1) "If women are raised with only beauty in mind, then we can blame their mothers more than the media for perpetuating that." Yes, it eventually comes back to parenting, and I agree 100% with that. That does not absolve the media of any and all guilt though.

See, what you call narrow, I call empirically proven. There is a difference between brainwashing and understanding facts.

Women are punished in lots of ways. In terms of pure aesthetics, women feel pressure to be "marriage material (aesthetically and in terms of passivity)." They face greater pressures to be chaste but cute (if a man has slept with 10 women, he is a stud, if a woman sleeps with ten men, she is a slut, but if she does not…

Well, I am going to ignore your extremely condescending final line since you were trying to make a point.

1) You managed to prove my point while in the midst of attacking it. Good job! Women have a diminished (assigned) capability in the American society. Lately, things have been changing for the better, but women are still judged on image more than men. Seth Rogan, Jonah Hill, Cristopher Walken, and a myriad of others…

Really? Your argument is flawed in so many ways. First let's tackle the body image issues. We are going to put people with actual physical deformities aside for this discussion because this cannot be a 30 page thesis and actual physical deformity is another issue. Secondly, I really don't care if you want to throw the…

I really don't care if you want to throw the word "bias" around, but I will tell you right now that I am a white heterosexual male. So, you can try that argument, but you will not get very far on that line of thinking with me.

Okay, first of all, we are going to put people with actual physical deformities aside for this discussion because this cannot be a 30 page thesis and actual physical deformity is another issue. Secondly, I really don't care if you want to throw the word "bias" around, but I will tell you right now that I am a white…

But, don't you see where your logic creates more danger? Two people with guns on opposing sides just ends in more death. Sure, there are circumstances where having a weapon is beneficial, but I cannot think of a single one in which an assault weapon provides any benefit to the owner. Basically, you just want to feel…

But, I never considered Gandalf the main character. In GoT/SoIaF, it really seemed that Ned was the glue for the series. Meanwhile, Gandalf was more of the sage wisdom type that imparts important information and then dies so that the journey is not too easy. That is not to say that it was not surprising, I just don't…

You realize you are defending your faulty logic with faulty logic, right?

So, you are saying that a taser, mace, knife, handgun, shotgun, bolt action rifle, or semi automatic rifle are not good enough. Only a military grade weapon can protect you? Who are you protecting your home from, Cthulhu?

Why? What use does any civilian have for an assault rifle other than killing a bunch of creatures really fast with excessive force?

Martin's writing style is not for me. With that said, the show has been amazing and surpasses LOTR in my mind. Yes, LOTR has more historical significance and GoT/SoIaF would not exist without it, but that does not change the fact that GoT's (the tv series) world building/characterization/ and twists are superior.

Martin's writing style is not for me. With that said, the show has been amazing and surpasses LOTR in my mind. Yes, LOTR has more historical significance and GoT/SoIaF would not exist without it, but that does not change the fact that GoT's (the tv series) world building/characterization/ and twists are superior.

Martin's writing style is not for me. With that said, the show has been amazing and surpasses LOTR in my mind. Yes, LOTR has more historical significance and GoT/SoIaF would not exist without it, but that does not change the fact that GoT's (the tv series) world building/characterization/ and twists are superior.

Martin's writing style is not for me. With that said, the show has been amazing and surpasses LOTR in my mind. Yes, LOTR has more historical significance and GoT/SoIaF would not exist without it, but that does not change the fact that GoT's (the tv series) world building/characterization/ and twists are superior.

Martin's writing style is not for me. With that said, the show has been amazing and surpasses LOTR in my mind. Yes, LOTR has more historical significance and GoT/SoIaF would not exist without it, but that does not change the fact that GoT's (the tv series) world building/characterization/ and twists are superior.

Martin's writing style is not for me. With that said, the show has been amazing and surpasses LOTR in my mind. Yes, LOTR has more historical significance and GoT/SoIaF would not exist without it, but that does not change the fact that GoT's (the tv series) world building/characterization/ and twists are superior.

Martin's writing style is not for me. With that said, the show has been amazing and surpasses LOTR in my mind. Yes, LOTR has more historical significance and GoT/SoIaF would not exist without it, but that does not change the fact that GoT's (the tv series) world building/characterization/ and twists are superior.