Oh, I agree, they're not completely uniform, but most of the time it's just a difference in intensity, rather than some substantively unique outlook on the world.

In the narrow scope of my earlier comment, I was defining conservative as believing in one or more of the fairytales the social group known as "conservatives" like to tell themselves. You espoused two:

1. That "liberal bias" exists.
   
2. That liberals are lazy lieabouts who don't work for a living.
   

I'm not denying the existence of misogyny, but I do wonder why, if men are paid more then women, anyone would hire a man? Why not hire a woman in a man's place, pay them 80 cents on the dollar, and make a killing?

I don't understand what you mean by accusing someone of misandry as a form of misogyny. You'll have to explain that to me.

Personally, I found Warren Farrell's book, Why Men Earn More to be fairly illuminating with regards to these issues.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^Trancecoach:
Not all of the studies and census statistics are as clear cut as Rachel makes it seem in this clip. For one thing, statistically speaking, more men's "value" or "worth" is based on their income, and are therefore willing (or are socially coerced) to work in particular kinds of jobs that women are not (such as physically riskier jobs, longer commutes, more frequent travel, longer hours, for example), for a greater number hours per week and/or days per week, and/or more years over the course of their lives than women. By contrast, women's worth or value is based less on their income and are therefore more willing (or socially allowed) to work in jobs that have a greater range of flexibility in terms of experience, time, and physical impact.
I'm not seeing any data. In any case, we're talking about different pay for equal work. We're not talking about average male salary vs. average female salary in aggregate, we're talking about men and women with the same position, same education,working the same hours, producing equivalent work, under the same working conditions...and they're being paid less.
>> ^Trancecoach:

The question we should be asking is what is lost by the income disparity? If the society is complicit in a gender bias as evidenced by an income disparity, it is just as complicit in the social pressures that are imposed on what is valued on the basis of gender and why.
The confrontation with misandry is a third rail, politically speaking, but, the myth of male power only serves to further propagate both the misogyny and the misandry that are both rampant throughout the society.
A fair point, but we're not talking about the "myth of male power", we're saying "misogyny exists, and we have data that proves it, but Republicans say it's a fairytale."
From where I sit, the a big part of misogyny is the rank dismissal of all claims that misogyny is real, or failing that, that misogyny is bad. To accuse someone, even lightheartedly, of engaging in misandry by presenting hard data saying "misogyny exists, and is widespread", is itself misogyny.
Just like the whole bit where Republicans accuse people of being racist against white people for pointing out that white people discriminate against black people, and that by talking about it we're just perpetuating the problem we're trying to solve...

>> ^Trancecoach:

Not all of the studies and census statistics are as clear cut as Rachel makes it seem in this clip. For one thing, statistically speaking, more men's "value" or "worth" is based on their income, and are therefore willing (or are socially coerced) to work in particular kinds of jobs that women are not (such as physically riskier jobs, longer commutes, more frequent travel, longer hours, for example), for a greater number hours per week and/or days per week, and/or more years over the course of their lives than women. By contrast, women's worth or value is based less on their income and are therefore more willing (or socially allowed) to work in jobs that have a greater range of flexibility in terms of experience, time, and physical impact.

I'm not seeing any data. In any case, we're talking about different pay for equal work. We're not talking about average male salary vs. average female salary in aggregate, we're talking about men and women with the same position, same education,working the same hours, producing equivalent work, under the same working conditions...and they're being paid less.

>> ^Trancecoach:


The question we should be asking is what is lost by the income disparity? If the society is complicit in a gender bias as evidenced by an income disparity, it is just as complicit in the social pressures that are imposed on what is valued on the basis of gender and why.
The confrontation with misandry is a third rail, politically speaking, but, the myth of male power only serves to further propagate both the misogyny and the misandry that are both rampant throughout the society.

A fair point, but we're not talking about the "myth of male power", we're saying "misogyny exists, and we have data that proves it, but Republicans say it's a fairytale."

From where I sit, the a big part of misogyny is the rank dismissal of all claims that misogyny is real, or failing that, that misogyny is bad. To accuse someone, even lightheartedly, of engaging in misandry by presenting hard data saying "misogyny exists, and is widespread", is itself misogyny.

Just like the whole bit where Republicans accuse people of being racist against white people for pointing out that white people discriminate against black people, and that by talking about it we're just perpetuating the problem we're trying to solve...

All these reimaginings of classic fairytales where the heroes are now professional assassins, master samurai, and general baddasses rather than innocent children in scary situations are getting very cliche.

>> ^Yogi:


They're mad. They're very upset that Obama isn't doing what he said he was gonna do. They're fucking morons believing in fairytales.


