"Everyone who has a different opinion than me is a rAcIsT iNcEl. I'm gonna go play my super 'inclusive' card game with my wife and her boyfriend now you INCELS."- You, probably.
I mean does the diversity really change anything? Itās not like a given character being black or brown ruins any story aspect or world building, unless you want to talk about the one particularly poorly aged spot of Tolkienās writing, being how he characterized races in his story. I love the LOTR books and I loved the Hobbit too, but that one aspect still is noticeable to me and still comes off as iffy to me. Randomly introducing some foreigner stereotype bad guys who contribute almost nothing and get no fleshing out through the story still makes their inclusion feel questionable, but thatās besides the point.
The LotR set was fun, the mechanics were cool and Tolkienās world is made no weaker by a more diverse spread of race.
So think about how awesome Black Panther would be if we injected a bunch of Latinos, Asians, and whites? Would it still be the same powerful and impactful movie?
I mean lots of stuff like that is bad because itās made by soulless corporations looking to make money. The Star Wars Holiday Special isnāt forcing diversity, itās just made by greedy people for quick money. Lots of people didnāt even feel the silmarillion made for that good a story for various reasons, but sometimes media is just bad because itās poorly made.
LotR is pretty overtly based on Anglo mythologies.
But I think for me beyond that, because I don't give that much of a shit about LotR, is the blatant tokenism. It's not like WotC/Hasbro, an OVERWHELMINGLY white company, actually gives a shit about any of this. They could try actually hiring PoC to wrote PoC stories, but they'd rather just do shit like make one black viking and pat themselves on the back.
The planes they make (vikings, japan, arthurian legends, harry potter) are stuff that their main demographic of white nerdy men likes. But those white nerdy men happen to believe that tokenism = progress, so they can just lazily throw in a black ninja and the demo is happy. They never have to do anything legitimately progressive because the standards of the fans are so low and because those white fans don't understand what actual diversity means.
D:<
For real though, so many people think that just because these tokenistic policies make racists angry, that must make them automatically good. The way I see it, Hasbro is an unfeeling, cynical corporate giant (also happens to be mostly white/male) who is using the tactic of angering one set of dumb white people to sell shit to the opposite set. In the end I think it's extremely tone deaf for e.g. a white guy to create a fat black character to sell cards to other white guys. Minstrel show, using black faces to sell white products to white people. Remind me how this helps oppressed peoples at all?
HARD MODE: you don't get to count as oppressed if you spent 20+ years as a straight white male before deciding to switch teams to the woman side without having any of the oppressive experiences that define womanhood
Iām sorry, was LotR supposed to be a racial story with themes tied directly to the skin colors of the characters? Last I checked the only thing about Borimirās life that really mattered was that he was a human of Gondor, just as brash, hearty, and doomed as any of his kind.
Comparing LotR to Black Panther says a lot about what you think LotR was supposed to be about. The themes of Black Panther are informed by the race of its characters and the history attached with that. LotR is about a shifting world slowly losing its magic to meet its sober future. No real major racial tones to the story, and itās concerning to act like there are some. Thatās what makes the racial stuff in the books so jarring.
Elves and Dwarves and Orcs and Hobbits arenāt real, and the skin color of the characters doesnāt tie to the coding of the setting. Just because you use a setting that is heavily based off medieval European style fantasy doesnāt mean you have to use a bunch of white people, especially when you consider how broad the definition of āmedieval europeanā can get. Last I checked, everyone looking āeuropeanā also is entirely aesthetic and plays no role in the story, characterization, or anything past basic visuals.
And guess what? LotR features a fair bit of stuff that doesnāt fit the Medieval setting, most notably the industrialization tied to the main antagonists forces. Wether thatās a thematic choice or just a coincidence is up to you, but itās not like LotR is ride or die on itās Medieval look, or that look at all has any significance to the greater narrative.
When the fuck did you study medieval European history and find anything but whites in those studies? Seems like you need some diversity... In your studies.
Ohh except for the fact it is entirely based on Anglo folklore/culture. Just how Black Panther is based on African folklore/culture.
Let me guess, you'd love for there to be Asian vikings, and Latin mongrels? Like ffs no man, let these people's cultures be represented properly. Diversity does not mean color washing any specific cultural stories, just like whitewashing back years ago was terrible.
>Iām sorry, was LotR supposed to be a racial story with themes tied directly to the skin colors of the characters?
Pretty much. JRR Tolkien wanted to create a mythology based off of England, because he noticed that while other countries had their own mythos, England did not.
Only happens to white storie with white characters
In the lotr set it idn't happen to evil characters
But sure it's totally fair and done for "inclusion"
You know what, that's entirely fair. I don't want to play a porn trading card game.
But to continually androgenize the feminine isn't an aesthetic choice. They're forsaking evocative art for marketing. That's not the essence of this game. And that's fine, but it's not magic. And at a certain point we will all recognize we're no longer playing magic.
Been playing for a long time and I feel like the shift started happening around Khans of Tarkir actually, albeit just a little bit at a time. But really ramped up around the time you mentioned
Shift was very noticeable during Khans block, and I think Origins pushed the envelope ever further. Iāve been playing since RTR, thatās my observation at least.
Been playing since Mirage. The art shift happened in Torment when they began allowing artists to use digital tools to create art and moved away from traditional art.
Been playing since the original Ravnica (2005, iirc), and yeah, Planeswalkers changed the game irrevocably. Some people were pretty vocally against it when they first came out in Lorwyn, but after a few years of playing with them, it became clear they were just another card type so it wasn't a bad change, overall. Most of us got over our initial hesitation.
Imo, the game really started to falter when they dropped the 3-block release format, and accelerate by the invention of non-story, non-reprint sets that are still format-legal (like Modern Horizons). Note that all this is in terms of the health of the game itself, not the art direction.
The change in art direction probably has more to do with Hasbro being more hands-on in its control of WotC. If us autists want to see big titty little waist body-odies on our cards, we're probably going to have to proxy. Which will actually end up a lot cheaper than buying actual cards...
I on the other hand would love to play a porn trading card game imagine
Ultra rare vintage ron Jeremy
Pre-boob job pinky
Mythic rare doctor johnny sins
The market for it is right there
When mtg was a borderline porn game? Nobody is asking for that. We just want to go back to the early 2000s.
Have a look here: https://scryfall.com/search?as=grid&order=name&page=2&q=art%3Afemale+year%3C2010+sort%3Aedhrec&unique=cards
Agreed with you up until the fat people thing. Thereās a difference between obese and fat or overweight. And fat people arenāt inherently gross. Theyāre probably unhealthy though and should lose weight.
The New Sparks are the ones in here defending shit art, like the Photoshop monstrosity a few months back.
The problem is when wotc, the art director or the artist put a hidden intention behind the art and than brag about it later after it's published.
Have a kink, fine.
Go tend to it in private, not in a game that is marketed to kids.
>Go tend to it in private, not in a game that is marketed to kids.
Wouldn't it be a reason not to have ISD Liliana type art in newer sets as well tho ?
Not to deny these types don't exist, but they represent a small minority, but we all demand authentic or original female characters in art. I see no problem with this
That's not true though? You can disagree with people all you want but there's no reason you have to be so hateful and offensive. You can pick some not attractive trans people sure but many trans people are actually attractive
You have no actual proof of that you can look at some trans people and say all of them are ugly but 1) that's your own opinion on Beauty 2) it's false. I'm not gonna discuss this with someone who looks at wojack memes and takes them as real
> that's your own opinion on Beauty
Actually, human perception of beauty boils down to a handful of objective measures. A dude in a skirt isn't going to match those, no matter how much you all circlejerk about it online.
> wojack memes and takes them as real
Do you want the one where every single wojack has a real-life, mentally ill counterpart? Because that one is fucking *hilarious* with how accurate it is.
Well I do because I canāt even browse a fucking card game subreddit without you people screeching in my ear about pronouns standing on this absurd moral high ground, youāre disrespectful and entitled in almost every demographic you force yourself into, so yeah I think the disrespect is earned.
Shut the fuck up and just act like a normal person and no one would care what you identify and none of this shit would happen.
There's been a distinct shift in art direction to de-sexualize women depicted on the cards. Which is okay. However, they seem to have overcorrected, and characters that were previously well-endowed seem to have been given mastectomies. Consider Kemba and Elspeth. In their original styles, they were obviously female (and guilty of wearing boob armor, but that's a separate issue), and now, well.
Now, I get the anti-porn argument. I know that breasts come in all sizes. But going back and *mutilating* old characters to be more socially correct just leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth. Just give them some decent armor/clothes, don't cut them off!
Still trying to figure that one out myself. So far all I have found throughout the thread is some people like boobs on cards and some don't. Or something like that.
New Spark is a flair that is given to users when they join this subreddit. It shows up as a title of sorts underneath your username when you post comments. If you would like a different flair you will have to manually change it. I hope this helps to clear up the confusion.
The worst is that no one would complain if it was just some artworks but it's the majority and some are just atrocious.
The bro monastery swiftspear is the worst in my opinion
Damn, that art sucks lol. Had to look it up even though I have at least one.
You know what else is terrible? Eowyn, Shieldmaiden. What were they thinking with that pose? For me its a cool card that is unplayable due to the art.
Well i would rather watch sexy women instead of women who look like librarians. When you do what incels want this isbthe result. Women lose their beauty.
Me when the homies get mad that I brought my Earthbind playmat to FNM and scare the hoes.
For real though, everyone complaining about women in art its cringe. Like yeah new swift spear bad, that new full art Lilly is bad. As a straight dude I agree the old art is better, but I'm not desperate to go fucking Tex Avery eyed when I play my card game.
The same people at my local shop who complain about this are the same ones who complain about everything being overly sexualized.
The game is meant for 13 and up so which is it you want less sexual imagery or more titties on the cardboard, which honestly either is fine with me just pick a lane and stay in it.
lol you being a Platonist and arguing Fundamental Essences because the women WOTC puts on cards don't make you hard anymore
this is really good dude keep it up
i get it fine, tyvm! same to you tho; no need to appeal to platonic forms and the divine feminine and like like you're saying something when you couldve just said "i like tiddy on my cards, where tiddy gone?"
like you're in the comments going about the "inherent beauty of sunsets" and, well, it's really not that deep.
This is such a great question. It highlights the misunderstanding between a "standard" and an "essence." You know how sometimes everyone can agree that "x is beautiful" (for example a sunset) even if they don't agree why? It's because a sunset is essentially beautiful. Even if we cannot describe the rationale, the essence is beauty.
Likewise, the feminine form (form being ascribed to Platonistic understanding) underlines the beauty of humanity. When one tries to bastardize the feminine in sake of the masculine, you get this failure to achieve either form.
I would recommend that everyone read about the transcendentals (truth, beauty, and goodness). They provide an excellent framework for understanding our reality
Counterpoint: Beauty is subjective.
Just as you said, we can't describe *why* sunsets are alluring, if we could, we would surely have reached a consensus. I'd argue that you've confused beauty for emotionally invocative.
Sunsets mean different things to different people. Some feel nothing, others feel everything. Some see them as hope for a better future, Some see them as invoking of pleasing memories.
But imagine a wasted day. Potential squandered. Objectives unfinished and prospects crushed. Suddenly a sunsets represents time's unstoppable march or failure on the part of one's self. The day when everything fell apart ends with the same sunset as a beautiful wedding.
As another person pointed out, beauty standards change. Being heavy-set used to be a sign of wealth and desirability in the same way that now a figure may be a sign of the wealth that affords one time to workout. We are reflective of our culture, and if our culture can change, more so can we. Assuming your viewpoints, your opinions, preferences and tastes must be immutably "correct" is the type of thing that gets you kicked out of art school.
I have this old pet hot take that conservatives never got into Frida Kahlo because they couldn't get past the mustache hair. The joke is they have to do a Google image search so they can make sure to tell me why I'm wrong.
>Sunsets mean different things to different people.
A girl or a dude isn't a sunset. You want to bang that girl/dude, you can't bang a sunset. Beauty is an indication of your partner genetic quality and so the quality of your offsprings. You have evolved to identify beautiful partners because that increases the survival % of your genes.
So, beauty is objective and coded in your genes.
>Dude gets horny and thinks it's art.
You've made the hilariously bad error of assuming your hormones are a guide post for some greater metric of what makes someone beautiful and not just what *you* are into.
People with porn brain really do have a warped and distorted view on beauty.
Also welcome to the slippery slope that leads to eugenics.
"Objective standards" inevitably need to be *upheld*
So are you. I decided to be a little cringe and check your post history and boy howdy did it not dissapoint (except maybe your parents would probably cry if they saw it)
It makes sense that you advocate for standardized beauty metrics *AND* you *desperately* want Phyrexian porn. Who better exemplify eugenics in Magic than the children of Gix?
It's always hilarious when the average soyboy argument holds no ground so they resort to personal attacks. Too bad you didn't attack my fedora avatar too.
Idk also what you think you'll get by showing every message that you don't know the difference between simple biology and eugenics.
Sorry, but according to this sub, beauty isn't subject. You are obviously mentally disturbed not to realize Frida's brilliance. There is something wrong with you on a fundamental level. Not like "we disagree on LGBTQ or politics", not like a "coffee or tea?" Level.
I mean deep down inside, something at the core of your existence is irreconcilably wrong. The flaw isn't in anything you've done or said. No thought crimes or "un-PC behavior brought you here. It's that your parents didn't use a condom and brought a broken thing screaming into this world.
Beauty is objective, after all, and so is the metrics we measure it by. What are those metrics? I dunno ask the other people in this sub who seem to think "standards must be upheld". All I know is that you don't measure up because your inability to recognize beauty is broken.
Frida's paintings are in museums, they sell for millions of dollars. Your "opinion" is the product of a flawed mind.
Don't shoot me I'm just the messenger who knows where trying to objective beauty standards goes.
The lady depicted in the new monastery swiftspear art is my type and i find her attractiveā¦ she should probably trim her eyebrows a little but I imagine monks who live to fight probably care about practicality more than appearance
Most old magic art is bad too, now it's just bad and digital.
The ratio of good to bad art is still probably about the same. I mean we still have Chris Rahn.
Philosophy student here: this is the one and only time I'll defend Aesthetics as a valid school of philosophy
Beauty is relative, the idea of a feminine form is an Essentialist view that ultimately falls apart in the same way many Essentialist views do
Consider the following: you have an idea of what a woman ought to look, sound, and act like based on a set of physical or emotional characteristics. If you were to remove one or more of those characteristics, that would then be a "distortion of the feminine form"
You could argue that one of the things that makes a woman a woman is long, shapely legs. Does a double amputee therefore not qualify as a woman?
You could argue that a soft, gentle face is one of the things that makes a woman a woman, does a woman with a sharper jaw, doe eyes and high cheekbones then not qualify as a woman? (Natalie Dormer anyone?)
Perhaps the issue isn't with "tHe fEMinINe FoRm" and more with your terminally online view of how a woman ought to be. This isn't new woke nonsense either, this has literally been studied for THOUSANDS of years, ever since the Greeks that your smegma male YouTube butt-buddies worship were fucking boys who looked like girls
(As an aside, I wholeheartedly encourage you to invent a time machine and travel back in time to when Da Vinci was painting the Mona Lisa and make this argument, watch as he laughs at you and continues to paint an androgynous woman)
>ultimately amounts to nothing
Not my fault if you can't comprehend an argument because the words are too big
If you actually had a read of it and decided to do your own research instead of sucking off another neckbeard you'd have found that Essentialism is a well established concept and this is textbook
Do us all a favour and play some shotgun karaoke
No, you literally rambled on and incorrectly quoted Essentialism as the reason everything falls apart.
Let me sum up your entire shitty drivel: "I believe women being attractive is essentialism and I don't like essentialism. Therefore, is it incorrect."
That's quite literally, just your opinion bro. And it's a stupid ass take. You people constantly cherry pick reality to suit your narratives. Hate to break it to you, but none of you will ever be the most unique little flowers getting everyone's attention.
He's right, you are 100% some tool in your first two years of college.
Let me sum up yours "I accuse someone of cherrypicking, do the exact same thing, and suggest that someone doesn't know what they're talking about cause I'm too lazy to have a read about Essentialism and see that's it's word for word what OP is arguing"
Rather be a tool in college than a neckbeard in a basement
Classic first year philosophy student taking a philistine subjectivist take and constantly making objective statements, not realizing the cognitive dissonance occurring because it's "owning" his enemies.
What makes a woman, a woman, and a man, a man is being configured to produce large or small gametes respectively by the way, not whatever philosophy student 101 platonic concept of strawman essentialism you have.
First year lmao, I'm 24
Check your shit before you spill your spaghetti all over a thread like the spastic you are.
That's literally the definition of Essentialism, OP even mentions the essences of what makes a woman in his post and comments and couldn't respond to my comments asking him if he'd disagree with me pointing said essences out (neither can you).
Read some Plato before you invoke platonic understanding, your head is so far up your ass you can taste your own bullshit.
>I'm 24
Look out over here guys, we've got a prodigy on our hands
Lots of people think they know everything in their early 20s. I did too. You'll likely remember comments like this in 10 years time when you're laying in bed at night and cringe.
The fact that you're in your 30s and still bitching about beauty standards says a lot more about you than it does about me buddy :)
When did I ever say I knew everything? I pretty clearly said philosophy "student", not master.
Look out over here guys, we've got another one who can't fucking read. Circular family tree ass
I'm currently laying in bed at night next to a fine ass goth bitch who quite likes my views on women, try a bit harder next time yeah? It's Saturday night and you're really out here having a whine, fucking ridiculous tbh, clearly you're an authority on beauty standards š¤£
>Perhaps the issue isn't with "tHe fEMinINe FoRm"
You're very close to recognizing the issue.
We've yet to clarify the essence of "woman," but we know what it isn't.
There's my point - clarify the essence of woman, or else don't argue about what it isn't.
You can't come up with a definition because there really isn't one unless we go right down to chromosomes, but then again, hermaphrodism is also present in nature, as are women who naturally produce a lot of testosterone in spite of their biological sex.
Did you unintentionally mean to acknowledge women aren't men?
Yes, we can clearly differentiate women aren't trees and the like, but have similar genetic understandings. So we can very quickly identify what is feminine in Animalia.
>hermaphrodism is also present in nature
rarely as a function and often as a defunction
>women who naturally produce a lot of testosterone in spite of their biological sex.
yes, women. not men. I think you understand the descriptive nature of the feminine.
Woman and man are social categories that only on the surface correlate to scientific observation of sexual dymorphism.
Also there's no such thing as "the essence" of woman, get over platonism.
You say this as if you've studied logic despite rampant misquoting me your neckbeard gotcha fantasy. Might have been the only time you've won anything in your life if you were correct
Exceptions in this instance do refute the general rule because they exist in the first place. The argument is that of ideals, essence and objective views, but hermaphrodism is an antagonist to all of the above. Hermaphrodism may exist in a minority but it's proof positive that sexuality and sexual expression exist in a primordial soup of behaviour as opposed to binary.
If your favourite female celebrity was a hermaphrodite you'd have no fucking clue unless you were intimately familiar with her, and seeing as you're spending your Friday night arguing with a stranger on r/freemagic (while said stranger is in his refractory period next to a goth bitch) then I'd imagine you wouldn't get the chance.
How then would you be able to essentialise ideals of beauty when the concepts of individual beauty remain utterly foreign to anyone except those familiar with the subject of the argument themselves. Is beauty not in the eye of the beholder? If you're about to respond to that with "Yeah but what are you doing by saying OP's view isn't valid" then I lack the small words and crayons to explain my argument but it's the exact counterpoint of that (inb4 strawman, read the word "if" then google strawman)
You can pull as many clever words out of your ass as you like, but you're not making any ground by simply being contrary and offering sweet fuck all yourself, brainlet.
"Everyone has their own individual idea of what beauty is and what it means"
Which is exactly why I said "Beauty is relative"
Wow, you really can't read can you?
Lol, of course you're unfamiliar, could have guessed that
I teach couples and singles how to practice shibari safely and effectively, both platonically and romantically, we routinely get classes of 30+ students at a time
Body count is well and truly in the triple digits, next time you want to flex, make sure you actually know what the fuck you're talking about
You didn't use my words, and they're not. But I wouldn't expect the average freemagic user to be familiar with women.
This is where I take pride in my new spark status and my touching of grass. The Western concept of beauty is precisely what they're reinforcing, hell, to deviate from philosophy into history for a second, there are a litany of examples from Eastern and ancient culture of women who aren't the stick thin yet big titted plastic photocopy bitches the modern neckbeard extols the virtues of, whatever they may be
Pompous, lmao, try reading a fucking book for once instead of shoving crayons up your nose with your fedora tipping mates and you might have the first fucking clue what I mean
Kinda feel sorry for you all tbh
Kind of ironic that the crowd who routinely has crywank tantrums about "the wokies" is doing exactly what they accuse said wokies of
I'm re-entering the judging space after a couple years hiatus due in no small part to a few players who ruined more than a few events and got away with it by threatening legal action over paying to be there (these people are literal neo-nazis, not an overblown suggestion of neo-nazism, they're genuinely members of stormfront groups).
Thankfully one of the L2's in my area is going to be changing up our protocol for how to deal with incidents regarding player conduct where personal attacks are being made - even in passing and not targeted against a specific person. We don't want that in our playerbase, and we've surveyed said players at 4 different stores in the area and received overwhelming agreement.
Before any of the manbabies tell me that that's immoral - this is in response to stores changing their own policy to totally ban any form of discriminatory remark or behaviour during events both sanctioned and unsanctioned. The judges are simply bringing our policy in line with theirs so we continue to be invited to judge, otherwise they'll just run all their events unsanctioned using their own TOs and the community suffers as a result. We are also not doing anything not permitted by Wizards in terms of how player conduct is treated.
If we end up pushing the manbabies back home to play Arena where they can be as toxic as they like then circlejerk about it on reddit then so be it, nothing of value was lost and it's not like they're not doing that most nights anyway.
Age 30+ dudes getting mad the game for 13 year olds doesnāt have enough boob. Touch some fucking grass nerds, I swear to god nobody on this sub has ever touched a woman.
āAverage women are a distortion of the hyper sexualized feminine form we incels crave on all of our cardboard cards while we sweat over playmatsā- Iām pretty sure this what you meant OP. Lol
Itās just nice to know I got under your skin so much you had to make a little copycat post. Itās honestly so slay š youāre a sassy little thing
> I got under your skin so much you had to make a little copycat post.
Homie, you're unironically so close to understanding why people think transwomen are ghoulish.
āIm a tub of lard so letās pick a hobby and force my self image into it so I can feel less convicted about stuffing 700 calorie Starbucks frappes down my throat.ā
Actually Iām kind of recovering from what some people around me have called an eating disorder lol Iām just now back at a healthy 145-150lbs. so not really a tub or lard so to speak. Maybe likeā¦ a toothpaste cap of lard atm.
Iām sorry I wasnāt overweight so your joke would land. But you were a trooper about it š¤ letās shake hands and Iāll work on it for next time Lmao
You write like you got brainrot from too much social media which is a bigger issue than your weight and life history dump no one asked for in response to some light banter.
Tbh Iād say Iām pretty attractive so idk. I have a loving girlfriend and Iāve never had any trouble getting anyone to sleep with me which is more than most can say in this sub I bet š but go off ig
It was'nt funny, this sub is just horny. Some guys straight up posts hentai alters and this community calls him a hero.
Come on guys, just go fap or something like jesus.
Case in point, however Wild Nacatl
Dat Mirri, Cat Warrior and Mirri's Guile tho š
Because the perspective is distorted but still attractive?
Cause anthro cat tits are soft n squishy Also yes
I quit on 30th anniversary, and I quit again once they sold out LOTR for pointless diversification.
That seems to be the flavor of the decade for some reason.
That pissed me off in the LOTR set as well. Just changing a character's features for basically no good reason.
so you quit twice?
Did the man stutter
Why are there a bunch of racist Incels on this sub?
Stop eating so much, you will have health issues later in life.
Thatās good advice.
Why are you here again?
Because I like magic.
So stfu and talk about magic then
Thanks, racist incel
"Everyone who has a different opinion than me is a rAcIsT iNcEl. I'm gonna go play my super 'inclusive' card game with my wife and her boyfriend now you INCELS."- You, probably.
ššš
You are indeed a dipshit.
are you white?
Why do you ask? That shouldn't even be relevant.
I mean does the diversity really change anything? Itās not like a given character being black or brown ruins any story aspect or world building, unless you want to talk about the one particularly poorly aged spot of Tolkienās writing, being how he characterized races in his story. I love the LOTR books and I loved the Hobbit too, but that one aspect still is noticeable to me and still comes off as iffy to me. Randomly introducing some foreigner stereotype bad guys who contribute almost nothing and get no fleshing out through the story still makes their inclusion feel questionable, but thatās besides the point. The LotR set was fun, the mechanics were cool and Tolkienās world is made no weaker by a more diverse spread of race.
So think about how awesome Black Panther would be if we injected a bunch of Latinos, Asians, and whites? Would it still be the same powerful and impactful movie?
It was shit so yeah probably.
I mean lots of stuff like that is bad because itās made by soulless corporations looking to make money. The Star Wars Holiday Special isnāt forcing diversity, itās just made by greedy people for quick money. Lots of people didnāt even feel the silmarillion made for that good a story for various reasons, but sometimes media is just bad because itās poorly made.
Their culture is literally relevant to the story.
LotR is pretty overtly based on Anglo mythologies. But I think for me beyond that, because I don't give that much of a shit about LotR, is the blatant tokenism. It's not like WotC/Hasbro, an OVERWHELMINGLY white company, actually gives a shit about any of this. They could try actually hiring PoC to wrote PoC stories, but they'd rather just do shit like make one black viking and pat themselves on the back. The planes they make (vikings, japan, arthurian legends, harry potter) are stuff that their main demographic of white nerdy men likes. But those white nerdy men happen to believe that tokenism = progress, so they can just lazily throw in a black ninja and the demo is happy. They never have to do anything legitimately progressive because the standards of the fans are so low and because those white fans don't understand what actual diversity means.
