Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

OK, usually I don't have significant problems with analogies, but that was just nonsense. What the hell? :v

_{(I vaguely remember seeing this show, like, once, and concluding that it was terrible.)}

Over applying a concept that was a weak and general statement to the extent where it becomes overblown, unwieldy, and ruins the point of the product in the first place.

So lets assume they weren't completely speaking out of their butts and girls do like nurturing characters (I mean they were...). Well they took a character who was already working and basically have her a lobotomy in order to make her conform to that standard, but also in doing so made a incredibly bland character because ALL she was, was a "nurturing character"... All because they found out ONE thing girls like.

This is ignoring that it sounds to me they were doing what a lot of pseudo sciences do which is "try to prove social norms". The same kind of scientists who said women weren't as smart as men and used "science" to do so (one of the many reasons why I don't give 'science itself' a free pass in conversations, as well as why I believe blind faith in science is... well... blind faith and not "reason".)

[karhell]

OK, usually I don't have significant problems with analogies, but that was just nonsense. What the hell? :v

_{(I vaguely remember seeing this show, like, once, and concluding that it was terrible.)}

I think I see where Neonivek is coming from: they took the assertion that "women have motherly traits", and then went on to "fix" Janine by making her almost entirely about being motherly, instead of that being just a part of her personality.

Yeah, the chocolate car is a bit far fetched as an analogy, but it works reasonably well.

(ninja'd by Neonivek)