him but the thing is paid already so what gives.
I wrote some tales and a big novel. Fantasy. Sometimes instead of avoiding the tropes I highlight them. My heroes laugh about the stupid things heroes in the legends do, and compare them with less epic reality. Same with violence.
Regards.
using it. Example. Magic female armor created by magician long ago. He was male. Made for his female fiancee. Wanted her to look sexy and damned be safety. Heroine sighs but... it's magic 🤷🏻♂️. Another example: female knight pays in advance for expensive armor. Blackmith is a horny bastard. She curses➡️
@cryptcallie.bsky.social
The problem is, unforuntately, patriarchy. Again.
Male-dominated artists world, male-dominanted fanbase, many on the right/wrong years... drawing sexy less dressed women as big success factor... a tradition is born.
I proposed the OP to highlight the trope whilst➡️
even *watch* the video. They will only see the cover, get assured that the EU has nothing to do bcs Russia will collapse soon, and move on with their lives.
And vote accordingly in the next elections, when some "warmonger" party takes away social benefits to rearm.
This is dangerous, and wrong.
And how does this compare with the situation of Ukraine since war began?
There is, I admit, a strong difference between the content of the video once the first absurd statements are made, and its beginning, description, header, title and presentation. Click bait, I guess.
But many ppl will not➡️
2. "allies warn, stop or face rebellion". No. Russia has no allies, that for starters, and no friendly nation has said so.
3. "Putin issued WILD ORDER" . No. No wild order.
And the actual video? Well, Russia may enter in recession. For whom is this a shock? ➡️
and how that kind of channels present it. Let me check this concrete case you bought:
Prompt: "Urgent address by Putin". No. It is about quarterly data so by definition not urgent.
Description:
1. "Vladimir Putin risks a coup in the Kremlin (...)". No. He does not.
➡️
having an effect in two years? Increase spending by GDP? New military R&D programs? New military collaboration with Canada? Russia is no threat at all, by that account.
And there is an astronomical difference between how Reuters, for example, handles the declaration you presented, ➡️
unsustainable for them. Two countdowns, and very unclear which would end first.
Overoptimistic, complacent channels *work for the enemy*, intentionally or not. If five months ago Moscow was "collapsing", which sense does it make to elaborate European rearm programs which will start➡️
Ready to go, I have some time now, @thoreau.bsky.social .
Look. I will not discuss that the war is damaging Russia and is in a long term unsustainable. Actually it is worse: when it ends, the effects of *peace* may be even worse.
The problem is, it is also damaging Ukraine, and is also➡️
I hurt the Ottoman descendent 😂😂😂
bsky.app/profile/edua...
He *asks a question* and then does not want to clariify... why should I then frigging *care* about his question?
But I got it spot-on and he does not want to loose face admitting it, I'd wager. It was Greece.
I read to fast, yes, now answer the question, dude.
Which one? Be concrete so that I can search you bibliography.
Wait... let me make a wild guess... Greece?
Has NOTHING to do with your bloated national myth, dear descendent of Ottomans, nor with a culture whose language modern Greeks don't understand better than modern English would understand Æthelred II
🤦🏻♂️
🤦🏻♂️ Very Greek answer.
Ok, again: Your historiography is clearly not my historiography. The historical science I have learned does ask difficult questions. You should probably learn more serious historiography.
Now you get it?
Your history is clearly not my history.
Ok, @grundlefly.bsky.social , then here some simple answers you can give to that awkardly ignorant "history":
- Nobody attacks a nuclear country.
- Nobody important won anything from it.
- It was far away and their enemies very near.
"History" should know and understand every one of these reasons.
More reasonable female armor. Rule of thumb: no tits. They create weak points in a place you REALLY do not want them. And polster that chest, give it space.
don't exaggerate, the armor must be still better than no armor at all or a far cheaper one. Counterexamples here: this armor is so bad that you are better off with a polstered burlap sack.➡️
@nrcgray.bsky.social : maybe you can integrate this in a story. Knight pays for expensive armor, sexist horny blacksmith makes what you want, she gets mad a him but already paid for the armor so has no choice but to wear it. Instead of falling into the trope, you use it for a feminist comment. But➡️
armor and show dubious priorities.
I show you good ones of both.
I am afraid so. Real armor has polster between the upper layer which gets the blow til skin, to enable it to loose energy. This flattens surfaces.
BTW even without polster a costume will flatten surfaces unless you explicitly design it not to - which is dangerous. Most superhero costumes are bad➡️
Es lo lógico, la esperanza de vida aumenta y la natalidad disminuye.
No veo ninguna mecesidad de tener vergüenza de nada.
I won't repeat myself, mate. Tomorrow I am in Chisinau, I have things to prepare. Have a nice day.
Years. I have heard and seem channels like these for years. Two weeks after I helped in the evacuation of the Kyiv Spanish embassy while the battle of Antonov Airport raged, they were already there spreading complacent nonsense.
As I said: choose better channels.
Slava Ukrainyi.
