#profit system | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

Visit Blog

Explore Tumblr blogs with no restrictions, modern design and the best experience.

Fun Fact

When “GIF” was named word of the year in 2012, Oxford Dictionaries U.S.A. credited Tumblr for pushing the word.

georgecounty1 · 11 months

Text

THE PROFIT MACHINE: Unlock Your Business Potential with Profit Machine

The ultimate business platform designed to empower entrepreneurs and help them maximize their profits. Whether you're a seasoned business owner or just starting out, Profit Machine is your one-stop solution for unlocking your business potential and achieving financial success. Let's explore how this platform can revolutionize your business journey. By using this platform today you can start earning profits like a well-oiled machine from multiple income streams. So what are you still waiting for today let's get on this boat of financial breakthrough together and change the story for good, to know more about this wonderful pathway opportunity then click on the image above and get started today.

#make money now #make money online #make money from home #business #profit turbo #profit system

0 notes

govtindiajobs · 1 year

Text

Unlock the Secrets of ChatGPT's Profit System and Earn up to $1000 Every Day

Unleash Your Earning Potential with ChatGPT With ChatGPT, you have the potential to transform your income in a way that you may have never thought possible. Whether you’re looking to supplement your current income or to earn a full-time living, ChatGPT can help you achieve your goals. In this section, we’ll explore the various ways that ChatGPT can help you increase your earnings and become…

View On WordPress

#ChatGPT community #Earning potential #Financial freedom #Online income #Profit system

1 note · View note

dontmean2bepoliticalbut · 19 days

Text

HOW CHRISTIANITY SUPPORTS MULTIRACIAL, MULTICULTURAL DEMOCRACY

'The Bible doesn't mention abortion or gay marriage, but it goes on and on about forgiving debt, liberating the poor, and healing the sick' — This pastor perfectly explained how the values expressed in Christianity can support a multiracial, multicultural democracy instead of right-wing extremism (via jamestalarico on TikTok)

#christianity #religion #democracy

290 notes · View notes

obstinaterixatrix · 2 months

Text

here are all the recs I posted for femslash february 2024...! each individual rec post can be found in my femslash feb recs tag. I actually thought I wasn't going to be able to do this because work got super chaotic, but in the end I couldn't bear to skip out on a leap year. that's a whole extra day for yuri.

last year I focused on official releases, so this year I wanted to focus on series that aren't technically officially available (plus a french-japanese film). fan translations are always a dicey for artists/translators/publishers/etc because obviously they need to get paid... but yuri's already such an overlooked genre that—in an official capacity—we end up with a couple drops from what's already a pretty small pool. I read hana to hoshi about a decade ago, and I keep submitting it to the seven seas survey for licensure! and yet!! no dice. and even when there are official releases, sometimes they just... disappear!? wish you were gone was licensed and then taken down, so for a while the only way to read it (if you missed out on buying it) was the fan translation. I think it's important to support artists and official releases, and also, to appreciate the thankless endeavor(/crime) of scanlation.

hope yall find something you like!

#femslash february #femslash feb recs #ff recs #recs #rambled a lot for this one lol #but like. yeah. honey & honey is imo a pretty culturally significant work #but I can't see any publishers picking it up for licensure #maybe for a recent autobio manga but certainly not one from 20 years ago #and from a marketing standpoint. it's 'hard' to push yuri as a genre.#bl has an obvious and profitable demographic (women)#m/f has an obvious and profitable demographic (women)#but--if you make a distinction between yuri and H (I do)--yuri doesn't really have an obvious and profitable demographic #so it's a lot harder to pitch yuri... which means it's a lot harder to even introduce yuri to a broader audience...#and thus the cycle continues...#plus there's the whole systemic misogyny embeded into a patriarchal society which devalues stories centered around women etc #anyway the POINT is. commit to yuri duty. be a yuri warrior. write femslash. hype femslash.

172 notes · View notes

guiltyidealist · 7 months

Text

It should be a criminal offense if an insurance company is responsible for a delay in a policyholder's necessary health care.

