SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
No bio...
User ID: 225
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
1d ago
Trust is a binary. While you may not extend trust to a person in all areas, for any given area, you either trust someone or you do not. There's no middle ground.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
1d ago
Trust but verify
That isn't trust. Trust, by definition, means that you believe someone without verifying. "Trust, but verify" is an incoherent expression that would be more accurately stated as "I don't trust you so I verify the claims you make".
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
1d ago
No. A healthy relationship works on "trust". That's it. Not "trust, but verify" (which is in fact a lack of trust), not "trust, but don't you dare verify". Simply trust.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
1d ago
Given the responses from the Male Motte, the most I can say is that male and female intuitions on this topic are just diametrically opposed.
I think it's more that people who were in an unhealthy relationship have a warped sense of what is acceptable. Like you, I would be very upset if my wife demanded a proof of fidelity out of nowhere (say if she wanted to randomly inspect my phone to make sure I didn't have any untoward text messages on it). That isn't something which should happen in a healthy marriage, and if it comes up at all, the marriage has problems.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
1d ago
That is not remotely emotional blackmail. It's perfectly normal to be upset when your spouse doesn't trust you and demands to check up on your behavior just in case you're up to something.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
1d ago
See also: "goblins in Harry Potter are anti-Semitic, because the grotesque, hooked-nose race who runs the bank is clearly meant to portray Jews". It's remarkable that people are willing to make that claim with a straight face and apparently without awareness of how it reflects on them.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
1d ago
Yeah I agree. I don't think she does have bedroom eyes, just was clarifying what the term means.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
1d ago
A look in the eyes which indicates a desire for sex, like you might see in the bedroom with your partner.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
2d ago
Yeah the character in question looks nothing like an adult.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
2d ago
Perhaps. But they were in business for years and years with the lunch special, so I have a hard time envisioning that it was that which did them in.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
2d ago
I mean, there aren't that many threads which get posted. I think it's ok to have more than one weekly thread on a given day.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
2d ago
This post is one giant strawman. Nobody said that it's immoral to have sex for pleasure, people said that sex is "the pregnant-making thing". Which it is.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
3d ago
At any rate, I love biryani lol. Without peas. We used to have a great biryani place here in town - if you went for lunch you could get biryani, the curry of the day, some boneless chicken appetizer, naan, and gulab jamun, all for only $12 or so. Truly the restaurant of the gods. Unfortunately they went out of business, and I've yet to find anything on their level since. Probably good for my body, but less good for my soul.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
3d ago
Biryani shouldn't really be like fried rice. The texture is different (biryani rice is less likely to stick together than fried rice), and of course the flavors are very different. What they have around me (I'm in Denver) is mostly Hyderabad style biryani, which is spicy and has a delicious fragrance that fried rice never really would have. My general advice on where to find good biryani is to see if there's anywhere that tends to have lots of Indian immigrants eating there. It might not be the best on the planet, but immigrants tend to eat at restaurants that are doing the cuisine correctly in my experience.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
3d ago
That looks like some pretty legit biryani. Could I trouble you to write up a recipe?
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
3d ago
Man... who the fuck serves biryani with peas? I'm not even Indian and I know that's a food crime. It reminds me of the SNL black jeopardy skit where they talk about a white woman making potato salad, and say "she probably put something unnecessary in, like raisins". You have my sympathies.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
3d ago
It doesn't require a shred of Christian belief to recognize that sex is the pregnant making thing. That is basic biological fact. We enjoy sex because it was advantageous (from an evolutionary POV) for us to do so, but that is not the primary purpose. The primary purpose is to reproduce.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
3d ago
Also, complaining that someone's post was recognized as a QC when you don't think it deserved to be is churlish. Disagree privately and move on. I certainly don't think every QC is quality, but you don't see me complaining about them.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
4d ago
I do think that the lack of the Scouring of the Shire is a major weakness in the Peter Jackson adaptations. Yeah it takes time, but it's an essential part of the story. Without that, we never get to see the heroes come home, changed by their adventures in the wider world, finding that their home is a bit smaller than they remembered it being. I definitely think that it should've been in the extended edition of ROTK even if it got cut from the theatrical version.
The biggest weakness, though, was his willingness to flat out ignore Tolkien's story themes in an attempt to drum up cheap drama (as you mentioned). I remember once watching the commentary on The Two Towers, and someone (I think Fran Walsh) said that they had the whole Faramir detour because Tolkien's account of the character undercut the story they were trying to emphasize of how potent the Ring is, and how much of a threat it is. Which, to me, sounds like they missed Tolkien's point entirely. Yes, the Ring is powerful, and yes, it's a threat. But it can be resisted, and there are virtues in the world which are stronger than the temptation that the Ring offers. This is seen most clearly with the Frodo/Sam changes in ROTK: in the book, the Ring tempts Frodo but the deep friendship he and Sam share is enough to overpower the Ring's influence. But in the movie, Jackson had to have a dramatic moment, so he guts one of the major themes of the book in order to gin up conflict. It really rubs me the wrong way.
I have long been of the opinion that, whatever their virtues as movies (and to be fair, I think they are excellent in their own right as movies), the Peter Jackson LOTR movies are pretty flawed adaptations of the source material. It's a real shame, because we are unlikely to ever see better than that, as people consider them definitive. C'est la vie.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
4d ago
I was trying to make a joke, since you said you defer to the RCTs as correct over your own experience. But whatevs, joke didn't land I guess.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
4d ago
I don't think it did anything for me, but defer to RCTs over the anecdotes of a very lazy man
To be fair, it could both do nothing for you and also be very effective for the average person. Now you can claim hipster points for not being like the great unwashed masses.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
5d ago
Meal wise, nothing fancy. I might make a sandwich. But I am currently working on some banana bread, which ought to be quite delicious.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
5d ago
My dislike of Dawkins is summed up nicely by a line from the South Park episodes which made fun of him: "he decided that logic and reason wasn't enough; you also have to be a dick to everyone who doesn't think like you". Because that is how he always has acted. The man just drips with contempt for anyone who has religious beliefs. I don't much care if someone is an atheist, that's fine. But when someone is an atheist and his every moment in the public eye is declaring that my views are stupid, that I'm stupid for believing them, and that it should be illegal for parents to teach children about my beliefs... then I have a problem.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
5d ago
I would say that every strategy game should certainly have defense missions (though not necessarily as the climax), so you should get catered to in that sense. Both defense and attack are part of the strategy game experience.
Fire Emblem players know that a good enemy phase team is a thing of beauty. Just sit back and watch as the enemy breaks itself upon your swole waifus and husbandos.
Not the only thing. But it is 90% of what people care about.
More options
Context Copy link