Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Presentable
No I'm not. I was just making an observation. Hollywood right now is a Pro-Life motherfucker. Baby gets born. Always.
A *wipes tears* will never cancel out contradicting yourself, either. What did you mean, exactly? You claimed that movies with abortions wouldn't make money, and that there's no deeper meaning to it than that. I've been saying that these new abortion-free movies happen to make money, whilst apparently satisfying some greater moral good. Then you claim the lack of abortions in films helps them make money. I counter that you don't hold them to independent anyway, and you drop "ahahahahaha" because you don't actually have a rebuttal, or a point.
|
Your thinking is pretty jumbled.
I'm saying that lack of, let's say "unsympathetic" abortions in entertainment media doesn't indicate that the industry has pro-life values. I think
it indicates that including protagonists having "unsympathetic" abortions would be box office death, because of what it perceives as deeply
imbeded cultural values about such things.
So it doesn't reflect their values (other than commerce); it reflects their perception (or research) about national cultural values. That's what
I've argued consistently -- you're the one who's changing:
Your initial thesis is that it reflects on Hollywood's values, and I say no. Later in the game your wording implies whether it reflects any values
at all, which is a very different animal.
Hence: pfffffffffffffffft.