• 8 Posts
  • 633 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: December 19th, 2023

help-circle




  • The fact that you only equate sex/nudity to porn reveals the problem.

    I took the trouble to delineate tasteful nudity, or sex that actually serves a purpose in the plot (your fine examples of drama or fear are great suggestions, though I worry about the encroachment of porn with a “fun sex scene”) from common smut.

    As for public life: the theater is a public place, my thought goes no further than that.

    Thinking back now, I can even empathize with some of your feelings here. In the abu dhabi branch of the louvre, there is an ancient marble statue of a man that stands twice my height if my memory serves. Its genitals have been roughly gouged out with chisels in stark contrast to the smooth curve of skin and cloth for the entire rest of the statue. It’s nauseating and disrespectful not just to the creator’s work and vision but to human dignity. I think me seeing that statue and feeling what I felt is something comparable to how you now feel. I’m not afraid of or ashamed of the human form or human sexuality, but these things have a time and a place and a respect due that is often not granted or even considered.

    So maybe im just watching the wrong movies. what not-porn movie are you watching that treats sex with the dignity and respect it deserves?


  • The point of John Wick is the gratuitous violence. The plot of John Wick is in service to delivering gratuitous violence. The name for a movie whose plot is in service to delivering gratuitous sex is “pornography.” Tasteful, artistic nudity is one thing. Even sex, in service to the plot or purpose of the movie, is another thing. But sex just to sell the movie or check a box is not a thing: we’re now talking smut. Cheap, common, vulgar smut.

    “Everyone is ugly and everyone is fucking” is just real life. If you want “Everyone is beautiful and everyone is fucking,” good news- that’s called porn already, and there’s so much of it. I like smut, and porn. Which is why I can recognize softcore in movies when I see it. Stop me if you’ve heard this one before, but if I wanted to watch porn I’d go home and masturbate.

    I congratulate you on your personal sexual liberation. Please keep your jollies to yourself- in private- while we pitiful repressed twilight zone voyeurs awkwardly exclude sex from our public lives.


  • do you actually think the potential misapplication of the word carpet is the thing that makes it a genocide or not? let me help you with that

    ‘carpet’ is very obviously used in a figurative sense to describe “a lot, like in world war two” above, not the technical sense your strictly literal pedantic argument would require to have any pretense of validity.

    the person obviously does not know that “carpet” bombing means anything other than “a lot, like in world war 2”. this pedantic bullshit you’re trying to pull does not fly, nor does it argue against the fact of genocide if true. i have already answered literally all of this before. it is a red herring, you are not arguing in good faith, and i am now blocking you, you disingenuous troll.




  • do you actually think the potential misapplication of the word carpet is the thing that makes it a genocide or not? let me help you with that

    the proof is in the genocidal language and intent, the mass starvation, the indiscriminate targeting of civilians and infrastructure, the manipulation of journalism, the unhesitating violation of human rights and international law. its a genocide because of the systematic erasure of a people, a culture. ‘carpet’ is very obviously used in a figurative sense to describe “a lot, like in world war two” above, not the technical sense your strictly literal pedantic argument would require to have any pretense of validity. “lie about carpet bombing”






  • its 100% in any meaningful sense of the word move the electrons that move, but thanks to ol’ benny franks we have an ass-backwards roundabout way of describing the relative motion of stationary proton “holes” compared to electrons which are- well, more teleporting than moving, frequently (if you’ll pardon the pun). holes move in the same way that water pressure is analogous to voltage: there may be mathematical and maybe even some physical comparisons to be made, but the conceptual framework is fundamentally an analogy, and in the case of “hole flow” a fudged up cya excuse for not updating the damn convention when the mistake was discovered. hurrumph.

    holes flowing… protons with free motion? in a solid wire or semiconductor? you mean a plasma.

    is there a physical constraint one could apply to matter to cause “holes” to flow while electrons stay put?