Kal-El814

YO MY BAD

5 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

I would view "man it must be hard for Trump to walk around with Putin’s dick in his ass" as entirely about dominance (he is getting fucked by Putin without consent) and not about homosexuality.

You could split an atom with the razor you’re using to split that hair.

16 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

Final-fucking-ly. Now can something real happen?

No.

There are countless ways one could describe Putin having one over on Trump. People going to the notion that Trump is Putin’s bottom for a specific reason, not randomly, not for no reason, etc.

I’m honestly blown away by the mental gymnastics here.

25 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

"Taking it up the ass" isn't inherently negative, but that is one potential context for negative submission, like anywhere else. 

Again, you’re giving the people saying this way too much credit.

27 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

Because submission (in any context) is seen as weak by society, as someone else has power over you.

This isn’t “in any context.” The context is very specific. If people were saying, “Trump is submissive to Putin,” I’d agree that there’s a lack of context and that drawing a line from those words to dom/sub relationships is a stretch. Saying “Trump takes it in the ass from Putin” is really fucking specific. Looking into the literal meaning of those words and divorcing them from the context that was absolutely and deliberately intended is fishing for nuance that just isn’t there. And anyone who says stuff like, “man it must be hard for Trump to walk around with Putin’s dick in his ass,” but who DOESN’T intend for that to be suggest negative things about homosexuality should chose their words more carefully.

2 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

I think there's a distinction there. 

I just don’t think it’s worth making. The implication is pretty clear. 

10 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

There's nothing wrong with being an employee and someone else being a business owner...but you can still say "man he's not the boss of you!" to someone to imply that they are being submissive to someone else and are an idiot for allowing it.

Except “business owners” haven’t been historically discriminated against, being a business owner isn’t a personal trait, etc.

This is a pretty lousy apples to oranges comparison. 

12 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

And where do they think the notion of sub as negative comes from?

Yuuuup. 

Just now, Jason said:

The pejorative part is Trump being the sub to Putin's dom, the gay part is something incidental that's a given due to their both being men. 

Again, I think this is giving the people saying this stuff far too much credit. Besides, even if you’re going to take that angle... there’s nothing negative about being a sub, either.

It’s a lazy fucking “criticism” all around.

1 minute ago, Greatoneshere said:

But they don't mean it pejoratively, so how can it be pejorative? It's meant as political commentary, not anti-gay. They are indicating that Trump is Putin's puppet in the most degrading way possible. Not because the act is degrading that they are mentioning ("taking it up the ass") but because it indicates how much Trump is under Putin's thumb in a vile way. 

They absolutely mean it pejoratively.

It might not be “anti-gay” in the most literal sense, but the implication is unquestionably that Trump and Putin being gay for one another is negative. Looking for nuance in this situation is giving the people slinging the remarks MUCH more credit than they deserve. The notion that Trump is so beholden to Putin that he takes it in the ass from him is unquestionably implying that Trump is weak because he lets another man fuck him.

It doesn’t “not count” when it’s political commentary. I don’t get that at all.

I think it’s certainly possible to say, “those two are gay for one another” without it being anti-gay, but the, “Trump and Putin are totally gay for one another,” is absolutely pejorative.

Part of my issue with MI:II is that they explain the plot in detail over and over and over.

31 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

 

Ouch

Toplel 

You mean a technocratic libertarian organization is a poorly organized shitshow?

Shocking.

5 hours ago, MarSolo said:

He spelled collusion wrong. He fucking spelled collusion wrong and it's on camera.

Yo maybe he’s been saying “no colusion” this whole time. Like, “oh you’ve been investigating ‘collusion’ with Russia? Eeeeeeeeesh.”

7 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Most unpopular candidate, perhaps not "worst" in an objective sense. In fact, I found Hillary Clinton very qualified for the position, despite my disagreements with her. 

But she’s objectively not the most unpopular candidate either. She was not even the most unpopular candidate in 2016. 

Edit / typo

Clinton was an obviously flawed candidate in a few key ways, but section interference was a real thing and she won the popular vote. The retcon of her into the worst candidate ever is... weird. 

yolo

And for not that long, possibly. 

Maybe he’s meeting with the All-Russian Congress of Soviets?

Watched it last night, that was pretty fun.  I liked the camera pan to the “gameplay angle.”

47 minutes ago, SFLUFAN said:

Y'know - I haven't seen her in a couple of days...

How did her urine look upon your most recent inspection?

This was on my feed today and it seemed relevant. 

I dunno if I’ve watched more than 5 min of the original Jurassic Park since the theater? That sounds impossible (homina homina homina) but I cannot recall seeing all of it again...

8 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

I dunno if I agree. M:I plays like a great 1970's John Le Carre-lite spy thriller. On bluray I thought the film looked and sounded fine. Both show their age similarly I feel. 

Haven’t watched the first MI in a while, but I remember the ending helicopter sequence looking rough. 

Of course he did. 

47 minutes ago, Chris- said:

New York pizza and bagels and now Uncharted, what's next? What else do you insist on pissing on today, you punk ass motherfucker?

I have great affection for NYC bagels and pizza, as well as for Uncharted. But you show me someone who enjoyed any of the gameplay in any of the young Drake segments and I’ll show you a rube.

Are 4 minutes of it flashbacks to boring ass segments in Drake’s past, keeping in line with the ratio of the actual games?