GuntherBait
Banned
I was waiting for you to join this thread.adelgary said:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Row over Kidman's film romp with youngster
- Thread starter Suerte
- Start date
- Status
Teknopathetic
Member
It's "art", it's somebody's "vision," and at the end of the day, Loki, etc.'s whining's not going to change a damned thing.
Mega Man's Electric Sheep
Member
"I knew that you were somewhat joking, but I also felt that there was a kernel of true sentiment there on your part due to your sexual orientation and my stated disagreement with it."
You "disagree" with his sexual orientation? How's that work?
"He's gay!"
"I disagree!"
I'll save you a post, I'm just joking, and I assume you were referring to the fact that you don't agree with what gay people do.
" personally have never had a racist, anti-semitic, or child pornish thought, ever."
No, you're just "in disagreement". Which is fine, if you drop the holier than thou attitude. Everyone is bigoted to some extent. You are too.
You "disagree" with his sexual orientation? How's that work?
"He's gay!"
"I disagree!"
I'll save you a post, I'm just joking, and I assume you were referring to the fact that you don't agree with what gay people do.
" personally have never had a racist, anti-semitic, or child pornish thought, ever."
No, you're just "in disagreement". Which is fine, if you drop the holier than thou attitude. Everyone is bigoted to some extent. You are too.
HalfPastNoon said:
It's nice that that's all you can take from my post, but anyway...
No, I didn't intend for it to come off like that-- I do a HELL of a lot of wrong; it just has never fallen within those areas, owing mostly to my upbringing, which I am thankful for, and also the fact that I am intelligent enough to think of things (such as race) beyond mere generalities. Sorry if that comment was too "condescending" for you, but it's the truth.
I do a LOT of wrong. Look in this very thread at how I snapped at Adelgary without having full possession of the facts (i.e. asking him to clarify what he meant). I'm somewhat ashamed of it now.
Mega Man's Electric Sheep said:
Ok, I'm not understanding what part you didn't get and why everyone keeps thinking that I believe myself to be "holier than thou". First, this comment:
...was one that was made SOLELY to illustrate the reason why I judge people who are beholden to those thoughts; to recap, it is because these are BLATANTLY wrong thoughts and acts which I, and many others, tend to take "mental shortcuts" with (a form of heuristic, if you will, as we simply CANNOT evaluate all assumptions/situations). I used those particular examples (racism, child porn etc.) to show that I only take such "shortcuts" when it concerns the most self-evidently wrong actions or thoughts, which is the best I can do, since we all have to take shortcuts sometimes, and it's best to limit them to those issues which don't deserve scrutiny.
And I've NEVER said that I am not bigoted to some extent; as you quite correctly point out, we all are to some degree. Understand why I said these things before you paint me as some sort of egomaniac.
You people are weird.
LOKI!
Where were you in 1987?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093253/
15 year old boy beds and marries two considerably older women.
Where were you in 1987?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093253/
15 year old boy beds and marries two considerably older women.
samus4ever
Banned
I wonder what peoples replies would be like if it was Michael Jackson and not Kidman.
Levious, I can only comment on that which is before me. Also, read my posts for my opinion on the distinction between a 15 or 16 year old and a 10 year old; also at issue is whether they actually had a 15 year old actor involved in graphic scenes with the older women, or if this was just a plot element and something which was implicitly understood.
But anyway, I've already dawdled too long here.
Btw, I was 9 years old in '87-- I was smart, but not smart enough to be making social commentary of any significance.
EDIT:
What does "passionately kissed" mean 9 times out of 10? I'll tell you that it doesn't mean a peck on the lips. Besides which, the reactions of the people involved in screening the film seem to point to it as well. If it didn't happen, then great-- you're free to disregard my comments, as I'm sure you did anyway.
But anyway, I've already dawdled too long here.
Btw, I was 9 years old in '87-- I was smart, but not smart enough to be making social commentary of any significance.
EDIT:
What does "passionately kissed" mean 9 times out of 10? I'll tell you that it doesn't mean a peck on the lips. Besides which, the reactions of the people involved in screening the film seem to point to it as well. If it didn't happen, then great-- you're free to disregard my comments, as I'm sure you did anyway.
karasu
Member
What does "passionately kissed" mean 9 times out of 10? I'll tell you that it doesn't mean a peck on the lips. Besides which, the reactions of the people involved in screening the film seem to point to it as well. If it didn't happen, then great-- you're free to disregard my comments, as I'm sure you did anyway.
So it could be a long kiss on the lips, or the forehead, or anything. That doesn't mean it involves tounge. Take it in context, remember they're referring to an adult woman and a ten year old boy, it probably doesn't mean tounge. The outrage probably stems from the fact that they're naked.
Well if that's the case, then great-- but understand that that's how I interpreted it (which seems to be logical imo) and that's what my posts have been based upon. If there's no tongue, and the nudity is handled tastefully (i.e. a mother bathing her son-- though ten years old is a tad old for that ), then I don't have a problem.
), then I don't have a problem.GuntherBait
Banned
Mooreberg said:
Worth watching, but fair warning.
So what's the fair warning?
Mega Man's Electric Sheep
Member
"I say the kid caught a lucky break if he was old enough to enjoy it. He if he wasn't old enough to enjoy it no harm no foul. There is a big difference between young boy older women and young boy/girl older man. That's just life."
That is absolutely retarded.
That is absolutely retarded.
The Promised One
Banned
Loki said:
I agree. She should know better.
The Promised One
Banned
samus4ever said:
Good point.
My earlier post was completely ignored by Loki. Either I made a point that couldn't be contested, or what I've contributed was deemed to have no value.
So I'll try again.
So, using your imagination to interpret "a passionate kiss" as a full blown makeout session, wasn't child pornish at all?
And maybe you can give the kid's parents, who are required to be on-set at all times and are seemingly okay with this, some friggin credit.
This has been a message from the gay community.
So I'll try again.
So, using your imagination to interpret "a passionate kiss" as a full blown makeout session, wasn't child pornish at all?
And maybe you can give the kid's parents, who are required to be on-set at all times and are seemingly okay with this, some friggin credit.
This has been a message from the gay community.
Goreomedy said:My earlier post was completely ignored by Loki. Either I made a point that couldn't be contested, or what I've contributed was deemed to have no value.
So I'll try again.
So, using your imagination to interpret "a passionate kiss" as a full blown makeout session, wasn't child pornish at all?
And maybe you can give the kid's parents, who are required to be on-set at all times and are seemingly okay with this, some friggin credit.
This has been a message from the gay community.
Sorry, I must have missed your post.
If you want to get that technical about it (as people here seem so fond of doing), then allow me to rephrase my statement and say that I've "never had such a thought of my own accord, having its genesis in my own mind and not resultant from reflection upon outside acts and circumstances". Is that better? Sounds too much like legalese to my ears...
As for "giving the parents credit" (in terms of them being caring and good parents looking out for the welfare of their child), meh-- I could just as easily assume that they have a child whom they realize is talented and is going to make millions and want to jumpstart his career; what better way to do so than to star in a provocative movie alongside one of Hollywood's A-list actors? Parents exploit their kids all the time, and for far less pressing reasons. I'm not saying that this IS the case, I'm just saying that as much as you'd like to believe otherwise, it very well could have been the case. It's just speculation either way, though, which is why I didn't take into account the parents' decision necessarily.
Beyond that, I also do not give parents the final say as to what constitutes "correct" or "appropriate" behavior regarding their child-- that's what the law and social consensus is for. Though a parent's wishes for a child are legally binding, they are only so to the point where those wishes intersect with established law and social practice. If it weren't so, we wouldn't have a Bureau of Child Welfare, now, would we? Moreover, the moral conceptions of some parents are horribly malformed, and a child should not necessarily have to be subjected to their consequences where situations can be deemed to be either avoidable, detrimental (to the child), or corrosive (to society).
But these ancillary concerns would take much too long to speak to in depth; so I hope you'll forgive me for not doing so.
Felidae_Khrall
Member
Loki said:Sorry, I must have missed your post.
If you want to get that technical about it (as people here seem so fond of doing), then allow me to rephrase my statement and say that I've "never had such a thought of my own accord, having its genesis in my own mind and not resultant from reflection upon outside acts and circumstances". Is that better? Sounds too much like legalese to my ears...
As for "giving the parents credit" (in terms of them being caring and good parents looking out for the welfare of their child), meh-- I could just as easily assume that they have a child whom they realize is talented and is going to make millions and want to jumpstart his career; what better way to do so than to star in a provocative movie alongside one of Hollywood's A-list actors? Parents exploit their kids all the time, and for far less pressing reasons. I'm not saying that this IS the case, I'm just saying that as much as you'd like to believe otherwise, it very well could have been the case. It's just speculation either way, though, which is why I didn't take into account the parents' decision necessarily.
Beyond that, I also do not give parents the final say as to what constitutes "correct" or "appropriate" behavior regarding their child-- that's what the law and social consensus is for. Though a parent's wishes for a child are legally binding, they are only so to the point where those wishes intersect with established law and social practice. If it weren't so, we wouldn't have a Bureau of Child Welfare, now, would we? Moreover, the moral conceptions of some parents are horribly malformed, and a child should not necessarily have to be subjected to their consequences where situations can be deemed to be either avoidable, detrimental (to the child), or corrosive (to society).
But these ancillary concerns would take much too long to speak to in depth; so I hope you'll forgive me for not doing so.
I think I see the problem here. Loki is merely jealous that he wasn't cast for the role of the 10 year old boy. Just get naked, get in the bath with a picture of Nicole, and go to town!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked