• Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!

Post your searing hot takes

Get fucked kids with allergies, some local dog thinks you don't deserve medicines

loooool as a super lil kid wont lie first time a friend told me "oh i cant eat peanut butter" cus i offered him a snack and he said "allergies" i was like "Damn, that sucks..... *eats the rest*" lmao

Hey, I was little, tf does a 7 year old know. I still feel bad for the homie cus Peanut Butter keeps me alive lmao.
 
Basset Hounds puppies are the GOAT puppies (lil everything but paws and ears) cus they'll get excited and run to you and step and trip on their own ears. If you don't think thats GOAT of Adorability than idk what is. lol

yes I'm bias having one (had a Cocker Spaniel as a kid, adorable too. he was super understanding of me being a wrestling kid and playfully hitting him with moves [ofc making sure i never actually hit him cus that's my buddy like the basset] as he sleeps and he'd pop up like "OH HAI FAUX HULK HOGAN MR. LEG DROP -kisses-" lmao
 
Italian unification was based
German unification was dumb. The reunification was fine but the first unification had absolutely horrendous consequences for the rest of Europe and for Germany itself
I am still pissed about the fourth crusade and the fall of Konstantinopel
European history is stupid and dumb and I regret having learned the history of this continent so throughoutly
 
The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in “advanced” countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in “advanced” countries.

The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy.

If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later.
 
The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in “advanced” countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in “advanced” countries.

The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy.

If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later.
this but with the invention of agriculture^^
 
This post is going to be less of me posting any takes and more about me wondering why some of my takes I've had on Smogon have honestly just been kind of stupid. Maybe I'm dwelling on something that doesn't matter way too much (again), but I think there comes a point where I have to ask myself if I need to start putting more, quote, "actual thought" into some of my weird opinions. Some specific examples that come to mind include some takes I've posted about various generations of OU shoutouts to the one time I said with total seriousness that I though starmie was better gen 3 than tyranitar and within the past 24 hours when I thought it would be smart to post a thread elsewhere about me thinking there was a borderline conspiracy theory going on with Pokémon video game sales numbers. Like I said, I might be dwelling on things too much because, hey, it's the Internet, I do this a lot, but by and large, I feel like I need to ask for advice on how to actually give good takes and opinions. I want to feel like I can be a part of this community, but I don't want to make myself look or feel unintelligent, if that makes sense.

This isn't to say I'm ashamed of myself for having unique opinions; this is more about me wanting to teach myself posting discipline. See you guys in the foreseeable future with more extremely bad/weird takes because I apparently have the maturity of a child and refuse to take my own advice because I'm just that stubborn.
 
This post is going to be less of me posting any takes and more about me wondering why some of my takes I've had on Smogon have honestly just been kind of stupid. Maybe I'm dwelling on something that doesn't matter way too much (again), but I think there comes a point where I have to ask myself if I need to start putting more, quote, "actual thought" into some of my weird opinions. Some specific examples that come to mind include some takes I've posted about various generations of OU shoutouts to the one time I said with total seriousness that I though starmie was better gen 3 than tyranitar and within the past 24 hours when I thought it would be smart to post a thread elsewhere about me thinking there was a borderline conspiracy theory going on with Pokémon video game sales numbers. Like I said, I might be dwelling on things too much because, hey, it's the Internet, I do this a lot, but by and large, I feel like I need to ask for advice on how to actually give good takes and opinions. I want to feel like I can be a part of this community, but I don't want to make myself look or feel unintelligent, if that makes sense.

This isn't to say I'm ashamed of myself for having unique opinions; this is more about me wanting to teach myself posting discipline. See you guys in the foreseeable future with more extremely bad/weird takes because I apparently have the maturity of a child and refuse to take my own advice because I'm just that stubborn.
if it makes you feel any better your not alone. i have had some stupid opinions in my time
but murkrow being viable in natdex ubers is not one of them, and i will die on this hill
the important thing is to agnowlege when you say something stupid. if you dont, your future arguments will lose power, because people think you stand by your old stupid ones.
 
They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in “advanced” countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in “advanced” countries.
1. it hasn't particularly increased the life-expectancy of people in first world countries.
1702036336517.png

The end of large wars, the invention of antibiotics, the appearnce of social welfare and, interestingly enough, decolonization have all greatly increased the life expectation of first world countries. Medicine and quality nutrition was available to common folk, healthcare and monetary funds were a lot easier to claim and people didn't need to travel to far away countries were they died en masse on the way there, contracted deadly diseases and died fighting innocent people for their masters have helped the people a lot more than the industrial revolution

2. People had to live in indignified circumstances even before industrialization. Most of human population across human history had to live as slaves, had to live in serfdom or as plebians since the agricultural revolution and the first civilations. Whilst some of them had it rather well under certain feudal lords that were "generous", most of them weren't treated or considered as humans, but as property, capital and resources. That goes for all civilizations. Look at roman law and what they did to their slaves, most of them coming from "advanced" civilizations that were claimed from warfare. The british empire, one of the greatest enslavers in human history, have also enslaved and violated the Irish and even enslaved British people. For example, the narrative that Australia was a prison continent falls apart when you hear about how Brits that stole a single apple for their starving families during famines were sent there and were basically enslaved their entire lifes

3. Physical suffering has come for all due to the revolution. The first and the second world war, the holocaust, the countless deaths from being overworked, poisoned, all the children that were forced inside mines and were killed by machinery...

I am saying all this because, whilst it's unfair how some of us are doing much better than others simply due to being born in richer countries, we shouldn't antagonize each other and understand how we all have suffering and brutality in our histories. We shouldn't go on each others throat for it, we should unite against our masters, understand what happened to our ancestors and what they have done themselves and learn from it for a more peaceful and liberated future. I think I see things this way because my parents are immigrants from a rather poor country and found their way into a rather wealthy country. I've seen both sides and how similar these are in many ways

If the industrial revolution was a mistake or not, I don't know. I think it was inevitable and almost all technological advancements have costed human lifes. The mistake was in how these advancements were abused by people in power to fill their wallets and increase their power instead of them being used for the wellbeing of all. And in how oil companies and governments knew in the 80s about what happened/happens to our nature due to these techological advancements and not doing anything about it, despite having the ressources for it
 
Local dog:
1. it hasn't particularly increased the life-expectancy of people in first world countries.
View attachment 577550
The end of large wars, the invention of antibiotics, the appearnce of social welfare and, interestingly enough, decolonization have all greatly increased the life expectation of first world countries. Medicine and quality nutrition was available to common folk, healthcare and monetary funds were a lot easier to claim and people didn't need to travel to far away countries were they died en masse on the way there, contracted deadly diseases and died fighting innocent people for their masters have helped the people a lot more than the industrial revolution

2. People had to live in indignified circumstances even before industrialization. Most of human population across human history had to live as slaves, had to live in serfdom or as plebians since the agricultural revolution and the first civilations. Whilst some of them had it rather well under certain feudal lords that were "generous", most of them weren't treated or considered as humans, but as property, capital and resources. That goes for all civilizations. Look at roman law and what they did to their slaves, most of them coming from "advanced" civilizations that were claimed from warfare. The british empire, one of the greatest enslavers in human history, have also enslaved and violated the Irish and even enslaved British people. For example, the narrative that Australia was a prison continent falls apart when you hear about how Brits that stole a single apple for their starving families during famines were sent there and were basically enslaved their entire lifes

3. Physical suffering has come for all due to the revolution. The first and the second world war, the holocaust, the countless deaths from being overworked, poisoned, all the children that were forced inside mines and were killed by machinery...

I am saying all this because, whilst it's unfair how some of us are doing much better than others simply due to being born in richer countries, we shouldn't antagonize each other and understand how we all have suffering and brutality in our histories. We shouldn't go on each others throat for it, we should unite against our masters, understand what happened to our ancestors and what they have done themselves and learn from it for a more peaceful and liberated future. I think I see things this way because my parents are immigrants from a rather poor country and found their way into a rather wealthy country. I've seen both sides and how similar these are in many ways

If the industrial revolution was a mistake or not, I don't know. I think it was inevitable and almost all technological advancements have costed human lifes. The mistake was in how these advancements were abused by people in power to fill their wallets and increase their power instead of them being used for the wellbeing of all. And in how oil companies and governments knew in the 80s about what happened/happens to our nature due to these techological advancements and not doing anything about it, despite having the ressources for it
Also local dog
Megan Fox isn't that hot
the duality of dog
 
Last edited:
Purple Coins by the Seaside from Sea Slide Galaxy is like a billion times worse than Luigi's Purple Coins from Toy Time Galaxy in Super Mario Galaxy 1.

In a game where for the most part (aside from a few other Purple Coin missions like Honeyhive, Freezeflame, and Beach Bowl) most Stars take like six minutes at worst, Purple Coins by the Seaside feels especially molasses and almost scientifically designed to be as slow as possible. Even with the other scavenger hunt ones, you can at least long jump for the most part.

