Deme

Who could’ve seen this coming…

Pepe was also stolen back in 2016 or so, but that one got reclaimed by people “pretending” that it wasn’t a symbol of hate. The ok-sign shouldn’t even need to be reclaimed since it has such strong previous connotations. But if you do think that it is, and that every cheff doing the chefs kiss or a scuba diver saying “I’m ok” with their hand is actually doing a nazi hate symbol, then it too should be reclaimed.

He’s doing it like that.

The association of the gesture with white supremacy derived from the assertion that the three upheld fingers resemble a W and the circle made with the thumb and forefinger resemble the head of a P, together standing for “White Power”. While some members of the alt-right started using the symbol after the launch of the 4chan campaign, it initially remained ambiguous whether or not it was being used to communicate genuine adherence to white supremacy, or with deliberately ironic motives.

That’s just the ok-sign.

Edit: Ok sure it can be used and interpreted as a white power thing, but I would prefer for that not to be the case. The alt-right co-opting of the sign is one of the most stupid things in recent memory.

I have not heard of that association for a long time. Mostly it’s just a lmaooo gotem -type of thing. For proof, read the other comments here.

But sure, do give the nazis more ammo by giving ownership of such symbols to them.

Edit: I recommend you read the parts about “the circle” game and White power symbol on this Wikipedia article.

Not efficiently, but the boat wouldn’t go in circles and the rowers wouldn’t be bumping into each other.

It’s not as efficient, but it’s not like there’s a shortage of manpower there. Also not quite as ergonomic, but that definitely isn’t a concern here. The main problem is cramming as much rowing power in the boat as possible, and that setup works.

The last time I rowed a boat was a bit over three weeks ago, and reversing has it’s uses.

Edit: And one more mistake in the picture. The oars would be bumping into the structural beams.

Edit2: It’s probably an ai slop illustration and I have no reason to think such setups were ever actually used, so my reasoning about sacrificing efficiency for more rowers is moot. My main point was that such a setup would be technically possible and would go forward.

No and no. Every oar handle goes forward and back at the same time and the boat goes forward. That just means that the rowers facing backwards are doing the movements in the opposite phase compared to the rowers facing forwards, pulling when the others are pushing and so on.

The only issue I see, is that the oar on the left has nobody holding it. And ofc the side of the boat is missing.

I think “get even more money” has always been a thing they strive for, but I get what you mean.

Can you quote the part where I said that you said that? Oh don’t bother, you can’t even seem to accurately quote yourself. The comment you replied to was “…or just too close to nazi symbolism for comfort?” and your reply was “All of the above tbh.”

I just explained in length what I said and why I said it, so I’m not going to do it again. This has been entertaining enough. Have a good night.

I’d guess that it just needs the space so it can extend that far into the tree, without blocking the airways.

Huh, the link to the research article works for me. Weird. I’ll post the summary below. The woodpecker is trying to break the surface of the tree, whereas a dead-blow hammer is “helpful in minimizing damage to the struck surface”, as said in that wikipedia article. The total impulse just means how much energy the bird is expending, whereas the peak force is what breaks the structure of the wood. So it’s beneficial to get as hard of an impact as possible with the highest possible peak force.

The skull of a woodpecker is hypothesized to serve as a shock absorber that minimizes the harmful deceleration of its brain upon impact into trees^1–11 and has inspired the engineering of shock-absorbing materials^12–15 and tools, such as helmets.¹⁶ However, this hypothesis remains paradoxical since any absorption or dissipation of the head’s kinetic energy by the skull would likely impair the bird’s hammering performance⁴ and is therefore unlikely to have evolved by natural selection. In vivo quantification of impact decelerations during pecking in three woodpecker species and biomechanical models now show that their cranial skeleton is used as a stiff hammer to enhance pecking performance, and not as a shock-absorbing system to protect the brain. Numerical simulations of the effect of braincase size and shape on intracranial pressure indicate that the woodpeckers’ brains are still safe below the threshold of concussions known for primate brains. These results contradict the currently prevailing conception of the adaptive evolution of cranial function in one of nature’s most spectacular behaviors.

Van Wassenbergh S, Ortlieb E, Mielke M … Woodpeckers minimize cranial absorption of shocks Current Biology, 2022; 32, 3189-3194.e4

If you want to debate semantics, I’ll say that what’s there to admit? I never made any claims about what it is you’re saying, other than that one citation of your original response. The closest was when I said that “If you wish to label all of those as nazism, only the nazis will thank you for it.”. I didn’t claim that you do, but if you do, then only the nazis will thank you for it.

What I did do was take what I perceived to be the reasoning behind your comment (this picture of people posing as vikings is too close to nazi symbolism, so the concept and aesthetics of vikings is too close to nazi symbolism, presumably due to the far-rights attempts to appropriate said aesthetics) and apply it in a wider context in an attempt to demonstrate why I have my issues with it. If the vikings are too close to nazi symbolism, then what else is? You didn’t explain your reasoning, so I had to make some assumptions based on what I see around me in the world. We have plenty of neonazis here in Finland trying to appropriate ancient symbols for themselves, and we’re having similar discussions about that here every now and then. Countries (even smaller ones) aren’t hiveminds and you will find most opinions represented within them.

If you think that symbols shouldn’t be surrendered to the nazis, then why take issue with this image where the viking aesthetic is being used outside of fascistic ideology? It only serves to diminish that association. And the fact that you do take issue with this, means that you don’t want to see symbols which you consider to be too close to nazi symbolism to be used by those who don’t wish to portray themselves as nazis, effectively surrendering the symbol to the nazis. If you want the concept and aesthetics of vikings to be surrendered to them, what other symbols do you want to surrender?

You make no efforts to clear up your stance to any of the above, so I’m still left speculating.

Your original response was “All of the above tbh.” to a list of critiques of the photoshoot. If you think that posing for a viking picture is too close to nazi symbolism, then why do you think that? I can’t see anything that would directly associate the picture with the german nazi party, or fascism in general.

The only explanation I could figure was that you think the nazi appropriation of the general aesthetic taints the whole concept of vikings with the nazi label. If my assesment is incorrect, then I do apologize. It’s just that that specific line of thinking is sadly somewhat common and is the core of a wider phenomenon of surrendering the symbols and aesthetics of many pre-christian traditions (particularly in northern Europe) to the nazis.

That one has basically no other associations in the western world and I’m not a hindu, so I don’t have a reason to. But pagan traditions, symbolism and mythology are a different matter. If you wish to label all of those as nazism, only the nazis will thank you for it.

I was talking about the symbolism associated with the viking cultures, not the way they conducted themselves when visiting neighbours. I wouldn’t want the majority of thar to be shelved off as nazism just because some germans a millenia later thought the letters and mythology looked cool and wanted them for themselves. Or should we ditch every aspect of mythology and folklore that the schizoid Himmler decided to take a fascination with?

That is a common misconception. Shock absorption would diminish pecking performance. You want your hammer to be hard instead of soft if you want to get anything done. Woodpeckers have very stiff heads because of this.

While I think it’s just harmless fun, understand most of those criticizms. But the nazi comparisons seem sad and pathetic. Should every symbol the nazis tried to appropriate for themselves be surrendered to them? Should we give them the ability to limit what symbols the rest of us are allowed to use? I don’t think we should.

They didn’t cut ties with the UN as an institution, just SecGen Guterres.

Unfortunately.

Repeating the last word of the top caption at the start of the bottom caption used to be a common ironic trope at least in certain circles, an attempt to make the meme shittier on purpose. An elegant literary device for a more civilized age…