This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Mordo
Pages: 1 ... 215216217 218219 ... 243
6481
« on: December 28, 2014, 05:17:02 AM »
 the ass was fat the waves were rode the cushion was pushed
6482
« on: December 28, 2014, 05:02:45 AM »
Rights don't exist.
So, no.
What exactly do you and Molyneux mean by this? Nobody has the right to life? Nobody has the right to pursue their own destiny?
6483
« on: December 28, 2014, 04:52:55 AM »
Tertiary however, isn't.
It's getting to the point where it should be, though.
Not really. Declaring it a universal right for everyone would only devalue college degrees, virtually rendering them worthless.
If people want to enroll into higher paying fields they should expect to put some semblance of work in.
Too bad that's what is happening anyways? When more people go to College, the value of Associate degrees is next to nothing; now it is Bachelors or higher.. How long do you think those will last? How long before we will be required to have PH.Ds to get jobs that people could just do if they learn from a bunch of FREE instructional videos on the internet?
That's basically my point. Shoving out degrees like hot cakes is only really going to kick the problem down the line.
6484
« on: December 27, 2014, 05:09:38 PM »
6485
« on: December 27, 2014, 04:14:56 PM »
tfw Asda is the lowest paying supermarket :^[
scrub
i get payed 10 pund/hr to push trollies around
u fokin wot morrisons needs to get their act together no wonder their profits are dropping
6486
« on: December 27, 2014, 04:10:44 PM »
If by "high paying field" you mean literally anything above minimum wage... Ugh
I hear this time after time from the left and I'm getting pretty sick of listening to it. Every minimum wage job I've seen and applied to requested the minimum standard of secondary education. If all jobs required a college degree like you suggest, half of the labour market would be unemployed. Let's drop the myth, shall we?
Not to mention, things like the police force (at least in this country) don't even require A-levels in order to be eligible for employment.
Shit, I'm 17, haven't finished my A-levels and I get paid more than minimum wage.
tfw Asda is the lowest paying supermarket :^[
6487
« on: December 27, 2014, 04:00:14 PM »
But that's what employers want. Not if literally everyone has one. How can employers even discern who to hire and who to reject if every possible candidate held a PhD? If by "high paying field" you mean literally anything above minimum wage... Ugh I see this being espoused time after time from the left and I'm getting pretty sick of listening to it. Every minimum wage job I've seen and applied to requested the minimum standard of secondary education. If all jobs required a college degree like you suggest, half of the labour market would be unemployed. Let's drop the myth, shall we?
6488
« on: December 27, 2014, 03:51:19 PM »
Tertiary however, isn't.
It's getting to the point where it should be, though.
Not really. Declaring it a universal right for everyone would only devalue college degrees, virtually rendering them worthless.
If people want to enroll into higher paying fields they should expect to put some semblance of work in.
Because it isn't already getting there? Having a college degree is pretty much required for any field.
And that's exactly why we shouldn't be shoveling more people into tertiary education. How long before a college degree is no more valuable than the A+ on that drawing you did when you were 5 years old?
It already is. So what we should do is subsidize it so people don't put themselves in massive debt.
Yes, because giving everyone and your grandma a college degree is definitely going to entice employers, right? Get real. Not everyone can, and should be getting college degrees. It's not a fundamental right, and never will be. It's there for those who wish to enter high paying fields, not the everyday average joe.
6489
« on: December 27, 2014, 03:41:33 PM »
Tertiary however, isn't.
It's getting to the point where it should be, though.
Not really. Declaring it a universal right for everyone would only devalue college degrees, virtually rendering them worthless.
If people want to enroll into higher paying fields they should expect to put some semblance of work in.
Because it isn't already getting there? Having a college degree is pretty much required for any field.
And that's exactly why we shouldn't be shoveling more people into tertiary education. How long before a college degree is no more valuable than the A+ on that drawing you did when you were 5 years old?
6490
« on: December 27, 2014, 03:35:30 PM »
Tertiary however, isn't.
