mcity: (Default)
You don't just get to "consider" your boyfriend your husband. And no, it is not idolatrous to require government approval, any more than it would be idolatrous to get a driver's license. Render unto Ceasar, remember? The Bible says get married. You make some good points elsewhere, but put a ring on it. Or, heck, ask him. It's a brave new world! Girls can actually do that now!


Yes, I am aware that some people have different ideas of Christianity. I'm merely expressing my disagreement with one of those ideas. I'm not going to find the individual, kick their door down, and force them to get married at gunpoint. My lawyer said to stop that.
mcity: (Default)
These daily "random" picture collections seems to have an awful lot of hot women partially exposing intimate parts of their anatomy included in them, some directed specifically at your website. Much more than the statistical mean, in fact. I suspect you deliberately included them to increase your popularity!

On to you,
mcity: (Default)
I see you've finally gotten around to the original trilogy.

Luke's player to keeps making references to Quick Time Events and autosaves and suchlike. He is playing a tabletop RPG. Yes, he's never played before, naive farmboy, ha ha. Problem is, he should know the difference between Final Fantasy and DnD, no matter how much of a gamer he is. If he's doing this as some sort of joke, please have another character at least point it out somehow.

It is not funny.

mcity: (Default)
I don't care how stupid the character is.

I don't care that she's the equivalent of a little girl.

You cannot, with a straight face, have her speak in lolcat.

mcity: (amazing)
I know it's a fetish thing, but why on earth would anyone wear a tie when going horse-riding? Much less those entirely impractical boots? Did you get the "sexy librarian" and "sexy jockey" costume boxes mixed up? Because I don't think jockeys have ever dressed in anything close to that, of either gender.


(Incidentally, this guy makes a good deal of money off those novelty military patches, and has interest and is keeping his hand in in guns n' gear. His day job? apparently, DJ. If this was a character in a story I'd be calling him a Mary Sue.)
mcity: (exclamation mark)
Our boy specifically thinks he does not want to marry women X and Y, while he is sneaking into a quick wedding with woman Z.

X and Y were willing to share, since the planet allows polygamy, but he did not want to be shared, since he felt that for all their good company in the bedroom, either or both would be the domineering type of woman his mother is before long, and more than he could bear. He has been dodging their offer of marriage for two years.

And Z is the girl next door type, and he both loves her and wants to help out her dad.

Due to a series of circumstances, X and Y show up, and our hero is forced by social and political pressure--from two Emperors, no less--to marry all three women. Z seemed to have no problem with it, but absolutely no one saw fit to consult our boy, even while they were negotiating right in front of him.

So he walks in expecting to marry one woman (whom he loves), and ends up marrying three women, two of whom he explicitly did not want to marry.

I know he's the whipping boy of the canon, but that's Not Okay.

And to think, this fanfic series was going so well up until now, then you just ran full tilt into what TVTropes calls Unfortunate Implications.

Do you know why people like the Wooster books? Because we know Wodehouse is never going to let Bertie end up in a loveless marriage. If he ever did end up getting hitched, we would be reading less along the lines of a light-hearted comedy of manners, and more along the lines of those critically-acclaimed Oscar-nominated movies where everyone is miserable but played by really good actors.

Hang on, I think I'm onto something here. All I have to do is call it a "deconstruction".

mcity: (Default)
A qipao or cheongsam is a Chinese dress.

Geisha are Japanese.

If you're going to create a comic that is entirely about women being objectified, would it really be so hard for you to have a little cultural sensitivity?


Dear X,

Feb. 14th, 2012 01:05 am
mcity: (Default)
No, it is not always, or even usually a good idea to err on the side of the alleged victim in cases of abuse or rape accusations. Yes, women are most likely to be raped. But the dark corollary to that which no one likes to talk about is is that men are most likely to get falsely accused of rape. The Duke Lacrosse incident was in March 2006, charges were filed in April, and it was December before they were partially dropped. The remaining charges weren't dropped until April 2007. Innocent men spent a year with the sword of Damocles hanging over their head, because of a lying or perhaps mentally unstable woman and an incompetent DA.

This comes up in feminist discourse, except the hue and cry is that it makes it harder for the genuine accusers of rape. While this is true, there is little concern for the innocent people falsely accused of a crime. Ironically, they take something that should, in fact, be about the menz and tried to make it about the womenz.

If anything, err on the side of caution. "Innocent until proven guilty" gets thrown out the window far too much when dealing with sex crimes; where "too much" is equal to or grater than "at all". Even SVU has episodes where everyone is convinced He Did It, then it turned out He Didn't Dood It. In one case, the poor guy got killed in prison because the "victim" and her family were actually trying to scam the place where the alleged rape happened for a settlement.

And the fact that you are self aware enough to note the irony of you having distaste for Chris Brown, but not Michael Fassbender, means there's some hope for you yet.

mcity: (Default)
I can pretend, for the sake of the story, that a certain confluence of random events could end up becoming a virulent, sentient virus, turning the crew of the space station into monsters.

However, I can't buy that the scientists had the animals on board to study their reproduction, yet the resulting abomination of a species was exclusively--and, ahem, prominently--male, even if the station was crewed entirely by men.

Much better to simply have the animals be pets of the personnel, present at the accident, and all male.

