12 yr old testimony drama

[Guest]

3 hours ago, pam said:

MormonHeart will not be responding in the future.  Let's move on.  I am starting to think we're pretty much done on this subject anyway.

That's strange.  The "Banned" notation is no longer showing up on the avatar. You have to go to the person's profile to see the label.

[Maureen]

45 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

That's strange.  The "Banned" notation is no longer showing up on the avatar. You have to go to the person's profile to see the label.

It's there, maybe you're just not special enough to see it.  It's right under the avatar.

M.

[Vort]

3 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

So....

What did everyone think of the new Spider-man movie? I haven't seen it yet.

Lots of bad language and filthy innuendo. "Screw the pooch" is used at least twice, the last time being expanded upon with bon mots such as "taking care of the hybrids". The last word of the movie (before the stingers) is the F-word -- played for laughs, of course.

The irony is that it was a well-written, well-directed, well-acted, otherwise entertaining movie. The bad language and flipping off, etc. added not one good thing to the movie. It's flavoring the cookie dough with dog poop. Apparently, that's a pretty popular flavor these days. But I've just about had enough of it. I am on the verge of swearing (npi) off of future Marvel movies.

[Guest MormonGator]

7 minutes ago, Vort said:

Lots of bad language and filthy innuendo. "Screw the pooch" is used at least twice, the last time being expanded upon with bon mots such as "taking care of the hybrids". The last word of the movie (before the stingers) is the F-word -- played for laughs, of course.

The irony is that it was a well-written, well-directed, well-acted, otherwise entertaining movie. The bad language and flipping off, etc. added not one good thing to the movie. It's flavoring the cookie dough with dog poop. Apparently, that's a pretty popular flavor these days. But I've just about had enough of it. I am on the verge of swearing (npi) off of future Marvel movies.

  I didn't catch the innuendo, and I didn't hear "lots" of bad language. In fact, I didn't hear any of it until the the last word of the movie of course. I think the movie moves so fast that you won't really hear the profanities unless you are looking for it. 

[Vort]

Just now, MormonGator said:

  I didn't catch the innuendo, and I didn't hear "lots" of bad language. In fact, I didn't hear any of it until the the last word of the movie of course. I think the movie moves so fast that you won't really hear the profanities unless you are looking for it. 

Then you're mistaken, MG. I certainly wasn't "looking for it", and tried to ignore the first few times. It was relentless, and not subtle in the least.

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, Vort said:

Then you're mistaken, MG. I certainly wasn't "looking for it", and tried to ignore the first few times. It was relentless, and not subtle in the least.

Way off. It wasn't relentless in the least actually. 

[Vort]

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

Way off. It wasn't relentless in the least actually. 

http://www.kids-in-mind.com/s/spidermanhomecoming.htm

Quote

PROFANITY 4- 1 not fully enunciated F-word, 1 obscene hand gesture, 6 scatological terms, 9 anatomical terms, 24 mild obscenities, name-calling (crazy, insane, stupid, weird, goofy, old man, rouge stooge, lame, jerk, monster, losers, psychopath, demon, little spider friend, Springsteeny, Big Bird, Pro Wrestling, Halloween costume Bozos), exclamations (heck, sucks, oh my gosh, bingo, hot dog, shut-up, I swear), 9 religious exclamations (e.g. Oh My God, God, Thank God, Jesus).

"Relentless" is the perfect word.

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, Vort said:

http://www.kids-in-mind.com/s/spidermanhomecoming.htm

"Relentless" is the perfect word.

Nope,  If you think calling someone a "loser" or saying "heck" is swearing, than sure. It's "relentless". Other than that it's not noticeable.  

[Vort]

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

Nope,  If you think calling someone a "loser" or saying "heck" is swearing, than sure. It's "relentless". Other than that it's not noticeable.  

Then why did I notice it so prominently?

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, Vort said:

Then why did I notice it so prominently?

Ask yourself that, not me. My guess is that if you walk into any movie with scowl on your face looking for "swear words" you'll find them. With the sole exception of the last scene, which yes, that word is obvious. So you are right about the last scene. 

[Vort]

Just now, MormonGator said:

Ask yourself that, not me.

I am asking you, because you're the one who took issue with my movie report and then claimed the constant profanity was "not noticeable".

1 minute ago, MormonGator said:

My guess is that if you walk into any movie with scowl on your face looking for "swear words" you'll find them.

Yet I did no such thing. On the contrary, based on what I had heard and read, I expected a fun and entertaining movie. I had no other expectations, positive or negative. So how else do you account for it?

[zil]

6 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Nope,  If you think calling someone a "loser" or saying "heck" is swearing, than sure. It's "relentless". Other than that it's not noticeable.  

 

4 minutes ago, Vort said:

Then why did I notice it so prominently?

Likely we have here a scenario where Gator is inured to vulgarities more so than Vort.  I would have found it far more offensive than Vort, probably.  I can go whole weeks (maybe more) without hearing anything worse than words used to describe outer darkness and the state of being there.

[Guest MormonGator]

4 minutes ago, zil said:

Likely we have here a scenario where Gator is inured to vulgarities more so than Vort.  

Probably so/assuredly so . Or maybe the movie really is fast moving and you have to be looking for it.

Edited July 14, 2017 by MormonGator

[zil]

4 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Probably so/assuredly so . Or maybe the movie really is fast moving and you have to be looking for it.

Gator, one does not have to be looking for it.  Trust me on this.  If the F-word is something you only hear twice / year, it's going to be glaringly obvious when you do hear it (more so if you find it inherently objectionable).  You won't need to be looking for it or taking special note of it.  If it's something you hear all the time, you're not likely to notice when it is used.  This is true of pretty much everything - the unusual stands out, the norm passes by unnoticed.  Our brains have neural pathways for processing the norm without conscious thought; not so with the unusual - the unusual doesn't have neural pathways and the brain must engage the consciousness to assess how this unusual thing should be handled.

Given what I know of your background and Vort's background, I think it's safe to say you've heard (and perhaps still do hear) vulgarities far more often than he has (and probably still do).  I can pretty much guarantee both of you hear them more often than I do.

[Guest MormonGator]

23 minutes ago, zil said:

Given what I know of your background and Vort's background, I think it's safe to say you've heard (and perhaps still do hear) vulgarities far more often than he has (and probably still do).  I can pretty much guarantee both of you hear them more often than I do.

Oh for sure, totally agree. Vastly different backgrounds and lifestyles. Doesn't matter in the long run, everyone knows how much I like and respect him, even though we are very different and don't agree on much. @Vort is a great guy, for sure. 

Edited July 14, 2017 by MormonGator

[zil]

Just now, MormonGator said:

Oh for sure, totally agree. Vastly different backgrounds and lifestyles. Doesn't matter in the long run, everyone knows how much I like and respect him, even though we are very different. 

Agree, and I wouldn't say there's fault or good / bad or whatever going on here.  This is a simple case of perspective.  From your perspective, prominent vulgarity means something completely different than from Vort's perspective, which means something completely different than from my perspective.  Thus, Vort is right about how vulgar the film is, and you are right about how vulgar the film is, and I'm right to wonder how either of you could have made it past the first three minutes.

[Guest MormonGator]

3 minutes ago, zil said:

 I'm right to wonder how either of you could have made it past the first three minutes.

It was raining down here and I didn't  feel like driving to Disney. That helped. 

[Guest]

52 minutes ago, Vort said:

I am on the verge of swearing (npi) off of future Marvel movies.

Welcome to the club!

[Vort]

21 minutes ago, zil said:

Given what I know of your background and Vort's background, I think it's safe to say you've heard (and perhaps still do hear) vulgarities far more often than he has (and probably still do).  I can pretty much guarantee both of you hear them more often than I do.

I worked (and still work) as a software developer and writer. As anyone who has read The Martian (written by a software engineer) can vouch for, software guys tend to have filthy mouths. Not all or even most, but a significant proportion. So, sadly, my ears are far from virginous.

