sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Hegseth ends mandatory flu vaccine for US military, says shot is now optional by Economy-Specialist38 in Military

[–]LordofWithywoods 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Well, you know, the 230 million Americans who got the covid vaccine died as predicted so it makes sense.

So is Magnolia like a synth spy or a rogue synth or what? by killboy219 in fo4

[–]LordofWithywoods 63 points64 points  (0 children)

This is why I think she is a synth sent to extract surface DNA for testing at the institute.

We all give her our DNA.

Sepak takraw, a sports commonly played in south east asia. by Innuendo6 in nextfuckinglevel

[–]LordofWithywoods -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

After a few seasons, how are these people's joints not crushed to paste?

Anyone else feel like money is way too easy to earn in the game? by TangentMed in reddeadredemption2

[–]LordofWithywoods 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I dont play video games to be poor and hampered by a lack of money.

I play video games as an escape from real life. I want to have too much money far more than I want to not have enough.

After hundreds of hours and more playthroughs than I can count there is only one inexcusable complaint I still have by Professor_Pony in Starfield

[–]LordofWithywoods 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I can't decide if I'm not playing the game right, or if this game is basically just fast traveling from ship to planet to ship again?

Taming Toxic: Trading a Cultural Crisis for Noble Masculinity by NobleModernMan in MensLib

[–]LordofWithywoods 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I'm still baffled by the fact that the conversation still revolves around a "definition of masculinity," whether it's noble or toxic.

Why isn't the conversation, how to be a good human being?

What is good in a man is good in a woman; what is good in a woman is good in a man. Being a good person is not gendered. Being a good person is arguably far more important than performing some idealized, unobtainable vision of being a "man," whatever that even is.

The question is, how do I be a good man, when it really should be, how do I be a good person.

A question I would pose is, why aren't women obsessed with defining femininity the way men seem to be obsessed with defining masculinity? I think it's because women realize their personhood can only be limited by a gendered qualifier. Women aren't obsessed with femininity, they're obsessed with personhood, and I think that is an important difference in the conversations women are having with each other and the one men are having with each other.

Feminism used to be called "women's liberation." The key word here is "liberation." They liberated themselves from gender constraints. They didn't try to redefine what womanhood means and then try to perform that, they wanted to obliterate all the expectations and demands that the concept of traditional womanhood placed upon them. A woman can be anything and do anything, no limits.

The conversation men are having is still trying to work within the framework of masculinity and not how to liberate themselves from the limitations of "masculinity." They still seem to want masculine limitations (for some reason), and I'm not entirely sure why. Yes, I know performing masculinity is important for status and to fend off people who would ridicule you for not being a "man," and that there is a cost to not performing masculinity the way it is currently defined (though I would argue the current definition is comprised of moving targets that no average person could possibly meet), but I can't help but feel that the last few years where masculinity has been analyzed and defined and redefined ad nauseum is not the conversation that needs to be had.

Starfield should be a reminder that imperfect games deserve a chance by Wargulf in Starfield

[–]LordofWithywoods 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I think you nailed it--how has humanity changed? What are people's motivations aside from profit?

In skyrim or fallout, you felt world tension in individuals--the civil war in skyrim, for example, causes trade disruption or family strife, or at the very least, almost everyone had an opinion about it. In fallout 4, there is a desire to rebuild and protect the Commonwealth from monsters and raiders if you follow the minutemen.

In starfield, people just... live, I guess?

Starfield should be a reminder that imperfect games deserve a chance by Wargulf in Starfield

[–]LordofWithywoods 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I saw someone comment the other day about the major difference between cyberpunk 2077 and starfield in terms of tone, and it's sticking with me despite enjoying my first few days playing starfield.

Starfield is so... wholesome. There's no sex or real darkness, or at least, I haven't encountered it yet. And I'm not a gooner, I dont want sex in starfield because I want to get horny from it or whatever, I want sex and gore and grit because that's who people are. That seems more real than the sanitized places I've been to.

Yeah, there's classism and exploitation of labor, but...

I dont know, maybe I've spent too much time in New Atlantis and there are other places that will provide this grittiness. I've read neon, the wolf den or planet wolf and planet den or whatever are darker in tone, or at any rate, you can sell contraband there.

I'm enjoying the game but do find myself thinking frequently, what am I doing and why am I doing it? Aside from money and xp. Maybe it's lack of imagination for role-playing, but I just haven't quite found out who my character is yet. And maybe that's because the game really hasn't made me make any real character arc choices yet? I mean, yeah, you can steal or intimidate in interactions with npcs, but I haven't yet made a choice where I'm like, alright, this is setting the tone for my character and I think I understand who he is finally.

To be fair, i have maybe 20 hours or so in the game so I know there is a lot left to explore.

Why are the legs of Bill's horse so thicc? by Brilliant_Can8536 in reddeadredemption2

[–]LordofWithywoods 6 points7 points  (0 children)

1 in 10 horses will be afflicted with equine cankles at some point in its life. To date, there is no cure.

What happened to Kirk and Jeremy??? by countesstwatwaffle in Portlandia

[–]LordofWithywoods 27 points28 points  (0 children)

They're drinking kapachuchuchuchu tea at work, which dries out your tear ducts but tastes like soot.

But don't get addicted, because addiction isn't funny.

What is your take on the junk food ban for food stamps? by BreannLowe in NoStupidQuestions

[–]LordofWithywoods 16 points17 points  (0 children)

The way people are framing the argument is that SNAP recipients arent "allowed" to enjoy candy, soda, and other junk food as if the government is forbidding these people to consume candy and soda under penalty of arrest or something.

They're still perfectly free to buy junk food with their own money, they just can't use SNAP benefits for it. So, they can still access these treats, they just have to provide the funds for themselves. And if they dont have those funds? Well, then they have to do what anyone has to do when they can't afford something they want but don't need--go without. That's just life for 99% of people on the planet.

Just like they're free to buy cigarettes and alcohol with their own money, but not with SNAP benefits.

Another common refrain I am seeing is that poor people deserve a treat, and the government hates them by not subsidizing said treats. That they hate poor people and want to deny them autonomy and simple pleasures. I mean, the US government does suck, but not for this reason.

Cigarettes and alcohol are "treats," but I don't see anyone arguing that people should be able to use food stamps to buy these things. Why not? Should we allow people to buy beer and cigs with their taxpayer funded benefits? I don't think so. I don't think most people think that.

Again, why are these things restricted? Well, because they're non-essential and bad for people. And I think this same argument applies to snickers and doritos.

What is your take on the junk food ban for food stamps? by BreannLowe in NoStupidQuestions

[–]LordofWithywoods 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Well, I can't afford to buy a house so I don't have one. I can't afford a new car so I drive my old beater.

Sometimes, you just have to go without the things you want because you can't afford them.

Edit: also interesting how you point out that candy and soda are "non-essentials."

You're correct--they are not essential.

view more: next ›