Anyone ever heard the phrase, "the color drained from his face"?
It's not just a turn of phrase but a real effect, something having to do with blood circulation that gives our skin a reddish tint, without which it is much more grayish. If you've ever seen it in real life, it's quite startling.
Evidently, we're supposed to believe that if you get your head cut off, that's not enough for the color to drain from your face.
You know, if I had to speculate as to why, it's because real gore is very disturbing and people detect it on a subconscious level. I'm guessing the calculation is, "Hey, we just want to stress people so that they are nudged in the direction we desire. We don't want people so freaked out that they won't soon forget and will demand to get to the bottom of the issue,"
This is actually a specific application of the more general theme: They vastly prefer complete fakery over leveraging real circumstances and real events for Their ghey ops.
I always think of it by analogy as a loose puzzle piece sliding over a surface. If it's not real, not part of the jigsaw of reality, you can easily slide it wherever you want all across the surface at any time, here and there and wherever. If it's an authentic piece and it locks down in to the related pieces of the puzzle, then if you suddenly need to move it you'll have a hell of a time convincing people it doesn't really fit there.
Divorcing us from Reality in all respects can be considered an intermediate goal.
Anyone ever heard the phrase, "the color drained from his face"?
It's not just a turn of phrase but a real effect, something having to do with blood circulation that gives our skin a reddish tint, without which it is much more grayish. If you've ever seen it in real life, it's quite startling.
Evidently, we're supposed to believe that if you get your head cut off, that's not enough for the color to drain from your face.
Another thing I've noticed is that the "media" only seems to promulgate content with gore if it's fake.
Severed artery guy from the Boston bombing. Daniel Pearl. Stephen Paddock. Kenosha and Rittenhouse.
You will almost never see gore associated with something that goes against the grain either. I find it interesting because it is so blatant.
You know, if I had to speculate as to why, it's because real gore is very disturbing and people detect it on a subconscious level. I'm guessing the calculation is, "Hey, we just want to stress people so that they are nudged in the direction we desire. We don't want people so freaked out that they won't soon forget and will demand to get to the bottom of the issue,"
This is actually a specific application of the more general theme: They vastly prefer complete fakery over leveraging real circumstances and real events for Their ghey ops.
I always think of it by analogy as a loose puzzle piece sliding over a surface. If it's not real, not part of the jigsaw of reality, you can easily slide it wherever you want all across the surface at any time, here and there and wherever. If it's an authentic piece and it locks down in to the related pieces of the puzzle, then if you suddenly need to move it you'll have a hell of a time convincing people it doesn't really fit there.
Divorcing us from Reality in all respects can be considered an intermediate goal.
Every generation has its PTSD programming. 911, Challenger shuttle, JFK, etc etc