But that's work, and that's what I get paid to do (when I'm getting paid). It's like being in high school; you don't really have much of a choice. But when I go for entertainment, that's an entirely different deal. I don't want to pay good money for "entertainment" and get filth back. That's what I got with the Spiderman movie.

[Vort]

23 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

even though we are very different and don't agree on much.

At the risk of retreading an old joke: I disagree. I think we actually agree on a lot. We simply have more to discuss when we don't agree on some point, so that's what gets talked about. That's the common condition of internet discussion lists, and tends to magnify differences of opinion and minimize agreements.

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, Vort said:

At the risk of retreading an old joke: I disagree. I think we actually agree on a lot. We simply have more to discuss when we don't agree on some point, so that's what gets talked about. That's the common condition of internet discussion lists, and tends to magnify differences of opinion and minimize agreements.

Very true. Great points and great insight, as per usual. 

[SilentOne]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

PROFANITY 4- 1 not fully enunciated F-word, 1 obscene hand gesture, 6 scatological terms, 9 anatomical terms, 24 mild obscenities, name-calling (crazy, insane, stupid, weird, goofy, old man, rouge stooge, lame, jerk, monster, losers, psychopath, demon, little spider friend, Springsteeny, Big Bird, Pro Wrestling, Halloween costume Bozos), exclamations (heck, sucks, oh my gosh, bingo, hot dog, shut-up, I swear), 9 religious exclamations (e.g. Oh My God, God, Thank God, Jesus).

That's disappointing. I love Spider-man and was really looking forward to not just watching this but adding it to my collection. Now I'm thinking I probably shouldn't.

[Guest]

If you want to talk about good entertainment being polluted by filth, I hate, hate, HATE it when violence that borders on cruelty shows up in what is supposed to be comedy, something that seems to be occurring more and more often.

I love shows like King of the Hill.  However, the Simpsons is absolutely and completely banned from my household.  I can't stand the violence on the Itchy and Scratchy show.  I interpret such violence as trying to make cruelty against animals (and sometimes women and children) "funny" and acceptable.  Well, it isn't - it is pure wickedness and it makes me FURIOUS when I stumble upon it.  Violence and cruelty are NOT funny and it is NOT OK to laugh at such things.  And it really is too bad... if it weren't for the Itchy and Scratchy show, I think I would be a pretty big Simpsons fan.

I would far rather come home to see my family watching Erin Brokovich (rated R because of profanity) than the Simpsons (rated TV-14, apparently).

Anyhow, end rant.

[Vort]

1 minute ago, DoctorLemon said:

I can't stand the violence on the Itchy and Scratchy show.  I interpret such violence as trying to make cruelty against animals (and sometimes women and children) "funny" and acceptable.  Well, it isn't - it is pure wickedness and it makes me FURIOUS when I stumble upon it.  Violence and cruelty are NOT funny and it is NOT OK to laugh at such things.  And it really is too bad... if it weren't for the Itchy and Scratchy show, I think I would be a pretty big Simpsons fan.

For the record, that is the whole point of Itchy and Scratchy -- the absurdity of violence for violence's sake being used to entertain children. it's a send-up of many older cartoons from the Golden Age, especially Tom and Jerry.

I took at distaste to the Simpsons years ago, not because of Itchy and Scratchy, but because it became clear that the writers and producers shared little moral and ethical ground in common with me. Extraordinarily clever and well-written show, possibly the best sitcom ever. But their ceaseless cynicism and contempt for religion and the religious (plus their lack of anything approaching a even-handed mockery of social and political targets, with liberals being portrayed as clueless and perhaps stupid but conservatives as evil and bloodthirsty) have convinced me that they don't want my viewership. So I take them at their (implied) word.

[Jane_Doe]

12 hours ago, person0 said:

Spider-man looked 12 years old, and was way too dramatic.     (Actually, I haven't seen it yet either)

He's actually 15 in the movie, and they make constant jokes about him being so young.  I just saw it today- it was hilliarius!  I totally recommend it!