It is surprising to me

that git --force has absolutely nothing to do with star wars.

http://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/NotMyPresident?src=hash

is --force consensual?

>>4
Of course not. Its repository rape.
https://developer.atlassian.com/blog/2015/04/force-with-lease/
Git's push --force is destructive because it unconditionally overwrites the remote repository with whatever you have locally, possibly overwriting any changes that a team member has pushed in the meantime. However there is a better way; the option --force-with-lease can help when you do need to do a forced push but still ensure you don't overwrite other's work.

I don't always push --force...

It's well known that git's push --force is strongly discouraged as it can destroy other commits already pushed to a shared repository. This isn't always completely fatal (if the changes are in someone's working tree then they can be merged), but at the very least it's inconsiderate, at worst disastrous. This is because the --force option makes the head of the branch point at your personal history, ignoring any changes that may have occurred in parallel with yours.

I always push --force because I want to make sure that my semen will be the one that will impregnate her.

>>4
There's a hiring video advertisement for Atlassian featuring a transexual programmer.

>>6
who gives a shit?

>>7
I would give a shit if I saw it. Disgusting creatures.