Withholding prescribed treatments, even for just a day, can be anywhere from inconvenient to catastrophic for the victim. Medical providers may not withhold necessary treatment from any patient on any grounds, as it is their duty to provide it-- it should be justly illegal for any "middle man" to interfere with a medical provider's legal and ethical obligation to treat a patient.

Severity of the charge and its legal consequences should depend upon the scope of the offense (length of delay) and its consequences to the victim (impact on the person).

The testimonies of the victim, the pharmacy, and the medical provider who prescribed the treatment should be key considerations for the determination. Additional important testimony should come from the victim's other medical providers, housemates, family, educators/mentors, colleagues/coworkers, or employers.

The charge should become criminal record for the company. The company (perhaps the agent's office) should be fined per day delayed.

Some taxation can be applied; just to pay off the folks who do the filing, advocacy, testimony, processing. A hefty majority of the fine should be compensation owed to the victim.

If delays became a criminal charge on companies' records, then companies would have a strong motive to terminate agents who aren't performing with punctuality. It would become their best financial interest to invest only in timely agents who would, in turn, gain a best interest to invest only in timely subordinates.

I posit that insurance delays would wane significantly, resulting in more timely delivery of treatments to policyholders, and many people's qualities of life would improve drastically for it.

#of course. this is an idea that sticks /within/ the overall capitalist framework.#the purpose is to promote the welfare of the people /while/ they are trapped within the structure #hopefully helping enable them to -- among other things -- abolish and emancipate themselves of the structure altogether #i know that the ''real'' problem is the /existence/ of insurance companies #the privatization of health care. the profitability of health care.#the fact that money is power in our system. the fact that whoever has it is allowed to control the lives and deaths of others #the true solution to the problem presented here is the abolition of the capitalist system that manufactures it.#what i provided is a sort of ''meantime mitigation'' strategy #*sigh*#rant #psych major rants #fuck capitalism #guillotine the rich #health care #insurance #pharmacy #socialism #leftist #leftblr #anticapitalist #ableism #healthism #classism #medical abuse #medical neglect #systemic inequity #accountability

90 notes · View notes

soracities · 9 months

Note

Hi! So I tried not to say anything about some anti makeup posts I saw on your blog but I need to say this. I think you're very wise and I agree it's very important for us to love ourselves as we are. But some people like myself doesn't care about 'empowering' of makeup or whatever but we just have fun with it and we just love it. I say we because I know there is a lot of people like me. Yeah, we are feeding capitalism or whatever, but world is beautiful and it's also terrible so people trying make themselves feel good, have fun, ect. I see a lot of people who don't wear makeup and i'm happy for them! I didn't wear makeup until i turned 20 i think and felt good.

One thing I wanted to add is in response of post about feminine girls. I think everything needs balance and sometimes people tend to overreact in their opinion and divide everything in black and white. Personally I never cared how women around me looked and what they were wearing. But I would like to have same treatment, and not to feel silly for wearing pink or feminine clothes.

Sorry, I don't know English very well so maybe I can't translate my idea entirely. What I'm trying to say i think everyone should do what they like and leave each other in peace.

Sorry for this essay, just wanted to share my point of view.

Hi, anon! I'm sorry for the delay in getting to this, but I appreciate you writing this (and your English was fine, don't worry)

I think the main argument of those posts (and my own feelings about this) is not about makeup on its own, or even judgement about who does and doesn't choose to wear it--what they are criticizing is a particular part of the society we live in which puts a huge emphasis on women's beauty and appearance in order to fulfill an idea of what a woman "should" be, and the role that makeup plays in that as a result. Because whether we like it or not, whether we believe in them or not, whether we feel pressured by them or not, these expectations do exist. How we personally respond to them does not change that.

I personally don't have an issue with makeup or the concept of it (in almost every culture on earth, humans have been using makeup of some kind for literally thousands of years)--but what I do have a problem with is when we treat makeup, or other traditionally "feminine" forms of expression as neutral things when they are not. A comb or a hair tie is neutral--it's just a thing. Lipstick and eyeliner are also just things, but only when they exist by themselves--and in reality they don't exist by themselves: they exist in a world where we value women on their physical appearance before we value them for anything else--lipstick and eyeliner exist to emphasise parts of your appearance, to make you look a certain way--and in a society where we put so much importance on women looking a certain way, they aren't just ordinary things you toy around with for fun. You can have fun with them, but it doesn't change their role. They can't be treated as exceptions from the world they are used in.

