouldn’t respond logically. It doesn’t merit any effort on my part. I’m not in the business of convincing anyone that everyone has human rights, should have equal acces to all civil rights, or that someone else’s gender is none of their fucking business. It isn’t about logic. Anyone at this point trying to frame gender as some kind of science debate is a douche and can go fuck themselves. The debate at this point has nothing to do with “biology”. It’s about human rights. And yes, I will fight on that hill.

4: it would only contradict if the person trying to bring “biology” into a conversation is being a douche instead of just missing the point. I don’t automatically assume a person trying to frame the subject in those terms is acting with malice. So they may not be contradicting the fact that trans women are women. They may just be exploring the language of transness in an attempt to better understand the matter. And that’s okay. It isn’t a built in part of language, so everyone has to absorb the concepts over time.

Alas, assholes and morons use that language to denigrate trans people. So I also can’t assume someone isn’t doing so. I have to wait for context, or be proactive in stating that I ain’t putting up with bigotry, so if that’s where they’re going, it won’t end well.

Me? The debate is over. What’s still in play is people finding their path to internalizing the subject. We don’t get to debate what is a fundamental human experience. Trans people exist. It isn’t imaginary on their part, it isn’t bad parenting, it isn’t trauma. They’re trans, and that’s it.

Total baby face and heel swap. All the villains become the good guys, and the good guys immediately betray them as a cage descends

I mean, it is the alpha. D&d is the root of ttrpg. Didn’t have to be, there were other things that could have been. And it wasn’t the true first stage of that became ttrpg; it was built on other things.

But you gotta be realistic and admit that d&d as a “thing” is the single best known, most successful system out there. It is what it is.

Ford Fiesta.

It’s a party in your mouth

Dude. Dude.

Fucking majestic af word play right there

Fries

I don’t think there’s a single objective answer.

The gist would be that it’s habitual due to long term cultural patterns, the same as what any given culture has in regards to food.

At some point, the concept of big piles of food being the default crept in. I suspect that it originated between feast/celebration foods and the “working man’s meal” where early workers in agriculture and industry needed a shit ton of calories to keep doing their work. Once enough people see that kind of portions often enough, the mind decides that must be what everyone is supposed to get on their plate.

Then, as things like machinery and eventually robots removed more and more of the physical labor from jobs, sizes never went back down because the outcome of eating beyond what you need isn’t immediate and obvious. So you follow the defaults, do what you have seen and internalized as the norm.

But there are still plenty of jobs where loads of calories are necessary to get through a shift. So people still see that, and thus expect it on their plate even if it isn’t a healthy amount for the job they have.

TV just follows society most of the time, so a show will most often mirror a norm without any effort to correct for what’s best for individuals.

When it comes to restaurants, there’s an extra later though. Even if people know they don’t need that much, there’s an expectation that if you pay for a given order, you’ll get the same amount as anyone else that orders it. So restaurants have to scale to what at least a decent sized segment of the population expects to see. They won’t be happy if they get less return on their plate compared to another diner, despite that other diner being on a road crew busting their ass laying pavement in the sun all day and needing more.

If a restaurant either changed sizes per customer needs, or charged an extra amount for people with higher needs, they’d go out of business fast

For humor, strokin’ by Clarence Carter. I’ve been known to say “ima put on some mood music”, then start that track and do a bump n grind to it. Surprisingly, it works often enough that I keep doing it.

More seriously, I favor Barry White for background music for sex. The combination of solid rhythms and that sweet baritone get the job done when a partner doesn’t have their own preference, but wants music.

That being said, Prince, during his symbol era, put out a song called 7. It’s not even a sexy song, per se. But the rolling rhythm and vaguely romantic lyrics work for me, and tend to work well for others, so it’s high on my list of songs for sex. As a single favorite, it takes the spot. https://youtu.be/9V-vcXOpG9g

Depressing though? I am not depressed by music, even sad music. Sad music may make me somber, but not sad.

However, if I need a good cry, the Dixie Chicks version of Travelin Soldier will do it damn near every time. Don’t even know why really, but I think it’s the voice tone and arrangement that push it into tear jerking rather than the lyrics, even though the lyrics are sad. That’s because there’s other versions, including by the original songwriter, that don’t make me cry at all. No other song comes close to the reliability of tears that one does.

Yeah, and Twiztid has a few decent tracks as well.

Wouldn’t be able to name them without looking up though, not something I listen to a lot.

One of the things about ICP is that I tend to appreciate parts of their lyrics, but the rest falls flat. I don’t dislike their music, it just doesn’t do it for me. It falls right under the threshold where I won’t change it if it’s playing and I can change it. I tend not to be able to listen long because I’d rather have something else, or even silence, rather than have them in the background for extended listening. But I can tolerate it for short and medium times.

That motherfucker be trippin

Homies and spin the bottle lol

Homies is just a great track, period. If anyone else had done it, it would have been bigger than it was.

Spin the bottle is less great overall, but I like it anyway

Ya know, they do have two songs I like, maybe I’m a juggalo now

Yes! We have learned that video killed the radio star

I’m not sure if you’re mildly irritated at the compilations themselves, or that the “franchises” involved went way too long.

I’m a f an of compilations tbh. It’s a solid way to snag the whole schmear cheap (usually). I can just choose to ignore the ones I don’t like, same as I did when a given series started going to shit.

Spider-Man though, that’s a different kettle of fish. Comics run for decades, lifetimes in some cases. Movies about the same characters are going to be as likely to have extended production, with as many ups and downs as the comics do (and there are some horrible runs of even the best comic titles).

I’m with you on the laziness and risk aversion that makes 9 American pie movies happen. Or most franchises that start in a similar way. The first was a great movie, but it really didn’t need a sequel, much less multiplies that not only abandoned the characters and what little storyline there was, but stopped putting in effort to good writing.

Not that a successful one-off can’t spawn a decent franchise, it’s just that studios don’t put in the investment to make it happen.

Look at the Bond series. While there have been plenty of stinkers, it was approached as a long term thing early on and has also managed to have some great movies even as it aged. No high art or anything, but still some solid escapist action.

Chicken food & bedding, toilet paper, chocolate, and coffee

No bullshit

Consarned cantankerousness

You know, as much as I dislike the way llms and other models have been made and used by capitalists, I agree with you that the moral panic around it has turned into a form of slop itself.

It isn’t like people haven’t been dreaming of what the technology could be for decades. And it isn’t like it wasn’t inevitable that something would be created like the various generative models. The only part that’s bad is the execution. Which is extremely fucking bad, and it’s disgusting that it is happening. But that’s not the same thing as the underlying concept and technology being bad.