2021 pts ยท February 23, 2016
Something about yourself!
But time and distance doesn't directly heal it. It leaves cracks in the foundation. And if the trauma is never addressed, those cracks can cause the entire thing to come down. All it needs is pressure in the wrong spot. Not saying it's a good metaphor but it does point out that who you are today is a result of what you went through. My foundation was bad but now I've addressed a lot of the issues so while it's not pretty, I feel much safer with it.
If they get to be considered as people for their benefits, morality should be applied. It shouldn't just work in one direction.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. Are movie theaters different where you are? The projector is displaying ads and PSAs with the lights on every time I've gone to see a movie. Most people during that time are talking with each other or on their phones.
Ohio Supreme Court decided that "boneless" doesnt mean "without bones." They say it's a style of cooking. They did that to protect the companies that a man was suing after being royally fucked up by swallowing a bone inside a boneless wing. Still pisses me off.
I think you interpreted what they said wrong. The way I interpreted it was in the way people know an undercover cop is a cop. Posture and build aren't solely based on genetics, either. Cops from around the country present themselves in a very similar manner, on and off duty. Now, I, personally, have no clue what to look for but I assume this is the idea they meant.
This post just reeks of "Nuh uh" and ignorance. Try learning something instead of staying ignorant. Make sure to use mental health as the context for the distinctions between the words.
Honestly asking as I literally don't understand how it's misleading, what part is misleading? What part of the post are the points you made contesting? Honestly asking because maybe I'm missing relevant context that would make it make sense.
You listed three different reasons why YOU think people had trouble with liking the show, not JUST the animation quality. They disagreed and said why THEY think people have trouble like the show and you decide to ignore all of that for the animation quality for some random reason. Why list more than just the animation quality if that's the only thing you cared about?? None of your responses to them seem to indicate that you are actually comprehending what they say. Just arguing for some reason.
She literally says it was wealthy elite that didn't like the competition to their own illegal tea trade......did you watch the video?? Or was it NOT that and some third thing i haven't heard of yet????
So how many people did the "pay us enough to live" guy burn alive? Just curious as you seem to think it's impossible to burn buildings and property down without sacrificing innocent people. Like, you do know people aren't required for things to burn, right? You don't need to use humans as combustible materials. You do understand that, right?
Yeah, my "classification" of autism at 32 years old was, in no way, to make me special. Turns out spending all my life being called lazy or not showing enough initiative while I was in the Army was, in fact, due to executive dysfunction from my classification of being "special." Once I got that classification, I suddenly had an answer to fixing a problem that was always attributed to a failure of character. Now I know to create systems to help me function. I don't give a shit about being special
No evidence needed as it's just a belief based on all current knowledge of who Trump and his ilk are as people. If Trumps actions and words up until now aren't enough for you to believe that setting up an attack near the White House to garner support for his ballroom idea that he keeps begging for is something they would do, then nothing anyone says will matter to you. If the right don't need evidence to villify trans people and minorities, why do we need evidence to "prove" Trump is an ass?
Very likely the attack you hear in the video so it can be used as "proof" to justify rushing forward with the ballroom/bunker.
Thank you. I'm high and reading their message was making me wonder if I'm just too high to understand but, no, it really doesn't make an ounce of sense.
If you spoke Spanish and didn't look like you sterotypically would, you should have responded from that point on entirely in Spanish. At least I find the thought funny being a big, tall, white man.
Collecting things has always been regarded as a hobby and the majority of the time, they aren't the ones making what they collect. How does collecting things fit into your view of hobbies? Especially if they collect things that don't even have any inherent value.
Since you're old, you should also know that collecting things has always been considered a hobby. Trains, comics, rocks, crystals, figurines. They aren't the ones making them the majority of the time, yet it has always been regarded as being a hobby. How are video games any different? What's the distinction?
It stops a few seconds after it starts. I skipped parts of the video and was confused by the comment as I apparently skipped the sound entirely.
You are literally choosing to believe it's because they don't know the difference. You are literally assuming the cause and you are also getting incredibly defensive over a literal non-issue. I also gave two other possible scenarios that don't involve autocorrect. All of them are assumptions and you are purposely choosing the one where you're an asshole. And cupcake? Really? Are you just having a shitty day and lashing out or is being a dick to people for no reason just your default setting?
So there is no way for it to be due to autocorrect or just a simple mistake? It's automatically because they are dumbasses who don't know English??? A single instance is enough for you to know, for a fact, that they don't actually know it was a mistake? It's weird to me that your first thought is they didn't actually know the difference instead of it being a simple mistake that wasn't big enough for them to correct or that they simply didn't notice before hitting send, but you do you, I guess.
It's nowhere near equivalent. Nazis labeled other people subhuman based on their own Nazi beliefs. Not the actions and beliefs of the Jews, etc. We are labeling people based, not on our beliefs, but on that person's own actions, statements and morals. Those aren't the same thing. How you think they are is mind boggling to me. How do you equate calling a person who is clearly racist a racist to a racist person calling a black person inferior? How are those the same to you? Those are rhetorical.
How, exactly, is labeling someone based on their actions and beliefs victimizing them??? I don't understand what you are trying to say. If a person has racists beliefs, would you not call them a racist? Or is this an issue of not keeping up with the times and you're trying to make some claim that they can't be Nazis because the party "no longer exists?"
I think they are referring to justice sensitivity and calling out issues within a social group even if it causes issues within that group. Like how people in a church would quietly ignore the pastors "vices" but the autistic person would question it out loud and likely be shunned for doing so. Something about group identity not meaning as much to autistics. I remember reading something about that but it's been a while. At least, that's the only thing I can think of but I could easily be wrong.
I'm an American Vet and I don't feel that way. Most Americans can't even tell you what Socialism is and you seem to be part of that group. Sometimes I wish ignorance could be forcibly fixed but I know that's an iffy route to take. Try learning what people mean before you parrot talking points you don't seem to understand.
You sound exactly like someone that would have forced left handed people to use their right hand because "99% of society use them" Jesus, you seem to not have an ounce of empathy if you're this aggressive that people uncomfortable with something should be made to conform to your standards instead of you accepting they aren't you. You seem to have issues with your expectations of how other people should be and don't care to understand it from their point. Just conform to made up standards.
If I can follow along with a conversation on Discord without eye contact, why is it necessary? I'm actually diagnosed through the VA with autism and I've hated looking people in their eyes my entire life. Why should we keep dealing with the anxiety of that just to appease your need for eye contact in a verbal interaction?
I agree with the first part but, being autistic, eye contact is uncomfortable as fuck. The only reason I do it as much as I do is because I was forced to during my time in the Army. Doesn't change the fact that I get anxious while I'm making eye contact. I'd say responding and following along with the conversation is more important than looking them in the eyes the entire time.
Just going to let you know you weren't alone. I, too, thought they meant ICE from the image. Once I saw who sent it, I was appaled that they used that image to show it from their side. It fits from our side not their's to any sane person, in my opinion. Once the party was added in context-wise, I knew it wasn't meant the way I saw it. It's funny to think about how the sender can completely change the interpretation.
You're missing the FACT that with the location of the hole and the angle from the hole to her body, if he was in the red zone, the bullet hole and her body no longer line up, meaning he WASN'T in the front red zone. Thats how angles work. It shows he wasnt in the front of the vehicle when he fired the shot. You can also see that he leans INTO the vehicle to get his first shot off because the pillar is in his way.
No, we see that he leans into the vehicle to get a better shot through the windshield for the first shot because the car pillar or post is in his way and he already planned on shooting her.
But time and distance doesn't directly heal it. It leaves cracks in the foundation. And if the trauma is never addressed, those cracks can cause the entire thing to come down. All it needs is pressure in the wrong spot. Not saying it's a good metaphor but it does point out that who you are today is a result of what you went through. My foundation was bad but now I've addressed a lot of the issues so while it's not pretty, I feel much safer with it.
If they get to be considered as people for their benefits, morality should be applied. It shouldn't just work in one direction.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. Are movie theaters different where you are? The projector is displaying ads and PSAs with the lights on every time I've gone to see a movie. Most people during that time are talking with each other or on their phones.
Ohio Supreme Court decided that "boneless" doesnt mean "without bones." They say it's a style of cooking. They did that to protect the companies that a man was suing after being royally fucked up by swallowing a bone inside a boneless wing. Still pisses me off.
I think you interpreted what they said wrong. The way I interpreted it was in the way people know an undercover cop is a cop. Posture and build aren't solely based on genetics, either. Cops from around the country present themselves in a very similar manner, on and off duty. Now, I, personally, have no clue what to look for but I assume this is the idea they meant.
This post just reeks of "Nuh uh" and ignorance. Try learning something instead of staying ignorant. Make sure to use mental health as the context for the distinctions between the words.
Honestly asking as I literally don't understand how it's misleading, what part is misleading? What part of the post are the points you made contesting? Honestly asking because maybe I'm missing relevant context that would make it make sense.
You listed three different reasons why YOU think people had trouble with liking the show, not JUST the animation quality. They disagreed and said why THEY think people have trouble like the show and you decide to ignore all of that for the animation quality for some random reason. Why list more than just the animation quality if that's the only thing you cared about?? None of your responses to them seem to indicate that you are actually comprehending what they say. Just arguing for some reason.
She literally says it was wealthy elite that didn't like the competition to their own illegal tea trade......did you watch the video?? Or was it NOT that and some third thing i haven't heard of yet????
So how many people did the "pay us enough to live" guy burn alive? Just curious as you seem to think it's impossible to burn buildings and property down without sacrificing innocent people. Like, you do know people aren't required for things to burn, right? You don't need to use humans as combustible materials. You do understand that, right?
Yeah, my "classification" of autism at 32 years old was, in no way, to make me special. Turns out spending all my life being called lazy or not showing enough initiative while I was in the Army was, in fact, due to executive dysfunction from my classification of being "special." Once I got that classification, I suddenly had an answer to fixing a problem that was always attributed to a failure of character. Now I know to create systems to help me function. I don't give a shit about being special
No evidence needed as it's just a belief based on all current knowledge of who Trump and his ilk are as people. If Trumps actions and words up until now aren't enough for you to believe that setting up an attack near the White House to garner support for his ballroom idea that he keeps begging for is something they would do, then nothing anyone says will matter to you. If the right don't need evidence to villify trans people and minorities, why do we need evidence to "prove" Trump is an ass?
Very likely the attack you hear in the video so it can be used as "proof" to justify rushing forward with the ballroom/bunker.
Thank you. I'm high and reading their message was making me wonder if I'm just too high to understand but, no, it really doesn't make an ounce of sense.
If you spoke Spanish and didn't look like you sterotypically would, you should have responded from that point on entirely in Spanish. At least I find the thought funny being a big, tall, white man.
Collecting things has always been regarded as a hobby and the majority of the time, they aren't the ones making what they collect. How does collecting things fit into your view of hobbies? Especially if they collect things that don't even have any inherent value.
Since you're old, you should also know that collecting things has always been considered a hobby. Trains, comics, rocks, crystals, figurines. They aren't the ones making them the majority of the time, yet it has always been regarded as being a hobby. How are video games any different? What's the distinction?
It stops a few seconds after it starts. I skipped parts of the video and was confused by the comment as I apparently skipped the sound entirely.
You are literally choosing to believe it's because they don't know the difference. You are literally assuming the cause and you are also getting incredibly defensive over a literal non-issue. I also gave two other possible scenarios that don't involve autocorrect. All of them are assumptions and you are purposely choosing the one where you're an asshole. And cupcake? Really? Are you just having a shitty day and lashing out or is being a dick to people for no reason just your default setting?
So there is no way for it to be due to autocorrect or just a simple mistake? It's automatically because they are dumbasses who don't know English??? A single instance is enough for you to know, for a fact, that they don't actually know it was a mistake? It's weird to me that your first thought is they didn't actually know the difference instead of it being a simple mistake that wasn't big enough for them to correct or that they simply didn't notice before hitting send, but you do you, I guess.
It's nowhere near equivalent. Nazis labeled other people subhuman based on their own Nazi beliefs. Not the actions and beliefs of the Jews, etc. We are labeling people based, not on our beliefs, but on that person's own actions, statements and morals. Those aren't the same thing. How you think they are is mind boggling to me. How do you equate calling a person who is clearly racist a racist to a racist person calling a black person inferior? How are those the same to you? Those are rhetorical.
How, exactly, is labeling someone based on their actions and beliefs victimizing them??? I don't understand what you are trying to say. If a person has racists beliefs, would you not call them a racist? Or is this an issue of not keeping up with the times and you're trying to make some claim that they can't be Nazis because the party "no longer exists?"
I think they are referring to justice sensitivity and calling out issues within a social group even if it causes issues within that group. Like how people in a church would quietly ignore the pastors "vices" but the autistic person would question it out loud and likely be shunned for doing so. Something about group identity not meaning as much to autistics. I remember reading something about that but it's been a while. At least, that's the only thing I can think of but I could easily be wrong.
I'm an American Vet and I don't feel that way. Most Americans can't even tell you what Socialism is and you seem to be part of that group. Sometimes I wish ignorance could be forcibly fixed but I know that's an iffy route to take. Try learning what people mean before you parrot talking points you don't seem to understand.
You sound exactly like someone that would have forced left handed people to use their right hand because "99% of society use them" Jesus, you seem to not have an ounce of empathy if you're this aggressive that people uncomfortable with something should be made to conform to your standards instead of you accepting they aren't you. You seem to have issues with your expectations of how other people should be and don't care to understand it from their point. Just conform to made up standards.
If I can follow along with a conversation on Discord without eye contact, why is it necessary? I'm actually diagnosed through the VA with autism and I've hated looking people in their eyes my entire life. Why should we keep dealing with the anxiety of that just to appease your need for eye contact in a verbal interaction?
I agree with the first part but, being autistic, eye contact is uncomfortable as fuck. The only reason I do it as much as I do is because I was forced to during my time in the Army. Doesn't change the fact that I get anxious while I'm making eye contact. I'd say responding and following along with the conversation is more important than looking them in the eyes the entire time.
Just going to let you know you weren't alone. I, too, thought they meant ICE from the image. Once I saw who sent it, I was appaled that they used that image to show it from their side. It fits from our side not their's to any sane person, in my opinion. Once the party was added in context-wise, I knew it wasn't meant the way I saw it. It's funny to think about how the sender can completely change the interpretation.
You're missing the FACT that with the location of the hole and the angle from the hole to her body, if he was in the red zone, the bullet hole and her body no longer line up, meaning he WASN'T in the front red zone. Thats how angles work. It shows he wasnt in the front of the vehicle when he fired the shot. You can also see that he leans INTO the vehicle to get his first shot off because the pillar is in his way.
No, we see that he leans into the vehicle to get a better shot through the windshield for the first shot because the car pillar or post is in his way and he already planned on shooting her.