The Last of Us Part 2 is, in general, an amazing excersize in storytelling, empathy, and character development. It left me on the edge of my seat, managed to make me like characters that I thought I never would, and overall was an incredible experience. The ending is also so frustrating I can't bring myself to ever touch the game again. Ellie sparing Abby in the way she did not only doesnt make sense, but its practically disrespectful to whats otherwise a very good game.

Please keep in mind these are all my opinions. I haveall the respect for the writers and artists on the game, and this is not a mindless misogyny or hate fueled rant. I genuinely think they made a mistake with the ending and I fundamentally disagree with people who enjoyed it.

Firstly, killing Abby would have been a satisfying end to the game. It would have been sad, yes, especially if the game managed to succeed at making you care about her and Lev, but it would have ultimately been more satisfying than Ellie going through the entire journey for no reason. Was it somewhat predictable? Yes but that is okay. Theres a reason revenge stories are so popular, and its not because we like seeing revenge fail. Whether you liked Abby or not, it would have been a clear note to end on, which is what stories often need. As is, we're left with practically no conclusion, which could only work if they continued the story for a Part 3, but ultimately weakens Part 2 as a result.

Secondly, killing Abby would have supported the game's message. The Last of Us Part 2's central themes, as far as I understand them, involve empathy and the the impact revenge has on you. If there was a message the game tried to tell, it would either boil down to "revenge isn't worth it" or "be compassionate to others". Theres probably some other themes about holding onto the past and such, but those seem less prevalent to me. Those are all simple ideas, but not bad ones. The problem comes in when you conflate those ideas with the ending of the game. Ellie, our central protagonist (Sorry Abs but its true) has lost everything at this point in her quest for vengeance. Dina, JJ, Jesse, Jackson, even the small connections she had to Anna and Joel are gone. And yet...she made the "right" choice. She showed mercy. She spared Abby. Narratively speaking, this is messy. It would have been more powerful if she DID kill Abby, and then realizes when she comes back to her farmhouse that she's lost everything.

Thirdly, if the game did to you what it did to me, the death of Abby would have been one of the most powerful in the game. We got to see her entire character arc, from the moment she shot out Joels kneecap to her broken down and begging on the beach, we got to see her at her best and worst. Seeing her die at the hands of arguably the most beloved character in the franchise would have been crushing, if done right. I truly believe that Abby would be more fondly remembered as well, not because we necessarily want her character to die, but because we grew to know her and its all the sadder that the character was so brutally killed.

Fourth off, and this should be obvious, Ellie killed *hundreds* of people in her quest to kill Abby, most of them only tangentially related to her. Ellie being willing to kill all of them but refusing to end the "big bad" (quote unquote) is ridiculous in my opinion. Its the definition of a cliche. Are you really supposed to make me believe that she didn't mind killing any of the random people she had no connection to, but suddenly felt sympathetic when faced with the woman who caused it all in the beginning? I don't buy it.

Finally, and this is a minor point, I have the feeling of dread that they only spared Abby so they can use her in a future project. If this ends up being true, that would be really disappointing. Ruining the ending of what was otherwise a great game by trying to capitalize on a future product is lazy and below Naughty Dog. But it feels like that what they did.

So yeah. Those are my main reasons. You can discuss it with me if you want down below.

The common refrain and argument for the FTA disparity in last night’s game has been play style, duh! What do you expect when one team attacks the basket more and one just shoots midrange jumpers?

Is that argument still true now? Would love to know how one would square that argument now that the drive numbers from the game have been posted.

I'm sorry but kids need routine and schedules. They definitely don't know what's best for themselves. Especially infant's and kids under 4. You don't just let them sleep when they feel they want to. It's not about what they want its about their needs and as a nanny of 10 years i know that schedules are ALWAYS NEEDED for kiddos without special needs to be on some sort of schedulesome sort of routine. It can not be a whatever they want free for all situation. And I'm sorry to the parents out here..but some of us nannies have been taking care of kids longer than youve been a parent. We aren't coming at you when we tell you that you're not doing something necessarily correct.. we are trying to help you do the best thing for your child. Yes you're their parents. But we're actually professionals as in this is literally our job to know all the tips and tricks and facts about kids. Please just listen to us.

Edit: you can make suggestions to parents while also adhering to their parenting style. We're there to help in every way possible to help the kids best we can. And I can do that with any parenting style and I have tips and tricks and knowledge with every parenting style. You can make suggestions that still ar ein said parenting style. Damn. Also I never said nannies are always right

I spent over 4000 hours of my free time in the past 6 years learning code & more specifically, PHP full stack web development (WAMP/LAMP). All self taught from scratch! I've worked in roles with close relationships directly to lead devs at multiple fortune 500 companies. My efforts have led me to get paid significantly more than I ever could have staying only in the business space. I'm still working on projects on the side while maintaining a "FTE" role at a FAANG company. Ask me anything!

I'm going to Pride Fest this weekend. I went once and had a great time. I have a few questions about this year's event:

What time does the parade kick off? I think I read 2pm? EDIT: Bay News 9 link says it starts at 4.

How early should I arrive? When I was there last time, we got there at 11am and hung out for about an hour. It wasn't very crowded then, but I imagine it's totally packed when the parade starts.

How family friendly is it? I want to take my 6-year-old because (1)he loves parades, and (2)it's really important he see that gay, trans, drag, etc. are all totally normal. Some Pride events, however, can get R-rated. Dudes holding hands and kissing? Great for the kid to see. Dudes dressed in leather thongs and drinking from penis-shaped cups? Not so great.

Fun events beside the parade? The time I went, I saw food trucks and other vendors, but we didn't have time to check out everything. Are some of the clubs or bars having special events the same day?

(Tank Girl is on Paramount Plus for anyone interested in watching)

First off, let me say I came into this movie looking forward to all the things it was trying to be. But...it failed. It's not in the "so bad it's good" category, it's simply bad. It's a bad movie. Period. Let me explain why this movie failed so hard for me.

I like camp. The campiness fell flat. I like action. The action was un-interesting. I like non-sequiturs. The non-sequiturs only added to an already disjointed movie. I find the absurd funny. The absurdity was forced, so it didn't work. I enjoy suspending my disbelief and rooting for nonsense characters. Tank Girl herself never got past the nonsense to give me a reason to root for her.

Lori Petty does an admirable job of trying to make Tank Girl into something tangible, but the character never meshes. For me, Tank Girl's chaotic energy would come across better if it was presented more diabolically, rather than childish. The masturbation and penis jokes would actually land if they came from a character who seemed unhinged and not purely cartoonish. Her manic behavior is intended to be fun and quirky, yet dangerous, but instead it's just exhausting.

Let's talk about the action. Most of it is camera shots of Tank Girl shooting off into the distance and yelling at the sky. I'm all for that...when the dosage is right. However, that's MOST of the action in the movie. When you are constantly pulled away from seeing bad guys get mowed down, it disconnects you from the FUN of the violence. Take Robocop for example. That movie is pure art when it comes to making over the top violence fun. You are invested in the rest of the movie as soon as the board room scene happens. It brings you right in, makes you witness something brutal, gory, nonsensical...and you're left grinning ear to ear ready for the rest of the film. The only example of well-done violence in Tank Girl is when she breaks that guys neck between her legs.

Let's talk about the camp and the humor. I'm all for camp. I'm all for cheese. I like the absurd. I don't need reality in my movies. But when you're going for camp and you don't pull it off, it fails twice as hard. I think one of the most glaring examples of this failing is the "saxophone prayer" that Deetee does to honor Johnny Prophet. That was so NOT FUNNY, it stood out in a movie that was filled with moments that were supposed to be funny, but weren't. I'm 100% down for a jazzy saxophone-prayer...but do it well. The lines tried to be absurd, but they were just stupid. There's a way to do what they were trying to do, but that wasn't it.

That (generally) covers the problems I had with the movie as you saw it on screen. And you know what? Maybe you disagree. Plenty of what I described is objective, so I won't die on any of those hills because maybe we just have different tastes in humor or style. What, I think, cannot be disputed is that the structure of that movie is also horrendously bad.

If you read about Tank Girl on Wikipedia or in other articles, you'll hear plenty about studio interference, forced editing, etc. There's nothing to argue with here, because it is obvious. There are glaring continuity errors. There are parts where a substantial amount of time would have had to pass to move the story on, but suddenly we're in the next scene as though we clearly didn't just skip a ton of time. One thing that is left thoroughly unexplained is how the tank itself suddenly becomes autonomous. Did they cut a scene of Jet Girl working on the tank and giving it some type of AI? Regardless, out of nowhere, in the final raid scene, the tank is driving, shooting, and responding to Tank Girl's whistles all by itself...which would be awesome, if there was ever an in-movie explanation for this.

The thing that makes these cuts even worse is...I still found the movie too long, and it was only an hour and half. And get this, before watching the movie, I saw it's runtime and was given hope. An hour and half is the right amount for a movie like this. Let's compare two legends in the action-camp world, Mad Max: The Road Warrior and Waterworld. Mad Max, is an hour and half - perfect. Get in, do the thing, don't overstay your welcome, and call it a movie. I will re-watch that whenever. Waterworld, on the other hand, tries to be Mad Max on water...but it's 2 hours and 15 minutes. It's too much movie for what it actually is, and becomes a stale slog by the end. While I enjoyed Waterworld enough, I highly doubt I'm ever going to watch it again.

I bring those two movies up because Tank Girl manages to be the worst of both worlds. Blame writing, editing, whatever. The fact of the matter is that "Tank Girl" got chopped to pieces in the editing room and became disjointed... but still manages to feel too long. Add in non-sequitur scenes like the musical dance number at the club, and instead of rollicking along with a fun side-track, you're rolling your eyes and waiting for it to be over.

There's plenty more detail I could go into but I'll paraphrase a little here. The Rippers are like the rest of the movie...weird but not in a good way. I feel bad for Ice T, I wonder how he feels about that role. The death of Johnny Prophet, while immensely important to the Rippers, falls flat for the viewer because there's barely any mention of him prior to finding out he's dead. It's hard to care about a character when the movie spends zero time making you care. This generally applies to the Rippers as well. Deetee's death should have been sad and dramatic, instead it was shoehorned, obviously coming, and carried no emotional weight for us watching. Malcom McDowell is pretty great, but let's be real, that's a typecast role for him that he could do in his sleep. Can't give him that much credit for simply doing the thing he's known for.

I don't want to be accused of missing the overt feminism of Tank Girl, as a female anti-hero who uses sex, violence, vulgarity, etc as her means of being a badass is certainly worth celebrating. I'm all for that, and I don't want to take away from anyone who may have been inspired by the character. But what I'm saying is, all those things Tank Girl is supposed to stand for could have been done A LOT better, and I don't think it's wrong to ask for that. I'll give it credit for perhaps being ahead of it's time, or for inspiring future films and artists...but that in and of itself doesn't make it a good movie.

There's articles worth reading that go over the directors displeasure with studio interference, how the creators of the original Tank Girl comics were displeased with the movie because it's nowhere near source material, and basically how all these things interacted to give you the mess that is this movie. None of this would necessarily matter to me if the final product was enjoyable, as I can look past just about anything if I'm having fun. However, Tank Girl, simply put, fails on just about all fronts, and is not a good movie.

This cult is based on evolutionary psychology, violating the is/ought problem , dehumanizing women and selfishness.

1. Rollo book the Rational male literally says its based on evolutionary psychology in the description on Amazon. Anyone who knows anything about science particularly soft sciences vs hard sciences knows that evolutionary psychology is a pseudoscience with a hypothesis that is not falsifiable. Similar to religion, most young men aren't educated to combat such rhetoric because we don't teach it in schools just like the proposition of a God. Therefore Red Pillers can claim whatever they want unchallenged in regards to men and women in these spaces.

Red pillers will misrepresent studies saying there's causation, refer to pseudoscience and would even refer to Feral children ( raised without any or very low socialization with some found in the wild ) if it benefited them but it doesn't.There's not many feral children so it's difficult to reach a firm conclusion but they all lack a sense of gender or even sexuality for most of them. I personally believe we undermine socialization not realizing without it we wouldn't resemble anything we expect today from a woman or man. Interestingly enough red pillers will claim that beauty standards for men and women are uniform across time appealing to evolutionary psychology. Meanwhile beauty standards have changed during history and are different around the world.Red pillers would never appeal to evolutionary psychology to explain the Greco-Roman period where pederasty/homosexuality was normalized,edo period where there was a 3rd gender called the wakashu and where homosexuality was normal etc.They only appeal when it benefits them.

1. Red pillers often violate the is/ought problem. I don't know how many times I've seen Red Pillers say

" Men and women are different ( fill in the blank)"

That doesn't follow , if you told a Christian

" Men and women are different - therefore men should be able to sleep with other women in a relationship as a woman enjoys the security she's receiving in one"

That doesn't follow , it will fall upon deaf ears because the Chrisian hasnt agreed with the OUGHT. You can't provide descriptions and then give a prescription. We must first agree with the prescription.

Even the most fundamental description that relies on our existence is the ability and wanting to procreate . You can't tell someone that your body is meant to procreate therefore men and women OUGHT to procreate turning it into a normative statement .You do not get oughts from descriptions . I've seen so many young men brainwashed speak with such indignation of this community saying " men and women are different " to say whatever they want looking at women with vitriol for not behaving as such . Another reason why this is a cult .

1. This cult doesn't treat women like they are human. Kevin Samuel's telling men it's OK to physically discipline your wife if she consents even referencing Sean Connery. Red pillers telling men to leverage your wealth to treat women how they WOULDN'T want to be treated. This cult lacks character, it tells to leverage your wealth even if it's exploitive to a woman's financial state to get what you want hence the passport bros and the like. Men who can't get modern women so they seek poor countries to exploit women making them into bang maids .This cult raises men to be a psychopath when it comes to women . I see this hang up on consent continually where any behavior is considered non-normative if she consents .

2. Red pillers invoke concepts to actively shame men and women in order to coerce such as masculinity and femininity. When invoked these labels are to establish a normative perception of what one ought to do in virtue of their sex independent of being a good partner.

   For example , I've seen men be content as a masculine man because they make more money however their significant other needing help with child rearing , cooking or cleaning doesn't draw out this feeling of not being a masculine man . These labels are worthless making men weak . It's an effort to control a mass of people similar to a religion . Whatever entails a good partner is what we should strive for even if everything a good partner is considered feminine by some group . If being a feminine man entails a good partner by some group label then all men should be feminine or rather just ignore such labels that attempt to trigger some shame or guilt in virtue of sex. This is another reason why this is a cult . Men being brainwashed and bogged down mentally by concepts that are irrelevant

Dudes an adult and just bone headed , stubborn, and has extreme anger issues. Heard during games, he doesn’t talk to teammates and looks away when discussion of game plans are happening. Just the opposite of a team leader. Thank god we have Brunson .

I just abhor ppl like him that are impossible to get thru to and can’t check their own emotions. We re not animals fuck that

Just tired of seeing all the 20 years ago Andys posting and moaning that this isn’t like D2 or that rune-words are gone….that game already exists go play it!

WOAH KIDS: seriously people, reporting this to “Reddit Cares” because your 60 years old fee-fees got hurt? you should seriously seek help.