WhatDoYouMeanPodcast

I'm not actually listening to this

Disco Elysium who??

https://www.butajape.com/comic/one-big-mario-party/

it's relevant to AI

Relevantly

Kasparov is chairman of the Human Rights Foundation and chairs its International Council. In 2017, he founded the Renew Democracy Initiative (RDI), an American political organisation promoting and defending liberal democracy in the U.S. and abroad. He serves as chairman of the group. Kasparov is also a security ambassador for the software company Avast.[14]

In 2021, Kasparov promoted a series of 32 NFTs that detailed important moments in his career. The top four sold for more than $11,000.[197][198]

I would say that he's a trying his best. And I believe I could stand to learn something from somebody who was so outstanding at his craft.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NP8xt8o4_5Q

https://nitter.net/aprettyPR/status/1733189753523081247

I might not have used the phrase waste of money, but I'm within the same ballpark if I'm asked to do something I don't want to do. I don't want to spend some $60 for a tiktok trend. I'm slow to do activities beyond what I'm already investing my limited energy into. I historically feel like I'm putting forth a lot of energy on top of what I already use to exist to be aware of my partner's presence, making sure we're doing enough together, making sure they're happy, etc. It has historically been and seems like the sort of thinking that your partner should want to do things like this that makes me feel like I'm obviously out of the loop on something. I couldn't imagine wanting a partner to be down for every idea I have and there would be some catharsis in not having the expectation that I drop what I'm doing and open up my wallet for theirs. "I don't want to spend money on this" is a common part of my life - it's something that I'm conversing with myself all the time. I could but I'd be content abstaining. It seems like if "if [he] wanted to he would" is the dynamic, then my partner would be another spinning plate (alongside work, health, social obligations) instead of my fellow plate spinner with their own burdens to satisfy.

The consensus that the boyfriend is being hurtful and obviously a bad partner feels like getting checkmated. How could I ever be a good match for any of those people? How could I ever want to? Because they spend their hard earned money on some cutesy thing for me in return? Like please don't. Where am I going to put it? What if I want to horse around and there's all sorts of fragile shit around? What if we have friends over and now there's shit they need to be careful around? What if there's shit we need but we already spent all our money on shit we don't need? Big expectations around gifts feel like a big burden. "comrade let's go for a walk." "comrade let's cook a meal." "comrade let's have friends over for board game night." "comrade teach me something new." "comrade let's have a deep conversation." "comrade my friends are having a party." are things off the top of my head that would feel much better to drop what I'm doing for and look forward to doing it. The kind of person who would do shit like that with me is the kind of person who I'd go on road trips with, travel, move in with, etc. But the idea that we'd get into fights over some sort of "you should want to do this" and "I don't want to" isn't a good answer would be disqualifying for me and it looks like that's a common attitude.

I just want to be your big tent communist

According to that study, the post has to have at least 50 words and some undisclosed key words in order to be scraped.

I am the bomb at wrestling when compared to other people at my academy, but I suck compared to people with fresh wrestling experience. In the past, I was like, "I hate pulling guard, it doesn't feel like fighting." So I committed to either getting the takedown or getting takedown. My go to move is a duck under to the right side where I chicken wing my right arm to get an opening which exposes their back which, per its namesake, I duck under to get to the back. From there their neck is vulnerable, but if I choke them and they tap, I let go. If I didn't, I would be strangulating them. That's not being a good training partner

It's recently come out that, on September 10th, Lauren Boebert was removed from the play Beetlejuice in Denver. This would be all fine and good, right? A politician is being an asshole. The sky is blue. Well, Hexbear, it is anything but fine. Anything but.

The plot thickens when it's revealed that, beyond the vaping and the being loud (which is it's own struggle session whether that's based), that part of her contribution to getting owned was that she was giving her partner an over the pants handjob. Now, this would have gone through the news cycle with a sensible chuckle for me, but, my fellow hexbearians, do I look like I'm having a sensible chuckle? NO! This is literally me right now. See, what had happened was that this news circulated to the website that I like to post on. The title of the post was "boebert was giving a no-foolin for-reals handjob during the beetlejuice musical" This post got some of the most vile, vitriolic comments I've ever seen in all my posting.

>no-foolin for-reals handjob >over the pants rubbin Y'all that's not even a handy to a seventh grader. @[email protected]

unironically @[email protected]

Let's get one thing straight here, hexbear. Over the pants is a handjob. This is my central thesis. Let's start with the most obvious positive case. If you have sex with a condom, do you call it over-the-condom sex? Of course not! Protected sex, maybe, but you wouldn't call it not sex. Would you call a blowjob with a condom not a blowjob? Of course not! If you did that'd be annoying and weird. Let's try not to be annoying and weird. skin-to-skin contact with the genitals isn't a requirement for something to be called a job. Repeat it once more for the people in the back getting a handjob rn: skin-to-skin contact with the genitals isn't a requirement for something to be called a job. If home runs are so unambiguous, why is third base so "ambiguous?" Because of a single fringe case. If it wasn't for the existence of this fringe case, then there's be no argument about how getting your genitals stimulated works.

Fairies, monsters, and others that go bump in the night, let me introduce you to the water jet/bubbling system of a hot tub. Wikipedia defines a hot tub as "a large tub full of water used for hydrotherapy, relaxation or pleasure." Let's explore that last word, pleasure. Whom hasn't used a hot tub as it was meant to be used. I think this is where the friction comes from, the jet stream in a hot tub. Dissenters will say (like sniveling cowards) "b-b-but WDYMP, the hot tub isn't sentient, it can't give you a job!" Let's get one thing straight, if you had your hands over the edge of a hot tub and your partner was pushing your crotch into a jet stream, that would be a type of job. The solution, my compromise for the haters and losers, is what I would like to call the jetjob. It would be a normal jetjob if they're pushing you via hands on the buttox into a water jet, and a reverse jetjob if they're using their feet. It would be a backwards jetjob if your back is facing the water jet. This also expands the capacity for a combo jobs because your crotch is facing your partner. This would be the exciting introduction of the triple job if they're using a hand, their mouth, and the water jet. I propose that, upon climax in such a fashion, one would exclaim "Tic tac toe, three in a row!"

With this, let's get one thing clear, over the pants is a type of handjob the same way that over the condom sex is a type of sex. If we can start using the term jetjob, then it will be easier to recognize when something is a job and when something is not. This would also be a step closer to communism. Thank you. I hope I haven't fractured our fragile community too deeply with this.

Who is James Woods? What happened to James Woods? Has anyone checked up on Cat Turd recently?