sexist bullying turns into...purposeful reflection and some positive changes. Just kidding, it turned into yet more bullying....
-1 ( +3 / -4 )
2 ( +2 / -0 )
It is not counter to evolution because it exists as a trait expressed by a portion of our species and our species as a whole continues to evolve. You are making assumptions as to what is and is not 'moral' and or 'beneficial' in evolutionary terms. I think it is impossible for you to know that and you are basis your evaluations of your own assumptions of what is 'good' and 'optimal.' Frankly, the process is not hemmed in by these assumptions. One could argue, just as blindly, that suppressing this trait hinders our 'big-picture' evolution as a species. But really, it is impossible for us to evaluate this kind of thing. The scope involved is just to great. So, I don't think the point has any practical merit or relevance.
I think our best bet is to focus on dealing with things on an individual and societal level. And I think the best way forward is to support individual rights and social tolerance. Social tolerance doesn't mean that you have to like or agree with everyone. It just means that you recognize that in a free and responsible society adults should be invested with and respect individual rights, dignity and freedom.
The government has no place in the bedrooms of consenting adults.
4 ( +6 / -2 )
This is horrible news. I hope the killer is caught and the community can start to come to terms with what happened.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
FizzBitJun. 03, 2014 - 11:18AM JST
I watched one show of this just to see what the hype was about. "Terribly Bad" is what they should have called it. Though I'm not shocked by the publics favorable response, the world needs ditch diggers too.
Ziiinnnnnggggg! But please don't hold back. How many ditches have you dug since you quit watching BB?
1 ( +2 / -1 )
I was working at my desk in Sendai. Then my desk started bouncing and everything changed.
My daily life in the months that followed was dominated by a kind of 'fog of war' uncertainty and confusion. Many people are still coming to terms with what happened and we will be living with the effects for many years to come. In hindsight it seems both unreal, and much too real.
I urge you to please take a moment today to remember what happened on that day and to try to wrap your heart/head around the loss and suffering that affected so many.
9 ( +9 / -0 )
Putting a 'culture' label on something doesn't mean it can't also be out-dated, intolerant and discriminatory hogwash. If you disagree please pm me and I will provide you with a long list of such 'cultural nuggets' from my own country. Japan is no different from other countries in this respect. Their society is presently struggling to integrate the past with the future.
Thankfully, as several posters pointed out, this particular bit of 'culture' will be taken to court (sooner or later) and resolved there.
1 ( +4 / -3 )
The documentary helps us understand the human side of the tragedy BECAUSE it sheds light on a life, a family and story. Because it does that we get a fuller understanding of what happened on an individual/micro level. This isn't a case of the forest isn't getting lost for the trees, but rather of taking a moment to really appreciate a person's story. I mean, it is really difficult to process a huge death toll like that in a meaningful sense. Frankly, it tends becomes abstracted, tangled or superficial when you get information in bits and pieces. In this case the documentary tells us about a remarkable young woman and her family. Feeling this sense of loss on an individual level really doesn't let you get away with the abstraction any more. But more than that, it really is a moving story about someone living life to the fullest. Is Taylor's story more important than the thousands of other stories? Of course not. But it is important. It is worth listening to these personal stories and if hers helps some people understand what happened and live a meaningful life, so much the better.
For the record, I saw the movie and I was really moved and inspired by it. I think most people who watch it will feel the same way.
3 ( +3 / -0 )
I have serious problems with these being called "martial arts", because competition fighting isn't a martial art (an art of war), it's a sport. It's the same difference as kendo to katori, or sword fighting to fencing, simply put there's no lethal intent in a sport, while in a proper martial art there are movements which are undeniably designed to kill your opponent. This is why these tournaments are always won by ground fighting specialists, because one can only fend off an opponent with slaps and tickles for so long, in order to mount a proper defense against a ground fighter you need to be allowed to hit them somewhere critical. Ground fighters only feel free to charge in simply because they KNOW that the real martial artists aren't allowed to hit them anywhere important and they'll just have to absorb one or two painful but not life-threatening strikes. The relevance to this article? They defend the arm-breaking as a movement that was legal because there was a plausible alternative, tapping out. To my mind this is sophistry, the viable alternative to avoiding a throat shot is simply a good defense and not charging in, but the rules outlaw throat shots but permit arm breaking. It's not martial arts, this is just a sport and has nothing to do with which martial arts are best.
Adding attacks to vital/vulnerable areas in a fight would not negate or neutralize grappling and/or take-down skills. It would add a new dynamic/danger to said matches. But, as was pointed put by Jason, both fighters would be aware of these attacks, would have to defend against them and both would be able to apply them. Gordeau wasn't trying to tickle Nakai's eyeball. He was gouging it. Clearly an attack to a vulnerable area. But despite this he submitted and lost the match (via heel hook). He's damn lucky Nakai is a class act and released the submission. Can't say I'd be so quick to release someone that had just gouged my eye. In fact, I think it is safe to say most people would complete the submission, inflict a serious injury, and then look to do some eye gouging of his/her own.
Nakai is a class act.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
I don't know many (any) vegans that keep pets. Some may but I haven't met them.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
This thread pretty much sums up my stock answer to the question, 'so why did you become a vegetarian?' ...My answer?
'A leprechaun told me to.'
Works for me.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Just thinking about the U.S. health care system is enough to sick me sick.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
I'm a vegetarian. I think of it as a personal choice and I have no interest in converting others or in being converted.
The social aspects of eating/dining make my lifestyle choice somewhat difficult or awkward at times. Those problems are magnified here since I don't speak much Japanese. But I try my best to plan ahead, be courteous to others and find solutions with which I am comfortable. Sometimes I am successful and sometimes I'm not. Live and learn...fail and laugh.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Sick indeed. At the very least she had serious mental health issues. The article mentions that she had a one year. I wouldn't be surprised if postpartum depression factored into this mess. Very sad situation.
0 ( +0 / -0 )