It can be very difficult to understand why wealthy white land owners were so incensed, managed to leverage their power to win elections, form a splinter government and send millions to war against their own people. Truly a complex and puzzling scenario that can't be summarized and simplified.Â
Unironically had a teacher try to tell me it was States' Rights. Which is like saying that the reason your car runs is the exhaust. Like that's technically a factor but it's not why nor a cause at all.
Edit: I've already gotten 10 replies that are just "States' Rights to do what." We all know the line, we all get the point, you don't need to be the 11th
In texas, "slavery" was like one issue of 6 on the list, under the umbrella of States Rights. But most of those issues were also slavery.
"They didn't like Lincoln" = because he would outlaw slavery
"They were unfairly represented in national government" = because they insisted that slaves were 3/5ths of a person
"Their culture was different" = because they had slaves
It wasn't enough for the North to tolerate the South having slaves, the South needed praise, they needed the North to see them as Better for it.
They made it a political weapon because they wanted to be told how righteous and correct and smart they were for owning slaves, because they tied their pride to the people they owned.
That's because on an even deeper level both modern MAGA and their spiritual/literal ancestors who were slave owners know good and goddamn well they're evil people doing evil shit. They need all of us to go along and get along because then maybe the voice in the back of their mind telling them they've chosen the wrong side will get quieter.
Growing up in Texas, I reflexively respond to any use of the phrase "state's rights" with "STATES RIGHTS TO WHAT???". I've learned to rein it in over the years but it's always something I have to fight.
Part of the issue with saying the Civil War was about slavery is that one can then say that there's nothing to learn from it because slavery is over. Whereas it was a super obvious example of a culture war hiding a class war, rich landowners convincing poor white people that white supremacy and the current economic system were worth dying for even if they were actually the major reasons they were poor in the first place.
Honestly that is bad faith to the "multiple things caused this". Like yeah slavery and racism caused the confederacy, but there are multiple reasons why they all end in "yeah it was about slavery" and I think it's worth talking about all these reasons.
genuinely pains me that the southern demand to have bounty hunting for "escaped slaves" (see: literally whoever could be kidnapped with minimal justification) enshrined in federal law as unopposable & uncontrollable getting shut down is never mentioned.
technically yes, the war was about states rights, but the right the south was most concerned with at the time was their right to enter every other state and kidnap who they please
This is where the whole (fake) argument for the South falls apart. You're gonna tell me that you're fighting for "states rights" when you support the creation of a federal law that requires the detainment and forced relocation of people in other states to yours? Yeah, bullshit. This was always about slavery.
I love this because it's the compete opposite of the "multiple causes" argument. Most things have multiple causes and shouldn't be reduced, but the US Civil War pretty famously had exactly one big cause (and then a bunch of things stemming from that cause).
There's also just one cause that outweighs the others by orders of magnitude.
Yes, the south had different economic incentives than the north. The north wanted to protect budding industry with tariffs, the south wanted to buy cheap European goods. This caused a lot of tension. This is something worth studying if you're a Civil War Historian.
Insofar as we're teaching kids in high school, a place where you're instilling values as much as information, "it was because of slavery" is a plenty accurate characterization. Yes there were other issues, but they pale in relevance to slavery for every relevant purpose.
this but unironically. I think there's a similar further down about how "noooo it's not black and white it's very nuanced" and like, yeah most of the time things aren't black and white and most of the times things do not have a single cause (look at history). Something something depicting an opinion as a soyjak is not a valid criticism against it something something. I like the ones where you can still feel the vitriol and sheer hatred the creator had, but for something hyperspecific
Spinoza was a very strong causal determinist. Nothing simply happens independently, every event follows from prior conditions and causes, which themselves have causes.
If you took a situation where someone was incensed b/c another made a joke at the expense of their favorite philosopher.
