Chairchucker

Dunno about technological, but there are a bunch of sociological - if not solutions, ways to mitigate/lower the rates of abortion. Better sex ed so unwanted pregnancies are rarer. Better social safety nets so prospective parents don't feel like they're choosing between an abortion, or having both them and their child live in poverty and/or starving to death. It's late and I should go to bed so I'm not gonna look up the exact stats but I think those were two of the bigger predictors of abortion rates. Interestingly, nowhere on that list: the legality of abortions.

You have to remember that in movies and TV, there are two sexualities, straight, and POLITICAL And two ethnicities, white and POLITICAL Anyway. I just watched the season finale of Moon Knight and it was really good imo. Pretty excited to see more of

The latest season of LEGO Masters Australia recently started, so I've been watching that. It's almost the only reason for free to air TV to exist, imo.

I have tried and failed a few times to articulate my reaction to the above re: MTG, I think I'll just settle for damn she is the worst.

I know you said you didn't need too much detail, but I've got the AEC website open on my other screen and I'm gonna break down my voting order for Senate and House of Reps. House of Reps: Green, Labor, Liberal, Liberal Democrats, One Nation, UAP (In House of Reps I guess I hate all the minor parties that aren't Green, hooray.) Senate: Independents David Po**** (lol I always forget about this site's dumb language filter) and Kim Rubenstein (still not sure on order), then (a lot of this is not yet settled, gonna delve through websites and see what I think) Australian Progressives, Greens, Animal Justice Party, Sustainable Australia (not sure tho) Legalise Cannabis Australia, (LOL. I'll check out their policies tho) Fuxin Li, Labor, (my votes will probs actually end here, but if I had to number them all....) Liberal, UAP, Informed Medical Options Party (Actual antivaxxers, screw these guys) If you see someone after the Liberal party in my rankings, I think they suck a lot.

I will be preferencing independents and parties with progressive policies, including the Greens party which is (kinda?) our third biggest party, then Labor. (Despite the fact that they embarrassingly spell their party the American way.) I'll have to read up a little on the latest changes to voting rules, but I believe these days I don't need to continue numbering past the first 6, in the senate at any rate, but if I did, I'd go Liberal after Labor, then the various conservative minor parties. (For some of these parties, read 'conservative' as 'racist and or/antivaxx') Specific policy leanings that I care about that will be contributing to Labor being at the bottom of that stack: I would prefer we treat refugees more humanely. Labor still seems to favour trying to discourage people from trying to seek refuge via boat, by making the experience less pleasant. I would prefer we listen to the scientific consensus that we're damaging our earth and should knock it off. Labor still seems to favour building new coal power plants. Those are the biggest things keeping Labor on the bottom of that stack. I think one of the reasons I like Independents and will probs preference them high in the senate is they're not beholden to a party; I get the impression there are probs people within the Labor party who would prefer not to be setting fire to our planet, but are required to toe the party line. Side note, both our two major political parties accept millions in donations from coal companies. So that's another thing I don't love. Other things are the usual 'not treating LGBT people like garbage under the guise of religious freedoms', 'making education free', 'supporting medicare', stuff like that.

Also we've got preferential voting, so even if (when) they 'both' suck you can vote for someone else and still contribute to keeping the less good candidate out of power.

Voting is made a lot easier in Australia than it is, for example, in the USA.

Mention of political correctness brought this to mind. Broadly speaking, the point Mr Lee seems to be making is that objection to 'political correctness' (insert also 'woke SJWs' or whatever terms are popular these days) seems to be largely driven by people who would very much like to continue to be awful to minorities without consequences, and I agree with his overall point that while they may not be perfect, they are infinitely preferable to what we had before.

I think falling to death also makes sense in kids' movies where you're trying to maintain the moral purity of your hero so you have the villain die to their own hubris, and falling to your death is a pretty good way of doing that.

Amateur nouns only, please.

I'll take 'the previous US President and associated administration' for 500, Alex.

