Combating idiocy with idiocy is...idiotic. You have big cities. Congratulations.

Pandering to emotions is vital to good storytelling. There’s no shame in not wanting to be stimulated by the erotic, but I see no compelling argument as to why anyone else SHOULD feel shame for it, which you’ve implied. Why are bloodlust, rage, despair, and empathy valid, but eroticism is not?

Nope.

That is not, in fact, how they gain power. It’s convenient to think so, because “playing by the rules” is exhausting and it reframes the issue into one where pre-emptive violence is acceptable. But when a fraction of society is using fear of an external threat as a method of consolidating power, pre-emptive violence…

And it does what, exactly? Except make you feel better? Do you think it will stop them? Make them rethink? Will it help educate them?

I mean, I laughed. But that doesn’t make it okay.

Exactly my reaction. Lando is such a wonderfully complicated character, at least for star wars, and Glover just absolutely fits.

The point of nepotism laws is to maintain public trust. Hillary’s competence and experience were irrelevant, in that public trust would not have been eroded (necessarily) by her abilities but by the suspicion, regardless of fact, that her position was secured via her marriage.

I very clearly said dissipate the energy. And I point out that the reason body armor CAN work is because bullet momentum is small enough that it can be transferred to a slightly larger part of the body slowly enough that tissue can absorb the energy.

I don’t know how he does his trick, but most bullets don’t have all that much momentum. That’s why, say, body armor and helmets work. It’s the pressure and the speed, not the momentum. Entirely conceivable to safely spread the energy of .22 across a jaw.

I usually put it a little differently: there are good action movies staring Bond, and there are good comedies staring Bond, but Casino Royale is the only great movie that just happens to star Bond.

I sincerely doubt its seaworthiness.

Interestingly, this isn’t a tenant of Catholicism. Or rather, it shouldn’t be. “Hell” is more the idea of separation from God, which is a personal relationship that the New Testament takes great pains to state should not be assumed: love everyone.

And here we see how glib jokes, while humorous, should not be taken as legitimate argument...because someone will remind you that penguins thrive outside Antarctica.

The Tree that Adam and Eve ate from wasn’t just the “Tree of Knowledge,” it was the “Tree of Knowledge of What is Good and What is Evil.” So a literal interpretation of “the fall” is that ignorance is bliss...which ironically neatly answers the above question while simultaneously being ignored by most…

On the other hand, their decision gave some play to the Italians and Austrohungarians. Most WWI stuff focuses on the Western front, so it was nice to see a bit of variety.

I mean, it’s an insidious problem precisely because it doesn’t need to act on an individual level. Damon and company might legitimately have wanted to tell this specific story. And, in isolation, that’s legitimate! It might be offensive, but it’s a legitimate story, especially in fiction. The Chinese are certainly no…

But...why is that particular trope so prominent, out of the literal thousands that build modern stories? It’s not portrayed in a positive way. It may be titillating, but so can most forbidden behaviors, including violence generally.

Listen to yourself. Can you imagine blaming poor, unsuccessful black people...for anything? People would be rightly outraged, for a multitude of valid reasons. White America doesn’t have to deal with racism...and that’s no small caveat!...but that doesn’t mean that their issues don’t exist. Do they correctly attribute…

Agreed, but also it would help if women in power didn’t, you know, marry shitty men?