Someone seems to have upset a couple people with the truth.

Except you did when you said that “any engagement, even non-commercial, has the effect of promoting the brand.”

That is assigning blame onto the consumer, as you blame them for the effect of their action. Her brand is being promoted regardless, because the industry that is “advertising” exists. Additionally, the effect from people consuming her media is negligible, as even if you boycott and spend that money elsewhere it is still just being funneled to some other bigoted owning class fat-cat doing the same shit because that is how the system is designed. It just means that she, specifically, won’t be getting the money, while just denying yourself something that you wanted, assuming you actually liked the franchise to begin with.

So the best thing to do is encourage people to find ways to bypass these systemic barriers without needing to sacrifice their own desires so that the system which enables these bigots loses its power to restrict our access to the things we need and desire unless we enable them.

This is why we should just wholesale abandon the concept of intellectual property, which is simply an extension of the exploitative private property system.

This just ends up with the argument of “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism”

People are gonna do what they can to stay sane and engage with the things they find enjoyable. Unfortunately, literally everything in some way shape or form contributes to the oppression of minorities, LGBT+, workers, etc… through the fact that those producing these things have to engage in an exploitative system in order to maintain any sort of business.

That’s just the society we live in. So don’t blame people for being human, blame the system for exploiting our humanity and encourage the individual to find ways to bypass it, such as pirating media.

This makes zero sense to me. It’s all just cloth. The person in a g-string & harness is, literally, less exposed. You’re conflating the context of “being exposed” and “adds to the exposure”. Those two phrases mean different things. The first is referencing how much skin is visible while the second is referring to how noticable and attention-grabbing the individual is. You would be arguing an entirely irrelevant point to what was being discussed in your own hypothetical

Clothing being “suggestive” is entirely a subjective concept. What is “suggestive” to you might just be something the other person finds comfortable. It is also the same general logic behind “look at what she is wearing, she was asking for it” and I find that really problematic.

The underwear example is also just dumb to me. It’s just cloth. It isn’t “meant to not be seen”, it’s just there to avoid regular clothes chafing sensitive areas of the body. It being seen is irrelevant and simply a coincidence of being worn under other articles of clothing. There are no inherent, underlying implications except for what you put on them through your own bias.

This just reaffirms for me that people like to add arbitrary, subjective aspects to things and then try to assert these as intrinsic facts instead of personal biases.

People really be arguing in favor of bread and circuses without understanding it is the very thing that is keeping them from engaging in political action for change.

Western neoliberal democracy isn’t the only option and, depending on perspective, was part of the problem by systemically enabling the rise of fascism.

While at the same time allowing people to be systemically murdered through lack of access to necessities because someone wasn’t able to make a profit off of them.

Or are you trying to say those deaths are justified just because the state doesn’t label it as “murder”?

Making people angry enough to get up and do something about it, angry enough to disregard the system and start breaking it. Angry enough to disobey.

Instead people are all too happy to remain obedient to the very system that oppresses them as long as they continue to be provided their bread and circuses.

Rage can be a useful tool when that anger is channeled into a cause.

We shouldn’t lose ourselves to anger, that is true, but we also shouldn’t pacify ourselves out of fear of it.

Thing is, we can do something about it — just not alone.

The rub is that it requires other people joining us and organizing to use our collective power to assert our political authority to take back ownership over the base resources which enable society to exist and devise a new system to replace the current, failed system.

Unfortunately that takes a lot of hard work and an inordinate amount of risk. People aren’t ready yet to take that plunge; there are still too much bread and circuses keeping the majority of the working class distracted and pacified.

But hey, lamp right?

That was the last time AAA publishers allowed devs to take risks. Those games, while profitable, were considered financial failures by executives.

That era taught the industry to be risk averse.

Gaming was profitable long before by decades at that point, mostly due to the quick evolution of technology propelling a lot of the innovation and novelty of new titles. Yet, due to how the economics of capitalism work, the industry reached the peak of how much they could ride those coattails before they had to begin creating their own industry growth, which was around the time of those consoles.

Publishers and Devs scrambled to find new ways to bring in more players. They eventually learned what worked and what didn’t, and the economic necessity of growth forced those companies to rely on what they knew had mass appeal instead of taking those risks like before. The wiggle room just wasn’t there anymore.

It is fun but it requires a lot of patience. If you didn’t like Metal Gear and don’t really have much patience then this game most likely isn’t for you.

It’s a very very slow burn, if the first is anything to go by. Like, there are high-action, combative moments but they are absolutely not the focus of the gameplay — majority is just planning routes, figuring the best ways to traverse the landscapes, and helping rebuild the local infrastructure for your Strand (the asynchronous multiplayer server shared with other players)

The main focus is on the messages, themes, and other literary merits of the story. Supposed to get you to think about things from new perspectives.

We stopped micro dosing over a decade ago. We on that hero dosage now, space cadets.

Yea, not anymore considering they dropped the gag at the end of S5 and they are now beginning their 27th.

Ugh, I hated the shoehorning of Butters into the group dynamics during Kenny’s absence. Rubbed a lot of fans wrong to the point the backlash forced writers to change the ending of that season and bring Kenny back.

I too wish they would have kept the joke going. Or at least occasionally make reference to it now and then.

Lol you tell on yourself too much. The people using violence in that scenario was the Jews. They rose up and used violence against the Nazis that were oppressing them.

We all know what side you’d be supporting, considering your adamant stance against those who use violence. This is exactly how liberalism enables fascism. Enjoy sitting on your fence while you still have it.

The state should not get a monopoly on violence, especially when it wants to use that violence to maintain its power of authority to oppress the working class within its imaginary boundaries.

If the state can use violence to assert its will then we of the working class can do the same to defend ourselves against it.

Remember that episode where Kenny finally dies “for good” and subsequently disappears for an entire season?