foeofthelance
-
Posts
1,696 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
27
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by foeofthelance
-
-
So sayeth Momochi Reiko, author of Scar Tissue: "I am amazed that my manga has made it to America where my novels have not. The preconcevieved notion that my literary works portray Americans as cruel or lazy is incorrect. Rather, I have poked fun at my own country and have discussed things that had been going on in Japan at the time. For example, bullying, prostitution, and corpral punishment. Yet, these books were not distributed in America simply on the bias that I am Japanese and writing novels that are explicit and have American characters. The only work that shows Americans in a bad light has an American man soliciting a teenage girl and this manga can be found on many book shelves in America. It is perplexing to me."
You know, I sincerely doubt it's because of the way Americans are portrayed in her books, especially if her manga is being sold over here. I think it is far more likely that as a Japanese author her books aren't being brought over because, let's face it, she's Japanese. Who writes extremely graphic novels. Which makes her stand out...how? How many other Japanese authors are having their novels imported? Or French authors? German ones? An author really needs to stand out if they are going to break into a foreign market; she just hasn't made herself stand out.
"But the manga!" Well, that's different becase it is manga. There really isn't an American form of entertainment to compare to it. Admittedly, there is a slight crossover with the recent increase in trade paperbacks from comicbook companies, but the idea of a purely image based novel is still inherently Japanese in execution. The only real source of manga is Japan, and so we import titles written by Japanese authors, such as Reiko. So where as her books don't stand out well enough to compete with American authors, her mangas can fill a vacuum. That's just how the market works.
-
Just out of curiosity, who gets to "ban" these things anyway?
They don't, at least not officially. The worst that happens is that either a community decides it doesn't like something, and tries to have it removed from libraries etc. (which is fair, sort of, as that's also the basis for obscenity definitions) Those normally fall through at the first complaint, or break down over time. Or, more like in the case of this, publishing companies just don't pursue the rights to be able to distribute it here in the United States. It isn't really banned, everyone just considers it to be too controversial to be worth the headaches. And again, these things tend to break down over time, and eventually someone picks it up. But if you ordered a copy from the Japanese publisher and had it shipped via the U.S. Postal service it would be delivered.
Compare to this to a place such as China, which actively does ban things, to the point that certain books cannot be sold in stores, certain websites can't be accessed, and certain shows can't be watched. In that case, the source of the bans is the group in power, which fears free information flow would put their power at risk. Which, if half the ancedotes I've heard are true, it probably would be...
-
What? I have to actualy spell out: I dare you?!
Laid down and accepted! Though I admit, this may be my toughest task yet. I started writing it this morning, and did OK up until Chick started hitting on Phelps. At that point nasuea began to set in...
-
You wouldn't dare.
Is that a challenge?
-
It was an interesting exercise.
Black Leaf and Marcie are Dead!
Behind the scenes of Jack Chick's comical tract: Dark Dungeons. Just why did Mike save Debbie, but not Marcie? BDSM, Oral, Toys
Comics > Chick Tracts
I tried to do Big Daddy, but i just kept screaming at the stupid.
God help me, but divine retritbution if there ever was...
Should I write a Jack T. Chick/Fred Phelps slash fic?
-
Chick Tracts slash
Wouldn't that make Baby Universes cry? I mean, just trying to say it mentally is causing my eyes to bleed out all over my keyboard...
Keith, there is a ninja in your future...
-
Personally, I think the second article to be the more accurate of the two, for several reasons:
1) The first article never quite explained how 'orphaned works' would be given into the public domain, let alone bypass the claims just about every hosting site on the net uses. (Point blank: "If we host it for you, we get to use it. In exchange, no one else but you can. Agree/Disagree?"
2) I know lobbying is a big business, but seriously, does the term 'political suicide' not mean anything to people? Senators and Reps can only keep sucking at the public teat if they get re-elected. Not gonna happen if the other guy can claim you sold out every talented person in the nation.
