Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:
Clear bookmark | How bookmarks work
Note: Bookmarks are ignored for all search results

Total Found: 1,437 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 58
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 9:42am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S3: Explorers

@Booming stars don't "burn" like a torch.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Fri, Jun 11, 2021, 12:06pm (UTC -5)
Re: ENT S1: Dear Doctor

"What business the USA has in Taiwan which is a breakaway state of China I do not know. "

Well if we are being technical it's more accurate to call China a breakaway state of Taiwan :)
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Fri, Jun 11, 2021, 9:17am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S2: Time Squared

I did a tally just for fun and the average Jammer star rating for Season 2 is 2.45 compared with 2.9 for Season 3. Not exactly a massive difference.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Fri, Jun 11, 2021, 8:05am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S2: Time Squared

Tomalak sorry I missed your earlier message.

It is true that there are "only" two great episodes. But I'd argue that those two aren't just great in the vein of the Survivors or the Defector (two other four star episodes from season 3) but absolute classics, of which even the beloved third season only has two as well (Yesterday's Enterprise and Best of Both Worlds). Now are the middling Season 2 episodes equal to the middling Season 2 episodes? No. Season 3-5 are unquestionably better overall.

But I will take Season 2 any day over Seasons 1, 6 and 7. And while the lower tier episodes are bad, excepting Shades of Grey, there are no genuine stinkers on the level of Code of Honor (Up the Long Ladder is debatable).

Season 2 just doesn't deserve the hate it gets. And ya, I am on team Pulawski no question.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Fri, Jun 11, 2021, 7:44am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S2: Time Squared

"But for me it's really the 2nd season when this happens....albeit still with those spandexy uniforms..."

Agreed, Season 2 has some of that offbeat weirdness that hadn't yet been stamped out as the series homogenized. And with two bona fide classic episodes (Measure of a Man / Q Who) I cannot understand why Season 2 is so casually dismissed as terrible by fans.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Thu, Jun 10, 2021, 10:54am (UTC -5)
Re: ENT S1: Dear Doctor

@Booming didn't home sapiens cross breed with other human variants eg: neanderthalensis at various times? I don't recall the specifics, but a book I was reading recently alluded to the possibility that different groups of h. sapiens may have encountered and bred with other humans that were occupying different geographical regions outside of Africa. It was also suggested that h. sapiens underwent a "cognitive revolution" (mythmaking etc...) although it was unclear to me if this was supposed to be a genetic mutation or merely a new "technology" but either way just throwing that out there as it seemed pertinent.

I am still unclear as to what this episode gets so horribly wrong about evolution.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Thu, Jun 10, 2021, 10:48am (UTC -5)
Re: ENT S1: Dear Doctor

"which suggests the cause here is that usual Star Trek problem of misunderstanding how evolution works rather than the belief that natural selection will be refuted one day."

Where in the episode does it demonstrate this misunderstanding?
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Thu, Jun 10, 2021, 6:37am (UTC -5)
Re: ENT S1: Dear Doctor

Is evolution or an understanding of it really a key component to this episode? It seems like a red herring to me borne of a single statement made by Phlox that one group was on an "evolutionary threshold" whatever that means.

I don't think, in context, there was any misunderstanding or contradiction of natural selection in this episode and even if there was, it was incidental to the main ethical dilemma.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Wed, Jun 9, 2021, 12:48pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: The Host

"The body changes, the mind remains"

If only it were true. Even excluding conditions like Alzheimers it is simply a fact that the mind, like everything else, changes as we age. You are no more mentally the same person at 90 as when you were 20 than physically.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Wed, Jun 9, 2021, 9:42am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: The Host

"The difference is that when you reject a stranger, you're not breaking the trust of a long-term friend who relies on you. Why do you think they say "till death do us part" in weddings? It's not just for kicks, you know."

Are you sure about that? Apart from the simple fact that a huge percentage of marriages do eventually end up in divorce, I know of no one living in modern society who believes that this oath is literally binding "till death do us part". Pretty much anyone in a modern context concedes that there are conditions which, if met, would lead to divorce (eg: a spouse raping or abusing them, a spouse going to jail for a heinous crime...) in 2021 It is a massive conceit (bordering on willful blindness) to pretend otherwise.

Incidentally, I'd add sex change to the list of things that many spouses would consider "deal breakers" in this context and yes, to many people, a man without a penis is certainly no longer truly a "man" at least not a complete one.

And if you say it is heinous to think that after you marry someone, why is it less heinous to think so before?

"Another difference is that - hopefully - a person's relationship with their long-term partner is not a one-trick pony that centers on sex. If two people spent a considerable portion of their lives building something wonderful together, it's just stupid to break it all just because of this one thing."

I think you are guilty of an equivocation here or at least a lack of clarity when you use the word "sex". Sex, as in coitus (or even expanding the definition to other forms like oral or masturbation...) is important to marriages, but admittedly not essential, especially as couples age and their respective needs may change. But sex, as in the sex of each person, isn't something incidental to most relationships.

There is a tendency in some circles to pooh poo or downplay the physical as being base or unimportant next to the spirit and the mind, which is a very Christian attitude. But a person's body, I put it to you, is every bit as essential characteristic in any marriage. Otherwise, you reduce all romantic relationships to the status of friends (with or without benefits). You take out an essential component.

Now getting back to the penisless man, my view is that when you strip away the irrelevancies, it is morally not all that different to reject such a man at the outset versus doing so after being married to him. Either way you are rejecting someone based on what you perceive to be a fundamental condition-precedent to the relationship.

Now the one difference I see here between the two scenarios is that if you reject a stranger, that is going to damage his feelings far less than if you reject a man you married and might have built a life with. And certainly you might be so connected with him that you can't bare to hurt him so.

But on the other hand, if your feeling is so strong that you never would have married him in that condition, then you are, presumably, sacrificing your own well being for his. And it should be noted that marriages based on unwilling or co-erced sacrifice where one person's needs are ignored, frequently end in divorce anyway.

Anyway, as I said I am playing devil's advocate here and concede that my feelings about the situation are in line with yours- but honestly I am just not sure those feelings can be justified truly.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Tue, Jun 8, 2021, 9:47am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: The Host

"Secondly, if a person was mutilated against their will, leaving them would be a dick move (pun intended)."

I can't help but think that in actuality, not wanting someone because of an injury is, morally speaking, neither better nor worse than not wanting to stay with them because of one. If you reject someone you just met, say, because they have no penis, is that morally distinct from leaving someone because they no longer have one?

I know what the answer should be if I follow my feelings but is that feeling actually justifiable? Does it need justification or is it enough to assert that it IS end of discussion?

I realize I am playing devil's advocate here and concede that I certainly feel as you do on this subject - yet I wonder if we are too quick to leave our feelings uninterrogated.

Haha! And now I feel I might be saying we are responsible for our feelings as much as our actions, which is the opposite of what I originally intended.

Next thing you know, I'll argue that a cis male who rejects a trans woman for having a penis is as bigoted as a cis female who rejects a cis male for not having a penis who is as bigoted as a cis female who leaves a man who has lost his penis....
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Tue, Jun 8, 2021, 9:14am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: The Host

"hmmm, so if an US soldier loses his genitals in an ied explosion then the wife should divorce him. Interesting. :)"

The better question is whether she would have married him in the first place after said event. Most people, if they are honest, would say no.

Indeed, I doubt it would be the first time a catastrophic injury leads to divorce. Happens all the time.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Mon, Jun 7, 2021, 5:53am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S1: The Big Goodbye

"1. Why did Picard rave on about the holodeck in the staff meeting? We already knew about its marvels from “...Farpoint”. Show, don’t tell."

In Farpoint all we saw was an environment, a pleasant forest and a stream. In Big Goodbye we see actual persons rendered, which is a huge leap.

