Are We Becoming Too Sensitive

Perfectly-cromulent.gif

  On 8/18/2015 at 7:55 PM, ThatSpanishGuy said:

This is what happens when your country goes on without a war for too long

Could you imagine if we got invaded by China on the pacific front and our only defense against the encroaching Red Army was a generation of neon-pink-haired gender neutral Tumblr vegans who cry about the death of a lion with a posh British name? Thank god we still have the rifle toting deep south to keep us safe.

Why would China invade? To invade means to take responsibility for - and who wants to take responsibility for Florida?

Empathy is the path to harmony.

I know it's implausible, but just let me entertain my fantasy of California being invaded & destroyed while its emasculated Xanax-ridden stoners cower in basements crying into their kale shakes.

That doesn't sound anything like MS-13 or Los Zetas

  On 8/18/2015 at 11:51 PM, autopilot said:

 

  On 8/18/2015 at 7:55 PM, ThatSpanishGuy said:

This is what happens when your country goes on without a war for too long

 

Could you imagine if we got invaded by China on the pacific front and our only defense against the encroaching Red Army was a generation of neon-pink-haired gender neutral Tumblr vegans who cry about the death of a lion with a posh British name? Thank god we still have the rifle toting deep south to keep us safe.

 

I wonder what the stats are when it comes to infantry and where they are from. I know the disproportionate majority are from it's rural communities and farmtowns, but I'm curious what that breakdown is when it comes to region. A lot of them seem to be from the south.

Also we've been in a perpetual war since 2001, the longest in our country's history, our police forces are more militarized than ever, needlessly so, and ironically the vast majority of the population is more detached and oblivious to our military and it's scope than ever before.

  On 8/19/2015 at 12:06 AM, chenGOD said:

Why would China invade? To invade means to take responsibility for - and who wants to take responsibility for Florida?

Universal Studios and Disney, 49/50, with NASA owning 1%

  On 8/19/2015 at 12:11 AM, autopilot said:

 

  On 8/19/2015 at 12:06 AM, chenGOD said:

Why would China invade? To invade means to take responsibility for - and who wants to take responsibility for Florida?

 

I know it's implausible, but just let me entertain my fantasy of California being invaded & destroyed while its emasculated Xanax-ridden stoners cower in basements crying into their kale shakes.

 

Damn, you really hate Californians for some reason. I'm offended

Trigger Warning: Obvious Hyperbole

  On 8/19/2015 at 12:11 AM, autopilot said:

 

  On 8/19/2015 at 12:06 AM, chenGOD said:

Why would China invade? To invade means to take responsibility for - and who wants to take responsibility for Florida?

 

I know it's implausible, but just let me entertain my fantasy of California being invaded & destroyed while its emasculated Xanax-ridden stoners cower in basements crying into their kale shakes.

 

Having been born in California myself, I find this lol.

  On 8/18/2015 at 7:55 PM, ThatSpanishGuy said:

This is what happens when your country goes on without a war for too long

Are you saying you're in favor of another?

  On 8/18/2015 at 11:30 PM, Rubin Farr said:

Microaggressions isn't even a real word.

Yeah I find that term confusing as hell. Why can't they just say "offensive remark/material"?

  On 8/19/2015 at 12:06 AM, chenGOD said:

who wants to take responsibility for Florida?

I sure as hell don't. That place is crazy-land.

ambermonk, on 18 Aug 2015 - 7:33 PM, said:

  On 8/19/2015 at 12:11 AM, autopilot said:

 

  On 8/19/2015 at 12:06 AM, chenGOD said:

Why would China invade? To invade means to take responsibility for - and who wants to take responsibility for Florida?

 

I know it's implausible, but just let me entertain my fantasy of California being invaded & destroyed while its emasculated Xanax-ridden stoners cower in basements crying into their kale shakes.

 

Trigger warning.

  On 8/19/2015 at 3:19 AM, joshuatx said:

 

 

  On 8/19/2015 at 12:06 AM, chenGOD said:

Why would China invade? To invade means to take responsibility for - and who wants to take responsibility for Florida?

 

Universal Studios and Disney, 49/50, with NASA owning 1%

 

That's a lol.

I've just noticed that the latest update on my phone has made all emojis yellow skinned instead of white or black and they look weird as fuck.

