Skip to content

What about “Man” and “Woman”, Justin Trudeau? Peoplekind depend on it!

7 February 2018

In light of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s assertion that “peoplekind” is the preferred word to “mankind” because it’s more “inclusive”, maybe it is time to find new words for “woman” and “man” too. It’s not even the case that Trudeau is so entranced in his vacuous social engineering drivel that he forgot “humankind” is already the politically correct term, it’s that he’s so subservient to identity politics to comprehend that “man” refers to the human species, not the male human, so in essence it’s men being cheated by a lack of a gender-specific word. Explaining it to him? Don’t waste your time. These people have such entrenched agendas that there’s simply no capacity for reasoning or rational thought.

Justin Trudeau representing peoplekind

Justin Trudeau representing “peoplekind”. Image: bbc/reuters

Of course, “human” and “humankind” contain “man”, as does “woman”, so it won’t be long until the likes of Trudeau is triggered into saying that calling a woman a “woman” is not inclusive. So it’s best to intercept the problem before the it becomes even more ludicrous. Curiously, these problems still persist despite the recent progress we’ve made with gender fluidity and self-identification, where a man can be a woman and a woman can be a man, and therefore “man” now is gender neutral, just as it always was before the feminist and socialist elites attacked it as a symptom of our alleged sexist and misogynist civilisation.

In finding a new word for “man”, let’s all note we we are talking about “man” the species, not the male human. Therefore the male human will stay known as “man”. Whereas for “woman”, it is explicitly for the female human that we have seriously, cataclysmic problems, for it contains “man” and therefore suggests women are a subclass of the male human. We’re also not interested in the even more nonsensical attacks on words like “history” (contains “his”) and person (contains “son”). Although, with the new word for man the human species, there’s nothing stopping those words evolving.

Let’s meet our new words!

Wirl – formerly “woman” (as in female human)

Yes, to all you wirls out there, embrace your new word! It’s merely “girl” with a “w” replacing the “g”. Don’t worry, the etymology has been checked and “girl” has always been female, possibly even gender neutral in some languages from which it was derived. There’s also no other common use for “wirl”, and the current abbreviation of “w” for woman can remain. So for all women, or wirls, out there, it’s time to embrace your new, unequivocally gender-specific word. Wirl!

Gog – formerly “man” (as in the human species)

No thought or reasoning behind this, it simply popped into my head as something unique, distinctive and short – and can easily substitute for “man” in any word. Even better, there’s no current use of the word so we gogs can own it. Remember, we’re not changing human to hugog because, in time, “human” will fade in general language as gog assumes control. In words containing “man” that are gender-neutral or relating to the human species, “gog” is the replacement. Example: gogkind, gogpower and gog of war jellyfish.

What about “male” and “female”?

Drop the “ale” from female and you have “fem”! “Fem” is already such a common prefix for words relating to women, or wirls, that it should become a word of its own. Not only that, wherever “man” or “men” form parts of a female-related word, they should be replaced with “fem”. Example: femstration and femopause. Too easy!

 

Advertisements

Change the date of Australia Day – Change to what?

26 January 2018

Every year the howls become worse. It’s time to “change the date” of Australia Day. One problem: no one ever offers an alternative date. There’s certainly no alternative pushed as part of any campaign, so no wonder the “idea” is treated with great suspicion. Without an alternative the campaign is really “problem with the date”, and merely the latest attack on the status quo by inner city socialist elites, obsolete celebrities trying to make themselves relevant again, and token (predominantly white) urban aborigines. Almost none of these people have have anything to do with real aborigines, whose attitude to Australia Day as a legitimate grievance would be “that’s some white fulla’s day off work, it’s nothing to do with us”.

ausday18log

Why no alternative? Because a larger agenda is at play here. Changing the date would not change their key grievance – that of a country built predominantly by white, European, Christian, straight man, and to find a suitable alternative date that didn’t involve this nasty beast is almost impossible. As with any socialist tendency, they hate the status quo, and power is obtained by railing against it and the destruction of it. Hence their passion for “diversity”, and constantly on the prowl for victims. If there’s not enough victims, they’ll even create them, and all the while they live in their predominantly white inner city enclaves and mingle with their predominantly white, elitist friends. In truth, under the socialist utopia, there’d be no diversity, everyone would be a victim of the regime, and as for aborigines, they’d be given a tin shed, food rations, and told to shut up. Understanding this backdrop is key to understanding the attack on Australia Day. With it being on 26 January, they have an easy attack too.

ausday18tw1

Make no mistake, Australia Day has its problems. None of them as severe as the elitists claim. While many aborigines can justifiably claim it as “Invasion Day”, the notion of genocide, and even “ongoing genocide”, is absurd. No armies were brought and, in fact, attempts to build relationships with the local aborigines were more important than slaughtering them. As the colony expanded over the years, that’s when tensions rose and many aborigines were killed, often in organised massacres, while countless others succumbed to European diseases. Sadly that’s human history all over the world, and let’s not forget, if the British didn’t arrive then, someone else would eventually. A later landing by any foreign power would far more likely been in the name of conquest than settlement, and any indigenous rights like native title would have vanished – if there were any indigenous people left.

Australia Day - Change The Date - Change to what?

The real problem with Australia Day is that it’s a nondescript day and has almost nothing to do with the formation of Australia as a nation. 26 January 1788 was the day the First Fleet arrived at Sydney Cove to establish a British Colony under the governorship of Arthur Philip. It wasn’t even the first time the British arrived – with Captain James Cook discovering the east coast of Australia in 1770. From there, as essentially a Foundation Day for the state of New South Wales, it was mostly celebrated in Sydney, and would become widely known throughout the country as Anniversary Day. In the decades following Federation in 1901, it began being recognised as Australia Day, although, not always celebrated on the day. For a significant part of its history, Australia Day was celebrated on the Monday after 26 January, to ensure a long weekend. The Bicentennial in 1988 was the turning point, with the government of the time keen to make a big deal of the occasion. In 1994, 26 January was officially declared as the nation’s official day, and celebrated on that day, and Australia Day has grown in popularity since.

If Australia Day marked a major event in history, something integral to the formation of the country, then there’d be no debate. In fact, many countries don’t have an eponymous national day. USA has Independence Day, Britain has St George’s Day or Queen’s Birthday, and France has Bastille Day. Canada would be our closest analogy, with Canada Day of 1 July celebrating the enactment of the Canadian constitution, and it formally being called Canada Day in 1982. Before that it was Dominion Day.

Australia Day Change The Date - Change to what?

Changing the date of Australia Day is only the start. Image: indigenousx.com.au

Recent polling shows Australians don’t have a “problem with the date”, with support for a change barely passing 10%. They don’t have a problem with British colonisation either. In fact, it was fundamental to the accommodating, multi-cultural and successful nation we are today. Changing the day won’t change history, so whenever Australia Day is held, it would be impossible to celebrate Australia without acknowledging British settlement. So it really is a fringe issue of the loony socialist elite more intent on destroying national institutions than genuinely care about the issue. They hate Australia Day as a concept, and even Australia, period. Using the Aboriginal Rights movement as their pawn, once Australia Day is eradicated, next step is change the flag, and then begin the talks about treaty, even sovereignty. Not that they really want this – socialist elites are globalists and ideally want no countries or individual sovereignty. It’s all to upset the status quo and portray the entire country as racist.

Let’s presume Australia Day should be changed, to which date should it become?

1 January – Federation Day (1901)

This was the day the six British colonies (now states) agreed to federate into one nation. This would be the perfect day if it didn’t fall on 1 January. That being New Year’s Day and during the busy Christmas holiday period, it might get lost, as too would the notion of losing a separate public holiday at another time of the year. Also, Federation could be seen as “white construct” from those nasty British colonists, and still attacked by the same nutters attacking 26 January. If Federation Day became the day, New Year’s Day Holiday would move to 2 January. You’d find the nation would quickly adjust, and with it the start of the new year, the day would actually gain extra significance and celebration. Shouldn’t the importance of the day override its potential for the best festivities anyhow?

Last Monday of January

This borrows several things important to the nation’s history as part of a broad celebration: Federation being in January, the First Fleet arriving in January, the late January tradition of the existing day, and the tradition when Australia Day was deferred to a Monday for a long weekend. As a long weekend, the festive occasion would be enhanced too. 26 January would revert to its original meaning of either Anniversary Day or Foundation Day, while 1 January stays Federation Day and would be the country’s official birthday.

3 March – Australia Acts Commenced (1986)

Most people are unaware that Australia is a 100% independent nation, formally severing all ties with Britain in 1986. Sadly, this notable event in our history gained minor media attention, and it would be doubtful 1 in 1000 Australians would have a clue about the Australia Acts. Still, with an education campaign and inaugurating the day with a big celebration, that would quickly change. It seems a perfect fit for the anti-British socialist elites too.

9 May – First Day of Parliament (1901)

This is essentially a deferred Federation Day – when the new nation of the Commonwealth of Australia first sat in parliament – and generally suggested because of the 1 January clash of Federation Day with New Year’s Day. That’s hardly a great endorsement of the day, and does the nation really want to celebrate a day about politicians?

27 May – Recognition of Aborigines and Torres Straight Islanders as Citizens (1967)

Conducted by referendum, it passed with 91% support. While it is an important day, most people would be clueless about it, it has nothing to do with the formation of the country, and ideally should be a day that stands on its own, as a Recognition Day. Then you don’t need to mess around with the mostly useless proposition of constitutional recognition. The archaic Queen’s Birthday Holiday in early June could be dropped for it.

1 September – Wattle Day (1992)

Australia’s official flower is the golden wattle and Australia’s official, popular and enduring national colours of green and gold come from that. Most importantly, they are indigenous to the country, and became popular of their own momentum, before being officially declared in 1984. In the words of Terry Fewtrell, president of the Wattle Day association: “The Golden Wattle has been witness to the whole Australian story. It has been in our land for more than 30 million years and welcomed us all – Aboriginal, colonials, post-war and 21st century migrants. It has no historical baggage. It is our national colours – the green and gold.” 1 September is the suggested day because that’s the first day of spring and therefore when the golden wattle is in full bloom. Such a day would also raise the profile of the national colours, as many Australians see them as “sporting colours”.

3 September – Flag Day (1901)

The day was officially declared on 28 August 1996 and has never been celebrated. Again, most Australians wouldn’t know we have a Flag Day, much less know its day. With the British Flag on the national flag, the day would present the same problems as 26 January… unless the flag changed… then you’d use a new day anyway.

Monday before the First Tuesday in November – Melbourne Cup Eve (1861)

Originally run in 1861 and first run on a Tuesday in 1875, it’s the race that stops a nation. The Melbourne Cup is easily Australia’s most popular and endurable cultural and sporting event and a national day before it would be the perfect lead-up. With Melbourne Cup Day also a public holiday in Melbourne, it would make an extra long weekend for them and reduce that other great Australian tradition of “taking a sickie”.

The Day Australia becomes a Republic

You can almost guarantee that this day would become a holiday. The question is whether Australia would ever become a republic. To most Australians, it’s a trivial issue, would not affect our lives in any way, and for all intents and purposes, Australia is already a 100% independent country (see the Australia Acts). The British monarch is only a symbolic head of state. The real one is the Governor General.

Choose The Date

Ideally, 1 January Federation Day should be the day. Recognising its problems, especially the desire to have your national day stand alone from other holidays, I would make Australia Day the last Monday in January. It would be a new date for one, would have no real baggage, can encompass several events important in the nation’s history, while preserving the tradition of a late January holiday. All the other options would need some selling before they were accepted, with the Australia Acts the next best candidate, followed by Wattle Day.

One year of Donald Trump as President – Pros & Cons

22 January 2018

Despite all the insane warnings of an economic meltdown, more wars and terrorism, mass deportations, women losing all rights, global warming running riot, and general worldwide catastrophe, the world and the USA survived Donald Trump’s first year as president. Yes, all those predictions were serious too, and to think it’s Donald Trump the one critcised for hyperbolic and grandiose statements. The hysteria and derangement was never justified, as anyone with even half an active brain cell would know, the US president has very little real power. The greatest democracy in the world simply has too many checks, balances, rules and downright Washington obstinance, that even with someone as bellicose as Trump, or before him someone with the charisma of Barack Obama with his first year goals of immigration reform and closing Guantanamo Bay, they face extreme difficulty to progress their agenda.

trump-fna

USA President Donald Trump. Image: gop.com

The most stark example of Trump’s frustrations is the travel ban against several despotic and mostly muslim countries. It was constantly challenged in lower courts, and while one was eventually implemented, Trump remained frustrated by the courts on other issues. Then there was Obamacare, the “repeal and replace” Republican dogma for nearly 8 years, even with a Republican house and senate, it couldn’t be done. That’s because members of congress are not rigid to their parties. The loyalty is more often to their district or states. It’s a stark contrast to the likes of Australia where a member of parliament will vote like a zombie as dictated by party policy. That’s even despite a direct mandate from their district to do otherwise, as was seen with the recent gay marraige plebiscite.

On the positive side, Trump can celebrate three key achievements: the appointment of Neil Gorsuch to the supreme court, the tax reform law, and the demolition of ISIS. Undoubtedly that Trump named several potential judges during the presidential campaign helped him grab the evangelical christian vote, and that he followed through with that, including many appointments for lower courts, has held the support of this key voting constituency. Tax reform, along with the many cuts in regulations, will be judged on its economic effect. With big cuts to the corporate rate to make the USA more internationally competitive, obviously the Democrats hate it. For citizens, the fact is nearly all Americans will get a tax cut, with those potentially a bit worse off being those in high taxing states where the state tax rebate was eliminated. Rightly so! Why should the federal government be subsidising tax rates of individual states? They should reduce their rates to allow people to keep more of their hard earned money. States like California and New York are two of the highest taxing states, while several states have no tax rate. Low-income taxpayers are served well with their standard deduction doubled and child tax credit increased. The blazing stock market means a bonanza for retirement schemes for everyday Americans, while unemployment is at records lows, even for blacks and hispanics. Finally, ISIS is almost done. Trump’s “bomb the shit out of them” has worked.

