thread to continue the sex/gore in movies/tv dicussion from the Random Thoughts thread — Page 3

He shouldn't be told to shut his beliefs up or to get over it. But movies and other art shouldn't become a theocracy because it might somehow offend him either.

TV's Frink said:

darth_ender said:

 

TV's Frink said:

My biggest problem with people having standards different than mine is not when they have them, but when they try to force them on me.

 I certainly hope you are not implying that is what I am doing.

 Not necessarily, though you cetainly wish people like me would think like you.  More importantly, it seems to bother you that it isn't the case.

Again, I'm not sure what the problem is.  Don't like, don't watch, done and done.

 maybe part of the problem is the lack movies and tv shows that don't show the stuff he doesn't want to see.  

For example:

There are virtually sitcoms or movie comedies that I like all the much any more.  This is because virtually every other joke in them is either a sex joke, bathroom joke, or some other sort of dirty joke.   Virtually gone is comedy that is clean.  Look at the three stooges(not recent film the real three stooges), the Marx Brothers,  look at Its a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, World,  look at old sitcoms like the Honeymooners.   Halariously funny without being dirty.   Being funny without being dirty seems to be gone from modern comedy.   Now am I saying that comedies should be forced to be clean? no.  I just wish I could fine some modern comedies that were clean and still funny.   Yes I can and do avoid watching comedies that do things I don't like.  The problem is the lack of comedies I do like.  

boredom3031 said:

He shouldn't be told to shut his beliefs up or to get over it. But movies and other art shouldn't become a theocracy because it might somehow offend him either.

 I believe he made clear that he wasn't for forcing his beliefs on others.

imperialscum said:

darth_ender said:

It's really not that hard when you imagine that the whole discussion is about the morality of such open sexuality, instead of all the minor supporting points you fight against.  You, my friend, are the very epitome of "Can't see the forest for the trees."

You can blame me now, but unlike you, I was staying on topic (i.e. nudity/sex in film/art), except when I replying to your off-topic arguments.

you were staying on topic all right, but you were/are deliberately refusing to see the point(s) he was making and respond to them.

Warbler said:

boredom3031 said:

He shouldn't be told to shut his beliefs up or to get over it. But movies and other art shouldn't become a theocracy because it might somehow offend him either.

 I believe he made clear that he wasn't for forcing his beliefs on others.

I didn't say that either, I said movies/art/whatever shouldn't all be something that conforms to his tastes. And fans of for example horror movies shouldn't have to also feel like they're being talked down to because they don't share his same opinions on violence or sex in a movie.

imperialscum said:

Well if the storyline prescribes a scene that is to rely an information that two characters had sex (let's say sex just for fun), then that's what the scene should rely. Why the hell would you force filmmaker to attach a big discussion about pregnancy and STDs to the film, just because there is a sex scene in the story?

depending upon the situation and the type of characters involved, it might be unrealistic to not have such a discussion. 

Lets say the woman in question was depicted up to that point as a responsible adult.   Lets say it was made clear she didn't want a child at that point in her life.  Would it be realistic to depict her to then decide to have sex with a man who was a total stranger and have absolutely no concern about getting pregnant or getting an STD?   

darth_ender said:

I am tempted to continue itemizing responses, but I am still convinced you are an idiot who is determined to miss my point most of the time.

We went over this already once. If you want people not to miss your "points" write them in one or two sentence and leave out all the unnecessary ballast.

And it may not be that I missed/ignored your points just because I didn't directly replied to them. If I estimate that something came down to a matter of different opinions, then there is little to no room for further arguments and discussion.

 This just shows why I ignore you most of the time.

boredom3031 said:

Warbler said:

boredom3031 said:

He shouldn't be told to shut his beliefs up or to get over it. But movies and other art shouldn't become a theocracy because it might somehow offend him either.

 I believe he made clear that he wasn't for forcing his beliefs on others.

I didn't say that either, I said movies/art/whatever shouldn't all be something that conforms to his tastes.

actually, they should be IF they wish to get his money.  He has every right to refuse to buy a movie ticket or a DVD/Blu ray if the movie doesn't conform to his tastes.  He also has every right to wish there were more movies/art/whatever that did conform to his tastes.  Who doesn't wish that?   

And fans of for example horror movies shouldn't have to also feel like they're being talked down to because they don't share his same opinions on violence or sex in a movie.

Was he talking down to them or just giving his opinion?

imperialscum said:

darth_ender said:

Um.  Is it that hard to understand that I wish people held a standard like mine?  That isn't the same as dictating that they should.

There is only one step from wishing to imposing, and it is called power. When people get in power their wishes will be imposed on others, consciously or subconsciously.

 actually that is not true.  There has to be one more step: the willingness to impose.  Wishing for somthing is not same as being willing to force it to happen. 

Warbler said:

boredom3031 said:

Warbler said:

boredom3031 said:

He shouldn't be told to shut his beliefs up or to get over it. But movies and other art shouldn't become a theocracy because it might somehow offend him either.

 I believe he made clear that he wasn't for forcing his beliefs on others.

I didn't say that either, I said movies/art/whatever shouldn't all be something that conforms to his tastes.

actually, they should be IF they wish to get his money.  He has every right to refuse to buy a movie ticket or a DVD/Blu ray if the movie doesn't conform to his tastes.  He also has every right to wish there were more movies/art/whatever that did conform to his tastes.  Who doesn't wish that?   

And fans of for example horror movies shouldn't have to also feel like they're being talked down to because they don't share his same opinions on violence or sex in a movie.