Yeah they're crazy for wanting to stop the destruction of the biosphere, end suicidal trillion dollar opportunistic oil heists around the world, get rid of nukes before one ends up in NYC, control the bullying of 6th generation intellectually mediocre inheritees wielding billions, stop rich right wing politicians sending the poor off to die in foreign fields in return for backhanders from Halliburton, Blackwater and the oil companies, stop 'losing' billions of dollars in cash on aeroplanes bound for Baghdad, try and resuscitate America's tattered reputation as a country of democracy, freedom and law, deal with Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi because THATS WHERE THE TERRORISTS LIVE NOT IRAQ, stop burning thousands of children to death in their cots in self defeating attempts to dominate huge populations of increasing angry bereaved paupers,and stop America from ending up as the poor beggar in a nuclear standoff with china in 20 years that they'll have to back down from cos china could take everything the US has and walk away with 300m people breathing -and the US knows it- and the west now talking about 'freedom' and respect for individuals and other nations will just make the Chinese commie party laugh even harder (and milks been coming out of their nose since 2002).

Stop America tearing itself to pieces and handing the next 2 centuries to 1.5 billion Chinese who have EVEN LESS interest and empathy for the 'Rest Of World' than Americans?

Maybe you're right Yogi.

>> ^quantumushroom:

An OUTRAGED liberal? There's something you don't see every minute of every day.


They're mad. They're very upset that Obama isn't doing what he said he was gonna do. They're fucking morons believing in fairytales.

It's called a cover. Distract everyone with planes so that they aren't focused on the buildings blowing up. It's not that complicated or difficult to imagine. It would be a lot more difficult for terrorists to have set up the demolitions.
You have to admit that this video presents some interesting connections and coincidences, no matter what you believe.>> ^volumptuous:

Retards, all of you.
If there were controlled demolitions, why would they involve airplanes at all? Why not just claim terrorists planted the demolitions, instead of going through all the trouble to ALSO hijack airplanes filled with people, and fly them into buildings at precisely the moment the explosives were set to detonate? Jesus fucking christ you have to be so thick to believe any of this horseshit for even a second.
You must literally have to remove your brain to not instantantly brush this off as the dumbest fairytale ever told.
You people are worse than Religious freaks. Zero evidence, and you keep banging your head against the same retardation wall endlessly.

>> ^volumptuous:

Retards, all of you.
If there were controlled demolitions, why would they involve airplanes at all? Why not just claim terrorists planted the demolitions, instead of going through all the trouble to ALSO hijack airplanes filled with people, and fly them into buildings at precisely the moment the explosives were set to detonate? Jesus fucking christ you have to be so thick to believe any of this horseshit for even a second.
You must literally have to remove your brain to not instantantly brush this off as the dumbest fairytale ever told.
You people are worse than Religious freaks. Zero evidence, and you keep banging your head against the same retardation wall endlessly.


u mad bro?

Retards, all of you.

If there were controlled demolitions, why would they involve airplanes at all? Why not just claim terrorists planted the demolitions, instead of going through all the trouble to ALSO hijack airplanes filled with people, and fly them into buildings at precisely the moment the explosives were set to detonate? Jesus fucking christ you have to be so thick to believe any of this horseshit for even a second.

You must literally have to remove your brain to not instantantly brush this off as the dumbest fairytale ever told.

You people are worse than Religious freaks. Zero evidence, and you keep banging your head against the same retardation wall endlessly.

Come on of course Cowboys and Aliens was going to terrible. They took a funny story and tried to make a serious movie out of it and that's why it fails on so many fronts. Plus Ford is phoning in everything now just like Pacino and De Niro.

Hanna was good but disappointing mostly of what Blankfist mentioned already. She takes out a whole base and suddenly shes scared of 3 guys and 1 woman in the finale? Ninja please.

Hanna with its fairytale bullshit was really weak as well. I was hoping it would have more of a Bourne Identity feel about it. Am not 5 give me complex storylines not rooted in fairytale bullshit. By the 3rd act all I wanted to do is fucking leave because the story started to fall apart and retcon everything they built up in act 1 and 2. Still good but it's not Leon or Nikita.

Overall this whole summer has been shit for movies.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

** Spoilers Continue **

I didn't have a problem with the ending. It was a bit magical. She was in the fairytale house and the witch came to get her. Although Hanna was bad ass, she was completely freaked out psychologically by confronting the witch, so not functioning well. I thought it was a pretty good ending actually. Cate played evil really well in this one.

>> ^blankfist:

I saw Hanna a while back. It's really well done. And the tone is exceptionally great for this kind of story. It's really good. Or at least the first two acts are really good. By the 3rd act I felt like the stakes were lowered too much. In the very last big scene I never felt the main character was threatened.
SPOILER ALERT
Do NOT read further if you don't want the ending ruined.
@dag, how'd you feel about the ending? Up to that point we've seen what Hanna is capable of: fighting troves of baddies with guns and kicking ass all the way. I mean, she's the perfect assassin, right? Then by the end it's just her versus Cate Blanchett's character. Sure, Cate is armed with a gun, but she's so out matched it's a deflation from the action-packed ride we were just on.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'shortfilm, happy ending, funky music, chris allison, little mermaid' to 'shortfilm, happy ending, funky music, chris allison, little mermaid, fairytale ending' - edited by Trancecoach

I admit, I do bash religion, but there is just too much hypocrisy, inconsistency, and lack of reason in it to leave it alone. In the world of science, harsh critique is beneficial. I evaluate my position all the time and I have changed my stance on issues as supporting evidence surfaces. There is where the difference lies. Religion is incapable of functioning in the presence of evidence and reason. It survives in a logic vacuum. It is incapable of simply stating, "we don't know what happens after we die because there is no evidence.". Instead the answer is, "an multi-thousand year old book tell me I go to a magical land, so it is true.". Sorry. Not good enough.

It may not be your personal task to convince me that god exists... tough apparently it is for the hordes of missionaries that fan out across the world, johovas witnesses that buzz around my front door, and the mormons in their white shirts and magical underwear that harass my wife at the house during the day. Add to that churches, and the signs plastered across towns spouting 'truth' without evidence. Apparently they have something to say and are trying to convince me their fairytale sky god is real. If all is in their great god's plan, then apparently the existence of atheists is a part of that plan too? I'd like to hear the logic behind that. Again, the mysterious ways argument doesn't cut it.

You certainly have a right to believe in whatever fashionable religion you happen to be born into through familial tradition. You'd be following islam if you were born in the middle east. You certainly have the right to believe in a magic sky god. Just as I have the right to state that I don't endorse superstitious fairy tales.

Interestingly many think it is taboo to speak up against religion. Well.. to them it is because doing so, as per christianity and islam, for example, is punishable by death. Oh wait. We ignore that part don't we... probably because it is not popular. I guess following god's word per the infallible book isn't all that obligatory, if it isn't convenient of the culturally acceptable norm for the times.

From where I stand, it is the responsibility of the religious to take the stories that they spread and prove their validity. They cannot prove it. Thus why should I confide in it? They are welcome to confide in it if they wish. Just as you are welcome to confide in finding a high paying job by calling 800-HOME-JOB. Sure I could tell you all about how wonderful god or that perfect job it is, but without a paycheck (evidence) in hand, it is just a fantasy/scam.

Yes, some religious individuals do good things. So do many atheists. The point I am making is.. you do not have to be religious to do good. I volunteer and I donate to charities. I get riled up when a religious person takes into assumption that if someone doesn't believe in a magic sky god. They are innately immoral. I would contest that morality has nothing to do with religion. Religion holds no monopoly on charity. It never has. Religion just likes to claim it does because god will not show up at your door and help you through that bout of cancer. This supposed all powerful universal creator is unfortunately sleeping at the wheel or too darn busy making flowers to show his face, noodly appendage, or whatever to help those of us that were supposedly created in his 'image'. Whatever that means.

About muslims vs christians. I don't give muslims a free ride. I don't give christians a free ride either. The only group I may be a bit lenient on are the buddhists. While the foundation of the belief is bunk as is all other religions, the core general philosophy is somewhat honorable. The purists that is. The ultimate in pacifism. We don't see buddhists blowing themselves up, nor do we see them crusading across the and telling everyone they are going to burn in hell if they don't worship a man nailed to a torture symbol.


>> ^quantumushroom:

It's not my task to convince you that God does or does not exist.
There are likely millions of people on this planet that would deny the existence of God even if God appeared before them.
But the militant atheist, who denies that ANY good has come from religion is, IMO, intellectually dishonest, ignorant of history, or both.
In this age, subversives have made it fashionable to bash the world's one billion Catholics while giving the world's 1.5 billion muslims a free pass.

>>

>> ^mentality:

>> ^westy:
Its simular how to how the top sim racers could probably beat allot of the profesoinal drivers out there.
Racing sims help you to get to know the track and your lines, but this is complete BS. Have you ever been in a race car? It's a completely different experience than a racing sim.
The only "gamer" to turn pro was Lucas Ordoñez. He was already an amateur racer, and it still took ~1 year of training. If you think you can take the best sim racer with no actual track experience, dump him in a real car for a month or two and expect them to do well, you are ridiculous.


I haven't driven a Race car , but I know people that do sim racing who have jumped into cars and beaten people by over 1/2 second on a national level .

I would not describe sim racers as "gamers" there are at least 20 sim racers that would probably beat 70% of drivers out racing today , if they were given 6 months. ITS PURELY DOWN TO COST.

GT3 although probably the best console bassed "sims" , is pretty shit when compared to the top pc simulators intemrs of getting feal , But the fact is anything below GP2 , star Mazda , is so fucking slow and non reactive a talented sim racer would have absaluty no issues racing to a high level.

obvously u have allot of shit sim racers , but there are allot of people that are better than the majority of real world race drivers excluded purely by cost. ( I follow all the driving schooler ship programs and events allwing sim racers or noobs to get into a real race car , and so far nearly all of them are a scam to ethor milk money out of people or purely a promotoinal tool for a game developer and dont actualy lead to annything of anny sugnificance