agracer said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

beanbean said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

Re Catherine. Listening to the podcast.

Q: Why would (insert bearded army dude) follow HER?

A: Yes! You asked the question we wanted the audience to ask. We wanted some confusion. Isn't he the more natural leader? Well, keep watching.

---

So they wanted the question asked. Posters on this thread get *****ed at for asking the question. Seems about right.

---

There were about 150 posts I skipped since 0730 today, but I mostly saw amazing alpha males who require a special slings to carry their enormous testicles complaining that women can't be leaders.

---

No one is saying that. They are saying how could this woman could be the leader. Put her in as Sarah Conner and the terminator wins.

EDIT: I didn't read every post, but the gist of what I did read seemed to be that the character/actress was miscast for the role.

---

AggieOO said:

---

agracer said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

beanbean said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

Re Catherine. Listening to the podcast.

Q: Why would (insert bearded army dude) follow HER?

A: Yes! You asked the question we wanted the audience to ask. We wanted some confusion. Isn't he the more natural leader? Well, keep watching.

---

So they wanted the question asked. Posters on this thread get *****ed at for asking the question. Seems about right.

---

There were about 150 posts I skipped since 0730 today, but I mostly saw amazing alpha males who require a special slings to carry their enormous testicles complaining that women can't be leaders.

---

No one is saying that. They are saying how could this woman could be the leader. Put her in as Sarah Conner and the terminator wins.

EDIT: I didn't read every post, but the gist of what I did read seemed to be that the character/actress was miscast for the role.

---

actually, there was one poster, who every much said women can't be leaders.

---

aTmAg said:

---

AggieOO said:

---

agracer said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

beanbean said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

Re Catherine. Listening to the podcast.

Q: Why would (insert bearded army dude) follow HER?

A: Yes! You asked the question we wanted the audience to ask. We wanted some confusion. Isn't he the more natural leader? Well, keep watching.

---

So they wanted the question asked. Posters on this thread get *****ed at for asking the question. Seems about right.

---

There were about 150 posts I skipped since 0730 today, but I mostly saw amazing alpha males who require a special slings to carry their enormous testicles complaining that women can't be leaders.

---

No one is saying that. They are saying how could this woman could be the leader. Put her in as Sarah Conner and the terminator wins.

EDIT: I didn't read every post, but the gist of what I did read seemed to be that the character/actress was miscast for the role.

---

actually, there was one poster, who every much said women can't be leaders.

---

Can you guys actually read? I specifically said that women can be good leaders (like Queen Elizibeth I, Mary Barra, etc.) But that they have very small chance of earning leadership of a combat unit. Yet this show is 2 for 2 on that.

For similar reasons, there have been no female head football coaches in NFL, or college (that I know of) and likely will be very few or zero within our lifetime. Ditto for all male sports. It's much easier to earn respect of your underlings if you have "been there" (especially combat). To pretend otherwise is just self delusion. A group of 100 people living in a mad-max world aren't going to self-chose a leader due to "organizational skills" (like Eisenhower). Hell, he would have never been picked if the troops chose their own leader instead of Roosevelt appointing him.

---

Chuck Cunningham said:

---

This is discussion goes well beyond Texags.

https://www.eonline.com/amp/news/1364343/melanie-lynskey-claps-back-after-adrianne-curry-criticizes-her-appearance-on-the-last-of-us

---

barbacoa taco said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

AggieOO said:

---

agracer said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

beanbean said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

Re Catherine. Listening to the podcast.

Q: Why would (insert bearded army dude) follow HER?

A: Yes! You asked the question we wanted the audience to ask. We wanted some confusion. Isn't he the more natural leader? Well, keep watching.

---

So they wanted the question asked. Posters on this thread get *****ed at for asking the question. Seems about right.

---

There were about 150 posts I skipped since 0730 today, but I mostly saw amazing alpha males who require a special slings to carry their enormous testicles complaining that women can't be leaders.

---

No one is saying that. They are saying how could this woman could be the leader. Put her in as Sarah Conner and the terminator wins.

EDIT: I didn't read every post, but the gist of what I did read seemed to be that the character/actress was miscast for the role.

---

actually, there was one poster, who every much said women can't be leaders.

---

Can you guys actually read? I specifically said that women can be good leaders (like Queen Elizibeth I, Mary Barra, etc.) But that they have very small chance of earning leadership of a combat unit. Yet this show is 2 for 2 on that.

For similar reasons, there have been no female head football coaches in NFL, or college (that I know of) and likely will be very few or zero within our lifetime. Ditto for all male sports. It's much easier to earn respect of your underlings if you have "been there" (especially combat). To pretend otherwise is just self delusion. A group of 100 people living in a mad-max world aren't going to self-chose a leader due to "organizational skills" (like Eisenhower). Hell, he would have never been picked if the troops chose their own leader instead of Roosevelt appointing him.

