We need more stereotype-filling quotes
-
The incapacity of you to see anything other than small pretty lights when you look at a movie is pretty funny.
-
It's a reasonable assumption
But it's unreasonable to always make the assumption.
The bigger problem is when feminists claim credit for every woman's success, saying that the woman couldn't have done it without feminists.
So, the woman benefited from classical feminism. But modern feminists are arrogant twats if they think that a woman twice their age owes anything to them.
-
-
Dude you are talking to the guy who posted the recut 2001 trailer. Do you really believe that's true?
So be it, I guess.
-
-
Do you really believe that's true?
...
The whole point of GitS is that it is giving you something to think about.
If you think that the nudity failed to do that, fine.
But I think it's unfair to say that the nudity in GitS was just there for fanservice.
Because watching half a body with robot guts (puppet master) that claims to be a guy and just happens to have tits, doesn't qualify as fanservice on my radar.
-
Is that it.
Oh god, I was beginning to think that there really was people just that stupid in the world... whew...
...
Oh, you mean you're trolling.
We're doomed.
-
This post is deleted!
-
Oh, you mean you're trolling.
I mean, I was serious about Hillary! owing her success to her husband (duh).
-
...
You can tell a moron anime fan because they type an ellipsis on its own as if that meant something. Probably because they saw it in a badly-translated Final Fantasy game at some point.
The whole point of GitS is that it is giving you something to think about.
Yeah: tits.
If you think that the nudity failed to do that, fine.
No it worked pretty well.
Because watching half a body with robot guts (puppet master) that claims to be a guy and just happens to have tits, doesn't qualify as fanservice on my radar.
Yeah but you think animes are good, so what the fuck do you know?
Oh, you mean you're trolling.
Everybody here is always trolling.
-
I still think you'd like:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPyJZrNcYn0&list=PLI-_rMTHyphT5bgJHGu9bqoC-vLFX7NY8
-
tits.
Have you seen von Trier's Nymphomaniac? It's a rather awful movie overall, but it gets one point right - you can have lots and lots and lots and lots of tits in your movie, and yet make it horrifyingly unsexy.
I haven't watched GitS, but I guess that's what @xaade is angling for, with his usual communication skills.
-
lots of tits in your movie, and yet make it horrifyingly unsexy.
I need to hire you as interpreter.
Have you played Dante's Inferno.
I think it's appropriate that the lust circle of hell is full of sexuality turned horrifyingly unsexy.
-
Have you even watched chobits.
The whole point is that they are robots, and you can treat them however you like, but the main character refuses to do so.
Never in that show is a human woman treated bad.
-
Have you even watched chobits.
God no.
The whole point is that they are robots, and you can treat them however you like,
How does point 2 there follow from point 1? Japanese are assholes.
-
How does point 2 there follow from point 1? Japanese are assholes
So is the Matrix, and the 3 robotic laws, and pretty much every other topic covering robots.
You know, just because someone does something in a video, doesn't mean it is condoned.
Otherwise, you could say that Die Hard promotes terrorism and hostage taking.
I thought my points were clear.
In the show, the main character refuses to treat robots as objects, simply because the robot appears human. That's a remarkable concept, because I've never seen anyone walk into a factory and hold the robot's hand and tell them they are loved.
The show goes into concepts like: Can you love a robot? Is it okay to love a robot? Even when the robot has obviously virtual AI.
But then that mirrors back on humanity, because one of the robots appears very human until she gets her memory wiped by accident. Then she reverts back to the drone like default setting. Is that robot the same person?
Because you could apply the same question to a person with Alzheimer's.
-
you could apply the same question to a person with Alzheimer's
Well right. As you say, there's really no such thing as a person with Alzheimers. Just like a previously likable robot after a memory wipe, it is no longer classifiable as a person.
-
Well right. As you say, there's really no such thing as a person with Alzheimers. Just like a previously likable robot after a memory wipe, it is no longer classifiable as a person.
Alzheimers is more complicated than that, and the slide into memorylessness a gradual thing that does not take the whole of a person at once.
-
I suppose then that complicates using Alzheimer's as an analogy here, indeed.
-
Don't worry @magus, I got it :D
-
I suppose then that complicates using Alzheimer's as an analogy here, indeed.
Losing a loved one to that sort of thing makes you see it differently. In the end, when they die, you don't cry: you realise that the person you loved was really already long gone, and you had just been visiting your memory of them for years.
-
Yeah, or, possibly a cleverly disguised robot. Really, how would you have been able to tell?
-
A fleshbot? I don't think so.
Memories are not all lost in the same way. Often, long-term cherished memories seem to last much longer than more recent or mundane things. My grandmother would remember what her mother had said to her when she was a little girl, and also what it was like taking me shopping when I was about 2, but not the reason that we'd come to visit her in the nursing home.