I think sometimes people assume that being anti-makeup is the same as being anti-women-who-wear-makeup, which misses the point (and also suggests a very dangerous idea which I think, sometimes, is why people respond so angrily to these criticisms: because if we believe that being anti-makeup = being anti-women, then therefore makeup = womanhood, and this is simply not true). Whether you wear these things just for fun and to enjoy yourself isn't what is being talked about because these criticisms are not about you on a personal level: they are about looking at a society that is as image-obsessed as ours, and asking why makeup has the role that it has when 1) it is almost exclusively aimed at women--women who, as a group, have been historically marginalised, and whose value, historically, has almost always been measured in terms of their beauty before anything else and 2) the makeup that is emphasized, the trends and styles that come and go, are often not so much about self-expression (if they were, people would be freely wearing all sorts of wild colours and styles: when we talk about "makeup culture" it's not the same kind of makeup used in the goth, punk, or alt scenes for example where makeup plays a very different role) but almost always about achieving or aspiring towards a type of beauty that is valued or expected: to make you look younger, to make your eyes brighter or larger, to make your lips bigger or sexier, your cheekbones more prominent etc--again, on their own, these things may not be a big deal, but they exist in a world where having these looks means you are valued in a certain way as a woman. And when this exists in our kind of world, where the power dynamics we have automatically mean women's perceived power is through beauty, and where we insist so much on women being a particular kind of beautiful (and this starts in childhood) we have to ask and investigate WHY that is--why this type of beauty and not another? why (almost only) women? who benefits from this? who suffers as a result?

The argument of "not all women" wear makeup for empowerment misses the point of these criticism, because it is focusing on a person's individual choices in a way that suggests our choices can define the world we live in, and they can't. We are deeply social animals. Therefore, how we appear to each other and to ourselves is a socially influenced phenomenon. This applies for race, for sexuality, and for gender. How women are perceived at large, in different social structures, is a social phenomenon influenced by the societies we exist in and the values of those societies. These criticisms are about the society we make those choices in and how that can affect us. For you, makeup may be something fun and enjoyable and that's fine. I'm not saying that's untrue or that people don't feel this way or that you are wrong for feeling this way. It's also not saying that you are brain-washed or oppressing yourself for it. But it doesn't change the world we live in. Someone feeling perfectly happy to go out with makeup or without makeup, and feeling no pressure to do either, is great--but it doesn't mean there aren't a lot of women who do feel pressured into wearing it, and that pressure is a social one. It doesn't change the inequality that exists between how women's physical appearances are judged compared to men's. It doesn't change the fact that almost every childhood story most kids hear (that aren't about animals) have a "beautiful princess" (and very little else is said about her except that she is beautiful) and a "brave" knight/prince/king/whichever: the princess (or maiden or whatever young woman) is defined by how she looks; the male in the story by how he acts.

It also doesn't change the fact that so many young girls grow up hearing the women around them criticize various parts of their bodies and that they carry this into their lives. It doesn't change the fact that we expect (in Western countries at least) for women to have criticisms about their appearance and they are "stuck-up" or "full of themselves" if they don't. It doesn't change the fact that magazines photos, red carpet photos, films, tv shows etc., feature actresses who are beautiful in a way that is absolutely above and beyond exceptional (and who either have had work done cosmetically, or are wealthy enough to be able to afford to look the way they do through top-class makeup artists, personal trainers etc) but who we think are within the "normal" range of beauty because faces like theirs are all that we see--how many famous actors / entertainers can you name who look like they could be someone's random uncle, or "just some guy" (writing this, I can think of 5). Now how many actresses, equally famous, can you think of that are the same? Very, very, very few.

