band together and hate a specific cause.
The thing with Gen X teenage nihilism was that the only cardinal sin was actually having a strong opinion. There wasn’t much room to hate on anything, because actually hating something showed that you cared too much, and that wasn’t what we were about.
Gen Z seems to be much more willing to embrace negative emotions and acknowledge that they care enough to hate. Whether that’s a better or a worse thing, I’m not sure.
The worst part is no-one cared, fucking “they’ll grow out of it” and now everyone is suddenly in shock. When I talk about it to my friend today he’s even in fucking denial about it, “Oh they didn’t actually mean that, it was all jokes”.
Most edgy teens do grow out of it. I roll my eyes at embarrassment at some of the stuff I wrote in college, and high school me was even stupider.
But one difference in my high school years (in the 90’s), edginess wasn’t inherently politically coded. Some of it was racist, sexist, or homophobic, but plenty of the targets were also Republican constituencies: rural/small town people, Christians, fat people, old people, prudes, etc. In a conservative suburban area, jokes about abortion, sex, drugs, etc. were often designed to elicit shock and disgust.
I think we’ve seen a cultural shift in which edginess is seen as right wing in itself, in part because the right, which used to get offended at things like Harry Potter and Howard Stern and Disney movies, has fallen in line with edgy Gen X comedians who somehow didn’t grow out of it, and made room for people who smoke weed and mock the Bible.
Any male born after 1999 can’t fuck, all they know is Joe Rogan, vape, charge they phone, Twitch, be cucks, eat hot tendies and lie
I think it depends on a lot of real-life interactions, too. I had coaches and teachers and older work colleagues (including in heavily male dominated workforces, like the military) who were strong masculine role models. So when it came to media consumption I tended to gravitate towards celebrities or famous characters who already fit the worldview.
Nick Offerman played a libertarian Ron Swanson on TV, but in that fictional work the core cultural markers of manhood were explicitly presented as non-political, and seem largely shared with the left-leaning actor himself.
Terry Crews is similar, as you’ve pointed out. On Brooklyn 99 his character was presented as a loving father of young girls, who was in connection with his feelings, but also loved working out and sports and, you know, was a cop with a gun. In real life, in interviews, he seemed very much in tune with healthy masculinity and his place in the world.
Steve Kerr and Greg Popovich give off positive male leader vibes and often speak up about political and cultural issues, while largely being protective and supportive of the younger men who essentially work for them.
George Clooney is funny because he came off as a bit of a womanizer for years, but dove right into his long term relationship with a woman whose own career would arguably overshadow his. He is unabashedly and vocally a supporter of Democrats and other causes associated with the left in the United States.
Nobody is perfect, or deserves to be put on a pedestal. But there are little nuggets of positive examples all around us, including traditionally masculine men who support ideals that are more culturally and politically associated with the cultural left.
Year to year comparisons can be viewed here.
Strangely enough, he lost educated white voters compared to before. He won white people with college degrees the previous two times, but lost them this time.
I guess that means that the shift in minority support cut across education levels.
They’re talking about specifically white women, not all women, which the link (and exit polling from other major sources) also reports had a 53% vote for Trump.
James Cameron has a history of making great things happen with a low budget, and spending millions responsibly to actually make a positive difference in big budget films.
is a “B-movie” now?
Did you not read the article? It was regarded as a B-movie when it came out: a low-budget sci-fi slasher/horror film. Arnold referred to it as a B-movie when asked about it on the set of Conan the Barbarian (which had 3 times the budget as Terminator). The New York Times referred to it as a B-movie in its review, as discussed by this article, which is also why the headline uses quotes around “B-movie.”
Unless the drugger was in this person’s group
Isn’t that a pretty common thing, where a woman is drugged by a man she is actively on a 1 on 1 date with?
The logistics of a stranger kidnapping a roofied victim seems much more complicated if they didn’t show up together.
TGI Friday’s used to be a full blown singles bar advertised as a place for young professionals to meet for one night stands and the like. When their core audience got older and started getting married and having kids, they pivoted to a neighborhood family friendly restaurant.
Yeah, I understand the article to be saying that the Hitachi contract is for the train control system, including the software and equipment necessary for the operation of the train underground. The broader system upgrades include communications systems between trains and stations. At least how I read it.
No, the $212 million includes the entire upgrade (and 20 years of support) of the automatic train control system. The full $700 million plus is for the overall modernization of multiple systems.
pulled right from the fuckin court documents
The “court documents” are filings by the parties. You’re summarizing litigation documents filed by Twitter, in a motion to dismiss, which is a phase of litigation before either side comes forward with any evidence.
The court hasn’t ruled on anything, so you’re just repeating statements that one side has claimed. I’m pointing out that the other side is claiming the opposite.
The suing company isn’t going off anything but fucking assumptions.
They’re not required to come forward with evidence (and litigation procedure doesn’t even give them much of an opportunity to come forward with evidence at this stage). What they have come forward with is literally sealed by the court, so unless you’re leaking confidential court documents you don’t have any idea of what they’re claiming. Take a look at the docket.
If you’re going to be aggressive in this comment section, at least learn the very basics of the thing you’re being aggressive about. It’s clear you don’t know the basics of this type of litigation, so it might help if you show some intellectual humility, take a step back, and let the knowledgeable people actually weigh in, to be able to evaluate the publicly filed documents in an informed way. Whatever it is you’re doing instead, looks pretty bad.
There was no purchasing contract in place when the suing company placed the $20 million dollar order they are claiming is all custom made and cant be recouped, “the social media platform had not made any firm purchase order when the server dealer went ahead with its purchases and deliveries.”
You’re leaving out that the paragraph you’re summarizing starts off with “X claims that.”
One side says there was a contract. The other side says it wasn’t firmed up yet into a binding contract. Neither side has come forward with their evidence.
Also, Wiwynn is also suing for negligent misrepresentation and promissory estoppel, which don’t require a contract.
In that case, you have a few options:
Are you talking about the office or the sauna?
given the logo
…and the business model
Skewers and other utensils are obviously OK. Some parts of natural foods can sometimes act like skewers or utensils, too, so that just becomes a normal part of the presentation and eating method. Like cocktail shrimp should still have the tails on, as a little handle.
Where’s the source data for that, that shows that Trump won under-29 men by 15 points, compared to Biden winning them in 2020 by 14 points?
NBC News shows 2 points, 49% to 47%. It doesn’t seem to have 2020 data on that specific combination of gender and age, though. But it does show an overall swing of about 11 points towards Trump for the under-29s of all genders.
CNN didn’t break things out by gender but their data shows that Trump gained 13 points among under-29s generally, including women.