Yeah, but some women, as well as some males, would prefer it if the public speaker of the group would handle the task of speaking in public, even though everyone is capable. Some people rely on others for better results, because they might not want the responsibility.

Some women want to be protected, or rather be treated like women are in movies and media depictions.

as do some men

this is why i don't even care to fuck with this "manliness" word

i suck =/= it's bad

i don't suck =/= it's good

just saying

I believe in ethics to have a common ground, but what I'm talking about is the differences here, not the similarities. Every sane person would want both sexes to act well (ethics), but what is considered well for one sex exclusively if it has to? What are those trademark things?

i don't think there are any

you could say that, since women are biologically the "weaker" sex, men have an ethical responsibility to protect them, which would be a fair argument if it wasn't such a bad generalization

some, if not most, women are very capable and independent without men

That's assuming men and women are the same,

no it isn't

it's only proposing that men and women should act the same, in terms of being excellent to each other

what you're doing is saying that one of the sexes is incapable of being ethical, which is just silly

i don't give it a definition, because the idea is worthless to me

if "manliness" is generally defined to be "how a man should act", as you put it, then that necessarily excludes women from that equation

i'd amend that to "how men and women should act"--humanliness
and i already have another word for humanliness--it's called ethics

in which case, yes, i generally try my best to be an ethical person

play this game again in five years and tell me if it's still your favorite game of all time

hell, one year

Alright, but the OP imitated (or at least tried to) a user,

no, he didn't

he described them

so he wasn't following the rules of his own title

I loved Jar Jar.

i do indeed enjoy all the "old zeldas", whatever that even means, but i've never once said any of them deserve perfect scores

the original zelda is a 7/10 at best

zelda 2 is by no means a great game--i've just beaten it twice, and i use it as a counterexample in dark souls arguments whenever people accuse me of being a casual, because zelda 2 is a FAR more punishing game than shitty fucking dark souls

link's awakening is... link's awakening

and lttp is an 8/10
it's really fun, but the gameplay gets really stale after a short period of time

so... wtf are you talking about

in general, all hyping up a game does is make me want to buy it for the sole purpose of pointing out each and every one of its flaws in order to prove how mediocre or shitty it really is

This is rich coming from a guy that thinks the old Zeldas are worthy of their 100 metacritic score.

1. where/when did i say this
2. what the fuck are "the old Zeldas"
3. the only zelda game i've openly praised on this website is wind waker
4. either way, what does this have to do with any of my points

you're a moron

|
||
||\
||\\
|| \\
||  \\
||   \\
||   //
||  //
|| //
||//
||/
||
|


|
||
||\
||\\
|| \\
||  \\
||   \\
||   //
||  //
|| //
||//
||/
||
|


|
||
||\
||\\
|| \\
||  \\
||   \\
||   //
||  //
|| //
||//
||/
||
|

when i was like, eight, i was running as fast as i could downhill on a road surface next to my house (i don't know why) when i tripped, landed on both my knees, and slid for a good five or six inches on the concrete

that was actually the first i ever saw my own blood, and it was fucking everywhere

oh, i didn't know we were talking about difficulty

i don't really care how "hard" a boss is; i care more about how well designed it is

Believing in a deity.

would you consider buddhism a religion

buddha isn't really a deity

Okay, so I got it right?

yeah it was dustin lol