Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
I concede the character you describe is common and a burden on the audience. Romantic comedies have the same defect (male characters swooning for the female lead).
But this is just a symptom of plot-driven content. Plot-driven content is a symptom of pursuing ratings breadth instead of depth. The main solution is to jettison all this emphasis on vanity and superficiality.
The style is the message.
And, yes, I intend to find some pre-mortem satisfaction in that.
Seriously, we should stop caring about the male/female thing and start caring about people being people.
The only concrete evidence is when people confess to misogyny (and even then we could ask if they aren't trying to get attention or some other motive).
As far as metrics go, people apply for developer work at my job with things like, "Hey! I'm 27 years old! So I'm a good programmer!". Metrics are superficial and a way to distract from what is really going on. Example: the trains in the USSR always arrived on time (pay no attention to the 4-6 million people who starved to death in the Ukraine because they didn't have the most "correct" political views).
It doesn't care.
To say life is improved by something related to a quantity of maleness or femaleness is to misrepresent life entirely.
What does having a bare minimum of female interaction teach me about life or being a person?
Will I look back on my life and consider it a success if I watched these shows?
We can ask scientists about science and morality.
But we cannot ask preachers about science OR morality.
Good thing we have these pointed, one way rules in place.
Just like the way ethics should be lopsided, pointed, one way, et cetera.
Excuse me, I think some rich people owe me a million dollars.
The broader term for couping effort or resources to priority is economics.
In the USSR, for example, the trains arrived on time, but 6 million Afghans died of starvation in a single summer.
The centralized leadership in the USSR had no sense of economics.
Can't get any taxes off that.
The UK gov is trying to push a thread.
The citizens make the country. The government just collects money from the people.
Lots of government agencies means lots of helping!
Are you going to trust an organization to fairly handle an issue when they charge based on political affiliation?
If people in the US don't believe in something (and, in this case, they don't), it isn't the job of the government to convince them otherwise. I'm not even talking about the (more important) group of people who vote.