The 80s were a different time. Honestly I’m surprised Mario wasn’t originally on coke. And Luigi, and Toad…AND OBVIOUSLY royal princess peach can get the good shit.
But as it pertained to sexuality, being homophobic, being transphobic, it was the norm in the 80s.
And it was worse too, because racism absolutely existed in the 80s, just as it always has. However people in the 80s knew racism was wrong, and bad. Even in the 80s, you knew you didn’t want to be known as a racist.
But when it came to sexuality in the 80s, it was cool to call someone a fag, or laugh at a man in a dress, or anything that wasn’t “straight guy, straight girl, or two straight girls exparementing with each other at a party for others entertainment.”
So today if someone asked “Did you just call (obviously gay person) gay???”, you’d be mortified that they thought that about you.
Back in the 80s, you’d say “Hell yeah I did!!!” and then you’d high five them. Because back then, putting people down for sexuality was seen as today putting someone down for being a pedophile. If some today asked you if you were sexually attracted to young kids, you’d be repulsed and say no. But if you were British Royalty you could go to any house in your kingdom, take any child, and then tell the parents you’re taking their kid to live with you as a sex slave. Today we’re past that. We’ve gotten to the point where we all agree thats wrong. But in the 1600s, English peasants would brag to each other that THEIR kid was chosen by the king. Like it were an honor, rather than an arrestable offense it is today.
As we advance as a species, we’ll look back at centuries ago and say “what were they thinking???”
Then again, theres about 13 undiscovered, lost, still armed nuclear bombs that the Americans lost in test drops. Mostly dropped into oceans, they’ve been deteriorating away for 70ish years. Wherever they are an earthquake could set them off. Maybe an aggressive shark. The point is, there are 13 points which we KNOW at some point, will set off a WWII era atomic bomb. This will have an unknown outcome, 13 different times. Any one of which might end Earth. Or maybe it causes some tidal waves. No one knows.
Another thing nobody knows is how many atomic bombs the Russians lost.
My point is, we all might might die, because of a war that ended 34 years ago. Of which, the whole point is to NOT use nukes. (Oops)
We may NEVER get to see the moment that humans have progressed through their own toxicity.
Then again, theres about 13 undiscovered, lost, still armed nuclear bombs that the Americans lost in test drops. Mostly dropped into oceans, they’ve been deteriorating away for 70ish years. Wherever they are an earthquake could set them off. Maybe an aggressive shark. The point is, there are 13 points which we KNOW at some point, will set off a WWII era atomic bomb. This will have an unknown outcome, 13 different times. Any one of which might end Earth. Or maybe it causes some tidal waves. No one knows.
This is completely wrong. Lost nuclear bombs are not going to be functional in the slightest after decades, as they require very precisely timed detonation of explosive charges to actually trigger the main fission reaction. They’re not like chemical bombs, which will explode with enough heat or pressure. And after decades the circuitry to control the explosive charges will be long dead.
This is completely wrong. Lost nuclear bombs are not going to be functional in the slightest after decades, as they require very precisely timed detonation of explosive charges to actually trigger the main fission reaction. They’re not like chemical bombs, which will explode with enough heat or pressure. And after decades the circuitry to control the explosive charges will be long dead.
So wait, you’re telling me that Mr. Burke can’t really blow up that bomb in the middle of Megaton?
You’re probably right, and in terms of the design yield absolutely right.
But if just one explosive charge were to miss fire, you could theoretically still get a fizzle that measures in single digit or even tens of tonnes of TNT.
That’s pretty trivial as bombs go, but it would be incredibly dirty.
And it was worse too, because racism absolutely existed in the 80s, just as it always has. However people in the 80s knew racism was wrong, and bad. Even in the 80s, you knew you didn’t want to be known as a racist.
Shit, interracial marriage was not acceptable to the majority of Americans until 1994. People deluded themselves into thinking that was not racist.
I still run into people who claim that “Race Mixing” is this radical thing that the “super liberal mainstream media” is “pushing against people’s will”
Well I did until I stopped using Facebook…
I cannot believe the idea of an interracial marriage is STILL taboo.
Hell I’m surprised you said the three letter f-word… That’s basically become the n-word for gay people, only without the “Members of the minority group in question are allowed to say it.” loophole
Yeah, I don’t abide by that whole “only WE can say things”. I’m not calling anyone a fag. I don’t support either word, but I AM using them in historical sense to paint a broader picture for anyone who’s younger than 30. The thing I’ve noticed about most teenagers people is that they think they’re the first ones to experience things, and the things they experience is also somehow it’s always been.
I was at the airport a few weeks ago. I was rolling my eyes because this 19 year old is bickering with his mom, about how the government is corrupt. As if he’s made a HUUUUUUGE discovery that hasn’t been public knowledge since the 70s. Then he finally says the reason he’s calling the government corrupt is because they want to ban tiktok.
Before I rolled my eyes because I thought he was making obvious points. Then I rolled my eyes again, because of all the things to call the government corrupt over…you chose tiktok.
But yeah, thats not breaking any rules, because I’m not using it as a slur.
I know, I’m just saying people are so sensitive these days, I’m surprised you were able to say it even in an historical context without people jumping on your case. Maybe I’ve been subjected to Youtube’s overzealous censorship policy for too long.
I watch a series on youtube called MXR Plays. 10 years ago it was a guy who played video games with VERY adult mods.
Then he got a girlfriend, about 8 years ago and the series changed dramatically. This is about the time I found the channel.
So after he gets a girlfriend, they transition from playing skyrim and other PC games with adult mods into a reaction channel. Except it’s not what you think of when you think of reaction channels. They browse reddit for various subreddits now. Each 20-30 episode is either 1 episode = 1 subreddit, OR they fast cycle through multiple subreddits in one episode.
They might go on /r/aww or /r/subtleasiandating (Jeanie is korean (with the joke being that they never specify north or south) and Henry is Chinese. Or they might go on /r/nononoyes or /r/maybemaybemaybe or /r/interestingasfuck or /r/nextfuckinglevel
They watch more subreddits, but those are the normal ones.
The reason I bring this up because…in the 2010s, he rarely if ever got strikes against his channel showing video game footage of skyrim harlots in bondage, and sex escapades.
Barely a strike.
But NOW??? in the 2020s with faulty AI?
There was a video of an adult woman, fully clothed, blowing bubbles from those solutions where you dip the stick into the plastic jar, pull it out and now the solution is all over the stick with a ring at the end. Then you blow through the ring and make bubbles. Well one video showed us a trick where if you hot glued a straw to the ring, and put some salt into the solution, you get bigger bubbles. Like…WAAAAAAAY bigger. Like 20 foot round bubbles, as long as your lungs can hold out. Uhhhhhhh…I guess smokers don’t need to apply.
Anyways, they got a strike for “sexualization of a minor”. Theres no kids in the video, and theres nothing sexual about it unless you have some kink for a bunch out college aged girls smoking from bongs (hey! I guess smokers CAN try this…), and one of them is blowing really big bubbles.
As a gay man- at least in my local community, the loophole does exist, and I’ve heard a good number of queer people use it (though only in conversations with people they know will be comfortable with it). 🤷
I don’t necessarily take issue with it being used in a clinical tone like this. Context is context tho, and I don’t speak for everybody ofc. °_o
Idk why you’re being downvoted; It’s stated that they know she’s trans, then throughout, they misgender her five times and also discredit every trans person, ever, with the usage of the word “thinks”. Transphobic at the worst, ignorant at best.
Yeah it was also 1987 and the worked
Was filled to the brim with right-wing propaganda. Even people who wanted to be progressive didn’t really know how to refer to anyone correctly, there was no one to teach them.
Why don’t we cut it some slack for even existing at all? Is this really worse than nothing? Literally my first exposure to the concept of trans.
Because 1. that term is thrown around so often and so loosely-defined now it is sometimes losing its meaning, 2. nobody was intentionally trying to upset anyone, especially back then, and 3. not everyone agrees with the concept as a whole to begin with. Regardless of your beliefs I don’t even fault e.g. christians for only believing in biological male and female, as that’s what their book says and you’re not going to change everyone’s mind so easily or at all.
I don’t think you’ll get much agreement for your third point, but I completely agree with your first two. Reading something from over 30 years ago and applying modern sensibilities to it is stupid.
I’m pretty sure their book doesn’t say anything explicit about this topic. They choose to interpret passages in specific ways to foster their agenda, which is not ok at all.
BULLSHIT 2:43
AND THEN THE LORD SAID, BIOLOGICAL WOMEN SHOULD SHUT THIER MOUTHS IN THE CHURCH, BUT TRANS WOMEN CAN SPEAK, BECAUSE TRANS WOMEN ARE BIOLOGICAL MEN AND WE SHOULD HATE THEM, PASS DISCRIMINATORY LAWS AND DISSEMINATE LIES AND PROPAGANDA ABOUT THEM WHILE WAVING A FLAG AND CARRYING A BIBLE. (/s)
Yea, there is no mention of trangender people in the Bible, and honestly, its not my religion and I dont believe any of it, nor should any of it dictate my life. I am not a Christian, and I have freedom of religion.
