• Influencers
• Performance improvement plans
• The gig economy (specifically, the contractor loophole)
• Gentrification
• Public smoking of weed (this one is petty - the shit should be legal, the smell just bothers me)
• Customer service people having to recite a script
• New features that are on by default
• Conservatives
• Memes
• Conservative memes
• Religion

I’ll keep a running tab and post more over time.

There needs to be a vigilante for people who are just inconsiderate/bad citizens. Or, more accurately, multiple vigilantes.

Like instead of going after villains, these Civil Batmans would be responsible for an area and respond to people who break small - but nevertheless important - rules. Stuff like:

• Parking in a spot they aren't supposed to, like a handicapped spot or a "no standing" zone
• Excessive noise at any hour like playing a video out loud on the train or burble tuned cars backfiring
• Sharing mis/disinformation online, intentional or not
• Disruptive behavior in stores/planes/restaurants, like cursing out a cashier or not wearing a mask despite having been asked to

There are probably tons you could file under "roads" or something (not respecting pedestrians trying to walk AND pedestrians crossing when they shouldn't). And a whole bunch more about disruptive behavior (breaking into song at Applebee's to show everyone you should be on American Idol). I recognize this is all petty stuff but yeah - I'm petty. Big deal.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/24/politics/lisa-murkowski-done-with-trump/index.html

Talk about a game changer! This is a truly momentous piece of news and historians will look back at her choice as the first domino to fall in some kind of revolution.

(IN CASE IT ISN'T CLEAR THAT'S SARCASM WHO THE FUCK CARES)

I'll be the first to admit that it was pretty hot when Will Smith slapped the shit out of Chris Rock but otherwise the Oscars are just boring nonsense.

Like the SOTU address, the Oscars are pageantry - designed by the people who receive the awards to make themselves feel good about what they do for a living.

And just to be clear: I get that awards given to marginalized creators are important for various reasons beyond just the representation element. But those awards are very rarely given when there isn't an uproar about all the straight, able white folks winning.

An exception to that, of course, is the insulting inspiration film. CODA wasn't a particularly special film on its own merits. But those same straight, able white folks absolutely love to see someone they pity fit into whatever they consider, "normal."

Black person succeeding during Jim Crow era, albeit doing so on racist terms? Queer person breaking down barriers in a phobic society, albeit doing so on prejudiced terms? Best picture.

Disabled person walking/hearing/seeing/etc. for the first time? Queue up the tears. (Yes, I know CODA wasn't about this.)

For all the complaining against Land Back - especially as it relates to Native Americans - we're probably not far away from an award for some movie about an indigenous person in some rural area winning over the locals and having a tiny portion of their tribe's land returned.

Something that has always perplexed me is when people are like, "Did you watch President Whomever's State of the Union address?" Usually, they'll proceed to list off things they liked about what the President said, as well. To me, they seem happy - fulfilled even - by whatever was covered in the address. A recent trend, post-Trump, is to say things like, "So and so wasn't afraid to name this thing," about some topic. (Side note: Since white progressives are fond of using that "naming the thing" terminology I have to guess it was co-opted from Black people.)

As far back as I can recall, the SOTU address has just been pageantry where whichever President can bloviate about things they'll never actually do. Sure, sometimes they do follow through, but:

1. That's coincidental to something having come up in the address.
2. The thing is an extremely diluted version of the original so it can pass through our nonsense Congress.

That second point is the reason I don't get why anyone bothers. Maybe I'm just a jaded pessimist but telling me you care about the issues I care about isn't enough. Making a big speech so that you can set the stage for an election campaign or to raise money off strong words just doesn't do it for me. Performance isn't action and, to me, the SOTU is a huge act. Because without majority control, there can't be any true follow up. Plus, like we saw with the ACA and other important issues during the last Democrat majority, you still get watered-down legislation.

The other thing that boggles my mind is the opposing party's "reaction" to a State of the Union speech. First of all it isn't a reaction - just like how the address itself panders to the President's base, the reaction is a fan service recap of things the other party is on about. And, more often than not, it's just a way for the party to highlight some heat-of-the-moment jerk they're putting way too much faith in for something they think is lacking. Diversity, usually.

Again, perhaps I'm just burned out on the whole thing. Maybe for most people, hearing those cloying words in that setting is emotional and intellectual nourishment. I don't get it. That may be on me.

What is this, Facebook?

I added a new menu option in the admin panel to react to posts. The site displays them under each post. I did not write a notification system, though.

If we get some new members (or some of the older ones come back) it will be interesting to see how that plays out.

I know where that cunt lives.

I'm 30 minutes from her. I have an AR-15.

Let her try to send her stochastic terrorists after me.

Sunday person: I appreciate the respect and all, and your observation about the Supreme Court is great, but check wishing death upon that awful lady. I'm not sticking up for her, but all it takes is one post and her army of troglodytes will sleuth out who you are in real life faster than you can type GrOoMeR.

Also, while I loved the Brandon Lee movie from the start - and still do - I agree with ToS: Getting a new crowd of people into the story is a good thing.

The Crow gatekeepers can kiss the fattest part of my ass. Here's a little post I wrote responding to the hate:

Oh man, I remember these feelings... back in 93. Being a fan of the comics I was stoked to hear about a Crow movie. Then slightly less stoked when I saw Brandon Lee in costume because he didn't look EXACTLY like the comic (my ideal Crow movie would be Goth/Punk Rock flavored early 80's period piece). Then I was BITTERLY disappointed by the anemic and compromised adaptation we got. I would grow to enjoy the movie on it's own merits, but it will never be the Crow movie I want. I actually like this version's esthetic, it feels like the original comic filtered through this generation's view of what's cool. Just like Brandon Lee's version was the comic book filtered through grunge look. My point? Every piece of Crow media is someone's first and favorite version of The Crow. Let's not poop on it for them. The story itself is timeless, like Shakespeare, it should be told in a modern setting to keep it relevant. So that new people can be exposed to it.