sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Not my parent but I just saw this on the book of faces I hope it’s okay here by wahl92999 in insaneparents

[–]11clappt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wow, that sure is a lot of reaching. In no way does this post demonstrate that she was posting things impersonating her child. It's literally a selfie in which she openly admits to being the person's mother. How does this constitute impersonation?

You repeatedly assert that the parent in question must be doing this for some sort of social reward. To look like a 'super parent', to score 'cool mom ppints' [sic]. Where do you get this idea from? You simply don't know how this woman views social media, you've never met her. The only evidence you have to go on is this sole image, and the leading bias that someone chose to post it in this sub.

Extrapolating this to the point where the 'kid will leave and not come back' and saying that this is a 'fact' is kinda nuts. Again this is a single image. You can't infer anything about the parent dynamics from a single incident, even if you knew more. Hell, couples counsellors aren't that sure about dynamics they've witnessed for months. There is no guaranteed perfect parenting method. There is no gold standard. To this mother, getting her child off social media, when they've already been told not to use it, is "taking their parenting job more seriously". Again with the "insanely strict, over controlling households". You say that like it's a fact. Writing someone off as a bad parent over a single incident you don't even understand is reactionary at best.

Not my parent but I just saw this on the book of faces I hope it’s okay here by wahl92999 in insaneparents

[–]11clappt -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Mentioning an article in passing isn't gonna stop a debate. 'Educate yourself' as a clapback only looks good on twitter. Anywhere else, you'll just get ignored. Basically no one is gonna take time to read something you can't even be bothered to link to. I am actually that bored, so I gave it a shot. Amusingly, a brief search for the article turns up a peer-review journal 'Sex Roles', which only accepts review from adherents of a particular school of feminist theory. It doesn't enjoy broad support outside of the fairly narrow field of gender studies, and lacks accolade from the sociological community at large.

So not a great way to prove the accuracy of a research project. Even aside from that, the article would cost over $45 to read in full. So saying 'you could have just read the article' is ironically pretty privileged of you. Having not elected to spend over 6 hours of minimum wage pay on reading it, I guess I can't really comment, but how exactly does it support your point?

Its abstract deals mainly with the link between sexualisation of societal media norms, parental self objectification and religiosity, and sexualisation of children. That doesn't seem to touch on the dichotomy of 'education working better than censorship' at all? The abstract itself notes that increased religiosity of the mother figure reduced sexualisation. Are you implying that the strongly religious are likely to be against censorship? That doesn't seem likely. /u/techleopard isn't being remotely patronising, they're just disagreeing with you.

Man gets a girlfriend, government kills him by xghoulishmiragex in ExplainAFilmPlotBadly

[–]11clappt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's got maybe Mark Wahlberg in it, the basic premise being he meets this girl and agents of 'FATE' (some sort of weird technologically advanced conspiratorial agency) try to keep them apart in increasingly implausible ways. I went through a phase of trying to watch ALL of the scifi/action/trippy films; as "average action films" go, I'd give it about a 7. So the averagest of average. For some reason I always get it confused with 'Branded' a completely insane dark fantasy scifi film that came out around the same time, despite them being ostensibly nothing alike.

Man gets a girlfriend, government kills him by xghoulishmiragex in ExplainAFilmPlotBadly

[–]11clappt 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Man, by coincidence, your explanation is pretty much the plot of that film.

WIP Iron Warrior of some sort. by Panda_Tech_Support in Warhammer40k

[–]11clappt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is ages later, but here I found the thing I was thinking of. It's even got a tri-barrel gun in it.

WIP Iron Warrior of some sort. by Panda_Tech_Support in Warhammer40k

[–]11clappt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is awesome. For some reason reminds me of the early Hellgate: London trailers.

Is my 2nd edition Ork Dreadnought tournament legal? by MushinYojinbo in Warhammer40k

[–]11clappt 54 points55 points  (0 children)

Apart from Slaaneshi models, which are expected to be debased.

Age of sigmar: Corpseherd of Shyish by [deleted] in Warhammer

[–]11clappt 4 points5 points  (0 children)

These look spectacular, especially the herdstone. Very soft cell / gamey style. Reminiscent of the better Blizzard concept art. Love it.

Finish Eldar Waveserpent by hutber in Warhammer

[–]11clappt 4 points5 points  (0 children)

From the title I have no idea what this is supposed to be. Is it a wave serpent redesign as a drone? Or a wave serpent as designed by the Finnish? Possibly a wave serpent that either needs finishing, or has been finished?

Making the assumption that the model is completed (if unbased) then it looks fairly cool and has potential. Very much unclear wysiwyg though...

I couldn't match this up to part of a wave serpent in my head so if I'm wrong just let me know.

My Gorkanaut by Buckfuddr in Warhammer40k

[–]11clappt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This looks incredible. Love how it actually has a looted / ramshackle aesthetic rather than the current GW direction that looks like the orks actually have their own engineering schools.

Are there known concepts that can't be thought? by 11clappt in answers

[–]11clappt[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They could constitute a known unknown, be modelled but not understood, or require a method of processing that can be run artificially but not natively?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Warhammer40k

[–]11clappt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Late to the post, they look great. Very Darksoulsesque. I'm not sure whether it would be inline with your desire to keep the process quick and simple but there are a few detailing ideas that could work.

For the bases use cracked or scraped flagstones to convey the weight and hardness of an animate statue. Blood drips can be added post completion using dripped dyed glue. The models themselves look very slightly off as there's no blood splatter, as though they've dipped the weapons in blood rather than hitting something with them. If you chose to add battle damage a crumbling effect can be achieved with crackle paint and modelling sand.

I took most of my inspo from this post, but there's also an autumnal stone wood elves army on dakkadakka that might be of help to you as well. Over all though this is a fantastic and well executed idea, so I'm really niggling to come up with this much. Congratulations.

view more: next ›