All posts by Lerkin

<div class="quote"><i>Deist Zealot wrote:
Until further notice, her name is Ursa.</i></div>
<p>sounds logical. </p>

<p>thank's a lot, SaitamaBro! appreciate it! </p><p>suicides because of bullying always seemed strange for me. then again, the bullying might have changed. or the kids might had become more sensitive to this stuff... </p><p>i agree, that they need to aim for the best in order to succeed, but isn't the kind-of-national policy for social equality and community? one explanation of the school uniforms is for everybody to be the same and don't feel any different. kind of work together and similar stuff. individuality, as i hard, isn't very promoted. but then again, my knowledge might be out-dated. </p><p>neverthless, i don't think that these problems were raised by non-straight relationships in anime and manga. anime and manga might cause other problems (e.g. the decrease in knowledge about general stuff, since people switch from books to manga). </p>

<div class="quote"><i> <p>SaitamaBro wrote: </p><p>Sorry PSUAvatar14, i'm gonna let you finish but i need to say something about it: </p><p>The rise of delinquency is becoming a big problem in Japan recently. With this suicide rates(that were never low there, mostly because people being stressed by school, work and their own family) are going up because of bullying. There's also a raise in middle schoolers prostitution and drug addiction there. There are a lot of stupid and rude japaneses and they're causing the death of a lot of people(and their own) there. </p> </i></div>
<p>thank's for the updated information! i knew about the suicide rates in japan (although they aren't that high as in lithuania, hehehe). do you have any info (or a reliable source) where can i read about bullying, drugs and prostitution in japan? the japanese i met were really nice and educated - but i'm quite aware, that my encounters might be very skew. </p>

<p>Love Robin, while reading your comment i could not stop thinking about norwegian "barnevernet" (norwegian child protection agency). there are bunch of stories (well, i hear the lithuanian ones) of children taken away from parents if somebody heard parents talking to children with their voices rased, if somebody saw parents drinking alcohol and similar stuff... some of the norwegians i met seemed quite nice, but, again, they grew up in different system. </p><p>take japanese system. the education itself there demands a lot from kids. want to school - take exam. than after few years you have finals. than, if you want to go to middle school, you neet to take entrance exams and finals at the end again. high school? entrance and finals. university? entrance and finals. maybe some schools change this system, but at least that's how it was. have you ever met a stupid and rude japanese? education, buddhism, shintoism - they all are filled with still alive respect-the-elders-strangers-and-everything-else. is this bad? no! they are kicking other 'first world' nation ass in every important aspect! (i'm not saying that they managed to create an ideal society, an utopia) </p><p>i'm definitely not the one to say what's wrong with the western animation and children education, but from the things i see, i assume that kids are treated too much as idiots. kids are good at things. mostly - manipulation. as a person grows, this trait might deminish, but kids needs to have this trait - that is biologicaly determined for them to get resources for survival. if adults does not manage to contol their manipulative impulses AND does not stop treat them as idiots, the result would be idiocracy. kids are very much capable to understand any aspect of life: birth, death, sex, love, relationships. and they are way much better at dealing with anything, they haven't encountered before. BECAUSE they are kids, since they don't posses any prejudice based on any previous experience or extrapolation. but, again, most adults tend to forget this and treat kids as idiots, which, eventually, turns them to such. Korrasami was just an example of that treatment (judging others based on your own personal views/believes/experiences). tfu. </p>

<p>the problem that the argument "kids show" is used by adults, who forgot what they felt like when they were kids. and then they started to view kids as idiots, who cannot think on their own. sure, some kids are more easy to manipulate than others, but so is with adults. the problem is that some adults don't get, that kids does not hate or view anything as "wrong" or "unnatural" if it does not harm anybody. hate is tought by adults. </p><p>look at many of the nick's shows - all except korra and, maybe ninja turtles are ugly. no kid or any person would watch those shows just because they are ugly. the only explanation that comes to my mind why kids shows are made so ugly is brainwashing. and laziness. </p>

<p>they had asami animated in scenes, where, taken other characters, would be/ were left still (take another look at "terror within"). this means, that they wanted to put extra emphasis on asami and her emotions. </p><p>it was subtle, yes, but i would call it a non-spoon-fed than any other things. </p>

<div class="quote"><i>Love Robin wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Lerkin wrote: it's not agains social norms. it's agains biologically imprinted safety-catch to keep the population free from genetical recesive diseases. i think more countries does not have legislation objections of it compared to homosexuality as usually, biological saftey-catch does their work pretty well... </p> </i></div>
<div class="quote"><i> <p>Lerkin wrote: actually, the incest, happened early on, is one of the explanations why homo sapiens sapiens population is so f***-up right now.... </p> </i></div>
Actually, what you hear in the news and related "official" sources are little more than propaganda designed to instill a "health panic". Unless a family's medical history is predisposed to genetic and chromosomal disorders, inbreeding can go for quite a long time without triggering any genetic problems. <p>There was a case study of a pacific island population started with a shipwreck of 20 individuals after 300 years rising to a population of more than 1000. Unfortunately a disease introduced by rediscoverers reduced a much larger number to just under 1000 souls. </p><p>See, official "health authorities" like to trot out numbers such as 1-in-10 for genetic disorders. However realistically the so-called percentages are off. Oh, not about closed and fully inbred communities; that's where the numbers ring true. Or at least run truer. </p><p>See, the numbers *seem* to work when all you're talking about is one defective trait's gene. But the problem is there are *how many* chromosomes in the human body?? Of which only 23 pairs are needed to build a person? How many hundreds of thousands of gene base-pair combinations? </p><p>So even if I as a mother have 100 defective recessive defects among my genetic material, ditto for my brother as a father, the percentages of any of them making it into the selection of 23 pairs needed to build my daughter's double-helix *after* the dominant traits have taken their pick on the rungs of the ladder, the chances of a *recessive and defective* trait being activated rises to nearly astronomical. It is not until the gene pool is dammed off and dipped into a few hundred times that the numbers game health articles speak of begin to fit their <i>worse case</i> models because the traits stop being recessive *among that community*. So for that Island, after 300 years of a population of 20 begetting about 1000 at any given point, that trait is much more dominant in their shallow pool than it is in America. So by drawing comparisons between the communities is like comparing chess to checkers; sure both are on the same playing board, but they are far from the same game. </p><p>If you ever play a lot of dice-dependent games, you'll know that chances of hitting that 1 with a 1d4 is a lot less than 1 out of 4 throws… you can toss the little fucker fiddy times and still not get a 1. It's the difference between theory and reality, between paper and actually doing. Chaos Theory. Cause there are factors the paper-percentages don't take into account, or at least don't tell you about… the force of the die-throw, the angle, the friction of the table, the material and weight of the die, etc. Remember the pop-o-matic games? 1 or 2 dice in a small dome you press to trigger a spring to make the die dance inside it. The percentages of getting snake-eyes is higher due to the confined multiple rebounding-from-surfaces tight space as opposed to flinging them down a wide open craps table with *maybe* rebounding against the backboard. Still random enough for the purpose of a child's game, but hardly the same. </p><p>Sure maybe 1000 people rolling that 1d4 1000 times *as a whole* might *average* close to the theoretical math, and that's what they use to place a scare into people. The average of 1000-squared as if it's the same as two people with hundreds of thousands of genes playing musical chairs with 23-pairs of seats. </p><p>So I repeat, the chances –as opposed to the percentages– of defective recessive traits being activated are <i>very</i> remote indeed, and about on the same par as any two unrelated couples. </p> </div> <p>i'm a molecular biologist with the specialization in genetics, so i don't look at media on this stuff. </p><p>look at the lineage of european kings and queens - inbreeding is at high level there and most of them were crazy, ill or incapable of perform their duties. of course, you can give the example of japan - modern nation with, probably, the highest inbreeding levels. but it takes many generations to get rid of lethal or recesive disease alleles. and, again, species, possesing complex social structures have saftey-catch, as i said before, so that they won't get inbreed. </p><p>look at breed dogs - many of them suffer of inbreeding. especially in usa and britan. look at siberian tiger, where daugthers breed with fathers and produce dead babies or babies, that are smaller, ill and aren't able to survive in the long run. sure, if the population don't die-out, this might lead to bottle neck effect, and the population eventually recovers. but the genetic diversity is lost and, in an even longer run with a changing climate, it might be a bad. </p><p>coming back to people. yes, taken the number of us, the more aren't able to produce reproductive and healthy offsprings, the better. but the biology does not work like that. as the ultimate goal of an indivual is to produce the many healthy offsprings. so that is why incest is bad. </p><p>you are true, there are many genes and even more alleles of those genes. but next to coding dnr, you have non-coding one. and some mutations in that part are unknown. it is true, that homo sapiens sapiens dnr most of it is "junk-dnr" and therefore, mutations, that eventually have a phenotypic display are rare. but they are. and, again, as i said, we, as a social animals, have biological saftey-catches to avoid inbreeding. that is why incest is creepy. and, in some cases, it's just excuse for paedophilic relationship. </p>

