JazzFLASH @Jazzy_Butts@gameliberty.club

wendy experiences adulthood #dontstarve

S3E06a

wip

I saw it today with my brother and I was pleasantly surprised by it. The trailers really didn't do this movie justice. I wasn't expecting it to be as good as Sonic but in my opinion, I did like it better than the 1st Sonic movie. Definitely way better than Detective Pikachu, too.

Even at the start of the movie, Charles Martinet is there to welcome you into it for a fun time. I wasn't aware that Martinet would be in it at all. Chris Pratt Mario was also, surprisingly, nailed extremely well. I wasn't weirded out by it once the movie got rolling. This is why I feel the trailers really sucked for this movie because they didn't have him just speaking for longer periods. It sounds way more natural in the movie and he has a nice natural accent for Mario.

Luigi's voice definitely felt spot on, too. Since I'm a fan of the Luigi's Mansion series, it did feel his more nervous demeanor was carried out 1:1.

People are saying the movie has no plot and it's just game references. If you go in expecting a mind blowing plot, then you will be disappointed. The plot is simplistic just like the games. Bowser wants to marry Peach and conquer her kingdom. That is the main plot and all you're gonna get. For a Mario movie, it's appropriate. As the plot progresses, it takes inspiration from the games for the environments. It's very fun to watch. This is actually why I enjoyed it more than the Sonic and Pikachu movie. Mario is way more faithful to the games. They even threw in the DK rap when introducing Donkey Kong. As I also really like DK platformers, it was great to have the meme legend theme included.

Speaking of Bowser, Jack Black was a treat throughout the whole movie. He IS Bowser. If you had put this Bowser into a game, he would seamlessly fit in. He is silly and a hot head.

The "girl boss" Peach isn't there, either. She is helpful to Mario and not obnoxious. Despite all the woke actors, the movie was either cleaned up by Nintendo or there was some fuckery regarding the marketing for it. People are trying to dig up obscure references to justify the "girl boss" Peach that isn't even there lmao. I'm convinced these people do not play the Mario games.

Peach, Toad, and even Rosalina have all been playable characters in recent side scrolling Mario games. They jump around and do the same stuff as Mario and Luigi. It makes sense Peach teaches Mario the ropes as he arrives in the Mushroom Kingdom, since this Mario is from Brooklyn. She needs him to not be dead weight as they confront Bowser and save Luigi.

These are just my thoughts on it. I would like to see a 2nd movie with Wario, Waluigi, and Rosalina of course. There are Galaxy references throughout the movie, even having the theme song in the end credits. I'm very critical of Nintendo and know how they hate their fans sometimes (or a lot of times recently) and if you don't want to give them money or are a poorfag, I still recommend you 🏴‍☠️ it. It's sure to not disappoint fans of the franchise. Having said that, if you don't play the Mario games, then you will not get as much enjoyment out of it.

らくがき練習(‘､3_ヽ)_

✌️ 👅 ✌️ 第2ラウンドの時間だ！
https://twitter.com/mijimenahoshi

Okay so I read the studies that are still available in this post and let met tell you:

http://web.archive.org/web/20210314154037/https://wierstamann.wordpress.com/2020/03/29/debunking-pro-cs-a-masterpost/

Lecter is fucking illiterate and interprets studies however the fuck makes him most comfortable.
The first is unavailable, but I wouldn't use any study that primarily polls prison populations anyway bc that's fucking bigotry against ALL yappers you fucking idiot.
The second study ABSOLUTELY has pro c connotations. Those who had consensual sex under 16 had the same mental health outcomes as those who had no sex at all, this is WITH the evening of the playing field of their experiences with homophobia n shit, they LITERALLY account for all variables BEFORE using path analysis, you fucking liar. What do you want science to do, ONLY CONDUCT RESEARCH ON CIS WHITE HETEROSEXUAL MEN???? WOW WAY TO NOT WANT PROGRESS LMAOOOO the study is fine and does, in fact, bolster a pro c position. It says "consensual sex with adults isnt traumatizing, rape is" which isn't fucking shocking.

The third study I could not access either, but it's also from *1986* and I wouldn't touch their understanding of consent with a mile long pole. I don't trust his summary of it though. Considering-

THE FOURTH STUDY. IS FROM THE 1970S. And while it's a better study, it's still not fucking great and I would never use it!

But it still doesn't say what you said it does.

Let's talk about your summary.

"I’ve already criticized the objectivity of self report as a trauma evaluation tool"

This is the only real evaluation tool for trauma. Shut the fuck up. If somebody is self reporting that they have or haven't been traumatized by something, that's that. Just because you don't like the findings of a study doesn't mean you get to make shitty takes that have no bearing on reality.

"(especially since many people asked were still in the process of developing and might not have faced consequences yet),"

YO WHAT IS THIS AGEISM BUDDY BOYO???????? I don't need to say anything other than that do i????

"so I’m just going to focus on another thing – if you use this study to try to justify relationships with enthusiastic or indifferent children (the study made no distinction), by the same logic non-consensually exposing genitals to a stranger is also OK."

The study......literally talks about flashers and public masturbators. And how there was little to no harm done to the declared victims until other parties got involved. So uh. Aside from flashing not being a pro c position, it doesn't do the significant harm you're implying according to this almost 60 year old study. And you're being ridiculous and drawing false equivalence. And no, the study didn't make a distinction bc it was talking about RAPE vs CONSENSUAL SEX vs EXHIBITIONIST BEHAVIORS, not enthusiasm vs apathy! Stop asking for things that weren't thought of at the time, I'll just redo the study for you damn!

"This study proves that people tend to be less traumatized by less intense experiences, and that poor handling can give them secondary harm, not that putting children through it is good and fine."

Oh my gog imagine that. Rape is traumatizing and consensual sex isn't, and being flashed USUALLY isn't bc it's really, at most times, just gross. You don't seem concerned about that secondary harm which disturbs me. Maybe, like the study pointed out, we should focus on the declared victims wishes? Because if they're not traumatized, if they were not harmed, you are the one doing the harm, not the sex. You are so hyperfocused on controlling sex that you don't realize what you're doing to the PEOPLE.

the study clearly states that the rape was unambiguously harmful, traumatizing. That's not up for debate. IT DOESNT STATE THAT CONSENSUAL SEX IS THOUGH. You are so clearly coping your way through these(the ones I could actually read) trying to find any tiny little thing to say "THIS ISNT ACTUALLY PRO C ALIGNED SCREE" but they kinda are! They reiterate that rape is bad and traumatizes people, but as soon as they even imply that consensual sex DOESNT traumatize children you scramble and insert your own narrative!

You are a terrible researcher! Never go into this field! I will embarrass you publicly on purpose because you deserve it! Just like every other "researcher" with a fucking agenda!