Sigh In A Storm
-
Your RealPlayer is out of date.
-
YouTube channels I have watched a bunch of.
(part 1, off the top of my head)
Techmoan (Retro Tech series)
Red Hot Nickel Ball
Hydraulic Press
Taras Kul
Taofledermaus
How It Should Have Ended
Honest Trailers
-
why do nice girls always go for the assholes i dont even like pegging
No. Just. NO. I am so sick of this bullshit stereotype being both perpetuated AND played out. No.
um
Saying nice girls go with the assholes is the biggest stereotype in relationships of all time
uM
We don’t go with assholes, we go with the people who give us attention at the right time and ignore us at the right time and it just so happens to be the people who don’t care about us and it’s stupid a/f
This post represents tumblr
Okay but like that’s the most true stereotype ever… so many dumb nice girls date douchebags lmao
ARE YOU SERIOUS
The problem is not that nice girls date assholes, it’s that nice girls *knowingly* date assholes and then have the nerve to complain and ask “why can’t I find a nice guy?”
And I will now stop before this becomes a rant.
You dont get this post do you? Lol
The comments are priceless.
So many people being clueless.
Douchebags always date douchebags. The kicker is douchebags have 0 self-awareness that they are douchebags so in turn they complain that “they can never find a nice guy/sane girl.”
Holy fuck man not you too
So many non-comprehending mother fuckers
Pure comedy gold.
Oh. My. Fucking. God.
This post is a perfect example of what people mean when we talk about how nobody on this godforsaken website has any fucking reading comprehension skills
I fucking love this post and think about it often
(via dangerbooze)
-
Men 'face MORE discrimination than women': Global study claims males receive the raw end of the deal with harsher punishments for the same crime, compulsory military service and more deaths at work Men are disadvantaged in 91 countries compared to 43 nations for women
The UK, the US and Australia all discriminate against men more, a study claims
Italy, Israel and China are harder environments for women, researchers say
Scientists created the Basic Index of Gender Inequality to assess inequality
Closer the BIGI score is to zero the greater the level of equality is in the country
Hmmm. HMMMMMMM.
UH ARE WE GONNA IGNORE
THIS GODDAMN ‘STUDY’ CLAIMS THE COUNTRY THAT TREATS WOMEN BETTER THAN MEN THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD IS GODDAMN FUCKING SAUDI ARABIA.
STOP WITH THESE OPPRESSION OLYMPICS SO YOU CAN ACT LIKE MEN RE OPPRESSED YOU GODDAMN IDIOTS
I’m all for fucking equality and I’ll fight for men’s rights, father’s rights, paternity leave, equal pay, etc etc etc but this is the stupidest fucking thing and if I ever saw any of these morons that created this study or vouch for it in person I would slap the living shit out of them and cut their balls off and send them straight to Saudi Arabia to witness what it’s like to be a woman there.
A country where women (and girls! Girls! Little girls!) are fucking stoned to death for being raped. And you’re saying that they treat women better than men.
I fucking hate pieces of shit that just blindly push this kind of crap out to feed into a narrative. What the fuck. What the hell. Read for once, you fucking morons.
I think you have fundamentally misunderstood the target of the paper, its results, and the function of the associated graphs. This is not about either absolute or comparative evaluations of Justice or quality of life from country to country. This focuses on gender parity only. The researchers’ methodology for examining this question is clearly laid out. What is yours? I can see how, if you’re mentally comparing some sheik or other well-to-do Arab man to his woman kept as a pet, seeing Saudi culture described as equally insufferable might grate on you. But that is not a failing of the paper’s authors, their knowledge, or imaginations.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0205349
No, I’m not going to play this stupid game of pretend with you while you beat around the bush and backpedal like this kind of crap often leads to. You can pretend like using what you likely view as sophisticated phrasing makes you nice and smart and ‘logical’ or whatever, but you’re spitting in the face of every woman facing extreme horror and discrimination in these countries by complaining of men being “disadvantaged” in countries where women are treated like property.
It’s sickening that you’d even continue to defend it after you’ve so clearly not read it. Rather than just deleting the stupid post and moving along, you’re defending it. It’s sickening.
I will use this study’s own words against it and make it so you can’t backpedal and try to gaslight.
