Connecting to characters in media is a great way to connect to your own feelings. It sounds like you’re treating it like it takes away from reality somehow, but all media is a reflection of reality. People have a reaction to it because it connects to something in their life. If you haven’t found things that resonate with you that’s cool, but looking down on others for being emotionally open is unnecessary.
Making Elizabeth invincible is the only way that game is playable for me. There’s no chance in hell I’d play an entire game that’s one long escort quest where I’m constantly worried about the useless sidekick that I’d rather be without. She may not have added much, but a superficial narrative device is a thousand times better than a crippling gameplay decision.
It’s not even a good analogy, the basic idea of a ‘silent dark forest’ is pretty nonsense. Forests aren’t quiet at night. Animals aren’t hiding out to avoid predators. Most aren’t active cause it’s dark and it’s hard to see, so they sleep instead. Most predators are in the same boat, they typically hunt in late evening/early morning, when their prey is also active. That’s ignoring the plethora of nocturnal species of course.
There’s literally no part of the theory I find compelling, it seems like a poor conclusion based on a foolish assumption.
Out of curiosity, have you read Stranger in a Strange Land? I won’t say the character work is amazing, and it does feel a bit dated, but I find it to stand out in the genre.
And nobody is going to get in trouble for scrolling past a woman with a bikini on at work. If your workplace is that strict, you’re going to be in more trouble for scrolling social media on the clock.
More graphic content is visible in ads on any major website. The idea that a clothed woman should be censored as if it’s vulgar is excessive in my opinion. Where do we draw the line? Shoulders? Knees? Ankles? I had assumed as a society we had decided it was the actual genitals, but apparently not.
And they would be fine with you publicly browsing Lemmy on the clock?
NFSW is meant to help people view content at work/in public by making it avoidable.
I agree with this. This is the fundamental point of the tag. I don’t want anyone to lose their job, or suffer undue consequences for happening across something particularly graphic, upsetting, or unlawful.
If it’s debatable and isn’t tagged, that’s inconsiderate and a request to tag it should be treated with consideration and kindness.
This is what I don’t agree with. Everything is debatable. I live in the US south, if my coworkers had their way, any image of a drag queen or a pride parade would have to be marked NSFW. And while thankfully this isn’t a problem on Lemmy (yet), that means a sizable portion of the population would be unable to see that content at all without uploading their ID and giving up any semblance of anonymity.
There’s nothing dangerous, illegal, or upsetting about a woman in a bikini. It’s something any person might see in public at literally any time if you live somewhere warm. And yes, I’m sure there are people who would feel harassed if you waved an image like that in their faces, but I cannot imagine a scenario where someone suffers any professional setback because someone saw them scroll past some clothed tits.
NSFW is cultural shorthand for porn or graphic content. It’s not a literal guideline for what’s acceptable in every single workplace. Should ACAB posts be labeled NSFW because saying that at my workplace in the US south would make a hell of a lot of people uncomfortable?
And why are you browsing Lemmy at work in full view of passing coworkers? Is it that lax that you can just openly fuck around and your only concern is someone might see a girl in a bikini?
Vent just refers to the general end of the butt. It’s the cloacal aperture that’s the all purpose asshole/penis/vagina. It’s really an all-in-one orifice, quite a time saver.
And I think everyone here can agree that any of these subs that are focused on explicit material should absolutely be pressured into setting the sub NSFW.
The part that has people against the OP is that he’s claiming a girl in a relatively modest bikini should be flagged NSFW, and that a sub for non-explicit anime pics should have to adopt the NSFW label, which seems excessive to me.
It’s legally sold to minors, available in grocery stores, hell I’ve seen them sitting on a rack in doctor’s offices.
NSFW is the terminology we use for actual explicit material, that’s the point. It’s a shorthand. Getting overly literal about how ‘work’ should be applied to the context is like arguing that all FPS games are actually RPGs because you’re ‘playing the role’ of some character.
How is it ‘clearly’ anything? It’s the only example OP provided, what else are we supposed to judge his claims by?
Well since you obviously didn’t open the link, it’s a girl in a fully covered bikini. Literally not softcore anything, it’s as racy as sports illustrated.
Background checks typically only flag legal history. Your employer absolutely does not submit a list of ineligible employees for government record keeping, that’s purely internal use. If you aren’t planning on coming back, there’s absolutely nothing to worry about.
If a new job asks for references they might find out, but the risk of getting slapped with a lawsuit for keeping a former employee from getting a new job means it’s very rare for a (competently run) business to say something negative about a former employee unless it’s very severe and well documented.
I would argue that Eros is perfectly fine with the Jedi. In the novels and comics, Jedi have sexual relationships all the damn time. Padawans regularly have trists with other padawans, Jedi have one night stands, all kinds of stuff without fear of being expelled from the order.
I don’t think there’s a clean way to apply the Greek loves here really. It’s more like they’re forbidden from going too deep into philia? Ultimately ‘Attachment’ is not a kind of love, it’s a fear, and fear is the enemy of all Jedi. If you can love someone without being afraid to lose them, then there’s no issue, but that’s obviously an incredibly difficult concept. That’s why it’s easier to just keep some level of detachment from others.
Most of the OG stuff was written before the prequels introduced the ‘no attachments’ rule, but after that they were pretty much only ever portrayed as dogmatic and deeply, deeply flawed.
It hasn’t been until the recent High Republic material that any level of understanding has been shown regarding what ‘attachment’ is supposed to mean. Obviously the prequel Jedi have a messed up view of it, that’s the point, but there is a fundamental basis from Buddhist philosophy that is completely valid.
The only delusional one here is you. Yell all you want angry boy, it doesn’t change reality.
Are there really people playing VR stuff regularly? I only know 2 people in my circles that bought equipment for it, and both of them got sick of it after a couple weeks.
I don’t know, what I’ve tried was fun for about 10 minutes, but that’s about all I could take before the headache starts.
It’s more like ‘not commit their life to one person.’ Jedi are encouraged to love, but forbidden to prioritize an individual over the greater good.
Didn’t play TLoU, but if you didn’t catch it from the start, the point of The Mandalorian was clearly always about Grogu becoming ‘the Mandalorian’. Just cause it didn’t go the way you expected doesn’t mean nothing happened.