• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Arctic Norway

Recent Profile Visitors

511 profile views
  1. The Warder Field Trip

    How does the bonding thing work on here, anyways?
  2. Egwene realises she can learn from for example the Kin, the Windfinders and the Aiel, something most of the other Aes Sedai are unwilling to. That, in itself, shows she is willing to change and understands that she does not know everything. Sure, she becomes more and more arrogant as she grows more secure in her role as Amyrlin, but that is also pretty natural, the way I see it. You seem to dislike her because you generally dislike the WT and Aes Sedai, and she represents the WT faction. You can dislike the WT all you want, but I think it really clouds your judgment. Yes, she believes the WT are vital for the world to be a place of stability and peace. Can you blame her? She has been raised to the highest position within the WT. Even though she is very much a part of that institution, she also accepts they cannot - and should not - control everything, and that there will be other organizations of channelers. She wants them all to work together, but unlike her predecessors and many of her contemporary AS, she does not believe the WT way is the only way. She wants to connect the Windfinders and the Kin to the tower, yes, but in doing so, she also accepts that the sea folk channelers will not become Aes Sedai, but instead keep up the windfinder tradition. This, in itself, is a huge shift in the WT policy and world outlook. She will strengthen the WT in a way it hasn't been strengthened in decades, maybe centuries, and under her rule, the WT becomes the seat of power it once was. You might dislike it, because you dislike the WT and AS in general, but that doesn't mean Egwene is bad at what she does, or a bad person. The innkeeper Egwene was set out for a simple life. The Amyrlin Egwene holds one of the most powerful positions of the continent, and she IS aware of her responsibilities. You say she doesn't care if people suffer on behalf of her, but I don't see that lack of caring in her at all. She is just very focused on what she believes has to be done. She still cares about other people, and want the "regular people" to live in peace and be left alone. I agree Nynaeve has the biggest heart of them - she also grounds the other characters, when they are about to go too far. That doesn't mean all the others are heartless.
  3. Reading your posts here, I more and more feel we have not been reading the same series. Sure, she was at times arrogant - but not at all as bad as many of the other characters (including Rand, and virtually all the Aes Sedai we meet, maybe with Verin and Moiraine - and post-stilled Siuan - as exceptions). She much more than a lot of other characters learns from her mistakes, and does not blame others for them.
  4. @Faroresdragn You are forgetting that the AOL is in our future. A hyper-modern world. Sure, they relied on magic, but they had cars, planes, tall buildings, you name it, things that show they understood the laws of physics. The Randland in the book is equal to the middle ages, but the age the Forsaken left when the Bore was drilled, was a futuristic one.
  5. You don't see a difference between the Two Rivers girl and the Amyrlin? I think she is one of the characters with the MOST character development. She grows into the queen Elayne thinks she is.
  6. As others have already said, Japan is different. They have had a whole different cultural relation to suicide. So that Japan is an exception doesn't really debunk anything.
  7. What is your most controversial opinion?

    In those days, racism was the norm, anti-racism was "anti-establishment". But yes, there have been several studies showing blacks and latinos get harsher sentences for crimes, especially drug crimes. And they are (supposedly) more often caught, because they are more often suspected.
  8. Sorry, I am a bit drunk now, so I guess I swept by a couple of pages of discussion. Solarz said the study found no link between female sudicide increase and firearm ownership, and thus the studies I cited were irrelevant. Well. First of all, in most Western countries, at the very least, the suicide rate amongst men is much higher. And secondly, they found a DEFINITIVE link between male suicide and access to firearms. That should be an interesting thing to discuss... It is already known that women often choose less "messy" ways to kill themselves, so therefore, this conclusion is not that surprising (one theory is that they, more than men, think about those finding them and "cleaning up"...)
  9. Wait, solarz. This makes no sense. Correlation, in this case, does not mean causation. You can't just compare suicide numbers like that. You have to look at the reasons why people kill themselves, and then you realize why it's a higher number in f. ex. Sri Lanka. The debate is what happens after that point, when you decide to kill yourself. And the fact remains, using a gun is a "fool-proof" (virtually) way to kill yourself. It is better to look at comparable societies, or even look WITHIN the society. A couple of studies: States With More Gun Owners Also Have Higher Suicide Rates, Study Finds Firearm Ownership and Suicide Rates Among US Men and Women, 1981–2013: "Results. State-level firearm ownership was associated with an increase in both male and female firearm-related suicide rates and with a decrease in nonfirearm-related suicide rates. Higher gun ownership was associated with higher suicide rates by any means among male, but not among female, persons. Conclusions. We found a strong relationship between state-level firearm ownership and firearm suicide rates among both genders, and a relationship between firearm ownership and suicides by any means among male, but not female, individuals. Policy implications. For male persons, policies that reduce firearm ownership will likely reduce suicides by all means and by firearms. For female persons, such policies will likely reduce suicides by firearms." Guns and suicide: A fatal link "A study by the Harvard School of Public Health of all 50 U.S. states reveals a powerful link between rates of firearm ownership and suicides. Based on a survey of American households conducted in 2002, HSPH Assistant Professor of Health Policy and Management Matthew Miller, Research Associate Deborah Azrael, and colleagues at the School’s Injury Control Research Center (ICRC), found that in states where guns were prevalent—as in Wyoming, where 63 percent of households reported owning guns—rates of suicide were higher. The inverse was also true: where gun ownership was less common, suicide rates were also lower." The Association Between Gun Ownership and Statewide Overall Suicide Rates "Gun ownership predicted statewide overall suicide rates, with the full model accounting for more than 92% of the variance in statewide suicide rates. The correlation between firearm suicide rates and the overall suicide rate was significantly stronger than the correlation between nonfirearm suicide rates and the overall suicide rate. These findings support the notion that access to and familiarity with firearms serves as a robust risk factor for suicide." I really don't understand what you and @CUBAREY mean about there being no studies confirming this link.
  10. What is your most controversial opinion?

