Smallville 10/22/10

I think one of the things Wayfarer is refering to is Cat's comment, "I'll never understand Liberals." Insinuating that conservatives know so little about liberals that they would mistake the scene Cat walked in on as something only Liberals would do. This is insulting. Not ridiculing. Ridicule would speak more to the platform of the conservative party, not its intellegence.

Mind you, I'm not making this political at all. I have no desire to see the thread locked. I'm just pointing out what you're not seeing as insulting.

Everyone knows the Blur and Lois have some kind of relationship. She outed herself a few seasons ago on national television.

Plus it's a tactic Darkseid also tried to pull in the comics through Gordon Godfrey.

I'm a huge comic fan. I got a closet filled with only comics plus some more around the house in the garage to attest to that. That said, I don't mind at all some of the stuff that comes out of Smallville. I've read a lot worse. The one thing that makes me feel bad about Smallville ending is that this was probably the one chance we had in another long span that we get to see a shared DC univervse in live-action, certainly not while Geoff Johns has a stick up his butt about it.

*Facepalm.*

Meet the Ancient Egyptian civilization where Pharaohs had sex with their sisters, mothers, daughters, neices, brothers, nephews, etc. In the original mythology, Osiris and Isis were both lovers and siblings. Incest was not taboo in Ancient Egypt.

Also, in the original mythology, it wasn't Osiris' heart that Isis couldn't find, it was actually...




Waaait for it!






...His *****! Because it was eaten by a fish.

And yet they still managed to conceive Horus.

Not a romantic relationship. Notice that Cat didn't mention that Lois is in a relationship with the Blur. Only that she hero worships. You're still not adressing the ridiculous amount of times Lois gets into trouble for no other reason than she's Lois. It gets old, when there's plenty more to be done, like... you know... find this "darkness that is coming."

Like all the times Lois gets into trouble in the comics, cartoons, and movies cause she's Lois? Remember who you're talking about, even during the end of days you'll probably see Lois rushing headlong into the mailstrom and plaugues to try to get an interview with Satan...and then tell him off when she gets to him.

Cat is an idiot, why wouldn't she say that?

You are projecting the character of Cat onto all conservatives and making a mistake that is far too common among all people with a hasty generalization.

Lois gets in trouble a lot, because she puts herself into trouble or her stories lead her there. She was doing a story, had the necklace, she's the one that got possessed. Pretty easy to understand. The banshee episode the story was more forced than anything and would have worked the same with Chloe or Lois being the one that ends up possessed...

Hasty generalization? How am I generalizing any group? If anything, I'm saying that the lines of her character come across as a generalization of a group of people. I myself, am not generalizing anything. But I forget who I'm talking to. The king of strawman arguments.

Pretty easy to understand? And how exactly did she end up with the necklace? It seems like a pretty difficult thing to make the mistake of. Considering there seemed to be quite a bit of security at the exhibit, the only way to have come into its possesion would have to be on purpose. Or, someone placed it. But none of this is even half-way explained in the show. Nope. Someone mentions its missing, then Lois happens to have it. Hell, they could have at least had Lois say something to the effect of "Oh no, I didn't return the necklace." Nope, she doesn't even recognize it!

I know, Durakken, that for you, so long as there's a point A and a point B, you don't consider a line between them to be necessary for good writing. Unfortunately for those that know better, there should be one.

But I digress. The real reason they did this, was that they didn't know of any other way to write an episode. They fell back on their usual "how to make an episode last 45 minutes before we do what the episode is supposed to" ways. They could have had an entire episode in which Darksied's attempt to take control of Clark (which would have been good since that's suppose to be the concern of the season) put Lois in danger as collateral damage, thus making Clark realize he wants to tell her who he is. But no, they went with the hokey, cheesy, been-done-a-dozen-times Possession episode.

We just lucked out that this time it actually ended with forward momentum, most likely because it's the last season.

She is generalizing. You are generalizing in saying that this is how Liberals view conservatives... instead of understanding that this is how SHE views Liberals.

Which by the way is an idiotic term. Just about everyone in the world is a liberal (for freedom) in some way. I wish politics wouldn't mess with words.


I do more than one thing at once so I may have missed the part where Lois was all like "oooh I'm going to take this thing somehow that I have already been told what it is and then forget what it is" If that happened ok, I missed it and you have a point.

However, that's not what I saw. One presumes that Ollie or Carter let her borrow it for pictures or something and didn't tell anyone and then your mistaking the admiration scene for her going "What's this?"

No, I'm saying the writers are insulting a political group. I've made no assertion that I think that's how all liberals are. Again, another strawman argument.

Obviously it was Theo Adam and Clark will have to fight Black Adam.

And the fight will consist of two punches.

Please go look up the definition of "strawman".

He's discussing the same thing you are.

Not "presenting a similar but false situation and then attacking that made up situation as proof that he is right."

Your position seems to be that the writers must view conservatives as being like Cat.

Durakken is positing that this idea is wrong, that Cat hating liberals and generally being an idiot is just a symptom of Cat being Cat, not that the writers view Cat as "representing all conservatives."

Dur has done the strawman thing before, but this isn't one of them.



-k

Actually, Durakken's first stance was this:

Keep in mind, I was originally trying to clarify what others in the thread probably found insulting.

Instead of seeing what I was doing as a way of helping one person achieve understanding of other's points-of-view (knowing that Dur more than likely has an incredibly crippled ability to relate to humans), Dur instead makes the fallacious argument based on me projecting Cat onto others. I'm not projecting Cat onto anything. I've only said that the writers are insulting a political group. It may not have been their intention, but they did it none-the-less. They created two characters (Cat and Godfrey) acting in ways what would be stereotypical of a political group. When you create stereotype characters, you insult people. Intent or no intent. For another example, looks at the Transformer 2 twins.

He also asserts that:
Something I never said.

So here's the Strawman:

I point out why some people in the thread may feel insulted.

Dur says I'm projecting onto a character. Then later, says I said something I didn't.

The original post he refers to isn't meant to show what I think or not, only to help reach understanding between people. Hence, him derailing onto what I'm talking about fails to understand what's being said. It also fails because his statement is wrong anyways. Does that work?

Whatever you do, chances are you're insulting or offending someone. People are irrational twits who'll murder a harmless Tar Baby out of ignorance.

The character in question is essentially a caricature of bigotry (a term that has wider meaning than mere racial intolerance, though people often forget it). Her comment about liberals merely falls in line with her ongoing motif of intolerance to beliefs and opinions that are alien to her own. Which is to say that it is symptomatic of her bigotry rather than her political leanings.