Then, we will say "we have not eaten enough of you and we are still very hungry caterpillars."
jaemo
I would like to understand why, when ask these questions, which demand a sober, reflective response after some internal dialogue, we stop there, and seem to gloss over what I consider important follow ups:
- Why in the fuck do we have a thing called "Ultimate Fighting Champion" and still think men should be treated with any degree of seriousness?
- Have we considered that there is actually enough fighting already and being an ultimate champion of it is not the flex some think it is?
- Having considered the first 2, why would anyone care about/admire/wish to be seen in the vicinity of the winner of this thing, let alone any rando participant?
- Have we considered there might be a causal connection between his rapey-ness and his ultimate fighter champion-ness? Sex and violence do go to the same concerts a lot...
I can't think of a single thing that would make my wish I had my time back more than spending 30 seconds watching this fucking drivel. It's pig swill distilled into electromagnetic waves meant for things with a lot less folds in the cerebellum.
What I took away from this: social media platforms apparently feed, cause, and thrive from metal health pathologies.
We voters sure as shit don't anymore...
Yeah that's... probably not why.
(Heavy Brian Blessed voice) This is no man
MAGA. Make America Go (into the) Accretion (disc)
They will stop once we have eaten a few of them.
There is no yield, only death is the test of it....
I mean....if your fusiform gyrus is horribly miswired or you have like.... traumatic right hemisphere brain injury...you....can ignore them. It does lead to some inexplicable plot points if you don't pick up on it though.

Because the human brain is a pattern-matching, rationalization engine and not a database with any sort of logic discrimination built into the interfaces?
I dunno. Seems like the same result happens when we dream; buncha random stimulus with no bearing on realty, brain "invents" a narrative that explains the anomaly, and hermetically seals off that "truth" from evidence that would implode it.