What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Bill Maher Back At It (1 Viewer)

Given that you've been touchy about exact wording today ("drink bleach" / "inject disinfectant"), I'm curious about which government you think is handing out donuts?  I agree with you that the government should be doing more to encourage healthy practices such as vaccination (like handing out cash).

That said, sure, Americans should eat healthier too.  The vaccine is still the single best weapon we have against COVID.  Anyone stating otherwise is fooling themselves.
You're right, it's not our government. It is corporations doing that. I conflated the two.

I disagree vaccines are the best weapon. Being healthy and having a good immune system is the best weapon. We just don't want to mandate health. We want to mandate the vaccine. 

 
You're right, it's not our government. It is corporations doing that. I conflated the two.

I disagree vaccines are the best weapon. Being healthy and having a good immune system is the best weapon. We just don't want to mandate health. We want to mandate the vaccine. 
You really couldn't be more wrong about this.  Go read the vaccine threads.  Start with every post by @Doug B and @Terminalxylem.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A vaccinated obese smoker has less to worry about than an unvaccinated in shape non smoker?

I dont agree with that 
"Obese" and "smoker" are relative terms (how obese?  how much smoking?).  All else being equal, vaccination is the single most effective thing one can do to protect oneself (and society).  You know this.  I don't understand why you want to conflate it with other things.

 
"Obese" and "smoker" are relative terms (how obese?  how much smoking?).  All else being equal, vaccination is the single most effective thing one can do to protect oneself (and society).  You know this.  I don't understand why you want to conflate it with other things.
It's called "whataboutism". 

 
A vaccinated obese smoker has less to worry about than an unvaccinated in shape non smoker?

I dont agree with that 
Whether it’s true or not doesn’t matter - it doesn’t follow that being healthy is our best weapon.  We know this because healthy people are dying.  Our COVID response should me multifaceted- vaccine, getting in shape, masking in some situations (for now), distancing, healthy diet, hydration and on.  The vaccine is the best weapon because they are safe, highly effective at preventing death and (almost) everyone can do it.  Healthy people can’t get healthy.  Many people with certain conditions can’t get healthy.

 
Whether it’s true or not doesn’t matter - it doesn’t follow that being healthy is our best weapon.  We know this because healthy people are dying.  Our COVID response should me multifaceted- vaccine, getting in shape, masking in some situations (for now), distancing, healthy diet, hydration and on.  The vaccine is the best weapon because they are safe, highly effective at preventing death and (almost) everyone can do it.  Healthy people can’t get healthy.  Many people with certain conditions can’t get healthy.
So the new Nashville Hot Cheetos are out?

 
So a Communist Vietnamese leader ate at a famous restaurant (SaltBae) and ate a nice steak with 24k gold on top.  Video was posted and Facebook censored it along with the #SaltBae hashtag.

Nice to see Facebook doing the bidding of a third world communist dictatorship.  Ok, well, they say they're "looking into why it was censored".  Right.

Seriously, this world would be better off without this company.

 
Maher was on with Chris Cuomo tonight brought up the silliness of some crazy woke and cancel culture issues that get attached to the Democrats. I agree with him. 

 
I lost touch with Maher when he went hard left instead of his usual left-centrist which he had been on Politically Incorrect and even Real Time he would usually wink at his GOP viewers in the TV screen to let you know he wasn't blind and could call out his own party. During Trump he decided to go hard the other way and that's a marketing choice he and the producers decided. He is entertainment 1st and foremost. 

-I firmly am with Maher on this and since he "Took one for the Team", safe to say behind the curtains that he doesn't believe in the vaccine at all and like a lot of healthy people doesn't view the Virus as the threat so many folks make it out to be. I find that chilling coming from a Liberal like Maher, to sort of peel back the curtain and say OK I'm not going along with this any more. 

-That of course leads us to the 50% of the population unvaccinated right now and some fo them are going to say "I told you, even their own party is starting to question all of this" 

-That woman who holds office in Oregon should be removed immediately. I couldn't listen to her for a minute discuss why vaccinated people need to be wearing masks outside, it's ludicrous and I'm grateful i don't live in that state with the meltdown in Portland to boot. We have a Tennis player who come to Florida in the winter and has a home in Oregon, Ducks alum and all and he is moving permanently here. 

The folks who are wanting to force people into masks outside, there is something chemically wrong with them I guess. 

People died from cancer today i assure you and much of it could have been prevented with proper diet and exercise but that doesn't get you news headlines so you have to be brash and bold and tell poor citizens they need to wear a mask outside at this stage of the game, outrageous. 
Good ole MOP. Glad to c you are still around. 

