Posts by Tim Hannah
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
We recently enjoyed the company of a First Nations friend from Canada who pointed out both the similarity between avatar and pocanontas as well as the offensive nature of both tales. Not that I think this would have swayed the academy's judgement.
The winner pretty much proves that offensive tales won't sway the academy's judgement. Not a single Iraqi portrayed as anything but victim, coward or psycho killer. Only character in entire film who cares at all about Iraqi kids is the big ol' American - really, he asks the natives for help and gets none. And for his suffering and pain he is never thanked, but still does it again, cos that's the kind of world saver he is.
I'm not defending Avatar's story, but it didn't win. The winner was at least as bad and doesn't have the excuse of being highly fictionalised. It's creepy.
-
"Flawed" is an understatement. It was a visually gorgeous pile of steaming crap that ticked off every trope it could. The 3D was fun, but in order to get a Best Picture award, it might have needed to have three dimensional characters as well.
Have you seen the Hurt Locker? Cos there's a distinct lack of three dimensional characters there as well. I watched it to the end, but it was an effort.
-
I missed who it was but the Jets almost scored a fantastic own goal too
That'd be Elrich, again.
-
Heh, not sure that handball counts. Also, an estimate of potential cumulative viewers is very different from actual cumulative viewers.
Suspect that, like some other sports, they were giving an aggressive positive spin to viewer numbers.
-
Yes, Tom, I understand you're being rude. Thanks for explaining.
You're missing the elephant. The post asks how common gays are in rugby. Now there are two potentially two types of gays in rugby (oversimplifying horribly), those we know about and those we don't.
You and Hayden both seem to say, the gays we know about in rugby would have a horrible time, therefore there are and have been very few or no gays of either kind in rugby.
There's a big fat deep logical hole right there delicately paved over with wild speculation. But if you don't want to see it...
I'm bored too, so last post.
-
Humour me Tom.
Why is the question of closeted gays, or people living a lie in regards to their sexuality worthy of such derision in light of Gareth Thomas? He was closeted for a decade or two, he was living a lie, he did play rugby.
Why polar bears?
-
And if XYZ hadn't come out as gay? Maybe because they don't want the bullshit and the comments and the heavier hits? What if XYZ goes out with a girl he met at a party, gets married? You know, like Gareth Thomas.
How long does it take everyone to know then?
-
1 in a billion?
-
Did I say that? No. What I said was you have to buy into a self consciously male culture to succeed.
No you didn't say that, and it was an admittedly cheap shot. But you did pretty much say that gays are much much less likely to buy into a self consciously masculine culture.
And Gareth Thomas is a counter example of a highly masculine gay man. As are an unquantifiable number of closeted rugby playing gays who, as he did, use that masculine culture to portray themselves as masculine.
Your argument (and, I think, Hayden's) relies on very very few closeted gays buying into a masculine culture. And your evidence is what? That we don't see any masculine closeted gays?
But we do see masculine gays who are out, so why the assumption that there aren't any still in the closet?
-
So your argument boils down to gays are effeminate?
I give you... Gareth Thomas. Self consciously masculine and apparently gay...