930 réponses à ce sujet

[X Equestris]

I don't really agree with the idea of doing it for the sake of doing it.
 
It's the military. It's a predominantly male field. It always has been, and it likely always will be. The reason? Not nearly as many women join the military as much as men do. Hence, you're more likely to get high ranking men than you are women.
 
It seems like false egalitarianism and inclusiveness to put so many women at so many levels. It's arbitrary.

Percentage and probability don't matter so much when things exist. There have been 89 women who've made it to some level of admiral in the USN alone. It doesn't matter how likely being under a female officer is when that actually happens to you. And here we're talking about one nation's navy in the modern day. I'd expect there to be even more women as flag officers by the time Mass Effect is set. Not to mention we're only talking about the military here; even today there are a lot of women in political positions.

[mickey111]

Percentage and probability don't matter so much when things exist. There have been 89 women who've made it to some level of admiral in the USN alone. It doesn't matter how likely being under a female officer is when that actually happens to you. And here we're talking about one nation's navy in the modern day. I'd expect there to be even more women as flag officers by the time Mass Effect is set. Not to mention we're only talking about the military here; even today there are a lot of women in political positions.

 

I'd expect things to carry on as they've always done. Women irl tend to get preference in the most social and artistic jobs (teachers of children, tour directing, crafting) because they're demonstrably better at it. 

[In Exile]

So you're assuming that I'm being disingenuous? That's not very nice. Quite offensive actually. Attacking my character just because you 

disapprove of my viewpoint. I'm not providing you with any justification for my opinion until you retract that disrespectful statement first. 

Right, so you don't have a justification. Like just I said. Saying your position is baseless isn't an attack on your character.

[AlanC9]

I'd expect things to carry on as they've always done. Women irl tend to get preference in the most social and artistic jobs (teachers of children, tour directing, crafting) because they're demonstrably better at it.

Wait... as they've always done? These percentages have changed within my lifetime.

[In Exile]

I'd expect things to carry on as they've always done. Women irl tend to get preference in the most social and artistic jobs (teachers of children, tour directing, crafting) because they're demonstrably better at it. 

 

Oh, you mean there's a seminal scientific study out there that proves objectively, empirically and absolutely that women are better at teaching and directing tours? Awesome. I've always wanted to read it. Link?

[SpaceLobster]

teachers of children

Did you consider that when it comes to teaching little kiddos it might ''generate'' less money. Where I come from, it is (if income is a priority) often better to teach adolescents. That is one of the (if not the) reason there are more females teaching kids. I think when it comes to teachers at gymnasia, middle schools, etc. male and female teachers are (moreorless) evenly spread.

[DuskWanderer]

Yeah, people who take this position don't have a leg to stand on. C'mon: offer an actual justification for why Krem is a "second rate character". Do it by comparison, with a "first rate character" who isn't a companion (or advisor, in DA:I). Use any Bioware game you want. Let's see it. Let's hear about these "intriuiging characters". Because until you actually articulate a position, I'm going to say you've got an ulterior motive for adopting it.

 

Krem is second rate because Krem is boring. The character is flat and uninteresting. Compare to characters with intriguing back stories like Lieutenant Renn. Krem's personality is boring, uninteresting, doesn't fit the mythos, and is generally just an excuse, just like Caitlyn Jenner being an excuse to get people to watch a TV show. 

 

It sounds to me like you're just attacking someone because they dare to question the concept of "diversity = good". 

[In Exile]

Krem is second rate because Krem is boring. The character is flat and uninteresting. Compare to characters with intriguing back stories like Lieutenant Renn. Krem's personality is boring, uninteresting, doesn't fit the mythos...

 

That's not a justification. That's an opinion. You don't like her. You said boring twice, and uninteresting twice. Why is Krem uninteresting (which, really is basically just a synonym for 'boring character')?

 

Anyway, I don't want to derail the thread. I won't reply further. But I'll point out you're the second poster to not offer an actual reason. I'll helpfully repeat my challenge (changing it to be on topic)00000:

 

Give me a "first rate character" who isn't a companion. Use any ME game you want. Let's see it. Let's hear about these "intriuiging characters".

[DuskWanderer]

That's not a justification. That's an opinion. You don't like her. You said boring twice, and uninteresting twice. Why is Krem uninteresting (which, really is basically just a synonym for 'boring character')?

 

Anyway, I don't want to derail the thread. I won't reply further. But I'll point out you're the second poster to not offer an actual reason. I'll helpfully repeat my challenge (changing it to be on topic)00000:

 

Give me a "first rate character" who isn't a companion. Use any ME game you want. Let's see it. Let's hear about these "intriuiging characters".

 

Take it from someone who knows something about writing: Characters need to have a spark, need to have something interesting about them. This is just you throwing a tantrum because someone dares not to like your special.

 

An intriguing, first rate character with a rich range of depth that isn't a companion would be Matriarch Aetheyta. Major Kirrahe on a lesser scale. Pre-Omega Aria is a third. 

[Battlebloodmage]

This is off-topic anyway, I love Kaidan, but if I have a nickel for everytime someone call him boring. People can like or dislike characters for various reasons or someone may even dislike a character for no reason at all. I don't get the love for STEEEVE, but it's all personal opinion. Krem's character didn't pop out for me, but it's probably because the other cast just seem to overshadow Krem, IMO.

[In Exile]

Take it from someone who knows something about writing: Characters need to have a spark, need to have something interesting about them. This is just you throwing a tantrum because someone dares not to like your special.

 

I'm not persuaded you know something about writing given that second sentence ("someone dares not to like your special?").

 

An intriguing, first rate character with a rich range of depth that isn't a companion would be Matriarch Aetheyta. Major Kirrahe on a lesser scale. Pre-Omega Aria is a third. 

 

That's still not a justification. You've now given a list of characters you like. Great. What are the qualities that makes them first rate? What's their "spark"? What defines a spark? How will I be able to look at a character and say - he or she has the "spark"? What's "interesting"? What's "a range of depth"? Why not just "depth"? Is a deep character not good if the depth doesn't have range? What does it mean to have "depth"?

All you're doing is changing one buzzword ("(un)interest!") for another ("depth!").

 

Here. I'll help you out by defining the word interesting:

 

1. The feeling of a person whose attention, concern, or curiosity is particularly engaged by something.

2. Something that concerns, involves, draws the attention of, or arouses the curiosity of a person.

 

How do the characters you list engage, involve, draw or arouse your attention, concern or curiosity? Why does Krem not do these things?

[DuskWanderer]

I'm not persuaded you know something about writing given that second sentence ("someone dares not to like your special?").

 

 

That's still not a justification. You've now given a list of characters you like. Great. What are the qualities that makes them first rate? What's their "spark"? What defines a spark? How will I be able to look at a character and say - he or she has the "spark"? What's "interesting"? What's "a range of depth"? Why not just "depth"? Is a deep character not good if the depth doesn't have range? What does it mean to have "depth"?

All you're doing is changing one buzzword ("(un)interest!") for another ("depth!").

 

Here. I'll help you out by defining the word interesting:

 

1. The feeling of a person whose attention, concern, or curiosity is particularly engaged by something.

2. Something that concerns, involves, draws the attention of, or arouses the curiosity of a person.

 

How do the characters you list engage, involve, draw or arouse your attention, concern or curiosity? Why does Krem not do these things?

 

I'm a published writer. I know quite a bit about the writing world. Can you say the same?

 

The qualities that make all the characters interesting is that they are richly detailed, relate to their mythos, expand upon it in a rich and interesting way, and captivate my attention through their dialogue. Krem does none of these things, Krem was just an excuse to throw in "TRANS!" Krem doesn't fit the mythos, doesn't have anything interesting to say, and is literally nothing more than a blank diversity gimmick attached to a flat character who was supposed to throw in War missions. 

Modifié par BioWareMod03, 22 août 2015 - 02:38 .
Edited for inflammatory content.

[Mr_Q]

Right, so you don't have a justification. Like just I said. Saying your position is baseless isn't an attack on your character.

 

Claiming I have ulterior motives behind my post I think is an attack on my character. The term implies that I 'intentionally hid' my motives from you. That isn't the case, I just didn't know you wanted to know them. Claiming my position is baseless is absolutely fine and I'll address that issue in this post. 

 

I'm not sure why you don't want me using characters from DAI but since it's the first Bioware game I've played in who knows how long, I'm using it. So my apologies in advance if you're not satisfied with my choice of example. That is the Iron Bull, who I felt was a first rate character from DAI. (In comparison to Krem at least). 

 

Spoilers for Dragon Age Inquisition below. 

 

Spoiler

The Iron Bull is a non-judgemental, laid back and amicable individual who is part of the Qun, a draconian religious doctrine that so far has only produced characters that are generally the complete antithesis of this. When I first met the Iron Bull it created a form of tension and concern within me because it's not what I anticipated from a Qunari following the Qun and especially so, when he freely admitted his links to a secret Qunari network. Furthermore, characters such as Solas and others challenge him on his beliefs and opinions about the Qun and Bull is compelled to defend the beliefs he was taught as a child to believe despite having a much more open and broad life experience than other Qunari under the Qun due to his line of work. Subsequently, I found his party banter to be fairly interesting especially his debates with Solas from a political philosophy point a view. 

What is key to note is that Patrick Weekes didn't even need to write the Iron Bull as such. He could instead be a character that was just a Tal-Vashoth or Vashoth. If he was, the character effectively writes himself, just a free living type similar to Isabella from DA2 and in my opinion a character with fewer dimensions. Doing this, from my perspective would be detrimental to his character as it would also removes that unique internal conflict that adds more layers to him and has changed my perception of the Qunari that follow the Qun to some extent. By making him part of the Qun, I'm convinced Patrick Weekes was aware of all this. Weekes believed this would provide us as gamers with a new and distinctive avenue to explore the Qun than the typical Qunari that we have seen in DAO and DA2. In turn, this also creates a stronger and more intriguing character in the process.

In comparison, Krem felt mundane. Nothing stood out for me or grabbed my attention beyond the fact that Krem was the only transgender character in DAI. Krem doesn't have the mystique and enigma-ish element that Flemeth has, nor any unique abilities such as Cole's gift to read minds and make one forget his existence completely with a child's personality that I've seldom seen. Krem doesn't have an unbending personal ambition of Solas where his desire is to restore the Elven people to their former glory and retain his godhood, even if it means giving an orb of power to a megalomaniac such as Corypheus. That kinda stuff makes me find characters interesting to the point where I would be unwilling to call them second rate at the very least.  

 

What could of helped develop Krem's character is if we could see rather than be told what Krem experienced growing up. Then I could witness how Krem felt at that very moment and how that developed Krem as a person based on my interpretation of events rather than only his. Being told something isn't as compelling as seeing it in some cases and I felt this was one that had the capacity to provide greater insight into Krem's character. Perhaps then, Krem could be a first rate character like Iron Bull was to me. For now, I can only go with what was produced in DAI.

Krem came across as loyal, plucky and a respectful person to others including my Inquisitor which was nice. As a person I like Krem that said, there wasn't anything significant that made Krem a first rate character as the Iron Bull was in comparison. Hence, I consider Krem a second rate character.

[Heathen Oxman]

Reading this thread, I'm just glad I opted for science instead of "liberal arts."

 

Too many blowhards thinking their subjective opinion equates to "fact."

 

Can't imagine buying into that pretentious nonsense.  But, please, keep insisting that Krem is irrelevant and boring........"objectively," of course.

 

[Pasquale1234]

I'm not sure why you don't want me using characters from DAI but since it's the first Bioware game I've played in who knows how long, I'm using it. So my apologies in advance if you're not satisfied with my choice of example. That is the Iron Bull, who I felt was a first rate character from DAI. (In comparison to Krem at least).

You might want to re-read the post. I'll make it easy for you:
 

Yeah, people who take this position don't have a leg to stand on. C'mon: offer an actual justification for why Krem is a "second rate character". Do it by comparison, with a "first rate character" who isn't a companion (or advisor, in DA:I). Use any Bioware game you want. Let's see it. Let's hear about these "intriuiging characters". Because until you actually articulate a position, I'm going to say you've got an ulterior motive for adopting it.

Iron Bull is a companion. Companions (and advisors in DA:I) get a lot more attention and development than other NPCs.

If you'd like to respond to In Exile, you'll need to choose a different character as a basis - ideally, one whose total screentime and plot relevance are comparable to Krem's.

[mickey111]

Oh, you mean there's a seminal scientific study out there that proves objectively, empirically and absolutely that women are better at teaching and directing tours? Awesome. I've always wanted to read it. Link?

 

 

doesn't have to be proof, I've seen with my own eyes far fewer men in certain professions than women. The one male director I've met out of more than ten was awful at his job. Maybe the ratio of teachers is different in other times and places, and I noticed it gets more even as classes get older

[In Exile]

The qualities that make all the characters interesting is that they are richly detailed, relate to their mythos, expand upon it in a rich and interesting way, and captivate my attention through their dialogue. Krem does none of these things, Krem was just an excuse to throw in "TRANS!" Krem doesn't fit the mythos, doesn't have anything interesting to say, and is literally nothing more than a blank diversity gimmick attached to a flat character who was supposed to throw in War missions.

"Interesting" is a subjective standard, by definition. But it takes striking ignorance of the character to suggest that Krem's story is tied in with "diversity" (which, for whatever reason, you seem to be using as a pejorative), beyond the fact that this is what PW chose as his basis for being an outcast. First, to address your ignorance of the character:

Spoiler

1. I have to imagine that by "mythos" you actually mean "theme". Bull's Chargers have a simple theme: they are all social outcasts. Krem is a social outcast in the same way that the other chargers are outcasts. It's yet another reflection of how Bull struggles with his own identity: that's why, specifically, Krem is the "face" for the Chargers. Bull doesn't know who he is (which, in the Qun, is everything). Krem, no matter everything else, knows exactly who he is identity-wise. Your ignorance of the basic character theme of Iron Bull is foundantional to your criticism.
2. By "mythos", you might mean lore. Krem substantially expans the lore on Tevinter, in four ways. First, Krem provides the only human commoner perspective we have ever had on Tevinter life (apart from Fenris and his sister, both of whom were slaves and elves). Second, we are told a great deal about Tevinter military organization. Third, we learn that the Tevinter military has clear gender distictions. Fourth, we learn about Tevinter (martial) criminal law. He has a great deal to say about Tevinter society, and he's our direct contrast to Dorian's "life is great for the lower classes, or at least not much worse than here." That's his second and important role.
3. Krem's story has nothing but drama and adventure. He met the IB while fleeing from the Tevinter military, in a huge tavern brawl. He's had multiple adventures with the Chargers, tells you about all of them. He's our window into the Bull's chargers before Bull's personal quest. In fact, before his reveal, he's not but an exposition machine about the chargers. Let's recout his story:
a. We have touching memories about Krem and his dad.
b. We have his mother telling him that he has to marry, or his family will be in dire straights.
c. We have Krem following his dream to pursue military service.
d. We have the way he's demeaned and betrayed, and how he ends up on the run.

Second, as for what Weekes says, well, let me introduce a writer as great as you to a small concept from literary criticism (peons such as myself have to feel better about themselves in the presence of greatness such as yours by posting definitions): death of the author.

I wouldn't say I'm a fan of Krem. Still, he's a well-realized minor character who serves the thematic role he's chosen for, which is to be a literally contrast to the IB (someone who's identity is certain vs. someone who's identity is not, both struggling with the topic in a society that has clear views on who they should be in the end).

If Bioware introduces more high ranking human women in the same manner they introduced and handled Krem, then it will be a victory for them and for video-game writing.

Claiming I have ulterior motives behind my post I think is an attack on my character. The term implies that I 'intentionally hid' my motives from you. That isn't the case, I just didn't know you wanted to know them. Claiming my position is baseless is absolutely fine and I'll address that issue in this post.

I'm not sure why you don't want me using characters from DAI but since it's the first Bioware game I've played in who knows how long, I'm using it. So my apologies in advance if you're not satisfied with my choice of example. That is the Iron Bull, who I felt was a first rate character from DAI. (In comparison to Krem at least).

The reason I asked to stay away from DAI is that, ultimately, this is the ME:A board and I would think we should stay on-topic regarding the ultimate subject matter. As for the ulterior motive accusation, well, you only need to look at the political context of where a term such as "diversity character" developed to see why I would look quite sceptically on anyone who uses the term.

This is only by way of explanation. I do very much appreciate that you took the time and energy to write out a thoughtful post. While, ultimately, I disagree with you on the writing part of Krem (I actually also didn't find him to be interesting; I just don't think he's second rate. To me, Scout Harding is the single most boring character I've ever encountered in a video-game, but that doesn't mean I think she's "second rate" or that being boring - to me - makes a character second rate.)

My reply is in spoilers (and lengthy):

Spoiler

As Pasquale1234 points out, the IB is a companion. He's a "focal" character, who has his own arc and a great deal of resource dedicated to his development. Krem isn't mean to be a standalone character. He's meant to be a side-character in the IB's personal story. Krem isn't meant to be someone important, like Alexius or Gaspard. He's meant to be a character on the level of, say, Dagna or Scout Harding. Actually, his most comparable character is Varric's Bianca, and IMO he's a better character than her.

As I explained above, Krem's role - from a literary perspective - is to provide a foil to the IB. He's also a bit of an exposition machine, and that's tied with his experience with the Chargers (to give them a face, when we get to the personal quest choice for the IB) and to provide background on why he's an exile and outcast too.

I think, however, it's completely misreading and misappreciating Krem to say: "Krem doesn't have an unbending personal ambition of Solas where his desire is to restore the Elven people to their former glory and retain his godhood, even if it means giving an orb of power to a megalomaniac such as Corypheus." Krem - to be only person who he can be - chose to risk Tevinter prison to express his identity. This willingness to stand up to authority is the direct contrast to the IB, who - when he has doubts - surrenders himself for re-education. Krem is meant to be the brave contrast to the IB's - at least in his early part of his narrative arc - cowardice.

Let me put it differently: Krem is meant to provide us with a different perspective on the IB, in the same way that the IB - from a lore perspective - is meant to provide us with a different perspective on the Qun. The Qun is all about identity: who you are is what you are, everything that defines your worth without allowing you to choose that for yourself. Krem is someone who -in virtue of his gender identity - is someone who has been defined his entire life on who other people believe him to be without being allowed to choose that for himself. Identity - whether it's gender identity or something else entirely - is at the core of the IB's story and the IB is part of that arc.

I can't argue with you that you didn't find Krem interesting. Like I said, interesting is subjective. Though to me it sounds like you primarily find supernatural characters (you list Flemeth and Cole) interesting. My post was really confrontational, and for that I apologize. But I think Krem is a first rate character concept that - ultimately - isn't well executed in practice by PW. But he's a "first rate" character concept because of how closely he ties in thematically with the IB's personal story. Look at the final quest:

When the IB sacrifices the chargers, he's broken. He's never fit in with the Qun, he's always chaffed under it (see how every time he talks about the Qun coming, unlike Sten from DA:O, he looks at it like a horrible disaster, that will wash away and crush this society in Southern Thedas he's come to love). That's the opposite of the choice that Krem makes, and to make that choice he has to sacrifice Krem.

The problem with the execution is that Krem ends up basically being the IB's morality pet (to use the TV tropes term) and is a bit of an exposition machine, but to look at Krem as somehow being there to fill a quota misses the richness not just of his character, but the IB's own character.

[X Equestris]

Claiming I have ulterior motives behind my post I think is an attack on my character. The term implies that I 'intentionally hid' my motives from you. That isn't the case, I just didn't know you wanted to know them. Claiming my position is baseless is absolutely fine and I'll address that issue in this post. 
 
I'm not sure why you don't want me using characters from DAI but since it's the first Bioware game I've played in who knows how long, I'm using it. So my apologies in advance if you're not satisfied with my choice of example. That is the Iron Bull, who I felt was a first rate character from DAI. (In comparison to Krem at least). 
 
Spoilers for Dragon Age Inquisition below. 
 

Spoiler

The Iron Bull is a non-judgemental, laid back and amicable individual who is part of the Qun, a draconian religious doctrine that so far has only produced characters that are generally the complete antithesis of this. When I first met the Iron Bull it created a form of tension and concern within me because it's not what I anticipated from a Qunari following the Qun and especially so, when he freely admitted his links to a secret Qunari network. Furthermore, characters such as Solas and others challenge him on his beliefs and opinions about the Qun and Bull is compelled to defend the beliefs he was taught as a child to believe despite having a much more open and broad life experience than other Qunari under the Qun due to his line of work. Subsequently, I found his party banter to be fairly interesting especially his debates with Solas from a political philosophy point a view. 
What is key to note is that Patrick Weekes didn't even need to write the Iron Bull as such. He could instead be a character that was just a Tal-Vashoth or Vashoth. If he was, the character effectively writes himself, just a free living type similar to Isabella from DA2 and in my opinion a character with fewer dimensions. Doing this, from my perspective would be detrimental to his character as it would also removes that unique internal conflict that adds more layers to him and has changed my perception of the Qunari that follow the Qun to some extent. By making him part of the Qun, I'm convinced Patrick Weekes was aware of all this. Weekes believed this would provide us as gamers with a new and distinctive avenue to explore the Qun than the typical Qunari that we have seen in DAO and DA2. In turn, this also creates a stronger and more intriguing character in the process.
In comparison, Krem felt mundane. Nothing stood out for me or grabbed my attention beyond the fact that Krem was the only transgender character in DAI. Krem doesn't have the mystique and enigma-ish element that Flemeth has, nor any unique abilities such as Cole's gift to read minds and make one forget his existence completely with a child's personality that I've seldom seen. Krem doesn't have an unbending personal ambition of Solas where his desire is to restore the Elven people to their former glory and retain his godhood, even if it means giving an orb of power to a megalomaniac such as Corypheus. That kinda stuff makes me find characters interesting to the point where I would be unwilling to call them second rate at the very least.  
 
