southsamurai

It's about goals.

The whole point of guerrilla tactics is asymmetry. It's a smaller force with less resources maximizing impact.

In order to work against it, you have to go hard.

Going hard means wrecking support and resources. You know, like dumping agent orange, white phosphor, mustard gas, that kind of war crime level brutality.

If you do that, then if the goal isn't making enemies and spending large amounts of money, you're fucked. Because you'll spend billions and make enemies not only in the target region, but all around it, and for generations after.

Given enough budget and the freedom to destroy everything, guerilla tactics are easy to counter.

Ok so Lenovo is essentially bringing graphene to Motorola phones, and just flew past damn near every other laptop in repairability.

If this is a sign of things to come, I'm going to have trouble not getting hyped. I'm already at half chub for whatever phone happens, and now this t series news comes along. I'm going to jizz my pants soon

I'm stuck in DDD land too. It totally sucks, and you have my sympathy

If that's the same person, they had shit ton of dental work done, because the angles are different

A lot of the time, coming in with visual examples to help guide the conversation will help.

Like, if you know cosmetology terminology, just going that route is great, but even with my best friend teaching it, I don't have enough grasp to pull it off. So find visuals. From what my friend has said, it's going to go a lot smoother than just using words even if you do have some jargon under your belt.

It's also important, imo, to realize that unless you just let it stay natural, you'll be changing styles a few times as you progress from shoulder length to properly long hair. Not just because it'll frame your face different, but because the weight of the hair changes how it hangs and flows.

I've had long hair since I was 12ish, and until my balding progressed far enough that my only style option was skullet, I tried all kinds of styles. I agree with my friend (who, unfortunately, didn't get into the field until after my ass went bald heavily); the best cuts I ever had were when I took visuals in and used them as a framework for figuring out what I wanted on my head shape with my face.

If it helps, I did find that I looked more androgynous (despite being a beefy dude with a beard) with more layered or feathered styles. It kinda took the harder edges of my features and softened them a tad. Since I have a generally round face and head, it also lengthened my face more than I had thought just a hairstyle could. So, I reckon if my features could be softened that much, it might be a good starting place to look for visuals of androgynous vibes.

that's kinda where I was in my early twenties after letting it grow back out from a high school mullet.

Something like that might be a decent starting point since you haven't reached shoulder length yet.

But it really comes down to how it fits your face, so pics are only a starting point for a good stylist to work from

It already has.

Too many people throw around both terms willy-nilly, for any kind of age gap. It's fucking stupid, and it completely plays into the witchhunt hysteria mindset people seem to revel in.

Shit, I'm not even a fan of applying pedophilia to people into teenagers. It's still shitty, but it isn't the same thing at all as someone trying to diddle a child. Anyone that doesn't get the difference is a moron, and if they also don't get why conflating things in that way is dangerous, they're beyond help. There's terms for the different age groupings (and it isn't based purely on age, for good reason) for a damn good reason. But that's what happens when language drifts, so I've mostly learned to ignore it.

Look, let's just take it there, one more time

Sounds like you need some vitamin D in your mouth

I am both frightened and aroused

You've apparently never slipped on a banana peel

Which slid you off the side of a hill

Where you rolled onto a trampoline

Then bounced off, losing all your clothes

Onto a pogo stick

Which then bounced through an oil refinery

Where you slammed into a group of workers

Who were in the middle of a shower

Then landed square on a cock that went balls deep

And then got thrown off a half second before you came

Only to go sliding down the hallway, missing the orgy

To faceplant into the lap of a crack whore

That had just finished the last of her last rock

And was in the middle of explosive diarrhea

After having eaten a can of surstromming

Then spinning around until you're cock first in her syphilitic twat

Only to realize it's OPs mom

We got to pick, though most people stuck with the closest version to their real name. I did.

But we could pick any name, if qe wanted, which was pretty cool

Just removed?

Not power tripping.

Is it debatable if the image is or isn't NSFL? Sure, but that's inherent to moderation; judgement calls suck to make, but they do need to be made quickly when something is sensitive.

I personally wouldn't have removed the post without also contacting the poster to repost with an nsfw tag, but it is well within acceptable limits to pull something fast when a shit storm starts brewing in comments. Ideal, no; but also not power tripping

I can't comment on your being stupid or not based only on this post.

However, you aren't mistaken about the misogyny of that concept

Well, obviously it depends on which myth/legend/author is in play.

That being said, vampire myths were not prone to syringe teeth. The bite opens an artery, or just tears a patch out, and the blood comes out either under its own pressure, or assisted by sucking (I vant to suck your blood).

Typically, and I haven't read every vampire fiction piece so ymmv, when syringe teeth are used, it's for injection rather than extraction. Typically some kind of anaesthetic and/or blood thinner, with consumption still being via the mouth rather than the teeth.

Werewolf (or other therianthropes) shedding is less clear cut. In myths, I never saw any mention of it at all. At most, shedding skin entirely, or otherwise leaving behind parts of one shape when transforming was involved, but that was in creatures far away from what could be called werewolf. So, shedding hair like a dog or cat does isn't part of traditional lore.

Unlike vampires, however, it does appear in modern fiction. Most often as a joke or aside, but it is present. The apparent reasoning being linked to how long the individual stays in their wolf/animal form.

In other words, it seems most writers have an assumption that the "wolf" won't shed unless it spends enough time in that shape to have hair reach the end of its growth cycle. However, I don't recall any examples of that applying in reverse. When in human form, it's rarely covered, but the default is that weres who only shift monthly do have normal human processes, including shedding hair as it cycles.

But there are references to both here and there (please don't ask me to remember which books, I have read way too many urban fantasy series to keep track of exactly which author uses what system). Wolves shedding when in wolf form even when only in it overnight does happen. As does humans not shedding hair, or regrowing hair they cut or otherwise lost, after returning to human form.

When it comes to this kind of stuff, there can be difficulty sorting out older myths from those that get passed around now due to stuff like dracula, the old universal movies, etc. Most of the scholarly, historical information is hard to find nowadays. It's buried on the internet, and local libraries are more likely to have secondary works interpreting old lore than direct translations of the small amount of written records of such legends. But it is out there, if you have reason and motivation to slog through shitty ai search results.

Here follows geek/writer stuff, be warned.

Now, personally, I've used both shapeshifters and vampires in both written fiction and rpg play. My choices tended towards a time based factor for shedding. Since hair takes time to be shed in humans or other animals, my default is that any hair or fur is "new" upon the shape change. Thus, shedding would only be a factor after extended time in a shape. Indeed, one version of were-being I use has reduced aging because of that. Each form ages slightly slower than normal by virtue of the thing that causes the power (in my main worlds, it's a magically linked quasi-virus symbiote), and each change hits pause on the other form, leading to life expectancy into the two hundreds or more. However, they would also shed less because the symbiote prefers a stasis when possible. It's linked to fast healing.

Vampires in my main fiction and trrpg worlds are also symbiote virus based. Part of that is being able to inject a bolus of the virus through the fangs at will (and sometimes involuntarily), so fangs are essentially syringes in that setting. I have played around with the fangs being able to suck up blood, but it isn't really viable on a "realism" level (yeah, it's fantasy, but I try not to hand wave bullshit when it isn't essential). The mechanisms for sucking parts in real world animals/creatures just don't match what could work in human sized fangs, much less alongside injection.

That being said, my main universe has a vampire planet. And there are things there that can both suck and inject via the same body part. Larger predators there, which originated before the symbiote got there, developed fangs capable of doing the job. Humans that arrived there were not dominant as a species for quite some time. The large arachnid-ish predators there were particularly fond of human juices. Even after alterations by the symbiote, it took time before the new vampires had the power to be on equal footing, and much longer before they got powerful enough to dominate the planet.

Anyways, that's the geek gush over lol

That's a pleasant surprise!

Sorry, but as shitty as they are as people, they turned out some trippy great videos.

I might support it if they went ahead and took out all the religious leaders. Yes, that one too.

Sterility isn't necessary for safe water. You only need it to be pathogen free, and lack dangerous contaminants.

So, beyond that, it kinda depends on what you think "clean" means.

I took a quick gander at how Ireland's drinking/tap water is regulated.

Assuming whatever location is actually following regulations and standards, y'all got some damn nice water out of the tap. The EU regulations are great. There shouldn't be anything pathogenic at any concentration to worry about. Since water there is treated, I doubt you'd have much of anything reaching your tap at all. You'd have more particulates than anything else, some trace minerals (which is a good thing), maybe some organics here and there (think bits of algae swept along).

Think about it like aquariums. You don't want sterility; you want a healthy, flourishing biome because all those bacteria eat bad things.

It's the same in water pipes; you get a good biofilm growing, and pathogens aren't going to be able to set up shop, even if they do get past whatever treatment is going on at the source. I've even seen arguments against chlorination in water treatment because it's indiscriminate. It can kill off the friendly stuff and make the system as a whole less resilient to unexpected blooms of something pathogenic.

If you ever set up ponds, you actively encourage bacterial growth as part of the process. There's aquaculture guides where between the right plants, fish, and bacteria, you can end up with water so clean you'd want to drink it, and can, even starting from sewage contaminated water.

If you then slap a filter on to catch particulates, you're left with something that's more pure than if you sterilized the source water by chemical or other means.

Anyway, the EU standards for drinking water are top tier. Go look them up, it's a really comprehensive and science driven set of standards. If your locale is even half-assing things, you've got great water indeed

I don't know what you mean. They who?