I thought the point was to stop him before stuff was going to be permanent?

Wait, do you mean to imply Nate is a bad Chief of Police? What possible evidence ::coughcough:: could there be for that?

But hasn't she consistently been bad at her job? And only recently the skinwalker? I admit I missed more than I thought, but we know at least when she wasn't the skinwalker, and have no idea what the gap between the last identified victim and her was—there could be other dead people hidden away.

But it's not new or not limited to screenwriters. I was going to say so many of our heroes recover (or never fall) through Herculean efforts, but they don't have the demigod advantage.

I think that's attacking it from the wrong angle. It's not that the "its" are overcomable (it'll catch on, mark my words), it's that, given the success, they put the biggest worstest thing inbetween the hero and the resolution, and that's been impossible for a long long time.

It's a blatant adaptation, but it's written and produced by SyFy and aired nowhere else first, so I don't understand this aversion to the term. It coulda been a Psycho/Coupling stamped copy but instead it's different stories with some guys who are kinda like some other guys. They diverged pretty quickly.

This series? Yes. They've diverged from the plots of the British version, and SyFy is producing it, so it's a lot more original than something like Lost Girl (which they also claim on the strength of being the first US airings).

A Tolkien geek friend saw it yesterday, and she's thrilled to bits with the filling in from other sources.

More than that, in fact.

I think you're missing a word, otherwise—limited will power it is!

Yet it is a Batman clone featuring a total jackass. So maybe a little.

I twitch at too much of this show being Batman lite, so anything he does that separates him from Gotham is a good thing.

When's the last time you saw someone in red outerpants?

How else are you going to fit him inside?

There's still a transvestism fetish in the paraphilia section that has some of the community angry at a bait and switch, but I'm still trying to understand it myself—I can't explain it. http://gidreform.wordpress.com/2010/10/16/ten-reasons-why-the-transvestic-fetishism-diagnosis-in-the-dsm-5-has-got-to-go/And there's…

I think the key semantic is—if your life isn't disturbed by it, it's a trait. If it's fucking you over, it's a disorder.

Here are the last two windows I have open: http://www.care2.com/causes/being-transgender-will-no-longer-be-classified-as-a-disorder.html and http://gidreform.wordpress.com/2010/10/16/ten-reasons-why-the-transvestic-fetishism-diagnosis-in-the-dsm-5-has-got-to-go/

I'm sorry! Here, have this.

I think the premise is that being trans* is not a disorder, but the dysphoria you experience if it's unaddressed is a disorder. Once you've had sufficient gender realignment procedures done, then you're no longer in the DSM.

Come and give us a kiss and a cuddle, eh?