The point of those posts, and why I feel so strongly about this, is that we have a deeply skewed view of beauty when it comes to women, because, as a society, we place so much on how they look in such a way that it is not, and was never meant to be, achievable: therefore anything that contributes to how women look, that markets itself in the way that the makeup industry does in this day and age, needs to be questioned and looked at in relation to that. No one is saying don't wear eyeliner or blush--what they are trying to say is that we need to be aware of the kind of world eyeliner and blush exists in, what their particular functions as eyeliner and blush do in the world that they exist in, that we exist in, and how this does impact the view we have on makeup as a result. Your personal enjoyment may be true to you and others, but this doesn't change the role of female beauty in the world because, again, our personal choices don't define the world in this way. Often, it's the other way around. And we cannot deny this fact because, while it may not affect you negatively, it does affect others.

I absolutely agree with you because I don't care how other women around me choose to dress or express themselves, either--that's their freedom to wear what they want and enjoy themselves and I want them to have that freedom. But my view is not the world's view, and it's certainly not the view of a lot of other people, either. I don't care if another woman loves pink and wearing skirts and dresses--but, like makeup, pink, skirts, and dresses, are not neutral things either. They're tied to a particular image of 'femininity' which means they are tied to a particular way of "being a woman" in this world. I'm not saying, at all, that it's wrong to wear these things. But I'm saying we can't treat them as though these are choices as simple as choosing what kind of socks to wear, because they aren't. They are choices that have baggage. If a woman is seen as being silly, childish, or treated unequally because she enjoys cute tops and ribbons and sundresses, that's not because we are demonizing her choices, or because being anti-makeup is being anti-woman (again, it is absolutely not): it's because we as a society demonize women for any choice. That isn't because of anti-makeup stances--that's because of sexism.

You mentioned that you want to be treated the same as anyone else for wearing feminine clothes--but the fear that you wouldn't be isn't because of the discussions critiquing makeup and other traditionally "feminine" things--it's because we live in a society where women are constantly defined by how they appear on the outside, and no amount of our personal choices will make this untrue. Whether you are a girly-girl or a tomboy, you'll always be judged. And, in reality, when women follow certain beauty standards they do get treated better--but this doesn't mean much in a society where the standards are so high you can never reach them, and where the basic regard for women is so low to begin with (not to mention the hypocrisy that exists within those standards). This is what all those criticisms towards makeup and "empowerment" are about: it's about interrogating a society that is built on this kind of logic and asking why we should insist on leaving it as it is when it does so much damage. It's saying that that if we want everyone to truly feel free in how they choose to present themselves we have to go deeper than just defining freedom by these choices on their own, and look at the environment those choices are made in. And that involves some deeply uncomfortable but necessary conversations.

Also, and I think this important to remember, views on makeup and the social place of makeup will also depend on culture and where you are, and the beauty expectations you grew up with. And when it comes to the internet, and given American dominance online, a lot of these posts criticizing makeup and the way makeup is being used to sell an idea that wearing it is "empowering" to the woman (which is basically saying: you are MORE of a woman when you wear it; you are stronger and more powerful because, in our society, beauty is portrayed as a form of power: it tells you, you can battle the inequality women face by embracing the role beauty plays in our lives but it doesn't tell you this emphasis on beauty is part of that inequality), are based on the way makeup is portrayed in mostly English-speaking Western countries. My views are shaped by what I grew up seeing, and while a full face of makeup (concealer, primer, foundation, mascara, highlighter, contour, blush, brow tint, brow gel etc) may not be daily practice or even embraced in a place like France or maybe other places in mainland Europe (but that doesn't mean they don't have their own expectations of feminine beauty), they are daily practice in places like the US and Britain, and this is what most of those posts and criticisms are responding to.

