Believe it or not, if anyone in this scenario were to throw a punch, it would’ve needed to be me. Don’t find myself in that situation often! But once is enough to realize how unprepared I am to lay someone out.

— Tara Vancil (@taravancil) November 7, 2019

Throwing a punch for most people is a bad idea, even if it’s not that hard. Most people just aren’t very strong and if you don’t punch a lot, you’re just likely to make someone angry rather than hurt them all that much. And it’s very easy to hurt yourself punching something hard, especially with no training or experience.

But something most people can learn to do quickly and effectively is a stomp. This looks less violent to others, and it doesn’t appear to the person you want to harm like you’re about to attack someone, and it takes a fraction of the time to learn. Also, unlike a good punch, most people are strong enough to deliver this very effectively.

A stomp is very simple and in fact is shockingly effective. There’s a very good reason it’s banned in martial arts competitions! For fighting in public, a foot stomp or ankle stomp is what you’ll want to go with. Most of the time it’s what I’d use too, and I’m a very good puncher. So it’s not just for newbies.

Anyway, let’s discuss a good foot stomp. Approach the target. Lift your foot as high as possible (all of this is done quickly), then slam your shoe heel-first downward onto the target as quickly as possible while using your full body weight to exert maximum force. If it’s an ankle instead of a foot stomp, go for the side about two inches above the ankle bone and kind of slide down it after contact. If it’s a foot stomp (this one is easier), go for a little bit above the toes.

You can (and likely will) break someone’s ankle or foot if done correctly, even if you are a relatively small woman. I have ended a fight with a foot stomp against someone a good bit larger than me, so yes, they do work.

This person didn’t watch the entire movie.

The fade to black scene is not followed by the credits! (Spoilers follow.) There is a coda scene where Chris and Sarah are shown living a new life, somewhere else, where they seem happier. Sarah is back in college and her son is riding his bike around, seemingly having returned to his normal self.

Except she takes some pictures of him outside riding his bike and his face is distorted while all else is sharp — as (presumably and was implied) had happened before when she’d thought he was an impostor back in the countryside.

That still leaves open the question of her sanity and the impostorhood of her son. However, the movie ended on a quite different note than the reviewer claims because Sarah still thinks her son is an impostor, or that she’s crazy, or perhaps both, and I’m guessing from her look decides it just doesn’t matter.

As a side note, Seána Kerslake was really good in the film. I’d never seen her before in anything but will keep her name in my head.

Live in a pod, don't do drugs, never drink, don't smoke, don't eat meat, eat bugs, don't read questionable material, don't say that word, only indulge in accepted counter-culture activities, be a silent and content uninteresting grey shapeless blob for the rest of your life. https://t.co/Lyr4MJksEi

— Justin Little (@Vernaculis) November 4, 2019

I will not live in the pod and will not eat bugs. Amazing how much of this propaganda has sprouted up so very quickly. Interested to see what the next phase of it looks like.

The Environmental Impact Of Your Thanksgiving Dinner.

More propaganda. I see it everywhere now. The “progressives” won’t be content until they take away everything that makes life worth living. I guess that’s one solution to global climate change: mass suicide.

This is going to get worse, and given that propaganda works and works well, expect to see the more non-intellectual progs parroting this dreck relentlessly over the next few years.

Don't agree with Cortez on much in terms of politics, but as with so many left wing people who were banned, at the very least "Why" should be answered. #freeAJAC@twitter @jack

— Ian Welsh (@iwelsh) November 6, 2019

I agreed with him on almost nothing politically, but I know why he was banned:

• He was mostly anti-capitalist, which is the main reason anyone on Twitter gets banned.
• He was not beholden to any particular ideology, therefore a threat.
• AJAC didn’t tolerate dumbasses, though he never threatened anyone. He did the worst thing of all: ignored them.

Around 1/3 of the accounts I used to visit are now banned, mostly left-wingers. AJAC was mostly more on the right, but was largely anti-capitalist, as mentioned, so he had to go.