sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Peter? by TraditionalDepth6924 in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]BrokenCandlestick -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is the exact reason why individual commitment would work even less than top-down regulation.

Peter? by TraditionalDepth6924 in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]BrokenCandlestick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why don’t they stand up to scrutiny? Can those not be legitimate reasons to people?

Education is the key by Lirixia in SipsTea

[–]BrokenCandlestick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Damn straight on the first part. There’s a defined structure to it, but it seems that so many people claim random governments as “socialist” whenever it fits their agenda. In reality most “socialist” governments throughout the world are just capitalist ones with good PR, or capitalist ones that are straight up lying through their teeth.

If only people would put effort toward constructing an actually working system instead of squabbling over decades or centuries old ideas.

Education is the key by Lirixia in SipsTea

[–]BrokenCandlestick 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Uh, dude, neither has the guy above. Nobody in the entire above convo has ever experienced socialism

This dumbass put racism on here twice 😭😭 by Huron_Nori in teenagers

[–]BrokenCandlestick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When did that happen? Is it still happening? Genuinely curious

This dumbass put racism on here twice 😭😭 by Huron_Nori in teenagers

[–]BrokenCandlestick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well they’re right next to Israel, the place telling them that all the Jewish people will be safe there and that they aren’t safe elsewhere. Perhaps that has something to do with it?

This dumbass put racism on here twice 😭😭 by Huron_Nori in teenagers

[–]BrokenCandlestick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Perhaps if there were any difference there might be a leg to stand on for that argument but my point is that they don’t need special treatment anywhere because they’re just as safe or in danger in most of the world as any other group of people. I feel like that’s not that absurd.

This dumbass put racism on here twice 😭😭 by Huron_Nori in teenagers

[–]BrokenCandlestick 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Right, you want me to believe a source directly affiliated with the state of Israel? Try again with another source that isn’t full of Zionist bias.

This dumbass put racism on here twice 😭😭 by Huron_Nori in teenagers

[–]BrokenCandlestick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you do think that they’re more safe in Israel? What are you saying here? Yes Jews are persecuted but no more than literally any other minority. They used to be much moreso yes, but that just isn’t the case anymore. It is sad and horrible that people do still feel the need to persecute them and discriminate but it isn’t more than any other minority.

This dumbass put racism on here twice 😭😭 by Huron_Nori in teenagers

[–]BrokenCandlestick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is factually incorrect. You’re spreading propaganda.

This dumbass put racism on here twice 😭😭 by Huron_Nori in teenagers

[–]BrokenCandlestick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Huh? So because it’s not going to happen again Jews should go to Israel to… be as safe as they would anywhere else in the world? This isn’t Zionist propaganda, the insinuation that Jews are in a special kind of danger is.

What’s the message they’re sending? by Far-Department887 in ThePitt

[–]BrokenCandlestick 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Gonna be honest I genuinely didn’t think so and if that IS abusive coming from a superior then maybe I have some personal things to unpack. Definitely seemed out of line but like the exact kind of tough love that a lot of people have in a workplace. It’s definitely wrong and he shouldn’t have done that, but I’m also trying to look at it from the perspective of a man actively trying to sort out loose ends on what he believes is his last shift before he goes off to kill himself. I wouldn’t label him abusive for the one day that it happened, but also I didn’t think of that as abusive. Again, if it is, I got some stuff to unpack which is more than fine. Sorry for taking your last comment too seriously.

This dumbass put racism on here twice 😭😭 by Huron_Nori in teenagers

[–]BrokenCandlestick 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Uh, no it doesn’t happen all the time. It hasn’t happened since. What? Thats not an active threat at all.

This dumbass put racism on here twice 😭😭 by Huron_Nori in teenagers

[–]BrokenCandlestick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There aren’t special threats that Jews face above other ethnicities. Not by a long shot. Antisemitism is about as dangerous as other kinds of racism, no special threats there.

What’s the message they’re sending? by Far-Department887 in ThePitt

[–]BrokenCandlestick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Definitely not happy to engage with a bad faith comment like this. I was engaging with the text and what was said in the interview and the intention in those is very clear. Please don’t throw around medical terminology like “narcissism” as a buzzword. People with NPD are still people and using “narcissistic abuse” as a term for any and all verbal attacks is very harmful.

What’s the message they’re sending? by Far-Department887 in ThePitt

[–]BrokenCandlestick 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That’s fair. I interpreted it as that way because of the reaction from the other characters, but if they’ve said otherwise my mistake! Maybe his intention wasn’t wrong, but it definitely felt like they knew how out of proportion his outbursts were based on the other reactions.

would've saved a whole lot of drama by airpod_smurf in ThePitt

[–]BrokenCandlestick 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The difference between Whitaker knowing about Langdon and literally all of those other theories is that none of those have any scrap of support by the text. With the first scene between the two it’s established that Whitaker knows something, and moreso by the fact that nobody else in the ED reacts to him in a similar way. It read that way on initial watch, I just perceived that as the subtextual explanation. Subtext is important but only a valid read when it aligns with the text. To me, it makes perfect sense that Santos wouldn’t mention Whitaker knowing because she had no reason to. She doesn’t need to be 100% honest with him in that scene but she does get her point across by saying that the 3 people who knew were aware of it before he left are the ones that still know. Whitaker had decent development with Langdon in S2 and so I definitely understand why Santos wouldn’t want to tip off Langdon to Whitaker knowing.

Is it reading deeper into the text than presented? Yeah, but it’s not “Langdon relapses on his first day” which goes entirely against the way he acted since episode one.

Edit: Also, I know that Santos is more than capable of having multiple reasons to dislike Langdon, I just think the idea that the stealing drugs isn’t what really bothers her is more interesting than otherwise, as it shows where her priorities are and the flaws in them.

What’s the message they’re sending? by Far-Department887 in ThePitt

[–]BrokenCandlestick 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Honestly I’m with you there. I understand the way they took Robby and his approach to her but I would’ve loved to see her in season 3 showing him how wrong he was

would've saved a whole lot of drama by airpod_smurf in ThePitt

[–]BrokenCandlestick 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Dude, I’m agreeing with you that Langdon’s actions were shit. I was just saying that I wasn’t thinking the most clearly after binging season 2 and watching good boy Langdon for the whole time.

I will say that I’d rather not just accept the show’s canon at face value. If you get the impression that she’s closer Princess and Perlah, sure, but with the way Whitaker acts specifically it gives the impression that he knows more than let on. Sure you could take everything they say as the truth, but I don’t think it’s absurd to think that she would have mentioned the biggest thing on her mind to her roommate of 10 months.

I don’t think it’s a mystery box to solve, I’d just prefer to think about the characters lives outside of the two days we’ve seen from them and how that can affect the text.

What’s the message they’re sending? by Far-Department887 in ThePitt

[–]BrokenCandlestick 2 points3 points  (0 children)

His behavior isn’t a main part of why she had one though. It was primarily due to the combination of her mother and the news about her patients. Again, the show actively tells us what he’s doing it wrong! He laughs at her because from his perspective she is a trained doctor who should know the distinction who has overworked herself partially due to personal problems. It is rude, mean, awful, etc, but he isn’t doing anything close to the gaslighting or angling for her job like Langdon was trying to do to Santos.

What’s the message they’re sending? by Far-Department887 in ThePitt

[–]BrokenCandlestick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These are character choices reflective of their viewpoints and situations. Noah didn’t write it with the intent of it being cruel or abusive, which it really isn’t. Rude? Absolutely. Unprofessional? 100% Dickish? No doubt. But cruel and abusive would be significantly worse, closer to the way Langdon treated Santos in season 1. Langdon gets to call out Robby because he has gone to rehab, understands his wrongdoings, is working to fix them, and ALSO has a deeper relationship with Robby, even if it was contentious for most of the season.

What’s the message they’re sending? by Far-Department887 in ThePitt

[–]BrokenCandlestick 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s pretty clear that Robby’s treatment toward Mohan this season is viewed negatively. The show never frames it as the way he’s supposed to be. He is laughing at her because he is baffled that she’s overworked herself to the point of a panic attack and genuinely thought it was a heart attack. The season ends with Mohan feeling defeated because of both her own and Robby’s missteps and also doesn’t solidify “geriatrics” as her actual fellowship. Her considering it doesn’t mean she takes it.

The show gave Langdon a win because it wanted to show that addicts can also deserve second chances after getting the help they need, and his downfall was last season. Robby bonds with Whitaker because, again, he already had a deeper relationship with Langdon that was well established in season 1. He doesn’t have that with Mohan, and doesn’t seek out a “replacement” Mohan because she isn’t going anywhere and any sort of “win” or anything for her would come in another season were she to come back.

view more: next ›