What could of helped develop Krem's character is if we could see rather than be told what Krem experienced growing up. Then I could witness how Krem felt at that very moment and how that developed Krem as a person based on my interpretation of events rather than only his. Being told something isn't as compelling as seeing it in some cases and I felt this was one that had the capacity to provide greater insight into Krem's character. Perhaps then, Krem could be a first rate character like Iron Bull was to me. For now, I can only go with what was produced in DAI.
Krem came across as loyal, plucky and a respectful person to others including my Inquisitor which was nice. As a person I like Krem that said, there wasn't anything significant that made Krem a first rate character as the Iron Bull was in comparison. Hence, I consider Krem a second rate character.

There's not much basis for comparison between Krem and Iron Bull. One's a companion, one's not. Bull gets way more dialogue and interactions than Krem does, so of course he'll seem more fleshed out. For the relatively small role he plays in the story, I thought Krem was well written and comparable to other characters with a similar amount of content.

[In Exile]

doesn't have to be proof, I've seen with my own eyes far fewer men in certain professions than women. The one male director I've met out of more than ten was awful at his job. Maybe the ratio of teachers is different in other times and places, and I noticed it gets more even as classes get older

 

Right, so you don't have an actual proof beyond "this is my unsubstantiated opinion". Cool. I'm not trying to be confrontational, but generalizing about a few billion people based on who you've met is a little much, wouldn't you agree?

[BabyPuncher]

Surely you wouldn't be suggesting that a person only has permission to think something if they're agreeing with a study on the topic, and any thought not backed up a study is therefore stupid? That would be very silly.

Data is neither intelligence nor knowledge, and too often it's pushed as a substitute for thinking. If the data itself is even any good in the first place.

I certainly believe that women and men tend to gravitate towards different professions. No, I haven't read any studies on the topic.

[In Exile]

Surely you wouldn't be suggesting that a person only has permission to think something if they're agreeing with a study on the topic, and any thought not backed up a study is therefore stupid? That would be very silly.

 

People shouldn't say "X is demonstrated" when they can't demonstrate X. Surely you're not suggesting that people should be immunized from the consequences of expressing their opinion? Because that would be silly.

 

I certainly believe that women and men tend to gravitate towards different professions. No, I haven't read any studies on the topic.

 

That's not the statement. This is the statement: "[w]omen irl tend to get preference in the most social and artistic jobs ... because they're demonstrably better at it." If they're "demonstrably better at it", then you should be able to demonstrate that they're better at it. And that's an empirical claim.

[BabyPuncher]

That's not the statement. This is the statement: "[w]omen irl tend to get preference in the most social and artistic jobs ... because they're demonstrably better at it." If they're "demonstrably better at it", then you should be able to demonstrate that they're better at it. And that's an empirical claim.

What I said wasn't his statement, but it is certainly a generalization about millions of women (women in the western world) that is ultimately based on my personal experience more than anything else. Which is something you clearly have a problem with based on your previous post.

[mickey111]

Right, so you don't have an actual proof beyond "this is my unsubstantiated opinion". Cool. I'm not trying to be confrontational, but generalizing about a few billion people based on who you've met is a little much, wouldn't you agree?

I'm not really inclined to meet a few billion people, and surveys and statistics only prove whatever the surveyor wants to be proved, because no surveyor is under obligation to publish ALL of the questions leading up to whatever loaded question that ends up been published. It is a safe bet that the hospitality, tourism, education and whatever other industries there are favoring the female gender know what they're doing because companies who are bad at their work don't last long enough to give the rest of the industry any bad ideas. In short: natural selection.

[In Exile]

I've previously replied (to you and BP), but this is taking the thread too far afield. I've made my position clear, and I would rather not have the conversation go in circles.

[BabyPuncher]

Gee, it seems we're right back to the idea of the only permissible thinking allowed is thinking to nod in agreement with a study, covered up by a veil of how 'perfectly entitled' people are to be ignorant to hide from the obvious flip-flop.

"It's not cool to think things unless you're here to nod in agreement with a study. But it actually is cool. But it's not cool because that's ignorant. But it's actually cool because you're 'perfectly entitled to be ignorant."