gizgal Posts
Gravity cat wrote...
I remember I used to draw all sorts of variations of Furbies in my sketchbook while I was at school.Furby made of glue, horny Furby, Drunk Furby, slut furby, prostitute furby, furby made of glass, furby eating glass, dead furby, necrophilliac furby, furby that think it's a dog, dog that think it's a furby, Shelby pretending to be a Furby
Oh lordy, SHELBY. That one was weird.
As was the one that gave birth to an egg/baby creature. It was all birthing sounds and "HEREEEE COMES BABY!!!!". o_o
Personally, I had a little Baby Furby, then later the Gizmo furby (of course!... but I think I gave it to charity. DAMMIT.) and the ET furby (still have... rules). Also one regular Furby but it was a bit wonky.
My rich friend gave us all Furbies (and Tamagotchis, once) as party favors. For real.
She also had a fucking TRUNK FULL OF FURBIES at home and over time their minds went to crap so we just played Furby therapists. It got weird.
Rowdy Rocker! wrote...
They still make Furbys?Yeah. Oddly enough they even made a "second gen" that had huge haunches and more pronounced ears.
They kinda flopped, though, relative to other toys that year.
But they didn't look nearly as scary, imo.
But... those toes. D:
Kind of old news, but now that it's actually out... WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOT
It sounds absofuckingloutely insane. And I love it.
"Kids don't know much, but they do know when their central nervous systems get the playtime equivalent of a kegstand. The Furby is like an electronic frat party stuffed into a faux-fur chassis."
"Its hair is an unkempt, fluorescent tangle of wispy purple and pink—what you'd find clogging an cyborg prostitute's shower drain."
http://www.gizmodo.com/5937402/the-new-furby-review-absolute-horror
Also look at the promo video.
The thing is more crazy than its predecessors.
http://www.amazon.com/Hasbro-A3174-Furby-Teal/dp/B008DKA3XI/
(apparently the purple furby is higher price, wtf?)
WHO ELSE WANTS ONE OF THESE CRAZY FUZZ BALLS!? (I will admit, though... sad that the eyes are LED; no more drunk-eyes Furby ;-; )
It sounds absofuckingloutely insane. And I love it.
"Kids don't know much, but they do know when their central nervous systems get the playtime equivalent of a kegstand. The Furby is like an electronic frat party stuffed into a faux-fur chassis."
"Its hair is an unkempt, fluorescent tangle of wispy purple and pink—what you'd find clogging an cyborg prostitute's shower drain."
http://www.gizmodo.com/5937402/the-new-furby-review-absolute-horror
Also look at the promo video.
The thing is more crazy than its predecessors.
http://www.amazon.com/Hasbro-A3174-Furby-Teal/dp/B008DKA3XI/
(apparently the purple furby is higher price, wtf?)
WHO ELSE WANTS ONE OF THESE CRAZY FUZZ BALLS!? (I will admit, though... sad that the eyes are LED; no more drunk-eyes Furby ;-; )
Mulan was cool... but if you think about it, the dude who liked her was probably gay if he fell for her prior to knowing her sex. o_o
Some crabs travel inland. In certain seasons, lots even clog up the roads trying to get to the ocean.
I think... for SOME types.
I think... for SOME types.
yurixhentai wrote...
Timoteiiiiiiiii~Yeah, I'm guessing that's why he has it... I don't speaken ze German, though.
Shinzumakami wrote...
gizgal wrote...
It's weird that cartoon smut brings us togethergizgal wrote...
[size=15]weird that cartoon smut brings[/h]gizgal wrote...
[size=19]that cartoon smut[/h]gizgal wrote...
CARTOONYEAH I SAID IT.
WANNA FIGHT ABOUT IT?!
I was putting it into the simplest of terms. <3
No, it's not an indie band name or obscure VN.
Some dude actually did it...
...looks like she got major grass stains there. What a shame.
Some dude actually did it...
...looks like she got major grass stains there. What a shame.
Gism88 wrote...
Are you high? No, sorry. Sleeplessness does affect the brain though, I assume.
yurixhentai wrote...
Have we actually talked before? I don't ever remember us doing.Either way. Love you.
that I actually do love you guys/gals?
I know I get angry and all social-justice-mode, but most of you are all good people.
It's weird that cartoon smut brings us together, but who the fuck cares.
(No, I am not drunk. I am merely very very tired, and introspective.)
I know I get angry and all social-justice-mode, but most of you are all good people.
It's weird that cartoon smut brings us together, but who the fuck cares.
(No, I am not drunk. I am merely very very tired, and introspective.)
rx7b9er wrote...
While it was a few posts ago, this is a very interesting video on the topic of the 70cents to the dollar discrepancy.
Spoiler:
I can say it was interesting to see that in my core classes for math majors the guy to girl ratio was about 4:5, yet in the master program it was 7:1. There was a time when I thought that the reason for this was that in male dominated professions there are stigmas against women entering.
A humorous example:
Spoiler:
It was in a Math History course were this topic of females in math was asked to our female professor. The reason for the discussion was we finally had mention of the female mathematician Hypatia of Alexandria, who to this day is questioned as being worthy of being one of the seven great Alexandrian mathematicians and is questioned whether she is only mentioned for being female. She said the she had never encountered any major difficulties or obstacles, but she had heard from other female math professors that did not have a similar case. We were then directed to an article which studied the affect of having female elementary teachers who were uncomfortable/anxious with math and science and how this more readily transferred to the girls in the class. Sadly I could not find the original article, but this one is fairly close.
http://hpl.uchicago.edu/Popular%20Press/ABC.pdf
Edit: I spent way to long looking for that link, missed two posts.
I find it interesting that the video brought up this, also mythical, idea that all women have some sort of mindset that they want to stop working to have children, or somehow refuse to enter STEM (Science, Tech, Engineering, Math) fields.
In fact, new and current generations of women ARE being encouraged to work in STEM type careers. Which rules!
But when they get there, they encounter not only (somewhat humorous, as you show with that appropriate comic) situations where they are not taken seriously as workers, but also make less than their male counterparts of the same skill sets and educational background.
All because their employers beleive that their viable uteruses are a risk to their productive ability. Employers even (illegally!) ask potential female employees about their plans to have children or become married, seeing family creation as a threat to their workforce... while males, some of whom undoubtedly go on to have spouses/kids are never bothered with such profiling.
LustfulAngel wrote...
Then there's the difficulty of matching up the DNA of the prepetrator with someone, etc. I don't make "excuses", but there are logical reasons to an extent of the difficulties.We should think of ways of making it easier to catch prepetrators of sexual violence.
That's the thing: the reason so many sexual criminals are never found is because... surprise surprise, the rape kits collected by police and hospitals are often NEVER examined. No follow through. Just sit on the shelf.
It's an national issue. Just a quick Google search for "rape kit testing" brings up countless stories regarding the problem, but here is a summary of the issue. Thankfully, it IS being addressed, but very slowly.
http://www.kintera.org/c.nlIWIgN2JwE/b.5706887/k.37FC/Eliminate_the_Rape_Kit_Backlog/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx
623 wrote...
gizgal wrote...
not what "not to do/wear/drink".I think it's unfair to say preventative measures/knowledge shouldn't be encouraged. If you live in New York City, you don't just go out to the worst part of town in the dead of night wearing a $500 suit or a diamond necklace with wads of cash taped to your shoulders. Anyone would say you were an idiot. "But I should be able to do/wear what I want." Yeah, technically, but that doesn't mean you won't get mugged. And you can tell people "don't steal" all you want, but some will still do it. You're free to learn self-defense, as you mentioned, but not everyone has the time, money, or even mobility to. So the easiest solution is to just be smart. Yeah, you're letting the thieves and rapists have the power, but can you really eradicate all of them? No.
In short, yeah, teaching people not to do something and having them actually listen would be ideal, but there will always be criminals (or a lot of people would be out of jobs lol), which is why preventative measures and common sense should still be taught and encouraged.
I agree. However, those "prevention" measures are emphasized far more often than measures to encourage (potential) rapists to not rape, and bystanders not to belittle/blame victims of sexual assaults. Or for people to respect others' bodies.
42 wrote...
If it is to expand so much to encompass all genders it would be out of sense to call it "FEMinism" as its not about the female only anymore.
PS: If you're talking about Crenshaw's work, I find it completely misguided. It's pretty much like Pierre Bordieu theory of "symbolic violence" (which was very stupid) changed to accommodate feminist ideals. That's why the theory is so easily changed to accommodate Marxism as well.
I agree: feminism as a term should be changed, but as of yet, no one seems to have breached that hurdle. Even degree programs are only beginning to call gender studies "gender studies" instead of "women's studies". Language is a problem.
Sorry, I can't say I recall the two figures to whose work you are referring, though.
LustfulAngel wrote...
The issue stems from the flaw of trying to bring 'justice' to the victim through monetary compensation in the first place! It literally devalues the crime that was perpetuated on the female victim. In my mind, you cannot place a dollar sign on a rape victim, nor should you. The only fitting punishment for a rapist is a long sentence term, and I mean at the least 25 years-to-life.
I think we kind of step over the boundaries when we attempt to regulate sex. As your example of "Drugged/drunken/sleeping/otherwise impaired individual" occurs. Let's take for example, a honeymoon. A couple will typically go to a fine wine resturant, order cocktail and after a few hundred kisses, eat to their hearts content.
After which, they probably are a bit intoxicated as they go to either A: a neutral romantic site or B:The home, where they then proceed to make love.
Is it against the law? Both parties are intoxicated. Similarly, a couple may be sleeping and one day the male(heck, in some cases even the female), wakes up and proceeds to sexually advance on his/her partner. Hell, to me, it's hot and I wouldn't mind my significant other doing it to me one day.
I know that, you're trying to highlight situations where the female obviously wasn't able to give consent, but what I'm trying to point out is:There's no blanket that covers all situations, we can only uphold a sense of morality to govern human laws and nature.
When we victimize situations however, sometimes we tend to lose that morality in a sense of vigilant justice.
First point: sexual assault victims/survivors don't make money very often on a case; in fact, most lose some paying the various fees and personal expenses needed to attend a trial. It is suits of sexual harassment where one might. I agree: monetary compensation isn't exactly a great route when a crime is perpetrated against someone, but in some cases it makes sense. But determining which cases is a tricky matter. Even so, most who have had sexual crimes committed against them simply want the perpetrator put behind bars for their crimes to spare others (and themselves!) further harm, not much more.
Second, yes. People can be intoxicated and have sex and be happy with it. It does happen. But it is not wise. However, just because someone is in a relationship with another person and their partner wants sex (and they don't or cannot consent) doesn't mean the partner is entitled (through said relationship) to more sex.
Just because you think it is "hot" does not mean people the world over do.
And it's not just females I'm talking about here: it's anyone.
Graduated college.
Had 12 moles surgically removed.
Had wisdom teeth out.
Applied for jobs, gotten a second round Skyped interview for one. Yet to hear back.
Tried to come up with a plan for the next phase of my life.
And now, trying to talk sense to people and ending up feeling like the only way the message will get across is this:
Had 12 moles surgically removed.
Had wisdom teeth out.
Applied for jobs, gotten a second round Skyped interview for one. Yet to hear back.
Tried to come up with a plan for the next phase of my life.
And now, trying to talk sense to people and ending up feeling like the only way the message will get across is this:
Mr.Shaggnificent wrote...
gizgal wrote...
Mr.Shaggnificent wrote...
https://www.fakku.net/manga/the-secret-base-behind-the-company-condos-on-third-street-sequel-englishshouldn't have the vanilla tag(implies sexual contact i think). could have random.
Vanilla can apply to ecchi, but it's missing that tag too. That should fix things :)
I think vanilla works, as there's no non-sexual gore or anything.
The uploader wants to leave it without the ecchi tag... I can't change it in that case. Sorry. There's a lot of room for variation in current tagging rules...
i thought i remembered* the vanilla tag discription mentioning something like it applied to straight boring one on one sex. i agree with no ecchi tag too. there was nothing sexual that i saw.
i really should fact check before i post.
I get what they mean, too, but we have an ecchi tag and a hentai tag. The random tag doesn't really apply, does it? But it would be all we have to mark a non-ecchi, non-hentai manga. @_@
cruz737 wrote...
gizgal wrote...
Teach both genders self defense,
Sadly, they're not focused on but rather afterthoughts to a crime scene. Everyone has 20/20 hindsight. Why not improve FORESIGHT instead?
This is actually taught in "how to avoid" orientations.
They also put emphasis on community efforts to make it easier to stop it.
gizgal wrote...
not what "not to do/wear/drink".I can understand the wear one.
But I think teaching people stay and travel in large groups, especially when out at night is a good prevention measure. And asking someone not to drink isn't illogical(I think it's about 45%-50% where both the victim and perpetrator are drunk/drinking, male usually always held responsible), although it's better to ask them to be responsible, and to keep a constant eye on your drink.
I agree. But the problem is, such teachings are taught mostly to females only, from what I hear/see/read of others' experiences. My own schools taught rather well, but I cannot speak for all.
Most males I know have not been made to learn that sex with a drugged/drunken/sleeping/otherwise impaired individual is not merely "faux pas", but against the law. Some, further still, do not beleive that coercion into sex is also a form of this.
Male students (and older men, to boot, as well as a shocking amount of women) are not discouraged from perpetuating stereotypes among themselves that rape is merely a "cry wolf" claim from those who "just regretted sex the morning after" or "are out to make money". Trust me, ask any victim of sex crime: if it was really about that, do you think they would go through the emotional, public upset of a trial?