Also, don't try to sell us on the species being the good guys because they just want to be left alone. I admit, it was rather clever to have them seem like mindless monsters, then it turns out they're sentient, but it doesn't change the fact that they are a blight upon the galaxy who could easily infect the next ship that comes along, unless you'd have the government spending a lot of effort guarding the station. In fact, precisely that happens during the course of the story, when pirates come straight in when they get our initial group's distress beacon. And what happens if some lunatic or nation decides to just point the station at an enemy planet? The species is nearly invincible. Even nukes don't work; they'd just kill the sentience of the members who still have it.

Basically, you're arguing that the government should just let the lab full of experimental tech that the virulent adaptive species can integrate with just sit there, based on the minority claim that they just want to be left alone. That and 60p will get you some crisps.

mcity: (Default)
All I want to do is draw Derpy Hooves and Cookie Monster in Illustrator. Why is the fill so complicated? Why can't I just tell the program "put the fill here!" like in Flash? Why?

mcity: (Default)
Seriously, not every website needs a SOPA blackout, and it's ironic that you're haranguing sites, such as Gawker Media, that say they won't. Ironic because the protests are about freedom.

mcity: (Default)
How on Earth is it even possible for Trucy to be cuter than Pearl Fey? Is it the hat? And isn't that banned by the Geneva conventions, under the provisions for Weapons of Mass Moe?

mcity: (Default)
A heterosexual North American male not wanting to kiss a male member of another species, even if said species solely uses kissing for purposes rather than an expression of romance, does not mean he is not "mature" or homophobic. It simply means that the action is outside the bounds of activity he is comfortable with. Ask yourself; what if the situation involved a gay man and a mermaid? How about a lesbian and a merman? A straight woman and another woman?

Actually, scratch that last one, you lot would probably find it hot.

mcity: (Default)
So you think the Catholic church, and the Pope as representative of that Church, infringes on people's rights over their own sexuality.


Then you say the Pope has no right to complain when Benneton photoshoops him in an ad kissing an Egyptian Imam.

In other words, you're saying he has no right to complain about other people infringing on his own rights about his sexuality.

That's kind of a contradiction.

mcity: (Default)
Iraqi veteran Scott Olsen was shot in the head, yes, by a beanbag round. Or by a tear gas round, it's unclear. I didn't even have to click through to any of the pages Google found to learn that. While that is bad, the way it the headline is phrased deliberately leads people to think it was bullets.

And Dorli Rainey, the 84-year old granny who was pepper sprayed? She was in a crowd of protestors that had marched what Google Maps tells me is over two miles from their camp. I don't know if she was there from the start, or joined in at some point, but the protestors were in the middle of downtown Seattle, and not dispersing when the cops asked them to.

Now unless you think the cops should screen for Iraqi vets and OAPs in crowds when they deploy less-lethal measures, you need to pull back on the propaganda. There seems to be a focus only on how those policemen are big ol' meanies, instead of worrying about who causes these confrontations in the first place. And no, don't keep dodging responsibility with those nonsense rumors about agent provocateurs, whom there is no credible evidence for. If you want the police to be bad guys, don't confront them in such a aggressive manner that it gives them a reason to respond with force. MLK knew this, Gandhi knew this.

It is hypocritical to want to have a movement demanding accountability and responsibility for others without wanting either for themselves. And for all the protesting, there doesn't seem to be anything changing.

Quit with the sound and fury, and start signifying something.

EDIT: It turns out rocks were being thrown at the time of the injury, so Mr. Olsen could've been hit by one of those, and not by the police at all. Please note that beanbag rounds are usually aimed at chest height--they're not exactly aerodynamic, and the torso means a better chance of incapacitation without serious injury--and tear gas is usually thrown by hand towards the ground. The Oakland protests in question had already gotten confrontational, had built barricades which they set on fire, and were destroying bank property during the day. Basically, the OWS account of the events is slanted so far as to be nearly horizontal. I mean, Olsen was supposedly seriously injured, but was still texting.
mcity: (Default)
You complain about commercials where parents lie to their kids to get them to eat helthy food being some sort of Unfortunate Implication, and say that said commercials are actually advising parents not to teach their kids to eat healthy.

Leaving aside the usual tactic of extrapolating from a depiction of a single event to a statement about everything, ever:

Have you ever seen a child?

Or better yet, have you ever been a child?

Going to eat a bacon sammich
mcity: (Default)
Is there any particular reason why your program has been around since 1988, yet only Photoshop CS5.5 has introduced the ability to scroll outside the document bounds when zoomed in, a feature which OpenCanvas has had for the better part of a decade?

mcity: (nope.avi)
I go to your website, containing tens of thousands of scripts for Greasemonkey.

There is no search box on the front page.

You have to click the "scripts" button to find to the page with the search box.

This strikes me as...counterintuitive web design.

Argh what

PS: I really don't appreciate removing the functionality from Firefox 4+ that lets users choose which websites scripts operate on, without having to, y'know, edit the actual script. I have a small amount of experience with coding and scripting, enough to know the code that designates the website when I see it. It helps that it's the first thing in the document, but a lot of people don't have Notepad++ on their desktop.

Dear BBC,

May. 26th, 2011 10:22 pm
mcity: (Default)
Thanks for making iPlayer automatically resume where I left off when I accidentally close the relevant tab because I think I have the Firefox window active instead of Chrome.


October 2012

  12 3456
21 2223242526 27


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 17th, 2017 08:29 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios