I mean we don’t have a /c/ for that yet, so might as well be here.
I mean we don’t have a /c/ for that yet, so might as well be here.
Who in the actual fuck uses notepad?
Whether or not you personally agree with the military’s choice of language is not relevant. You’re assuming the trainer agrees with your political views, but you weren’t there, so you have no idea what they said or didn’t say.
You’ve obviously never been in the military, because it’s definitely “females”.
In other words, you have the right to be an asshole, but if you do it too much, others can invoke their right be assholes right back to you.
He’s not saying they’re right wing governments, just that they’re highly authoritarian, which is something that leftists, on average, tend to be against, so if someone claims to be “left” but supports Russia, they likely have a poor understanding of one of those things.
There ya go! I knew there had to be a couple out there!
There ya go! I knew there had to be a couple out there!
I do, but only if it’s built up properly. This is also true of musical numbers and fight scenes. If built up properly, they can be incredibly cathartic and the best parts of the film, but if not, they grind the plot to a halt.
The reason so many people hate these kinds of scenes is that most screenwriters are really bad at creating tension. The purpose of these scenes is to release emotional tension, so without building this, they feel pointless and jarring. The best parody of this is in Men in Tights when Robin bursts into a love song out of nowhere and it scares the hell out of Marian.
I’m trying to provide examples of love scenes I actually like in films, and to be honest, I’m coming up blank. I think it may just be a lot more difficult to generate romantic tension in the average timespan of a film. It’s easier in television, where you get more time to tell the story. I think my favorite intimate scene in tv is in Game of Thrones season 3 when John and Ygritte are in the cave.
At least that scene is funny and develops the plot. I think they’re talking more about stuff like all those 90s movies that have the plot grind to a halt so two characters can punch each other for ten minutes.
For me, it just came down to how unintuitive and slow Windows’s desktop environment is. Setting up the most basic customizations requires going through like 15 sub-menus or dealing with the registry. Also, GNOME and KDE are just so much prettier than Windows’s desktop environment.
You’re coming dangerously close to re-inventing the kilt
This is the real answer. It’s easy to forget that for most people who are famous for their unusual political views, most of their overall content has nothing to do with that. There’s something about politics that can turn even the most open-minded of individuals into raging idealogues.
It’s hilarious to me that Joe Rogan is now known for his like 3 conservative views when I mostly remember him as the guy who hosted Fear Factor, did every drug known to man, interviewed scientists in every field out there, and did that really popular interview with Bernie Sanders a couple years ago.
The point is that every hobby and niche interest has someone who gets way too hung up on one particular issue and devotes way too much time to talking about it, dragging the whole community down with them.
I feel like it’s more about distribution of responsibility. If you have a king, he’s either a good king and runs things well, or a bad king and runs things poorly. A King’s success is generally measured by the quality of his kingdom, which is at least somewhat tied to the wellbeing of subjects.
In a corporation, even if you have a comparitively “good” CEO, he’s still answerable to the shareholders, and thus obligated to raise the stock value by any means necessary, a factor which is not necessarily dependent on the wellbeing of his employees.
I mean Jim Jones was pretty damn effective at convincing a large group of people to commit mass suicide. If he’d been ineffective, he’d have been one of the thousands of failed cult leaders you and I have never heard of. Similarly, if Hitler had been ineffective, it wouldn’t have takes the combined forces of half the world to fight him.