Whenever Sam or Freddie mentions the other’s butt.
Whenever Sam talks about food/being hungry.
Whenever Sam eats (twice if it’s meat).
Whenever Carly says. “Aw.”
Whenever Spencer gets hurt.
Whenever Spencer mentions Socko.
Whenever Spencer mentions the junkyard.
Whenever Freddie does something that expresses his crush on Carly.
Whenever there’s a Seddie moment. You must first yell “SEDDIE!” to make it obvious to others that a moment just happened. (If you play this with me, I will find lots of Seddie moments. :D) If you root for team Creddie, I guess that’s OK too… : /
Whenever Mrs. Benson is overprotective of Freddie.
Whenever someone besides Sam forces Freddie onto the floor.
Whenever Sam’s mom is mentioned.
Whenever something related to Japan or Canada is mentioned.
Whenever Gibby takes his shirt off.
Whenever Sam says one of her Freddie nicknames.
Whenever Sam steals something.
Whenever spaghetti tacos are mentioned.
Whenever Freddie speaks Spanish.
Whenever hobos are mentioned.
Whenever Spencer causes something to set on fire.
Whenever Sam refers to herself as Mama.
Whenever Freddie has/drinks a bottle of water.
Whenever Galaxy Wars or Star Wars is mentioned.
Whenever someone is eating or holding a banana.
Whenever Freddie gets in trouble for something he didn’t do.
This is hilarious! If this got played with the episodes comin’ up, you’d have to take out the Seddie moment one because you’d be drinking pretty much the whole time, ahaha.
I got the chance to do TWiT today. I was pretty nervous. I thought I did well.
It’s not a unique story, but I’ll tell it anyway. When I first started thinking about podcasting on a regular basis This Week in Tech was the show I listened to as a reference guide for… well… what a podcast…
JuRY, you were great! First time I ever watched TWiT and I found, to my surprise, that I might actually like it even when it isn’t helping my ears have sex with your voice. xD
“I sometimes visualize the ongoing cycle of racism as a moving walkway at the airport. Active racist behavior is equivalent to walking fast on the conveyor belt. The person engaged in active racist behaviour has identified with the ideology of White supremacy and is moving with it. Passive racist behaviour is equivalent to standing still on the walk way. No overt effort is being made, but the conveyor belt moves the bystanders along to the same destination as those who are actively walking. Some of the bystanders may feel the motion of the conveyor belt, see the active racists ahead of them, and choose to turn around, unwilling to go to the same destination as the White supremacists. But unless they are walking actively in the opposite direction at a speed faster than the conveyor belt - unless they are actively antiracist - they will find themselves carried along with the others.”—
Yes, brilliant analogy. It can be applied to any systematic oppression, the status quo encourages you to go along for the ride. Keeping people down (or letting others keep them down) is easy, fixing the system, working against it, that requires true effort.
I enjoy the fact that you’re relatively grounded on a day-to-day basis. You don’t have these epically superior plans jotted down on your agenda and most of the time all you want to do is probably catch a quick game on EPSN or curl up on the couch to play LA Noire. Whatever your jam is at the moment, you’re content with it not being extreme and I find that to be attractive.
You’re the guy that will come home from work and get into his own thing. You don’t always have to go out, you can lounge around the house and be completely content wearing that same band t-shirt you’ve been wearing three days in a row. Who are you trying to impress in your house, right? I like that.
You’re just a minimalist man who finds pleasure in the simplest forms. And I have to say, thats probably the most sexy quality about you. I just needed you to know that.
Sincerely, A simple kind of woman.
Let me tell ya, this is overrated. I’d say aim for someone in the middle? Or either I’m complicated as fuck because this gets annoying after a while.
The researchers of the study wanted to test a theory called “defensive attribution” which suggests that people will try to protect themselves from blame in a given situation. Using this theory, the researched hypothesized that victim-blaming men would be the ones who were most likely actual or potential harassers.
To test the theory, researchers asked 119 college men, ranging in age from 18 to 28, to take a survey measuring how likely men are to sexually harass women.
“The survey doesn’t ask men directly whether they harass women, but rather asks about attitudes associated with harassment, such as whether women use sex to their advantage or are flattered by sexual advances…
Next, the men read eight short vignettes about instances of sexual harassment. In one, a male restaurant server tells his female coworker that her tips would be higher if she’d show more skin. The study participants were then asked how likely it was that they would be in the shoes of the man in each vignette and how much the fictional men and their victims were to blame for the harassment.
Unsurprisingly, the men with a high proclivity toward sexual harassment, as rated from the initial survey, said they felt more similar to the fictional harassers. They were also less likely to blame the harasser for his behaviors and more likely to blame the victim, [fitting with the self-protection theory].
The men’s attitude seemed to be, ‘I might do that kind of thing and I don’t want to get in trouble.’”
I will have to read the entire article after my nap!
Oh man, this is so relevant. I was wondering about this exact freakin’ thing last night and here goes that there’s an actual study.