Don't use it here, and don't argue publicly when a moderator gives you an informal notification. Next time you'll get a formal warning. Arguments to PM (Conversation function).
Honestly, that would create so MANY ethical issues, that I cannot see them going that route and I hope that the writers do not do so. UNLESS, he agreed to be such a donor, but she never told him that it worked because he's not a fan of kids. That would be an interesting line to follow, but I'll be surprised if that is the case.
You grotty little wanker!
those salamanders need a dad
It's only the first episode with her jeeze.
Reading a novel must be sheer torture for those kinds of people.
$$$$
Yep. If something is left hanging at the end of 10 episodes, then it's a legit beef. Think the finale of nuBSG after 4 seasons.
Fair - but this season has been set up as an over arching story from the get go, rather than a one off episode. There is more room to work here. In a fair comparison making the season equivalent to a one off, this episode was 6 minutes out of the full hour. There is still time to resolve the character.
Nothing new under the sun, really. As much valid criticism Discovery, for example, has received through the years, I've noticed really early on that the most vitriolic whining about plot holes, destroying Gene's vision etc. tended to be made about stuff that got resolved in literally the next episode. Case in point: Ripper the Tardigrade being used to power the spore drive, people started whining about how the show is throwing Star Trek's entire message into the trash and treats animals being harmed as normal (despite the obvious focus on Ripper's suffering), and lo and behold, Burnham spent the entire next episode freeing the poor tardigrade and finding an alternative.
Terry has said you may end up sympathizing/empathizing (I don't remember what word) with her before the end, so there is more to her character than what we saw here.
