Weeb Wars / AnimeGate / #KickVic / #IStandWithVic / #vickicksback - General Discussion Thread

Pedro Sanchez said:
View attachment 707341

I'm guessing she noticed.
Click to expand...
If she's actually reading this thread.
Woman comes from the old English Wifman, the singular for a female human, whereas the old english for a singular male human was wereman. Thus the word "werewolf" is a portmanteau of "wereman" a human male, and "wolf" the animal. "Man" in this context means "human" not "male", and so even if coincidentally, replacing that part with "wolf" is a way of subtly saying that a werewolf is a man who has lost what connects him to all other humans. You can see this in older english texts as well. If someone says "for the good of man" the meaning is often closer to "For the good of mankind, for humanity" and less "For the good of males". Regardless of what many modern feminists may scream into the void, it's a product of the evolution of speech, not a conspiracy by men to oppress females.
Over time language evolved and the singular for human and human male merged into one. Due to rhetoric and the implicit and assumed toxic association with the word "man" to male, the "human" meaning of man has as of late been ignored and "man" came to mean exclusively male. That doesn't remove the context of the language, however, in that the "man" part in woman is the human part, not a male part. What you've done by censoring that section of the word is dehumanize yourself. Fitting, actually, in that your attempt subjugate yourself to a political class and signal your virtue you have lost a part of what has made you human, in the way that a werewolf has lost what made him human.
 
Last edited:
  • DRINK!
  • Informative
  • Winner
Reactions: King Mob, Rossacciu, ConSluttant and 22 others
5t3n0g0ph3r said:
I apologize if I'm too blind to see if its already there, but could you add a link to the first thread if there is not a link already (for archiving sake). Looking out for you, @SinglePlayerCarl.
Click to expand...

Added it to the top of the doc, @5t3n0g0ph3r

707384
 
Last edited:
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: damian
BigNinjaDaddy said:
I remember the last time I went to a con the autographs were still free and even getting a picture with the VA was free. I only ever had to pay for one autograph but that came with stuff that made it worth it for the small price he was charging.
Click to expand...

Same.

Or if it was somebody really popular, and there were a lot of people, they'd do a raffle for autographs at that person's panel.

If you told me 15-20 years ago that any of these people would be able to get away with charging $30 for an autograph, I would have laughed at you.
 
  • Feels
  • Agree
  • DRINK!
Reactions: beardium, Exterminatus, Burnout and 5 others
BigNinjaDaddy said:
I remember the last time I went to a con the autographs were still free and even getting a picture with the VA was free. I only ever had to pay for one autograph but that came with stuff that made it worth it for the small price he was charging.
Click to expand...
Depends on the guest and con (and to come extent when the con happened). I remember a few years back Nolan freaking North was giving free autographs and free photos. Nowadays at this same con most guests still have free autographs but charge for additionals, or for pictures.
 
The people are revolting.
Archived link of the Top tab
Archived link of the Latest tab

707396


707401


707402


707404


707406


707408



707409


707410


707412


707414


707416

?? :story: ??

Edit: Honestly, it's optimistic to say they're revolting, but goddamn, it feels good to see there are still people who are willing to resist the lies and spread the truth.
 
Last edited:
  • Optimistic
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: You Just Ever Yandere, Rossacciu, I got rabies and 11 others
OneHandClapping said:
Depends on the guest and con (and to come extent when the con happened). I remember a few years back Nolan freaking North was giving free autographs and free photos. Nowadays at this same con most guests still have free autographs but charge for additionals, or for pictures.
Click to expand...
I've had worse where the rules were you were only allowed to get one autograph per guest. Literally everyone thought it was a bullshit rule including the guests but we all had to abide, though some did let slip a few quick seconds here and there.

I totally get not wanting to hold up lines but that years was especially ridiculous. Luckily it seems they lifted that rule, although they seemed to have replaced it with not allowing any photos to be taken of the guests. Was at a con last year and wanted to get a photo of Josh Grelle (before he went retarded) with a specific item just for something funny but he revealed that the con staff forbade him and the others from doing photos.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Army Burger and SinglePlayerCarl
Bullshit Fucked said:
I've had worse where the rules were you were only allowed to get one autograph per guest. Literally everyone thought it was a bullshit rule including the guests but we all had to abide, though some did let slip a few quick seconds here and there.

I totally get not wanting to hold up lines but that years was especially ridiculous. Luckily it seems they lifted that rule, although they seemed to have replaced it with not allowing any photos to be taken of the guests. Was at a con last year and wanted to get a photo of Josh Grelle (before he went exceptional) with a specific item just for something funny but he revealed that the con staff forbade him and the others from doing photos.
Click to expand...

what was the item?
 
Captain Manning said:
Same.

Or if it was somebody really popular, and there were a lot of people, they'd do a raffle for autographs at that person's panel.

If you told me 15-20 years ago that any of these people would be able to get away with charging $30 for an autograph, I would have laughed at you.
Click to expand...

I never had to deal with a raffle for autographs. The con I went to was a smaller con but it was the only con in the whole state. In fact it still is the only con in the state. Nowadays I would consider the con a medium sized con though.

Yeah I wouldn't have believed $30 a pop myself back then either.

OneHandClapping said:
Depends on the guest and con (and to come extent when the con happened). I remember a few years back Nolan freaking North was giving free autographs and free photos. Nowadays at this same con most guests still have free autographs but charge for additionals, or for pictures.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's why I think some of the bigger cons have a rule in the contracts that you must charge for autographs/pictures or something like that. Otherwise it's weird to give them free at one con and then charge for them at another.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Burnout
Captain Manning said:
Oh boy. :story:

View attachment 707420
Click to expand...

I still can't get past the mental gymnastics for trying to downplay CP as a lesser crime than Vic having personal space issues at worst.

Since this thread is moving at lightning speed and it's hard to keep up, has anyone of her buddies called her out or are they circling their wagons?
 
  • Agree
  • DRINK!
Reactions: Francis York Morgan, beardium, Exterminatus and 2 others
  • Agree
Reactions: Dynamite Ninja, ChevroletBlackboard, Jaimas and 2 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back