  On 8/19/2015 at 2:55 PM, QQQ said:

I've just noticed that the latest update on my phone has made all emojis yellow skinned instead of white or black and they look weird as fuck.

Android introduced the Apple-esque skin tone thing for emojis, if you use one for the first time or hold down on it, you can choose the skin color. No different sexualities/family structures yet for relationship emojis though, nor skin colours, so yeah they just look yellow and weird.

They look like Simpsons flesh!

Long Live The Simpsons Flesh

  On 8/19/2015 at 8:11 PM, Salvatorin said:

Long Live The Simpsons Flesh

Re: actual thread, yes we are becoming too sensitive. Chen's line "life is a trigger warning" sums it up pretty well imo.

  On 8/19/2015 at 8:28 PM, triachus said:

 

  On 8/19/2015 at 8:11 PM, Salvatorin said:

Long Live The Simpsons Flesh

 

I needed a trigger warning for this

People want to handle certain subjects with kids' gloves and it discourages open discussion, which narrows perspectives and hides the nuances about many issues. I've seen it on this site from time to time.

  On 8/19/2015 at 12:11 AM, autopilot said:

 

  On 8/19/2015 at 12:06 AM, chenGOD said:

Why would China invade? To invade means to take responsibility for - and who wants to take responsibility for Florida?

 

I know it's implausible, but just let me entertain my fantasy of California being invaded & destroyed while its emasculated Xanax-ridden stoners cower in basements crying into their kale shakes.

 

yes its true, the gigantic ridiculously out of proportion military population of California wouldn't stand a chance against a chinese land invasion. only stoners would stand in their way.

part of me almost wishes stoners were pacifist like the stereotype portrays. Unfortunately some of the people in control of the weed industry especially in northern california easily rival some of the craziest gun-toting militia/white supremacist compound people in the south. A large swatch of even medical marijuana is entirely controlled by the Hell's Angels in california

  On 8/19/2015 at 8:28 PM, triachus said:

 

  On 8/19/2015 at 8:11 PM, Salvatorin said:

Long Live The Simpsons Flesh

 

Strange timing. A few of my friends have become Facebook social justice warriors over the past year or so (before they were just super liberal, now it's plus SJW). I posted "Donald Tramp 2016" in jest, and I got back "stop posting bullshit on my facebook" and he deleted my comment even though he knows I'm for Bernie Sanders (as he is) honestly. Basically he thinks his facebook posts are super important even though the only other people who like them are the other 2 SJW I know:). the SJWs I know, I only know 3, one of them being particularly bad (as a sjw), are more annoying than the many conservative friends I have ( don't really have any die-hard conservative friends tho). I don't know why either. I just roll my eyes so heavily when they call people ableists and all that bullshit.

I like them otherwise, when they're not talking about 'politics' and calling people prescriptivists, ethnocentric, classist and ableist etc.

He also said that 'reverse racism' isn't real (wtf? racism is racism?)

Where are they getting this crap from?

He refuses to believe in nuance, basically.

  On 8/20/2015 at 7:39 AM, Brisbot said:

He also said that 'reverse racism' isn't real (wtf? racism is racism?)

Correct me if I am wrong here but some time around the 80s, sociology began defining racism and sexism as prejudice and discrimination which enforces or justifies a social hierachy. Based on the idea of privilege, cis white dudes are racist to non-whites, but since a non-white minority is not privileged, being prejudiced towards a white person is not racism since that is challenging the current hierachy and they do not enjoy the same privilege of those at the top of society. So basically if you didn't study sociology or social studies or the like, you'll have a different definition in mind.

An interesting theory, but simply turning around and saying "Ok, that's what racism/sexism/whatever means now" was just a really dumb idea. It causes confusion like this and completely sidesteps this side of the debate. "Heirachal racism" or a similar coined term would have made more sense. Saying someone is prejudiced regardless of the details of the parties involved is still a valid idea to express through language, the quoted assertion from your friend assumes a different intentionality in your message, something along the lines of "You are prejudiced and are neccessarily bad for doing it."

This article about Generation Wuss by Bret Easton Ellis was also an interesting read. An old one but just read it today.

http://www.vanityfair.fr/culture/livre/articles/generation-wuss-by-bret-easton-ellis/15837

i really liked The Canyons and I'm surprised no one else seems to have seen it. (sorry about the tangent but it's in the article)

Edit: sounds like affluenza to me btw https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluenza specifically unrealistic expectations of life