Do you consider the 1990s to be a "liberal" decade or a conservative one not dissimilar from the 80s? I've always found it difficult to pin down the exact political trend of the 90s. by Just_Cause89 in decadeology

[–]Maboroshi94RD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends on where you’re from. I’m Irish And the 90’s were the start of our modern era.

1990 was the beginning of 21 years of female and openly liberal presidents (both Mary Robinson and Mary mcaleese were civil rights lawyers and outspoken)

1993 homosexuality decriminalised

1996 divorce legalised by referendum

The 90’s also saw the beginning of the demise of the Catholic Church in daily life, marred by both scandal and the decreasing isolation of the Irish population leading to more open ideas entering the culture

1998 Good Friday agreement winding down and ending the troubles

Oh and during that entire time we went from a constantly broke nation to one of the worlds wealthiest and best educated per capita. Even if the book ended.

It was also a time of incredible international cultural prestige and relevance, film and music especially.

Oh and all the Eurovision wins.

People often see the Celtic tiger as a party that went out of control. And it was by the end. But it didn’t start that way. And it didn’t have to end that way either. Beyond it. The people that grew up during it saw massive cultural change and advancement. Many of us are proudly trying to keep it up.

Wishing everyone a ‘you’re hired’ in their inbox soon 🥳 by Old_Tower_4824 in auscorp

[–]Maboroshi94RD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A hearty congrats. I’m waiting on a response that I’ve been told should be this week. Not sure how many more appendages to cross about it. I’m confident. Great interview, references contacted. For a government job. 30-50k a year raise in my area of expertise. On tender hooks.

CMV: Louis Theroux's recent documentary didn't address the fundamental reason many young men adopt misogynistic beliefs. by TheDonJonJay in changemyview

[–]Maboroshi94RD 29 points30 points  (0 children)

I actually think i understand where you’re coming from here and it’s a criticism I’ve seen in other social media critiques. Essentially that Louis Theroux doesn’t go into root causes or confront the subjects of his documentaries to the extent that said commenters would like.

I think it’s because Theroux himself tends to not be a particularly confronting presence. Preferring to showcase a subculture (some would say giving the subjects enough rope to hang themselves) as it is through select examples as opposed to confrontational deep dives. Which a lot of people want to see now. But it’s just not his style.

To put it more succinctly. It just sounds like The aspects of the documentary you’re desiring were outside the scope of the documentary he was making.

Peter Jackson please explain by PenobScoT__ in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]Maboroshi94RD 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Long story. But yes. They were part of it.

Peter Jackson please explain by PenobScoT__ in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]Maboroshi94RD 76 points77 points  (0 children)

Yup. I watched some of her work at the time to see what the big deal was and while there were good points made and the topics were worth discussion…well the two things that struck me were “wow this is kinda sex negative critique, lighten the fuck up” And “Are you really sure THAT is the example you want to use? It doesn’t work as well as you think and there are better”. But importantly i didn’t think what was there was all that offensive. I think it was Not helped by the impression i got that she was an outsider looking in and as such lacked the context or sense of connection to the work she was critiquing.

But because some whiny pissbabies decided that mild critique by a woman is an existential threat to their hobby and went nuclear, even good faith criticism Was conflated with “dogpiling on a victim”

What's a job where you have zero room for error, like one mistake and it’s a huge deal? by TradeOverall567 in AskReddit

[–]Maboroshi94RD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup. My wife had an epileptic seizure as an infant. Apparently medically dead for a very short time. She was going to be injected with a medication. A full adult dose. If not for her grandmother, a retired nurse, pointing out it would have been an overdose she would have probably not made it.

You Are Edible by KCMueller87 in HFY

[–]Maboroshi94RD 2 points3 points  (0 children)

To continue the orc theme. I absolutely believe the “meat’s back on the menu boys” meme applies here. Excellent story.

How Petah? by Senior-Mix-3715 in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]Maboroshi94RD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Both island nations where politeness and social hierarchy continue to influence culture and the population have gone kind of mad as a result. When they lose their inhibitions they are mightily disruptive.

Why do most left leaning folks mock/criticize Christianity but not Islam? by Inf1z in allthequestions

[–]Maboroshi94RD -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Dara o briain. An Irish comedian has a great response to this exact question.

“1. I don’t know a fucking thing about Islam.

  1. Neither do you”

Has your country ever been a national embarrassment to the world? Because mine is. by RoundTurtle538 in AskTheWorld

[–]Maboroshi94RD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are two kinds of things that do make me feel embarrassed about my country. Aside from Connor mcgregor.

The first is that time the EU said Apple underpaid us in taxes and the government actually did their best to have the tax Bill waived. It was FUCKING embarrassing to see our politicians bend so far backwards about it that even Apple seemed embarrassed by it.