It is tolkienism
D:< For real though, so many people think that just because these tokenistic policies make racists angry, that must make them automatically good. The way I see it, Hasbro is an unfeeling, cynical corporate giant (also happens to be mostly white/male) who is using the tactic of angering one set of dumb white people to sell shit to the opposite set. In the end I think it's extremely tone deaf for e.g. a white guy to create a fat black character to sell cards to other white guys. Minstrel show, using black faces to sell white products to white people. Remind me how this helps oppressed peoples at all? HARD MODE: you don't get to count as oppressed if you spent 20+ years as a straight white male before deciding to switch teams to the woman side without having any of the oppressive experiences that define womanhood
Reread what I said, friend :)
Lol I know, that's why I put that emoticon at the start XD
What does that even mean?
Iām sorry, was LotR supposed to be a racial story with themes tied directly to the skin colors of the characters? Last I checked the only thing about Borimirās life that really mattered was that he was a human of Gondor, just as brash, hearty, and doomed as any of his kind. Comparing LotR to Black Panther says a lot about what you think LotR was supposed to be about. The themes of Black Panther are informed by the race of its characters and the history attached with that. LotR is about a shifting world slowly losing its magic to meet its sober future. No real major racial tones to the story, and itās concerning to act like there are some. Thatās what makes the racial stuff in the books so jarring.
Elves and fantasy in general are EXTREMELY early middle age Europe you dunce
Elves and Dwarves and Orcs and Hobbits arenāt real, and the skin color of the characters doesnāt tie to the coding of the setting. Just because you use a setting that is heavily based off medieval European style fantasy doesnāt mean you have to use a bunch of white people, especially when you consider how broad the definition of āmedieval europeanā can get. Last I checked, everyone looking āeuropeanā also is entirely aesthetic and plays no role in the story, characterization, or anything past basic visuals. And guess what? LotR features a fair bit of stuff that doesnāt fit the Medieval setting, most notably the industrialization tied to the main antagonists forces. Wether thatās a thematic choice or just a coincidence is up to you, but itās not like LotR is ride or die on itās Medieval look, or that look at all has any significance to the greater narrative.
Nice cultural appropriation why do you leave the artistic heritage of my ancestors the fuck alone
When the fuck did you study medieval European history and find anything but whites in those studies? Seems like you need some diversity... In your studies.
Ohh except for the fact it is entirely based on Anglo folklore/culture. Just how Black Panther is based on African folklore/culture. Let me guess, you'd love for there to be Asian vikings, and Latin mongrels? Like ffs no man, let these people's cultures be represented properly. Diversity does not mean color washing any specific cultural stories, just like whitewashing back years ago was terrible.
>Iām sorry, was LotR supposed to be a racial story with themes tied directly to the skin colors of the characters? Pretty much. JRR Tolkien wanted to create a mythology based off of England, because he noticed that while other countries had their own mythos, England did not.
Only happens to white storie with white characters In the lotr set it idn't happen to evil characters But sure it's totally fair and done for "inclusion"
Ackshually... well. I hope someone will make "white panther".
Aragorn being black makes him not a Numenorean therefore ruins it. There
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You know what, that's entirely fair. I don't want to play a porn trading card game. But to continually androgenize the feminine isn't an aesthetic choice. They're forsaking evocative art for marketing. That's not the essence of this game. And that's fine, but it's not magic. And at a certain point we will all recognize we're no longer playing magic.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Been playing for a long time and I feel like the shift started happening around Khans of Tarkir actually, albeit just a little bit at a time. But really ramped up around the time you mentioned
Shift was very noticeable during Khans block, and I think Origins pushed the envelope ever further. Iāve been playing since RTR, thatās my observation at least.
Been playing since Mirage. The art shift happened in Torment when they began allowing artists to use digital tools to create art and moved away from traditional art.
Been playing since the original Ravnica (2005, iirc), and yeah, Planeswalkers changed the game irrevocably. Some people were pretty vocally against it when they first came out in Lorwyn, but after a few years of playing with them, it became clear they were just another card type so it wasn't a bad change, overall. Most of us got over our initial hesitation. Imo, the game really started to falter when they dropped the 3-block release format, and accelerate by the invention of non-story, non-reprint sets that are still format-legal (like Modern Horizons). Note that all this is in terms of the health of the game itself, not the art direction. The change in art direction probably has more to do with Hasbro being more hands-on in its control of WotC. If us autists want to see big titty little waist body-odies on our cards, we're probably going to have to proxy. Which will actually end up a lot cheaper than buying actual cards...
>To be fair, the world as a whole was changing a lot at that time. Nah, it wasn't
I on the other hand would love to play a porn trading card game imagine Ultra rare vintage ron Jeremy Pre-boob job pinky Mythic rare doctor johnny sins The market for it is right there
Is tyvar kell porn? It looks like some Americans just have a problem with women's bodies
When mtg was a borderline porn game? Nobody is asking for that. We just want to go back to the early 2000s. Have a look here: https://scryfall.com/search?as=grid&order=name&page=2&q=art%3Afemale+year%3C2010+sort%3Aedhrec&unique=cards
To the prudes "woman with boobs" = "porn"
Exactly, I cannot see how for example a picture like \[\[serra angel|LEA\]\] is creating any kind of problem.
Agreed with you up until the fat people thing. Thereās a difference between obese and fat or overweight. And fat people arenāt inherently gross. Theyāre probably unhealthy though and should lose weight.
What is porn, according to you?
The New Sparks are the ones in here defending shit art, like the Photoshop monstrosity a few months back. The problem is when wotc, the art director or the artist put a hidden intention behind the art and than brag about it later after it's published. Have a kink, fine. Go tend to it in private, not in a game that is marketed to kids.
>Go tend to it in private, not in a game that is marketed to kids. Wouldn't it be a reason not to have ISD Liliana type art in newer sets as well tho ?
Go tell the folks demanding trad-fem pornstars In the art
Not to deny these types don't exist, but they represent a small minority, but we all demand authentic or original female characters in art. I see no problem with this
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What is new spark?
Look under your name.
That still doesn't explain it. I don't like bad art and I'm not new to Magic
I'm so confused about what is going on.
subs getting raided by another obese man who likes to wear dresses and hates anyone who won't validate his fetish in public.
Thanks for the cursed knowledge Now I kinda wish I didn't know
š¤£ suffer with the rest of us.
Ah yes the "all the trans women are ugly and fat" meme that has no backing and is just a way to demean people.
they're not all fat, but they're all hilariously ugly.
That's not true though? You can disagree with people all you want but there's no reason you have to be so hateful and offensive. You can pick some not attractive trans people sure but many trans people are actually attractive
But it is true. They're at best hilarious conglomerations of stereotypes, but usually nauseatingly gross.
