Its hard to see, but I’ve squires one of Canada’s greatest secrets. BLK water.
Its an electolight drinking water that is completely black in Colour.I still don’t trust it.
There’s something wrong about that.
sounds like the black Vitamin Water
which is coincidentally my favorite
Saw this in ShopRite the other day. No, not like black Vitamin Water. This looked horrifying. It was so black. Unnaturally black. Like paint. I’d be terrified of drinking that.
if these guys aren’t complete shit I would be very surprised
ironic that a genre that’s often concerned with minimalism is populated by so many pretentious lunkheads
Quality so gud
mediocrebrutality replied to your post: Oh, the thumbnail for your music video shows…
Guess you think Megadeth is garbage… [Moto Psycho]I was waiting for you to say this
Good thing the thumbnail on Youtube for that song is Dave Mustaine :P
Yeah, but thumbnails are generated differently on different sites. I’m sure there are several instances of Moto Psycho out there where the thumbnail is indeed showing scantily clad women who are not a part of the band.
WHAT!?
No words… none, whatsoever… can describe the mere beauty I’m looking at right now.
Whose guitar is that?
probably not anyone from any actual band
it looks uncomfortably bottom-heavy
Lol this is an ESP Triryche. It is a guitar shaped like the Queensryche band logo.
(Source: darkface)
egog:
as you say, but discussions cannot be initiated if one party fails to request explanation and the other does not know it is needed. a decision must be made on the part of the judger as to how much information they feel comfortable making a judgment based upon. i did not feel comfortable judging your opinion on the original post based on what you first said, so i asked a question that would get you talking about it. there are a number of things, given context clues and my background knowledge about the speaker, about which i feel comfortable making a snap judgment.egog:
i did not mean to assert that you should argue toward the person instead of the problem. rather, i meant to argue that your steps of “give room for the original speaker to clarify” and “then agree or disagree” should be switched. i do not think a judgment call, such as agreeing or disagreeing, should be made without the full story, which can only be obtained by first allowing the original speaker to clarify.egog:
that i agree with; there are a number of stretches made to support feminism. but i would ask that the next time you see something you think is a stretch, you ask for further explanation from its defender - perhaps they’re just not good at getting their point across on the first go. (or perhaps they have no defensible point, in which case i would certainly not malign you for choosing to dismiss it. but it’s important to give it a chance.)egog:
i agree that the importance to society of the mere surficial “people should be married” is not and should not be a bastion cause for the feminist movementegog:
but is that the only thing they get asked?I need feminism because in the last year, I have graduated from university, passed my driving test, travelled around Europe, got myself a job in the midst of a recession and moved to Asia to work for charity on youth empowerment/poverty reduction programmes… and all anyone can ask me is, “So, have you met any nice boys?”
Not to undermine the importance of all what was achieved but… guys ALSO get asked, “So, have you met any nice girls?”
I really wouldn’t refer to that question as something that brings about a “need” for feminism…
Not only, but primary, yes, quite often, especially by older individuals such as grandmothers. Probably exactly as the above original poster described - especially since I doubt no one asked her about her job, travels, etc. That’s just absurd. I think the idea is that asking about a guy was the main concern.
Sure, I think there are plenty of issues that need to be addressed about male/female equality/inequality, but “Have you met any nice boys?” isn’t one of them. Isn’t it a little underwhelming to the cause as a whole to point that question out as an issue that needs to be addressed when guys have the exact same “problem” (if you wanna call it as such)? In my opinion, the feminist movement would be taken more seriously if the important issues were brought up, instead of every little thing being turned into a feminist problem when the connection is virtually nonexistent.
i disagree that minor issues should be disregarded in the feminist movement. it is because the minor problems are so ingrained as a natural part of life that the stage is set for the major problems. i think that the connections run much more myriad and intertwined than you believe.No, I do agree with you on the second point, sorry if I wasn’t clear before. I do think minor issues should be addressed as well but what does bother me is when issues are basically stretched out and over-analyzed in order to tie in with some larger feminist idea when they really aren’t. I understand that the implications of our unequal system are visible throughout our society - women tend to get paid less due to the ‘glass ceiling’, they think/are taught to think that they need to marry to achieve that extra bit of money cuz men will earn more, etc. It is a problem that reaches far. BUT. There is no point in looking at the smallest possible “points” and thinking of some far-fetched way of connecting them to the big picture. Ultimately, it ends up weakening the entire movement due to not enough consolidation. Not everything is fundamentally a feminist issue as some people make it out to be. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar - sometimes relatives just care about their loved one finding a romantic partner. The same for guys as for girls. Nothing more, nothing less.
No, I agree with you there, but I wasn’t attacking the poster directly. It’s foolish to automatically think every post that one disagrees with is worded poorly rather than ‘wrong’. I believe one should look at information as it is presented, then agree or disagree, and then give room for the original speaker to clarify if needed. I interpreted this post one way and disagreed with it, then coming up with an argument against it.
To quote myself, “I really wouldn’t refer to that question as something that brings about a “need” for feminism…” My post in itself really only addressed the question and not the “defender” herself.
