Miscellaneous Thread V watch

Lúcio · 23-03-2016 07:17

(Original post by difeo)
Agreed (until she cut her hair off ffs), but Tay is more talented and beautiful on the inside (no homo)

Ngl I died a little inside when she went short hair.
She's back long now isn't she though?

The Wavefunction · 23-03-2016 08:45

(Original post by Lúcio)
Ngl I died a little inside when she went short hair.
She's back long now isn't she though?

It's like a medium length, but she's getting there

AR_95 · 23-03-2016 08:57

Kaley > Taylor ANY day

Jimmy Seville · 23-03-2016 11:29

tfw when your ends is trending on Twitter

And then you realise it's because some berk was chatting stupid **** about muslims

Kenan and Kel · 23-03-2016 11:45

Give Kaley no ratings at all

SA-1 · 23-03-2016 12:01

(Original post by Jimmy Seville)
tfw when your ends is trending on Twitter

And then you realise it's because some berk was chatting stupid **** about muslims

I imagine these are typically swirly's thoughts

AliRizzo · 23-03-2016 12:19

(Original post by Jimmy Seville)
tfw when your ends is trending on Twitter

And then you realise it's because some berk was chatting stupid **** about muslims

Lmao is it that guy from Croydon who confronted a woman?

The Wavefunction · 23-03-2016 12:32

(Original post by AliRizzo)
Lmao is it that guy from Croydon who confronted a woman?

Think it's Ryan Gossling tbh mate

**sr90** · 23-03-2016 12:45

(Original post by AliRizzo)
Man on here complaining about shite phones and Bluetooth - count yourself lucky I didn't have a phone until I was like 16. Blackberry Curve was a good first phone though tbf.

No Nokia 3310? You missed out

Posted from TSR Mobile

SA-1 · 23-03-2016 13:24

What a bizarre season - it feels like the PL will only get more shambolic as we move forwards.. which is exciting and nerve wracking.

"Leicester have 66 points after 31 Premier League games, 41 more than they had at the same stage last season, when they were bottom of the table with seven games remaining."

"Leicester rank 18th in the Premier League for possession and 20th for pass success rate, but second for goals scored with 54."

"Jamie Vardy and Riyad Mahrez cost Leicester a combined £1.4m, yet have scored more goals in the PL this season than Aston Villa, Crystal Palace, Newcastle, Norwich, Stoke, Swansea, Watford or West Brom - and only three fewer than Man Utd."

"At the end of March, Leicester have won as many away games as Man City and Chelsea combined."

http://www.skysports.com/football/ne...-suggest-it-is

AliRizzo · 23-03-2016 14:02

(Original post by The Wavefunction)
Think it's Ryan Gossling tbh mate

Witty banter is witty

(Original post by sr90)
No Nokia 3310? You missed out

Posted from TSR Mobile

I remember being addicted to the snake game on my mum's Nokia, if that counts

SA-1 · 23-03-2016 14:06

"While I'm in the dressing room five minutes before I come out, I'm breaking my gloves down, I'm pushing the leather to the back of my gloves, so my knuckle could pierce through.

When I come out I have supreme confidence. I'm scared to death. I'm afraid. I'm afraid of everything. I'm afraid of losing. I'm afraid of being humiliated. But I'm confident.

The closer I get to the ring the more confident I get. The closer, the more confident. All during training I've been afraid of this man. I think this man might be capable of beating me. I've dreamed of him beating me. For that I've always stayed afraid of him. The closer I get to the ring the more confident I get.

Once I'm in the ring I'm a god.

No one could beat me. I walk around the ring but I never take my eyes off my opponent. Even if he's ready and pumping, and can't wait to get his hands on me. I keep my eyes on him. I keep my eyes on him. Then once I see a chink in his armor, boom, one of his eyes may move, and then I know I have him. Then once he comes to the center of the ring he looks at me with his piercing look as if he's not afraid. But he already made that mistake when he looked down for that one tenth of a second. I know I have him."

swirly · 23-03-2016 14:10

(Original post by SA-1)
I keep my eyes on him. I keep my eyes on him.

Real Friends · 23-03-2016 14:29

(Original post by SA-1)
"Leicester rank 18th in the Premier League for possession and 20th for pass success rate, but second for goals scored with 54."

This is the fun one. Pep's (and Spain's) success led to a generation of managers like Martinez and Rodgers focused on possession, but Leicester are having ****ing none of it.

They will be lucky to finish top half next year. Those 1-0s from Mahrez's magic just can't be kept up.

Real Friends · 23-03-2016 14:34

(Original post by swirly)

thoughts

swirly · 23-03-2016 14:35

brahs srs question.

you know in the Spiderman story arcs, did Mary Jane ever make it as an actress?!?!