<div class="quote"><i>Love Robin wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>Neo Bahamut wrote: Oh, okay, I guess I'll just go apologize to the religious right for criticizing their comparison of incest & homosexuality, since apparently this thread has decided that actually is the same concept after all. </p><p>Call me what you want, wanting to see siblings be "romantic" is weird & creepy. </p> </i></div>
While you're apologizing to them, ask them…

1. Where did Cain get his wife?
2. Where did their children get *their* wives and husbands?
3. What was the relationship, besides husband and wife, of Abraham and Sarah/Sarai?
4. After fleeing Sodom & Gomorrah, what activities did Lot's daughters take turns doing with their father on successive nights, and for what express purpose?

</div> <p>actually, the incest, happened early on, is one of the explanations why homo sapiens sapiens population is so f***-up right now.... </p>

<div class="quote"><i>Dragonboy6491 wrote: <p>Why not? Because it goes against "social norms"? I guess homosexual couples should never have been shipped either. </p> </i></div>
<p>it's not agains social norms. it's agains biologically imprinted safety-catch to keep the population free from genetical recesive diseases. i think more countries does not have legislation objections of it compared to homosexuality as usually, biological saftey-catch does their work pretty well... </p>

<p>cool! i just realized how hard i ship mako and bolin! boko! or malin (although this one might be used by other ship...) they supported each other and even lived together for an extensive amount of time! don't tell me it's not love, because i heard them say that themselves!!!! </p><p>
</p><p>(p.s. korra looking like that at a robot-thing-y is weird...) </p>

<p>wow. so i get the discussion about Korra and Asami (although for me it's a no brainer, unlike dark energy or dark matter). but the discussion about anna and elsa... wow. i know that some research shows that blood siblings, if grown apart tend to fall in love with each other (or, for that similar matter, children fall for their parents -> interestingly, i know more incidents with daughter - farther than son - mother relationship...). talking about paedophelia.... O_O </p><p>coming back to anna and elsa: what would happen if you replace one or the other with a man..? well, the other one will end up having a brother... </p>

<div class="quote"><i>Neo Bahamut wrote:
I don't have social skills that aren't related to the internet. </i></div>
<p>the real interactions does not exactly work as the ones on the internet. maybe it changed and i'm old fashioned, but the studies show decrease social skills and increased loneliness in new generations as the usage of social media increases. c'mon, we get webpages where they tell that while writing a cover letter, one cannot use "i <3 ur company". this is pathetic and shows how much the social media takes over the mind. </p><p>(i'm not saying that social networks are bad a priori. heck, forums make it possible to learn and share knowledge like it wasn't possible before.) </p><p>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pyJlERCrJE </p>

<div class="quote"><i> <p>Hasdi wrote: </p><p>That's cool, yo. My personal interpretation is that neither Korra nor Asami know for sure that the other is lesbian/bisexual and would reciprocate each other's romantic feelings. So for years, they were holding back out of fear of rejection. They were having a great relationship as close friends, so why risk damaging that over sex? </p> Per Neo above. This reminds of the funny scene in <i>Remember the Titans</i>. This was shortly after the white kid (<i>Sunshine</i>) humiliated a jerk by kissing him in front of everyone in the locker room. <span title=":lol:"></span> <center></center> </i></div>
<p>agreed. i think that, it goes for both hetero and homo relationships. having a good friend as a partner sometimes seems way too risky and people tend to value the friendship more than the possibility of having a relationship. </p><p>loved that movie!!! watched few times, red the real story. :) i get why the guy would like to know if suneshine was gay or not, but, sorry, still don't get the mako part...   </p>

<div class="quote"><i> <p>Hasdi wrote: </p><p>Aye... but here's the rub. If someone who is close to Korra and Asami (and familiar with seeing love in their eyes), can't pick up any hint of their same-sex attraction despite spending a lot of time with than anyone, why should we expect the audience? <span title=":eusa_think:"></span> </p><p>Maybe despite having strong suspicions, he is frustrated that Korra and Asami are not acknowledging their same-sex attraction, even to themselves. Just like the fans during SDCC and NYCC 2014, Mako wants to know, are they OR are they not? Instead saying yes, no, or maybe... Bryke and the cast were coy with their answers. <span title=":shifty:"></span> </p> </i></div>
<p>it does not matter how close you are if you don't posses the needed emotional intelect/empathy/or whatever it's called. trust me, i know that very well. as for the audience, i think many people got used to being spoon-fed (e.g. direct announcement that they are together, love confessions, kiss, love making, other stuff of that matter) . but if people got their minds open and let the story take them and had the ability to accept it, have enough social skills developed in life and not through computers or social media, i think the "korrasami was rushed-and-stuff!!!!!" would be way lower. </p><p>why would mako be frustrated for korra and asami not acknowledging their attractions? it's really not his place to feel anything towards that. he might have feeling about them having feelings, but i don't think that that's the angle. i might be wrong, but i just can't connect with why would he be frustrated about that. it seems to me like he's: "you act kind of weird..." and then after a moment: "ok. we have bigger problems now!". he's a hero type, so the personal stuff is realy not his thing. he might save his friends, save the world, do whatever other thing, but i see him as the type who would forget the anniversary date because he was to engaged in problem a case or chasing a triad member. </p><p>
</p><p>(note: that's my personal opinion which are based on both personal experience and world observation. you are free to disagree with it as we all possess different personal experiences, views and understandings.) </p>

<div class="quote"><i>Weltall8000 wrote:
<p>Varrick and Zhu'Li were in a non romantic relationship for three seasons and suddenly decide to get marrried. Where's the outrage about that? "But that's different!" Well, how? "They were closely working with each other and spending alot of time together so they develop romantic feelings toward each other, duh!" Hmm, you don't say... </p> </i></div>
<p>i would add that we even didn't seen varrik and zhu'li relationship start. and their relationship happened totally of screen. i guess the other argument that someone would use would be: "but they aren't main characters". well, true. but that still does not change the fact, that they went from co-workers to huband and wife in a week (assumingly). </p>