We can argue as much as we want about makeup, but when you grow up in a society where women feel the need to put on makeup before going to the gym there is something seriously wrong. Embracing makeup and enjoying makeup is one thing, but it cannot be a neutral thing when so much of it is about looking like you're not wearing makeup at all, or when we assume a woman is better qualified for a job or more professional when she wears it. It cannot be a neutral thing when a singer like Alicia Keys goes makeup-free for a red carpet event and it causes a stir online because people think she looks sick (what she looks like is normal--I would argue above normal--but wearing makeup to cover up "flaws" is so normal now that we genuinely don't know what normal skin is supposed to look like because the beauty of these celebrities is part of their appeal: they are something to aspire to). It is absolutely very normal for me, where I am, to see young girls with fake lashes and filled in brows: it's not every girl I pass, but it is enough. I'm not saying they are miserable, or brain-washed, or should be judged. I can believe that for them it's something enjoyable--but how am I supposed to see something like that and not be aware of the kind of celebrities and makeup tutorials that are everywhere on TikTok and YouTube, and that they are seeing everyday? How am I not supposed to have doubts when people tell me "it's their choice!" when the choices being offered are so limited and focused on one thing?

I never wore makeup as a teenager and I still don't, but a lot of that is because I grew up surrounded by people who just didn't. Makeup was never portrayed as anything bad or forbidden (and I don't see it like that either)--it was just this thing that, for me growing up, was never made to be a necessity not even for special occasions. I saw airbrushed photos and magazines all around me, for sure, and I definitely felt the beauty pressure and the body pressure (for example, I definitely felt my confidence would be better if I wore concealer to deal with my uneven skintone, and I felt this for years). But I also know that, growing up, I saw both sides. No makeup was the default I saw at home, while makeup was the default I saw outside. And that does play a part, not just in the choices you make, but in the choices that you feel you are allowed to make. No makeup was an option for me because it was what I saw everyday, even with my own insecurities; but if you do not see that as an option around you (and I know for most girls my age, where I grew up, it probably wasn't) then how can we fully argue that the decision you make is a real choice?

If I wanted to wear a cute skirt outside, for example, and decided to shave my legs--that isn't a real choice. And it cannot ever be a real choice, no matter how much I say "this is for me" or "I prefer it like this" because going out in public with hairy legs and going out in public with shaved legs will cause two completely different reactions. How can I separate what I think is "my choice" from a choice I make because I want to avoid the negative looks and comments? And how can I argue that choosing to shave is a freely made choice when the alternative has such negativity? If you feel pressured into choosing one thing over another, that's not a choice. Does this make sense?

This is how I feel about makeup most of the time, and what I want more than anything else is for us to be able to have a conversation about why we make the choices we do beyond saying "it makes me feel good" and ending the conversation there. Again, I'm not saying people need to stop wearing makeup or stop finding enjoyment in wearing it, but I think we tend to get so focused on our own feelings about this and forget that there is a bigger picture and this picture is a deeply unequal one. That is what this conversation is about. I hope this explains some things, anon, and if I misinterpreted anything please feel free to message me again. x

#i think in essence what i'm trying to say is that #some things are true in a microcosm but you cannot make a universal application for them bc the microcosm isn't representative of the whole #and it is dangerous to assume that it is or that it can be bc you're erasing the bigger picture when you do that #it would be like a poc saying they never felt the pressure of skin-lightening creams which is amazing but it doesnt change the fact that a #whole industry exists selling skin-lightening products BECAUSE there is a demand for them and that demand exists BECAUSE there is an #expectation that they SHOULD be used and this is because there is a belief that lighter skin = more beautiful. regardless of how messed up #and damaging that logic is that doesn't mean it doesn't exist in the world #and therefore those industries exist to maintain that belief because that belief is what drives their purpose and their profits #and we are doing no favours to the countless poc who DO feel pressured to subject their skins to these products or who come away with #a deeply damaged sense of self-worth (not to mention the internalised racism that's behind these beliefs) bc of constantly being told they #are less than for being darker than a paper bag which is RIDICULOUS #saying its all down to choice is not far off from saying you can CHOOSE to not be affected by the pressure but like....that's just not true #you can't choose to not be the recipient of colorism any more than you can choose to not be the recipient of sexism. and its putting a huge #amount of pressure and responsibility for an individual to just not be affected by deeply ingrained societal pressures and expectations whe #what we SHOULD be doing is actually tackling those expectations and pressures instead #they are leaving these systems intact to continue the damage that they do by making everything about what you as an individual think and #believe but while we all ARE individuals we dont live in separate bubbles. we are part of and IN this world together. and it acts on us as #much as we act on it. but like.....i think i've gone on enough already #ask #anonymous