 
Maher weighs in on the Will Smith Slap. Wondering what people thought of this.

https://nypost.com/2022/04/02/bill-maher-says-jada-pinkett-smith-lucky-to-just-have-alopecia/

“If you are so lucky in life as to have that (alopecia) be your medical problem, just say ‘thank God,'” Maher cracked to his guests, attorney Laura Coates and former presidential and New York City mayoral candidate Andrew Yang.

“It’s not life threatening. It’s part of — for most people, 80 percent of men, 50 percent of women — it’s part of aging.”

“Aging is, trust me I know, it’s the degradation of the flesh. It happens to all of us,” the 66-year-old political comedian added.

“And you know, just put on a f–king wig like everybody else at the Oscars if it bothers you so much.”

 
Maher weighs in on the Will Smith Slap. Wondering what people thought of this.

https://nypost.com/2022/04/02/bill-maher-says-jada-pinkett-smith-lucky-to-just-have-alopecia/
It is worth noting that Maher said all of this during his monologue (see: jokes). 

And while he told all of it as jokes, I have no doubt that most of what he said is his legit take on it, and it is hard to disagree with most of what he said.  There has to be a part of Will Smith that is slapping himself for ruining his rep by defending a woman who has publicly humiliated him. 

 
It is worth noting that Maher said all of this during his monologue (see: jokes). 

And while he told all of it as jokes, I have no doubt that most of what he said is his legit take on it, and it is hard to disagree with most of what he said.  There has to be a part of Will Smith that is slapping himself for ruining his rep by defending a woman who has publicly humiliated him. 


Yes. 

The monologue: https://youtu.be/W34ueQvL938

“You know, I must say, comparing a woman to Demi Moore looking her hottest is not exactly the worst insult I’ve ever heard in the world. I mean, alopecia, it’s not leukemia, OK. Alopecia is when your hair falls out. … There are worse things,” he said.


I think this is where a lot of people are. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not really political, I suppose, but are posters here really buying that this was a real slap and not staged?

I mean, ratings for the Oscars have been declining and they desperately needed something to get people interested.  Will Smith probably doesn't fart without his agent's approval.  Will Smith also literally just won the award for best at "making you believe he did something that he actually didn't".  He's good at, you know, acting.  And that's before we get into the fact that Will is a big dude and Chris Rock is not.  If Will slapped him full force, it would have knocked him halfway across the room.

 
Not really political, I suppose, but are posters here really buying that this was a real slap and not staged?

I mean, ratings for the Oscars have been declining and they desperately needed something to get people interested.  Will


Smith


probably doesn't fart without his agent's approval.  Will


Smith


also literally just won the award for best at "making you believe he did something that he actually didn't".  He's good at, you know, acting.  And that's before we get into the fact that Will is a big dude and Chris Rock is not.  If Will slapped him full force, it would have knocked him halfway across the room.


Don't you run with the same crowd ridicules Trump loyalists types for believing in conspiracy theories?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not really political, I suppose, but are posters here really buying that this was a real slap and not staged?

I mean, ratings for the Oscars have been declining and they desperately needed something to get people interested.  Will Smith probably doesn't fart without his agent's approval.  Will Smith also literally just won the award for best at "making you believe he did something that he actually didn't".  He's good at, you know, acting.  And that's before we get into the fact that Will is a big dude and Chris Rock is not.  If Will slapped him full force, it would have knocked him halfway across the room.


I seriously doubt this was scripted and if so it was a horrible miscalculation on the part of Will Smith and his agent/handlers. This will probably overshadow everything he has done in his acting career. The first line in his obituary after he passes will probably mention this before his acting awards and accomplishments. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I said as much in the FFA thread.   IMO there has to be some level of comfort on Jada's part to go out in public like that and choose not to cover it up somehow.     I think that would play into a comic's mind a bit as to if something is able to be joked about or not.  
Right, every pic I see of her she looks supremely confident and there she is so embarrassed with it sitting front row at the oscars.  But maybe she is crying on the inside.

 
I seriously doubt this was scripted and if so it was a horrible miscalculation on the part of Will Smith and his agent/handlers. This will probably overshadow everything he has done in his acting career. The first line in his obituary after he passes will probably mention this before his acting awards and accomplishments. 
The worst part for Smith might not even be the lameness of the situation, it’s that I learned that his wife treats him like #### and he stays.

 
Not really political, I suppose, but are posters here really buying that this was a real slap and not staged?

I mean, ratings for the Oscars have been declining and they desperately needed something to get people interested.  Will Smith probably doesn't fart without his agent's approval.  Will Smith also literally just won the award for best at "making you believe he did something that he actually didn't".  He's good at, you know, acting.  And that's before we get into the fact that Will is a big dude and Chris Rock is not.  If Will slapped him full force, it would have knocked him halfway across the room.
Yeah, we went through this in the FFA thread - your take seems crazy and has nothing to back it up.  What exactly would Smith gain from staging that?  And now he’s resigned from the Academy?  Makes zero sense.

