Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by futureshock

  1. 1 hour ago, APM said:

    Oh my god. You're stupider than I first suspected.


    Then I'm in good company, with everybody else seemingly being totally fine with the whole "What, you're fucking my 21yr old daughter? Police! He molested my 7yr old daughter!" timeline against a man with no other public allegations of sexual misconduct against him.

  2. 4 hours ago, APM said:

    Seriously, who the fuck refers to a vagina as it? How do I refer to a vagina? As a vagina. Dead fucking hard to do, that is. Can you not see how dehumanising it is to write "stuck his dick in it"? Jesus Christ, man. 


    Your finger is an it, my arm is an it, his shoulder is and it and her head is an it. You can't possibly say the word can't be used with vagina. The entire universe is an it, along with everything that has ever existed and has yet to exist. 

    "It's dehumanising." - I agree. To refer to a person like that is dehumanising. The problem is, I wasn't referring to a person. (And to those who are quick to jump up with "Yes you did! Liar!" - no, I'm afraid you don't get to tell me my own mind, but thanks for letting me know you think you're telepathic.)


    7 hours ago, Talvalin said:

    I think the problem is less with the use of the word "dick" and more that your phrasing is referring to Mia Farrow as "it". You might want to try avoiding that in future if you wish to avoid giving a bad impression.


    I didn't refer to Mia, I was talking body parts, that's why I said "dick". If outrage addicts took it as meaning a person then there's nothing I can do about that. I think it's a pretty sick that some people chose to read it that way.

  3. 32 minutes ago, K said:

    Hmm. I wonder - I wonder - if the guy who defended Ched Evans, hates feminists, argued at great length that Woody Allen is not a pervert, and had tears running down both cheeks at the prospect of the porn / naked woman review thread being deleted, used the phrase "he stuck his dick in it" in a non-misogynistic way. What could he have meant? It's a mystery worthy of Sir Arthur CL Smooth's Mysterious World.


    Tears running down both cheeks? Is this like your interpretation of the Alien 3 thread between me and Gorf, where you insisted it was a bad tempered argument when it actually was just two guys laughing about which was the better of two bad sci-fi movies? You need to up your reading skills, K. I never said Woody wasn't a pervert. I never said I hated feminists.

    Keep trying, though. You'll get that zinger one day! Come on, tell us what you do when somebody refers to a vagina as "it" - do you scream?

  4. 22 minutes ago, Don Rosco said:

    So both Frank Sinatra and Woody Allen are creepy as shit? Good point.


    Well, to be accurate, Woody asked if she wanted to go to Paris and got politely turned down, while Frank actually stuck his dick in it. I'm not sure saying they're both (equal) creeps properly describes the situation, but sure, knock yourself out.

  5. 3 hours ago, Isaac said:

    Woody Allen's ouvre


    Did you mean oeuvre? I'm not sure this is the thread for analysing his library of work. Some of the people in here thought Ghostbusters 3 was good.



    To go so far as to put this much effort into defending him? 


    I'm defending the facts of the matter after the same old Vanity Fair article was regurgitated. And besides, it's an interesting story on the whole - for example, Mia Farrow was 18 or 19 when she lost her virginity to Frank Sinatra, who was nearly 50.

  6. 3 minutes ago, Shoes said:

    What a magnificent trailer.


    I'm dying to play it, but scared at the same time - what if it doesn't live up to expectations! etc

    Go and play and let us know. :D

  7. 1 hour ago, Unofficial Who said:


    Or it’s possible that once he became romantically involved with her adopted daughter she re-evaluated his relationships with her children and suddenly paid more attention to Dylan’s claims.


    There were no Dylan claims until a couple of months after the Soon Yi affair exploded. Mia hated him for it (who wouldn't?), the children all knew about it over the summer,  and the stage was set for the claim of child molestation a short while after. The context of when and how it all happened is just 'one more thing' in that long list.


  8. 7 hours ago, Benny said:

    It's quite simple: futureshock hates women, so he'd rather defend to the hilt an alleged paedophile than agree with one.


    Jesus. Could you be any more of a walking cliché? I'll tell you what, seeing as you're happy to spout slanderous shite like this, you'll have no problem if I address you as Benny the Paedophile from now on, right? 

  9. 10 hours ago, NickC said:

    Exactly, that's the sort of stuff I don't understand.  Child abuse is littered with sad examples of mums who are in fear of abusive dads


    Absolutely true. Only, you couldn't possibly say that about Mia Farrow. That's the difference.


    10 hours ago, NickC said:


    You never really explained this one. I don't understand your thinking.

    How does someone signing off on a person's lifetime achievement award mean that it's impossible that that person is also a paedophile?


    It doesn't mean that it's impossible, it's just 'one more thing' in an increasingly long list that points to a far more simple explanation. 


    9 hours ago, geekette said:

    Indeed, but I'm not going to go back round the loop about the details. The fact is that any lay person cherry picking from the evidence leaked to the media 25 years ago is not going to form a clearer picture than the judge who made findings on the case (findings, I note, that have never been successfully challenged despite all Allen's wealth and influence).


    You mean the same judge (page 10 of his report, if you care) who observed that Mia's first claims of child molestation were actually against Woody's affair with 21 year old Soon Yi, and that it was - and this is coincidence of the century, I'm sure - only a matter of weeks later when she decided to change it to being about Dylan. That's the linear narrative that you're wholeheartedly accepting? I maintain you have to either be really quite thick to believe that, or that you want to believe it. 



  10. 2 hours ago, geekette said:

    If by "willing it to be true" you mean generally believing victims


    I prefer to base my thoughts on evidence and reason, rather than blind belief. 




     You haven't yet made any case about how this case is "not like the others" 


    I already did. Go back and read what I wrote months ago if you can be bothered, where the case for him being an evil paedophile crumbles on the revelation that Mia Farrow signed off on his Lifetime Achievement Award. Or in another Vanity Fair article where she talked about speaking with Frank Sinatra , who offered to send some guys round to break his legs, and she insists that Woody was left unharmed, making her probably the only mother on planet Earth that had it in her to protect the abuser of her child. That's ODD, isn't it? Or how about even though they were together 13 years, only a few years before their breakup, she stood in court and swore he was of sound enough character to be the adoptive father of some of her children. That's WEIRD, isn't it?  On and on, the holes appear, all pointing towards a spurned bat-shit crazy ex.


    That Guardian article, (and Weide's Daily Beast article) are both inescapably damning. That's the reality of it.


    Then last week in the Daily Beast, Weide, who made the 2012 PBS American Masters documentary about Allen, followed up with his close analysis of exactly what happened in 1992. It's quite a demolition job on the Vanity Fair piece, deconstructing timeline, opportunity, and circumstance. What's more, it paints a far more complicated picture of Mia from the one she has curated about herself, including that her brother is in jail for child molestation – Mia's own family is a horribly dysfunctional one – and that her son, Moses, no longer speaks to her and accuses her of "brainwashing".


  11. 3 hours ago, geekette said:

    Do you go rooting around


    That Guardian link is literally in the Vanity Fair article quoted above. If by 'rooting around' you mean click a link, yeah, you got me. Hands up.



    So, why stand up for poor maligned millionaire director.


    That you can't see the inconsistencies in this particular case is almost as interesting as the case itself. But then I remembered you're willing it to be true, and are quick to condemn anybody who points out how this case is not like the others you listed.  


  12. 1 hour ago, McCoy said:

    Frankly a refinement is all that is needed rather than a total overhaul.  The actual gameplay mechanics are pretty good, just sort out the technical issues and spend a bit more time of the location (all the different places are all pretty samey to be honest) and you've got a proper winner. 


    With all those explosions, it's one of those games that really benefits from a beefy CPU. An i7 is recommended - that's why the consoles struggle.

  13. 7 minutes ago, VN1X said:

    Well, didn't manage to cancel my Humble Monthly subscription in time so hopefully these games find a good home:

    • Passpartout: The Starving Artist
    • BlazBlue: Chronophantasma Extend

    • H1Z1

    • H1Z1 Trickster Crate (whatever that means)


    I'll take h1z1 if you still have it. :)

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.