/hobby/ - Hobby

>>32327
Middle one probably.

>>32328
Those are sold out everywhere, unfortunately

>>32327
Definetly middle one

>>32175
Cinemascope, the objectively correct answer

>>32184
Funhouse mirror looking format

>>32175
1.85:1

>>32175
Male Gaze™

>>32175
A tie between 1.66:1 and 2:1
More movies need to be shot on Super 16

pallas cats

>>29222
>>29221
1 Манул

>>29219
Those coons hit the jackpot

>>23664
>weather proofed octa-cicle
sweet ride.

>>23664
Just get an RV at that point

>>23667
I think what he meant was that you can't drive that thing outside of paved roads (which are also destructive to the enviroment themselves)

>>23567
>Not the carbon type
join the based dept wimps

>>32000
>I often wish I could commute to school/work, or go to the supermarket on my bike, but this is a very unsafe place so it'd easily get stolen. Plus I don't have a helmet.

Get a dirt bike with good suspension. Also my bikes got stolen so I know those cable locks dont work, they just cut them.

Go to a motorcycle store and get a thick chain lock and a thick U lock and if you want hide a gps in the seat or something. They can't cut those off easily

I liked how he basically told this speech in an earlier episode

full stream of dogma, a hollywood comedy flick with a weird premise

>>32024
whoops that's fucking embarrassing lol delete this thread lol

>>31570
Maybe people overcritizing the "Noble Savage" trope is them coping with the obvious advantage of living under a classless society.

>>31930
>they come across as something entirely inhuman. They're something more akin to wood elves from a fantasy setting.

and what do you think they are an allusion to???

>>31950
NTA but myths about elves and other creatures long predate European colonialism in the age of sail. Which actually raises the point that a lot of the tropes about spirituality and connection with nature weren't originally generated by contact with a new people group, but were a process of synthesizing existing European myths with this new contact. Europeans already had a romanticized or mythologized view of nature (probably a reflection of the separation from it being created in their society) that they brought with them. Upon seeing peoples who did not create such a distinct separation, these peoples fit into an already existing ideology about the distinction between society and nature and a template for human-like but not human magical creatures. A large part of the mystique of Americans for the early European explorers and settlers was the seeming contradiction of a society that was not seeking to "master" nature and bend it to submission under the yoke and plow, totally reshaping it to suit their class society. The mythologizing of the Americans was an attempt to reconcile this seeming contradiction, and were a reflection of the Europeans' assumption that such a society wasn't possible.

One of the directions this took was "actually they're not a real society because they don't cut down the forests to make farmland. They need to be civilized or killed." Which among other things is partly what this anon says >>31949 i.e. coping.

Another direction this took was "if these people can resolve the contradiction between human society and nature, maybe their society is better than ours or at least we could learn something from them."

Part of the motivation for the wars and exterminations was certainly that American societies raised a lot of difficult questions about European societies by contrast. This is of course a threat to the ruling class and the kneejerk response to destroy these people also created an opportunity to acquire vast quantities of resources, so it's hardly surprising that this was the direction they went. This is, after all, a culture that had already spent centuries burning heretics, Christianizing Europe, and otherwise supplanting the "indigenous" European cultures alien to Rome and a post-Roman Christendom, like the Goths orPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

based. Nothing more I could say, you put it better than I could possibly have.
>People who say this are just coping about their culture being (rightfully) criticized as specifically and uniquely destructive in a particular historical context
>>31947
>Most people whining about the “noble savage trope” are literally pasty crackoids criticizing a film for acting like the natives weren’t inherently inferior
Yeah I agree with both of you especially on this. There's a very strong classist element to it too when I've seen this reaction from people in my region (not in the US).
<stop fetishizing poor people (mostly indigenous or mixed), they can do bad things too!!11
It's not fetishizing or demonizing to say the truths which the whiter, upper class (and those who aspire to become like them) are not used to hearing, mostly that the effects of colonization have been so devastating that certain groups of people are still being oppressed to this day, and that the capitalist class actively works to oppress us all.

>>31952
>I struggle to think of an example from popular media where indigenous people are portrayed as purely good while settlers are portrayed as purely evil
Eh I've seen several in recent times. Prey for example does this shit where the native Americans are, at worst, just misogynistic, while the European hunters are all depicted as savage, fat, smelly killers that would use a human being as bait for a monster.

There's some others I can't think of in this moment because I'm tired as hell, but there's a good number of such films that depict Indians as the uncritical heroes. It's a mythology on the level of "muh honorable Japanese Samurai".

Hell a lot of movies in the 80s have native Americans as wise, quiet people from whom the white man learns a thing or two from. And I can think of a few films of that era, depicting cowboys massacring villages of their women and children, which is hardly a good presentation of "colonizers".

Really makes you think.

>>31743
this one's easy. it's basically a shortened "fabricate"
>>31744
really shows the huge gap between middle english and everything afterwards
>>31745
patriarchy is PMC

got any more riveting fox news comment section takes on tv shows

how is a show "homosexual"?

>>30672
I'm gay, but I don't watch it because it has Royals in the title and I don't support monarchist propaganda.

>>30910
>I'm gay, but I don't watch it because it has Royals in the title and I don't support monarchist propaganda.

this
>I'm gay, but I don't watch it because it has Royals in the title and I don't support monarchist propaganda.