Swear she never did?

Rk2k14 help?

swirly · 23-03-2016 14:37

(Original post by Real Friends)

thoughts

the way he dances

dayum he was really feeling that

fallen_acorns · 23-03-2016 15:39

Proposition: Western individualism will go down in history as both the catalyst to success, but also its eventual downfall.

Discussion spoiler-ed for those who don't care.

Spoiler:
Show

For me in the wake of yesterdays attacks people are only focusing on the symptoms of the problem, rather then the problem itself, which is that in the west, specifically within white communities we have became dangerously individualistic, and are failing in comparison to more collective groups.

Individualism is responsible for a lot of good, but also for the dangerous idea that 'we are all of equal importance'.

Now that Idea is perfect in isolation, we are all of equal importance.. but it falls completely flat when its not shared by every one in society. In western societies we value ourselves, and only ourselves above everyone else. The idea of the family is weak on average within white communities, and the idea of loyalty due to location, race, age, culture, is considered a negative.

The problem with these is that it makes us weak. It makes us perfectly moral and good humans, but weak.

If you have 1 group of 100 people who are all working to serve their best interests.. Their neighbors are another group of 100 individuals, who all serve a common purpose, what will happen? The first group wont work together, they seek different goals, they view themselves as equal to all 200 people, and think everyone should be treated the same. The second group view their 100 people as more important then the first group, and will act together in accordance to what is best for their collective identity, and not what is best for all 200 people.

The result? the 2nd group prospers with their greater collective influence over the first group.

A good example of this is how brilliantly some communities often band together collectively to achieve their goals.

Examples:

Black lives matter - Brilliant collective movement, that is having a real influence. Even if their means are sometimes questionable, their results are not. They constantly put their cause to the forefront of our consciousness.

LGBT movement - near complete success in the UK, legalized marriage, broke down discrimination, ended awful laws, approaching a complete cultural norm.

Chinese expat communities in western countries - Establish, work together as a community to pool resources (sometimes unethically) but create an economically prosperous bubble in otherwise troubled cities.

South/East Asian families - Put their family above all else, would do anything for each other.. pool resources and support children in a way far greater then many western families

All function because and succeed because they band together a group of individuals, and put more focus and importance on those individuals then any others not in their group.

Honestly, here in china there is a common collective identity: chinese. and that comes with a hierarchy of importance: starting with your family, and ending with your country. Anything outside of your collective group, is less important then what is inside, and should be considered secondary to what is best for your group.

This is demonstrated really well by the refugee crisis. Why didn't some gulf states take in refugees? Because its not in their interest, or the interest of their people. and those interests come before the interest of refugees, as that is their collective group.

Why does Europe say yes to refugees? Because there is no collective group (or at least a very week one) as a result all life is important. An English person is barely more important to another English person then a refugee in desperate need of help. So they say yes..

What happens? the self serving country prospers without the problems associated with the crisis.. the country that helps suffers internally for doing what was right.

I genuinely worry that the idea that thinking as a collective is not only been abandoned, but is also downright condemned by large parts of our society. And at the moment that is quite right. For instance, right now it is ridiculous to have a collective group of 'white people'.. we don't need it, white people are the luckiest in society in western countries, as we live as the majority, have the majority of influence, no social barriers etc..

But the tides are turning. and slowly life for people who share western European culture (of all races) are feeling more threatened. Nothing will happen this year, or next, but some day the problem will be all to big to reverse.

Our individualism will be what causes our downfall. Our ethical decisions and morals, whilst completely just, will fall flat against other cultures and groups who don't share the idea that we are all of equal importance. And this will be most noticeably by the rich/powerful, who will let the normal man/woman of their country burn if it serves their personal worth.

Not surprising that the west was at its most powerful when the idea of nations and countries were at their most distinct and had the most importance.

In summery:

In an ideal world, we have every race and culture living in equal importance, having equal respect and value. But that cant be achieved as long as we have groups working for the interest of themselves alone. So as long as all groups do not adhere to the idea that all are equal, all groups must remain prioritizing their own, to create balance. Any group which serves all equally and not itself first, will slowly fall.

Jimmy Seville · 23-03-2016 15:44

(Original post by AliRizzo)
Lmao is it that guy from Croydon who confronted a woman?

Yeah, not even sure what a 'mealy mouthed reply' is...

The parodies on Twitter are actually pretty good as well

UnknownRoyalist · 23-03-2016 16:12

(Original post by fallen_acorns)
Proposition: Western individualism will go down in history as both the catalyst to success, but also its eventual downfall.

