Honestly I'm of the opinion that "fish" should only refer to bony fish anyway; sharks should be their own thing. But also yeah, let people live lmao

LaTeX way of writing "is a subset of"

Perfect, half of the sentences I say in real life are similarly indecipherable 😎 this is the #authentic #me

Honestly shocking that we didn't discover that birds \subseteq dinosaurs until recently

Girl, go read some Enlightenment philosophy, why're you askin us 😭😭😭

This is a really mean thing to say out of the blue. You've assumed malintent when there wasn't any. I just wanted to give a measured spoiler-free review.

Why did you say something? Like, what was your objective by leaving this comment alongside the downvote instead of just downvoting? I want to understand your perspective but I'm a bit wounded since I've been so misinterpreted

Ok, I understand your perspective now, and I sincerely thank you for elaborating. It's important to hear people out in full and really understand them before you cast judgement, and you gave me this opportunity to evaluate your stance.

I could not disagree with with your opinion more, and find it appalling that you would employ the condescension that you so loathe in your response.

When I say "baby's first [complicated subject]" the implicit joke is that the complicated subject is indeed not for babies. To Kill a Mockingbird is "baby's first systemic racism" but that should not be read in a pre-school. Linear algebra is "baby's first abstract math" but there's a reason it is taught at the 100-level. I find it extremely hard to believe that anyone would actually feel demeaned by "baby's first psychological horror," and if they do, I encourage them to evaluate why being a total novice to a subject gives them such intense feelings of inadequacy that they cannot find levity in their inexperience. The fact that I have to seriously acknowledge that "baby's first [difficult thing]" is in any way not lighthearted is ridiculous.

You could also ask them about how it feels to be unable to satiate their bloodlust for brown children by losing the Iran war, and then get economically fucked for it as well. Just nothing but L's on all fronts from their perspective

I don't think the lore dump was necessarily bad. But I think that stories should try to not meander.

::: spoiler TADC finale spoilers ahead The way I see Jax, you can really do only a few things in the finale as it is currently structured:

1. Mostly the same, but she de-abstracts/is on the path to doing so after spending half the runtime on emotionally saving her.

2. Have the major flashback, then abstract her, putting her in the current "nigh unsaveable state"

In the former case, Jax (alongside Caine), would have to actively earn back the group's trust, because you're right, she's been quite hurtful. But in essence, beyond the moral implications, the narrative structure itself leaves something to be desired in this regard. :::

Ok I do understand this, but if we look at the discussion as it has unfolded in this comment section, the evidence shows that people are willing to share their positive opinions on the finale (in fact, most people have more positive perceptions than I do). It doesn't seem like what I said has scared away people who hold different opinions (which I'm glad ofc).

Even if we say that this particular phrase scared away like 90% of positive commenters from commenting (which I feel like, even with the opinion you hold about it, is a gross exaggeration), the fact that the ensuing discussion has been mostly positive and non-judgemental of that positivity aside from this thread of meta-conversation would serve as reassurance for more people with positive opinions to participate. If anything, my take is the only one that's actually on trial lmao (even if it's just the wording of the take and not the actual sentiment, which I acknowledge is the main issue and I don't wanna distract from the wording part being the actual discussion piece).

I also find that interpretation of what I said to not really square with the rest of what I said. Like you mentioned, context matters, and I give the show a "7/10" and am indeed recommending that people watch it (with particular audiences in mind). So, if one interpreted my comment as "you'd only like this show if you're inexperienced and like baby things," I'm also saying that I am inexperienced and like baby things. My review would be insulting my own sensibility. And I'm not above insulting my own sensibility ofc, there's some shitty media (not TADC to be clear, mainly "two people talking about nothing" podcasts) that I love. But then I would be positioning myself within the group I am insulting, so even in this more negative reading I'm not casting judgement but being self-deprecating.

I think we may just not be able to see eye to eye on this, unfortunately. BUT, you've worn me down enough that I'll make an edit. I'm kind of like a stone in water where I'm really hard-headed but you chip away at me enough and I become smooth and then sand.

To be clear, I will continue using this turn of phrase in future media reviews, as it comes up in my everyday speech and writing.

Heated Rivalry is a raunchy show about gay hockey players, based off the romance novel series where one of the books had the same name

This was really good but...

::: spoiler tadc finale I just wish it was like plot relevant. Like revealing that she's trans and then her abstracting from her emotion, OR she reveals her true self to Pomni and is now on the path to de-abstracting. Something like that. Instead it's sort of this bait and switch of "Pomni is going in to save Jax" "Jax is vulnerable, she's gonna be saved" "...oh, she's still abstracted ig. that was a nothingburger." Basically, I'm fine with the character development but the narrative needed moving around for it to make a bit of sense contextually. :::

Tyty

Ethanimale is a youtuber who makes video essays about the show Big Brother (very good ones). He fell asleep on his keyboard

I think that if I were intelligentsia in a different period of human development I would go and try to discover something. But that's only because I'm in academia now so as long as I have the prerequisite material conditions my personal impulse for obtaining new knowledge would drive me

Ladies with this attitude gave us Heated Rivalry. And for that, I am thankful, I wanna eat those hockey player asses 🥵🥵🥵

Doing a "this you" on the internet is peak condescension. There are more constructive ways to bring up what one takes umbrage with, and by far this one is one of the most demeaning. Especially when one stands by your quote that the person is viewing negatively (and I indeed stand by it, and spoiler, I will not be changing my post).

I think the quotation marks already existing within my post make it crystal clear that "baby's first psychological horror" is entirely self-contained with its levity. The only way that someone would take personal offense at this is: A. if they view their age as a point of shame such that they read undue subtext in my post, or B. if they view their ability with the subject as a point of shame that they read undue subtext. In both of these instances, one has to take a very specific, bad faith reading of my post. In other words, I feel that this is a "bean soup" situation, which is not something I will change my post for.

I have made many versions of "baby's first [difficult thing]" jokes in my real life, in a variety of groups (and in one-on-one contexts), with a variety of ages. Not once has anyone pulled me aside for a serious conversation about this in any casual context.

In addition, I work (part-time) at a tutoring centre, where I have a "tough love" manager and am highly accountable to parent feedback (i.e. on childrens' behalfs but also somewhat their own whims); I have maybe been written up for tardiness once and never have been seriously reprimanded in relation to either my ability nor my conduct with students, from any avenue. If anything, my flaw as an instructor is my leniency (as commented in passing by my manager and other instructors). I also have never encountered issue as a university TA during office hours. I do make this joke, along with similar kinds of jokes (e.g. to a calculus learner: "this is now trigonometry, which you learned in preschool, so it should be super easy"). Notably, these audiences encompass teenagers and young adults.

If strangers on a text-based forum are saying "there are hypothetical teenagers/young adults that could be hurt by this," I have yet to encounter this once, let alone in significant numbers or enough to cause issues (until now).

Basically: why change something that causes no problems ever except to you (btw I think you're generally rather nice, we just have an issue here but other than this we're chill) and then one other person who can't help but actually and consciously deliver their feedback in a highly condescending way?

I don't have pets. Why would I have pets when I can save up for children, who actually matter?

Everyone knows that to transition into a woman you walk into a booth in Bangkok called the "cunt machine" and after a magical girl transformation sequence you walk out a hormed and surged up doll

I was gonna say "this is boomer as hell" until I saw the bottom half of the picture. With that added context, I'll say: this is gen X as hell