From Picard's reaction, I suppose we are meant to understand that at this moment in history, this isn't just some standard technology that exists everywhere (as it must have been by DS9 where even Quark's dive bar has one). Given that the Galaxy Class starship is some brand new design perhaps this was a fancy new capability of that breed of starships.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Sat, Jun 5, 2021, 6:49am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: The Host

"What is love"

https://youtu.be/e7z1PuDRCko
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Fri, Jun 4, 2021, 4:59pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: The Host

Ugg seriously disregard my comment. No interest in hijacking this site for the next week.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Fri, Jun 4, 2021, 4:51pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: The Host

"True. Fear of transsexual women"

Correction: in the 1990s as now there is little recognition among the human population that a "woman" is anything but a female (sex) outside a few tiny enclaves.

Whoops? Am I allowed to say that?

Please strike it from the record. I need to lay off the wine.

Apologies.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Fri, Jun 4, 2021, 3:41pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: The Host

As an aside I think this fear of trans wasn't transphobic but actually homophobic technically speaking because the fear back then was of being "gay" as quaint as that seems in 2021. Trans wasn't even on anyone's radar.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Fri, Jun 4, 2021, 3:37pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: The Host

For the record Norman Bates wasn't supposed to be a transexual either - he actually had multiple personality disorder (which I know is controversial in of itself) but bottom line his cross dressing was incidental.

And yes in the 90s there was this trope that heterosexual men would just literally die if anything remotely trans would touch them (like the Vorlons I guess lol)

Even back then in the pre alphabet days I found it annoying, not because it was "transphobic" but simply because it was tiresome and lame. I remember the scene in the Crying Game was treated by mainstream audiences like something out of Hellraiser or Aliens - it was basically considered a horror movie.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Fri, Jun 4, 2021, 2:38pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: The Host

His pathology was 1000 times more savage :)
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Fri, Jun 4, 2021, 12:48pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: The Host

"Psycho or Silence of the lambs come to mind"

Buffalo Bill wasn't a transexual.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Wed, Jun 2, 2021, 5:51am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: The Loss

@Trish he called Devil's Due a "well crafted fun adventure".

Seems he doesn't hate everything.
Set Bookmark
R.J.
Tue, Jun 1, 2021, 10:12pm (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S1: Arena

I do like FASA's take on the Gorn from their role playing game supplement Demand of Honor: a society that values physical prowess and is ruled by a complex honor code.
Set Bookmark
R.J.
Tue, Jun 1, 2021, 10:06pm (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S1: Arena

"There’s plenty to critique- like why did Kirk and company not immediately beam up when first beaming down to the colony when it was very obviously a trap."

They had to assess the situation and look for survivors. It wasn't known that the Gorn were still on the planet until they came under fire...after they found that one colonist alive. Also they did try to beam up but by then Sulu had raised the shields because the Enterprise was under attack. Geez.
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Fri, May 28, 2021, 11:48am (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S3: The Best of Both Worlds, Part I

Never mind your silly banter. When is someone going to address the existence of the pool on the Borg cube?
Set Bookmark
Jason R.
Wed, May 26, 2021, 1:23pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S4: Galaxy's Child

"Ok, Jason - I'm turning up to your office all next week. I won't threaten any repercussions, either, but I'll be rude when we first meet and from then on I'll constant ask you to justify everything you do and I'll be sure to have regular scathing comments for your every explanation. If you ever seem puzzled or ask why this is happening, I'll just say "What is so complicated here? What is so difficult to understand?". See you on Monday."

I haven't watched the episode in a few years, but didn't Geordie invite her to the Enterprise? She's not some random hobo who wondered off the street unannounced. She's a fellow engineer who criticizes what he did with the engine she designed. She doesn't threaten to sanction him or imply that she has such authority. She just acts like a jerk to him.
Next ►Page 1 of 58
▲Top of Page | Menu | Copyright © 1994-2021 Jamahl Epsicokhan. All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication or distribution of any content is prohibited. This site is an independent publication and is not affiliated with or authorized by any entity or company referenced herein. Terms of use.