Preferential voting seems like a more efficient way to get a similar result tbh

Apparently France has preferential voting so they can still vote for their favourites and just preference Macron before Le Pen EDIT: I'm wrong, you need an absolute majority and if not you vote again, weird

Huh, very progressive for the 20s, having a female character be a womaniser.

Unrelated: our PM just called Australia's election for 21 May. That's not long before my birthday, so hopefully as an early birthday present Australia will vote out these losers.

Probs the biggest example is Germany's fairly solid introspection of their own actions during World War 2, including creating a museum at Auschwitz dedicated to commemorating German war crimes. Has lead to a nation that tends to rather firmly reject Nazi ideologies these days.

You've added a 'just' and an 'only' there where they previously weren't. I'm aware of very few proposed history topics that include, as part of their subject, an explicit (or implicit for that matter) 'and these bad things are the sum total of what happened.' BUT In my opinion it is WAY MORE IMPORTANT to talk about the bad parts of history, ie the bits we need to not repeat.

I worded it poorly, I meant he was a black version of Spider-Man. On the second point, now I kinda wanna see black Superman land in 1940 or something...

Anyone been talking about Moon Knight? I'm really enjoying it so far. Feels tonally very different to anything else in the MCU.

Eh, theoretically Kryptonians could have any colour skin, surely. And there seem to be so many different origin stories to every superhero, one more wouldn't really matter. Although personally if I were going to make a black Superman I'd probably just make it another Kryptonian rather than Kal-el. Maybe Kal-el has a son. (with a black Kryptonian, whatever) Maybe some other Kryptonian comes and takes the mantle after Superman gets killed by doomsday or whatever killed him most recently in the comics. I just looked up the Superman wiki page, there's been a few other people called Superman, should've known they'd do that. One of them was his son apparently. Or his clone, either way. They write a bunch of alternate origin stories for some of these dudes.

I suppose that's theoretically possible, (and I'm excited for some of the more diverse heroes we're getting in the MCU now) but established heroes seem to get more attention. Just checked Wikipedia's list of theatrically released live action DC films, for example, and there appears to be 9 Batman movies, 6 Superman movies, a Batman vs Superman movie, and 17 others. When there are slightly more movies starring Batman or Superman than there are DC films not starring either, and of those 17, one prominently features both, (Justice League) and three more star Batman villains, (Catwoman, Jokes and Harley Quinn + Birds of Prey) it's clear that the people with the licenses think different iterations on the established heroes are the way to go.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-open-borders According to this: Liechtenstein Iceland Malta Luxembourg Estonia Latvia Slovenia Lithuania Slovakia Norway Finland Denmark Switzerland Austria Hungary Portugal Sweden Greece Czech Republic Belgium Netherlands Poland Spain Italy France Germany

I know you didn't ask me BUT I actually don't follow comics much, (love the movies though) but I get the impression that for some superheroes, mantles are frequently passed from one character to another. For example, by far the most common Batman has Bruce Wayne as his alter ego (or vice versa, however that works) but others have also donned the cowl, most notably Richard (really, that one's censored?) Grayson. AntMan has been the alter ego of Hank Pym, Scott Lang and Eric O'Grady. Funny you should mention Spider-Man, because as well as Peter Parker, there is a black version of him; his name is Miles Morales. Other Spider-Men (Spider-Mans? Spiders-Man?) appear to include Ben Reilly, (a Parker clone) Mattie Franklin, (she apparently became Spider-woman once Peter Parker came back from retirement) and some alien or something (a member of the Vodu pantheon whatever that means) called Anansi who was supposedly the first ever Spider-Man. People got mad when there was talk of Jane taking over from Thor, but I guess they were ignoring that the title of the God of Thunder had previously been held by a bunch of different other characters, including a frog looking dude called Beta Ray Bill. One of my favourite examples because I like both characters and the TV show bearing the name: both Clint Barton and Kate Bishop are known as Hawkeye. The comics seem to have a long history of weird alternate versions of heroes, baton passing etc, and heck, I think it's neat.

Ron Gilbert has stated MI3 remains canon. Interested to see how that remains consistent with this new one being a follow up to the first two, maybe time travel or multiverse shenanigans?