That one goes hard.

https://youtu.be/jgad4u6m9MI

Relevant.

Shame Shaffer the Darklord ended up being a New Yorker in the media.

It took me way longer than I’d like to admit to get that one.

No, you may not. Next question.

If you’re worried that you’re too square, the only way to change things with pretentious art is to tape a banana to your chest.

The count is already nobility, and he’s good with numbers.

Gotta be masterofballs.

There’s still people who defederated wolf balls today, years after it closed, out of fear he might one day return.

I mean… you know who they are.

Isn’t it obvious?

I’m never gonna give you up Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around and desert you

There is, it’s called pregnancy. It’s not as fun as the first one (Basically a completely different thing), but really I think they really covered everything they could with sex and it was time to explore other ideas.

The third one fills out the trilogy, it’s called kids. Actually better than pregnancy, but it’s Rated G and a lot more wholesome, you almost forget about the first of the trilogy.

They only get offended because they’re leftists and they heard you’re supposed to pretend to be offended when that happens so you can look all smart.

For the rest of us retards we’re like “lol ur right send me cat pictures”

It doesn’t feel like it, but you can have that life you think is unattainable. You can find a wife, you can get a home, you can have a child, and there’s a good chance you’ll like it. You have to pick your hard, maybe you don’t get to live in the capitol city and go to the club every night, but try to be consistently virtuous and you can succeed even in a world that feels stacked against you. Remember that you only exist because thousands of generations of your ancestors made it through harder times than this.

You don’t shit where you eat.

Yeah, and it’s not because it’s diversity but because it’s more about the message than about the art – you remember ever watching one of those horrible Christian movies? Very few were even watchable because they were so busy literally sermonizing. That’s fine, but it makes for crappy movies.

And on the other side of that, there’s lots of works out there that integrate Christianity as a theme that are first and foremost about making something good, and often they’re awesome.

It’s been busy but going well. Glad springtime is finally here.

The nature of power is such that it isn’t self-sustaining. Many people see something that has been powerful for a long time and particularly neo-marxists think power is the lens through which everything is viewed, but such a lens ignores where power comes from.

When I say “neo-marxist”, I’m referring to the ideology that all there is must be power and we must view everything through that lens. Marxism split the world into the working class and the owners, neo-marxism split the world instead into the powerful and the powerless. Neither viewpoint is accurate enough to be a useful model of reality, even if both do touch on truth. By basing your actions on these models then, you’re going to be acting wrong because your models predict things incorrectly.

You can get power through raw force, but it never lasts. Examples exist all throughout history. The first imperial dynasty of china was extremely legalistic, the punishment for most crimes was death. The dynasty ended when one of the generals was late for a meeting, and when faced with death anyway chose to take his men and rebel. The Assyrians used brutal repression to become a powerful player in their region, but as a result every other player in the region banded together to take them out because they were too dangerous to be left. The same for the National Socialist Germans – they used a lot of force, and as a direct result everyone else ganged up on them and tore them to pieces.

Lasting power comes from mutual service. Even dictators who last end up having to live by this playbook. Dictators who last end up building coalitions of people within the nation because to do otherwise will just mean the next person will use slightly more force and become the next one. China as an example was a dictatorship, but the people tolerate it because many people felt the dictatorship was working in the interest of the people (more or less), and did supervise the greatest increase in the middle class in china ever.

All of this applies to the movie industry because people think the movie industry has power solely because it has power, when in reality it had power because it was producing films and TV shows people wanted to see and were willing to pay for. As the neo-marxists have come in and changed the industry into the left-wing equivalent of making those hokey Christian movies nobody likes it has lost much of its power because a screen nobody is watching is meaningless and powerless. Meanwhile, Japan as an example has lots of great media coming out of it because they’re making stuff people like first and foremost and then if they have other goals they come with that (and they’re great capitalists, using media to sell all kinds of stuff)

People think the problem is diversity, but the real problem is that diversity has become the centerpiece of the western media landscape, when it’s a boring centerpiece. Just being a different race or sex or sexuality isn’t interesting by itself, and all these new priorities come at the price of making unwatchable tripe.

To give further examples, there was a lot more popular media from black people in the 1990s, and A-list actors like Wil Smith came from those backgrounds. It worked because those black people were telling stories that involved them and were about them, helping audiences learn a bit more about the world around them while being entertained. By contrast, today we have black snow white, black little mermaid, and girlboss Aladdin. It’s a meaningless display of token diversity that is disrespectful to the source material as well as to the talent who could be doing something more relevant.

Why would I leave it open to response? You’ve responded to 3 messages saying “enforce monogamy does not mean arranged marriages or anything of the sort” with “so what you’re saying is you agree with arranged marriages”, which only leaves 2 options – troll or idiot. And again, being a redditor who thinks every opinion that isn’t his is a troll, you’re probably being sincere and also really stupid because that’s what redditors do.

The west can’t make movies anymore, but it just goes to show the destruction of western infrastructure. Increasingly, people are looking to asia (japan, korea, and india in particular) and I’m sure they’re going to keep growing until the west remembers that it’s the viewers that allow the film industry to exist.

No, you didn’t understand it at all. You’re either a troll, or you’re apocalyptically stupid. Since you’re a redditor, I’m guessing the latter.

“I came to a new server and people there had opinions I didn’t understand. lol cool story bro they just be trollin”

No, you’re just indoctrinated by bullshit and it’s making you say insane and stupid things.

If you think that monogamy means you get to rape your partner, then you probably shouldn’t be in any relationship under any system ever because clearly consent is something you have a fuzzy concept of. You can stay in incel town where you belong.

Monogamy is a system of relationships where you and another person agree that while you’re in a sexual relationship you won’t have sexual relationships with other people. Under such a system, if you have sexual relationships with other people while already in one relationship it’s called cheating and it’s frowned upon. You can have sexual relationships with other people, but first you need to end the relationship you’re in.

The enforcement of monogamy isn’t forcing people into being in a relationship. It’s the enforcement of monogamy as the general way of having relationships rather than something like polygamy or a sexual free for all. Under monogamy, there’s lots of men and women who aren’t in relationships for a variety of reasons, and there’s nothing at all inherent in monogamy that suggests you must be in a relationship, any more than there being anything inherent in polygamy that suggests you must be in a relationship.

Marriage in the west is a form of enforced monogamy. There is no law saying you can’t cheat on your husband or have a side boyfriend or girlfriend, and in fact a surprising number of marriages practice polyamory or other forms of sexual relationships but society expects that if you choose to marry someone then you’re going to be faithful to the other person. Under the European nuclear family model, there is no one ‘arranged’ to do anything – certainly not by the state. Young men go out and try to meet women, and a woman chooses who she wants to marry, and then they get married. The way that it is enforced is that you’ll face social disapproval if you cheat on your husband or wife. If your friends know that you are married, and they see your husband or wife kissing someone who isn’t you, they’ll come back to you and let you know, and if it gets out that you cheated on your spouse then you could lose social standing including losing friends because they don’t respect what you did.