Was he talking down to them or just giving his opinion?

 Agreed, that's his choice.  Also, he could possibly be giving his opinion, but it reads to me in a condescending way. Though I admit I could be mistaken.

It didn't read condescending to me, but maybe I am mistaken or perhaps I have missed parts of the conversation that were.  

(I assume you meant "then there is no way you won't at least subconsciously try to achieve it")

Buy there is only so much one can do subconsciously to try to achieve something without becomeing consciously aware of it.  

Since Ender as make it clear he doesn't want to force his beliefs on others, I have a hard time seeing what harm he would do should he somehow get in a position of power. 

Also what exactly is he wishing? 

1. that everyone would have tastes like his.

or

2. that everyone willingly choses to have tastes like his.

If he wishes 1, he maybe he might subconsciously try to make that happen if he could.   But if wishes 2,  forcing people to have tastes like his would not comply with that wish, therefore would he still try to subconsciously force those tastes on others? 

I'm not sure how the second one is a paradox and I don't think it clear that he meant the first.

Ryan McAvoy said:

Just to mention that when firefox shortens this thread's title in the tabs along the top of my broswer window, it reads "thread to continue the sex".

 Who's first in line?

One point I would like to make is that nudity/partial nudity is not always inappropriate in a movie. There is no problem with showing breasts on screen provided it isn't done to titillate. For instance, in The Gods Must Be Crazy, we see quite a few mostly naked people, but the movie isn't inappropriate (although if I recall correctly, there was one scene not involving the Bushmen that was questionable) because those people were not nearly naked for the purpose of entertainment. It was simply the way those people dressed.

boredom3031 said:

Ryan McAvoy said:

Just to mention that when firefox shortens this thread's title in the tabs along the top of my broswer window, it reads "thread to continue the sex".

 Who's first in line?

 We already discussed this in the Random Thoughts thread.

Nanner Split said:

Warbler said:

 the Marx Brothers

the marx brothers were definitely dirty whenever they could get away with it

compared to today's comedians, they were squeaky clean.

I wrote this during the outage, and then discovered I could not post it:

I appreciate that post, Post :)

I am so busy lately and stressed out lately that I don't have time to continue this discussion.  I want to be so clear that my views are completely understood, as I need to end participation in this discussion for a bit.

First, imperialscum and boredom, do you not see the hypocrisy in what you have been saying to me?  You tell me that I am forcing my opinion, though I have made it clear I am not.  You have said that I am trying to do is make movies and art a theocracy (improper usage of the term, but I get what you mean), which I am not.

I oppose adultery tremendously, though I would not illegalize it.  I oppose drinking alcohol and smoking, though I still would not outlaw those.  I oppose many things, but I think it would be foolish and even more problematic to impose those beliefs on others.  Do I wish that people would always choose what I believe to be right?  Of course!  But even I do not always choose what I believe is right.  I do things I morally oppose.  I say the same of sexuality (and violence) in movies or print or anything.  I believe that those things are wrong, I'd love for the world to agree, but am I going to impose that on anyone?  No, in fact, I think such a mandate would be damaging and in complete opposition to my deep belief in the free will of men.

So why do I call you both hypocrites?  Because not only do you tell me I am wrong in my belief, wrong to wish others share it, and apparently wrong to argue its merits, as such is supposedly equivalent to forcing others to believe the same (though it is not equivalent at all), but then you proceed to tell me that your beliefs are in fact right, clearly believe that I should share your beliefs, as you are not only telling me I'm wrong to oppose, but are vigorously arguing why you are right.  If what I do is somehow forcing my beliefs down your throats, how is what you are doing any different?

Now I just decided to look over old posts, and I realize that Boredom is not being a hypocrite, but is instead bent on the idea that I am imposing my beliefs.  So I guess I shouldn't call you a hypocrite, but I hope you will understand my views and get off my case a bit.

And Frink, as I said, it doesn't bother me that you don't agree.  As I said, I wish everyone shared my morals.  We all think we are right in our beliefs, otherwise we wouldn't hold those beliefs.  But just as I appreciate Muslims, Jews, Hindus, atheists, and even weak atheists, ;) I still believe my religion to be correct, obviously, and think it would be wonderful for everyone to agree.  I mean, look, you hate anything having to do with fart humor, and yet some people love that.  But you remove it from your edits in spite of all the other ridiculous humor you insert.  You have your preferences, and you don't really like that GL included it in the first place.  I can have the same feelings about the over-sexualization of our media and not feel a bit guilty about it.  Does it really bother me that you put the rising obelisk from The Ten Commandments in your AOTR edit?  I personally wish you hadn't, but I don't like you any less for it.  I don't see why it's such a big deal why I believe what I believe.

Bottom line: I believe what I do.  I posted my belief in the Random Thoughts thread, a thread where we are allowed to put our random thoughts.  People began criticizing me for those thoughts.  Am I arguing that they should accept what I said and agree?  Not a bit.  The only reason I have continued this argument is because I want people to understand my views clearly, to stop putting words in my mouth, and to ensure that folks understand that I actually have the right to hold such views.  If you don't like my views, then get over it!

^Forgive the formatting issues, I had to save it to a docx, and pasting it apparently screwed everything up.

I don't remember saying any of that, only that you sound so condescending to others that do not in fact share your beliefs or views. If you don't like what content is in a film, I will restate the advice Frink posted. Don't watch it, simple as that. Not a single person is forcing you to watch and/or pay for any content that you don't wish to view, that's why there's ratings, and on most tv services the guides telling you what content is in the show or film.