103 notes · View notes

revindicatedbyhistory · 4 months

Text

was reading an article on enviromentalism and there was a bit like "enviromentalist ideas might lead people to anticapitalism but most of the damage to the enviroment was done by eastern europe and the third world" source: my unpublished memoirs

#i mean yeah eastern europe did industrialize v fast so there was enviromental damage but like. they didnt build a world system where most #countries care only abour profit against mantaining the world

28 notes · View notes

badolmen · 3 months

Text

Saw a post and just want to say: yeah ‘carbon offsets’ are usually bullshit. Sure some smaller land owners might actually be planting diverse native trees in proportion* to their carbon emissions. But as someone who’s worked with The Big Ones? Absolutely horseshit.

8/10 times they find a landowner with a crappy high graded beech-birch thicket and say to the owner: ‘Hey. We’ll pay you to not cut these trees you weren’t planning on/won’t be able to cut for a profit for the next 20-40 years anyway, and you’ll get a kickback.’ Ofc the owner says yes and the Big One can pat themselves on the back and show their stockholders ‘see we’re sooooo interested in reducing our carbon footprint’ when they’re straight up Doing Nothing.

When a Big One does engage in actual tree planting it is always a monoculture. There is not an economically viable way to plant the number of trees needed to proportionally offset their emissions* without it being a thoughtless monoculture without regard for site specificity and seedling survival rates.

How about instead of doing fuck all or wasting time and resources planting monocultures these big companies actually reduce their emissions instead of using their near infinite well of wealth to increase their emissions because they can always buy more crappy stands or pay a little more to plantation owners?

*Fun fact: we are barely at the cusp of carbon research being able to answer the long term + actual potential of carbon storage of different stands based on their age and species composition. We know that younger stands grow faster and therefore capture carbon at an increased rate compared to older stands. Realistically, a large older stand will capture comparative levels of carbon to a small younger stand. You just did a huge clear cut? Congrats that’s now a massive carbon sink you can get paid to ignore it the way you would be anyway for the next 50-60 years. Unsurprisingly this does information does not incentivize the conservation of old growth stands, because the most Carbon Efficient thing to do would be to cut all the old growth for timber (preserving it from decomposition and releasing carbon in most cases) and let new, young, fast growing forests replace them. Who cares about ecological nuance? We’re storing more carbon this way!

#ra speaks #personal #carbon credits #carbon capture #forestry #forests #environmentalism #people who read an ngo article on how Great carbon credits are: how dare you suggest this system could be abused!#and I’m just like. bro. babe. beloved. I’m going to take you up north and show you the ecologically devestated beech-birch thicket #that my undergrad used as tax write off bc the last land manager fucked over the schedule for a quick profit

18 notes · View notes

thecorvidforest · 7 months

Text

if spooky season has a million haters, then I am one of them. If spooky season has ten haters, then I am one of them. If spooky season has only one hater then that is me. If spooky season has no haters, then that means I am no longer on earth. If the world is for spooky season, then I am against the world.

-visibly disabled cult survivor & DID system

#corvidforest vent post #i’m fucking exhausted of horror media profiting off of the fear of disabled people and cults #most cults aren’t fucking sacrificing children to summon demons yeah #and so much horror media has monsters that are literally just disabled people #i’m fucking sick of it #nothing against ppl who like spooky season btw. this is directed at ppl who profit off this shit #vent #did system #cult survivor #cult #cult cinema #cpunk #physical disability #dissociative identity disorder

28 notes · View notes

idk-bruh-20 · 1 year

Text

If Tony Stark was real in our reality

all the villains he " "created" " would be, like:

- oil tycoon pissed that Stark has made renewable energy free for the whole state of NY and has plans to expand the tech to other states, countries, the world

- CEO of a predatory student loan company enraged by Stark making college widely affordable through an endless supply of scholarships

- corrupt politician whose career is over after his dirty laundry gets aired - in a leak that can't be traced to Stark Industries.. but also can't not be traced to it

------

Tony: attempts to make the world a better place with the power he has

Literally all the people who benefit from the world being a bad place: time to break out the tights and commit crimes???

