This is too great for YouWhore.

You got a little less than 19 minutes to listen? This is a very awesome speech about how a single story can create many social conflicts and stereotypes. I find it very interesting and constructive.

http://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story.html

2 stories is more dangerous. You could totally fall off and break a leg.

Beautiful speech! I love TED, they have the best eye-opening talks. I had realized the concept of a "single-story" from very young as well, and how the majority of people don't bother to look deeper into what's visible to them. Ignorance is everywhere, simply because of the lack of teaching about certain topics.

This actually helped me to look on a different view about a classmate that is from Ethiopia. I could never help but think about the miserable way lots of the people pass there, but checking on my own country as well, we do have that situation, but it has been unequalably covered.

Quote from: Zombie Bill Murray;16913402 stories is more dangerous. You could totally fall off and break a leg.

hehehe

She has some good points but she is two dimensional arguements in many ways, regarding how others perceive africa when she herself perceive people who perceive africa.

Meaning; Just apply Sartre's thoughts on everything and you come to realise that we try to make everything smaller by putting titles on them, even she does this and thus fails at her own story.
(the whole way that people see one story of africa, because she sees one story of the people who see one story. There is always the ability to see past that story and it is up to each and everyone to do that... there is such media but media cannot force itself upon people.)

Also my father is african, christ most people don't know where carthago was but I don't feel a need to justify myself to anyone because that would make myself a smaller person... it would show that I have a need for others consent and as if they should for some reason strive for my consent.
Just see people are people and it wont matter in the end.

Am I the only one in the world who gets that in American Psycho he's not actually killing anyone.

Quote from: Eff Yoo Clawk;1691838Am I the only one in the world who gets that in American Psycho he's not actually killing anyone.

According to the movies he HAS, in the sequal atleast.

In the Book he does aswell in a sense but it is blurred out since he really turnes to shit at the end.

I didn't like this mostly because it was long boring and unfunny(she was obviously trying to be funny).

Book writers are usually shit at public speaking. They're too used to a totally different medium.

Quote from: HarmonyClock;1691843According to the movies he HAS, in the sequal atleast.

In the Book he does aswell in a sense but it is blurred out since he really turnes to shit at the end.

The sequel is part of the reason I feel like I'm the only one in the world who gets it. I really doubt you can shoot three cops in one night, blow up a cop car with a couple shots from a handgun, kill a hooker in an apartment complex stairwell with a chainsaw, and get chased into an office building with a helicopter searching you and get away with it unless it didn't actually happen. Plus the lawyer saying it didn't happen and the apartment with Paul's body dissolving being empty.

Quote from: Eff Yoo Clawk;1691850The sequel is part of the reason I feel like I'm the only one in the world who gets it. I really doubt you can shoot three cops in one night, blow up a cop car with a couple shots from a handgun, kill a hooker in an apartment complex stairwell with a chainsaw, and get chased into an office building with a helicopter searching you and get away with it unless it didn't actually happen. Plus the lawyer saying it didn't happen and the apartment with Paul's body dissolving being empty.

godamnit fuclock if it wasnt for your wifes lucious breasts i dont think id bear loving you

no see if you read what i said the book, aswell as the movie, fucks about at the end henche the "Psychopath" and not sociopath (even though we dont use that term), what i mean is yeah hes mad and you cant disort what is real at the end, most things are not.
But he DID kill some people like the hooker.

Quote from: HarmonyClock;1691853godamnit fuclock if it wasnt for your wifes lucious breasts i dont think id bear loving you

no see if you read what i said the book, aswell as the movie, fucks about at the end henche the "Psychopath" and not sociopath (even though we dont use that term), what i mean is yeah hes mad and you cant disort what is real at the end, most things are not.
But he DID kill some people like the hooker.

First, not my wife, but thank you for the compliment. Second, I did read what you said but I'll respond line by line.

QuoteSecond, what you said was, 'According to the movies he HAS, in the sequal atleast.'

^ That sequel was shite, has nothing to do with the first one, and is wrong.

QuoteIn the Book he does aswell in a sense but it is blurred out since he really turnes to shit at the end.

^ Obviously I haven't read the book and can only go on the movie. Sure, it's ambiguous, but you can't say with certainty that any of the murders were committed, so if some definitely weren't, why are any of them necessarily real?

Quote from: Eff Yoo Clawk;1691855First, not my wife, but thank you for the compliment. Second, I did read what you said but I'll respond line by line.

I know shes not
but she should be
with those breasts.

also i know you read my post i just ment the meaning, youre a great guy so dont take me wrong

Quote from: Eff Yoo Clawk;1691855^ That sequel was shite, has nothing to do with the first one, and is wrong.

yeah, it shouldnt be taken into act but it must be in some sense. Even disregarding that you have to take in regard...

Quote from: Eff Yoo Clawk;1691855the book and can only go on the movie. Sure, it's ambiguous, but you can't say with certainty that any of the murders were committed, so if some definitely weren't, why are any of them necessarily real?

yeah if you havent read it ofcourse you wont understand the movie in a sense, you are free to judge the movie as stand alone and in that regard you are 100% right and true.

i dont care all that much to be honest
i love sadistic things but the koncept was to low fetched and overblown

Quote from: HarmonyClock;1691856I know shes not
but she should be
with those breasts.

also i know you read my post i just ment the meaning, youre a great guy so dont take me wrong



yeah, it shouldnt be taken into act but it must be in some sense. Even disregarding that you have to take in regard...

yeah if you havent read it ofcourse you wont understand the movie in a sense, you are free to judge the movie as stand alone and in that regard you are 100% right and true.

i dont care all that much to be honest
i love sadistic things but the koncept was to low fetched and overblown

Fuck you.

Jk.

Interesting. This seems to be the case of the 'westernization' of the whole world, which is a very scary concept (just watch a Bollywood film)

That was actually very interesting to watch, I hadn't thought I'd actually watch it all the way through. She's basically attacking American ignorance though, because I can't imagine people reacting to an african student that way in the Netherlands. At all.

Quote from: Eff Yoo Clawk;1691850The sequel is part of the reason I feel like I'm the only one in the world who gets it. I really doubt you can shoot three cops in one night, blow up a cop car with a couple shots from a handgun, kill a hooker in an apartment complex stairwell with a chainsaw, and get chased into an office building with a helicopter searching you and get away with it unless it didn't actually happen. Plus the lawyer saying it didn't happen and the apartment with Paul's body dissolving being empty.

The lawyer called him Davis. The whole movie has people confusing people with other people. So it's possible that he killed some people.

TED is neoliberal trash