That description is transphobic as fuck
And yet, for the 80’s, progressive as fuck.
That’s the problem with progress, you cringe when you look at what things were like before.
Why did you have to do me like that with the 80s pro tip?
The 80s were a different time. Honestly I’m surprised Mario wasn’t originally on coke. And Luigi, and Toad…AND OBVIOUSLY royal princess peach can get the good shit.
But as it pertained to sexuality, being homophobic, being transphobic, it was the norm in the 80s.
And it was worse too, because racism absolutely existed in the 80s, just as it always has. However people in the 80s knew racism was wrong, and bad. Even in the 80s, you knew you didn’t want to be known as a racist.
But when it came to sexuality in the 80s, it was cool to call someone a fag, or laugh at a man in a dress, or anything that wasn’t “straight guy, straight girl, or two straight girls exparementing with each other at a party for others entertainment.”
So today if someone asked “Did you just call (obviously gay person) gay???”, you’d be mortified that they thought that about you.
Back in the 80s, you’d say “Hell yeah I did!!!” and then you’d high five them. Because back then, putting people down for sexuality was seen as today putting someone down for being a pedophile. If some today asked you if you were sexually attracted to young kids, you’d be repulsed and say no. But if you were British Royalty you could go to any house in your kingdom, take any child, and then tell the parents you’re taking their kid to live with you as a sex slave. Today we’re past that. We’ve gotten to the point where we all agree thats wrong. But in the 1600s, English peasants would brag to each other that THEIR kid was chosen by the king. Like it were an honor, rather than an arrestable offense it is today.
As we advance as a species, we’ll look back at centuries ago and say “what were they thinking???”
Then again, theres about 13 undiscovered, lost, still armed nuclear bombs that the Americans lost in test drops. Mostly dropped into oceans, they’ve been deteriorating away for 70ish years. Wherever they are an earthquake could set them off. Maybe an aggressive shark. The point is, there are 13 points which we KNOW at some point, will set off a WWII era atomic bomb. This will have an unknown outcome, 13 different times. Any one of which might end Earth. Or maybe it causes some tidal waves. No one knows.
Another thing nobody knows is how many atomic bombs the Russians lost.
My point is, we all might might die, because of a war that ended 34 years ago. Of which, the whole point is to NOT use nukes. (Oops)
We may NEVER get to see the moment that humans have progressed through their own toxicity.
This is completely wrong. Lost nuclear bombs are not going to be functional in the slightest after decades, as they require very precisely timed detonation of explosive charges to actually trigger the main fission reaction. They’re not like chemical bombs, which will explode with enough heat or pressure. And after decades the circuitry to control the explosive charges will be long dead.
So wait, you’re telling me that Mr. Burke can’t really blow up that bomb in the middle of Megaton?
Not before the explosives expert kid from 101 showed up.
There’s gotta be a better way to get a penthouse suite than committing genocide…
Also, the fissile material has been radioactively decaying for decades and should no longer be refined enough to go critical.
I’m not sure about that, plutonium-239 has a half-life of 24k years and uranium-235’s is far longer.
That’s not what we’re talking about.
I’m not sure what you’re talking about in that case, could you clarify?
You’re probably right, and in terms of the design yield absolutely right.
But if just one explosive charge were to miss fire, you could theoretically still get a fizzle that measures in single digit or even tens of tonnes of TNT.
That’s pretty trivial as bombs go, but it would be incredibly dirty.
Shit, interracial marriage was not acceptable to the majority of Americans until 1994. People deluded themselves into thinking that was not racist.
I still run into people who claim that “Race Mixing” is this radical thing that the “super liberal mainstream media” is “pushing against people’s will”
Well I did until I stopped using Facebook…
I cannot believe the idea of an interracial marriage is STILL taboo.
This rant took me on a journey.
Hell I’m surprised you said the three letter f-word… That’s basically become the n-word for gay people, only without the “Members of the minority group in question are allowed to say it.” loophole
Yeah, I don’t abide by that whole “only WE can say things”. I’m not calling anyone a fag. I don’t support either word, but I AM using them in historical sense to paint a broader picture for anyone who’s younger than 30. The thing I’ve noticed about most teenagers people is that they think they’re the first ones to experience things, and the things they experience is also somehow it’s always been.
I was at the airport a few weeks ago. I was rolling my eyes because this 19 year old is bickering with his mom, about how the government is corrupt. As if he’s made a HUUUUUUGE discovery that hasn’t been public knowledge since the 70s. Then he finally says the reason he’s calling the government corrupt is because they want to ban tiktok.
