Consoomers / Consoomer Culture - Because if it has a recogniseable brand on it, I’d buy it!

  • ⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
I don't like this etsy listing
1.PNG
 
I am reposting this but what is with this attitude that soulless corporations are people who have a clear artistic decision even with their shit business decisions

1629144056486.png
 
Ol Dirty Fatso said:
I've been to this secondhand record store in NYC that sells absolutely anything as long as it can still be played, and it really put this into perspective for me. I mean, for every pink floyd or David Bowie or funkadelic record you found, there were 1000 trashy novelty song, one hit wonder, or overdone Christmas albums from the 70s that you had to sort through.
Click to expand...
Most of those should just be ensured that the song is backed up on a hard drive somewhere, and the record recycled. How much time has been wasted sifting through all of those over the years? Do we really need to hang onto that copy of Gallagher Sings Christmas Carols that‘s been sifted past for longer than most of us have been alive?
 
Pissmaster said:
Most of those should just be ensured that the song is backed up on a hard drive somewhere, and the record recycled. How much time has been wasted sifting through all of those over the years? Do we really need to hang onto that copy of Gallagher Sings Christmas Carols that‘s been sifted past for longer than most of us have been alive?
Click to expand...
It happened with this guy:


In the comments, people are talking that a Brazillian millionaire bought his entire collection and is digitalizing everything.
 
Truthboi said:
I am reposting this but what is with this attitude that soulless corporations are people who have a clear artistic decision even with their shit business decisions

View attachment 2449591
Click to expand...
The companies go bankrupt if they don't make what the customers demands. Since every brand has soibois that buy everything regardless of how bad it is. The companies will never change, because their current behaviour doesn't affect their economy negatively.

Dude sounds like a troll, but probably isn't. And that's scary.
 
Truthboi said:
I am reposting this but what is with this attitude that soulless corporations are people who have a clear artistic decision even with their shit business decisions

View attachment 2449591
Click to expand...
This isn’t an epic bad take to protect corporations, this is an epic bad take to try to own “gamer chuds“. Same retard energy, but I don’t think this is because of consooming
 
Vingle said:
Dude sounds like a troll, but probably isn't. And that's scary.
Click to expand...
Oh I have no doubt it's legit, I see it more than ever now. These consoom-bots appear whenever there are complaints about some franchise, as though you have a duty to consoom whatever they put out as if there isn't a legitimate reason to critique it.

For instance, I generally liked Mario games until the 3-d era (I think I was just too old to appreciate anything not 2-D), but to the consoomers if you like Mario you have a duty to buy all of them because of Nintendo's benevolence in giving you new product. You can't say 'meh this Mario game wasn't that fun to me'.
 
BootlegPopeye said:
Oh I have no doubt it's legit, I see it more than ever now. These consoom-bots appear whenever there are complaints about some franchise, as though you have a duty to consoom whatever they put out as if there isn't a legitimate reason to critique it.

For instance, I generally liked Mario games until the 3-d era (I think I was just too old to appreciate anything not 2-D), but to the consoomers if you like Mario you have a duty to buy all of them because of Nintendo's benevolence in giving you new product. You can't say 'meh this Mario game wasn't that fun to me'.
Click to expand...
They do that with Pokémon too. Even if they don't like it, they simply must show their support by buying both versions, because Nintendo is their friend that loves and cares about them.

I can't remember which game it was, but a while back, a bunch of soys were buying 2 or 3+ copies on release day and bragging all over twitter about it. Because huge faceless corporation loves them and will surely repay their devotion.
 
Raging Capybara said:
It happened with this guy:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=SwXayHbUQ2o
In the comments, people are talking that a Brazillian millionaire bought his entire collection and is digitalizing everything.
Click to expand...
On one hand it sucks that he both had diabetes and was blind, but on the other hand, I couldn't even imagine having over 1+ million vinyl records in my storage.

My own parents only about 50 to 70+ vinyl records, and a record player that they said they were going to use, and yet they never did.
 
Lapis Lazuli said:
I've seen this bunch posted on the TikTok thread. How come modern day polygamy is always one chick and multiple dudes, and never the other way around? Is she taking advantage of their desperation? If so, that's... kind of sad honestly.
Click to expand...
Among other cultural degradations, women have gained the upper hand in techno-world. They are insulated from the full consequences of their actions by both government and social systems. It's also not an exaggeration to say that relatively homely women can freely couple with comparatively higher-value men just by opening up an app. The fundamentals of that aren't new (slumming, prostitutes, easy lays), but it's been heavily enabled and become "safe and easy" for the average person by virtue of technology.

Even short of the ol' suck and fuck, women can get tons of (fake) male attention by utilizing a handful of social media apps. This is actually part of the aforementioned social system that limits consequences. In my opinion this has a greater effect than sex apps, by virtue of rewarding women for their cunts being female with attention (fake as it may be) without demanding that they invest any real part of themselves into getting that attention. Keeping any one specific man interested is not well reinforced by the nature of social media itself (more bluntly, it doesn't matter - what's one among supposed thousands?).

While in reality pussy is still Earth's most plentiful and renewable resource, in socially declining western countries there exist artificial market forces which raise it's perceived value. Of course, this all leads to misery and further social atomization (and a birthrate under replacement level), but the people get their dopamine and the lizards get their billions. Simply put, you're seeing the visible effects of upended social norms run through the amplifier of technology. In rural areas where the social fabric is stronger and technology less effective (only 10 tinder matches!?) this particular form of decay is less visible.
A-Stump said:
I want to meet the crazy bastard who came up with the idea of selling shirts at premium prices with their logos on it. Coke, Reeses, etc. People pay to be walking advertisements. It didn't even cross my mind until the other day how goddamn insane it is.
Click to expand...
Last I checked big brand shirts were priced "normally", unless you were paying for some special item. You're not wrong about the inanity of buying merch just to be an advertisement, but in truth I think most people buy that shit for something safe (read: conformist) to wear. The big brands are sold in wal-marts and similar stores, people don't buy them because they're superfans, they're more likely to just like the logo or not even think much about it at all.

It's the "lifestyle" brands that are purchased more with an eye to social signaling, a phenomenon that's really taken off in recent years, that people buy to "say" who they are or whatever. This is something right and left wing consoomers actually have in common. Lefties buy their safe media brands to show how hip they are, and righties buy their individualist activity brands (muh yeti cooler) to show how white American they are.

I say this as someone who buys branded stuff, just not the kind of brands anyone outside of <insert subculture here> has heard of. Even if I personally utilize a company's product, I won't buy their shit unless it is aesthetically pleasing and well made. I have found myself wearing a handful of brands I've never used otherwise (admittedly a few only make clothing) because either their design is tit or the fit/material is high quality. Christ knows I'd never be caught dead in a McDonald's shirt, any more than I'd wear muh Blue Line Sniper Cop shirt, but in a way that also says something about who I am and what views I may hold.
 
Truthboi said:
I am reposting this but what is with this attitude that soulless corporations are people who have a clear artistic decision even with their shit business decisions
Click to expand...
There's a growing movement of corporate shills who are trying to get corporations recognized as living things. I think the endgame is for them to be granted protected status complete with pronouns and shit, so that things like complaining about a corporate decision or an annoying advertising campaign will now be legally considered discrimination/hate speech and people can be fined/censored over it.

A few of these people do genuinely see corporations as living things though. Which I probably don't need to tell you is horrendously dangerous.
 
A-Stump said:
I want to meet the crazy bastard who came up with the idea of selling shirts at premium prices with their logos on it. Coke, Reeses, etc. People pay to be walking advertisements. It didn't even cross my mind until the other day how goddamn insane it is.
Click to expand...

I remember being able to get some neat graphic tee's at target. No logos, just a cool design of some sort. Then one day all I could find are retro logos with a faded look. Retro Pepsi logo with faded look, retro star wars logo with faded look, retro atari logo, retro comic heroes and NASA (Its crazy how much NASA logo is on stuff, STEM consumers i guess.),
 
L50LasPak said:
There's a growing movement of corporate shills who are trying to get corporations recognized as living things. I think the endgame is for them to be granted protected status complete with pronouns and shit, so that things like complaining about a corporate decision or an annoying advertising campaign will now be legally considered discrimination/hate speech and people can be fined/censored over it.

A few of these people do genuinely see corporations as living things though. Which I probably don't need to tell you is horrendously dangerous.
Click to expand...
It's the next logical step. Corporate personhood is already a legal thing, so you get corporations recognised as living entities ... President Apple, anyone?
 
Shig O'nella said:
Kiwis.

That's not a disrespect - they're made by the New Zealand Mint and are actual legal tender. I got curious at such a ridiculous item (even for this thread), and looked them up.
Click to expand...
NZ mint is a private company, so those are collectors coins - not legal tender. New Zealands government outsources coin minting to Canada and the UK.
 
Mepsi Pax said:
Among other cultural degradations, women have gained the upper hand in techno-world. They are insulated from the full consequences of their actions by both government and social systems. It's also not an exaggeration to say that relatively homely women can freely couple with comparatively higher-value men just by opening up an app. The fundamentals of that aren't new (slumming, prostitutes, easy lays), but it's been heavily enabled and become "safe and easy" for the average person by virtue of technology.

Even short of the ol' suck and fuck, women can get tons of (fake) male attention by utilizing a handful of social media apps. This is actually part of the aforementioned social system that limits consequences. In my opinion this has a greater effect than sex apps, by virtue of rewarding women for their cunts being female with attention (fake as it may be) without demanding that they invest any real part of themselves into getting that attention. Keeping any one specific man interested is not well reinforced by the nature of social media itself (more bluntly, it doesn't matter - what's one among supposed thousands?).

While in reality pussy is still Earth's most plentiful and renewable resource, in socially declining western countries there exist artificial market forces which raise it's perceived value. Of course, this all leads to misery and further social atomization (and a birthrate under replacement level), but the people get their dopamine and the lizards get their billions. Simply put, you're seeing the visible effects of upended social norms run through the amplifier of technology. In rural areas where the social fabric is stronger and technology less effective (only 10 tinder matches!?) this particular form of decay is less visible.

Last I checked big brand shirts were priced "normally", unless you were paying for some special item. You're not wrong about the inanity of buying merch just to be an advertisement, but in truth I think most people buy that shit for something safe (read: conformist) to wear. The big brands are sold in wal-marts and similar stores, people don't buy them because they're superfans, they're more likely to just like the logo or not even think much about it at all.

It's the "lifestyle" brands that are purchased more with an eye to social signaling, a phenomenon that's really taken off in recent years, that people buy to "say" who they are or whatever. This is something right and left wing consoomers actually have in common. Lefties buy their safe media brands to show how hip they are, and righties buy their individualist activity brands (muh yeti cooler) to show how white American they are.

I say this as someone who buys branded stuff, just not the kind of brands anyone outside of <insert subculture here> has heard of. Even if I personally utilize a company's product, I won't buy their shit unless it is aesthetically pleasing and well made. I have found myself wearing a handful of brands I've never used otherwise (admittedly a few only make clothing) because either their design is tit or the fit/material is high quality. Christ knows I'd never be caught dead in a McDonald's shirt, any more than I'd wear muh Blue Line Sniper Cop shirt, but in a way that also says something about who I am and what views I may hold.
Click to expand...
That was the purest dose of incel cringe I've subjected myself to in quite a long time, thanks.
 
Mepsi Pax said:
<Weird seething>
Click to expand...

A few things I'll mention:

Markets exist because of a demand. Men wanting to throw money at women online/give them attention could be because they don't want to deal with people in real life. Maybe it's because they want extra mileage with their jerkoff material. I've got no idea but the basis is likely a lot less sinister or manipulative than you figure. I'm not simping here but people act like it's the easiest thing in the world for women to do. Have you seen the retards they have to put up with the daily? I don't think I'd have the patience to deal with mouthbreathing dumbass #5 talking about feet and licking ass, but they do. Most of these people have some weird shit going and the way I see it, it's a healthy outlet for it. Most of the time.

As you've said, it doesn't reward people who try to keep the attention of a single person. It doesn't because the goal isn't a monogamous relationship. Looking a certain way, being able to put on a performance, having a marketable skill or way of dealing with people is what they can do. Some men just want to see a woman who can put giant objects up their ass (basically) on command. Do you think it's wiser for them to try and cultivate a relationship with someone and hedge on them doing that or to splash out $10 to get a custom video? I think I know the costlier and more time-effective option of the 2.

As for the comment on rural communities and the social decline, let me give you the scoop since I've lived in multiple my entire life. Two people get together (usually after high school), they have a couple of kids, they end up cheating on one another with mutual facebook friends. Throw in an opioid or meth addiction, crippling debt because they punch far above their means of living, and you've got the typical relationship out in the sticks as I see it. The end to this modern love story is a guy working his dick off in a factory job while his bitch of an ex-wife passes out in her minivan in a Walmart parking lot because she can't handle the heroin. Kids get shipped off to live with grandma, END SCENE.
 
Funko pops are the Beanie Baby of the modern day. There are people who think they'll be an investment, and I 100% guarantee they'll loose value by about the time Gen Z is in their 30s at most. And even if they don't: Their ugly and I hate them.

Like, of all things I don't understand why people collect them. I get why people buy Legos as an adult. Model building is fun, and some people want a simpler version than the full on glue and paint build. Figurines can look cool. But funko pops look cheap, ugly, and you can't do anything with them. Why do people collect these
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom