I think representation politics in regards to characters of color on camera are way too messy, and rather we should focus on putting more POC behind the scenes (as producers, screen writers, directors, etc..) in order for the latter to be alleviated. That way, I think myths like minority quotas will be done away with if we actually ease those minorities in prominent positions that allow them to curate and welcome new talent into different entertainment industries.

We have quotas and regulations in Canada, for promoting ethnic minorities behind the scenes of media. It's horrible, and kills countless shows and companies. Turns out, enforcing racial quotas in a country that's 86% white is kinda difficult.

It's actually easier to have more non-whites and women appear on screen, and in music, than to get them involved in the technical side of things.

Obama is a decent president.

Obama is a decent president.

You know, I never voted for the guy, I voted third party both those elections, but I do think he turned out okay. Decent person? Fuck no. Decent for a president? Well, yeh, if you compare him with other presidents rather than with people. Though I suppose being the generation that came to adulthood watching Bush the Second lowered my standards something awful.

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

You know, I never voted for the guy, I voted third party both those elections, but I do think he turned out okay. Decent person? Fuck no. Decent for a president? Well, yeh, if you compare him with other presidents rather than with people. Though I suppose being the generation that came to adulthood watching Bush the Second lowered my standards something awful.

Until there's a major shift in the zeitgeist, a vote for a third party is a vote wasted.

<Snipped quote by Vilageidiotx>

Until there's a major shift in the zeitgeist, a vote for a third party is a vote wasted.

It's kind of a slippery slope though, isn't it? If everyone took your mentality (which may actually be correct here), then there would be no hope for the duality system ever breaking. You need to start somewhere, right?

<Snipped quote by Vilageidiotx>

Until there's a major shift in the zeitgeist, a vote for a third party is a vote wasted.

I always found that idea a tad narcissistic. Realistically I'll never decide an election, so voting based on the idea i'll decide an election is silly. But I can contribute to post-election statistics about independent voting patterns and groups a major party has to earn later down the line. Vote for your party regularly and nobody has to do anything for your vote because you'll give it to them no matter what, but if enough people vote for a third party then that put pressures on the major parties. So to me, I see the function of the Libertarian and Green parties in the US not so much to be winning elections and more like being ways voters can tell the parties "You are veering too far to the center and I don't like that."

<Snipped quote by Jotunn Draugr>

It's kind of a slippery slope though, isn't it? If everyone took your mentality (which may actually be correct here), then there would be no hope for the duality system ever breaking. You need to start somewhere, right?

Lol, well as it stands, nobody in America votes third-party. Everyone has taken my mentality (eesh, guess it's not much of an unpopular opinion). However, I added the caveat of a "shift in the zeitgeist" for a reason. You voting third party NOW will do nothing. But, if you vote for the lesser evil of the two major parties, and then work to change the hearts and minds of those around you, so that they align with the third party's ideology, you're setting up for third-party success down the road. Changes in the electoral process happen through personality, not polls. It wouldn't matter if Milo Yiannopoulos voted Democrat in the next election, because he's prosthelytized thousands to the Alt-Right.

<Snipped quote by Jotunn Draugr>

I always found that idea a tad narcissistic. Realistically I'll never decide an election, so voting based on the idea i'll decide an election is silly. But I can contribute to post-election statistics about independent voting patterns and groups a major party has to earn later down the line. Vote for your party regularly and nobody has to do anything for your vote because you'll give it to them no matter what, but if enough people vote for a third party then that put pressures on the major parties. So to me, I see the function of the Libertarian and Green parties in the US not so much to be winning elections and more like being ways voters can tell the parties "You are veering too far to the center and I don't like that."

It's a nice idea, and I think figures like Bernie Sanders do show how that can almost work, but when push comes to shove, we see that the powers that be are extremely resistant to change, and would rather try to change the voters than change for the voters. What I think is the the more effective method of enacting change is actually to vote for the lesser evil among the Democrats and Republicans, and then try to convince those around you, that third-party is the eventual way to go. You're not going to win any elections right now, so you need to play the long-game, and that isn't won with just statistics from any given election. You need to set up a voting block. If you read my response to Mateotis, I give the example of Milo Yiannopoulos. Whatever you think of him, he's done wonders for the Alt-Right, regardless of how he actually winds up voting. Now let's assume a figure like Milo appeared for the Green Party. He could change the opinions of thousands of people, though sheer personality, and still personally vote Democrat in this election. That way, his vote counts toward his short-term goals (#NeverTrump or something), and he's establishing a voting block that'll become influential down the line, which is the only way you'll actually see the Green Party become a powerful force.

In Canada, we have the Communist Party of Canada. They get less than 1% of the vote, and yet a lot of the ideas that are promoted by the other left-wing parties, are first presented by the Communists. In their own words (having seen a debate with a Communist representative and some other public figures) "we do most of our work between elections, not during".

I really think that this is how you win the zeitgeist, if that's your goal.

I really think that this is how you win the zeitgeist, if that's your goal.

That is a good goal, but it's not a realistic one for someone with my means, so I can only stick to small things. I can't really change the zeitgeist, I can just toss pebbles.

Now if I came into the limelight somehow then yeh, I'd abuse the bully pulpit, but i'm not in a place to do that right now.

<Snipped quote by Jotunn Draugr>

That is a good goal, but it's not a realistic one for someone with my means, so I can only stick to small things. I can't really change the zeitgeist, I can just toss pebbles.

Now if I came into the limelight somehow then yeh, I'd abuse the bully pulpit, but i'm not in a place to do that right now.

Haha fair enough. I was mostly thinking of little things. For example, I convinced two friends of mine, who weren't going to vote in the last election, to vote for my party. As far as I'm concerned, I just tripled my voting power XD

I don't support playing out sex scenes with writers who are in a different life stage as you if either is not 21.


M!15, with F!13.
Teenage boy, teenage girl.

M!18, with M!23.
Legal teen, young adult.

F!29, with F!38.
Adult, mature adult.

M!19, with F!40.
Legal teen, mature adult.


M!18, with F!13.
Legal teen, young teen.

M!16, with M!20.
Mid teen, young adult.

F!14, with F!23.
Young teen, adult.

M!10, with F!17.
Prepubescent, older teen.

... In short, sexy times with a minor is just squick-able.

Some people will probably argue that some teenagers are mature enough to: (1) write as well if not better than some adults, (2) differentiate between fiction and reality.

Yeah, no. Sex is most of the times part of romance, I do agree and believe, but 90% of them do not require explicity in a story.

I personally encourage teens to explore their sexuality as long as it's within moral boundaries. Paedophilia and hebephilia are not fine. Besides, it just creeps me out to imagine someone a chunk few years my junior writing out a sexy post to me.

Granted, people lie about their ages. Can't be helped in such cases. But those who knowingly engage in erotica with a minor are questionable - detestable, even.

More often that not, these minors are confused and afflicted with the ever-present loneliness teens feel amongst their own peers. And predators of these folks usually try to break down barriers by smutting "strictly in character", then being affectionate OoC ...

... and then they try to coax you into sending nudes. And probably will blackmail you with said nudes.

Most, not all, minors just don't make the best decisions. Those as adults should know better than frolick in curious indulgence with them!

(Oh Lord. Am I slapping this into the wrong thread? Unpopular opinions, right? Is this still considered a roleplay topic, or a debate of morals?)

Vanilla is better than chocolate.

Chocolate's not that good.

Come at me, bros.

(Oh Lord. Am I slapping this into the wrong thread? Unpopular opinions, right? Is this still considered a roleplay topic, or a debate of morals?)

It'd fit this thread well enough is you slap either Trump or Overwatch in there somewhere.

@Jotunn Draugr youre doing it again, lets get back to the UO now.

@Pair of Hearts I'm not against Roleplay Opinions, you're fine.

Batman vs Superman was an okay movie and I actually liked the Lex Luthor character.

Comic Sans isn't actually that bad of a font, I actually kinda like it.

The Battle Harem/"Titty Fighter" style of anime/manga/light novels isn't all that bad.

Expendables 2 is an outstandingly good movie.

Tom Holland is only an okay Spider-Man.

Tom Holland is only an okay Spider-Man.

Spider-Man is only okay.

Most people that claim Batman is their favorite superhero don't actually like superheroes.