<div class="quote"><i>OrderedComa wrote: <p>There really isn't even much you can really compare between all of these pairings and Korrasami in the end, one of the primary differences being that we actually saw the relationships developing from the very start. Korrasami is pretty much one of the defining examples of not following the principle of "show, don't tell" when it comes to writing. They go from barely even interacting with each other in the first two seasons to really close friends in Book 3 without seeing any of the development of their friendship. Which leads to their romance not being developed and rather forced as well. One of the key differences between Korrasami and the other relationships and one of the flaws with Korrasami is the lack of showing to the audience that the two were even attracted to each other like was done with all of the other pairings you mentioned. </p> </i></div>
<p>watch book 1, throw out book 2 and you'll have a development. </p><p>what, you don't have people in your life you don't interact a lot but care deeply? i have a friend who's complicated relationship with one girl lasts for most of his life. relationships in real life isn't "succesful love at first sight". they are of all kinds. you get to know somebody, you don't like them at first, get to know them better, change your opinion, then at some point for whatever reason you start to hang-out more with them. and sometimes, you end up together. don't tell me that does not happen in life. unless you have a very one-sided life experience... </p>

<div class="quote"><i>OrderedComa wrote: <p>And the other big one kind of ties into and sort of extends from the first point about a lack of development. The whole entire friendship between Korra and Asami is pretty forced in general because the two never had any significant interactions with each other. Come Book 3 they're just suddenly really close friends without any development to reach that point. </p> </i></div>
<p>asami and korra had clicked right away. look at the season one. asami conforting korra, staying at her side, worrying for her and stuff. the lack of their interaction was only in season two. throw that one away and you will get a development, build up, interactions, and genuie friendship from the start. korra even felt bad telling asami that hiroshi was equalist. that's not something you do for a person, you don't like/are jealous of/whatever-in-that-direction. </p><p>just look at the show without any expectations and allow it to take you instead of taking it to where-ever. you might experience something new. </p>

<div class="quote"><i>Hasdi wrote: <p>But I think what really signaled your professor is Mako. See, he is a deductionist archetype, like Sherlock and Batman. In all four books, his storytelling function is to explain/acknowledge to the audience what is not immediately obvious. Mako is also close to Korra and Asami, even after breaking up with them. If his former girlfriends are developing same-sex attraction to each other at the start of Book 3, shouldn't Mako, of all people, be the first one to pick up on it? So why didn't he? </p><p>
</p> <center>https://31.media.tumblr.com/e25078f191ae067200fed7880657e6a1/tumblr_n7toc7Arvd1rogcuio1_500.gif</center>Maybe he did. Think about it. <span title=":wink:"></span> </i></div>
<p>again, as someone clueless in the romantic stuff but able to pick up details in other areas i can tell, that being deductive and analytical does not mean that you pick up attractions faster than others. remember, that both asami and korra agreed that mako isn't very much in touch with his feelings. his 'emotional intelect' isn't very high, even if his observational and analytical skills makes him a great detective. </p><p>and yes, there were some moments, where mako looked at korra and asami with the: "what a hell is going on between you two?" look... so maybe in somewhere deep in the back of his head he did noticed some things, but just weren't to in touch with that part to be able to understand it fully. </p>

<p>do they have this "bad development" with bopal and kai and jinora..? </p><p>somehow, i get the feeling that they don't. "love at first sight" is ok and relationship growing over 4 years - rushed... talking about double standarts... </p>

<div class="quote"><i>OrderedComa wrote:
<div class="quote">AvatarKatar wrote:
<div class="quote">MerlinTheFairyFox wrote:
If the creators of the Avatar world must have a bisexual couple in the TV show, can they, at least do it with ANOTHER new set of characters?</i></div>
What's so wrong with Korra and Asami hooking up?</div>Form an objective standpoint and just that pairing as an idea in general, absolutely nothing.
<p>But in terms of how it actually was depicted on the show and the development (or rather lack thereoff), there's plenty wrong with it from a writing/quality/technical standpoint. </p> </div> <p>as someone, who's totally clueless in the romantic stuff and usually don't understand when flirting happens, i can say, that there was a strong development of their relationship and the ending wasn't a smack in the face with a wet towel. i would guess, that those, who accuse the story as poorly writen and similar stuff, had different expectations (consciously or not). </p>