m95thereblogger

[m95thereblogger]

I don't know if you'll see this, but I regret to inform you that in 2024, around eleven years after you made this post, Tatsuya Ishida himself has done exactly what you described.

It's like he saw your post and thought:

Here’s something to do, replace “man, male, etc” with “black, jewish, etc” and see how bad Sinfest has really gotten…

[m95thereblogger]

Marisa you live in touhou stupid. Its only girls.

[m95thereblogger]

[m95thereblogger]

Castle Heterodyne (portable/"dingbot" version, grey cube with 1 eye, not the full building) from Girl Genius.

Castle Heterodyne from Girl Genius is just a little guy!

[m95thereblogger]

Do I really?😒

[m95thereblogger]

How is Finland's involvement taught during WW2 in Finland? We don't really talk about it in school in the US, but when it is referenced, it is usually talked about as a deal with the devil after the Fins were rightfully pissed off at the Soviets for the Winter War. Is that how it is discussed in Finland or is it shameful or something completely different?

(also, do you have any cookies?)

It's not really swept under the rug but not taught in a self-flagellating way like nazi stuff is taught in Germany, either. It's been more than a decade since I last sat in a history class, but as far as I remember it's just brushingly aknowledged that yeah Finland had to resort to asking nazi germany for military aid against the soviets because no other party was willing to give that aid, but to be fair the nazis also burned down the land as they left when their help was no longer needed and they were asked to fuck off. I recall also being verified that the nazis did not think of finns as "aryans", but a subhuman slavic type of race, and they would have turned to decimate finns eventually once they'd run out of people darker than themselves.

So it was more or less taught with a stance of "wasn't right, wasn't good, but it was the only option so the fuck else were we going to do".

[m95thereblogger]

THIS IS KILLING ME. HELP

[m95thereblogger]

What sucks is that there is a genuine debate to be had about how to properly define "religion," especially since our construct of "religion" is newer than most people think (as in, within the past 500 years).

And then this debate gets sullied by people comparing everything to religion.

"[x] is basically a religion" really is the quintessential midwit intellectual trap of the postmodern era. I am actually struggling to think of things I haven't seen compared to religion.

[m95thereblogger]

kino

classicists will make the ugliest least functional website in the history of html and it will contain the entire library of fragmentary papyri of the works of aeschylus. for free

[m95thereblogger]

Can't this be considered cheating by escape room rules? I feel like using ChatGPT for escape rooms would violate some kind of official rule there, wouldn't it?

[m95thereblogger]

>"In no way is being taxed, asked to mask or vaccinate comparable to something or someone using your body without your consent."

This phrasing seems to imply that fetuses somehow choose to exist in womens' bodies, when both you and I know they don't.

>"Don’t want to be taxed? Move somewhere that aligns with your tax-less beliefs."

The vast majority of the world is under the control of some kind of state (which have taxes, or at least something equivalent like North Korea does), and the parts that aren't are either war-torn or underpopulated.

>"Don’t want to wear a mask or get vaccinated? Fine, but don’t look for jobs that require either."

First, what about just going outside in an urban area?

Second, given that I assume that you're left-wing based on your other posts (correct me if I'm wrong), the implication that capitalism is defined by unimpeded choice (lol) is weird. As is the implication that employment in Current Year is easy to get (also lol).

One of the main justifications I’ve heard from pro-aborts over the years is that the fetus can’t feel pain. They’ve been using that as reasoning as to why the fetus isn’t a person.

But now that there is research suggesting babies can feel pain as early as the first trimester suddenly pro-aborts say whether or not they feel pain is “irrelevant.”

Like I know that was my argument all along. The only reason it’s ever brought up in these debates is because you, the pro-aborts, bring it up as an argument!

And it just proves how completely disingenuous every single argument they try to make is. Because their incorrect assumption on the absence of pain has been a major talking point of theirs they throw out all the time to try and prove the baby isn’t a person and abortion is ok because the baby “can’t feel pain.”

So now that there’s information out there showing they are wrong about yet another thing do they adjust their beliefs accordingly? Do they go “wow all this time I was convinced they couldn’t feel pain and that’s been one of my main arguments for abortion so maybe I need rethink some things or check out this information”? No. They don’t. They immediately dismiss it because since it doesn’t fit their narrative any longer it’s now “irrelevant information.”

Funny how that works isn’t it?

It just proves the justifications they use to try to argue that abortion is ok don’t even matter to them. They don’t even believe them. They’re just throwing out empty phrases they don’t even care about the accuracy of because all they are interested in is that at the end of the day the choice of killing a baby never goes away. They don’t care if all their information is inaccurate, they don’t care what the truth is, if the baby is a person, can feel pain, has rights, none of that matters to them. You can prove they are uneducated and shamefully ignorant on every aspect of the abortion debate all day long and they literally don’t care because knowing the truth isn’t what they’re interested in.

That’s why as soon as you prove them wrong on any of their own arguments suddenly that information doesn’t matter anymore and they’ll just move on to their next equally incorrect and ignorant argument until you prove that one wrong too because again, they aren’t actually giving you the reasons they believe abortion is ok. They’ve already decided killing babies is ok and they have to make up reason why it’s ok along the way.

And that is because people who are pro-abortion are only pro-abortion because they are uneducated. And they choose to be uneducated. Don’t ever take their arguments seriously because they don’t even take them seriously. All they care about is killing babies.

