There are a total of 58 results to spend 'an hour' looking at, proving that Mr. Bhogal83 has done *none* of the research on the matter. They also state that none of the examples provided show people with skin tones that befit people of European origin (who, may I remind everyone, includes people from the Mediterranean).
I submit to the jury of public opinion whose case was properly argued and who failed to address any of the points raised, as had been put in the complaint by Mr. Bhogal83 in an earlier post.
Is it so much to ask that if you start an argument, you should see it through? Has the valor of the right fallen so low that at every turn they are opposed they resort to intellectual cowardice?
Or should it not come as a surprise that those who have admitted from their own mouths that they hate justice, also hate honor?
The hilarious part is that despite his "I'll no longer be checking this thread", everyone knows he is checking the thread. Shaking, covered in sweat, and considering it better to have made it out alive than to lose more of his dignity.
She's an elf.
You're going way out of your way to justify Dulcinea incarnate not being pretty. If not her, who?
Action women have been largely and understandably desexualized, and even seductress type characters are avoided and those we have to keep around like Liliana keep getting covered up further and posed in less glamorizing scenes than they used to. You may celebrate the abortion of harmless stereotypes if you must, but when the exemplar vessel of courtly love chivalry is not allowed to be beautiful ***** has gone too far.
You know, your entire post would gain a lot more substance if you established how you're actually suffering in practice, and not just in principle. Like, what are some of the real-world harms you're going through because of a pattern of dominant women being perpetuated in some forms of media?
Go ahead and give me your best actual examples. Let us know the actual forms of your suffering that your post hints at so strongly. Because for each one you give me, I'll give you two examples of the reverse being the case.
Again this is proof of how you fail to understand what ive said and only interpret what you want and how you want. Youre too emotional and Ive had enough of arguing with you and this method you've chosen of reinterpreting what ive said and my argument.
Been using the internet since 1996, and here's one of the mainstays: Some dude who is called out for his lack of logic by goddamn near everybody in a thread, yet insists that people just aren't interpreting his words right.
There was a topless male. You were triggered. The following five thread pages were just filler.
Can anyone explain why this is not one of the worst cards in this set?
Maybe it's because I'm a Standard player, but I can't think of a single deck that would ever want this. You can't play it on turn 1 or 2. If you play it on turn 3, you forfeit that turn.
If you're a 1- or 2-color deck, you don't need fixing like this. And if you're a many-colored deck, you'd much rather have the two dual-lands you just sacrificed than a land that can only produce one color of mana at a time.
My first thought was "wow, this is horrible. In a 1- or 2-color deck, it's just an ordinary land that you can't play on turn 1 or 2. In a deck with 4 or 5 colors, you don't want to sacrifice two dual lands for a land that can only provide one color at a time."
My next thought was "hmm, so now I can play Chainwhirler, Benalish Champion and Steel Leaf Champion in the same deck ..."
The hilarious part is that despite his "I'll no longer be checking this thread", everyone knows he is checking the thread. Shaking, covered in sweat, and considering it better to have made it out alive than to lose more of his dignity.
*three cards with feminine women are dropped
MRA people on this forum: "Wahh, there aren't enough feminine women on cards."
And then you grow sad.
Oh no.
Will you also screenshot our comments?
For posterity?
Okay, that was ******* hilarious.
You know, your entire post would gain a lot more substance if you established how you're actually suffering in practice, and not just in principle. Like, what are some of the real-world harms you're going through because of a pattern of dominant women being perpetuated in some forms of media?
Go ahead and give me your best actual examples. Let us know the actual forms of your suffering that your post hints at so strongly. Because for each one you give me, I'll give you two examples of the reverse being the case.
Oh dear god.
Been using the internet since 1996, and here's one of the mainstays: Some dude who is called out for his lack of logic by goddamn near everybody in a thread, yet insists that people just aren't interpreting his words right.
There was a topless male. You were triggered. The following five thread pages were just filler.
Waaah.
Maybe it's because I'm a Standard player, but I can't think of a single deck that would ever want this. You can't play it on turn 1 or 2. If you play it on turn 3, you forfeit that turn.
If you're a 1- or 2-color deck, you don't need fixing like this. And if you're a many-colored deck, you'd much rather have the two dual-lands you just sacrificed than a land that can only produce one color of mana at a time.
What am I missing here?
Eh, no, I think I'll just play Draw from Dreams for the same amount of mana.
My next thought was "hmm, so now I can play Chainwhirler, Benalish Champion and Steel Leaf Champion in the same deck ..."
My final thought: "Nah, this is awful."