A fourth achievement might be the withdrawal of the Paris Climate Change Accord. This is more symbolic than anything, that the USA wants no part of a ridiculous agreement more about global socialism than a binding, worldwide agreement to cut emissions. It was never a repudiation of the USA’s role in emissions reductions as climate loons claimed, as the USA is way ahead of its targets thanks to gas exploration. Trump’s “America First” mantra continued with trade agreements cut or reworked, and sticking it to the United Nations by reducing their funding. Recognising Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, and finally moving the American embassy there as all recent presidents had promised, was also a masterstroke.

Trump even made a dent into Obamacare by removing the individual mandate (a fine for not buying health insurance) as part of the tax reform bill. That will accelerate the death of Obamacare. It’s already in a so-called “death spiral” as high premiums force people out, which raises premiums more, which forces more people out. Note, Obamacare (primarily a bloated bill designed to subsidise insurance companies, even to maintain their profits) has been designed to fail from the start. The hiccup was the Democrats losing elections, so now it’s up to Republicans to deal with it. Most likely a government funded scheme for catastrophic injury or illness will arrive, with private insurance to deal with the rest. Essentially we have that in Australia. There’s no such thing as universal health insurance, only a universal safety net.

The most fascinating part of the Trump presidency is him dealing with illegal immigrants, and notably on DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), the so-called “Dreamers”, most of whom are all adults now. Essentially it defers deporting illegal immigrants that were brought in as children, and it was expanded and extended by Obama by executive order. So it’s not amnesty at all, only an order not to execute a federal law for certain people and only for a certain period of time. Then a new DACA deadline must be set. That was directly opposite to Obama initially saying he’s “not a dictator” so can’t act on immigration alone. Once re-elected in 2012 and without facing another election, he acted. The problem with an executive order is the next president can immediate reverse it. Trump has done that, saying (rightly so) DACA should be handled by a bill out of a congress, and the deadline is March 2018 when DACA expires. The genius of this is has shown Washington in all its ugliness as the Democrats tried to use DACA last weekend to help pass a budget bill. The government is shut down and it’s all the Democrats’ fault as they are exposed as using illegal immigration to hold the entire country to ransom. Trump and the Republicans knew they couldn’t be wedged, as DACA has nothing to do with funding the government, so the longer the Democrats sit on it, the more they are exposed as obstructionists and hypocrites. DACA is also the key bargaining chip in Trump getting his border wall. If the Democrats are so concerned about these “Dreamers”, surely extra border security would be an easy compromise, or will they be thoroughly exposed for using these people, and immigration in general, as a political weapon? Remember, immigration was meant to be Obama’s year one big achievement, and even with a super majority in the senate, did absolutely zero.

The most intriguing and entertaining part of the Trump presidency is his behaviour. His tweets are often hilarious, and nicknames like Sloppy Steve (Bannon), Cryin’ Chuck (Shumer), Leakin’ James Comey, Crazy Mika and Psycho Joe from MSNBC, and the best, Pocahontas for Elizabeth Warren. It’s staggering that after a year much of the media still hyperventilate over his antics and language. Remember, “take Trump seriously, not literally”. They do it the other way around. His tweet about his nuclear button bigger than Kim Jong Un’s was his way of saying that the USA is more powerful than North Korea, and they’re not afraid to act. Yet the media somehow thinks Trump really has his hand on a button ready to push. Such a thing doesn’t even exist, and his power is only in approving the request from generals. Then the “shithole” remark. It says enough that instead of Democrat senator Dick Durbin confronting Trump in the meeting about the language, that he chose to keep it for the media. While CNN used the hearsay of a vengeful political opponent to proclaim Trump a racist, the truth is the plan meant to make DACA permanent also increased chain and lottery migration, not reduce it as promised to Trump. A double-crossed Trump then raged about America always taking people from shithole countries, not places like Norway. Again, this is his style. He’s been a vulgarian since the day he announced he was running, yet so much of the media gets caught up in the histrionics of it. Probably it makes good ratings – probably the main point of it.

Trump gets the last laugh, and is beginning to thrive in his role as president. While the promise of his Fake News Awards had his media opponents salivating for a mention, he eventually revealed twelve actual and serious moments of fake news and general media bias, with CNN winning four awards. Personally, the most galling was the claim by Time magazine that Trump removed the bust of Martin Luther King from the Oval Office. This was barely a day into his presidency and yet the media were already trying to prove him a racist. It really highlighted their agenda, and from there it’s become worse, as opponents try and out-do each other on their various cable news shows. The division they apparent loathe is division they are fuelling, and merely a continuation of the divisive “basket of deplorables” identical politics Obama and then Hillary Clinton trafficked in. Trump is actually the product of that, and continues to fight back in his own inimitable style.

Rest assured snowflakes, Trump can’t really do much damage. Cries of fascist are absurd for someone that was democratically elected and, indeed, potentially could see his domestic agenda thwarted if the Democrats win the house in this year’s mid-terms. Yes, this great democracy has elections every two years to keep politicians to account. For those not taking it all so seriously or taking it all so personally, jump on the train, enjoy the ride, because this is already the greatest presidency ever!

Obama’s Legacy – The Reality Check; Trump’s Inauguration

Donald Trump is President – What the heck just happened?

 

Warrior’s Video Games of 2017 & Game of the Year

7 January 2018

2017 will definitely be known as year of Nintendo. Not only was the phenomenal Nintendo Switch released, it was accompanied by a line-up of stunning games. Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Splatoon 2 and Mario + Rabbids Kindgom Battle, not to forget a constant stream of smaller downloadable games on the e-shop. Then there was the 3DS still going strong, particularly with Metroid: Samus Returns a huge highlight. The Super Nintendo Classic Mini arrived during the year, and even the NES Classic Mini trickled in during April for those that missed out in 2016 and could quickly snap one up (yay!). Let’s break it down.

Nintendo Switch

Zelda: Breath of the Wild won just about every conceivable gaming award for 2017, and for obvious good reasons. It’s a stellar title – possibly the best in the series ever – and has been supported with excellent extra content too. The only complaint: I haven’t finished it yet! I’ve been so busy, and then other games came out. Mostly on the Switch I’ve played Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, FAST RMX (an F-Zero style of racing game), Blaster Master Zero (an excellent remake of an NES classic) and little bit of Super Mario Odyssey.

Nintendo Switch – Hardware Review

Mario Kart 8 Deluxe Review – Pros & Cons

3DS

Metroid: Samus Returns 3DS box

Metroid: Samus Returns. Nothing more to say. With Metroid my favourite game series ever, Samus Returns was a salivating release this year. It came out of nowhere too. Announced middle of the year for a September release, I was frothing at the mouth as I rode to the local shopping centre (no helmet naturally) to purchase it on its release day. Strangely, I thought it wise to shop around for the best price. Checking first that JB Hi Fi had some on the shelves, I then went to Big W and Target, which are usually cheaper. Neither had it so back to JB only to see none on the shelves anymore. I was furious! I thought I’d ask at the counter as they don’t display all inventory, and yes, I got one, and a JB-exclusive poster that I never knew about. Bonus! After picking up the special edition Samus Returns 3DS system on pre-order at EB Games (which will become my spare), I rode home and played Samus Returns for several hours non-stop, then a few more over the weekend. Suffice to say I’ve not finished it either. Although, I’ve made much more progress than with Zelda.

From the 3DS Activity Log

Pokemon Shuffle was against the most played game of the year at almost 280 hours. The year before that was 275 hours and before that 199 hours. Almost 750 hours all up is a ridiculous amount for a free title. While I have purchased gems a couple of times during this period, which help you proceed through the game when impatient, it’s only been occasions when 6 bonus ones are offered if you buy 6 or more, which I’ve done twice, and mostly to reward the developers for all the hours I’ve played. I never needed them. Only once have I needed a gem, and it was only after I just failed to beat a Pokemon after using a bucket load of coins and had leftover funds in my account. The gem allowed 5 more moves and increased the catch rate for remaining moves (I only needed one move and caught the Pokemon). Total money spent on Pokemon Shuffle is under $15. I wish I could say I’d get that value from all games.

Pokemon Shuffle 3DS Charizard

Then there’s my old, small 3DS, where I have Pokemon Shuffle running too. Time logged is 207:19 hours for 2017, for a total of almost 470 hours for the past 3 years. So that’s over 1200 hours for one game. The only game I know that rivals such time invested is Audio Surf on PC at almost 800 hours.

Metroid: Samus Returns is next most played at 14:37 hours, followed by StreetPass Mii Plaza at 10:48, Super Smash Bros at 2:35, 80’s Overdrive (a game bought late December) at 2:03 and Mario Kart 7 at 1:50. I really must get back into Mario Kart 7. The year before I didn’t play it all. Unacceptable! After Mario Kart DS, MK7 would be my second favourite version, followed by MK8 Deluxe on the Switch.

Mii Plaza has really dropped off compared to 22 hours last year and 127 hours in 2015 and 33 hours in 2014. I’m simply done or bored with the mini games, so much so I rarely carry the 3DS around anymore to accumulate StreetPass hits required for the mini games. Total steps is 180,586, compared to 1.1 million in 2014, 521,117 in 2015 and 221,171 last year. Most of the steps this year are from trips overseas to Europe/USA in May/June for 45608 and 32852 steps, and then to Japan in November for 58,895 steps. It’s worth taking the 3DS overseas because international hits fill in national maps on your system, and that’s fun.

Super NES Classic Mini

After the debacle with the NES Mini, I didn’t take the chance and decided to pre-order the SNES version. As it turned out, I could have walked in and bought one on the day. Nintendo kept their promise of plenty of stock. Indeed, there were several lying around at the JB Hi Fi near my office during the week of its release, and I’ve seen at other times too. Note that supplies do often run out quickly, and during a 2 week visit to Japan in November, I never saw a local one anywhere, so it’s clear Nintendo could sell more if they could have increased production even further.

Super NES Classic Mini

First game to play on the SNES Mini was Star Fox (originally Star Wing in PAL territories) so I could unlock the bonus Star Fox 2. The mixed reviews of that proved true: it’s a bit of a clunky game and would have been far better sticking to the original on-rails formula, not free roaming. I’ve dived into most of the other games since, and I’m pleased with the collection. My only gripe would be there’s too many RPGs on it, and do we really need a Street Fighter 2? While it’s obviously a “Nintendo classic”, it’s been on everything else for the past 20 years. Also, why not Super Street Fighter 2: The New Challengers – the one with the four extra characters that Japan got? While Turbo could be argued as the purest Street Fighter 2 experience, it’s not the definitive one.

The five RPGs on the SNES Mini are Zelda: A Link to the Past, Earthbound, Final Fantasy 3 (FF6 in Japan), Super Mario RPG and Secret of Mana. We easily could have done without Secret of Mana, and possibly Super Mario RPG. There’s also two Kirby games on it, which is at least one too many. Glaringly missing is a shooter or two, and some sports games. UN Squadron (Area 88 in Japan) would be the obvious inclusion, with Axelay another option. International Superstar Soccer Deluxe (Fighting Eleven in Japan) is the obvious sports game required, while another could be Super Tennis. NBA Jam would also be good.

A conventional driving game would have been good to sit with Super Mario Kart, with Top Gear probably the best option. While sequels Top Gear 2 and Top Gear 3000 are no doubt superior, Top Gear is the more familiar one to most people. Plus, it’s a classic! Instead of Street Fighter 2, how about Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 4: Turtles in Time? Adding some of these games also would have boosted the system’s multi-player capabilities. Or, given there’s no technical limitation to restrict the total of games at 21, why not just add all these games anyway? Maybe Nintendo didn’t want it to make the NES Classic Mini seem second rate. Speaking of which…

NES Classic Mini

Arguably there’s not really any obvious omissions on this system, only suggestions that would improve it. Games like Balloon Fight and Ice Climbers are really old school, while who has heard of Star Tropics? Curiously they have Super C and Double Dragon 2 instead of the original Contra and Double Dragon, yet persisted with Tecmo Bowl, Gradius, Ninja Gaiden and Castlevania ahead of the clearly superior sequels of Tecmo Super Bowl, Life Force Salamander, Ninja Gaiden 2 (there was also a third) and Castlevania 3: Dracula’s Curse. Castlevania 2: Simon’s Quest is also on the system, and while it could be argued as the weakest of the three, since it’s an RPG style of Castlevania, it definitely deserves its place. Besides, where else can you pay the ferryman? It is a tricky decision. You really need the first game for its “classic” status, and you don’t really need three, so the two selected are probably right. If you missed out on the NES Mini, Nintendo will resume production middle of 2018.

NES Classic Mini

SNES vs NES – Classic Battle

Overall, you will get more out of the games on the SNES despite nine fewer than the NES. Those RPGs will take eons, while Super Metroid is a long game and Super Ghouls & Ghosts is really hard. Even I struggled despite beating it at the time. Newbies to the Castlevania series will find Castlevania 4 a bit tough. Plus, if you’ve never played Street Fighter 2 before and get hooked, that is endless hours learning all the characters.

The other benefit of the SNES is two controllers in the box. Cables are also much longer than the NES, though, not long enough to station the system too far away from the couch. Personally I use a HDMI extension lead and keep the systems near me, because the other shortcoming in both is the reset is via a button on the box. There’s no controller shortcut. The SNES controllers are also much nicer to hold, and the bonus is they work on the NES. So if you require extra cable length or need an extra NES controller, your problem is solved with the SNES Mini.

In terms of interface, both are the same, and support 4 save-states for each game. Be aware some SNES games had battery back-up too, so if you use that function within the game itself, make sure it’s at a later point in the game than your save-state in the system, or only use the one save system. Otherwise you will confuse yourself! The SNES also has several themed borders to make the 4:3 ratio of games look better on modern wide-screen TVs, which is nicer than the black bars of the NES, and are good for your plasma TV, if you still have one like me.

Graphically, the NES games actually look much better than the SNES ones. This is all to do with pixels, and with the NES using much more blockier pixels, they expand much cleaner than the more detailed ones on the SNES. It is quite a shock when first playing a SNES Mini game that it’s so pixelated. You barely notice this on the NES Mini.