The study itself is called ‘A simplified approach to measuring national gender inequality.’ It is about gender equality and inequality in general. They have decided to quantify this by using the measurement “based on sex differences in the opportunity to lead a long healthy and satisfied life that is grounded on educational opportunities.”
Already you should be scoffing at the idea of Saudi Arabia being highest on the list when it focuses on education opportunities.
Do you know how it decided Saudi Arabia is oh-so-equal?:
Take for example Saudi Arabia. It has a very low overall deviation from parity (0.15%) but relatively high disparity in individual components (e.g., a 7% disadvantage for women in education and a 5% disadvantage for men in life satisfaction). In other words, because men’s and women’s disadvantages average one another out, it reaches a high level of overall parity. Indeed, Saudi Arabia is a country with one of the largest differences between its overall level of parity and the lack of parity in the individual components (S1 Table).
This is ridiculous. It has come to this conclusion because ‘men aren’t as satisfied with their lives.’ They claim discrimination based on this heavily, suggesting it’s almost just as bad as the insane inequality of women’s education in an Islamist state, not touching on ANY female discrimination beyond that, and then goes on to say THIS:
Second, as argued in the introduction, the general focus in the area of gender inequality is often on issues relevant to women, while discounting men’s issues. For example, while the issue of Saudi women not being allowed to drive has received much media attention, little is reported about issues affecting Saudi men. Little is written, for example, about the challenges many lower-status men have in finding a partner in a country where polygyny is legally practiced, yet this almost certainly undermines their health and wellbeing, as well as their life satisfaction. Moreover, although girls fall behind in educational opportunities (e.g., years schooling), the girls that attend school outperform boys by a larger degree than in many other countries [38], raising questions about Saudi education for boys as well. In this context, we would like to note that the often-touted bias toward the interests of men applies to high status men, not men in general.
The fuckers in this article. Are saying. That there is an unfair bias in the media that we are horrified at women not being able to drive or even leave the house without a man, and how we should be focusing on the fact it’s :( so sad that some poor-off men can’t have wives because the rich are taking them all!!
Do you notice that that argument that polygamy fucking over poor men seems to gloss over how terrible it is to be a woman in a society where polygamy is enforced because women are thought of as another form of property that rich men can collect?
Also, this was a study written by two people, in an online journal you can publish anything to that will be “peer reviewed” by anonymous sources that so magically don’t get to be mentioned.
This is an all-around piece of shit study that deserves to be thrown in the trash and the man that led the study, a professor in the UK, needs to be fired for bumbling on about how great he is for making an index that ‘gets rid of bias’ in gender equality ratings and saying how men are disadvantaged largely just because of (slightly) shorter healthy lifespans, when the alternative is being treated like property.
Why must you always act like this? It is very tiring. It would take much less energy, for both of us, for you to admit your biases. You could almost probably have saved yourself from acting the petulant brat.
The only one attempting to backpedal here is you, and you’re going about it by digging yourself deeper into your own droppings. It’s ugly and sad and without credit. Just stop.
-
OK, that Barbie thing
Once again I’ve seen on my dash that…art project? making claims about how horribly unrealistic Barbie is, with the smiling young lady standing next to a bizarrely-proportioned homunculus that claims to be how Barbie would look if life-size, and there’s text claiming unbelievable things about Barbie’s “real” proportions.
Y'know, these:
Oh, where to start…well, let’s start with the weight issue. The 110lb number comes, as the text admits, from 1965. In 1965, Barbie was still very much being marketed as a 16 year old ‘girl next door.‘ Illustrations from the time portray the character as younger and less curvy than the actual doll, because, honestly, the doll’s shape was ‘borrowed’ from a German sexy novelty toy, and not custom-designed to represent a 16 year old girl. So, tell me this–do you think it’s unreasonable for a 16 year old to weigh 110 lbs? I sure hope not, because that’s what I weighed at that age.