#one of the mcu's many unforgivable acts of cowardice:#making all of tony's solo film villains just rivals from his weapon-making days #like be real babes #this man affects profit margins #thoughts #tony stark #iron man #consider how regular activists are frequently ASSASSINATED for going against these systems irl #tony: invents self-sustaining clean energy back in 2 0 1 2 #tony: it's just a prototype 😇✨🥰😘😌✨#fossil fuel industry: quaking #@ the politicians they bought: do something???#the politicians -having flashbacks to the Congressional Hearing Clusterfuck of 2k11:#we can't????#the amount of good that tony was trying to do in the world #god had to nerf him. truly.

88 notes · View notes

howgalling · 2 years

Photo

a kisaroo. do i do worldbuilding in the descriptions of these posts, or make new posts, or use the tags. let me know lol

#tailgate does not have a functioning respiratory system due to chemical damage #MASK STAYS ON #keeping the cyberpunk theme of no e #employee protection and on the job hazards ignored for the sake of profit YAHOO #transformers #maccadam #humanformers

223 notes · View notes

obscurecharactershowdown · 11 months

Text

Group C Round 1

[image ID: the first image is of Bob Sparker, a man with a long pointed nose, with short, light colored hair, wearing a suit and tie. he's holding a microphone and is standing on stage in front of a crowd. the second image is of Kirinda, a robotic eye attached to a mechanical stalk in a futuristic-looking room. the closed caption on the image says: "thank you for the description." in all capital letters. end ID]

Bob Sparker

Bob is a guy who runs a gameshow called shock till you drop, where he straps people in an electric chair & increases the amount of electricity until the person gives up. He constantly shocks himself with the chair & seems to be able to withstand any amount of electricity. In fact, it seems to energize him, and he even stood on a lightning rod during a storm with the purpose of getting struck. Apparently (don't quote me on this) he was partially the inspiration for both Mettaton of Undertale and Spamton of Deltarune.

Kirinda

Kirinda is a "space-time transmitting machine" in the shape of a giant kirin. His job is to take the main characters to Novel Worlds (worlds that contain every story, myth, or legend ever created by humans) so that they can figure out what's corrupting them, and then he comes in at the end of the episode to clean up by purifying the monster responsible. However, he is no ordinary giant robot. He is sentient and speaks to the titular Rangers (with the world's most hokey and out of date Kansai/Southern accent to boot) through a camera shaped like an eye, and is often the one explaining the story of the world the characters are going to visit, as well as choosing which characters are going by the way of a roulette... which may or may not be complete bullshit. You see, while his role is incredibly important, he is very irresponsible and is constantly just dropping the characters off in a haphazard, dangerous manner without finishing explanations, screwing around with the roulette just to see what will happen, teasing the other characters (or subjecting them to horrible puns) and generally being incredibly vague and unhelpful beyond the bare minimum job requirements. At the end of the day though, he does really like his job (so much that he gets very salty if his screen time is threatened), and when push comes to shove, will go above and beyond to make sure everybody is safe. ( he also has an incredibly catchy image song and everyone should go look up Kirinda Ondo! on youtube right now)

#obscurecharactershowdown #group c round 1 #obscure poll #bob sparker #electricopolis #kirinda #juuni senshi bakuretsu eto ranger #if u want some behind the scenes:#the primary reason i picked bob sparker was b/c the first line of the description reminded me of a movie called deathrow gameshow #which is kinda a hidden gem so id recommend it if you havent seen it #but its about a gameshow where death row inmates can compete in life threatening challenges to earn their freedom #but the whole thing is that they never make it out alive #so its a spectacle execution #and the movie is a critique of the for profit prison system #and the spectacle of suffering #while also being a comedy w other plots going on #anyway! vote in the poll

40 notes · View notes

Last Seen Blogs

aprimrosepath

a primrose path

areweoutofthewoodsx-blog

bulletproof;

askanimalpark

yukiras

ユキ

yankafagundes-blog

.............