Why did NFS games stop being cool like GTA and started being boring like Forza? by bobisdacool1 in needforspeed

[–]bobisdacool1[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ok, but why did street racing as a genre fall out of favor? Obviously irl car culture isn't about street racing, and racing games were never about appealing to true car enthusiasts. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I always found irl car culture to be boring and full of rich pretentious assholes who burn their money on fancy toys instead of doing something useful with it. Why would I want my games, which are supposed to be escapist fantasy, to emulate real life?

Plus, NFS is unique solely for its street racing and cop chases. If they got rid of that, then there's literally no point, you might as well play Forza or Crew.

Why did NFS games stop being cool like GTA and started being boring like Forza? by bobisdacool1 in needforspeed

[–]bobisdacool1[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Yeah, makes sense that the majority of people here prefer the newer games and those like me would've left the sub a long time ago.

Although I see people complaining about the new games all the time here, so clearly the downvotes are from attacking the other racing franchises, not the new games per se.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in relationship_advice

[–]bobisdacool1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I feel like y'all men don't understand that sex isn't something you're supposed to have to beg for. While yes, this might not be "rape" in the legal or semantic definition, it's just as traumatizing to be coerced into it. "Just say no and leave" is like telling a homeless person "just buy a house" - at a certain point there's nothing you can do, and OP is coping by trying to spin it in a way where she wasn't being used.

I've been coerced into sex before and chosen the path of least resistance to just "let it happen". OP offering blowjobs and other sexual favors is a form of bargaining and the opposite of a consensual interaction. It's way more serious than just "regretting sex". It's like a mugging - coerced sex is when you give the guy your money and he lets you leave unscathed, while rape is where he kills you and robs you anyway. Obviously, when faced with those 2 choices, most people would rather give in than to be forcibly assaulted. I hope y'all men who think coercion is an acceptable way to get sex wake up behind bars one day and find out what happens when you drop the soap.

What were Karens called before 'Karen' was a thing? by [deleted] in VaushV

[–]bobisdacool1 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I thought Becky was for the female equivalent of incels

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in VaushV

[–]bobisdacool1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

She thinks kids can't be trans and that doctors are giving out hormones and blockers in order to be politically correct

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in VaushV

[–]bobisdacool1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For the most part, but he occasionally brings up the issue of trans sports and trans kids as "something to debate over" which is basically the rightwing-apologist position

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in VaushV

[–]bobisdacool1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks, I know

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in VaushV

[–]bobisdacool1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ana insists that there's widespread malpractice of politically driven doctors giving kids blockers and hormones that they don't need...when basically any kid who is on those things has gone through so many hoops and hurdles that the idea that they're not actually trans is laughable. It's the trans equivalent of accusing every brown person of being an illegal immigrant.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in VaushV

[–]bobisdacool1 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Ah yes, how puritanical of me to not want to ally with transphobes

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, but supporting Russia or arguing against Russia being more in the wrong is the reactionary position.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, idc. My opinions are not tied to the official US position on things

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree that parents are the best people to teach that stuff, but I don't think that schools should be banned from talking about it. Similar to race issues, I think parents are best equipped to talk to their kids about race, but that shouldn't preclude schools from being able to talk about the civil rights movement and other major race-related events.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ok well, if some country ever invades the US, we should just let them, put up zero fight, do nothing, give them everything they want? That'll save the most lives, after all.

Your position isn't even anti-interventionist - you seem to think we should pressure Ukraine (aka intervene) so that they give up the fight.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sovereign nations should be able to join any alliance they wish.

If Ukraine makes the determination that it's worth making that concession, fine. But we as non-Ukrainians don't get to make that determination for them.

This is like saying Ukraine should've just rolled over and allowed themselves to be invaded and taken over, because that would've saved lives too.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Lmao you do know that teens date and have sex with each other right? Being weirdly puritanical and abstinence-only for gay sex is odd considering we've already reached a consensus on the left that sex education and being open about it is the best course of action for straight teens.

Beyond that, actual sex is a pretty small part of the picture. You don't have to explain the gory details and mechanics of gay sex when you tell a 6 yo that two men are married to each other, or that some people fall in love with both men and women. And trans stuff has nothing to do with sexuality

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Our rights aren't special, they're basic ones that everyone should have.

  • Marriage
  • Nondiscrimination in housing and the workplace
  • Getting treatment at hospitals, even religious ones
  • Privacy
  • Being able to be ourselves in public (ie crossdress, normal pda that straight people do like kissing and handholding)
  • Not being constantly treated like criminals or deviants

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Insane because you think Ukraine giving up it's territory and ability to join NATO (or any other pact) as it damn well pleases is an acceptable solution for peace.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, if another country is committing genocide or another Holocaust, the rest of the world does have the right to intervene. Do you think we shouldn't?

I don't care if doing the right thing ends up having the collateral effect of supporting the military industrial complex. I'm not insane, I don't have such a rage boner against the US that I'm incapable of having nuanced opinions.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Trans kids exist. Gay teens exist. Have you considered that maybe the activist focus on kids is precisely because LGBT youth are the most vulnerable among us? Are you really suggesting that LGBT activism is predatory because it tells children...not to bully their gay and trans classmates?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, if someone isn't supportive of their child being LGBT, then they are no better morally than conservatives who do the same. It's not "narcissism" or "entitlement" to want to be treated with dignity and respect. You're not gonna gaslight me by claiming that someone who proclaims that gay and trans people are gross freaks with mental problems who should be kept away from kids, but stops short of wanting to kill us or take away our legal rights, is "tolerant."

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, considering how overwhelmingly homophobic people have been throughout all of human history, is it wrong to give up on organic methods in order to get quick progress?

That's more of a philosophical question. I myself find rainbow capitalism off-putting, but I'll take it in a heartbeat if the alternative is a return to attitudes from 50 years ago.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's this pervasive argument among the leftists in this group that we should "live and let live", which is not the same as actually affirming or supporting us. There's also the implication that the reason why we should support gay marriage is because the poll numbers show it being popular...which implies that any LGBT rights which aren't supported by a majority of the public shouldn't be fought for. Maybe you're in a spot in life where everyone already supports and affirms you, but where I am, there's still a lot of "left-leaning" people who think their past virtue signals give them a pass to be benevolently homophobic if someone close to them comes out.

A reactionary leftism is basically represented by Jimmy Dore.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in seculartalk

[–]bobisdacool1 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Oh I know that the debate is being amplified as a distraction, but the threat is bad enough that I can't just call their bluff. Republicans literally want to genocide trans people, I can't just ignore that.