3) How the heck did they expect it to survive the courts? The Supreme would have that tossed on the first case for infringement purposes, and with 200+ years of material to back the decision with.
-
Well, i thought i had linked to the petition, and the comments undersigned, but i guess i didn't.
Um. Read through the comments on the petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/as7gp9/petition.html
My estimate of the ratio of bugknuckle to rational is a bit more to the dark side...
Nah, petitions don't count. They're designed to attract the bugnuts.
As for paladins, I don't really get it either. But by the end of the debate I'd accused of being a Communist Nazi Demon, who was evil because he was a polygamist. (I stringently deny the first three. I admit the last, freely and plainly, though I don't see how it makes me evil.) All because I condoned the taking of an innocent life, to save both the world and the soul that had been bound with in that life. Apparently the proper answer was to foolishly sacrifice myself, and take the world with me, as my soul as a paladin was worth more than an individual commoner. That particular fued has now gone through no less than three seperate threads...
-
My reply was to make a distinction that i'm not blaming all christains, just those that ARE forcing their faith.
I don't see it as a double standard, i'm being distinct about the behaviors i find objectionable, not faiths or congregations.
I know, and I probably would have been better off quoting the line under that. :-P My bad. But I was trying to put the topic in a slightly broader focus, which, to be fair, is how it needs to be addressed. Honestly, I tend to find the people who inhabit internet forums to be generally rational about these kinds of things. (The odd troll or honest to god idiot aside*) Which simply means the majority of the bigots don't hang out on the internet...which makes these kinds of debates sort of odd, in a way. But I think the point stands, even if it does not necessarily fit one particular person: christianity tends to recieve the blame, rather than the specific church or cult, when all they seem to hold is a belief that one man was the son or prophet of god.
*Never try to argue the merits of how a Paladin's code of honor works in 3.X D&D. The experience is not a pleasant one, and tends to attract those who think moral superiority means they're right, and you're wrong, even if it hands the world over to Evil in the process.
-
Well, talking about your faith is one thing. Shipping it door to door is another. Making laws that force others to live by their litany is a whole other level up.
The problem is the harassment is always blamed on 'Christians'. That's like discussing the destructive actions of the more radical Black Panthers, yet only referring to them as "blacks". The Westboro Baptists are not the Church of Later Day Saints, who are not the Amish, who are not the Roman Catholics, who are not the Jehovah's Witnesses, who are not the Anglican Church, which is not where Calvinists worship. And it really is a bit of a double standard. If an Islamic terrorist blows up a crowded market place, we get a lecture on how Islam is really a religion of peace, and they don't all mean it. If the Westboro Baptists picket a funeral, however, then its Christian fundamenalists trying to impose their views on freedom loving people.
Personally, given the choice, I much prefer being woken up at 9 in the morning by some well meaning, if inconvenient, folks who think they're going to save my soul. (The Westboros, on the other hand, I would much prefer stay in their own tiny little temple.) Not to sound preachy, but as far as I'm concerned, God will reward as God chooses, and there are going to be a lot of people in for a surprise, not all of them happy...
-
But since when is Mexican synonymous with illegal immigrant? Since when was Mexico synonymous with every other Hispanic nation?
Because as far as anyone can tell, the majority of them are Mexican. (Sadly, they don't stand around to be counted. If they did, we probably wouldn't have an illegal immigrant problem.
) And if they aren't, it is still easier for them to cross the Mexican border than it is to come in from any other point. The Mexican government, from what I've managed to glean, has no real interest in actually taking care of its people, especially not when it is so easy to encourage everyone to emigrate to the great northern nation.The problem with this is that it drains resources that aren't being replaced. Paying an illegal immigrant is best done in cash, for a variety of reasons. That cash is then not taxed, and is quite often sent back home to support a family in the mother country or to pay for them to come here. That takes that money out of the economy here, save for perhaps a small living pittance. If an illegal uses a social support service (such as the emergancy room at the hospital) they are likely without insurance, and the end result is that the hospital never gets paid. The end result is that the hospital has to close. That happened locally. The immigrant population was churing out too many anchor babies, both for welfare and citizenshsip purposes, and the local hospital wasn't getting paid. The maternity ward was the first to go, and the entire hospital folded a year or so later.
My suggestion? Announce internationally that as of January 1, 2009 anyone living inside the United States is a citizen automatically, so long as they register ahead of time with a local government body, at which point they will be issued a federally recognized ID card. Keep track of who files for this card. January 1, 2010 go through the welfare rolls, picking out everyone who is physically fit, and announce their drafting into the Coast Guard or Customs and Immigrations. Preferably the Latinos will be trained in the Coast Guard, while the Asians who are being smuggled in get trained for Customs and Immigration. Africans and Europeans get assigned at a 1:1 ratio. (Note: This is to prevent conflict of interest. The main way to cross for a Latino is to jump the Mexican border. The main method of entry for an Asian is being smuggled into a West Coast port. So have the Latinos patrol the coast, and the Asians patrol the border.) Starting 100 meters away from Mexico, turn the entire border area into one massive military testing area. Ignore the Mexican protests about the damage being done to the plants*. Put up helpful bilingual signs to warn away border crossers. Run massive Coast Guard drills off the west coast. Watch as illegal immigration (hopefully) drops.
Admittedly, it is somewhat draconian of a solution. It might be easier to just out and out annex Mexico. Not only would that remove the urge to cross, but would bring American minimum wage laws down south. That, and it would be much easier to seal the bottom of Mexico than the bottom of Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and California. Or we could just trank border crossers, stick 'em on a helicopter and fly them down to Southern Mexico. Hire a bunch of out of work actors, and pretend they're in Southern Texas...
* When Bush announced plans to extend the chain link border fence another couple of hundred miles, the Mexican government protested on environmental grounds. Apparently it would interfere with airborne pollination.
-
-
-
Honor Amongst Thieves
Original/Fantasy
Adult
All OCs
Feedback? yes please!
The streets of Tyro are alive at night with death and deception. Amongst the darkness two lovers find it hard to have a relationship amongst a war between rival thieve's guilds.
http://original.adult-fanfiction.org/story....9&chapter=1
Tsukiyo Kage
-
The Role of Government as Seen Through the Eyes of a Bored Twenty Year Old
The federal government should play a role similar to that of a police force, in that it must provide a means of prevention and recourse for members of society who are wronged by other individuals, with wrongs and their consequences to be determined by the society in question, with judicial oversight to determine validity. The purpose of the legislature is to craft the laws, but not to interpret them, and is meant to serve the interests of the people, not anyone specific group. When so called minority causes begin to have champions, everything becomes a minority cause. The government is not supposed to solve squabbles between separate interests, but rather to provide a means for those interests to work out their own deals. Rather than creating an ever increasingly complex tangle of rules, it should provide a means of negotiation impartial to both sides. Only where a violation of the rights granted by the system occurs should a law be necessary. It is the responsibility of the Executive branch to ensure an orderly and effective means of running this government; so long as the rights of the people are not violated it should not worry about the means so much as the consequences. Failed programs should be terminated and replaced, not fixed or expanded.
The conflict faced by government is the depth of its role in common affairs. Modern candidates seek power, not progress, and are willing to promise goals which can only be accomplished through the expansion of their power. This places an unfair burden on the federal government, especially as consecutive generations of politicians seek to their own agendas, modifying or undoing the accomplishments of those who came before. To call this orderly chaos is unfair; there is nothing orderly about it. Instead ever increasing levels of bureaucracy are added to disguise the running conflicts that never seem to be resolved. Thus to be truly effective, higher levels of government should be given less responsibility. The federal government should have only three major areas of responsibility: security, financial, and mediation.
The Roles Expanded
Security- Just as each township and village has its own police force, so must the federal government act to ensure the welfare of the citizens. First, strong international presences through an unequivocal force of arms. This must be recognized for what it is: a means of defense rather than a means of destruction. As each successful government would be seeking a similar position it would be all too easy to fall into an arms race, and steps should be taken to prevent this. While the sharing of military technology with unfriendly hands would be terrible to consider, joint military operations so that each government might have some idea of the capabilities of its fellows would be useful, as well as a good way to promote constant investment in the forces necessary for defense. Finally, a strong intelligence initiative is important, so that those responsible for security are aware of changes both to and by a noted threat.
Financial- First, the government must provide a universally accepted currency of good value. This will in turn help ensure the financial ability of its citizens. In order to accomplish this the government must act more as a wise business man rather than as an over generous parent: willing to spend its money wisely, and even take a few risks, yet unwilling to just give it away to any who might ask. No one district or state should ever get back more than what it gives to the federal coffers, unless that money is being spent on a federal, and only a federal, project. This includes such things as new military bases, FBI offices, and other buildings necessary for the execution of federal programs.
Second, programs such as welfare and so called “universal healthcare” should be abolished. Any attempt to run such programs eventually turns them into political weapons, which does nothing more than defeat their intended purposes while at the same time crippling those who might find themselves dependent on those programs. Instead of welfare, a work substitute program, used to staff such things as custom and immigration agencies for those who are unable to find work, while funds for social healthcare initiatives should be invested into the hospitals directly, with only a few minor restrictions on how the funds might be spent, and even then those restrictions would be aimed at ensuring the money is spent on patients and their care, rather than on those running the operations. (It is acknowledged that there are those who are incapable of functioning in society, for whatever reasons. While the government should aid in financially supporting their care, it should not be allowed to dictate the terms of said care. That should be left to the communities where those individuals live, as there is likely to be an increase of specific interest from said communities.) A program such as Social Security is acceptable, as in this case the government should be acting as a bank, merely putting aside money earned by an individual for that individual’s later use. While finding ways for that money to grow through interest, the government should at no time be allowed to “loan” that money to itself.
Any funding left over after the above needs have been met should be reinvested into the communities from which it comes, with a small amount held in reserve for emergency relief situations, and for the easing and prevention of national debt. This would provide continued support for education, social programs, and similar constructs necessary for a healthy society could be funded, while specific problems and needs could be corrected and handled at the community level, as this is where it is most likely to be noticed, and easier to handle.
Mediation- The purpose of the courts is to rule in criminal matters, assign blame where blame must be assigned, and to negotiate settlements between two wronged parties. This should be left to the courts and the courts alone, to prevent special interest groups from trying to sway opinions. Law should be the tool by which disputes are framed, not decided. When the way to settle a dispute is to write a new law, it is likely to turn in favor of the group best able to influence the situation, whether or not they are in the right or wrong. The courts then, especially those elected, are most likely to be neutral, for a judge that seemingly serves a specific interest rather than that of the people is not likely to hold the bench for very long.
Finally, the federal government should only pass such laws as are necessary to ensure an equal status amongst the states. This follows on things such as abortion, drinking age, and regulation of interstate commerce. If one state denies a service then all states should deny the service; it also follows that if one state provides a service than all states should provide a service and that the federal government should decided between the two, preferably through national referendums, voted on during regular election cycles.
Please, criticize and critique. The entire point to writing this was so that I might discuss it with others.
-
I was thinking about the concept of chivalry, its evolution from a set of guidelines for the battlefield to a general code of conduct, and its (apparent) current downfall. Yet I don't recall ever hearing of a female form...
-
Well, in my case, none really, It was a matter of several factors.
1) I have a mother and two older sisters.
2) My place of employment is a sexual harassment lawyer's wet dream.
3) I'm a geek. Geeks study the hell out of things. Started with porn, ended up here, found a few tips here and there, worked back to porn.