It's getting to the point where it should be, though.
Not really. Declaring it a universal right for everyone would only devalue college degrees, virtually rendering them worthless. If people want to enroll into higher paying fields they should expect to put some semblance of work in.
6491
« on: December 27, 2014, 03:23:48 PM »
Basic primary and secondary education is a right, yes.
Tertiary however, isn't.
6492
« on: December 27, 2014, 05:01:45 AM »
18 weeks sounds like she intended to keep it. The family should probably adhere to her wishes.
6493
« on: December 27, 2014, 04:58:30 AM »
 mein dick
6494
« on: December 26, 2014, 05:49:56 PM »
 tfw never used a christmas avatar
6495
« on: December 26, 2014, 04:12:29 PM »
That doesn't seem like the narrative Turkey is going for, but perhaps I misinterpreted.
I'm pretty sure you did misinterpret.
kden
6496
« on: December 26, 2014, 03:55:15 PM »
So...basically what I've been saying then. Poor characterisation. I fail to see how homosexuality pandering has to do with anything.
The Wire had a homosexual character that was pulled off extremely well. Was that pandering too?
Nobody's denying that poor characterisation is the focal point, though. The only relation it has to homosexuality is that poor characterisation with such characters tends to be worse than with homosexual characters. Especially when the producer has to wade in afterwards and confirm it because it was so ambiguous.
Literally nobody in this thread has a problem with LGBT characters if they're pulled off well.
That doesn't seem like the narrative Turkey is going for, but perhaps I misinterpreted.
6497
« on: December 26, 2014, 03:48:03 PM »
Of course it's jarring. I just don't see why it warrants so much complaint.
Because it's jarring - that's exactly the reason.
It kills the immersion.
If two (maybe) homosexual characters kill your immersion then I really don't know what to say to you.
I imagine it's not only that but the fact that it's an ambiguous ending (think Dexter) and the fact that the producer had to wade into the fray and confirm it.
It's not necessarily that there are two homosexual characters, it's that Turkey felt there wasn't enough development, it was too ambivalent and the involvement of the producers has made it seem like SJW pandering.
So...basically what I've been saying then. Poor characterisation. I fail to see how homosexuality pandering has to do with anything. The Wire had a homosexual character that was pulled off extremely well. Was that pandering too?
6498
« on: December 26, 2014, 03:43:13 PM »
Of course it's jarring. I just don't see why it warrants so much complaint.
Because it's jarring - that's exactly the reason.
It kills the immersion.
If two (maybe) homosexual characters kill your immersion then I really don't know what to say to you. Stick to westerns perhaps.
6499
« on: December 26, 2014, 03:37:52 PM »
I'm not calling anyone a homophobe. I just find it funny that whenever a slight semblance of a homosexual character is introduced, people throw their toys out the pram and come up with pathetic excuses like 'shoehorning.' If you think it's bad characterisation that's fine, but I somehow really doubt you'd kick up such a fuss if it was two heterosexual characters.
And why should they?
I'd expect people to complain if they were heterosexual and it wasn't hinted at, but I'd expect them to complain more if it was bi or homosexual.
Such people are in the minority, so it's only natural for people to desire a more explicit build-up when it's part of a character's personality. It just seems more natural for viewers to see a male and female character hook-up, so when that tradition is broken abruptly, of course it's going to provoke more ire.
Of course it's jarring. I just don't see why it warrants so much complaint.
6500
« on: December 26, 2014, 03:27:40 PM »
Why does everyone kick up a fuss when homosexual characters are introduced? Can you not just chalk it up to poor characterization if you take such an issue with it?
How come whenever someone tries to bring up something they think may be shoehorning or tokenism they get labeled as whatever negative association that's related towards the subject material?
Shoehorning and tokenism are poor characterization. However talking about this poor characterization often leads to cries or racism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, et cetera.
Do I think Korra being bisexual was shoehorning? No. It was something that was hinted at for about 2 seasons so it had some build up. Her sexuality wasn't even what defined her, if you were to ask someone "What are the defining traits of Korra?", her being bisexual wouldn't be on that list in all likelihood. Therefore tokenism is also avoided.
However I also happen to sit on the opposite side of Turkey on this issue. Unlike certain other people I don't start implying that he's some sort of homophobe and am open to discussing the way he's interpreting this.
That's the thing. It doesn't seem like tokenism. It sounds like bad writing and characterization to me, not shoehorning lesbians in to appeal to the LGBT's. There's a very stark difference.
.....
Did you read what I posted? I said that it avoids being tokenism and it doesn't feel like shoehorning since it didn't come out of nowhere. It had subtlety been built up over two seasons. However I can see why someone might feel it's shoehorning as they could have missed that subtle build up I was talking about and that's why I'm not instantly pointing the homophobe finger at people who take issue with it.
Tokenism and shoehorning are bad writing and characterization. They always have been. You're just trying to make trukey out as some sort of closet homophobe now.
I'm not calling anyone a homophobe. I just find it funny that whenever a slight semblance of a homosexual character is introduced, people throw their toys out the pram and come up with pathetic excuses like 'shoehorning.' If you think it's bad characterisation that's fine, but I somehow really doubt you'd kick up such a fuss if it was two heterosexual characters.
6501
« on: December 26, 2014, 03:03:35 PM »
Why does everyone kick up a fuss when homosexual characters are introduced? Can you not just chalk it up to poor characterization if you take such an issue with it?
How come whenever someone tries to bring up something they think may be shoehorning or tokenism they get labeled as whatever negative association that's related towards the subject material?
Shoehorning and tokenism are poor characterization. However talking about this poor characterization often leads to cries or racism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, et cetera.
Do I think Korra being bisexual was shoehorning? No. It was something that was hinted at for about 2 seasons so it had some build up. Her sexuality wasn't even what defined her, if you were to ask someone "What are the defining traits of Korra?", her being bisexual wouldn't be on that list in all likelihood. Therefore tokenism is also avoided.
However I also happen to sit on the opposite side of Turkey on this issue. Unlike certain other people I don't start implying that he's some sort of homophobe and am open to discussing the way he's interpreting this.
That's the thing. It doesn't seem like tokenism. It sounds like bad writing and characterization to me, not shoehorning lesbians in to appeal to the LGBT's. There's a very stark difference.
6502
« on: December 26, 2014, 03:01:29 PM »
Why does everyone kick up a fuss when homosexual characters are introduced? Can you not just chalk it up to poor characterization if you take such an issue with it?
Did you read the OP? Poor characterization is the complaint, not bisexual characters.
I did. It sounds like you're complaining about both homosexual undertones and poor characterization.
6503
« on: December 26, 2014, 02:09:19 PM »
Why does everyone kick up a fuss when homosexual characters are introduced? Can you not just chalk it up to poor characterization if you take such an issue with it?
6504
« on: December 25, 2014, 02:28:13 PM »
ayyyy
6505
« on: December 25, 2014, 11:13:33 AM »
 WE AINT HAD NUFFIN BUT MAGGOTY BREAD FOR THREE STINKIN DAIIIZZZZZZ
6506
« on: December 25, 2014, 08:00:37 AM »
HE IS THE TRAITOR
EEUUUUGHHHHHHHHH
6507
« on: December 25, 2014, 04:52:33 AM »
6508
« on: December 24, 2014, 03:48:41 PM »
>boneless banquet
>not the mega bucket for one
fukin skrub
6509
« on: December 24, 2014, 03:14:20 PM »
cheeky bump
6510
« on: December 23, 2014, 06:20:14 PM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denialWhat the fuck? I take Holocaust deniers about as seriously as I take WBC, but prohibiting their speech because it goes against delicate sensibilities? That's quite literally, jewing to the max.
Pages: 1 ... 215216217 218219 ... 243
|
Show Posts