Elsewhere

While I do have a PlayStation 4, it’s been a bit quiet there other than for some favourite series like Gran Turismo Sport and Wipeout Omega Collection. Both are superb games, especially Wipeout. It’s the quintessential collection. Sony keep adding stuff to Gran Turismo, so there’s far more to it now in single player mode. Curiously when I bought that at JB, they were selling GT-themed controllers for only $40 extra. It’s been a year of the bonus too. Bonus!

Game of the Year

Simply because it’s so damn good, it’s part of my favourite game series, and it’s been 15 excruciating years since the last one of its type, it must be Metroid: Samus Returns.

Warrior’s Video Games of 2016 & Nintendo Switch Preview

Star Wars: The Last Jedi – the Complete Review!

14 December 2017

Preliminary Review (No Spoilers)

Session: 00:01 14 Dec 2017 – 2D

(Scroll down for subsequent reviews)

Who is Rey? The question we all wanted to know was eventually even asked by Luke Skywalker. Then there were other questions. Who is the last Jedi? Who is Snoke? Why was Rey dumped on Jakku? If you were expecting those questions to be answered in The Last Jedi, then this is not the movie you are looking for. While some were technically answered, they weren’t really. Much like when Darth Vader revealed to Luke, “No, I am your father”, it was so incredulous that we had to wait for it to be confirmed in Return Of The Jedi. While these days our ignorance of the Force and the Star Wars universe can’t be preyed upon like it was nearly 40 years ago, there’s still uncertainty about the answers provided in The Last Jedi, especially when those answers were not the juicy “OMG” moments we expected them to be. Even when handling the real life death of Carrie Fisher onto her character, Princess Leia, expectations and outcome fall well short. It’s a pattern that epitomises the movie as a whole.

Star Wars: The Last Jedi - poster

Much like The Force Awakens echoed A New Hope, The Last Jedi is a retake on The Empire Strikes back. It’s a connecting movie, heavy in character development and designed to lay the foundations for the awe-inspiring finale that should be Episode 9. Yes, the Resistance is fleeing from and battered by the tyrannical First Order, Rey begins to learn the ways of the Force, and when all seems lost for the galaxy, hope emerges at the end. Except, it didn’t do it anywhere near as well as The Empire Strikes Back.

The real problem is whereas The Empire Strikes Back was only developing Luke, The Last Jedi was developing Rey, Kylo Ren and Luke as well! Yes, the path that Luke takes will surprise you, and not in the way you expect after the emotional finale to The Force Awakens. After the stellar opening to The Last Jedi, it gets really bogged down in dialogue – and made worse because nothing is revealed. Meanwhile, the Resistance is on the run, and it proves no where as exciting or as suspenseful as Han and Leia trying to escape the Empire. In trying to spice up the action, the sub-plot to a casino world to find a master code-breaker was as clumsy as it was stupid. The last ditch hope to escape from the First Order would have been better served with another space battle. While gratuitous, it certainly would have been more exciting.

The Last Jedi leaves you with no feelings – and that’s despite major attempts to do otherwise. It’s mostly a series of events that don’t connect in any way to make a gripping individual story. In trying to lift it to the standard of The Empire Strikes Back, some of the ideas, particularly surrounding the use of the Force, seemed far too contrived, bordering on implausible, even for the Force. Even the substantial humour injected, while often funny, at times descended into the comical, which emphasises further an identity crisis with this movie. The Last Jedi never really takes off, provides few moments of any suspense or excitement, nor does it leave you with any emotional legacy. It’s almost a nothing movie. We saw nothing, we learnt nothing, we’re left with nothing. Yes, it was entertaining, and I remained keen for its duration. It’s just, for Star Wars, simply being entertained and remaining keen is not enough. On first impressions, The Last Jedi is one of the weakest Star Wars movies. Sadly, it should never have been this way.

-Return to this page as a I review The Last Jedi after each viewing and discuss key questions and moments!

Previews:

Star Wars: The Last Jedi – who is Rey?

Star Wars: The Last Jedi – who is the last Jedi?

 

17 December 2017

Main Review (includes Spoilers)

Session: 17:15 14 Dec 2017 – 2D

Nothing! That’s right, Star Wars: The Last Jedi is about nothing! After 2 and half hours (twice over now) of watching this most highly anticipated Star Wars movie, we saw nothing, we learnt nothing and we’re left with nothing. For a film that supposedly would answer so many questions from The Force Awakens, it answered nothing. Those that were answered were almost too ridiculous to be believed. Then there’s the plot. What plot? It was a series of events with no connection, with much of it being heavy sections of pointless dialogue. Most of the new ideas were too contrived or incongruous. The Force became ridiculously more powerful than you could possibly imagine (and I can imagine quite a bit!), unnecessarily comical humour was injected, and there was a sub-plot to a Casino world that, you guessed it, advanced nothing.

You sensed the farce had awakened the moment Luke tossed his light-sabre over his shoulder. How the seminal moment from The Force Awakens was treated with such disdain and frivolity shows the filmmakers simply had no idea how to treat the Star Wars franchise. It was a slap in the face to all fans and no wonder Mark Hamill himself, upon reading the script, said he “pretty much fundamentally disagreed with every choice” made for his character. Extend that to almost every fundamental decision made about every other character. Even Yoda went unscathed. Brought back not for enlightenment or mythical revelation; brought back for comic stupidity.

It seems the filmmakers didn’t want to be accused of being unoriginal and follow the path of The Force Awakens by mimicking almost directly part of the story from the original trilogy. This time The Empire Strikes Back would have been the inspiration, and why not? That’s the best of the series and had the right template. The result being they over-extended – tried to be too different – and the movie got stuck in an identify crisis. It’s Star Wars in terms of setting and characters. It’s not Star Wars in terms of advancing the saga and leaving a legacy. Let’s hope it’s all being saved for Episode 9, otherwise there’ll be hell to pay.

THE KEY QUESTIONS NEVER ANSWERED

Who is Rey? Three times they teased us with the revelation, with Kylo Ren eventually providing the most detailed response that Rey’s parents were drunks who sold her for money and are now dead. Seriously? These are the roots of the key character of this trilogy? The other problem is that the film already exposed Kylo as a liar. So who really knows what to believe!

Why was Rey dumped on Jakku? It seems only for one of the best – and perfectly appropriate – jokes in the film. When Rey told Luke she was from nowhere, he said everyone’s from somewhere. She responded Jakku. He said yes, that’s nowhere. Seriously, there must have been a real and important reason Rey was dumped there.

Who is the last Jedi? Meant to be the seminal moment of the film, it was a fizzer. For the entire film the past was to be killed. Luke was adamant the Jedi were over. Yoda even appeared as a force ghost to harness lighting and burn down the Jedi tree. Even typing that sounds as stupid as it actually was! Then, at the end of the film, Luke Force-holograms himself across the galaxy to face Kylo in an anticipated duel, swerves and ducks Kylo’s clumsy slashes of the light-sabre, and just as Kylo realises Luke really isn’t there (just check Luke wasn’t leaving any footprints, you dill!), Luke announces he’s not the last Jedi. We then return to Luke’s remote island to see him sweating profusely in Force hologram mode, collapse from exhaustion, and then vapourise. Yes, writing that sounds as stupid as it actually was too.

