James

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AzureWolf [/i] [B] I don't want to sound like a jerk, but besides the people born with AIDS (and that needle thing, which totals to a very small margin of the people), it's really a person's own fault for acquiring the disease. I always thought AIDS would decrease as time passed, since people would be more wary of the disease - but no - we've got too many people having fun.[/B][/QUOTE] [color=#707875]I just want to point out that it's unfair to make generalizations. There are people who get HIV (men and women) who either don't know their partner has the disease (neglect on the part of the partner), or who actually have a condom break or something like that. So, yes, while there are a lot of careless people...we should be careful not to say that everyone besides those born with the disease are automatically at fault. There's also the risk of being infected via blood transfer, for example. In any case, I agree that the current system for dealing with medication (especially life saving medication) is inadequate. And I dislike the way that poor countries are being denied access to cheaper versions of big-name drugs.[/color]

[color=#707875]I actually think that the N-Gage could be a fantastic machine, were it designed with even an ounce of intelligence and skill. Unfortunately, Nokia really demonstrated that they don't understand gaming...or even industrial design, to any great degree. I have rarely seen such a poorly designed product. Apart from the whole cumbersome issue about using the phone and apart from the weird screen size (and the fact that it is unviewable at various angles) [i]and[/i] despite the awful buttons, there are two even bigger issues. Firstly, there's the question of media format. The tiny little cards that the machine uses are really no good. Not only are they one of the least durable choices, but they're also quite expensive to produce. And secondly -- the biggest no-no as far as design goes -- the way that you actually insert games into your N-Gage is ridiculous. You have to pull the back off, remove the battery, put the card in, replace the battery and replace the backing. o_O;;;; This process could not be any less intuitive if it tried. I would have to actually use all of my effort to design a more cumbersome product. N-Gage deserves to fail. It deserves to fail because it's a poorly designed product. If Nokia were to release a new and totally re-designed N-Gage...(N-Gage SP? :-P), that'd be wonderful. And I'd be the first in line to take a look at the new unit. So it's not about hitting on Nokia in general. But at the same time, I don't think the market should tolerate awful products. Nokia needs to learn its lesson and either stay out of the handheld market [i]or[/i] design a superior product; one that is truly attractive for consumers.[/color]

[color=#707875]In reference to the 10% thing...I don't know where it came from, but it's a number that people always like to use when talking about telepathy and stuff. I haven't seen any scientific basis for it though. Bear in mind that a certain percentage of your brain is used for conscious thought, but that your brain also controls unconscious thought, motor functions, etc etc. In other words, you might only use 10% of your brain for conscious thinking, but you might use the other 90% for the millions of other biological processes in the body. That's [i]if[/i] the 10% claim is true though. And I doubt that it is. As far as thoughtspeak goes, I think it's [i]possible[/i]. We know that the brain transmits information via electronic impulses. And, presuming that you both fully understood the processes [i]and[/i] that you could engineer nanomachines small enough to take advantage of those processes, yeah, I think it could be done. But there are two big problems, aside from the whole question of actually taking data and interpreting it. Firstly, you'd have to work out a way to transmit that information. This is why I think that telepathy is a pretty silly idea; telepathy implies that one person's brain is communicating with another person's brain, over whatever distance. But nobody can explain [i]how[/i] that occurs -- how the electronic impulses of a brain can be transmitted to another brain and received. And then there's the whole question of interference and everything. It doesn't sound very feasable to me. But if you could mechanically capture that information and transmit it, perhaps that might work. Who knows. We're obviously talking about incredibly advanced technology (and incredibly advanced knowledge of the human brain). I have an even more important question for you though. What happens if you're in a chatroom and a naughty thought crosses your mind? How would the technology know [i]not[/i] to transmit that? And how could you control what thoughts are transmitted and what aren't? I mean, not that I think of dirty thoughts in chatrooms...but you know...it [i]could[/i] happen. Ahem. ...I blame Mimmi's pants stealing. Seriously. >_

[color=#707875]Guys, please note the dates on here. The third last post was on the third of November, 2003. That makes this thread three months old. I assume that this RPG is therefore inactive at the moment. If vicky would like to re-open sign-ups or something, please let me know.[/color]

[color=#707875]Also, the deceased wasn't just suicidal/depressed. Apparently he let the cannibal slice off part of his body and they [i]both[/i] ate it together, before the cannibal killed him. At least, that's what I heard on the news. So, based on that...I don't have a huge amount of sympathy for either person. They were obviously both completely crazy.[/color]

[color=#707875]Rather than displaying all of the images in your post, it might be an idea to simply use text-only links on certain images (perhaps the bigger ones or the less significant ones). That way, people will see most of the images when they load the page...but they'll have to click to view the bigger images. It's more of a courtesy to 56K users than anything else, I think.[/color]

[color=#707875]Apparently the ability to delete one's own thread has been around for a while, although hardly anyone has actually used the feature. Rather than intentionally putting it there, though, we had simply left it alone; it was a vB default setting. And at some point Charles switched it off, for reasons that he explained above. I think that's why I've been so confused about this. But now I know what's going on. In any case, it's all settled now. People can delete posts but not threads. The Posting FAQ has been updated accordingly. EDIT: Chabichou, please be aware that Charles wrote our Posting FAQ. I say this because Charles was obviously writing to accommodate the default settings on vB. And I hadn't even noticed his reference to thread deletion. So I guess that also explains things a bit more clearly.[/color]

[color=#707875]As far as I know, the ads on OtakuBoards will be a temporary reality. If you have been reading the main page of theOtaku.com, you will know that Adam recently upgraded our server's RAM. This was a one-off expensive cost that wasn't part of our regular expenses. So I assume that the ads are in place to cover that. You'll note that the ads are text-only and that they are at the bottom of the page. We have also refused to use pop-up ads. So if we [i]must[/i] use ads at various stages, we will always do so in a way that does not impede the services that we are trying to provide. [url="http://www.theotaku.com/privacy_policy.shtml"]Click here[/url] to view theOtaku.com's privacy policy. If you have any further questions about the fine details, I'm sure Adam would be happy to answer them.[/color]

[color=#707875]Everyone has a somewhat different idea of what horror movies are anyway. I mean, there are different [i]kinds[/i] of horror movies. There are your traditional "slasher" films. Stuff like Scream, or Freddy...I'd put them in that category. Although Freddy sort of has a comical aspect to his movies, which isn't really the same as a "traditional" slasher movie. Then you have movies that are more cerebral. Something like The Mothman Prophecies...it's not particularly a shocking horror movie like a slasher film, but it's more of an unnerving experience. It's something that makes you wonder about things. It's not really meant to make you scream and crawl under the furniture or something. So really, I don't think that horror movies are getting worse in general...you just have to know where to look and you have to be aware that not all horror movies are trying to do the same thing. One of my favourite horror movies is Rosemary's Baby. I like it for various reasons...but primarily, because the audience is being taken along for the ride with Rosemary. So we feel what she feels and we see what she sees. [i]We[/i] know that there's a conspiracy (us and Rosemary), and we're always trying to support her and encourage her to reveal the truth. But nobody will believe her...considering that just about everyone is in on the conspiracy in some way. I find those movies unnerving, but not outright scary. I like them because I kind of imagine what I'd feel like in that situation...and I think when you're watching the movie, you get a strong sense of [i]being[/i] in Rosemary's position. For me, that's a really effective element of the movie. Games like Silent Hill take the same approach -- not an outright "Boo! Scary!" but more of a slow, creeping, unnerving feeling. This is why I'm a fan of Hideo Nakata's Ring series. None of these movies are really going to make you scream. And if you watch them often enough (like I have), they won't have any effect on you at all, really. But they are [i]creepy[/i]. They make your skin crawl. If anyone has seen Ring 2, you'll remember the scene where we see Sadako's mother brushing her hair in front of the mirror. Sadako walks in and moves the mirror, to play a trick on her mother. And her mother smiles at her...and then the whole scene repeats. It keeps repeating over and over (like a broken tape) until finally, Shizuko turns around and looks over her shoulder at the people in the doorway. As [i]soon[/i] as she did that...my heart was really beating quickly. I was thinking "Oh no...she's seen us! What's she going to do?" It works really well. Again, it's not a sudden scary situation where you jump up and scream. But it makes you feel uncomfortable and frightened. I prefer those kind of movies because for me, they're more effective. Having said all of this...I can't really think of a horror movie that I've seen in recent times that has truly scared me (other than the Ring series). Mothman didn't really scare me like Ring did...but during the movie, I really enjoyed trying to work out what was going on and simultaneously feeling a bit freaked out by Richard Gere's character being tormented by the creatures. In general though, I think it's just the luck of the draw. Sometimes in a year, there will be [i]no[/i] good horror movies. But then, now and again, we'll come across something that is truly frightening and that works effectively. But I don't know if this means that there is an actual trend, in terms of movies becoming lower quality or something.[/color]

[color=#707875]The roads surrounding Xen were quiet. A calm breeze scattered sand over the dark concrete as the HAPC drifted along, almost without sound. The sun was now beginning to set. The Elite Hunters hadn't noticed many vehicles moving along the X-1 roadway, which led to the Aquaduct District. The Aquaduct District was somewhat seperate from Xen. It had originally been built several hundred years earlier and was designed to service remote farming communities with water. But as Xen had grown into a city of its own, the Aquaduct had become the only source of water for the barren metropolis. If Prime controlled the Aquaduct, he also indirectly controlled Xen itself. Or at least, he held a very strong card in his deck, when it came to bargaining with regional warlords. Even those guilty of crimes need drinking water. Proteus was sitting in a form-fitting leather chair, which itself sat on the eastern side of the command center. He was responsible for the HAPC's weapons systems, but given the lack of activity around them, he decided to take a break. "Taking a break?" murmured Havoc, as he focused on the wrap-around holographic display in front of him. "Yeah, I need a little time to think, before we go into battle," said Proteus softly. Havoc simply nodded in acknowledgement. Proteus walked down the HAPC's hallway. The hall was lined with doors, which connected to all sorts of rooms. One room was an "Emergency Bunker", which could be used if the HAPC were under such extreme attack that it would be at risk of being completely destroyed. The Bunker was an extremely heavy part of the vehicle and was lined with thick titanium coating. In essence, it was an escape hatch of sorts. Beyond that were two weapons storage centers, a medical facility, a small research room and a communications center. It was an impressive machine and Proteus could not help but marvel at it as he passed each door. Finally, Proteus reached the rear-most cargo hold. It was the place at the back of the vehicle where Havoc had been picked up. The rear doors on the HAPC opened horizontally, rather than vertically. That is, the rear was divided into a lower and upper door. The lower door was capable of folding downward to create a landing platform (or a ramp, should any smaller APC units be loaded on board). The upper door was capable of lifting up and completely retracting into the ceiling. Proteus noticed that the upper door was missing. He could see the road beyond and the orange-pink sky above. Iota was standing there, her hands touching the metal lining on the lower door's lip. Proteus stood next to her and looked out across the landscape. They could see Xen in the distance. At this time of day, its lights had begun to glow and somehow, it looked far more peaceful and beautiful than it had as they'd entered. Even the slums were filled with harsh neon lighting. Blue, pink, green. Xen had come alive. The two reploids could also see hundreds of private transports moving to and from the city, via its various connected highways and skyramps. Proteus thought that it resembled a big coloured mass, perhaps a heart, pumping commercial lifeblood throughout the continent. Despite the violence apparent in the city, Proteus couldn't help but admire Xen's freedom. Iota turned to Proteus. At first he was taken aback; it was as if he was seeing her for the first time. Her face was no longer determined or hardened and her hair was no longer tied up, it flowed gently in the air and framed her face softly. Her eyes were large and clear...they were like two pools of deep blue water. Had it not been for Iota's combat suit, Proteus could have sworn that he was staring into the eyes of a human female. "I should apologize," said Iota quietly. Proteus frowned a little. "Why?" Iota turned away from Proteus and looked out over the barren highway again. "i've been pretty distant lately. I've been questioning things, I guess. And I know that's not the right thing to do at a time like this." "What have you been questioning?" asked Proteus. "Whether I belong in Maverick Hunters or not," said Iota calmly. "I'm a Maverick Hunter, I know. I was designed for that. But more and more, I wonder if we are just some kind of tool that humans are using to fight one another." "Sometimes I feel that way," said Proteus, "but then I realize that despite the corruption and the anger...we were created to do good things. It's understandable that people don't trust the Hunters now. But they are forgetting about the wars that we fought to protect them from tyranny. Novus Concordia is only free because of us." Iota nodded. "I know. Everything you say makes sense...it's all logical. I know." She brushed a lock of hair away from her face as she continued. "But I can't help feeling that maybe our situation is untennable. Maybe we should just leave this place and start our own lives somehwere else." Proteus nodded slowly. "Maybe. But if I left the continent now, I would feel guilty for the rest of my life. I remember hearing the screaming and desperation on that night in the HQ, when we were attacked. Those scientists and their families didn't deserve that. They were only trying to make the world a better place." "The world is unfair," sighed Iota. "That's true," said Proteus, "but we're still here. And those scientists who lost their children, or their husbands or wives...they still keep doing their job. They will never stop trying to make things better. It's one thing I admire about humans; even if their resistance and their will to fight is sometimes illogical...they still do it. By running on sheer emotion, they can overcome what seem like impossible odds." Iota looked up at Proteus once more. "So you think we should ignore our logic?" Proteus shook his head and smiled. "No. But we shouldn't feel bad about dreaming of a better world, even if it seems like we can never achieve it. If all reploids could dream...I think we would be unstoppable." A vague smile appeared on Iota's face. "You always know what to say," she murmured softly. "I should go back into the command center. We only have a couple of hours before we reach the Aquaduct." Proteus bowed his head slightly, as Iota walked away. He stepped back from the lower door, as the upper door folded shut. He still had to prepare the firearms. He knew that it wouldn't be pretty once they reached the Aquaduct...and he didn't want to lose any more comrades.[/color]

[color=#707875]I think it's pretty unlikely that we'll dramatically expand the range of submissions for our Fan Art site. There are a few reasons for this. I guess the most obvious thing is that we aren't Deviant Art. And we really have no ambition to go in that direction. Whereas Deviant Art is designed to cater to a particular audience, theOtaku.com is also the same way. We have built our entire site (and our entire visitor base) around anime (and video games to a lesser extent). I think that it makes more sense for us to become the best in our category (ie: the best anime fan art site), rather than to dilute our focus and open the flood gates for every type of art. There's also the technical aspect, as you mentioned. Our entire network of sites are hosted on the same server. And so, we obviously want to ensure that we have enough room and speed to accommodate not only our existing sites...but also any new sites that come online. While I don't know the specific details, I do know that Fan Art and OtakuBoards still don't use a massive amount of our system resources...despite their size. But obviously, we want to ensure that we have more than enough room to grow. I think it's more likely that you'll see new categories being added now and then, rather than a [i]complete[/i] opening of the field. Maybe Adam would like to add more to what I've said here, I'm not sure. [/color]

[color=#707875]Not to mention the fact that the GBA SP is doing so well, that Nintendo has been pretty reluctant to talk about its successor. So if you do happen to own a GBA/GBA SP...I don't think you have to worry about your machine becoming obsolete anytime soon.[/color]

[color=#707875]I'm a big Silent Hill fan, though I never played the third game. I'm also a pretty big Resident Evil fan. And it's interesting to think about how the two franchises are so different. In some ways, Silent Hill has borrowed a lot of elements from Resident Evil; particularly in terms of control mechanism. But it's done more successfully in Silent Hill, because you get the feeling of being an ordinary person -- not some athletic cop or special forces type person. Resident Evil is certainly a franchise with a good name for a reason. Despite the stagnation in puzzles, controls and other elements...it's still a pretty fun series. The story is relatively strong and there are some genuinely frightening elements to it. But Resident Evil pulls a "Scream" -- it tries to shock you and surprise you with sudden surprises. It does succeed at this...but generally I think it does so to the detriment of other horror elements. Silent Hill is fundamentally different. Silent Hill uses some really basic techniques to scare you. The most-used technique would be disorientation -- Silent Hill deliberately makes you feel lost. You are constantly being thrown between the light and dark environments...and various events occur that are deliberately designed to disorient you. Another horrific aspect to Silent Hill is the sense of being alone. The enveloping fog...the fact that you often only hear your own footsteps...it all works so well. I remember when I first entered the school in Silent Hill -- I desperately wanted to take my shoes off. My footsteps were so loud...they were drilling into my head. It was like I was yelling with every step, telling all the creatures my exact location. It worked very well. Also, I think that Silent Hill's story was on another level. Resident Evil's plot is generally pretty linear and straightforward. But Silent Hill (particularly the first game) has an insanely difficult-to-grasp plot. Even Konami has had difficulty explaining certain elements of it, because many of their representatives simply don't know the answers. lol I like the fact that Konami also borrowed from various movies and novels, to create the story. The whole combination of a religious cult and a dark conspiracy...it's a truly terrifying story. [spoiler]The way that the older girl (Anna? I forget her name) was burned in order to keep her alive (but to keep the devil's power manageable) was a really nasty and gritty element to it.[/spoiler] Silent Hill 2 certainly had a better plot, in terms of it being more easily digestible, but no less horrific. [spoiler]The concept that Silent Hill is like hell -- that it is punishing truly guilty people -- was something that I found to be a devistating and sobering reality. Even the boy (again, I forget his name) who was going around shooting people...constantly seeing them as people who were teasing him about his weight, and also being punished for his mistake over and over again...it was almost a gut-wrenching part of the story. Really depressing.[/spoiler] So, I'm definitely a fan of the franchise. Silent Hill doesn't come anywhere near being one of my favourite games in terms of gameplay...but as a lesson in fantastic plot, awesome characters and truly horrific situations...it's right at the top of the list.[/color]

[color=#707875]I've always thought it was a bit odd to have one day of the year for all that stuff. Shouldn't you be buying flowers and doing romantic things all the time, rather than on just one day of the year? *shrug* It's definitely nice to spend Valentine's Day with a loved one. If you aren't in that situation though, it can be a little frustrating. But then again, maybe Valentine's Day is the day that you build up the courage to ask someone out on a date. ~_^ [/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Crimson Spider [/i] [B]Why, rather easily actually. For the same reasons why a person would convince themselves that they wouldn't be able to do something so small and insignificant as draw good, or play basketball well, or play volleyball well, or be smart enough to pass school, or why the glass is half empty, or why many women go back to their abusive husbands when given the chance to go away. Same reason.[/quote][/b] [color=#707875]So you're saying that people convince themselves to be gay? That so obviously flies in the face of reality. First and foremost, [i]many[/i] gay men and women convince themselves to be [i]straight[/i]. That's the first point. If you are a second class citizen, you're obviously going to try and fit into the status quo as much as you can. There are many people in this situation, who are essentially going against their own natural desires, because it is socially acceptable for them to do so. To me, the point you made here only underlines the fact that you don't understand sexuality. Did you wake up one day and decide to be attracted to women? Was that a conscious choice? And are you convincing yourself of that all the time, despite knowing better? Of course not. You aren't making a conscious decision to be attracted to a particular gender; it's part of who you are. You don't have control over that. In the same way, you don't have control over the women that you may fall in love with. You might fall in love with a girl and try to convince yourself otherwise for whatever reason -- but you know, deep in your heart, that you love her. And no amount of self-conviction will change that. It's exactly the same for homosexual people. This idea that they are "deluding themselves" or that they are simply trying to convince themselves is complete and utter garbage. All of this is an ill-informed justification for keeping gay people in their little box -- keeping them as social outcasts and "freaks of nature". It's [i]no[/i] different to racial stereotyping, gender stereotyping or even religious stereotyping. And what is it born out of? It's born out of ignorance.[/color][quote][b] Point of that sentence is that you cannot be attracted to the pheramone of the same gender, because you emit it yourself. And as any person with a must problem knows, you get used to your own smells.[/quote][/b] [color=#707875]That's just foolish. Are you really serious when you talk about pheromones? lol. If it were as simple as pheromones, I think our understanding of sexual attraction and love would be very different. You can't tell me that your love for a woman relates entirely to pheromones either. You know that your love for a human being is a complex and multi-layered thing -- yes, there's a visual attraction. But there's also an important mental attraction, there's a mental bonding and a bonding of personalities. Simplifying love and sex and bringing it down to the raw pheromone level is not only unrealistic, but it is also yet another attempt to put homosexuals in their place. It's truly a way of justifying an illogical intolerance.[/color][quote][b] I wish I could write briefly, and make that post only a few sentences long. Chances are I probably could figure it out, but I've convinced myself long ago that I am verbose, and talk a lot. But I certainly don't want to. [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#707875]In all honesty, I don't really blame you for what you're saying. Even though you are sitting there [i]justifying[/i] the second class status of homosexuals and attempting to explain that via a highly problematic "science", I don't blame you for it. This is an example of what parents are teaching their children and it's an example of the areas of society that need to change if we are all going to have the opportunity to live as equals in the future. Seperately, I would take issue with what Boba Fett said about gay marriage "opening the floodgates", as it were. This whole slippery-slope argument is not only a convenient out, but it's also pretty unjustified. And it fails to recognize the legitimate feelings of homosexual people. To say that homosexual marriages would also lead to acceptance of polygamy is ridiculous. How do the two correlate? Because they are both "unusual" and therefore, they tie into one another? That makes little sense. Interracial marriages are "unusual", but they haven't lead to an increase in acceptance of polygamy or other "alternative" acts. More importantly, I don't like the fact that homosexuality is being put on an equal ground with illegal actions like polygamy. I also don't like the fact that homosexuality has been compared to everything from pedophilia to beastiality (on this very forum, no less). I don't like it because it is, once more, an attempt to shaft homosexuals and to make them appear as subordinate, less-than-human individuals. It's wrong, cruel and ignorant. How is it that one can not see the difference between a homosexual relationship and relations between children and adults or adults and animals? The comparison is so far out and extreme that it boggles the mind. All of these issues are obviously long-held beliefs. The problem is that, like many beliefs in human history (ie: racism), they are fundamentally opposite to the concept of human equality and dignity. Even on a basic level, they disregard science. I find it interesting that Crimson Spider, for example, will jump up and start using science when it suits an anti-gay argument. But he'll reject science when it's used to debunk religious ideas. Does anyone else find this to be a unique, self-serving double standard? Or is it just me? Either way, I think it's very transparent. Anyway, that's my opinion on the topic. If everyone would like to continue this discussion, I recommend that it be done via PM and/or AIM. I say that for two reasons. Firstly, we've already had this same topic appear multilple times in recent months. Even though this thread was specifically about a new court ruling, we've actually had numerous debates about gay marriage before. Most of what we're seeing here is simply a repeat of what we've already seen. The same defences and the same misinformation. More importantly still is the whole idea that this is a thread that won't be able to go anywhere. We have already moved well away from the topic of gay marriage and we're now talking about whether homosexuals are natural or not. Here we are, dissecting the elements that allow people to fall in love. I can definitely understand why a discussion of this nature could be seen as callous -- or at least, unsympathetic to someone's basic humanity. It would be the same if people were trying to use science to justify the idea that one race is inferior to another. And following that line...we all know that this is very much like a religious debate. Nobody can win. I've already illustrated the selective science being used here -- and when that kind of thing is done, how can a legitimate debate be had? At the very least, we know that we're going to see a cycle of continually repetitive discussion. So that's about as thorough as I can be regarding this thread. I've allowed it to continue for a few pages, though, because I wanted to give everyone the opportunity to state their views for others to read. And now that's been done.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Baron Samedi [/i] [B] Animals may not be homosexual, but then again animals do not have thinking capacities equal to ours. [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#707875]Well, we have already established that homosexuality occurs in animals too. And in various types of animals, for that matter. I personally suspect that homosexuality is just nature's way of controlling population...which is why only a certain percentage of a particular species would be homosexual. But who knows, that's just an open theory. It may also interest you to know that not only is homosexuality apparent in various species, but so is gender-changing. There are many species that do not even have defined genders, or when they [i]do[/i] have defined genders, they are able to change their gender based on their environment. But human beings put a lot of weight into gender as well. Everything we do in society has some gender basis to it. Even the way you relate to men or women is largely based on gender. That's why issues of sexuality are so alien and so difficult for many people to grapple with...because it may disturb one's comfort zone. But of course, lots of things disturb our comfort zone -- people of different ethnic, religious or social backgrounds. Of course, as developed species...and as a developed society, we have to put our fear or misunderstanding aside and attempt to be fair. However, I do think that the second part of your comment is very important to consider. Humans aren't basing their lives purely on sex. Men and women do not base their lives purely on procreation -- men and woman fall in love, they have relationships that go far beyond the simple concept of making babies. If we were focusing entirely on that, then I'm sure nobody would care about a man having a million wives and billions of children. Afterall, it's successful procreation. So we [i]know[/i] that loving relationships are far more than sex and child birth. And we know that sex itself is an expression of intimacy...as much or moreso than the raw desire to have children. In any case, it's true that we're getting away from the core point here. We are definitely talking about marriage rather than the biological aspects of sexuality, or at least, that's how the thread started. I think it would definitely be interesting to talk about the whole gender issue as well. Women are still often paid less than men, despite doing the same jobs...and despite the women's liberation movement. I point this out because there are [i]still[/i] serious issues of inequality and "gender bias" out there. If women themselves can't always get a fair shot...what hope to homosexual men and women have? Or men and women of any other minority group? If there is one aspect of human society that I wish I could change...it'd definitely be this.[/color]

