Inkerman's forum posts

#1 Posted by Inkerman (1492 posts) -

Empress of China restaurant in Chinatown, REALLY good Chinese food.

#2 Posted by Inkerman (1492 posts) -

GoT: A Clash of Kings (the second book). Already read it once, but I read the whole series in about a week and a half just after the show came out, so all my memories of the story are basically a fever dream.

#3 Posted by Inkerman (1492 posts) -
@bomber_ said:


A dark, claustrophobic and foreboding depiction of how the "greatest generation"

not only fought against the evil of Nazism, but also the monster within themselves.

Pretty good!

If you liked the claustrophobia and the self-reflection, I highly recommend 'Lebanon', and Israeli movie about the invasion of Lebanon from the perspective of a tank crew. The entire movie is shot from inside the tank, and the plot is similar to Fury without the 'Fuck Yeah! America!' thing going on. I would be VERY surprised if the makers of Fury hadn't been inspired by Lebanon.

@anund said:

Fury: 3/5

Great visual effects and sound, gritty representation of WWII and seems rather realistic... until the end where it turns into complete, predictable BS. Overall though, worth watching.

Also, weird absence of actual tank battles for a tank movie. There was one fairly short and unimpressive one.

As for me, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, kinda meh. The Ape story was compelling, but for the humans I was just thinking the whole time "I don't care about you at all".

#4 Posted by Inkerman (1492 posts) -

I'm not a feminist, in fact I oppose a lot of what feminists argue for, because I believe that either it's actively harmful to men or harmful to women, or just plain factually wrong.

I do believe in equality though, and I don't think feminism represents equality between genders anymore. It's adopted an attitude in which resolving women's problems and issues is a far higher priority than resolving men's issues, even if they're more serious. Furthermore it's increasingly adopted a hostile, anti-male rhetoric, which not only targets those who oppose their ideals, but those who agree with them not as vocally or strongly (I remember reading an article, I unfortunately can't find it now, about a male feminist academic in the 70s who was feted by the feminist movement; attractive speaking and book tours, professorships, etc, and then later as women's issues began to be addressed, he turned to the issues that men faced, and in turn was ostracised and abandoned; because he dared to advocate for men). In many circles, and even the mass media, anything perceived as 'anti-feminist' is either smothered or ridiculed, no matter its validity.

The reality is that men and women are substantially and in many ways fundamentally different from one another. Take the 'Patriarchy' for example. Male power in society is not necessarily derived from denying women power (although I don't deny that does happen, and it should be stopped), rather because men excel within the social structures we've created. Men are simply better than women at taking and/or creating wealth, power, and prestige. How do I know this? Name me a non-patriarchal society of substance. Not one that was ruled by a woman once or twice, not a matrilineal one, nor a small tribal group in the Amazon. If patriarchy was just a social construct that can be broken, then there would be matriarchies somewhere. But there aren't, in fact Encyclopaedia Britannica lists 'Matriarchy' as a 'hypothetical' power structure, because no true matriarchy has ever existed. Men have always been the dominant gender. That's not 'social' influence, that's biology influencing society.

What does that mean? It means that even on a level playing field with no discrimination, men will beat women into positions of power, because men are simply better at taking power within our societies and the values that we hold as 'power', wherein lies the rub. Why do women want power? Why do they want to be CEOs or Presidents? Isn't feminism just pushing traditional male values and goals onto women? Some, many even, no doubt do; but it seems not most (Source). Here's another disturbing little fact. Women over the last 50 years have gained power, prestige, and wealth compared to their predecessors. So they should be happier right? Because that's how feminism defines female happiness; more power and money = more happiness. But sadly they're not. Women in the US are unhappier than they were 30-40 years ago (Source US, Source UK). And that's not because everyone is unhappier, men are actually happier now. You could argue that feminism isn't to blame, that some other factor is influencing women, but if we assume that, then following a feminist narrative shouldn't the cause of women's unhappiness also affect men? And if it was significant enough to not only cause women's decline in happiness but also overcome the theorised increase in happiness from women gaining power, wouldn't we notice it?

Men are sicker, both physically and mentally, than women; have poorer education; dominate the dull; dirty, and dangerous jobs; suffer from a justice systems strongly bias against them both in criminal and civil courts; and their gender identity is increasingly under attack or ridiculed in the media. The one advantage they have is in the wage gap, which increasingly analyses of shows that the gap isn't down to discrimination; men simply work harder. If feminism is for 'equality'...then where is the equality?

And don't even get me started on feminism and race!

#5 Posted by Inkerman (1492 posts) -

@bartok said:

Timothy Dalton was a great James Bond and way better than Roger Moore and Pierce Bronson

I'll fight you on Pierce but otherwise yeah, Dalton was probably the best Bond.

The Daniel Craig movies are awful Bond movies, and Quantum of Solace is an actively bad movie.

Also I think Minecraft is better than Terraria.

#6 Posted by Inkerman (1492 posts) -
#7 Posted by Inkerman (1492 posts) -

I have a joker bobble head I got for a birthday, and a map of Skyrim from the pre-orders. A couple of posters, nothing to heavy duty nerd. Although I do have that 10 year anniversary Firefly poster, still rolled up. Gonna get a proper frame for that baby.

#8 Edited by Inkerman (1492 posts) -

Just got the first book in the mail, I have the others, I somehow never had the first one, gonna read them all again. People keep referencing shit and I have no clue.

I'll be interested to see when Joffery's wedding (and so death) are in the Season. I assume it will be the second last episode, and the final episode will be Tyrion's escape. Apart from that I have no memory of what happens at this point.

#9 Posted by Inkerman (1492 posts) -

I thought it was an ok episode, but then again I love the crime solving stuff, and this episode didn't have a lot of it. I prefer it when Sherlock is just dominating people knowing tonnes of stuff, instead of running everywhere. Cool to see the new dimension to Mycroft and Sherlock's relationship. Something is definitely up with Watson's fiance, but I kind of wish they hadn't telegraphed it so obviously, and I was hoping Molly and Sherlock's relationship would go somewhere, ah well, maybe it still will.

#10 Posted by Inkerman (1492 posts) -

Is it too crazy to have John Drake on board? Would that be too much madness?