    If by "good lessons" you mean condemning the rich and greedy and "loving thy neighbour", then yes. If by "good lessons" you mean selling your daughter for cattle and killing everyone in villages you pass, or for that matter condemning people to hell for eternity because they prefer to sleep with people with similiar genitalia, then yes, I am sure they differ.
  11. What is your most controversial opinion?

    There have been lots of studies showing Blacks and latinos consisently get higher sentences than whites for the same crimes, and are more likely to get the death penalty. I wrote an assignment about this for my Sociology of the media class when I was an exchange student in Dublin. I can see if I find the assignment, for sources. I am not sure if they are more easily arrested for the same crimes, but because there is a policy of racial profiling, I would call it likely. Something completely different: another opinion I have, which I suppose is controversial, at least in the US, is that I have serious trouble understanding how someone can be religious, and truly believe in those ridicolous stories. :p (in Norway, only 38% of people say they believe in God, although 74% are members of the church - for most people it’s mainly because of tradition.)
  12. The rate of women being murdered by their husbands is much higher than the other way around. And this increased ratio is as far as I’ve understood for the spouse being killed, not the children etc. But yes, of course domestic violence also happens to men. I still think it’s somewhat a derailment of the debate to argue about that in this setting. :)
  13. Suicide should be counted - because the easy accessability to guns, means that more suicides will be committed (easier to do in the spur of the moment) and more attempts will be succesful. Another thing that should be mentioned, is that the probability of domestic violence turning deadly, increases when there’s a gun in the house. So this is also a women’s issue.
  14. What is your most controversial opinion?

    I think solarz and WWWombat are right. The problem lies in the whole culture surrounding the officers, the way the American culture in general looks at violence, and the training the police officers receive. I don't know if this is true, but I have heard that some places in the US you can become a police officer after just a few months of training. Can anyone enlighten me on this? Because in that case, that's part of the problem. I saw a discussion once, about the different attitudes of the European and American police. In most European countries, police are taught to 1) try to defuse a situation and talk someone down, 2) if that is not possible, try to approach and if possible arrest that person and 3) if you have to use force to do that, make it non-lethal. If you have to shoot a suspect because they're carrying a gun, arm for their arms or legs. The priority is always to bring the subject in alive. In the US, the officers are taught to neutralize the threat quickly, and thus shoot to kill. Those are two very different attitutes towards policing, and I think that's important. I also think a lot of the shooting deaths of unarmed civilians stem from a mix between paranoia/prejudice and the strict focus on always being in control. How can someone get their driver's license, if they are not allowed to take their hands down from the air? It's almost like a damned if you do, damned if you don't-situation. If you don't do it, the police can get rough, drag you out of the car etc. and it could result in an altercation. If you d, they can shoot you because they think you might have a gun. The fundamental lack of trust seems to me the main problem. Re: intruders: my point was that the home owners often escalate the situations, and thus make the violence happen. The safest thing to do if someone broke in while you were home, would probably be to hide and try to call the police. It's when people confront them that the intruder could panic and become dangerous. A lot of lives would be saved all around if gun-toting home owners didn't decide they wanted to try to deal with the intruder thmselves. (Oh, and Nolder, re: Japan: No, they have a capitalist system taken almost to the extreme. I am not talking about "loyalty to a company". I am simply talking about being involved in running it / deciding who get to run it. It doesn't have to be very different from today a lot of places.)
  15. I both liked it and disliked it. I dislike that kind of coy disinterest that Faile worked at for a while, and the rigid gender roles she wanted in the relationship. But, if you ask me, the annoying part of the storyline was when they were NOT together. Because then they would constantly think about each other and try to get back to each other. But just the other night, I read a scene in the tent shortly after Faile and the others had escaped the Shaido camp, she and Perrin had had sex and he fell asleep, and Faile was awake, looking at him. That scene was actually really great, it added something to their relationship for me. It was so... intimate, showed a new side of Faile, and was quite relatable for anyone who's ever been in an "adult" relationship. In that moment, I felt that Jordan (or Sanderson, actually not sure who wrote that scene, seems they both wrote some in this book) showed a rare proficiency for writing relationships that seemed real.