Who is Snoke? We don’t know. Not that it matters. He’s one of those token villains like Darth Maul, Count Dooku and General Grievous added to cause a bit of mayhem, and then die. Killing him off was about the only correct key decision the film made, and it was a good one! Kylo Ren has higher ambitions than someone’s subordinate, or even leading the Sith.

OTHER PLOT FAILURES

The sub-plot of Finn and Rose to the Casino world of Canto Bight to find a master code-breaker was the most pointless sequence in Star Wars history. Ultimately it did the Resistance more harm than good, so another space battle would have done just as well. The sub-plot only served in a visual sense, and even then it was full of cliched themes and ridiculous political overtones. Surely Star Wars gambling is beyond the dice, card and roulette games seen on Earth, and save your swipes at ultra capitalism, animal exploitation and child labour for a lecture hall. All it did was unnecessarily prolong the film. Then when there was time for a great moment, with Finn about to sacrifice himself by flying into the big cannon, stupid Rose swoops in to knock him away and they both crash. Then somehow he manages to drag her all the way back to the base without being shot!

The Resistance could never catch a break! Tracked through light speed, lost their core leaders like Admiral Ackbar, failed with their escape plan to the salt planet of Crait, and failed to defend the outpost. It was defeat after defeat! If not for the crystal wolves and Rey’s rock-moving powers, the pitiful band of about 20 that remained would have been doomed. There should have been some small wins during the fleeing process, like Han and Leia managed in the corresponding sequence in The Empire Strikes Back.

As we know, Carrie Fisher died in real life after the filming of The Last Jedi, so how do they handle her death in the movie? They don’t. First they surprise us when she’s blown into space in the attack on her cruiser’s bridge (which is strangely lacking any sheilds!) that killed Admiral Ackbar. That’s lame. Surely she deserves better than that. So she twitches into life and glides back to the ship. OK, so now we await the real death. No, it never comes. Noting Fisher died after filming was complete, with CGI and other tricks, something could have been done. Of course, the gravest mistake is her death wasn’t in the script anyhow.

The finale. We’re to believe children are the future of the Resistance? Get real. The film was set up nicely with the small Resistance group all huddled on the Millennium Falcon – and that should have been it as the Falcon launched into hyper space. No, an extra scene on Canto Bight of a dopey kid looking at the dopey ring that Rose gave him. Luke should have been convinced to leave his island, physically fight Kylo, and probably die. This would allow Leia and the Resistance to escape, Leia to reveal to Rey the truth about her parents and origins, and then possibly Leia dies from the emotional trauma (as her mother did). It would have been poetic if both Luke and Leia died together.

Too much time spent on both Kylo and Rey wrestling with the dark and light sides of the force. It’s never convincing, nor is it plausible, that Rey would go dark. Nor will Kylo go light until he reaches his ambition of controlling the First Order. To compound the issue, instead of a fight between the two, there’s a Force Duel over Luke’s light-sabre and they tear it apart. The explosion knocks Kylo out and Rey escapes Snoke’s chambers. Snooze! Speaking of that room, it looked like a warehouse with a painted red wall.

Since when is fuel such a strict finite resource in the Star Wars universe? Accept the “lighter and faster” Resistance cruisers could keep out of range of the First Order if I must. Accept that lack of fuel was a valid element to add suspense to the movie I won’t. Am impending ambush might have been better, or even simply the time it took to reach Crait. The Resistance were down to only a few ships already, so no reason to begin popping them off as they ran out of fuel. In fact, the remaining few could have made one final attack to ensure other Resistance members reached the planet surface and could make the distress call. They lost all their main ships, all fighters and nearly all Resistance members anyway, so why not lose them in a blaze of glory. Better than running out of fuel and a dubious side mission to Canto Bight.

Too much talk for no consequence. Telling the Luke/Kylo break-up 3 times was ridiculous. All it showed was that both lied, and then maybe Luke lied again! The mirror section after Rey fell into that dark seaweed hole – another waste. In trying to see her parents she only saw herself. This abstract nonsense should never be in Star Wars. At least she got a sexy new hairstyle from her swim. The telepathic Force connections between Rey and Kylo were too farfetched, and the explanation by Snoke that he created them was later contradicted when Rey and Kylo were still it after Snoke’s death.

Then there’s the talk with contrary consequence. Luke witnesses Rey’s power with the Force and says he’s never been afraid, until now. The next day he’s training her in three simple lessons. Luke is also adamant the Jedi are over. So much so he refuses to go with Rey, loses to her in a brief fight and, with Yoda, confirms the Jedi are over and destroys the Jedi tree and with it the original Jedi texts. Little does he know Rey took the Jedi texts before this point. Then, in what should have been the hero moment of the movie, he pops up on Crait as a hologram and declares he’s not the last Jedi. What the hell changed between burning down the tree and the Force hologram? It further illustrates that this movie had no idea about its direction. It was experimenting way too much instead of sticking to established Star Wars lore. This hero moment should have had the actual hero there, not a hologram. Viewers needed an awe-inspiring moment, not another cheap giggle and absurd contrivance.

Other than Leia’s line to Poe “get your head out of your cockpit”, the use of women in all the main lead roles actually proved an exercise in disaster not female equality. Every single decision they made was wrong, and they left the fleet and the movement obliterated. Purple-hair woman (Vice Admiral Holdo) was the worst of the lot, with the insane decision to keep the escape strategy secret causing the restless Finn and frantic Poe to enact their own plans. That Leia eventually resumed command and could lay the smackdown on mutineer Poe was probably the justification for it. Of course, it wasn’t true equality because the First Order only had a smattering of women, blacks and Asians as subordinates, not any high up in the command chain, like a black Hux or a female Snoke, for example. The only female in a commanding position was Captain Phasma and, yes, you guessed it, she was useless. Maybe that was the whole point – showing women as useless, and so it’s really a male chauvinistic film! Also, rather than bring in an Asian girl (Rose) to swoon over Finn, make it an alien male of some species. Way too hetero-normative and human-normative for my liking!

BB-8 controlling a AT-ST? Not sure about that. Despite being circled by stormtroopers, none of them could shoot him off the thing either. The filmmakers probably went a bit far, too, when BB-8 restored Poe’s weapons with his multi-dexterous, head-spinning shenanigans during the attack on the dreadnought. BB-8 should not be an R2-D2. He needs his own character trajectory. As for the “Darth” BB-8, I was really hoping for more from him.

CURIOSITIES

The Force hologram Luke was much different to the real one. Younger, darker clothes and shorter hair, was he so vain?

Despite no gravity in space, the Resistance bombers relied on gravity to drop their bombs, just like on Earth. It can actually be explained in that all objects produce gravity, with the larger the object meaning the stronger the gravity. Those ships are massive – with the dreadnought possibly 50km in length. The official explanation is the bombs are drawn magnetically to their target.

Han Solo’s dice in the Millennium Falcon. It was cool they made a gesture with them by Luke handing them to Leia. Unfortunately, most people wouldn’t know their history – that they’ve always been in the ship (I didn’t) – so it seemed a bit hokey. Plus it was made worse that they were hologram dice, disappearing once Luke did.

MEMORABLE MOMENTS

The opening space sequence was unbelievable. In this age of computer generated graphics these sequences never look better. Not only that, they find more ways to keep them thrilling. Rogue One would still lead with the best space battles. The Last Jedi is second.

Snoke’s death was a pleasant surprise, both in the event itself and the method. Also good was Rey and Kylo destroying his red guards. Sadly, that’s when they should have turned to fighting each other directly (not the Force Duel over Luke’s light-sabre), and an explosion caused by the space battle could have been Rey’s means to escape. Or, the explosion from the space battle causes Kylo to be knocked out just as the fight finishes so leaving the fate of their relationship unresolved. If you missed it, the film says Rey escaped in Snoke’s ship. She’d have found the Resistance on Crait by the blue signalling device she and Leia (and sometimes Finn) were wearing.

The kamikaze attack on the First Order fleet. As controversial as a “light speed weapon” is to many observers, it was beautifully shot scene, leaving a surreal, almost peaceful, ambiance on the viewer. It’s therefore a shame it wasn’t Leia at the helm, not Holdo. It would have been true sadness as well, because no one cares a crap about Holdo! So to see Leia go in this way would have been poetic. You could imagine quite easily an alternate narrative to this film that there’s no Casino world shenanigans. Instead it’s merely about reaching Crait, where the real Luke would eventually help. He would not indolent and cynical as currently depicted, nor would his X-Wing be submerged in the sea, and he’d be summoned by the tremor felt in the Force at Leia’s death. The movie carries out as normal, ending with the remaining Resistance group on the Millennium Falcon. Note there’s a porg standing on R2-D2’s head!

The new creatures were fine, especially the puffin-like porgs and their guilt-trip put on Chewbacca for trying to eat one he had roasted. I actually went in thinking they were smarter than they actually were, and one had replaced Han Solo in the Millennium Falcon. The lactating seal/cow thing was a good insight into Luke’s remote existence. Let’s remember, if we lived remotely, we’d be doing the same to cows, or even goats or sheep. Possibly llamas!

We got our nostalgia fix from The Force Awakens, so even though the sight of Leia, especially with Luke, did tug a little, it’s something that should be totally let go for the next film. Even minor things like the “rebel scum” references, it really is time to move on. If Leia had died we would have moved on.

Rey’s theme. It’s quite a beautiful peace of music and has been stuck in my head for days. Rey herself, especially with the new hairstyle, she’s a stunner.

SUMMARY

It’s sad that The Last Jedi, the film meant to answer so many questions, and open some new ones, failed in its most basic duty. It trampled on accepted Star Wars lore for the purpose of lame humour, political messaging and extravagant contrivances. These liberties were all to the detriment of the film and made it the disjointed and underwhelming movie that it is. While it was entertaining enough and I remained interested through both viewings so far, is that enough? It’s not. Star Wars is meant to be compelling, enlightening and thought-provoking, not flippant, comical and leaving you in despair. This one was nothing. It is the worst Star Wars movie, and it’s not even close. Not that all is lost. So much is left now for Episode 9 to expose. Along with answering all those questions and finalising the saga in general, one word will hover over it like no other and be the true measure of its success. That word: Redemption.

Rey - Star Wars: The Last Jedi

30 December 2017

Third Review

Session: 15:30 22 Dec 2017 – 3D

You must unlearn what you have learned. That is the message from Yoda in The Empire Strikes Back and it’s a message that applies to The Last Jedi. With almost every major decision made about the film being wrong, the best way to get the most out of it is to ignore preconceptions, accept its failures, and try to watch it as an independent movie. This being the third viewing, all that I had learned had subsided enough to a degree that I could absorb it as intended, and in that sense it proved the most enjoyable so far. Being in 3D probably also helped, as it provided more to see visually, especially the spectacle of the movie. Other than clarifying minor plot details, I didn’t get anything extra out of it. It’s not a multi-layered film like some of the others. There’s no mysteries or intertwined sub-plots. No revelations. No bonds to the new characters. No emotional legacy. No nothing. It just does its thing in a mostly enjoyable way.

That’s not to say I didn’t enjoy the previous sessions. I did. It’s just that for Star Wars they fell below expectations. When I say expectations, it’s not about quality either. It’s about expectations from the Star Wars series itself. If I want frivolity and humour, I’ll watch something else, not Star Wars. It’s the same reason so many people objected to Jar Jar Binks in The Phantom Menace. He was an unnecessary, tiresome inclusion. Likewise, in The Last Jedi, was the inane chatter, comic frivolity and the extravagant contrivances. Even then, the likes of Jar Jar had a purpose: to appeal to children. Whereas the inclusions in The Last Jedi, they appeal to the Hollywood elite. You see that glaringly materialise on Rotten Tomatoes, where currently it’s 91% for critics, 51% for the public. It’s the only Star Wars film with such a disparity. If The Last Jedi somehow wins an Oscar for Best Picture, or even gets nominated, that would confirm its failure. Note that Rogue One is currently 85% to 87% and The Force Awakens is 93% to 88%.

The period between the third session a week ago and until now has been spent engaged online with other fans, and learning there’s a massive rebellion against this movie. Despite the childish accusation it’s “haters” and those “impossible to please” forming the rebellion (odd since I’ve loved all 8 others), it’s actually a rebellion of love! The message must be sent with great force to Disney that there can be no repeat for episode 9. Redemption is already the word I’m throwing about, and that redemption is about bringing Star Wars back to Star Wars. There’s already a precedent for this when George Lucas listened after episode 1. Episode 2 pared the frivolity back and introduced unforgettable moments like Yoda fighting Dooku. Then think back to The Last Jedi and try recall something, anything, of that magnitude. There’s nothing. The potential was there, like when Rey and Kylo fought the red guards they could have either fought afterwards or an event could have left their relationship unresolved, and when Luke appeared on the salt planet of Crait it should have been actually him, not a silly hologram. Also Leia should have died in this movie, and it done in an emotional way. “In loving memory of our Princess” in the credits was the only tribute. The Last Jedi really is such a hollow experience that the use of a hologram for the grandstand moment of the film actually proved to be most apt.

 

Star Wars: The Last Jedi - Review - Rob J McPherson - Facebook

Excellent comments spotted on Facebook

-I plan to see The Last Jedi at least once more time, specifically at IMAX 3D. I saw Rogue One four times and The Force Awakens seven times. Rogue One would have been once more had it hung around the cinemas longer. For episodes 1 to 3, it was 9, 9 and 7 times, respectively. For the originals (episodes 4 to 6), it was once each at the time, and then 4, 4 and 3 times on the 20th anniversary re-release.

 

Star Wars Ranking

1) Ep5: The Empire Strikes Back
2) Ep2: Attack Of The Clones
3) Ep4: A New Hope
4) Ep7: The Force Awakens
5) Rogue One
6) Ep4: Revenge Of The Sith
7) Ep6: Return Of The Jedi
8) Ep1: The Phantom Menace
9) Ep8: The Last Jedi

In time, I expect Rogue One to rise in the list. Other than the slow start, it really was a great movie, full of emotion and had the most epic ending ever.

Star Wars: The Last Jedi – who is Rey?

13 December 2017

After Star Wars: The Force Awakens, much speculation surrounded the identity of Rey, who were her parents, and why was she dumped on Jakku.

No, Luke Skywalker is not her father. Remember, the Jedi are forbidden to bonk! Besides, that’s all too convenient.

Is she Leia’s daughter, and therefore Kylo Ren’s brother? Again, that seems a bit too convenient, Han Solo doesn’t know about her either, and Rey’s knowledge of Han Solo is only as a smuggler. Perhaps she had a different father? We might be on the right path here.

Star Wars: The Last Jedi - poster

Noting that this current Star Wars saga follows many of the same plot-lines from the original saga, Rey’s father is most likely the same as Anakin Skywalker’s – she had no father. She was an immaculate conception – conceived by the midiclorians. Possibly Leia was the mother, not that it’s relevant – other than the child would have the craziest midiclorian count ever! Whoever it was, the child was identified as hyper sensitive to the force, and Luke and Leia decided her path lay elsewhere.

Even if we presume Rey’s mother is Leia, and possibly her father is Han Solo, why was Rey dumped on Jakku?

Much like when Leia and Luke were separated at birth, so must be the two newest most powerful exponents of the force. If one went dark, there was need for another to restore light. The separation also acted as the ultimate test to determine if Rey was the next “chosen one”, and whether she, herself, was ready to fulfil her destiny. Despite the strong pull to stay on Jakku and hope for her family to return, she ultimately had to break that connection, discover Luke’s light-sabre, understand and harness her nascent powers, and then find Luke. Only with the Force as her strong ally could she achieve this.

Who dumped Rey on Jakku?

Leia, of course!

The key proof is when Leia and Rey reunite at the end of the film. Up to this point, Rey had no idea the woman that dumped her on Jakku was now leader of the Resistance. Upon seeing Leia, you can clearly see in Rey’s face revelation, realisation and then relaxation that General Leia was the one that dumped her on Jakku. Rey now fully knew her role in the universe, knew why all the events of her life had happened, and knew she was the one to find Luke.

The next mystery: Who is the last Jedi?

Why I voted Yes in the Same-Sex Marriage Plebiscite

15 November 2017

As the self-proclaimed defender of freedom, democracy and true equality, it was a simple decision to vote Yes in Australia’s Same-Sex Marriage Postal Survey. There were issues surrounding the vote, notably the bullying and abuse from the totalitarian left, the general erosion of both freedom of thought and personal values, and the increasing bigotry towards certain religions, notably Christianity. It’s quite fascinating that Muslims and the aboriginal community hold far more stricter and entrenched views on marriage than Christians, yet they are never torn to shreds by the ever increasing elitist and pompous national media. Important as those issues are, they can be dealt with later, and it would be unfair to entwine them with gay marriage because, as totally separate issues, they actually have a far greater reach into our lives than the minor detail of government recognising your personal relationship.

ssm-ballot2

Freedom

Despite the quaint slogan “Marriage Equality”, the true issue about changing our marriage laws is freedom. The freedom to marry anyone you like. Marriage Equality technically would be about equality within the institution of marriage, particular that each partner get equal rights. In truth, they often don’t, particularly with the likes custody of children, distribution of assets and alimony – all skewed heavily towards the female. Of course, with a gay couple, gender can’t really play a role, so it will be interesting to see if precedents and principles set by the courts when deciding same-sex divorces extends into all divorces. The “slippery slope” argument that gay marriage would open the door to polygamous and polyamorous marriages, while technically should be allowed in the strict definition of “freedom”, was nonsense because such marriages have never been seen as socially acceptable in Western societies, nor has there been a serious movement to allow them.

Democracy

Marriage is a social issue that’s been entwined in human culture for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. The people own it, not government, so it was absolutely the right thing to do to officially survey the nation. While we may hyperventilate about the reported $120 million in costs, it’s quite ironic that most of these people doing this whinging have zero concern that the nation blows 10 times that much every single month simply paying interest on our national debt. Also nonsense is that gay people will suffer extreme psychological trauma, even suicide, from “the debate” when it’s the Yes campaign full of vitriol, hate and nastiness towards anyone that might even remotely consider a reason marriage should be kept traditional. The truth is that these totalitarians, particularly those in the Labor and Greens parties, hate democracy. They also recently spent 6 years in power debasing gay marriage into a wedge issue. Political bigotry at its worst! If it wasn’t bad enough that the centre-right Liberals are about to legalise gay marriage, the totalitarians are further riled at the prospect that the people would force the issue. How dare they! Suck it up, snivelling politicians. You had your chance many times and blew it.

As it proved, at ground level, people were excited to campaign for their cause and to vote, and the tears at the overwhelming 61.6% vote for Yes was out of jubilation of the national embrace of gay couples, not sorrow from the undue stressed of voting, and it will serve as a shining mark on our nation’s history. It’s also good to see that the No campaign has respected the democratic outcome, not resort to protest and riots like juvenile delinquents as the totalitarian left is prone to do when democracy doesn’t go their way (eg: Brexit, Donald Trump). The only real error was the government should have attached the question at the last election, not mess around trying to pass a compulsory plebiscite through a hostile senate, before ultimately settling on an optional postal vote. Speaking of an optional vote, the 79.7% response shows Australians don’t need the threat of a fine to vote. Compulsory voting is a blight on our democracy, and despite our conceited belief it’s the best voting system, we’re actually in the severe minority with not only compulsory voting, also compulsory preferential voting that means we’re forced to vote for parties we hate.

True Equality

This area was always my main quibble. In truth, there’s no true equality. Typically with a discriminatory law, you repeal it, not extend it by adding a new definition or clause. The government shouldn’t really have any say in how you live your life. Except, we as people, over the years, have conferred upon government to be the arbiters of this social institution of marriage. This is where the No campaign missed their moment. Gay marriage was inevitable so there should have been a petition long ago to separate the legal framework of marriage from the ceremonial one. The official government recognition would be a “civil union”, with “marriage” the ceremony. The ceremony, even in a church, would have no legal ramifications. Only the civil union, either at at town hall or in front of a justice of the peace, would – and it would involve a prenuptial agreement, or “civil contract”, of sorts. At present, the worst part of marriage is that to obtain some rights important to your relationship exposes you to many rights you don’t want. Not to forget the hassle and stress caused by the uncertainty and expense with the courts when handling your divorce. That actually is far more likely to see people traumatised, and even commit suicide, than the debate to recognise their relationships in the first place. Ultimately the Same-Sex Marriage Plebiscite has ended in happy and celebratory ending, and I’m for one am glad I’ll be able to look back in years time and be proud of my role in changing the marriage laws. Australia, well done.

Australia rejoices at the resounding Yes vote in the Same-Sex Marriage Postal Survey

Australia rejoices at the resounding Yes vote in the Same-Sex Marriage Postal Survey

ssm-joy3

Australia rejoices at the resounding Yes vote in the Same-Sex Marriage Postal Survey

Australia rejoices at the resounding Yes vote in the Same-Sex Marriage Postal Survey

Australia rejoices at the resounding Yes vote in the Same-Sex Marriage Plebiscite. Top is Senator Penny Wong, and second is Christine Forster, Sydney councillor and sister of former Prime Minister Tony Abbott. All images courtesy of news.com.au.