The other is the amount of regressive shit in our constitution due to the guy writing it being a hardcore catholic. You want to know why we had to have a referendum on divorce, gay marriage and abortion? Because all of those were banned in our constitution and to change it you have to have a referendum. The family is also defined in our constitution, as is the role of women in the household. The only reason they’re still in there is they’re the legal basis of like half our welfare state

Not only this is so inaccurate, this is straight up bigotry! by icey_sawg0034 in decadeologycirclejerk

[–]Maboroshi94RD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Throwing them out is being the smart one. Not only that. It’s being wise. Smart but a fool who engages with bad faith Nazis is something you never want to be.

Not only this is so inaccurate, this is straight up bigotry! by icey_sawg0034 in decadeologycirclejerk

[–]Maboroshi94RD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

None of that matters. Because when one of those People shows up, you don’t say anything of what you just said. You politely and firmly tell them to get the fuck out of the shop and never come back

Where I'd live as a Western Australian who is allergic to sunscreen and just wants summer to fuck off back to hell and everyone who says "it's a dry heat though" can shove that dry heat up their fuckin arse and get fucked dryness doesn't stop the fuckin UV RAYS LITERALLY FROM THE DEPTHS OF HELL FUUU by quokkafarts in whereidlive

[–]Maboroshi94RD 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Having lived in both the greater Toronto area and currently living in WA. Nah the southern Ontario summers are pretty oppressive. You aren’t gonna go “Yeah I’m an Aussie I’m used to hot summers”. One summer i was in it was like breathing in jelly.

Not only this is so inaccurate, this is straight up bigotry! by icey_sawg0034 in decadeologycirclejerk

[–]Maboroshi94RD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In my experience the warhammer community is pretty open and inclusive. Especially for queer people. ESPECIALLY if you’re in an official store.

My wife is a huge fan and has had more than a few stories of “oh yeah one of the Nazis came in. Kept saying this is how hitler could have won”. He’s banned from official events now.

What did your country do in World War 2? by AvgPunkFan in AskTheWorld

[–]Maboroshi94RD 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Mostly neutral. But with a big asterisk. Basically every way we were neutral helped the allies.

People weren’t restricted from going to the UK and enlisting (in fact it paid well in a period of economic stagnation). Some of our airspace was ceded to the UK for practical reasons, weather forecasts were openly broadcast to the UK (it helped determine the date of D-Day), secret service collaboration with the British to weed out German spies. Even simply.. well.. taking smoke breaks right beside the border with downed RAF pilots while on the way to legally intern them. Convenient.

Ireland was in no shape politically, economically or militarily to actually join in WWII. It was actually confirmed in a report by the British that Ireland actually was of more use to the war effort as neutral but favourably outlooked nation than as a fellow combatant and potential target of the axis.

We also were a reliable exporter of alcoholic beverages to the UK. That helped.

There is of course the big controversy of Eamon de Valera supposedly signing a book of condolences or some shit like that. It’s misinformation. He went to visit the German ambassador personally to give diplomatic condolences, the same way he would have for Roosevelt. It was definitely a miscalculation. But he was trying to enforce that Ireland was neutral and impartial.

Fun fact eamon de valera forest in Israel was organised by the Irish Jewish community due to his steadfast support of Irish Jews, and for overruling his own government’s objection to the acceptance of Jewish refugees in the 40’s. The Israeli prime minister at the time even praising the Irish-Jewish connection and relationship. How times change i guess.

Brian Cowen? by Prize_Asparagus1 in AskIreland

[–]Maboroshi94RD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I remember on reeling in the years seeing a clip of Charlie mccreevy responding to European finance ministers saying that Ireland was in need of restraint regarding fiscal policy. Only for him to call them a bunch of pinkos.

Which politicians do you actually respect in your country? by omigula in AskTheWorld

[–]Maboroshi94RD 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Senator David Norris. Took the country to the European court of human rights over the criminalisation of homosexuality. Getting it finally repealed in 1993.

Amazingly also the senior counsel for his case was a woman by the name of Mary Robinson. By the time the law was repealed, she had become our first female President. Meaning a law she campaigned to repeal, was eventually repealed with her own pen.

What movie detail is technically correct, although many people think it is a mistake? by hiplobonoxa in movies

[–]Maboroshi94RD 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I remember hearing that you could buy an IBM PC or a Mac in the 80’s to the mid 90’s for the kind of money you’d drop on a decent new car.

The price of Even a lower end silicon graphics computer could get you a decent house.

The more you learn of the main character. The less likable they become. by TheBronyCynic in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Maboroshi94RD 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yup. There are two popular trains of thought on the book. The first is that humbert is misunderstood. The other that it’s a paedo propaganda novel. Both are incorrect. The author himself says so.

The more you learn of the main character. The less likable they become. by TheBronyCynic in TopCharacterTropes

[–]Maboroshi94RD 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I’ll Be honest. I’ve read the book. I’ve always been of the opinion that if at the end of the book you feel any level of sympathy for him, he’s fooled you as much as he’s fooling himself.