Roger
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMRVg_I7YCk
I know men are stronger but it not realistic to include men and women in sports then we should be segregated.
No Tracey it does say it if you go in a few minutes it talks about women getting the head start in the new york marathon race. A 30 minute head start.
And in the PGA head starts too. You are using a selective attention span. This is not a girls are icky rant, this is a wtf are feminists such incessant hypocrites for rant.
Answer
Women get heads starts so that the overall event doesn't take up more time than necessary.
And in those examples (marathons and golf), men and women aren't competing against one another. Men are competing against men, and women are competing against women.
Marathons are scheduled so that the slowest competitors will start first. They do this with different age groups as well, so that the roads will be closed for the least amount of time during the day. They are clocked the same start-to-finish, so it's not like women (or older runners) have 30 minutes subtracted from their total time.
And likewise in golf, I would imagine (since women can't hit the ball as far as men) it would take more strokes for a female golfer to get from the tee to the pin. So the tournament would take longer if both genders had to hit the same distance.
Women get heads starts so that the overall event doesn't take up more time than necessary.
And in those examples (marathons and golf), men and women aren't competing against one another. Men are competing against men, and women are competing against women.
Marathons are scheduled so that the slowest competitors will start first. They do this with different age groups as well, so that the roads will be closed for the least amount of time during the day. They are clocked the same start-to-finish, so it's not like women (or older runners) have 30 minutes subtracted from their total time.
And likewise in golf, I would imagine (since women can't hit the ball as far as men) it would take more strokes for a female golfer to get from the tee to the pin. So the tournament would take longer if both genders had to hit the same distance.
The bionic woman?
Stephen L
I saw the new "Bionic Woman" and thought it was pretty good with an excellent cast, and a big improvement over the campy original. It had sort of a dark "Blade Runner" kind of feel to me. I noticed the critics didn't like it though, but I'm not sure why. How did everyone else feel about it?
Junebug: I know what you mean. The main character definitely had some Sidney Bristow in her!
Answer
I saw it, and I'm kind of torn.
Standing alone, on its own merits it *is* some pretty good television. But....
Thing is, I didn't just *watch* the original Six Million Dollar Man and the Bionic Woman spin-off, when I was younger. Yes, I was a kid in the 1970s and saw the original airings. ^_^
But I also *read* the *book*. _Cyborg_. The book on which the whole idea was based.
Now here's the thing. In terms of the geeky stuff--the bionic limbs, the surgery, almost everything *but* the nanotech--the new "Bionic Woman" is actually closer to the book, to the original source material, than the original TV series was. That they did get right, that and the darker, grittier military tone of the people working at the secret base.
But...it really looks like the show is *second-guessing* itself here.
Does anyone remember the *promos* for the show, where they showed the leading lady with actually *mechanical looking* bionic legs? Ok then. You know what I'm talking about, that look didn't make it into the pilot, instead they just showed her natural arms and legs with an effect layer over it for the nanoprobes. I guess somebody *somewhere* thought having her sporting actual "borg limbs" would have been disturbing.
Which is rather the point. A cybernetics organism that has *machine limbs* is *Supposed* to be disturbing. Someone with "fake arms and legs" is supposed to be disfigured, at least for a little while, even with multi-billion dollar technology.
Likewise....I'm not really sure they have the right *actress* in the lead role. It seems like they were going, not for a woman who was a "badass" per se, but someone who was a "girly badass" in the _Buffy_ mold. Which works in a lot of shows, but not *Bionic Woman*. Really, in the beginning it really did seem like the *kid sister* was more of an adult and more tough than Jamie was. So....
It just seemed a little rushed that her boyfriend/creator got killed so quickly, because Jamie wasn't *convincing* in her turn from wimpy-girly to tough. Yes, she went through a lot for a first episode, but the speech at the end about "burying people" just wasn't real to me. It didn't work.
Granted....the boyfriend could have survived, been saved somehow, when his colleague made the call and said "we need *everybody*", that's always going to be an out for this type of show. Still, it just seemed rushed, and there didn't seem to be enough going on to make the character change real.
But hey.... ^_^ Let's be honest here, the Original show didn't even *come close* to paying this kind of attention to character and plot, now did it? It would be *so* unfair to judge this show by a _Heroes_ standard when the Original show would have fallen to pieces by that standard.
The truth is....the new "Bionic Woman" is pretty damn good. It is, on every objective level, *better, stronger and faster* than the Original series. But it's *not* going to be able to compete with our childhood memories of the Original.....nor should it.
I'm just worried that they went too far in terms of using such a tiny, girly lead actress for the main role. She really doesn't sound like she has a "tough" bone in her body, even post-bionics.
But we have a whole season to give the show a chance....for all we know it might turn out really good.
Hope this helps...thanks for your time! ^_^
I saw it, and I'm kind of torn.
Standing alone, on its own merits it *is* some pretty good television. But....
Thing is, I didn't just *watch* the original Six Million Dollar Man and the Bionic Woman spin-off, when I was younger. Yes, I was a kid in the 1970s and saw the original airings. ^_^
But I also *read* the *book*. _Cyborg_. The book on which the whole idea was based.
Now here's the thing. In terms of the geeky stuff--the bionic limbs, the surgery, almost everything *but* the nanotech--the new "Bionic Woman" is actually closer to the book, to the original source material, than the original TV series was. That they did get right, that and the darker, grittier military tone of the people working at the secret base.
But...it really looks like the show is *second-guessing* itself here.
Does anyone remember the *promos* for the show, where they showed the leading lady with actually *mechanical looking* bionic legs? Ok then. You know what I'm talking about, that look didn't make it into the pilot, instead they just showed her natural arms and legs with an effect layer over it for the nanoprobes. I guess somebody *somewhere* thought having her sporting actual "borg limbs" would have been disturbing.
Which is rather the point. A cybernetics organism that has *machine limbs* is *Supposed* to be disturbing. Someone with "fake arms and legs" is supposed to be disfigured, at least for a little while, even with multi-billion dollar technology.
Likewise....I'm not really sure they have the right *actress* in the lead role. It seems like they were going, not for a woman who was a "badass" per se, but someone who was a "girly badass" in the _Buffy_ mold. Which works in a lot of shows, but not *Bionic Woman*. Really, in the beginning it really did seem like the *kid sister* was more of an adult and more tough than Jamie was. So....
It just seemed a little rushed that her boyfriend/creator got killed so quickly, because Jamie wasn't *convincing* in her turn from wimpy-girly to tough. Yes, she went through a lot for a first episode, but the speech at the end about "burying people" just wasn't real to me. It didn't work.
Granted....the boyfriend could have survived, been saved somehow, when his colleague made the call and said "we need *everybody*", that's always going to be an out for this type of show. Still, it just seemed rushed, and there didn't seem to be enough going on to make the character change real.
But hey.... ^_^ Let's be honest here, the Original show didn't even *come close* to paying this kind of attention to character and plot, now did it? It would be *so* unfair to judge this show by a _Heroes_ standard when the Original show would have fallen to pieces by that standard.
The truth is....the new "Bionic Woman" is pretty damn good. It is, on every objective level, *better, stronger and faster* than the Original series. But it's *not* going to be able to compete with our childhood memories of the Original.....nor should it.
I'm just worried that they went too far in terms of using such a tiny, girly lead actress for the main role. She really doesn't sound like she has a "tough" bone in her body, even post-bionics.
But we have a whole season to give the show a chance....for all we know it might turn out really good.
Hope this helps...thanks for your time! ^_^
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment