I legit thought this was Babylon Bee for a moment

Dude, a fantasy show about various African folklore would be great and probably sell like hot cakes but the studios know they'll get more views by race-swapping established lore and characters. It's honestly kind of sad.

WB will throw millions at this so they can point to a Not Guilty verdict as proof that they were justified in keeping him on

The worst part is that even that is kind of sparse really. The best that can be said for it is that it's really not a poorly made movie, it's just kind of a movie. It does miss the point of the original story the novel. But then again, so did the original movie.

I have read it and it is obviously a much better version of the story than any of the movies classic or new.

I wouldn't be sleeping well either if every major media outlet was eagerly trying to convince me that I was hated and oppressed

Seeing other age groups would also be useful

I'm not really sure what this is meant to imply.

You think it might have anything to do with the fact that you've been pushing sexuality and sexual issues on children for decades now? No that can't be it. Silly me.

But there's a difference between sex for procreation and sex for enjoyment and pleasure. One is strictly vaginal intercourse, the other can be a myriad of things that have nothing to do with creating life. That's the one that's being pushed more on youth as so important.

I think the problem comes from the fact that society has turned a lot of women into children. It really has little to do with women voting. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with that idea. There are plenty of women who have rejected what society is pushing on them in the form of hookup culture and reduced morals, and vote in accordance with that rejection of these new societal norms.

Hell, he's not even admitting to his urges and then saying that he needs help or that he knows something is wrong with his thoughts. He's admitting to his urges and then turning around and saying that it's fine and that children can reciprocate those feelings. He seems like the very definition of a child predator.

I think moving in together before marriage being a negative or positive is entirely dependent on how long the relationship has been going on before you move in together. I understand that it's anecdotal but I can compare my own marriage to that of a friend who's now on his second marriage. His first marriage, they had been dating for a few months at tops before they moved in together. My wife and I had been dating for several years before we moved in together and we're now happily married well over a decade. My friend, after his first marriage fell apart, bounced around between living with his mother at the age of 34 living in an apartment moving from town to town moving from job to job etc etc.

I think a better idea would be to make sure you know the person before you move in with them or try to start a long-term committed relationship with them. You can't really know someone after a few months but after a few years it's much easier to get a grasp on who the person is and how they'll react to certain situations. Again, I understand it's anecdotal but I do think there is some truth to it.

I do think there is some merit to a little bit of sexual freedom in a society, but as with most things in life moderation is key. I think there's a saying that goes something like "make sure you have an open mind but not so open that your brain falls out." For example, arranged marriage is one of the dumbest concepts I've ever heard of. No one, male or female, should be forced into a relationship simply because their parents liked the coupling. The flip side of that is that anyone, male or female, sleeping with ten different people in a week, shouldn't be viewed as some sort of free thinker or progressive role model.

I will definitely take a look at your suggestion though thanks for it.

Yep. When you've been taught that all nice guys are creeps who just want to get into your pants, suddenly the guys that are jerks to you come across as the ones who are genuine and sincere and not weirdos.

You're not wrong there. But what I was talking about is the actual group of young men who would fall into the literal definition of "involuntary celibate."

I really do think that there is a concerted effort to make you untrusting of your neighbors and your friends and your fellow man. This started with the push to label anyone who believes something slightly out there or off the wall as some insane conspiracy theorist who thinks that the world is run by a lizard people, when in reality they just think that the government lies to us about stuff. Now it's turned into constant news articles about how everyone's buying guns, so you'll think that your neighbor is some psycho who's going to shoot you at the drop of a hat. Covid really exacerbated the issue too, because now they can label every individual that you don't know as some breeding ground for germs that's going to kill you and your whole family simply by being near you and giving you some horrible sickness. That's why media latches on to things like monkeypox because they can use that to further the idea.

I seem to recall the term celibate was all that was needed at one point, because it was generally looked at as a choice.

I personally think the whole "nice guy" thing is a two-fold issue. For example, women have been taught that if a guy is excessively nice to her or good to her that he's after something (sex is what they're told), to not trust him. The other side of the coin, is that guys have been told being nice to women doesn't mean they owe you something. But it's nature for a guy to be nice to a woman that he's interested in, which would, hopefully and traditionally, result in a relationship of some sort. That's the basis of courting and courtship in human beings. The problem, once again, is that we're taught that sex is what most people desire. It's really not what most people desire. What most people desire is a meaningful relationship of some sort, companionship.

Now, if you throw in guys actually listening to the advice women are given about nice guys only wanting sex from them, you end up with men who truly believe that, "Hey if I do want sex from this woman I just need to be nice to her" or "If I'm being nice to her that means I secretly desire to have sex with her." It's like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It used to be that the "thing" men wanted from women for being nice to them was relationship. Like I said before, that's the end goal of courtship, which is ultimately two people being nice to each other because they're interested in each other. It's usually started by one person, the man.

I think you hit the nail on the head there. It's kind of a cliche at this point but that saying about what we have not being important but who we spend our time with being important really nails it as well. We can see the whole world and visit places that are truly awe-inspiring, but does it really matter if we don't have anyone to share those memories with, be them a friend or a spouse or family member?

I don't know if I entirely agree with you, though I do see where you're coming from I suppose. There are examples of societies in history that have been ruled almost entirely by men that have devolved into hedonism and ultimately collapsed as well. I think it has more to do with embracing base human needs and desires rather than understanding that, while those things are part of our life, they shouldn't rule our life.

Addendum: in a way it feels like the book "Brave New World", where society has become based on hedonism and pleasure rather than a truly human experience.

How vaguely threatening of them.

There goes whatever miniscule amount of interest I had.

Talk about mixed signals...it wasn't too long ago we kept hearing about why fetuses with some of those issues should be aborted since that was the "humane" thing to do.