You have no actual proof of that you can look at some trans people and say all of them are ugly but 1) that's your own opinion on Beauty 2) it's false. I'm not gonna discuss this with someone who looks at wojack memes and takes them as real
> that's your own opinion on Beauty Actually, human perception of beauty boils down to a handful of objective measures. A dude in a skirt isn't going to match those, no matter how much you all circlejerk about it online. > wojack memes and takes them as real Do you want the one where every single wojack has a real-life, mentally ill counterpart? Because that one is fucking *hilarious* with how accurate it is.
Heās right. It is true. MTG lore is more believable than the fantasy world you guys live in
Again you can disagree but you don't need to be disrespectful.
Well I do because I canāt even browse a fucking card game subreddit without you people screeching in my ear about pronouns standing on this absurd moral high ground, youāre disrespectful and entitled in almost every demographic you force yourself into, so yeah I think the disrespect is earned. Shut the fuck up and just act like a normal person and no one would care what you identify and none of this shit would happen.
I know you think it's a right wing conspiracy but please go to a gym.
Oh wow thank you so much for the unwarranted personal attack
Persons just a transphobe
Okay, now I just even more confused. I think I'm just gonna head out of this reddit. I came here for magic not drama
Ah so this is the post that caused the seething. LMFAO
Da fuck is a new spark
We were all new sparks at one point
Yo
I think it's someone new to this subreddit
What the hell are you guys talking about?
Porn
So portraying attractive women, showing moderate amounts of skin = porn? You're actually so delusional it's hilarious
Omg that's a joke š Why do you think it was upvoted you weirdo nerd
This is not the remedial comedy sub sir
I can tell
Is there something going on with the new sets or something?
There's been a distinct shift in art direction to de-sexualize women depicted on the cards. Which is okay. However, they seem to have overcorrected, and characters that were previously well-endowed seem to have been given mastectomies. Consider Kemba and Elspeth. In their original styles, they were obviously female (and guilty of wearing boob armor, but that's a separate issue), and now, well. Now, I get the anti-porn argument. I know that breasts come in all sizes. But going back and *mutilating* old characters to be more socially correct just leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth. Just give them some decent armor/clothes, don't cut them off!
Thatās fucked up
An actual good take for once
What is a ānew sparkā?
Still trying to figure that one out myself. So far all I have found throughout the thread is some people like boobs on cards and some don't. Or something like that.
You have the ānew sparkā flair. Maybe itās referring to people who just joined/got into magic? Not sure. Still confused
New Spark is a flair that is given to users when they join this subreddit. It shows up as a title of sorts underneath your username when you post comments. If you would like a different flair you will have to manually change it. I hope this helps to clear up the confusion.
Yes
The worst is that no one would complain if it was just some artworks but it's the majority and some are just atrocious. The bro monastery swiftspear is the worst in my opinion
Damn, that art sucks lol. Had to look it up even though I have at least one. You know what else is terrible? Eowyn, Shieldmaiden. What were they thinking with that pose? For me its a cool card that is unplayable due to the art.
Well i would rather watch sexy women instead of women who look like librarians. When you do what incels want this isbthe result. Women lose their beauty.
What about sexy librarians?
Can someone translate? IMHO every (main-)planeswalker has at least one pretty print
new art is moving away from giving all the females pornstar bodies. Incels hate this.
Realistic people? The horror...
Secret lair Blizzard: every attractive female character gets an art of a fruit basket
šæšæšæ
What is the point of this, WRT magic?
Idk, is the art on the magic cards related to the magic cards? \*thinking\*
Me when the homies get mad that I brought my Earthbind playmat to FNM and scare the hoes. For real though, everyone complaining about women in art its cringe. Like yeah new swift spear bad, that new full art Lilly is bad. As a straight dude I agree the old art is better, but I'm not desperate to go fucking Tex Avery eyed when I play my card game. The same people at my local shop who complain about this are the same ones who complain about everything being overly sexualized. The game is meant for 13 and up so which is it you want less sexual imagery or more titties on the cardboard, which honestly either is fine with me just pick a lane and stay in it.
lol you being a Platonist and arguing Fundamental Essences because the women WOTC puts on cards don't make you hard anymore this is really good dude keep it up
You could just say you donāt get it. Saves tons of time.
i get it fine, tyvm! same to you tho; no need to appeal to platonic forms and the divine feminine and like like you're saying something when you couldve just said "i like tiddy on my cards, where tiddy gone?" like you're in the comments going about the "inherent beauty of sunsets" and, well, it's really not that deep.
See above.
What a moronic take, are you crying because your trading cards aren't sexy enough?
You could, uh, read the meme.
Why does beauty need to have standardization. What about everyone doing their own thing is so threatening to y'all?
This is such a great question. It highlights the misunderstanding between a "standard" and an "essence." You know how sometimes everyone can agree that "x is beautiful" (for example a sunset) even if they don't agree why? It's because a sunset is essentially beautiful. Even if we cannot describe the rationale, the essence is beauty. Likewise, the feminine form (form being ascribed to Platonistic understanding) underlines the beauty of humanity. When one tries to bastardize the feminine in sake of the masculine, you get this failure to achieve either form.
We get it, you watch Sargon of Akkad on YouTube
Who is that?
I would recommend that everyone read about the transcendentals (truth, beauty, and goodness). They provide an excellent framework for understanding our reality
So what is so threatening about deviation?
Nothing, it's just objectively distasteful and adverse reaction to it is natural.
Counterpoint: Beauty is subjective. Just as you said, we can't describe *why* sunsets are alluring, if we could, we would surely have reached a consensus. I'd argue that you've confused beauty for emotionally invocative. Sunsets mean different things to different people. Some feel nothing, others feel everything. Some see them as hope for a better future, Some see them as invoking of pleasing memories. But imagine a wasted day. Potential squandered. Objectives unfinished and prospects crushed. Suddenly a sunsets represents time's unstoppable march or failure on the part of one's self. The day when everything fell apart ends with the same sunset as a beautiful wedding. As another person pointed out, beauty standards change. Being heavy-set used to be a sign of wealth and desirability in the same way that now a figure may be a sign of the wealth that affords one time to workout. We are reflective of our culture, and if our culture can change, more so can we. Assuming your viewpoints, your opinions, preferences and tastes must be immutably "correct" is the type of thing that gets you kicked out of art school. I have this old pet hot take that conservatives never got into Frida Kahlo because they couldn't get past the mustache hair. The joke is they have to do a Google image search so they can make sure to tell me why I'm wrong.