Before I rolled my eyes because I thought he was making obvious points. Then I rolled my eyes again, because of all the things to call the government corrupt over…you chose tiktok.
But yeah, thats not breaking any rules, because I’m not using it as a slur.
I know, I’m just saying people are so sensitive these days, I’m surprised you were able to say it even in an historical context without people jumping on your case. Maybe I’ve been subjected to Youtube’s overzealous censorship policy for too long.
Fuck youtube’s censorship.
I watch a series on youtube called MXR Plays. 10 years ago it was a guy who played video games with VERY adult mods.
Then he got a girlfriend, about 8 years ago and the series changed dramatically. This is about the time I found the channel.
So after he gets a girlfriend, they transition from playing skyrim and other PC games with adult mods into a reaction channel. Except it’s not what you think of when you think of reaction channels. They browse reddit for various subreddits now. Each 20-30 episode is either 1 episode = 1 subreddit, OR they fast cycle through multiple subreddits in one episode.
They might go on /r/aww or /r/subtleasiandating (Jeanie is korean (with the joke being that they never specify north or south) and Henry is Chinese. Or they might go on /r/nononoyes or /r/maybemaybemaybe or /r/interestingasfuck or /r/nextfuckinglevel
They watch more subreddits, but those are the normal ones.
The reason I bring this up because…in the 2010s, he rarely if ever got strikes against his channel showing video game footage of skyrim harlots in bondage, and sex escapades.
Barely a strike.
But NOW??? in the 2020s with faulty AI?
There was a video of an adult woman, fully clothed, blowing bubbles from those solutions where you dip the stick into the plastic jar, pull it out and now the solution is all over the stick with a ring at the end. Then you blow through the ring and make bubbles. Well one video showed us a trick where if you hot glued a straw to the ring, and put some salt into the solution, you get bigger bubbles. Like…WAAAAAAAY bigger. Like 20 foot round bubbles, as long as your lungs can hold out. Uhhhhhhh…I guess smokers don’t need to apply.
Anyways, they got a strike for “sexualization of a minor”. Theres no kids in the video, and theres nothing sexual about it unless you have some kink for a bunch out college aged girls smoking from bongs (hey! I guess smokers CAN try this…), and one of them is blowing really big bubbles.
CENSORED!!!
As a gay man- at least in my local community, the loophole does exist, and I’ve heard a good number of queer people use it (though only in conversations with people they know will be comfortable with it). 🤷
I don’t necessarily take issue with it being used in a clinical tone like this. Context is context tho, and I don’t speak for everybody ofc. °_o
TBF it’s from 1988.
Lol at the down votes for pointing out a straight fact.
We can put qualifiers on it, like how text like this likely did more good than harm, but it’s still undeniably transphobic
Idk why you’re being downvoted; It’s stated that they know she’s trans, then throughout, they misgender her five times and also discredit every trans person, ever, with the usage of the word “thinks”. Transphobic at the worst, ignorant at best.
Yeah it was also 1987 and the worked Was filled to the brim with right-wing propaganda. Even people who wanted to be progressive didn’t really know how to refer to anyone correctly, there was no one to teach them.
Why don’t we cut it some slack for even existing at all? Is this really worse than nothing? Literally my first exposure to the concept of trans.
Because 1. that term is thrown around so often and so loosely-defined now it is sometimes losing its meaning, 2. nobody was intentionally trying to upset anyone, especially back then, and 3. not everyone agrees with the concept as a whole to begin with. Regardless of your beliefs I don’t even fault e.g. christians for only believing in biological male and female, as that’s what their book says and you’re not going to change everyone’s mind so easily or at all.
I don’t think you’ll get much agreement for your third point, but I completely agree with your first two. Reading something from over 30 years ago and applying modern sensibilities to it is stupid.
I’m pretty sure their book doesn’t say anything explicit about this topic. They choose to interpret passages in specific ways to foster their agenda, which is not ok at all.
BULLSHIT 2:43 AND THEN THE LORD SAID, BIOLOGICAL WOMEN SHOULD SHUT THIER MOUTHS IN THE CHURCH, BUT TRANS WOMEN CAN SPEAK, BECAUSE TRANS WOMEN ARE BIOLOGICAL MEN AND WE SHOULD HATE THEM, PASS DISCRIMINATORY LAWS AND DISSEMINATE LIES AND PROPAGANDA ABOUT THEM WHILE WAVING A FLAG AND CARRYING A BIBLE. (/s)
Yea, there is no mention of trangender people in the Bible, and honestly, its not my religion and I dont believe any of it, nor should any of it dictate my life. I am not a Christian, and I have freedom of religion.
lmao