This is actually a very interesting topic, although I think we’ve transitioned away from the original discussion. But to add one last response before this thread [most likely] dies, I agree that yes, in a perfect world, asking for an explanation before an assertion is made is optimal. That’s not practical at all, however, and hardly ever practiced. We read things and respond - it’s natural. If someone were to say, “All women belong in the kitchen”, would you respond with (or think) a statement about how sexist he is, or would you ask him to clarify under what context he meant that? I understand the contrast between the two, but it’s a slippery slope. We can’t question everything we read - it’s simply not practical. That’s why it’s important to be able to communicate effectively and clearly, and be willing to offer explanations if someone happens to misunderstand. Discussions are meant to lead to compromises.
Yes, but again I stress that my reaction was about “Did you find a guy?”, which I think is fairly interchangeable with “Did you find a girl?” As you say, a decision must be made on the part of the judger as to how much information they feel comfortable making a judgement based upon. That is what I did, since the story seemed fairly straightforward to me - individual achieves an impressive amount of goals, yet most questions seem to be about finding a future spouse. The “individual” could be either a “guy” or a “girl” - that is my point. So, technically, I don’t see how more context could be beneficial to my original “judgement”. If it were something as severe as a relative explicitly saying, “We don’t care about your job cuz you need to be a mother to be successful”, the original post would have most definitely been worded differently.
egog:
i did not mean to assert that you should argue toward the person instead of the problem. rather, i meant to argue that your steps of “give room for the original speaker to clarify” and “then agree or disagree” should be switched. i do not think a judgment call, such as agreeing or disagreeing, should be made without the full story, which can only be obtained by first allowing the original speaker to clarify.egog:
that i agree with; there are a number of stretches made to support feminism. but i would ask that the next time you see something you think is a stretch, you ask for further explanation from its defender - perhaps they’re just not good at getting their point across on the first go. (or perhaps they have no defensible point, in which case i would certainly not malign you for choosing to dismiss it. but it’s important to give it a chance.)egog:
i agree that the importance to society of the mere surficial “people should be married” is not and should not be a bastion cause for the feminist movementegog:
but is that the only thing they get asked?I need feminism because in the last year, I have graduated from university, passed my driving test, travelled around Europe, got myself a job in the midst of a recession and moved to Asia to work for charity on youth empowerment/poverty reduction programmes… and all anyone can ask me is, “So, have you met any nice boys?”
Not to undermine the importance of all what was achieved but… guys ALSO get asked, “So, have you met any nice girls?”
I really wouldn’t refer to that question as something that brings about a “need” for feminism…
Not only, but primary, yes, quite often, especially by older individuals such as grandmothers. Probably exactly as the above original poster described - especially since I doubt no one asked her about her job, travels, etc. That’s just absurd. I think the idea is that asking about a guy was the main concern.
Sure, I think there are plenty of issues that need to be addressed about male/female equality/inequality, but “Have you met any nice boys?” isn’t one of them. Isn’t it a little underwhelming to the cause as a whole to point that question out as an issue that needs to be addressed when guys have the exact same “problem” (if you wanna call it as such)? In my opinion, the feminist movement would be taken more seriously if the important issues were brought up, instead of every little thing being turned into a feminist problem when the connection is virtually nonexistent.
i disagree that minor issues should be disregarded in the feminist movement. it is because the minor problems are so ingrained as a natural part of life that the stage is set for the major problems. i think that the connections run much more myriad and intertwined than you believe.No, I do agree with you on the second point, sorry if I wasn’t clear before. I do think minor issues should be addressed as well but what does bother me is when issues are basically stretched out and over-analyzed in order to tie in with some larger feminist idea when they really aren’t. I understand that the implications of our unequal system are visible throughout our society - women tend to get paid less due to the ‘glass ceiling’, they think/are taught to think that they need to marry to achieve that extra bit of money cuz men will earn more, etc. It is a problem that reaches far. BUT. There is no point in looking at the smallest possible “points” and thinking of some far-fetched way of connecting them to the big picture. Ultimately, it ends up weakening the entire movement due to not enough consolidation. Not everything is fundamentally a feminist issue as some people make it out to be. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar - sometimes relatives just care about their loved one finding a romantic partner. The same for guys as for girls. Nothing more, nothing less.
No, I agree with you there, but I wasn’t attacking the poster directly. It’s foolish to automatically think every post that one disagrees with is worded poorly rather than ‘wrong’. I believe one should look at information as it is presented, then agree or disagree, and then give room for the original speaker to clarify if needed. I interpreted this post one way and disagreed with it, then coming up with an argument against it.
To quote myself, “I really wouldn’t refer to that question as something that brings about a “need” for feminism…” My post in itself really only addressed the question and not the “defender” herself.
This is actually a very interesting topic, although I think we’ve transitioned away from the original discussion. But to add one last response before this thread [most likely] dies, I agree that yes, in a perfect world, asking for an explanation before an assertion is made is optimal. That’s not practical at all, however, and hardly ever practiced. We read things and respond - it’s natural. If someone were to say, “All women belong in the kitchen”, would you respond with (or think) a statement about how sexist he is, or would you ask him to clarify under what context he meant that? I understand the contrast between the two, but it’s a slippery slope. We can’t question everything we read - it’s simply not practical. That’s why it’s important to be able to communicate effectively and clearly, and be willing to offer explanations if someone happens to misunderstand. Discussions are meant to lead to compromises.
