I play video games, but my “identity” as a “gamer” is not important enough to me to care about defending the label.

If someone says “gamers are trash,” you either know exactly the type of person they’re talking about, or you are the type of person they’re taking about.

I have no desire to argue “well I’m a gamer and I’m not like those people” because I don’t give a damn about the “sanctity” of such an arbitrary label. Also, not only are there tons of toxic gamers who are guilty of all the -isms, but there are also a lot of gamers who are all-to-eager to minimize the shitty actions of the former group and I don’t want to be associated with them either.

“That’s just how online gaming is” or “You think that’s bad? You should’ve seen call of duty lobbies back in the day” are common refrains from people who may not be hyper-toxic themselves, but they’re completely adjusted to bigotry being the status quo for the hobby and they don’t even see it as a problem to be corrected.

Also, I’m white. Seeing people criticize racism in gamer culture and jumping to the defense of the label as if that’s the problem feels very on brand for the way that white people tend to prioritize things. The bigotry is a much bigger problem than my “right” to call myself a gamer without the extra baggage. It feels a bit like still trying to defend twitter. I play video games, but yes, gamers are trash.

I had a “career” class in highschool where they setup a mock budgeting exercise in the library, and we were supposed to visit the grocery store, pay bills, invest, etc.

Instead of using our chosen career like every other class exercise, for this one you were just given a card with your life details on it and you had to work with that. I literally took one look at my card and said to myself “this isn’t going to work.” I was a single parent of 3 kids and my income was something like 2k/month. I knew I wouldn’t have enough money to even make it through the entire exercise so I asked my teacher, who created the cards, what I should do. She just pointed me toward the first expense and said “go do that, then do that” like re-explaining the sequence I was supposed to follow without acknowledging that I was going to run out of money in just a few minutes, so that’s what I did.

I did like 1/4 of the exercise, ran completely out of money, and then stood around for the rest of class while other students decided what they were going to do with their leftover funds. For whatever reason, at the end of the exercise, the teacher asked who ended up with this or that card, and when I pointed out what I’d gotten she was like “yeah that was the worst one” and that was all that was said about it.

I guess it actually was a pretty good lesson on how America deals with poverty.

I saw a movie last weekend and there was an ad before the film for tiktok. The ad was super “wholesome” and about this dude who I’m sure is legitimately a great guy. He uploads “Dad” lessons on things like tying a tie and whatnot.

I couldn’t help but think that both US political parties were in lock-step just a few years ago that tiktok was a national security threat because it was a vector for foreign propaganda. Now that the American side of tiktok is owned by Larry Ellison, it’s not only no longer a “national security threat,” it’s a wholesome place where you can find trusted information from real people who are doing it just because they care.

It made me wanna puke.

The A.V. Club used to do a series where bands would come on and choose from a list of songs to cover. As the season goes on, the list shrinks and the covers get more exotic. You can search “av undercover” on YouTube to watch through the back catalog of old seasons for some pretty great covers. I don’t think they do it anymore, but it ran for several years.

This isn’t exactly the same thing, but Matthew Fox played a paratrooper with no lines in World War Z. This was after Lost, so he wasn’t an unknown by any stretch. He originally had a bigger part, but they changed the entire 3rd act in reshoots and his role was reduced to basically nothing.

I have a bad feeling that apple is going to release a pair of smart glasses and all of the social momentum of discouraging wearing these things will be lost overnight.

Any content that was produced with the primary intent of making people angry.

Problem is that’s really hard to identify unless you know the original author’s intent. Just because it makes someone angry doesn’t necessarily mean it’s rage bait, but if it was explicitly made with that goal in mind, that’s what I would describe as rage bait.

Not defending this, but it did remind me of how nuts the monetization was on the original. I had a modded 360 at the time, and there used to be an old school forum style website that curated all available DLC. This game had exclusive content for GameStop, Walmart, Target, and I think a 4th and 5th retailer too. Not to mention the pre-order bonuses and other exclusives. I wanna say there were around 25 different pieces of content and to get 100% of what was available, youd’ve had to buy 5 retail copies of the same game… or have a modded 360 and an internet connection. Even unlocking the content was more of a hassle than most DLCs. You had to move your user profile to a USB stick, connect it to your PC, inject the entitlements to the exclusive costumes into your profile, then move the profile back to your console.