---

---

Chuck Cunningham said:

---

This is discussion goes well beyond Texags.

https://www.eonline.com/amp/news/1364343/melanie-lynskey-claps-back-after-adrianne-curry-criticizes-her-appearance-on-the-last-of-us

---

aTmAg said:

---

AggieOO said:

---

agracer said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

beanbean said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

Re Catherine. Listening to the podcast.

Q: Why would (insert bearded army dude) follow HER?

A: Yes! You asked the question we wanted the audience to ask. We wanted some confusion. Isn't he the more natural leader? Well, keep watching.

---

So they wanted the question asked. Posters on this thread get *****ed at for asking the question. Seems about right.

---

There were about 150 posts I skipped since 0730 today, but I mostly saw amazing alpha males who require a special slings to carry their enormous testicles complaining that women can't be leaders.

---

No one is saying that. They are saying how could this woman could be the leader. Put her in as Sarah Conner and the terminator wins.

EDIT: I didn't read every post, but the gist of what I did read seemed to be that the character/actress was miscast for the role.

---

actually, there was one poster, who every much said women can't be leaders.

---

Can you guys actually read? I specifically said that women can be good leaders (like Queen Elizibeth I, Mary Barra, etc.) But that they have very small chance of earning leadership of a combat unit. Yet this show is 2 for 2 on that.

For similar reasons, there have been no female head football coaches in NFL, or college (that I know of) and likely will be very few or zero within our lifetime. Ditto for all male sports. It's much easier to earn respect of your underlings if you have "been there" (especially combat). To pretend otherwise is just self delusion. A group of 100 people living in a mad-max world aren't going to self-chose a leader due to "organizational skills" (like Eisenhower). Hell, he would have never been picked if the troops chose their own leader instead of Roosevelt appointing him.

---

aTmAg said:

---

RealTalk said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

AggieOO said:

---

agracer said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

beanbean said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

Re Catherine. Listening to the podcast.

Q: Why would (insert bearded army dude) follow HER?

A: Yes! You asked the question we wanted the audience to ask. We wanted some confusion. Isn't he the more natural leader? Well, keep watching.

---

So they wanted the question asked. Posters on this thread get *****ed at for asking the question. Seems about right.

---

There were about 150 posts I skipped since 0730 today, but I mostly saw amazing alpha males who require a special slings to carry their enormous testicles complaining that women can't be leaders.

---

No one is saying that. They are saying how could this woman could be the leader. Put her in as Sarah Conner and the terminator wins.

EDIT: I didn't read every post, but the gist of what I did read seemed to be that the character/actress was miscast for the role.

---

actually, there was one poster, who every much said women can't be leaders.

---

Can you guys actually read? I specifically said that women can be good leaders (like Queen Elizibeth I, Mary Barra, etc.) But that they have very small chance of earning leadership of a combat unit. Yet this show is 2 for 2 on that.

For similar reasons, there have been no female head football coaches in NFL, or college (that I know of) and likely will be very few or zero within our lifetime. Ditto for all male sports. It's much easier to earn respect of your underlings if you have "been there" (especially combat). To pretend otherwise is just self delusion. A group of 100 people living in a mad-max world aren't going to self-chose a leader due to "organizational skills" (like Eisenhower). Hell, he would have never been picked if the troops chose their own leader instead of Roosevelt appointing him.

---

Why do you care so much about being right on the internet?

Just relax.

---

It sparks joy.

---

FancyKetchup14 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

RealTalk said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

AggieOO said:

---

agracer said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

beanbean said:

---

Ol Jock 99 said:

---

Re Catherine. Listening to the podcast.

Q: Why would (insert bearded army dude) follow HER?

A: Yes! You asked the question we wanted the audience to ask. We wanted some confusion. Isn't he the more natural leader? Well, keep watching.

---

So they wanted the question asked. Posters on this thread get *****ed at for asking the question. Seems about right.

---

There were about 150 posts I skipped since 0730 today, but I mostly saw amazing alpha males who require a special slings to carry their enormous testicles complaining that women can't be leaders.

---

No one is saying that. They are saying how could this woman could be the leader. Put her in as Sarah Conner and the terminator wins.

EDIT: I didn't read every post, but the gist of what I did read seemed to be that the character/actress was miscast for the role.

---

actually, there was one poster, who every much said women can't be leaders.

---

Can you guys actually read? I specifically said that women can be good leaders (like Queen Elizibeth I, Mary Barra, etc.) But that they have very small chance of earning leadership of a combat unit. Yet this show is 2 for 2 on that.

For similar reasons, there have been no female head football coaches in NFL, or college (that I know of) and likely will be very few or zero within our lifetime. Ditto for all male sports. It's much easier to earn respect of your underlings if you have "been there" (especially combat). To pretend otherwise is just self delusion. A group of 100 people living in a mad-max world aren't going to self-chose a leader due to "organizational skills" (like Eisenhower). Hell, he would have never been picked if the troops chose their own leader instead of Roosevelt appointing him.

---

Why do you care so much about being right on the internet?

Just relax.

---

It sparks joy.

---

---

gigemJTH12 said:

---

yall do realize if no one replied to him he would stop posting, right?

---

cbr said:

---

Chuck Cunningham said:

---

Quote:

---

What if Kathleen isn't supposed to fit the prototype of a hardcore, authoritarian leader? Maybe she is meant to appear more like a normal suburban mom who is now a leader of a resistance group? As in, in 2003, she was driving her kids to soccer practice in a minivan and going out to eat at Olive Garden and watching the View. But post-outbreak, she's a completely different person.

---

Based on what I can get from sources here and there and comments about her, I think you're on the right track.

---

that would make a great story, but it would have to hit hard and be well done. Certainly very possible.

however, just randomly featuring frumpy people in heroic/leadership roles... or underwear commercials... seems to be the norm now, and is just bad form.

---

Chuck Cunningham said:

---

cbr said:

---

Chuck Cunningham said:

---

Quote:

---

What if Kathleen isn't supposed to fit the prototype of a hardcore, authoritarian leader? Maybe she is meant to appear more like a normal suburban mom who is now a leader of a resistance group? As in, in 2003, she was driving her kids to soccer practice in a minivan and going out to eat at Olive Garden and watching the View. But post-outbreak, she's a completely different person.

---

Based on what I can get from sources here and there and comments about her, I think you're on the right track.

---

that would make a great story, but it would have to hit hard and be well done. Certainly very possible.

however, just randomly featuring frumpy people in heroic/leadership roles... or underwear commercials... seems to be the norm now, and is just bad form.

---

You mean having people who look like the customers?

---

schmendeler said:

---

Big asses weren't the thing in the nineties.

---

cbr said:

---

Chuck Cunningham said:

---

cbr said:

---

Chuck Cunningham said:

---

Quote:

---

What if Kathleen isn't supposed to fit the prototype of a hardcore, authoritarian leader? Maybe she is meant to appear more like a normal suburban mom who is now a leader of a resistance group? As in, in 2003, she was driving her kids to soccer practice in a minivan and going out to eat at Olive Garden and watching the View. But post-outbreak, she's a completely different person.

---

Based on what I can get from sources here and there and comments about her, I think you're on the right track.

---

that would make a great story, but it would have to hit hard and be well done. Certainly very possible.

however, just randomly featuring frumpy people in heroic/leadership roles... or underwear commercials... seems to be the norm now, and is just bad form.

---

You mean having people who look like the customers?

---

in all of human history, people have wanted their entertainment heroes and heroins, models, stars, etc., to be good looking, active, dynamic, or at least interesting looking people.

now in the past few years, yeah... i dont think people have changed, but for whatever reason the ownership is pushing an awful lot of frumpy ass people in shows, that sure do look like some of the couch potatoes in the audience.

i dont think that's a good trend.

---

Chuck Cunningham said:

---

cbr said:

---

Chuck Cunningham said:

---

cbr said:

---

Chuck Cunningham said:

---

Quote:

---

What if Kathleen isn't supposed to fit the prototype of a hardcore, authoritarian leader? Maybe she is meant to appear more like a normal suburban mom who is now a leader of a resistance group? As in, in 2003, she was driving her kids to soccer practice in a minivan and going out to eat at Olive Garden and watching the View. But post-outbreak, she's a completely different person.

---

Based on what I can get from sources here and there and comments about her, I think you're on the right track.

---

that would make a great story, but it would have to hit hard and be well done. Certainly very possible.

however, just randomly featuring frumpy people in heroic/leadership roles... or underwear commercials... seems to be the norm now, and is just bad form.

---

You mean having people who look like the customers?

---

in all of human history, people have wanted their entertainment heroes and heroins, models, stars, etc., to be good looking, active, dynamic, or at least interesting looking people.

now in the past few years, yeah... i dont think people have changed, but for whatever reason the ownership is pushing an awful lot of frumpy ass people in shows, that sure do look like some of the couch potatoes in the audience.

i dont think that's a good trend.

---

Yeah. Those actors in the Marvel movies are lumpy and frumpy.

---