Jump to content
NEurope

Dannyboy-the-Dane

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    14,942

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Dannyboy-the-Dane

  3. Posted · Edited by Dannyboy-the-Dane

    If ever it becomes possible to "choose" your own sexuality with the help of science, it only seems right that adults should have the right to choose to do so. We can only hope that acceptance has progressed to the point where a person's hand won't be forced by social stigma.

     

    Regarding paedophilia, it seems obvious to me that there's nothing morally wrong about the attraction itself; the problem is of course that there's no morally right way to practice it. I find it highly problematic that, as @flameboy so rightly points out, paedophilia is incredibly stigmatised by society; you never hear a single story depicting paedophiles in a sympathetic light as sufferers of an attraction they obviously didn't choose of their own free accord and would very likely rather be without. As with all problems in society, the answer is not trying to scare people out of doing bad things, it's trying to help them so they don't end up doing bad things in the first place.

  5. Posted

    My resolution for the past year was simply to continue improving my self-esteem, and I daresay I have succeeded. For probably the first time in my life I am beginning to genuinely consider myself attractive, which, needless to say, is quite a milestone. Obviously I have yet to completely rid myself of all feelings of low self-worth, and I suspect some amount will always linger, but I have certainly made monumental progress over the past year.

     

    As for future resolutions, I think I shall refrain from making any solid ones; I want to strive to improve at all times, and setting up arbitrary goals for arbitrary dates seems a likely recipe for needless anxiety and stress.

  7. Posted

    See to me this doesn't quite make sense. I know the Doctor wasn't aware of how it happened until his current iteration but surely the time lords would have always been aware they were saved by 13 Doctors wizzing their TARDIS' around? I took the time stream aligning excuse purely as a reason to explain how the Doctor had previously had remorse for his action when he needn't have done.

     

    I'm unsure what you mean; what doesn't make sense? The chronology goes like this:

     

    • The War Doctor steals the Moment, intending to destroy Time Lords and Daleks alike and seal the entire Time War in a time lock.
    • Rassilon learns of this and, having grown mad with power, devises a plan involving the Master and a White-Point Star to create a way out of the (non-existent) time lock. This plan is stopped by the Tenth Doctor, and the Time Lords are sent back to the Time War.
    • The Moment shows the War Doctor what he will become, and the Doctors, aided by Clara, devise a plan to save Gallifrey by moving it to another dimension. The plan succeeds and the Daleks end up destroying themselves in the crossfire, but due to the Doctor crossing his own timeline, he is unable to remember the events of the crossover until he has caught up with all three versions, thus believing himself to have committed double genocide until then. The Time Lords know the Doctors saved them, hence them calling out to him to help them return.

  8. Posted

    But then why would they put their faith in the Doctor when he had so stubbornly refused to bring them back....Along with having already sent them back in the End of Time?

     

    The ones in The End Of Time was led by the megalomanial Lord President; also, it happened before the events in The Day Of The Doctor, meaning the Time Lords realised the Doctor(s) eventually saved them from the Time War - that's why they were calling him, trusting him to help them return. I'm thinking that's why Clara's speech had the effect it had: It proved to them he was the Doctor and would get them back eventually, but that then and there they had to help him first.

  9. Posted

    I realise I misunderstood the first part of the question.

     

    It really was Christmas as per tradition for us (we celebrate Christmas on Christmas Eve): Most of the day was spent getting ready with food and everything, then we ate duck around 6 followed up by risalamande, a sweet rice pudding dessert in which an almond is traditionally hidden; the finder gets a present, but this year my dad put an almond in each of our servings. We were shocked to the core and all had to lie down for an hour (or maybe that was due to overeating). After that we sang Christmas songs; the tradition is to dance around the Christmas tree, but there's no room for that where our tree is standing, so we just sit, which is probably better anyway conidering our cardio. Then it was time for presents, and I think we hit a record this year with twenty presents for three people. It feels good to have reached the age where giving gifts is more fun than receiving them. The rest of the evening we just relaxed, and we've been doing the same for the past two days, just milling about, enjoying the peace and quiet and doing whatever we feel like. Tomorrow we're going to my uncle's for the traditional family Christmas dinner on my dad's side, the day after we're having dinner with another uncle on my mum's side, and the next two days we're going to Copenhagen to see a play and admire the Christmas lights in Tivoli among other things.

  11. Posted

    What did I do this year? Well, I handed in my BA project this December, which is probably the most I've accomplished. :heh:

     

    As for Christmas presents, I got some old books on Greco-Roman stuff (par for the course at this point), an electric toothbrush (dentist's recommendation which will hopefully improve my oral hygiene), a lot of chocolate (oh, the irony) and a DVD of a Danish stand-up comedian. However, the final two things I received were the most impressive:

     

    I got a Calvin Klein deodorant from a friend whose Latin studies I'm helping with; I really didn't want anything in return as I both enjoy doing Latin and helping out a friend, but said friend apparently feels bad about receiving the help without doing something in return. I was rather taken aback by how fine the present was.

     

    The second present I was impressed by was this - a 4-CD collection of musical interpretations of all the poems in the The Lord Of The Rings book trilogy. It is the final product of more than ten years' work by The Tolkien Ensemble, a Danish ensemble featuring Christopher Lee himself.

  13. Posted

    How did the Daleks regain memory of the Doctor after Clara removed them in that Dalek Asylum thing? They mentioned something about taking some memory from that Mother Superior who didn't age's brain but I got the feeling they still knew a bit about him beforehand (plus I'm sure there have been Dalek episodes since the Asylum)

     

    And the cracks: I thought they were attributed to the Silence/Prisoner Zero/Something, not the Time Lords. Who have now been called out for the Doctor to say his name so they can break through into this universe, but when Clara gives her help speech they close the crack, open one motherfucking-big crack in space and spit out a fresh clip of regeneration bullets into the Doctor and then close the crack not to be seen again*?

     

    *Until the next series finale which will no doubt "tie up all the loose ends"

     

    I am fairly certain this is the first time the Daleks have appeared since Clara wiped their databanks.

     

    The crack has always been attributed to the TARDIS blowing up; it has been hinted at that the Church of the Silence was behind it, which has now been confirmed. Prisoner Zero just used it to escape, just as the Time Lords were simply trying to use it to return; I assume this is the reason they were able to close it - because they were the only ones keeping it open, the universe before the TARDIS explosion having been rebooted. Why they decided to close it, I do not know; perhaps they realised this was not the time and place to return, instead choosing to put their faith in the Doctor.

  15. Posted

    I utterly, utterly loved it. Close to being a perfect episode in my mind.

     

    The only thing I noticed was the Doctor seemingly lying a couple of times (specifically about leaving Clara and having a plan), which really seemed to stand out considering the truth field; maybe it's a plot point, maybe it's just a minor detail or there was something I missed - either way it's negligible.

     

    Also, I truly don't get why people found the regeneration anticlimatic or underwhelming. It wiped out the entire Dalek fleet! Also, with the speech he gave at the end, it felt like the most dramatic ever, even surpassing Tennant's. Regarding Capaldi being confused, I think we might be seeing some amnesia as a result of the new regeneration cycle.

     

  17. Posted

    I think most people are, but we thought we'd have a discussion about it anyway, see what happens.

     

    Indeed. The concept of taboo topics really benefits no one and ought to be dealt with; all topics should be discussed openly.

  18. Posted

    All I'll say on the subject is that, for me, the thought of doing it with a family member disgusts me. It left a bad taste in my mouth when Dexter used that as a plotline, too, so it's not just a matter of blood.

     

    I'm all for people living their live the way they want to, but this is something I just can't accept. Flinky also brought up issues regarding a family growing up with such a mindset, too.

     

    All that said, it's still a choice, and if nobody's being forced or coerced into it, I suppose there's nothing wrong.

     

    I think it's important to consider that the aversion we feel towards incest isn't caused by its current illegality; rather, it's illegal because we feel a general aversion to it. Making it legal won't suddenly make it widespread or even common. I venture to guess it will remain a fringe thing, and even then there will be rules regarding consent and authority in place to prevent family gatherings from becoming orgies, which is probably the scare scenario people imagine when incest is mentioned. The whole idea is that a pair of consenting adults should be able to be together if they so desire, even if they happen to be blood-related.

  22. Posted

    In terms of morality: for the same reason that teachers can't have sex with students. Especially in younger (but above legal age) people. Family members are often too much of an "authority" figure for the younger person to truly consent.

     

    That would definitely need looking into, but I view it as a separate issue entirely, one of consent and authority. I was only talking about the moral question of incest itself.

     

    On top of that, having it as an accepted practice will cause younger kids to experiment with their siblings (yes, it happens now, but it's extremely rare), and they will make mistakes and unwanted pregnancies will occur.

     

    I hardly think the legality of it is much of a factor in their minds. In fact, if the research is anything to go by, it would still be more unlikely than them experimenting with their friends since people who have grown up together, as mentioned, naturally develop an aversion to sexual interest in each other.

  23. Posted

    I thought it would be interesting to talk about a few topics that people consider taboo, to see if they should remain taboo for a good reason, or if they have no ground to stand on. So we can start with one topic, and after it's got enough discussion we can move to another, or create another thread. Whatever works.

     

    Incest

    Incest to most people is seen as disgusting. While there may be cultural reasons and religious reasons, I would say that the main reason is evolutionary. The sense of disgust was born to be an aversive response to things that are harmful to humans. As such, because inbreeding decreases hybrid vigour because of the higher probability of homozygous recessive alleles being passed through, which are generally bad. As such, those who were disgusted by incest were more likely to survive. Additionally, those who were more inclined to incestuous behaviour were less likely to survive.

     

    Another way that evolution has sought to decrease incest is the Westermarck effect. The smell of family members who are raised in close proximity to each other at young ages will deter sexual attraction.

     

    Incest is seen as morally wrong enough that it is illegal in many places. But unless there's other reasons besides the lower inclusive fitness of the behaviour, it should theoretically be fine when no potentially reproductive sex occurs. Be it because one of the incestuous people is infertile, either by choice or not, or because it is a homosexual couple, there is no danger of birth defects.

     

    So what do you think? Is incest wrong?

     

    I see nothing morally wrong with incest. The key in any relationship is consent; if two family members both want it, I cannot fathom any moral reasons why it shouldn't be allowed. Reproduction should of course be discouraged if the risk of genetic defects is estimated to be high, but other than that I see no problems.

     

    (Great idea for a thread, by the way! :))

  25. Posted

    I was already questioning their alignments throughout the story, but the ending still caught me by surprise. I have to say, though, I think the comic would've been even better if the dialogue hadn't hinted at Commander Power being a hero and Blackwatch a villain, such as Snowfire being a hero and attacking Blackwatch and Commander Power battling the Bombardier, who was trying to destroy something; both of these examples are vague, of course, and don't actually detract from the message, but I think the message would have been stronger if we had only based our wrong perceptions on their current situations and not on misleading hints.

×