Let’s look closer at those measurements. We’ll start with the fact that Barbie is 1:6 scale–that means that for every inch Barbie has, it would be 6" in ‘real life.‘ Using that information, I took this doll, which used the body that’s been standard for Barbie since 1999, so is most familiar with modern youth, and made some measurements:
I won’t argue that, wow, those are some slender measurements, but…I don’t see anything like a 39" bust. Even the older Barbie bodies, with their slightly larger breasts, measure in at a mere 5.5", which that chart up there tells you is 33" (and she did have an 18" waist, but her hips are just under 5", so, again, I have no idea what the ‘facts’ up there are based upon.) And here’s the thing about those slim measurements–they’re not attempting to project an ideal of womaniness as much as to take into account the fact that, although the doll is 1:6, the cloth used for her clothes is still 1:1, which means they’ll add a lot of bulk to the clothed doll, making her look, oh, I dunno, maybe more like a ‘real’ person?
But I’m not done.
Let’s talk about that…thing…purporting to be a life-size representation of Barbie.
Oh, yeah. Nailed it. Looks spot on. I’m totally swayed by this.
And then I decided to do this
I honestly thought about using a random stock photo of a woman, or maybe a picture of my short self, but this seemed more…poetic.
I’m not saying there aren’t problems with Barbie (I don’t have the knowledge to argue with the shoe size claim, but, like the slender build, the reasons for the design of Barbie’s feet has to do with physical limitations of dressing something so small, especially when that something was designed with the technology of the 1950s.) But, the problems that Barbie does have? Aren’t any of those addressed by that project.
I first posted this in 2013, seemed like it might be time to bring it back.
although the doll is 1:6, the cloth used for her clothes is still 1:1, which means they’ll add a lot of bulk to the clothed doll, ‘
Exactly right. This is a big thing for model physics. Scaling does not work the same for all properties. Cloth cut small still behaves like cloth at its actual size—not like a shrunken version of big cloth. The only way to begin to approximate that would be to make it of such delicate material as to be unsuitable for children’s play.
As for the feet (and hands) and legs, they are made the size and shape they are to facilitate the putting-on and taking-off of doll clothes. Mattel might have made Barbie’s head smaller, too, but the face detail and the hair are kind of a big deal. RIGHT?
I used to make/repair/modify toys for fun and (very little) profit.
To be honest, I thinkMattel is missing out on a goldmine. If I were an exec over there, I’d start making a Barbie (or maybe all Barbies) with larger feet and articulated ankles. It may not integrate flawlessly with the rubber casement, but I’d use something like the 1970s Mego male-type-2 feet and ankles. The extra point costs more to produce, but Mattel could make it up and more by selling a line of SHOES for Barbies which, because they’re larger, more detail could be put into.
arched (heel) position or flat?
other thought: fully removable feet.
-
Men 'face MORE discrimination than women': Global study claims males receive the raw end of the deal with harsher punishments for the same crime, compulsory military service and more deaths at work Men are disadvantaged in 91 countries compared to 43 nations for women
The UK, the US and Australia all discriminate against men more, a study claims
Italy, Israel and China are harder environments for women, researchers say
Scientists created the Basic Index of Gender Inequality to assess inequality
Closer the BIGI score is to zero the greater the level of equality is in the country
Hmmm. HMMMMMMM.
UH ARE WE GONNA IGNORE
THIS GODDAMN ‘STUDY’ CLAIMS THE COUNTRY THAT TREATS WOMEN BETTER THAN MEN THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD IS GODDAMN FUCKING SAUDI ARABIA.
STOP WITH THESE OPPRESSION OLYMPICS SO YOU CAN ACT LIKE MEN RE OPPRESSED YOU GODDAMN IDIOTS
I’m all for fucking equality and I’ll fight for men’s rights, father’s rights, paternity leave, equal pay, etc etc etc but this is the stupidest fucking thing and if I ever saw any of these morons that created this study or vouch for it in person I would slap the living shit out of them and cut their balls off and send them straight to Saudi Arabia to witness what it’s like to be a woman there.
A country where women (and girls! Girls! Little girls!) are fucking stoned to death for being raped. And you’re saying that they treat women better than men.
I fucking hate pieces of shit that just blindly push this kind of crap out to feed into a narrative. What the fuck. What the hell. Read for once, you fucking morons.
I think you have fundamentally misunderstood the target of the paper, its results, and the function of the associated graphs. This is not about either absolute or comparative evaluations of Justice or quality of life from country to country. This focuses on gender parity only. The researchers’ methodology for examining this question is clearly laid out. What is yours? I can see how, if you’re mentally comparing some sheik or other well-to-do Arab man to his woman kept as a pet, seeing Saudi culture described as equally insufferable might grate on you. But that is not a failing of the paper’s authors, their knowledge, or imaginations.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0205349
-
Men 'face MORE discrimination than women': Global study claims males receive the raw end of the deal with harsher punishments for the same crime, compulsory military service and more deaths at work Men are disadvantaged in 91 countries compared to 43 nations for women
The UK, the US and Australia all discriminate against men more, a study claims
Italy, Israel and China are harder environments for women, researchers say
Scientists created the Basic Index of Gender Inequality to assess inequality
Closer the BIGI score is to zero the greater the level of equality is in the country
Hmmm. HMMMMMMM.
-
jalapeñis
-
compilation of kind and caring animals
Sometimes I feel like there is something truly missing in my life knowing I will never cuddle with a real live tiger.
(via whenimaunicorn)
-
‘Ripped’ Woman with Massive Forearms Is the Oldest Known Human Burial in Lower Central America
Archaeologists have uncovered the oldest known human burial in lower Central America: the skeletal remains of a mysterious woman who lived 5,900 years ago in what is now Nicaragua, a new study finds.
In general, tropical places don’t preserve human remains well, but in this case, the ancient women’s bones remained intact because of where she was buried, said study lead researcher Mirjana Roksandic, a professor of anthropology at the University of Winnipeg in Canada.
“[She] was buried in a shell mound, which reduced the acidity of the soil and helped preserve the remains,” Roksandic told Live Science in an email. Ancient people created shell mounds for a number of reasons, including to bury their dead or to mark the landscape, she said. Read more.
-
-
The female character in the SVU episode tonight was an amalgamation of Anita and the other women harassed by gamergate, but I guess you got to have a little sense to catch onto that. :/
Anonymous
Anita is a scam artist.
I’m a gamer sweetie lemme lay it down for you.
First Video Dinosaur planet was never Crystal’s game, it was her and her brother Sabre. The video Anita used was severely altered to never show Sabre. Because if she did her fans might notice that Sabre looked an awful lot like Star Fox model at the time. And so did Nintendo which resulted in them changing the game.
She whined about Bayonetta being for the male gaze. Then when presented with the fact it was made by a woman for her own power fantasy it was Nope nope nope.
She’s been proven to steal the footage she uses. Meaning highly likely she’s never played them and takes her cherry picking to what footage she does view.
This is evident in even that god awful ABC’s target video. In which Anita claims the woman must be killed in order to make the protagonist a hero for getting the killer. Despite the video even showing the HUD in bright red letters with INTERVENE. She purposely created the npc’s death to create her argument.
As such Anita was never a gamergate target she was thrown in by media and herself.
Her so called forced to cancel talk at Utah is false. The police of the area and the FBI stated it was a non threat and she could peacefully talk. She elected to cancel and as perpetrated this false I WAS FORCED TOO since.
As is Brianna Wu who was even proven to of never been forced from her home I should know I live in the same area as her. She went to Boston Comic Con and even tweeted where she was.
Her game is atrocious and uses the latest engine despite looking like something from ps1. Her game doesn’t follow Anita’s so called rules for gaming and are defined as I believe Fighting fuck toys. Nor does her story go anywhere. It’s a poorly made copy of Mass Effect even ripping outfits from characters she insults.
If you’re going to try and pull SENSE into it. Try to ensure I don’t know more about the situation than you.Additional information/sources:
Anita Sarkeesian:
- Anita admitting to not even being a gamer (skip to about 12 minutes in)
- Anita stole footage from other Youtubers.
- Anita stole someone’s artwork without permission.
- Anita really doesn’t look up anything about any of the games she talks about.
- Anita frequently gets things completely wrong—a pretty good sign that she doesn’t actually play the games herself. She doesn’t even get the PLOT of the fucking games right! (two links here)
- Anita admitted to knowing about 4chan prior to her kickstarter, which she had initially denied.
