>there are people who literally eat this shit unironically

>>7171431
Yeah since when does cardboard contain that much corn syrup? Don't be stupid.

>>7171431
I agree
But here's something you can do.

Mix some Muesli and cornflakes, add some maple syrup and a few chocolate chips and you have a solid breakfast to give your brain that sweet boost it needs in the morning to wake the fuck up

>>7171453
That is the gayest thing I've read all day and I've been on /r9k/ today.

>>7171431
Literally just finished a bowl. I don't think your pallette is refined enough to taste the complex flavors of malt and milled corn, complemented by the milk. (2% or GTFO)

Don't worry, maybe one day you'll understand.

File: 20130813-product-19-cereal-box.jpg (52KB, 349x500px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 349x500px

Anyone used to eat this shit? I don't know why, but it's always been my favorite cereal and you just can't get it anywhere any more. Regular corn flakes just don't cut it either, I can't find anything else like it.

File: 1447218847679.png (330KB, 330x319px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 330x319px

>being over the age of 12
>still literally eating globs of sugar for breakfast
>not being a manchild

>>7171464
This, to an extent.

"Complex flavors" is a bit much, but there is a nice subtle sweetness I really enjoy.

>>7171464
>malt and milled corn,
>complex
top kek tbqh senpai

>>7171431
What is with your liberal and wrong use of the word "literally?" You sound like a retard.

File: 6a0133f3a4072c970b0147e1028529970b-550wi[1].png (86KB, 550x447px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 550x447px

>>7171453

>>7171762
It's not wrong now, nigga

http://theweek.com/articles/466957/how-wrong-definition-literally-sneaked-into-dictionary

Wheatabix (or a cheaper off brand variety) or porridge with a side of fruit are the best breakfasts.

Shit like sugary cereals are corporate poison designed to make kids addicted to sugar at the earliest possible age.

>>7171779
Kind of backfires when they develop diabetes and have to avoid sugar later or they'll fucking die

welp I'm an adult now. time to eat flavorless shit.

>>7171775
Not to me and an emoji isn't either.

You know that Kellogg created that cereal to keep boys from fapping, right?

>>7171780

45 years of overconsumption is more profitable than 80 years of recommended sugar intake.

>>7171780
>>7171788
If you get diabetes as a child you don't make it to 45

>>7171785
>complaining about the alleged misuse of an English word
>denying the legitimacy of a dictionary definition of that same English word because you don't like it

Nigga you just went full retard

>>7171787
....What?

>>7171431
It's yummy when you add loads of sugar

File: right here buddy.png (167KB, 498x331px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 498x331px

>unironically

>>7172023
SCHEISSGEIST HAS POSTED

>>7171467

I used to love Product 19, too, but also can't find it.

It's fucking great when you have a nice bowl of corn flakes with freshly squeezed OJ, black coffee and two rounds of toast with jam.

>>7171431
I never got this either. Even as a kif the idea of starting the day with sweetened grain flakes in cold milk seemed like bullshit.As an adult I have trouble with the concept of buying a box of food where the box costs more than the food in it.

>>7171932
Who are you quoting?

>>7171775
I suspect that all other words similar - seriously, honestly, actually, really, totally, absolutely - also once exclusively meant what they say they mean.

People just like exaggerating, so it never lasts.

>>7171937
Google it and graham crackers sometime

I like it. What's wrong with that?

I also like rice krispies, chex, and cheerios.

Don't put sugar or anything on them. Just good cereal honestly.

>>7171431
Here watch Christina Tosi the Kellog's shill.
http://video.glamour.com/watch/christina-tosi-hacks-your-cereal-bowl-seasonal-corn-flakes
christ she's annoying and that granny face

Do people really eat cereal for breakfast?
I mean, as a dessert, sure, but can you really get full with cereal?

corn flakes is ok I like a little bit of cardboard flavor in my cereal though.

>>7174037
Never have just one thing for breakfast. You want a variety of foods.

>>7171431
With some sugar it becomes the best cereal ever
....
.......
..........
Behind Honey Bunches of Oats

>>7171775
I'd be fine with them including the misused word's wrong definition in the dictionary as long as they added that people who use the new definition are generally illiterates who expand their vocabulary by watching reality TV and overhearing conversations at the beauty salon.

>>7174165
>>7171762
The English language and languages in general are not immutable. Words take on new meanings. New words are created. As long as the majority speakers of the language accept new definitions, they can create new words and meanings almost at will. Languages evolve. The English language is quite different from how it was a few hundred years ago. And it will be quite different a few hundred years from now. So you wannabes the ones who look ignorant right now.

>>7171431
>unironically
Who the fuck would go to the store, ironically purchase a box of cereal, bring it home and ironically eat said cereal in order to appear witty and ironic to whomever may be around in the morning?

>>7174221
Being creative with language and making new words/meanings is one thing. Blindly using a word when you don't know what it means is both ignorant and stupid, and apparently it's contagious. Just because so many people are wrong about a word's meaning that we have to include their misuse of the word in the dictionary, doesn't suddenly mean those people were using the word correctly all along, or that using the new definition doesn't make you look ignorant of the original meaning.

When someone uses the idiot's definition of the word "literally," I immediately assume they are a dumb millennial and stopped reading books when they left school.

>>7174283
I wonder what you mean when you use the word "nice," or if you have any conception of its original meaning, or if you even care about the people who fretted about it during its transition.

File: got any daddy-o's.jpg (142KB, 625x401px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 625x401px

>>7174231
>hey, golden grahams! oh man I'm so old, I'm literally the oldest person ever, getting so much nostalgia for golden grahams right now... yeah hook me up with some of them golden grahams (I'm so fucking ancient right now)
>that'll be £8
>shit, really? I mean... sweeeeet! yolo, am i right? um, semi-skimmed...? no WAIT NON-DAIRY non-dairy non-dairy I'm like a vegan yeah? I just drink dairy... Ironically? aw shit yeah, golden grahams and fucking almond milk, this is gonna taste so uber random

>>7174294
Point taken. I don't know the original meaning of every word, only the modern usage. If the modern definition of a word is based on a history of ignorant misuse then that word eventually takes on a new, unambiguous meaning for everyone. The previous ignorance is still ignorance though, however unanimous we become on the word's new meaning.

You know what I mean when I use the word "nice." I mean the same as everybody else nowadays. There's a solid consensus on what that word means now, whether it's the original meaning or not.

There WAS a solid consensus on what "literally" meant, but now, through ignorant misuse, it's become practically meaningless because it can mean one thing, or another, contradictory thing. If I say I was driving at literally a hundred miles an hour, that would've been clear once, but now it's ambiguous. It could be hyperbole or it could be genuine.

Maybe the word "literally" will change it's meaning completely, but that won't mean people were using it correctly all along, and it won't mean they looked any less ignorant to people who knew the original meaning and recognised the ignorance behind it's misuse.

>>7174385
Just say "I was driving at a hundred miles an hour." We don't really need to add things to make sure people take us at our word, that should be the default interpretation.