Discussion spoiler-ed for those who don't care.
Spoiler:
Show

For me in the wake of yesterdays attacks people are only focusing on the symptoms of the problem, rather then the problem itself, which is that in the west, specifically within white communities we have became dangerously individualistic, and are failing in comparison to more collective groups.

Individualism is responsible for a lot of good, but also for the dangerous idea that 'we are all of equal importance'.

Now that Idea is perfect in isolation, we are all of equal importance.. but it falls completely flat when its not shared by every one in society. In western societies we value ourselves, and only ourselves above everyone else. The idea of the family is weak on average within white communities, and the idea of loyalty due to location, race, age, culture, is considered a negative.

The problem with these is that it makes us weak. It makes us perfectly moral and good humans, but weak.

If you have 1 group of 100 people who are all working to serve their best interests.. Their neighbors are another group of 100 individuals, who all serve a common purpose, what will happen? The first group wont work together, they seek different goals, they view themselves as equal to all 200 people, and think everyone should be treated the same. The second group view their 100 people as more important then the first group, and will act together in accordance to what is best for their collective identity, and not what is best for all 200 people.

The result? the 2nd group prospers with their greater collective influence over the first group.

A good example of this is how brilliantly some communities often band together collectively to achieve their goals.

Examples:

Black lives matter - Brilliant collective movement, that is having a real influence. Even if their means are sometimes questionable, their results are not. They constantly put their cause to the forefront of our consciousness.

LGBT movement - near complete success in the UK, legalized marriage, broke down discrimination, ended awful laws, approaching a complete cultural norm.

Chinese expat communities in western countries - Establish, work together as a community to pool resources (sometimes unethically) but create an economically prosperous bubble in otherwise troubled cities.

South/East Asian families - Put their family above all else, would do anything for each other.. pool resources and support children in a way far greater then many western families

All function because and succeed because they band together a group of individuals, and put more focus and importance on those individuals then any others not in their group.

Honestly, here in china there is a common collective identity: chinese. and that comes with a hierarchy of importance: starting with your family, and ending with your country. Anything outside of your collective group, is less important then what is inside, and should be considered secondary to what is best for your group.

This is demonstrated really well by the refugee crisis. Why didn't some gulf states take in refugees? Because its not in their interest, or the interest of their people. and those interests come before the interest of refugees, as that is their collective group.

Why does Europe say yes to refugees? Because there is no collective group (or at least a very week one) as a result all life is important. An English person is barely more important to another English person then a refugee in desperate need of help. So they say yes..

What happens? the self serving country prospers without the problems associated with the crisis.. the country that helps suffers internally for doing what was right.

I genuinely worry that the idea that thinking as a collective is not only been abandoned, but is also downright condemned by large parts of our society. And at the moment that is quite right. For instance, right now it is ridiculous to have a collective group of 'white people'.. we don't need it, white people are the luckiest in society in western countries, as we live as the majority, have the majority of influence, no social barriers etc..

But the tides are turning. and slowly life for people who share western European culture (of all races) are feeling more threatened. Nothing will happen this year, or next, but some day the problem will be all to big to reverse.

Our individualism will be what causes our downfall. Our ethical decisions and morals, whilst completely just, will fall flat against other cultures and groups who don't share the idea that we are all of equal importance. And this will be most noticeably by the rich/powerful, who will let the normal man/woman of their country burn if it serves their personal worth.

Not surprising that the west was at its most powerful when the idea of nations and countries were at their most distinct and had the most importance.

In summery:

In an ideal world, we have every race and culture living in equal importance, having equal respect and value. But that cant be achieved as long as we have groups working for the interest of themselves alone. So as long as all groups do not adhere to the idea that all are equal, all groups must remain prioritizing their own, to create balance. Any group which serves all equally and not itself first, will slowly fall.

Where did this come from?

Revision home

Revision discussion

Help with your subject

Tools and resources

Did he block me?

New uni friend is ghosting me

Is this affecting young men?

Learn an A-level in 7 weeks?!

Can you do this at Oxford?

See more of what you like on The Student Room

Groups associated with this forum:

See more of what you like on The Student Room

Shortcuts

Get Started

Using TSR

Info

TSR Group

Connect with TSR

Revision home

Revision discussion

Help with your subject

Tools and resources

Miscellaneous Thread V watch

Did he block me?

New uni friend is ghosting me

Is this affecting young men?

Learn an A-level in 7 weeks?!

Can you do this at Oxford?

See more of what you like on The Student Room

Groups associated with this forum:

Spotlight

See more of what you like on The Student Room

Shortcuts

Get Started

Using TSR

Info

TSR Group

Connect with TSR