- The alleged “death threats” she received were more than likely sent to her by her. After all, it’s pretty amazing that she just happened to be on this guy’s page literally seconds after he made these posts, especially when that account was only created in order to MAKE said posts. Plus, why was she logged out at the time of screencapping them? These are also the posts she blamed the majority of her fear on. Take note of the timestamps on the images themselves. (two links here)
- Have an entire goddamn page of Sarkeesian being a total fraud.
Brianna Wu:
- Has been caught multiple times now sending “harassment” to herself, or just plain faking it. She also lied about leaving her house over the “threats”. (six links total here)
- She had her husband beg people on Facebook to get Steam accounts in order to upvote Revolution 60.
- She accuses anyone that interviews her that doesn’t immediately take her side of trying to “humiliate” her (here she is screaming about her interview on the David Pakman show being a “hit piece”). For added fun, here she is on Huffpost Live getting completely destroyed by the mod of 8chan.
- She promoted another interview as “unbiased”, despite the fact that the interviewer donated to fund her ugly game. (four links here)
- Here’s Wu stating that “Gays see [women] as competition for the penis. When I watch drag queens, I can’t help but be insulted.”
- Here’s an image drawn by Wu of two women in lingerie cowering on a floor, about to be sexually assaulted by a robot.
- Here’s another image drawn by Wu that’s literally exploding with sexual objectification of women.
- Wu is currently screaming that all negative feedback regarding Revolution 60 is because of “misogyny”, and not because the game looks like a flaming sack of dog shit, and performs even WORSE.
Zoe Quinn:
- Used the death of Robin Williams to draw attention to her game’s release.
- Stole donation money intended to go to iFred. (<four links there) This is made all the more amusing by the fact that afterwards, 4chan started a donation drive for the American Foundation of Suicide Prevention, and managed to reach %278 percent of their original goal in a matter of HOURS.
- Faked being doxxed/hacked. (<two links here) Hmm…I’m sensing a pattern with these women…
- Sabotaged the Fine Young Capitalists’ “Game Jam” in order to eliminate competition for her own project, Rebel Jam (see link below). Hell, just read everything in that link. Despite the source, you can find screencaps of Quinn’s other shenanigans here.
What have other anti-GGs done?
- Circulated child pornography onto 8chan (because exploiting children is totally an okay thing to do, though perhaps not the smartest tactic against people known to cooperate with and assist the FBI in taking down anyone posting such content).
- Sent in false police reports, resulting the SWAT teams being dispatched to at least two different houses under false pretenses. These same two people were also sent items such as a dirty syringe, and a knife with a note telling them to kill themselves.
- Doxxed at least 23 people, including published equity feminist Christina Hoff Sommers. These people do NOT care about women. If they did, they wouldn’t be so eager to hack into their personal accounts, sexually harass them, deny their existence when they disagree with them, and hacking into and deleting a project by a feminist group intended to benefit women in gaming simply because they found out that 4chan had donated a substantial amount to it (which, by the way, was orchestrated by Zoe Quinn).
- In fact, ABC actively silenced women by deleting comments left by women on their recent GamerGate video (you know…the one with over 29 times as many dislikes as likes). (two links here)
- Pirated the game Claire, and sent death threats to the developers, as well as calling the female developers on the team “whores”.
- Sending false DMCA flags against any site posting evidence that incriminates them (so feel free to save/archive this post!).
And meanwhile, these people ignore the facts regarding representation of women in games.
Oh, but clearly…it’s those “cishet white MALES!” (and not, you know…women and minorities) that are “harassing” these “poor, innocent” women, and totally not that these women stand to profit dramatically from creating a problem where one doesn’t exist.
I eagerly await any incoming accusations of me being male, despite being exactly as old as Anita, and having been playing games since I could hold the controller to our Magnavox Odyssey.
Reminder
Still bitter these people were held up as relevant feminist thinkers
-
were you gone for awhile? Anonymous
Yeah, about a month.
-
Why do people get so offended when you tell them not to touch you? Like?
Because you are explicitly telling them that their attempt to create a connection with you has failed catastrophically. I’m not saying you shouldn’t tell people not to touch you, but, that’s why they get offended.
I say this as someone who doesn’t want to be touched, though I usually go with the evil eye over saying something
This was very well-articulated.
-