[color=#707875]I just see a lot of similarity between anti-gay arguments and racist arguments of 100 years ago. During that period, people of other races (not just in America, but all over the world) were seen as inferior, subordinate and in many cases, "unnatural". You know, I've read quite a lot about studies of human sexuality. I even watched a documentary about studies on transgendered people. And while I don't claim to understand human sexuality, I also wouldn't be prepared to say that "unusual" sexuality is "unnatural". Not only is that a statement that really [i]doesn't[/i] have a lot of factual weight...but there's a bigger issue. The bigger issue is that the debate over homosexuality on a scientific level is often used to degrade homosexuals. And homosexuals -- whether you understand their sexuality or not -- are the same as everyone else. They aren't perverts, or sexual deviants, or child molestors. Just as you can fall in love with someone from the opposite sex (and just as that love is [i]far[/i] more than sex alone), a homosexual person can do this with someone of the same sex. Yes, it's obviously confusing for those who aren't homosexual. And nobody's asking you to necessarily understand that point of view yourself. Obviously you won't ever entirely understand it, just as a homosexual person won't understand a heterosexual person's orientation. Regardless, we know that human sexuality is a very personal and very complicated issue. It's not a simple question of saying "you're sick, get cured". It doesn't work that way. And even if it [i]did[/i] work that way, there's still absolutely no reason to discriminate. Why discriminate? Because it's "unnatural" or because you don't understand it? That makes little sense. I would also say that apart from the raw issues of intolerance -- and you can talk about religion or you can talk about "science" or whatever you like, but that's what it comes down to -- there's also the question of pluralism in society. And there's the question of equality for all human beings. I have heard people say that gay marriage (or even civil unions) would equate to Government "accepting this lifestyle". My question is simply "so?" Government, unlike you or I, has a responsibility to protect the equal civil rights of everyone. You might be Christian and you may not be Muslim for instance. Under your own beliefs, you may simply not recognize a lot of Muslim practices, or practices of any other religion. But at the same time, there has to be a give and take -- those people must be given the same rights as you (to practice their own customs), so that there is a sense of equality. You don't have to agree and you don't have to teach your children to be Muslims. But nobody is imposing that religion on you; they're simply giving others a choice to follow it if they want. This is one of the things that annoys me about the gay marriage debate. People talk about gay marriage being "imposed" on society. I think that is an incredibly hollow -- and incredibly naive comment. It's especially hollow when you consider that so many marriages end in divorce...and that so many marriages are a matter of convenience and not love. And so on. There are many things in society that "corrupt the sanctity of marriage". But even from a religious point of view, one must accept that marriage has gone beyond a personal religious ceremony. Marriage is also a question of legality -- and the provision of equal rights to both partners in the relationship. This is why I feel that nobody can object to civil unions. Civil unions don't pretend to be religious ceremonies; they are secular ceremonies that are simply there to provide the same legal rights to gay couples as to heterosexual couples. How can someone -- even someone who is deeply religious -- be opposed to this? In this case, something is being done to adjust and correct inequalities in society...and it's being done without "intruding" on religion or religious principles. More importantly still, there are many practices in society that are legal, which the church may oppose. Your religion might strongly oppose birth control -- but since when has it been acceptable (or legal) for society to block access to birth control for those who want it? Do you see what I'm getting at here? Just as there [i]should[/i] be freedom for people to practice their religion, there also should be freedom for people to pursue their civil rights. While someone may say to me that I should not impose civil rights on society, I would simply answer by asking that person not to impose their religious views on society at large. If you think about it, the latter has been the reality for such a long time. And it's simply unfair. So that should change. If you disagree, that's okay -- you are allowed to disagree and you are allowed to disregard what you may not agree with. But don't use [i]your[/i] views to create an imposition on the lives of others. Remember, a civil union isn't imposing anything on people of strong faith. Nobody is coming to you and denying you your civil rights. But in the case of gay relationships, there [i]is[/i] a physical barrier, which relates directly to the beliefs of one part of society. And therefore, there is a very stark inequality there. It's one that should not exist.[/color]

[color=#707875]It's certainly okay to try again, if you're actually having problems uploading. Obviously there are various reasons why Adam may reject fan art. Sometimes there's a problem with plagiarism, or someone is uploading a duplicate, or the file is too big...etc etc. There are lots of reasons. But other than that, there isn't much more I can say. I haven't handled fan art uploads in a while -- I do know that we receive a [i]lot[/i] of submissions though. It can be quite difficult to sort through all the submissions in a day. I remember that when the site was relatively new, it still took me over an hour to approve submissions. So now, with even more activity...I don't want to know how long it takes. ~_^[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Semjaza Azazel [/i] [B]To me, my life is simply a means to an end. There are things I'd like to accomplish, things I'd like to feel, things I'd like to see. If you have nothing in your life that you feel like that about even remotely, you're already dead anyway. [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#707875]I agree. And I especially agree with your last sentence. I have a similar point of view. I know I'm going to die eventually -- or maybe even tomorrow, should something happen by accident (or if someone murders me or whatever). I think that there are many possibilities when it comes to death and we can never predict the way we'll die or whatever. The reason I say that is because there are [i]so[/i] many possibilities in life (and so many ways that death can occur) that it's not even worth thinking about. What I would [i]rather[/i] do, is concentrate on what makes me happy at the moment. Yes, I'm going to die one day. But why should I let that reality destroy the life that I [i]do[/i] have? You could be afraid of dying very soon...and end up living a long life. But even if you live a long life, what use is that if you're always spending every day worrying about death? If that becomes your focus, above and beyond any goals or expectations...then yeah, you are already dead. I also think that we decide our own purpose in life. And that purpose changes all the time. I don't see life as some kind of linear track that we have to move along -- life is ever changing and evolving around us. The responsibilities I have now will be different in five years and different in ten years. And I'll probably be a somewhat different person as those elements change. *shrug* I don't know. Death is inevitable and it's a reality. Death is as real as breathing -- but you don't sit there and think about each breath you take. It's the same with death. I'll die when I die...I'm not going to ruin my life by dwelling on that point.[/color]

[color=#707875]If your fan art isn't approved within about three days, then it won't be put on the site. I say that because fan art is generally sorted and uploaded every single day. Unfortunately we don't have a system for notifying people who have had their art rejected.[/color]

[color=#707875]I know that this isn't the most appropriate place for N-Gage discussions, but it's better than anywhere else. So I've moved it here, as it's game-related.[/color]

[color=#707875]This is something I may do eventually, but it really depends. Each skin will be very specifically designed; my intention is to ensure that the banner is created by the skin designer, whoever that might be. But who knows. Maybe I'll hold a "skin design competition" or something. We'll see.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Manic [/i] [B]The simple truth is (and there are a select few anime fans who won't admit it) Japanese animation is so much lazier than Western animation. There are a series of tricks used to give the illusion of animation in instances where there is none. For example, some animators will place a single cel of a character with their back turned over a background. You hear dialogue, but you don't necessarily need to see anything move. Also, Japanese animation uses less frames-per-second than Western animation. The only exceptions are full-length animated films. [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#666666]I think this is a [i]really[/i] important point. It's one aspect of anime that isn't really talked about amongst the more hardcore fans, but I'm sure that it's clearly evident to everyone. I will say one thing though, when comparing American and Japanese animation. I notice that with a lot of anime productions (whether they are series or feature length), individual backdrops and landscapes are so much more vibrant and detailed than what you see in American cartoons. When I watch an American cartoon series, I often notice repetitive backgrounds, or backgrounds with very few details at all. Obviously that occurs to some extent in anime, but generally, I find anime to be the more "artistic" of the two. Of course, there are variations within each type of animation...so again, one cannot generalize about it. Still, it's an interesting point to raise. I find it interesting that some people will sit there and tout the virtues of anime over other animation styles all day, without necessarily acknowledging some of the basic drawbacks of the style. On that note, I've even found myself being very impressed by a lot of French animation in recent years -- especially with video games. So I guess it's sometimes necessary to step back and look at the big picture with animation, rather than locking yourself into a box.[/color]

[color=#707875]There is no new OB rule. I don't even know what's happened with thread deletion. I always presumed that people [i]weren't[/i] able to delete their own threads. So the revelation that it was possible surprised me. In any case, let me put it this way. Imagine that someone starts a debate thread and it grows to a very large size; people put their time and effort into responding and discussing issues. And then the thread creator comes along and deletes it, because they aren't getting their point across successfully. That's a pretty unfair thing. It would certainly be annoying for those who participated in the thread. Deletion of threads and closure of threads is something that should be at Moderator discretion only.[/color]

[color=#707875]Oh yeah, it would make little sense to farm lions or bears. lol But it also comes down to what part of the animal you're eating. And there are a lot of perceptions surrounding that as well. But again, it's really a cultural divide thing I think. I certainly can't see myself eating various types of seafood for example. But a lot of people enjoy it, so...that's fine. *shrug*[/color]