Not so with Sea Slide Galaxy. You are forced to use the exceptionally slow Bee Mushroom (which I normally don't mind too much, one of my favorite levels is actually Honeyclimb Galaxy) to grab all the Purple Coins above the water, with NO semblance of speed whatsoever. Luigi's Purple Coins might be rough to a first timer, but at least that mission has some kinetic energy to it thanks to the the time limit. Purple Coins by the Seaside is practically guaranteed to take you a solid ten minutes due to how spaced out the coins are, and while you're unlikely to die in the game, you might die on the inside because it's so painfully dull. This wouldn't be so bad if the game didn't essentially make you scour the galaxy ALREADY in The Silver Stars of Sea Slide in the exact same game.

It sucks too because conceptually Sea Slide Galaxy is pretty cool and some of the other missions (rings, shadow race, and the penguin race) are fun and not needlessly stretched out. They could have had you race on a shell to get Purple Coins in a time limit, sure this galaxy already has like three fast movement stars, but it would have been a billion times more FUN. No other Purple Coin star in the game really uses shells much at all, and you'd still have Deep Dark for your exploratory water coins (Beach Bowl only has like, 5 in the actual main body of water).

I seriously do not understand why Purple Coins by the Seaside had to be so insufferably slow. Hands down my least favorite Star in Super Mario Galaxy 1.
 
ok i have never been one to argue about family films on a children's video game website but i feel it's time to break my peace. cars 2 actually fucking rules and all of the haters are lying and/or morons etc..
Like I mean, COME ON!
Tell me WHY Cars 2 isn't good!
The film was nominated for Best Animated Feature Film at the 69th Golden Globe Awards, (Wikipedia). Tell me how a bad film gets nominated anyways?
 
why are people so against their data being sold to advertizers? do you have a problem with you being advertized to with things you like? what exactly is the downside here? do you think that the company is going to dox you? do you think the wage slave hired by a souless corporation who hasnt slept in three days, goes through hundreds of peoples data a day, and will never meet you will judge you for your search history? be real.
 
do you have a problem with you being advertized to with things you like?
Yes? I hate being advertised to in general and think that the world would be better off with a lot less money going around in marketing. Anytime I'm not explicitly looking for information about something (and even then there's a reason to be skeptical of the source trying to sell it to me) encountering an ad will make me want to avoid the subject of that ad. I will deliberately look for alternatives in the event that I do actually think I need something and see an ad for that thing.
 
I fucking hate wannabe artsy movies. Black and white for no reason, playing at a single location, being vague on purpose, having no realy meaning but appearing to do so...

There are movies that work very well in black and white, there are movies that work very well in 4:3, there are movies that make a lot from surrealism, there are movies that manage a lot without dialogue, there are slow paced movies at a single location that work

But I hate how these factors have come together to present artful cinema. When you combine all of it to make something "special", it's just so fucking pretentious. It's like saying that fast-paced, shorter, dialogue-heavy movies are less artful, no, no they aren't, and it doesn't make your work more artful when you have a 4-hour movie with two spoken lines that moves like ass and is recorded on some 1940s camera

And yeah I said that because Malcolm & Marie is the worst thing I've seen in years and years and I hate Sam Levinson. Hope he never gets a job again after the Idol and that he'll be called out in mainstream media for his perversions
 
I can't stand Quentin Tarantino. As a director, he's an A grade but as a writer he's C-. The problem I think is that he surrounds himself with ass kissers and other yes men who say how high when he tells them to jump, and no one's got the balls to tell him when he's being an idiot. And it doesn't matter how smart you are, not every single idea you have is going to be a good one. Only film he's ever done that I genuinely like is Pulp Fiction.

Kill Bill is a film that perfectly sums up my problems with him.
She survives getting beaten half to death and shot through the head...somehow. That scene is shown in black and white for no reason (agree with above poster on that kind of stuff). Other flashback scenes are shown in colour, so not sure why that one had to be in black and white. Oh, and one is in a pseudo anime art style...why? She's in a coma for 4 years, yet has no scars, muscle wastage or brain damage and is left completely unguarded despite being a victim of attempted murder (and an extremely grisly one at that). One of her old assassin friends tries to finish the job, but then Bill has a last minute change of heart and she goes along with it, because otherwise we wouldn't have a movie. She gets woken up by some random guy who runs a side business where people rape unconscious people in the hospital trying to force himself on her (because you know, we needed more shock value).

And we basically meander along to Japan (or what an American who's never been to Japan thinks Japan is like). OK, seriously Quentin, in what universe does a man love a council of criminals "more than his own children." When I first heard that, I was like "damn you must really hate your children." And the bride triumphs just like we all knew she would, because we've already seen her killing name no.2 on her list. Why the fuck did they do that? I've got no problem with films showing events out of order (Memento does that brilliantly), but here all it does is take all the tension out of the fight scenes because I already know she's going to win.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top