The more educated a person is on fetal development and human rights the more pro-life they will be.

[m95thereblogger]

Interesting how many on the left will turn into Ayn Randian hyper-individualists the second abortion comes up.

How do you feel about paying taxes for social programs? Universal healthcare? Disaster relief? Foreign aid? Tax evasion is illegal, so paying taxes is basically coerced. Do others have the right to your money if they struggle to live without it?

On a different (and more directly comparable) note, what about getting vaccinated or wearing a mask during a pandemic? Should those be mandatory to prevent the spread of deadly diseases? If so, then what about bodily autonomy?

Most on the left (whether liberals or radicals) seem to understand that humans have obligations to their fellow humans that are more important than their individual right to choose... until abortion comes up.

(P.S.: I'm not a Republican, I support taxpayer-funded healthcare, disaster relief, etc., so don't pull out that card.)

One of the main justifications I’ve heard from pro-aborts over the years is that the fetus can’t feel pain. They’ve been using that as reasoning as to why the fetus isn’t a person.

But now that there is research suggesting babies can feel pain as early as the first trimester suddenly pro-aborts say whether or not they feel pain is “irrelevant.”

Like I know that was my argument all along. The only reason it’s ever brought up in these debates is because you, the pro-aborts, bring it up as an argument!

And it just proves how completely disingenuous every single argument they try to make is. Because their incorrect assumption on the absence of pain has been a major talking point of theirs they throw out all the time to try and prove the baby isn’t a person and abortion is ok because the baby “can’t feel pain.”

So now that there’s information out there showing they are wrong about yet another thing do they adjust their beliefs accordingly? Do they go “wow all this time I was convinced they couldn’t feel pain and that’s been one of my main arguments for abortion so maybe I need rethink some things or check out this information”? No. They don’t. They immediately dismiss it because since it doesn’t fit their narrative any longer it’s now “irrelevant information.”

Funny how that works isn’t it?

It just proves the justifications they use to try to argue that abortion is ok don’t even matter to them. They don’t even believe them. They’re just throwing out empty phrases they don’t even care about the accuracy of because all they are interested in is that at the end of the day the choice of killing a baby never goes away. They don’t care if all their information is inaccurate, they don’t care what the truth is, if the baby is a person, can feel pain, has rights, none of that matters to them. You can prove they are uneducated and shamefully ignorant on every aspect of the abortion debate all day long and they literally don’t care because knowing the truth isn’t what they’re interested in.

That’s why as soon as you prove them wrong on any of their own arguments suddenly that information doesn’t matter anymore and they’ll just move on to their next equally incorrect and ignorant argument until you prove that one wrong too because again, they aren’t actually giving you the reasons they believe abortion is ok. They’ve already decided killing babies is ok and they have to make up reason why it’s ok along the way.

And that is because people who are pro-abortion are only pro-abortion because they are uneducated. And they choose to be uneducated. Don’t ever take their arguments seriously because they don’t even take them seriously. All they care about is killing babies.

The more educated a person is on fetal development and human rights the more pro-life they will be.

[m95thereblogger]

The implications of a Bloodfeast political dynasty fascinate me.

2025 Political Rising Stars To Keep An Eye On

[m95thereblogger]

My first language doesn't have gendered pronouns at all, but it must be a headache and a half to live in a language where you've got, like, plurals of those things. Like you're just hanging out with your amigas and then someone comes out and suddenly it's your amigos and since it's still the same people now it's anyone's business to want to know who it was who made the whole squad change pronouns.

[m95thereblogger]

I expect to get drowned in a sea of reblogs, but Max Nordau did not coin the word "degerate" or even popularise it. In English, the word has been used by William Shakespeare and Jonathan Swift as another word for "immoral" long before it gained any kind of fascist connotations:

Neither Shakespeare nor Swift were talking about anything eugenicist, like, at all. Nordau helped popularise the word "degenerate" in the context of art, but that's about it.

Stop using the word degenerate to mean horny challenge

[m95thereblogger]

I am of the opinion that such "people" who gun down innocents for some ego trip, deserve to be posthumously mocked and remembered as pathetic.

Remembering them as scary is exactly what these "people" want society to do. Because they want to be remembered as impressive, but don't have the ability to create anything worthwhile, so instead of actually doing something impressive, they take the lives of the defenceless to be remembered as infamous.

Obviously, remember the victims. May the two children this loser killed rest in peace. But may the loser who killed them be remembered as an impotent lowlife.

im just hate posting about robin now

vape addicted racist nazi edgelord who claims to be pro palestine and anti trump and feminist while saying the n word and hailing a neonazi terrorist in the next sentence??? and then targeting one of the only groups of people who are entirely not responsible for anything bad in the world currently. i have never held this much contempt for someone

[m95thereblogger]

An unexpected crossover, and an unexpected character to use for the crossover, but my two cents are:

Lucrezia would easily survive Kira due to having backup Lucrezias, and she'd def be persistent in going against him. But...

Personality-wise, she suffers from many of the same flaws as Light himself (arrogance, massive god[dess]-complex, inability to accept defeat, etc.), and we've seen that she can be outsmarted by crafty people like Klaus or Zola who play on her arrogance.

Assuming that a conflict between the two starts from Kira offing criminals (of which Lucrezia is one), it would very much be "Unstoppable force (Light) meets immovable object (Lucrezia)." In all likelihood, it'd end in a stalemate.