I’ll go first: r/kitty. One of the hundred grillion cat subs back on Reddit, the culture in this one was you posted a cat picture, and the only word allowed in the title or in any comments or replies was “Kitty.”

Someone is using that subreddit for covert communications, I just know it. Either on the level of “if u/PM_me_your_nostrils posts an orange cat, we attack at dawn!” or there’s some steganography going on with the pictures, but that subreddit was too stupid to be as active as it was.

  • @GraniteM
    link
    212 months ago

    The fashion world is in a war on pockets, so they can sell more handbags. The fewer and smaller pockets we have, the more accessories we need to buy. First they came for women’s pockets. Now they’re trying to make cargo shorts unacceptable for the same reason.

    • Captain AggravatedOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 month ago

      Nah, this is just pure economics like all the abusive shit in the video game industry, or the so-called “pink tax.”

      If gamers really cared about microtransactions, season passes, gambling mechanics, things like that, they’d stop playing games from studios that do that shit and only play games that don’t or none at all. But gamers love that shit more than rock & roll sex drugs. Gamers will pay extra to experience the abuse before it’s even ready. A lot of the indie gaming sphere especially on PC is largely free of that shit, but the so-called AAA industry is only thinking of new ways to twist the teeth out of their customers. I think they’re going to start charging console customers for controller support next year. Make sure to stock up on verification cans.

      Women want shampoo that smells like mango and pants that fit tighter than her own skin more than they want money in the bank or a roof that doesn’t leak. A few might bitch about it on Twitter and then proceed to do absolutely nothing about it. The store brand unscented bar soap that cost $6 for 9 bars is right there. The “Compare active ingredient to Head & Shoulders” shampoo for $2.49 a quart is 4 feet away. She’d rather eat her hand than wash with those.

      There is no business model for women’s pants with pockets, because pockets just don’t work well in skin-tight clothing especially on a curvy figure. Even if you made the pockets have plenty of room the outer cloth wouldn’t permit any room, and if you do cram anything in there it’ll print hideously. As much as you hear about “We want pants with pockets!” there hasn’t been and won’t be a cottage industry for this because pants that are loose and straight enough for functional pockets are already mass manufactured and sold in the men’s section. Women can and occasionally do buy men’s pants to have working pockets. By far most of them buy women’s skin tight jeans, I presume to prevent blacking out during high G maneuvers. There’s also enough women in the world who will willingly pay $1500 for a purse to keep Gucci Vuitton in business.