4) The internet in general.
Admittedly, I'm still picking up tricks and ideas as I go, but I had a fair idea of what I was getting into.
-
Dark, as an unabashed, heterosexual 20 year old guy, I can indeed confirm: the girl is hot! Hell, I'd probably get smacked for staring.
And this is coming from the internet, where Barbie culture has mixed with everything else to such a degree that when people on the internet think you're hot, you've got to be to have earned it.Just goes to show: It is a damned shame my girlfriend won't let me go out with more girls...
-
Hmm, honestly? She seems to have a decent build. I wouldn't mind a shot that gave some sign of a bust line, but... (What? I've got a thing for a decent pair of breasts. So sue me!
) And I'd need to see her face before I could personally call her beautiful, but in this case I think I can trust your judgement. Seriously though, you're friend does not have a weight problem. I work in an italian resturaunt, and if I showed her photos of some the people who come in, she would see what a weight problem looks like. I know people who are so fat that they don't so much as walk or waddle as roll into place. Of course, she could always see if she'd be allowed to eat out in Mississippi...
http://bligbi.com/2008/02/01/mississippi-t...ting-in-public/
-
"Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."---Enough famous people that I'm not going to bother.
Personally, I think it depends on what was done. Knocked over a liquor store when you were 14 because you were young and stupid? That I can forgive. Got an abortion? That I can't judge; I have not and never will be in a position to make a decision like that, seeing as how I'm male. Found out you got your girlfriend pregnant and dumped her so your sorry ass could run for the hills? That I wouldn't be able to forgive, not unless you went crawling back to her, begging for forgiveness the next week, and yes, it would be time sensitive with a very small window. I'm big on the idea of personal responsibility. If you made a mistake, you should own up to it. You should also try to set right the mistake that you made. That said, we're all human, and mistakes will be made. The only reason not to be forgiven is if you did lasting, permanent harm, or if you were doing it out of a purely selfish motive.
-
While I don't agree with her idea, I do find Calenthee's reasoning sound. Ever since the game went free-for-all, it's become much more difficult to advance then when there were limits to who we could and could not attack. It served as a way to keep the higher level players from basically abusing the lower level ones, which is basically what's happened at this point. Before now, Keith and Teeta might not have been able to fight as often, but at least it was reasonable for a lower level player to chance attacking them.
Now, they're what 15+ levels higher? So they have higher hitpoints, higher strength, and reload faster than anyone else. I use to be able to show up, take a couple of fights, and may or may not be dead when I checked. Now, out of the last ten times I've tried to play, I've just been told I'm dead. Why did the level caps come off?
-
Zyx, its just a sort of map of the universe we're all playing in. It's for giving people ideas.
As for summarizing, Alda, Foe, Shinju, Janiece, and the demon have all just fucked themselves silly inside Cal, and are about to drop in on you at Hogwarts, where you've been apparently having problems communicating with the locals.
-
New post in the forum orgy. If it helps draw people in, we all just landed in Hogwarts. So won't you please come play with us?
-
Ok, so everyone but Zyx had been screwed at least once, so we're good! The Hogwarts we're all going to end up warping into is going to be the same one Zyx is currently having difficulties in, just so we can get everyone in one place again.
The Open Source Boob Project
in Aimless Babble
Posted
A group of SF fans got together at a convention recently, and tried what they called the "Open Source Boob Project". Quite simply, it allowed anyone to touch the breasts of a participating woman (marked by a button), as long as she gave her permission. The story can be found here:
http://theferrett.livejournal.com/1087686.html
Now, personally, I have no problems with this, and not only because I'm a guy and it means free touches. While I see the need for personal space, there can be a point at which we as people become afraid to approach people for fear that we may be seen as too intrusive, thus not risking any form of contact at all. As such, I tend to freely associate with people who are comfortable with their bodies, and behave accoridngly. What do you guys think?