Posts by Bart Janssen
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Next they'll be outing Ellen DeGeneres.
Well duh! Lesbians don't wear dresses so it was obvious she had to be gay.
-
I don't know what to think about this scene in Glee last week with the Deaf choir. Is it tokenistic?
Ok I'm going to reveal how simplistic I am. I loved the scene and cried both times I watched it. I appreciate that it's likely they are actors (as opposed to real people) and I did cringe when the Glee members joined in, which in real life I would think was horribly rude.
But for me, the scene worked, the combination of the actors (deaf or not) and the song, because it is one of the truly great songs, just worked.
Glee is not even remotely real life, the characters are caricatures and played for laughs and tears and I don't demand more of them. Sometimes they deliver more and that's a bonus for me.
I guess to answer the question I'd say I didn't "think" about it I just enjoyed it.
-
The slightly more upright riding posture has solved the back and neck problems
Yeah it seems weird but riding is one of those exercises that can really mess your back up if you do it wrong. Nobody ever talks about posture while cycling - because it's as easy as riding a bike - and as you get all warm and loose you can push your back into a really bad shape.
-
offender has a weapon.
Which leads to the question "what does the legal system define as a weapon?".
I know a crowbar counts from what Graeme has said
-
the maximum applicable sentence, to be served without parole, is the consequence.
And this is what has pissed me off about this whole debate. It is the idea that some ill-educated ill-informed politician is allowed to tell a knowledgeable experienced judge how to best do the job.
Why in any semblance of a sane universe do we let the dickheads who nothing about a particular case decide how best apply the law?
/insert sound of frustration followed by head banging on keyhw g gba-
-
freemartins
So biology does influence gender?
-
Really?
In my whanau, everyone takes the lids off their own bottles, whether preserving jars or booze...everyone learns the tricks for the recalcitrant containersYes really.
While of course anyone can get the lid of a troublesome bottle many women/females have learned the tool that requires the least effort to use is a man/male.
Seriously I think Gio's point is pretty compelling about gender roles being social constructs. But I really also think he is weakening his point by insisting it be absolute. There really are some gender roles that have a strong biological basis.
And yes of course we are talking about overlapping bell curves here so there will always be females that extend into the normal male range for any biological trait.
But that doesn't negate the influence of biology on gender roles.
In the same way that my stating that does not negate the fact that many/most gender roles are socially defined as Gio has stated.
We live in the shades of grey between absolute black and absolute white. Both views are right in different situations.
-
Gio I understand your point and it is useful. But I think you are taking it to an extreme by being absolute.
A male gender role in modern society is to take lids of bottles*. The role is based on biology, testosterone affects muscle mass and hence the gender role is defined by the biology.
*in other societies you can substitute any activity the benefits from strength
-
Back on topic (hah!)
What's the exclamation mark for?
Perhaps expressing the futility of expecting us to do anything other than allow the random firing of neurons to lead us from subject to subject :P
-
You know I look at this stuff with a different eye.
Mika's picture looks odd to me not because it's a full frontal male nude but because the fake boobs are so unreal. That is part of the art I know but I guess it just doesn't strike a chord with me for some reason.
I grew up seeing naked/nude people all the time. The naturist was a magazine I'd look at in the hope (vain I know in both senses) of seeing a picture of myself. None of the pictures in there, man woman or child, were remotely sexual. But some were art and all were real in a way that the exhibition pieces were not.
What strikes me about the pictures you showed was the weird aversion to the real human form. Why must bits be hidden or disguised? In the end, for me, it makes the art in question flawed and lacking in some way.