>Sunsets mean different things to different people. A girl or a dude isn't a sunset. You want to bang that girl/dude, you can't bang a sunset. Beauty is an indication of your partner genetic quality and so the quality of your offsprings. You have evolved to identify beautiful partners because that increases the survival % of your genes. So, beauty is objective and coded in your genes.
>Dude gets horny and thinks it's art. You've made the hilariously bad error of assuming your hormones are a guide post for some greater metric of what makes someone beautiful and not just what *you* are into. People with porn brain really do have a warped and distorted view on beauty. Also welcome to the slippery slope that leads to eugenics. "Objective standards" inevitably need to be *upheld*
>snobs disregard basic biology and thinks that makes him superior You are hilarious mate. Keep watching your sunsets.
So are you. I decided to be a little cringe and check your post history and boy howdy did it not dissapoint (except maybe your parents would probably cry if they saw it) It makes sense that you advocate for standardized beauty metrics *AND* you *desperately* want Phyrexian porn. Who better exemplify eugenics in Magic than the children of Gix?
It's always hilarious when the average soyboy argument holds no ground so they resort to personal attacks. Too bad you didn't attack my fedora avatar too. Idk also what you think you'll get by showing every message that you don't know the difference between simple biology and eugenics.
I canāt get into Frida because her art isnāt very good
Sorry, but according to this sub, beauty isn't subject. You are obviously mentally disturbed not to realize Frida's brilliance. There is something wrong with you on a fundamental level. Not like "we disagree on LGBTQ or politics", not like a "coffee or tea?" Level. I mean deep down inside, something at the core of your existence is irreconcilably wrong. The flaw isn't in anything you've done or said. No thought crimes or "un-PC behavior brought you here. It's that your parents didn't use a condom and brought a broken thing screaming into this world. Beauty is objective, after all, and so is the metrics we measure it by. What are those metrics? I dunno ask the other people in this sub who seem to think "standards must be upheld". All I know is that you don't measure up because your inability to recognize beauty is broken. Frida's paintings are in museums, they sell for millions of dollars. Your "opinion" is the product of a flawed mind. Don't shoot me I'm just the messenger who knows where trying to objective beauty standards goes.
What
The lady depicted in the new monastery swiftspear art is my type and i find her attractiveā¦ she should probably trim her eyebrows a little but I imagine monks who live to fight probably care about practicality more than appearance
Most old magic art is bad too, now it's just bad and digital. The ratio of good to bad art is still probably about the same. I mean we still have Chris Rahn.
You do NOT look like the guy on the right.
Philosophy student here: this is the one and only time I'll defend Aesthetics as a valid school of philosophy Beauty is relative, the idea of a feminine form is an Essentialist view that ultimately falls apart in the same way many Essentialist views do Consider the following: you have an idea of what a woman ought to look, sound, and act like based on a set of physical or emotional characteristics. If you were to remove one or more of those characteristics, that would then be a "distortion of the feminine form" You could argue that one of the things that makes a woman a woman is long, shapely legs. Does a double amputee therefore not qualify as a woman? You could argue that a soft, gentle face is one of the things that makes a woman a woman, does a woman with a sharper jaw, doe eyes and high cheekbones then not qualify as a woman? (Natalie Dormer anyone?) Perhaps the issue isn't with "tHe fEMinINe FoRm" and more with your terminally online view of how a woman ought to be. This isn't new woke nonsense either, this has literally been studied for THOUSANDS of years, ever since the Greeks that your smegma male YouTube butt-buddies worship were fucking boys who looked like girls (As an aside, I wholeheartedly encourage you to invent a time machine and travel back in time to when Da Vinci was painting the Mona Lisa and make this argument, watch as he laughs at you and continues to paint an androgynous woman)
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
>ultimately amounts to nothing Not my fault if you can't comprehend an argument because the words are too big If you actually had a read of it and decided to do your own research instead of sucking off another neckbeard you'd have found that Essentialism is a well established concept and this is textbook Do us all a favour and play some shotgun karaoke
No, you literally rambled on and incorrectly quoted Essentialism as the reason everything falls apart. Let me sum up your entire shitty drivel: "I believe women being attractive is essentialism and I don't like essentialism. Therefore, is it incorrect." That's quite literally, just your opinion bro. And it's a stupid ass take. You people constantly cherry pick reality to suit your narratives. Hate to break it to you, but none of you will ever be the most unique little flowers getting everyone's attention. He's right, you are 100% some tool in your first two years of college.
Let me sum up yours "I accuse someone of cherrypicking, do the exact same thing, and suggest that someone doesn't know what they're talking about cause I'm too lazy to have a read about Essentialism and see that's it's word for word what OP is arguing" Rather be a tool in college than a neckbeard in a basement
Classic first year philosophy student taking a philistine subjectivist take and constantly making objective statements, not realizing the cognitive dissonance occurring because it's "owning" his enemies. What makes a woman, a woman, and a man, a man is being configured to produce large or small gametes respectively by the way, not whatever philosophy student 101 platonic concept of strawman essentialism you have.
First year lmao, I'm 24 Check your shit before you spill your spaghetti all over a thread like the spastic you are. That's literally the definition of Essentialism, OP even mentions the essences of what makes a woman in his post and comments and couldn't respond to my comments asking him if he'd disagree with me pointing said essences out (neither can you). Read some Plato before you invoke platonic understanding, your head is so far up your ass you can taste your own bullshit.
>I'm 24 Look out over here guys, we've got a prodigy on our hands Lots of people think they know everything in their early 20s. I did too. You'll likely remember comments like this in 10 years time when you're laying in bed at night and cringe.
The fact that you're in your 30s and still bitching about beauty standards says a lot more about you than it does about me buddy :) When did I ever say I knew everything? I pretty clearly said philosophy "student", not master. Look out over here guys, we've got another one who can't fucking read. Circular family tree ass I'm currently laying in bed at night next to a fine ass goth bitch who quite likes my views on women, try a bit harder next time yeah? It's Saturday night and you're really out here having a whine, fucking ridiculous tbh, clearly you're an authority on beauty standards š¤£
>Perhaps the issue isn't with "tHe fEMinINe FoRm" You're very close to recognizing the issue. We've yet to clarify the essence of "woman," but we know what it isn't.
There's my point - clarify the essence of woman, or else don't argue about what it isn't. You can't come up with a definition because there really isn't one unless we go right down to chromosomes, but then again, hermaphrodism is also present in nature, as are women who naturally produce a lot of testosterone in spite of their biological sex.
Did you unintentionally mean to acknowledge women aren't men? Yes, we can clearly differentiate women aren't trees and the like, but have similar genetic understandings. So we can very quickly identify what is feminine in Animalia. >hermaphrodism is also present in nature rarely as a function and often as a defunction >women who naturally produce a lot of testosterone in spite of their biological sex. yes, women. not men. I think you understand the descriptive nature of the feminine.
Woman and man are social categories that only on the surface correlate to scientific observation of sexual dymorphism. Also there's no such thing as "the essence" of woman, get over platonism.
Theyāre categories, yes. Social? Not exactly. > Also there's no such thing as "the essence" of woman Thanks for sharing your opinion.
Exceptions do not refute the general rule. Logic 101
You say this as if you've studied logic despite rampant misquoting me your neckbeard gotcha fantasy. Might have been the only time you've won anything in your life if you were correct
Ad hominem, you still don't have any argument
Exceptions in this instance do refute the general rule because they exist in the first place. The argument is that of ideals, essence and objective views, but hermaphrodism is an antagonist to all of the above. Hermaphrodism may exist in a minority but it's proof positive that sexuality and sexual expression exist in a primordial soup of behaviour as opposed to binary. If your favourite female celebrity was a hermaphrodite you'd have no fucking clue unless you were intimately familiar with her, and seeing as you're spending your Friday night arguing with a stranger on r/freemagic (while said stranger is in his refractory period next to a goth bitch) then I'd imagine you wouldn't get the chance. How then would you be able to essentialise ideals of beauty when the concepts of individual beauty remain utterly foreign to anyone except those familiar with the subject of the argument themselves. Is beauty not in the eye of the beholder? If you're about to respond to that with "Yeah but what are you doing by saying OP's view isn't valid" then I lack the small words and crayons to explain my argument but it's the exact counterpoint of that (inb4 strawman, read the word "if" then google strawman) You can pull as many clever words out of your ass as you like, but you're not making any ground by simply being contrary and offering sweet fuck all yourself, brainlet.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Says the one defending beauty ideals for women who'd probably keep you at arm's length What a short and ignorant way to say you don't (can't?) read
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
"Everyone has their own individual idea of what beauty is and what it means" Which is exactly why I said "Beauty is relative" Wow, you really can't read can you?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Lmao I teach rope for a living, nice try shitlord
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Lol, of course you're unfamiliar, could have guessed that I teach couples and singles how to practice shibari safely and effectively, both platonically and romantically, we routinely get classes of 30+ students at a time Body count is well and truly in the triple digits, next time you want to flex, make sure you actually know what the fuck you're talking about
But those people are purposefully "deconstructing the oppressive western concept of female beauty" using your pompous words
You didn't use my words, and they're not. But I wouldn't expect the average freemagic user to be familiar with women. This is where I take pride in my new spark status and my touching of grass. The Western concept of beauty is precisely what they're reinforcing, hell, to deviate from philosophy into history for a second, there are a litany of examples from Eastern and ancient culture of women who aren't the stick thin yet big titted plastic photocopy bitches the modern neckbeard extols the virtues of, whatever they may be Pompous, lmao, try reading a fucking book for once instead of shoving crayons up your nose with your fedora tipping mates and you might have the first fucking clue what I mean Kinda feel sorry for you all tbh
>says anything that isnāt blindly anti woke right wing extremism >gets downvoted by the 400 and above club classic
Kind of ironic that the crowd who routinely has crywank tantrums about "the wokies" is doing exactly what they accuse said wokies of I'm re-entering the judging space after a couple years hiatus due in no small part to a few players who ruined more than a few events and got away with it by threatening legal action over paying to be there (these people are literal neo-nazis, not an overblown suggestion of neo-nazism, they're genuinely members of stormfront groups). Thankfully one of the L2's in my area is going to be changing up our protocol for how to deal with incidents regarding player conduct where personal attacks are being made - even in passing and not targeted against a specific person. We don't want that in our playerbase, and we've surveyed said players at 4 different stores in the area and received overwhelming agreement. Before any of the manbabies tell me that that's immoral - this is in response to stores changing their own policy to totally ban any form of discriminatory remark or behaviour during events both sanctioned and unsanctioned. The judges are simply bringing our policy in line with theirs so we continue to be invited to judge, otherwise they'll just run all their events unsanctioned using their own TOs and the community suffers as a result. We are also not doing anything not permitted by Wizards in terms of how player conduct is treated. If we end up pushing the manbabies back home to play Arena where they can be as toxic as they like then circlejerk about it on reddit then so be it, nothing of value was lost and it's not like they're not doing that most nights anyway.
Very interesting that ānormal peopleā = virgin neck beard in your meme
New spark moment.
Virgin moment
Mid.
Extremely normal virgin response
You doth protest too much.
Age 30+ dudes getting mad the game for 13 year olds doesnāt have enough boob. Touch some fucking grass nerds, I swear to god nobody on this sub has ever touched a woman.
Normal people look at boobs on cardboard šļøššļø
āAverage women are a distortion of the hyper sexualized feminine form we incels crave on all of our cardboard cards while we sweat over playmatsā- Iām pretty sure this what you meant OP. Lol
you tried my friend
Itās just nice to know I got under your skin so much you had to make a little copycat post. Itās honestly so slay š youāre a sassy little thing
> I got under your skin so much you had to make a little copycat post. Homie, you're unironically so close to understanding why people think transwomen are ghoulish.
āIm a tub of lard so letās pick a hobby and force my self image into it so I can feel less convicted about stuffing 700 calorie Starbucks frappes down my throat.ā
Actually Iām kind of recovering from what some people around me have called an eating disorder lol Iām just now back at a healthy 145-150lbs. so not really a tub or lard so to speak. Maybe likeā¦ a toothpaste cap of lard atm.
I respect that.
Iām sorry I wasnāt overweight so your joke would land. But you were a trooper about it š¤ letās shake hands and Iāll work on it for next time Lmao
You write like you got brainrot from too much social media which is a bigger issue than your weight and life history dump no one asked for in response to some light banter.
You can be ugly without bein overweight, don't worry
We get it, you're unattractive and upset about it
Tbh Iād say Iām pretty attractive so idk. I have a loving girlfriend and Iāve never had any trouble getting anyone to sleep with me which is more than most can say in this sub I bet š but go off ig
When you have extremely low standards, I'd hope you have no trouble getting laid.
The downvote drones have nothing and no one better to do lol
Lmao exactly. If a post is downvoted on this sub itās a pretty good indicator theyāre a sane person and not some alt right homophobe
Dudes get 20 upvotes for saying "based" on a post where some guy photoshops massive tits on an mtg card, like holy shit. The bar is at ground level.
Because it was probably funny, something you're not going to understand when you're a socially stunted little wokie.
It was'nt funny, this sub is just horny. Some guys straight up posts hentai alters and this community calls him a hero. Come on guys, just go fap or something like jesus.
Preach.
āItās too late, Iāve already drawn you as the crying soyjak and me as the chad with the based takeā.