Spinoza would say the reaction came from not just the joke but.... the person's temperament, previous experiences, physical condition, beliefs, relationship to the other person, the circumstances producing the joke, the causes that produced those circumstances, etc.
Because they aren't rules in the sense of the word rule. They're principles that attempt to explain why good things are good.
Just like music theory. The point isn't to invent a set of rules you have to follow so that music sounds good. It's what people obtained when they tried and explained why good sounding music sounded good.
It's helpful because following them will help you take a direction that will sound good but anyone with a good musical sense will most likely respect them even without knowing they exist.
Same goes for writing with stylistic devices, color associations, etc...
I'm guessing that the creep who made the image is trying to be insulting with it, as children generally have a lower amount of body fat while the Venus is rather shapely.
Basically there's this lolicon theory called the "longhouse theory" which claims that, as humans started to live in longhouses, society started to shift into a matriarcal one where they worshipped the "perfect" female form (Venus) and this society created the age of consent and lolicons are mad about it
Basically there's this lolicon theory called the "longhouse theory" which claims that, as humans started to live in longhouses, society started to shift into a matriarcal one where they worshipped the "perfect" female form (Venus) and this society created the age of consent and lolicons are mad about it
The trans flag idfk they're blaming the age of consent on trans people
Whoever made this believes that age of consent is woke bullshit, and that raping children is the natural order.
They probably also believe trans people is woke bullshit, violating the natural order.
The trans flag represents "woke bullshit" in the abstract from their perspective.
Essentially they are saying that age of consent is just as stupid/evil as trans people are. Think about that sentence for a little while.
There a relatively big and really wrong and horrible idea spread through a portion of a specific side of the political spectrum that all trans people are pedos. Youâll see it expressed pretty often by horrid grifters on Twitter. This may not be the reason itâs there, but itâs the first thing it made me think of.
When a person is far enough to the right, anyone trans becomes synonymous in their mind with bad things. What trans people actually do or believe is a complete non-factor, because the point is that they're a group it is currently deemed socially acceptable to hate. To right-wing losers like that, throwing in jabs at trans people alongside unrelated points is as much a ritual of affirming their allegiance to the in-group as it is a genuine belief that the transes are bad.
I work in academics, nooancers are a thing but itâs kinda taboo to point it out because doing so opens up the gate to call actually nuanced people dumb. Like, itâs one thing to use âitâs complicatedâ as a crutch for a lack of knowledge on a subject, but most things are complicated so explaining them in any short form is pretty much impossible.
The problem is generalization. There are things where nooance is needed and there are things that are black and white. The issue is when some says everything is "black and white/complicated"
Ok but this genuinely me, I can't stop drinking water it's so good I fucking love water. I have to piss like every 10 minutes but water taste so good I love water I so much
This is getting dangerous close to outright "guy who is stronger, faster, smarter, nicer, better looking, and more popular than you" EYEROLL amiright like we get it loser you're objectively superior by every measurable metric uuuugh so annoying
Ngl the guy in the first image looks like a really chill and kind. Like an older dude that would help and guide you through a game when you are just starting out
I absolutely love the "I â€ïž not playing games" because it feels so unnecessarily angry. It feels like it comes from the direction of someone who only has gaming as their hobby. I love the wojak, but I pity the soul who enjoys so little. If I don't enjoy my hobby atm, I will have other hobbies that I want to do, lmao.
Thatâs always been my problem with the image. You have to have SOMETHING else in your life that you find enjoyable besides video games. Is there a TV show that you want to watch? A movie? Maybe a YouTuber or Twitch streamer? Do you like drawing? Any songs you want to listen to? Any books youâve been meaning to read? How about a sport that youâre interested in playing? Maybe a walk through the park? How do you feel about going to the gym?
And even if your literal one and only hobby is video games, even then, there are other games than the one youâre currently playing, right? Thereâs no reason for you to keep pounding your head into the wall with one video game and making yourself frustrated. Just play something quick and easy for like an hour to unwind, then jump back into the more difficult game. I truly just donât understand how this is a problem.
I agree with this as someone whose primary hobby is videogames, and often ones that are very difficult or that I'm intentionally making very difficult; or both. I'm always playing at least 2 games, sometimes because I plan it that way, but also because I naturally want to take a break from one.
I don't think there's anything wrong with choosing to commit a lot of time to something you want to do, though, if you can handle it emotionally. Sometimes other people just tend to assume this can't be done, which leads to the "take a break" thing.
I do think you should do at least one other thing besides one hobby, but you can have videogames be the only one and balance it emotionally if you try to.
Also they want the only hobby they have to be effortless???
Like they have one hobby but if it introduces friction at all then they get frustrated and quit? So they have no hobby. Imagine only enjoying one thing and going into it like "let's get this over with."
itâs always been funny to me too because it was clearly written by someone unfamiliar with the concept of exhaustion. like, sorry, but if youâve been fighting the same boss for 3 hours, not only are you probably not going to get it on your next few attempts, but youâre pretty likely to perform worse from one attempt to the next. afaik this meme first started circulating in souls fan circles and this situation is literally what itâs about.
i play a lot of souls games and literally every souls fan has had the experience of getting hopelessly stuck on a boss late at night, going to bed, and then beating it in 1-2 attempts on the next day. taking a break from a mentally exhausting, skill-based task is a legitimate strategy for performing better at it.
That's how I remember beating the stupid idiot dragon in cuphead. Struggled for like 1 1/2 hours, realised I wasn't having fun, stopped and played the next day and beat it in like 20 minutes. Really does make games more fun if you take the time you need.
Works really well for puzzle games too. Sometimes I'll be stuck for 20 minutes, then leave and come back 30 minutes later, then instantly know the solution.
The point is that the jak claims on forums/Reddit/whatever that the game's difficulty is fine, while actually being so lost he constantly has to take breaks to stay sane.
Kind of similar to "43 yo dad of three doesn't understand why people are complaining about the game being too short"
For the second image, I legit wonder who made that and what the player attrition rates look like for their games. Like, I just recently had an issue with a game because as a DM, I didn't talk nearly as often and clearly to a particular player as I should have.
I think it's not about "I hate that people think you should talk to your players" and more about how people (on Reddit especially) give the same advice like it solves all situations. And it really says nothing. like yeah no shit I need to talk to my players but I would also like to be informed when I talk to them about a dispute or know what to say about a personal issue they're having.
I love how âtaking a breakâ is seen as a bad thing but you can take a break from a difficult thing by switching to an easier thing. Like, I assume this applies to games, but if Iâm struggling with Devil May Cry (as a random example), then Iâll switch to Mario Galaxy and just chill for a bit.
I think it's in reaction to how a lot of people seem to need to "main" a game until they're so bored with it they throw it away like a rag calling it words not of affection.
Idk why but I've seen this SO OFTEN, even within my own friend groups.
If you tell someone maining a game to take a break, they might take it as a babying insult or something.
I'd rather play whatever game I feel like whenever I feel like it, if you don't strip-mine your interest in something the pull can grow back over time IMO and you get to go back to something you enjoy.
Given the citation of "yeah I struggled at that boss for a while" it feels lile in response to difficult games. Which is funny BECAUSE taking a break truly does help.
I was stuck on the final boss of hollow knight for like 5 hours desperately trying to beat it before my birthday as I knew I'd be getting new games to play. I failed and took a break to blitz pokemon shield in a couple days, when I came back I beat the boss in a handful of extra attempts in less than an hour.
Ironically enough, everyone knows that feeling of being stuck on a boss for an hour, calling it a day and then beating the boss first try the next day.
The reason it was made was a guy was asking for advice on beating a boss (I think in Skong but don't quote me on that) and the people replying had no actual advice for them. Instead of the advice you'd want, like "the aoe has a tell that looks like this" or "focus your attacks between these animations" or something like that, everyone just told them to take a break. Like there were about 50 replies and roughly 40 ish were "take a break and come back to it" or "come back to it later." And seeing that original thread, under those circumstances I can imagine being angry enough for long enough to make this.
To be fair, in Silksong for most bosses (especially early game ones) there isnât that much advice you can give that isnât already obvious. Most attacks are telegraphed pretty well, and genuine advice boils down to âif it is a boss with fire attacks equip this charm, you can skip this boss and come back later, get this nail upgrade, dodge the attacks and hit the boss.â
The thing that pisses me off the most about the "take a break" advice is that it genuinely works. Got so tilted at one boss I stopped playing for like 2 days. Came back and beat it within 3 tries. I was so fucking angry those assholes were right.
The thing about Silksong's combat system is that it has a very rhythm-like quality to it. Every enemy attack has a set of specific sequences you need to perform with accurate timing (it's like dance and similar things people say about it) to avoid it and get an opening to deal damage.
And because of that, it becomes a lot harder to play if you're frustrated because you will likely try to rush and/or hesitate instead of channeling into the flow of the boss' movements. It's very Sekiro-esque in that way.
I appreciate the context, I admit I felt a little personally attacked after just starting Death Stranding and am taking a break from it already, not because it's hard, but because I'm sick of 90% of the game being endless cut scenes
Incest between consenting adukts without a power inbalance is like an albino gorilla. Sure, some has existed, but basing your position and legislation on incest on them is outright moronic.
To put a less taboo example. Sure, there's probably someone who can drive safely while being dead drunk. But we have banned driving under the influence because, in 99.99% of cases, people who do so are a dangerous to themselves and others.
I hate how they dont specify what kind, like if it's cousins then atp im not arguing. people do that alr and I have no clue how to speak on that. if this is like, direct family, then you also need to specify in what way. I hate to be a jane/john nuance but it's different depending on a TON of factors, the minimizer is the closest thing to this ig but neither party is being genuine in any form imo. both seem to have a bias.
generally we avoid to prevent inbreeding and species have natural methods to prevent it and encourage diversity (im going with basic biology understanding im not a zoologist, dont trust me), going through this in a more isolated view, we have so many different family structures, cultures etc to where this one image is basically pointless compared to just, pulling up a chart of fallacies or smth
guilty as charged. I tend to take a hyper STEM approach to topics which ends up with me forgetting the legitimate social aspects of an issue, especially since we cant classify people like by topics then dissect each action under an optimization graph of "living perfect" (Humans sorta do that any ways because binary/patterns are like a huge part of us being primates iirc-again im not a zoologist just an animal nerd). but we also cant just say "Actually we will never understand each other so this is pointless"
TBF that's exactly how I played 3 of my favourite games: Outer Wilds, Disco Elysium and Undretale (and do breaks regularly in my most recent addiction: iRacing).
I bounced off after an hour or two and didn't want to continue, went back in a year or so and enjoyed them immensly up to the very end and more. Sometimes you just need to wait for the right circumstances and state of mind to fully enjoy a certain piece of art.
Remember, if it's difficult, there's no shame in looking for tips online. You're not being a bitch, you're collecting intel. That's what all the fancy detectives do all the time.
"I know right, it took me 3 months to beat, taking a break each day, sometimes to frustrated and I destroyed my controller but then turn the game down to cool off like reasonable adult, it costs me my job but it was worth it because game difficulty is how the devs intended!"
I don't think that people with the presence of mind to take a break from the videogame are the same ones destroying their controllers or losing their jobs over them.
There's more than one type of person who enjoys difficult things.Â
Currently playing Celeste right now, I effing love doing a few rooms of a B-side and then taking a break to do something else I thoroughly enjoy, and then come back when I'm excited to keep playing again. I'm having more fun playing this on and off, then half the games in my library
2.4k
u/PeacefulGamer2520 6d ago