Minio's Ramblings on Cinema

Of course you don't

Because of the implied misogyny behind it. And yes, comments taken as insulting women who choose to sleep in the first date, coupled with past comments about suggesting a lack of purity for doing so, or even giving oral sex are a bit misogynist in nature.
I know you’ll try to defend it, but any time you feel the need to make a comment seen as a dig at their sexual history or otherwise shame them for it, yeah….it isn’t a good look.
Women shouldn’t have to worry about whether sex with a guy they like/love, even on the first date, is somehow some “black mark” against them.

I don’t want to derail this thread any, however.as I get that it’s your preference, and this is your thread anyways.

They’re ok, yeah, I might prefer Sammo as an actor, though.
Is there a director that you would toss alongside them, as well?

Just keep watching Jing Wong movies until your taste and sense of humor are utterly and irrevocably ruined.

Is the misogyny in the room with us? Anyway last time I checked promiscuous sex was a mortal sin. As a good Christian girl it's on my conscious if fellow sisters in Christ do things that'll make them burn in hell. Seriously though I apply the same standards to men. Does it make me misandrist? If yes then I'll happily start calling myself a misanthrope. If not then why it's only bad when applied to women?

How is calling out on behavior insulting? If you said Minio behaves impolitely on MoFo it wouldn't be insulting. And on what world a person who engages in this sort of lusty sinful behavior maintains their purity? You can talk about the purity of the heart or something like that I guess but I doubt that was the context of my original message, whenever I posted it.

I don't care about a good look. I dig at people for many reasons but for some reason only this provoked you. It was just a simple analogy anyway. No need to get all whiteknightey about it. Plus there're definitely things people should be ashamed of. Like liking Marvel. We live in a society governed by strict moral codes after all. And this is good.

They should worry a lot. And the guy should worry too. That's the very point. All of that is very momentous and a lot of thought and consideration must be given to the sort of behavior that can literally change one's future life. It's responsibility 101. I'm actually a big subscriber of second chances, turning the blind eye, forgiveness, and all that jazz but one's past actions usually tell you a lot about the person. People act like it's true in every other thing in life but somehow stumble when it comes to this.

__________________
San Franciscan lesbian dwarves and their tomato orgies.

I wasn’t aware you were religious. If you aren’t, it’s a little disingenuous to invoke it as your basis, regardless of the sarcasm. *
My argument isn’t about purity. That’s your stance. I could care less about it, as it doesn’t mean anything about a person. You wield abstinence as if it’s some measuring stick for how good a person actually is, when it isn’t. Far from it.
This isn’t about me being “white knighty”. I very much find any kind of talk where women are put down in such comments for enjoying sex, even if it’s promiscuity, as generally repulsive. Attacking women for this choice, as you’ve done in the past and not just the previous comment Filmbuff mentioned, especially attacking their lack of purity, is a very misogynist trait. Even if you’re not meaning it to be as such.
It’s almost like you’re still angry and bitter over your past relationship still, and maybe something else that’s happened, but it hints at insecurity that are a deeper issue. And the only way to make you feel better about your life is to perhaps criticize the women (and only occasionally men) over their relationships. Maybe go out and meet someone and watch less movies.
Ok, maybe not watch less movies. Baby steps, after all.

I was raised Catholic, bro. I'm lapsed now because I can no longer take the supernatural aspect of it seriously. Still, I think the moral element is meaningful and the most morally virtuous of all value systems I know. And cinema made me realize that, bewilderingly.

Where did I say anything like this? I think you're just angry and straw-manning.

I think you misunderstood my comment. What I said was that although the experience of a random sex encounter might seem amazing and fun in the moment, it's bound to end up as pointless and ultimately worthless in retrospect. This was an analogy to films that are fun when you watch them but you don't look back at the experience of watching them as foundational, particularly meaningful, or valuable. I wasn't putting down the women who engage in this sort of activity. I was criticizing the activity itself as shallow.

It was a controversial analogy, I admit, but you're not a new member and you should be used to my caustic style of writing by now.

Oh, so it's attacking now. Why stop ourselves, it's basically a verbal rape, right? That's the strawmanning I'm talking about. Anyway, if it's a choice, then we can by definition comment on it and criticize it. I detest satyrs, wolves, PUAs and the like much more than promiscuous women. Does it mean I have a very misandrist trait?

Looks like I think intent matters much more than you do. All of morality is built upon intent, to the point where if you do not intend something, you are usually less guilty if not downright not guilty of something. I'm well aware that implicit bias exists, but this would be entering the territory of how much we're responsible for something we had no say about; about our surroundings, strong influences, including rearing, and so on. Free will, basically. To say that one would still be responsible under such circumstances would be allowing the idea of free will, and that'd be half the step it takes to become religious. I don't think you're willing to take that step.

Seeing how triggered you are by the topic (now and in our previous discussions), one might infer that this is somehow unusually personal to you, betraying an insecurity (or vulnerability) of sorts. See? Speculation is fun, but it adds nothing of value.

Either way, whoever is "pure" is in a better position here. The "impure" one cannot admit they're wrong least they also admit that they are indeed impure. The pure can keep their purity, give it away lovingly, or just throw it away while changing their opinion on the matter, admitting they were wrong. I think people usually base their opinion on the matter on that very tangent, actually. The ones who lost their purity are more likely to try and defend the lack of purity or downplay how meaningful purity can be. I see that even amongst people who champion purity. The moment they lose it themselves, they start to relativize the whole thing as if it were aberrant to their beliefs.

Saying something isn't the most important thing or the only thing that defines a person is very different from saying something doesn't matter at all. Lots of middle ground here. But I can understand how people who irrevocably and foolishly lost their purity might try and convince themselves into thinking it's absolutely meaningless, for their own mental well-being.

Let's call it quits for now, not only because this is outside of the scope of this thread and verging on breaking the forum's rules, but also because I can see you're unable to talk about this topic without a lot of emotional investment that unfortunately involves resorting to ad hominems and strawmen. It just doesn't have the appearance of a worthwhile discussion anyway.

I know this is only an analogy, but I'd disagree with that conclusion.

Fun in itself is of value. Not everything has to be about building and learning.

Regardless, to the extent that you can remember such encounters, they are always there to occasionally provide some sort of fleeting memory of a good time.

Even in a fleeting encounter (sexual or otherwise) you can always learn something anyway.

Good effort. I'd be happy to have nr3 in my 1000.
A nice collection though regardless.

Minio also forgot in his comment that not all women have a vagina, and that not all people who have vaginas identify as women... It is a strictly binarist and reductive view of human beings.

Furthermore, it is not Minio's place to judge what other people, regardless of their gender, do with their private lives, what happens between consenting adults is nobody else's business, and kink shaming or shaming any decisions made by willing, consenting adults is infantile at best.

Of very little value, yes, which makes it essentially pointless in the grand scheme of things. I did come up with some better fringe cases, though. For example, the one where you do the one-night stand thing, and then you start dating and you eventually marry. The first one-night stand becomes sort of meaningful because of this. I also had a reason why it's not as meaningful or is meaningful in a different way, but it escaped me at the moment.

I think it just makes more sense/is more responsible and healthy to treat sex as something serious and momentous. Because after a long time together you love her and you want the best for her and you want to spend your life with her and then you make love to her with all that in mind and as such, it means much more than just a body part entering another body part. It's similar with films. If a film makes it hard for you to get in, makes you work to get it, to understand it, to acquire the taste for it, the result isn't just 90 minutes of meaningless fun but a lifelong love for a masterpiece that touched you in a profound way in the best case or at least a memorable, impactful film in the worst case.

I don't think this has anything to do with the discussion we were having, and I think that discussing this topic here is haram anyway. Regardless, men can spread their legs, too, or unbuckle their belts, or however you want to call it.

The thing is we all judge. You and Wyldesyde19 judge me in this thread, for example. If you say it's just to judge me because you believe I'm wrong, then by that very reasoning it's just for anybody to judge anybody else. Besides, you're basing your judgment of an actual person on bits and pieces, whereas I'm merely using a generic hypothetical as an analogy for a wholly different topic, a topic where I was criticizing a behavior (one I'm guilty of myself at that!) and not people who engage in it; the analogy you strawman into a whole purported ideology of misogyny, sexism, and whatnot.

I'm not sure if you'd be replying with the same sort of virulent passion if somebody said that overeating and weighing twice as much as you should is unhealthy. It's true that any obese person has the right to overeat and weigh as much as they want, but this doesn't preclude us from 'judging' and 'shaming' them by merely pointing out that being overweight can lead to serious health issues or by simply promoting healthier lifestyles. I imagine even if somebody called this being a fatso or eating like a pig, the point would still hold.

There is a difference between judging third parties and engaging in a thoughtful discussion with people who are actively participating in an online forum....

I'm trying to think what film character you're reminding me of.

I think it might be Francis Dollarhyde/Tom Noonan in Manhunter.

I don't think he would say whatnot though, but that could just be a disguise.

At least I murder people to good music.

Yeah I’ll let it go. There is nothing in that wall of text that excuses your view on women, anyways. It certainly isn’t critical thinking on your part. Just more defensive posturing where you somehow think it’s ok to say or think those things. *
It’s your personal view, and while I get that, it’s not a good one. *

What is my view on women, exactly?

You know, I always take this kind of accusation seriously. The other day somebody said I was narcissistic, so I took a considerable amount of time to slow down and think about this hard, read about narcissism, and so on. I concluded that I do not fit the definition no matter how one looks at it, and that the person simply said that out of anger and frustration over their own private matters. This proved to be true as they apologized the next day.

I'm thinking about the misogyny accusation right now and it doesn't fit, no matter how I look at it, either. However, I think I can understand why somebody could reach that conclusion just based on my jestful, provocative posts on MoFo. As I've said, though, I don't really care for my public image here, so all's good.

However, thank you for pointing this out to me anyway. I think it's important we check ourselves from time to time to make sure we haven't gone wicked quite yet, and that there's still good and purity (the other kind!) in our hearts.

Oh well, time for another rape pinku. Oh wait...

I can testify that Minio isn’t a misogynist.

Minio, the way you worded it, it looked misogynistic; not because you are, but because it is an argument often used by misogynists (they, unlike you, play it one-sided).

But that's it I think and honestly I don't know if I'm used to your caustic writing style but it didn't click me as something out of the ordinary when you said it, or with any intention. I even quoted your post normally xD

He definitely isn't.

Sexist and misogynistic aren't the same thing...