Awful Articles

https://www.thrillist.com/drink/nation/what-is-a-dive-bar-anyway

Calling taverns "dive bars" is apparently the next social injustice crisis. Because it's offensive to dive bars.

I couldn't make up something this ridiculous if I tried.

Could it be satire?

Quote :

Is there a condom machine in the restroom?
Might be a dive.

...No.

It didn't feel like it, especially when it launched into the incredibly boring history lesson that I didn't read, because it's about the fucking origin of a term used for shitty bars.

I'd say all bars are shitty, but that's not entirely true. Just the one's located in accessible areas like on a main street.

Almost every bar is great as long as you know when and when not to go there.

Like sports bars.

No time is a good time to go.

No, you just need to be already too drunk to care.

Bad time to be a depressive drunk.

http://christianlind.com/is-star-wars-the-force-awakens-an-allegory-of-gamergate/

This is hilarious.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/william-martin/by-feminism-do-you-mean-egalitarianism_b_5630165.html

Then I searched "egalitarian feminism" because I was pretty sure he just made that term up, & I found this confused bit of concern trolling.

Okay, you told me to head over here to see what you had posted about The Force Awakens. I thought it was going to be awful, not completely crazy. I think that was more than worth it.

My personal favorite part is that the metaphor doesn't even make sense internally. How can The Escapist be Finn if "The Game Journos" are Kylo Ren? Last I checked, Finn was not a part of Kylo Ren.

That sounds like the making of a very strange fan-fiction where they use the Dragon Ball Z-inspired Fusion attack to make Finnlo or something. Why do I have this awful nagging feeling that now that I've said that, someone is going to write a fan-fic like that?

What is this thread for?

It is for articles which are awful, as the name states.

I figured that it was supposed to be the antithesis of the Interesting Articles thread.

Sort of. An awful article can be "interesting" in a "so bad it's good" sort of way, but my intent with Interesting Articles is that they would be thought-provoking. However, I was finding it bogged down with a lot of posts where people were basically going "look how stupid this is" or posting things to refute them. So I made this in an effort to siphon some of that off.

Enjoy Your Transgender Bathrooms, We Just Lost America.

>Being this reactionary
>Being this moralistic

I spent the whole time thinking about the irony of how letting an American flag touch the ground, as in that picture, is considered disrespectful, then quit halfway through out of boredom.

The reason why "they" give trophies for "EIGHTH FREAKING PLACE!" is because research has shown that children develop emotional regulation abilities better if they get a consolation prize. Really, does nobody think that MAYBE there's a reason why people who devote their careers to learning how to teach children do the things they do?

No, because children should storm beaches and defend freedom like they used to before needing a safe space because of harsh words.

What Harley said sounds funny, I've changed my mind.

That was quick.

This Photo of Ohio Cops Posing with Black Lives Matter Protesters in Cleveland Is Awesome

>Being this liberal

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/darwin-on-the-right/

Scientific American decided to try to explain why conservative Christians should embrace evolution. I appreciate the concept, but "evolution fits your political-religious values" is a terrible argument with terrible implications. This thing strongly implies that evolution is a justification for conservative Christian ideas of morality, free market, & family structure, & that's just no, no, no, a thousand times, no.

Also, does it occur to them that the implication of this argument is that if you oppose these politics, you should reject evolutionary theory?

It's just perpetuating the problem with Creationism, namely deciding what is legitimate science based not on weight of evidence, but on whether or not it agrees with their religious & political agendas.

That would mean Marxists and Egoists should reject evolutionary theory and that makes no damn sense.