Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)PY
Posts
1
Comments
34
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I would argue it does make a difference. Like I said, many people don't fit gender norms, but most people do. So knowing it's a woman shopping can suggest a array of things.

    • She will likely be buying some degree more female-oriented or marketed products, a strong example being tampons or a weaker example being beauty products
    • Her experience shopping will be that of a woman's, i.e. she might get patronised in the hardware section or sales-bullied in the technology section, both of which are quite common for women even now

    I really can't think of an example where you interact with other people where a woman's experience won't be affected by her being a woman.

  • If you refuse to make the same product for someone because they're gay, that should be illegal.

    If you refuse to make a product because it's gay, that should be within your rights. However much of a terrible person that makes you.

    If a Christian asked me to make a Christian website, I'd say no and that should be within my rights. If a Christian asked me to make a hobby photography website similar to one I made for someone else, I should not be allowed to refuse on the grounds that they are Christian.

  • I couldn't disagree more, many people may not fit into genders, but most people do and simply knowing whether someone is a man or a woman is very useful. Gendered nouns though, like in French, Spanish, Italian etc. serve no purpose but do encode redundancy into the language which can be very valuable for speaking in loud places

  • Yes I get that, I simply find it doesn't achieve that goal and that its attempts to do so are without subtlety and overly contemporary, I'm now watching Discovery and in S01E03 or so, Captain Lorca cites Elon Musk as a great innovator.

    The show is already dated and it's only 5 years old, that's a major downside.

    I think it's primarily the shallow depth of the prejudice confrontation that causes the problem, I don't remember any episodes so far which didn't feel like primary school level metaphors for racism etc. A more tactful and/or deeper writer would perhaps cause me no issues

  • This was my first Star Trek Series, I've now realised it's a theme. It's certainly my least favourite aspect of the show.

    The episode about child sweatshops in particular felt very accusational to me, the message seemed to be that by existing I'm causing child suffering akin to child murder, through cobalt mines and clothing sweatshops etc.

    I'm reminded of that bit in The Good Place where the judge says "There's a chicken burger that, if you eat it, means you hate gay people. And it's so gooood! It's not fair!" (Referring to chik-fil-a)

  • It is a bit tiring watching my space escapism but it's actually just highly contemporary societal issues, I know I shouldn't expect it not to be, because this series has been highly contemporary from the very first episode, but it's frustrating.

    Almost everything about the show, from casting, effects, costumes, practical effects, vibe, directing, camerawork is all excellent.

    The writing however is a straight 4/10. Not for the contemporary issues, though they contribute, but half the conversations in this series simply don't make sense. Has anyone else noticed this?