MovieChat Forums > SixOfTheRichest > Replies
SixOfTheRichest's Replies
<blockquote>I haven't gotten any satisfying rebuttal from you why the theory cant be true....</blockquote>It is your point. The onus is on you to provide solid factual proof of your claims on a broader scale, despite whatever evidence you are basing it on.
There is evidence for many things, including the misogyny, sexism, domestic violence and pedophilia of heterosexuals, but it doesn't mean that they all get lumped into the same category of attitude\behavior.
You are over-thinking it all to want to be proven right or have others agree with you.
Focusing just on the one thing, when it is not the only thing people die off and those that have contracted it and died, (like any other thing they may have contracted), it is more than likely they had other health issues that contributed to the death. We need to know what other influenza viruses people have contracted and died from to make a comparison and what are the other health issues involved with the patient who died? We are given superficial messages.
The truth is not the same for everyone. To claim what is only perceived as a personal truth about homosexuality, and in your case it was about misogyny and correlating it with pedophilia is pushing the envelope for many. It doesn't appear born out of any solid evidence or facts, except your own perception of an archetype. It is not empirical only anecdotal.
You are asking for others to explore your truth, but to what avail and to prove what?
I am not big on political correctness myself, but with homosexuality, a lot of strides have had to have been taken to get to some sort of level of acceptance by society and the establishment.
Lets not compartmentalize a few rotten apples in a barrel, to infect the rest of the dynamic. These exist in all facets.
We all have a right to our opinions, but not at the expense of demonizing
an entire category with a generalization that amounts to nothing anyway. This can be said of all otherwise.
I had a friend who had his own grunge style band and his lyrics were poetic. His music wasn't to my taste though and if I was to be honest, I though it was crap. Nirvana is the same to me. If one can't understand the lyric while it is being sung, I don't see the point of attempting to sing it. I am not into the groupie scene. Tortured souls looking for meaning in dark spaces.
Madonna could have had some experimental fun, but like you say, I think she was way too intelligent to let it ruin her. Madonna was controversial to an extent, but she wasn't dark like Winehouse. I'd say, her health and level of fitness was first and foremost important. She needed a clear head and a lot of this comes through in her film Truth or Dare. She was more about being uninhibited sexually and not about clouding her vision with mind altering substances. I really don't think she would have tolerated substance abuse, or even excessive drunkeness with her troupe.
Cool, Trendy, all just buzz words really and taste is all subjective. I could listen to Winehouse, but couldn't care a hootin' holler about Cobain. I wouldn't go out of my way to listen to her though and even the sounds she emulates in comparison, I don't often seek out.
Madonna is more fun and proven to be more level-headed and shrewd. She is also still alive.
I'd say common sense and rationale is what is key. Those that believe in a fairy tale are only desperate to hold onto their delusion for fear of truth not being what they want to hear, or want it to be.
People want understanding and meaning for their lives, but trying to find it in a savior who will take the burden of proof away for them, just so they can live eternal life somewhere, (in what form?), is a cop-out delusion and rather convenient don't you think. Nobody said the majority of the masses were intelligent or sharp.
Her tunes are still embedded today in the minds of many. She was a one of a kind.
I still watch Truth or Dare aka: In Bed With Madonna.
Madonna was pop sounding though, and designed for mainstream connection. She was a watershed, in that she knew how to market herself and her sex, make catchy sounds and was in a sense a brazen f<>k you to much of stiff convention. She was all girl and was going to make sure everyone knew it.
Touche!
I think more than anything, she is seen as a tragic figure and a victim. I don't really buy into that. Same with Kurt Cobain. They were self-destructive at their own hands. Grungy looks and sounds that don't really elevate anything in the music regarding skill and\or talent, just an image that people choose to connect with for representation.
What are these mainstream and modern attitudes that you appear to take umbrage too regarding homosexuality? You can only account for and own your own thought process as an individual.
Are there mainstream modern attitudes towards heterosexuality that would never be accepted, or is it about wanting to see one sexuality as being superior over the other?
I don't often place great stead in humanity. I think we try our best with what we know, but I also run by the notion that there are far too many people on the plant and it is bursting at the seams. It would also depend on how one perceives life, as just living as human as the be all end all, or is there more to it.
What we see reflected in other animal and vegetation life, is also a projection of our own lives. I take a cynical approach to humans more often than not and masculine feminine qualities as an objective, are more external, when these qualities are also within each and all of us as an internal. I know I would rather be masculine form than feminine form and appreciate my maleness.
You would have to prove them true first and not just based on your own subjective prejudices.
They have shut down society to deal with it and given the rest of us the day off in the process, whether we wanted to or not...lol
They still have to deal with how their health care systems are holding up and the spotlight is rightfully placed on the US.
More like Ideals than Ideas and we know how certain ideals that promote hate can turn out. What we learn from history, is not to go there again.
Isn't that the same with all governments. This pandemic at the moment is making them work for their money.
Yes, and any decisions made should have been at National's behest to decide what they wanted to do with Peter's party. That was what the result should have naturally and rightfully cultivated. It will be interesting now to see how the NZ public vote in the next election, as Ardern is promoted as a shining star in the MMS around the world, but what goes on in the home turf is a different story.
That is fine and many people do. But that is also the irony which appears lost on you. Your own blindsided dogma has gotten the better of you.