There’s just so many people that work on movies and finance them that there has got to be a 100℅ chance that every great movie has a dickweasle wedged in the process somewhere.
I’d wager that both Clerks and Kentucky Fried Movie might have avoided dickweasles. That being said, to quote Kevin Smith about Clerks, both of them “are barely movies.”
You gotta separate the art from the artist. When one of my favorite bands got canceled because the lead singer was into the young ladies, I tried to remember there were four other dudes in the band, as well as presumably a lot of behind the scenes folks who assisted with touring and studio production. Same with movies. You can denounce people for being shitty, but at the same time recognize they were a part of something great.
Lol what does “young ladies” mean here? Like teenage adults or like girl kids. If you’re talking about a child abuser, describing him as a man who is “into the young ladies” is super dishonest and makes my skin crawl. If this musician is a child abuser, don’t sugar coat your language.
I think it’s definitely wrong across the board. I honestly think 40 year olds dating 20 year olds is weird and I’m going to think differently of that 40 year old, but the laws have drawn this arbitrary line at 18, and so here we are.
It’s all fucked up, but sexually assaulting a literal child versus sexually assaulting via coercion a 15 year old feels like a distinction worth making. You can be Lost Prophets pedophile or Brand New pedophile, they are vastly different degrees of awful, despite both being awful.
I don’t think it’s pointless to say there are degrees of wrong.
I know someone who cheated on their spouse with a willing 16 year old, which is legal here. This situation spawned arguments about morality that went on for years. Here’s a question to help those black & white thinkers break out of their shell a bit: which was worse? The 16 year old or the cheating? Does it change anything if the marriage had become sexless (spouse’s fault)? What if the 16 year old was or was not a virgin?
I don’t know about “gotta” but often, I agree. Picasso was a piece of shit and a great artist. I think it’s actually counter productive to take the binary good/bad route in cases like his. The guy is famous already, if we were to try and reverse that, we not only remove art from the world in a sense, but we also decrease society’s overall ability to discuss the light and dark side of things.
Lol! You mean those people whose entire living depends on pretending the (so-called) “art world” isn’t 90% hype and 10% “Great Man” fallacy?
I can throw a brick on deviantart.com and hit someone that’s more talented than Picasso was (well, you could before it got swamped with fake AI), but none of them gets hyped up by a scam industry selling feelgood to rich people, do they?
Since you’re having a hard time dealing with the cognitive dissonance you are suffering from due to your pathologic worship of (supposedly) “great men,” I’ll be reposting the obvious for you.
There’s just so many people that work on movies and finance them that there has got to be a 100℅ chance that every great movie has a dickweasle wedged in the process somewhere.
deleted by creator
I’d wager that both Clerks and Kentucky Fried Movie might have avoided dickweasles. That being said, to quote Kevin Smith about Clerks, both of them “are barely movies.”
℅👀
You gotta separate the art from the artist. When one of my favorite bands got canceled because the lead singer was into the young ladies, I tried to remember there were four other dudes in the band, as well as presumably a lot of behind the scenes folks who assisted with touring and studio production. Same with movies. You can denounce people for being shitty, but at the same time recognize they were a part of something great.
Lol what does “young ladies” mean here? Like teenage adults or like girl kids. If you’re talking about a child abuser, describing him as a man who is “into the young ladies” is super dishonest and makes my skin crawl. If this musician is a child abuser, don’t sugar coat your language.
Gross!
To me a child is single digits. You’re right though, 15 year olds, whatever term encapsulates that age.
Ephebophilia can be used as a distinction from pedophilia. Voicing that distinction makes you sound like a pedophile though.
I think it’s definitely wrong across the board. I honestly think 40 year olds dating 20 year olds is weird and I’m going to think differently of that 40 year old, but the laws have drawn this arbitrary line at 18, and so here we are.
It’s all fucked up, but sexually assaulting a literal child versus sexually assaulting via coercion a 15 year old feels like a distinction worth making. You can be Lost Prophets pedophile or Brand New pedophile, they are vastly different degrees of awful, despite both being awful.
Unfortunately, people really hate nuance when it comes to this topic.
Just about any topic, really. I dunno, maybe they’re right too, and maybe my desire to define is totally unnecessary.
I don’t think it’s pointless to say there are degrees of wrong.
I know someone who cheated on their spouse with a willing 16 year old, which is legal here. This situation spawned arguments about morality that went on for years. Here’s a question to help those black & white thinkers break out of their shell a bit: which was worse? The 16 year old or the cheating? Does it change anything if the marriage had become sexless (spouse’s fault)? What if the 16 year old was or was not a virgin?
Degrees of wrong.
I don’t know about “gotta” but often, I agree. Picasso was a piece of shit and a great artist. I think it’s actually counter productive to take the binary good/bad route in cases like his. The guy is famous already, if we were to try and reverse that, we not only remove art from the world in a sense, but we also decrease society’s overall ability to discuss the light and dark side of things.
FTFY.
Oh God. Every art historian and critic and fan basically disagrees but ok cool
Lol! You mean those people whose entire living depends on pretending the (so-called) “art world” isn’t 90% hype and 10% “Great Man” fallacy?
I can throw a brick on deviantart.com and hit someone that’s more talented than Picasso was (well, you could before it got swamped with fake AI), but none of them gets hyped up by a scam industry selling feelgood to rich people, do they?
Your ignorance (and contrarianism) shows.
If someone can take a look at Picasso’s works and say they suck, their opinion is to be ignored. So thanks for that ❤️
Since you’re having a hard time dealing with the cognitive dissonance you are suffering from due to your pathologic worship of (supposedly) “great men,” I’ll be reposting the obvious for you.
Deal with it.
Since you fail to understand words, ✌️