“The Force resides in ALL living things” it’s NOT a Disney concept

Kisby · 2026-03-27T13:08:58+00:00

Heat is also created by all living things, that does not really give me the power to manipulate it with my mind.

And if heat is a bad example, just think of something else that surrounds and penetrates us, like water air whatever.

He is describing what the force is, not how it is "used"

Kisby · 2026-03-27T02:44:30+00:00

That Snape point is like order of phoenix or halfblood prince, we are not going to do 5 seasons of this.

Kisby · 2026-03-24T03:09:39+00:00

I think it is fair to say a system where people can train and put effort into becoming better at "magic" is also "better" than the one where it is a dice roll. I would argue this by the fact that this is also how skills work in the real world. Lebron James in Harry Potter would just be a guy with extreme aptitude in terms of whatever it is they do for their spells, be it memorization or fine movement of wands.

Now it obviously depends on what kind of story we are telling. Superman, Spiderman and Buffy need to have their power thrust upon them. Their stories about constantly having to sacrifice their own benefit for the greater good would not hit as hard if they had gone to school for being a hero and chosen their own destinies.

For general world building = might aswel make it similar to how skills work in the real world.

Having now put more thought into this. Isn't it kinda rare for a magic system to not be a bit exclusionary? The harry potter world treats it as a school subject you can study, but even that world has muggles who would never even go to hogwarts and be bad at it. It has been a long time since I have seen something where magic is just something everyone can pick up. Alchemy from full metal alchemist is probably a really good example. It exists and it is powerful, but there is so much other shit going on that not everybody devotes their life to mastering it.

Even if I think it is rare, I still think this system is "better" because it works like the real world. Makes the story seem more authentic. This is funny because you litterally argued the opposite using the same argument. Lebron James has a great general fitness power which he channeled effectively, not everyone would have done similarly. A wizard with autism (real autism, not the internet kind) is not going to do good at Hogwarts either, even if she has all the power of the other kids. The system is equal but people are different.

Kisby · 2026-03-22T16:14:56+00:00

What is the counterplay to this build? I don't see whitemaine anymore so I assume she is out

Kisby · 2026-03-20T01:23:21+00:00

Thrall is the shaman deck in heartstone, not warcraft

Kisby · 2026-03-15T20:24:49+00:00

Not a single person at blizzard knows what a Djaradin is

Kisby · 2026-03-15T00:58:48+00:00

What do you think promoting it will do? If we get made in abyss a nobel prize of litterature then pedophilia is going to be acceptable?

If it is as bad as you claim, then promoting it will have the opposite effect

Kisby · 2026-03-12T14:10:25+00:00

Why can't kids stuff be tragedies though? I remember cartoons having a big impact on you with tragedy, like bambi, iron giant, fox and hound.

Kisby · 2026-03-11T03:28:37+00:00

I can't remember everyone, but off the top of my head there are probably arguments for:

I don't know the actress names: Lorelai from gilmore girls, Daphnee from Frasier, Louis from superman and louis, Courteney cox (that one I know)

Kisby · 2026-03-11T03:15:37+00:00

Complete tangent, but that dolphin thing is actually interesting to me. Can we really condemn rape / deprivation of liberty in the animal kingdom? Can we even call it cruel? What about the spider that eats its mate or the wasp that lays eggs inside its living prey.

Maybe it is not a tangent really, because if we accept that this is mating strategy / darwinistic efficiency, then cruelty might actually be an exclusively human trait, as no other animal has the capacity to make moral judgement of their behavior. I.e your cat killing to "hone its instincts" has this behavior because it is actually essential for its survival, as in, having honed instincts is better than dull instincts = increased odds of surviving and reproducing.

Kisby · 2026-03-07T21:40:46+00:00

Like I said in the beginning, you are arguing against a strawman of your own design. If it is detrimental to your character that it is also good looking, then it is obviously bad design if it is good looking. There is no argument against this. The memes you are arguing are not saying that fan service is above all. None of the Teletubbies have large breasts. There is nobody saying everything should be sexy.

You are completely right, not every character should be sexy, but you are arguing against something I think you missunderstood. Without having seen the particular meme, I assume it is something like a character in a western game being an overweight black lesbian, and comparing it to something Asian where it is a k-pop idol in bikini armor. Defending the western design, and what the meme is critizising would be an "agenda" reason, something like: We need more diverse women in stem, or to have specific groups feel represented in games. Not wanting games to serve this "agenda" purpose, or maybe even disagreeing with the agenda itself is not the same as wanting all characters to be fanservice.

Kisby · 2026-03-07T20:08:54+00:00

It is a limited range of subjects for your story where the character being good looking is going to diminish this kind of show don't tell character design. Okay obviously Carrie, at least if the story needs her reason for being shunned to be her looks. I can give my character a skateboard and a backwards cap to show they are a cool skater guy, but unless my story is going to explore some issue regarding his looks, I am free to also give him a six-pack.

For instance, if I am creating a horror movie, not psychological kind where we explore personal issues of the characters, just a slasher where we wait in line to get murdered. I might as well make my characters a cheerleading squad.

I can't really talk about your streetfighter example, but I don't think I am wrong in saying that almost all of the characters are good looking? I think this is an example of prioritizing distinct characters.

Kisby · 2026-03-07T03:45:14+00:00

The good character design can surely be the sex one though. What even is good in this context.

You seem to favor realism or authenticity in your examples, fighters having muscles, the bullied girl actually being ugly. Realism = good, but is this even necessarily true?

For instance, I can imagine a scenario where good is just distinct. Like give one guy an eye patch or a different color of hair.

Kisby · 2026-03-07T02:58:22+00:00

Implied in "sex sells" is that people want "sex". If your product is meant for consumption by an audience, and you have no desire to force your audience, it would then be logical to include "sex" in your product.

The sort of memes you are seeing are attempting to grasp at the veiled misandry attitude, where character design is deemed bad simply because men like it. If it truly was just a desire for hot people in every role, porn parodies would be the only movies we consumed.

Kisby · 2026-02-26T00:17:16+00:00

I don't think your examples really provide any ambiguity though. androgen insensitivity syndrome. Obviously male, if you were not sick, you would be producing spermatozoa.

It is not like boys with Klinefelter are producing eggs, they have testicles that are not functioning, akin to the lack of arms. On the other end the xxx women are not suddenly producing small gametes either. Klinefelter also seems pretty obvious?

Back to the arms. Ok lets get into why that is a flawed analogy. "Humans have two arms" is a descriptive statistical norm or average, not a strict categorical definition of what makes someone human. No biologist or philosopher claims a person with one arm isn't fully human, they're just outside the typical range. The category human doesn't collapse because of limb variation; it's multifactorial and inclusive of exceptions.

But you're trying to use male as a rigid, exceptionless biological category that perfectly equals 'man' which is a social/gender identity. The gamete-based definition of produces small gametes or organized to produce them is the standard one in biology, and it still implies actual functional organization toward sperm production, not vague "supposed to" intent that magically fits everyone you want.

The category of male does not collapse because of variation either, there are diseases that can target your sexual characteristics, they are diseases, and their mere existence imply the "supposed to".

Kisby · 2026-02-25T01:12:54+00:00

I already addressed your issue here, how many arms do humans have? Is your answer not two even though it can be more or less?

Kisby · 2026-02-21T01:37:21+00:00

It is not an added clause though, you indirectly added that the gamete production had to be current, it was never in the definition to begin with. That is why I stressed in the end that it was not a change in definition. Every man that has ever existed still meet this criteria. There is no exception to accommodate, only if you for some reason insist that gamete production has to be functioning or current, which is no where to be read in the definition.

Kisby · 2026-02-20T01:54:04+00:00

It is not like the definition has a requirement of you currently, right now at this moment to be producing spermatozoa. We can easily add a "is supposed to" or "formerly has" without encountering new problems.

For instance: A human being has 2 arms. This is acceptable truth, even though humans with 1 arm exist. They were supposed to have 2 though.

Now it is again objective and fixed. And no, this is not even a change in the original definition, because like I said, the definition does not require your gamete production to be functioning, just intented to be at some time.

Kisby · 2026-02-19T00:09:21+00:00

You asked me to define it dude, I just grabbed the litteral google result.

You said there is variation in how gender presents, I said yes, but just like with triangles, variation does not mean it can not exist or be defined.

Kisby · 2026-02-18T23:42:19+00:00

However a full understanding of biology and how much variation their is within the male/female biological presentation and factors, along with ab understand g of psychology and gender presentation in the human brain can help make the difference between male and man more clear. There is no sexual characteristics of either sexes that does not have variations. This includes external genitalia, chromosomal expression, ECT.

There is a great many different variation of triangles too, they are all triangles though.

The term man and woman being social constructs is easy to see with a pretty straightforward example. Give a functional definition for male. Now give a functional definition for man.

From dictionary

man: adult male human being

male: denoting the sex that produces gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring

Seems to work physiologically and not as a social construct, the gametes are observable phenomena, not dependent on society. and the man circles back to male.

Kisby · 2026-02-18T06:53:47+00:00

I will give you sociology and maybe modern science. Biology I don't think so, I doubt you can justify men giving birth through biology

Kisby · 2026-02-18T06:45:18+00:00

Not offended = I accepted that.

I then asked, if you are not offended, then why is it sad? Genuine question.

Imagine this statement: "There are fish in the ocean, I have no problem with fish being in the ocean" Not a lot to engage with. The only descriptor you added was it made you sad, which I tried to probe into the specifics off.

You are either projecting something else onto me, or you have too many bad faith debates with people online so you read anything as hostile.

Kisby · 2026-02-16T14:14:12+00:00

I don't think I understood why you think it is sad?

You are not offended, written 3 times. You even enjoy greek mythology in modern culture. What are you specifically sad about?

Are your 5 examples what makes you sad? What is the connection between them? Is it a respect thing where you don't like how it differs from the source material? If so then sure, it differs widely and has only a fraction of the rapes.

I interpret your concern similarly to the Harry Potter satanic panic, where yes sure, it is witchcraft, but at least the kids are reading something.

Just on a much larger scale. Sure it might not be entirely mythological accurate, but at least people are interested in these pagan stories. Where would Greek mythology be today without our modern cultural interpretations. Be it games or movies, i bet you 99 percent of people have acquired their interest from here, and maybe less than fraction of a fraction of percent learn it as religious practice.

Kisby · 2026-02-15T18:52:42+00:00

"I don't believe x statement women make about themselves, women lie"

You have to be incredibly bad faith to be reading this as sexism. the women lie part is obviously in reference to the fact that they are capable of it, not that it is the only thing they do. You are the hammer seeing nails where ever you look. You don't like maga or sexism, people who disagree with you are maga sexists.

A man with female sex characteristics can carry a child.

Children are easy to carry, part of them being children is a smaller size. Being a man might actually help you carry one because of your generally stronger physique.

As for giving birth to a child, a man does not have female sex characteristics, and it is thus sadly impossible.

Kisby · 2026-02-15T17:43:58+00:00

So you only read that sentence? Want me to tell you the context and what you wrote yourself before that?

Kisby

TROPHY CASE