JayDee

It's easier to understand if you say "wish into one hand, shit into the other. See which fills up first"

So you know when people mimick a butterfly with their hands? Yeah, just that one-handed.

Call a tailor probably

Oh woops, flipped em. Good call. Editing

The virile black man stereotype? Not in the US. it's apart of the myth that black men are naturally very strong and thuggish. It's also usually paired with the concept of them being extremely sexual (think of the giant black penis stereotype and the constant fear mongering surrounding black men 'stealing' all the white women). These are extremely old stereotypes that harken back to when black slaves were viewed in a fashion closer to beasts of burden than to human beings.

EDIT: woops, saw my typo, should be fixed now.

It's because they are in a performing role. They are token individuals destroying their bodies to create entertainment for the audience. It's no different than how the south treats rodeo as some kind of beacon of equality for black individuals. It's purely a facade to point at when denying the existence of inequality and dismissing civil rights arguments.

It's also directly tied to the myth of the primal black man - all brawn and no brain. A racist sex symbol.

EDIT: typos

EDIT 2: flipped brain and brawn, didn't notice. Fixed.

I know a certain firearms guy who's pointed out gun culture's hypocrisy for quite a while (most recent video regarding it).

Leather daddies (Tom of Finland style) are cool. So there's some things about man-on-man sex that can be cool.

Never forget Blair Mountain.

He's currently trying to get a 51st state (Canada would need to be at least 6 or more, in all honesty), but it looks like he's at risk of losing some states from where I'm sitting.

I agree with you. You hate them, that's reasonable. They represent humanity's failure at cooperation.

You're also totally justified to hate those who fetishize them.

You are wrong about them being designed only to kill, though. The point of them is to wield deadly force, and they are designed to send a high-speed projectile in order to achieve that goal, of deadly force. It's alittle semantic, but an important distinction imo, because the point of wielding deadly force is to make opponents compliant even if you never use it.

Swords, spears, bows, atlatls, and pretty much every weapon of war was the exact same way. A key difference between them and the firearm, though, is that the firearm takes little to no training in comparison to the others, which take considerable amounts more.

Everything else, we're in agreement about. I think you hold a hate for violence as well, based on your stance. That is also healthy, but I hope you also see violence for the liberating force that it is, able to protect those that are targeted.

We are on the brink of having the US become a full-blown fascist state - as opposed to the fascistic nation it's always been. Should that happen, I fear the only way back is through violence, and I'd much prefer having a rifle in hand to the alternative of charging down gunfire armed with a lesser weapon, as the Egyptians had to during their revolution in 2011.

This whole thing reads not like a codebase versus, but a traditional engineering approach (don't act like you can patch this once you release it - get it done so it's stable the first time) versus the more modern "move fast and break things" approach.