 
The worst part for Smith might not even be the lameness of the situation, it’s that I learned that his wife treats him like #### and he stays.


Yeah, there's a word for that and it was supposedly trending the second the slap was over.  That's probably a whole nother topic of discussion.

 
When is saw this bumped I was thinking it was going to be about Maher’s “New Rules” segment where he laid into how Fox News loves to pick up on the 2 minutes of his show where he blasts woke culture or Libs but then ignores the other 50 minutes of his show.

Real Time isn’t at its peak, say 7-8 years ago, but is still one of the better hours of TV each week. 

 
Not really political, I suppose, but are posters here really buying that this was a real slap and not staged?

I mean, ratings for the Oscars have been declining and they desperately needed something to get people interested.  Will Smith probably doesn't fart without his agent's approval.  Will Smith also literally just won the award for best at "making you believe he did something that he actually didn't".  He's good at, you know, acting.  And that's before we get into the fact that Will is a big dude and Chris Rock is not.  If Will slapped him full force, it would have knocked him halfway across the room.
What did Will Smith gain from this?

 
Yeah, there's a word for that and it was supposedly trending the second the slap was over.  That's probably a whole nother topic of discussion.
I had absolutely no idea about that particular aspect of Will Smith's life, and now it's common knowledge apparently.  Kind of undercuts the "it was just a PR stunt" view.

 
Yeah, we went through this in the FFA thread - your take seems crazy and has nothing to back it up.  What exactly would Smith gain from staging that?  And now he’s resigned from the Academy?  Makes zero sense.
I've watched the video.  Didn't look real to me.  There was something off about Smith's motion and arm angle throughout, and both of them were smiling/laughing immediately after.  I didn't participate in the other thread, so maybe someone can add something.

 
Rich Conway said:
I've watched the video.  Didn't look real to me.  There was something off about Smith's motion and arm angle throughout, and both of them were smiling/laughing immediately after.  I didn't participate in the other thread, so maybe someone can add something.
On this note, I'm aware this is a bit of a hijack.  In truth, it's really not something I care about.  My next time watching TMZ or the like will be my first.  Just wanted to consider the possibility.

 
On this note, I'm aware this is a bit of a hijack.  In truth, it's really not something I care about.  My next time watching TMZ or the like will be my first.  Just wanted to consider the possibility.
To be fair, I assumed it was some sort of bit when I first heard about it.

 
Rich Conway said:
I've watched the video.  Didn't look real to me.  There was something off about Smith's motion and arm angle throughout, and both of them were smiling/laughing immediately after.  I didn't participate in the other thread, so maybe someone can add something.
I also thought it was staged, especially seeing how Smith initially laughed and Rock was chuckling and sticking his head out as Smith approached.  But Smith put force into the slap. His heels lifted off the ground.  Rock was as stunned as everyone else. His confusion looked genuine.  He was probably expecting Smith to do something entertaining like make threats, not actual violence. 

The damage to Will's career is severe.  Such a bizarre decision from someone who always appeared level headed, but in retrospect, Will does have a history of being a goofy pseudo-intellectual.  I recently listened to an old Howard Stern clip where they were joking about a Will and Jada interview with Oprah. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHvmUOgBvj0 Who knows how much influence Jada had on him, but at the end of the day, Will is responsible for his own actions.

I'm a fan of Bill Maher.  I enjoy his arrogant humor but that may be because I nearly always agree with his POV.

 
The General said:
When is saw this bumped I was thinking it was going to be about Maher’s “New Rules” segment where he laid into how Fox News loves to pick up on the 2 minutes of his show where he blasts woke culture or Libs but then ignores the other 50 minutes of his show.

Real Time isn’t at its peak, say 7-8 years ago, but is still one of the better hours of TV each week. 
Great segment. I wouldn't have expected this to be bumped for that segment. This forum loves to focus on fringe people/beliefs on the left while the type of stuff highlighted in that piece have become the core of the GOP. They're (almost) all trying out Trump each other.

 
Saw that earlier, hard to argue with most of it.  

What I find interesting is how many liberals now think Maher is a conservative in disguise, simply because he has the nerve to call out bad behavior by those on the left or has on far right guests like Conway (who still sounds so full of it that I question if she really believes most of what she says).  I don't think Maher has much hope that the right will get better any time soon, especially those still foolishly thinking the last election was stolen, but I think he is just frustrated to see the liberals acting out and taking such foolish and/or extreme stances.  He expects better of liberals, therefore he vents his frustration about them more nowadays.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It’s an interesting contrast, how we’ve decided that entertainment needs to be so “politically corrected”, yet when it suggested that the glorification of violence and other bad behaviors in entertainment is part of the problem so many are quick to dismiss it.  Which is it?
Unfortunately it (the gun violence) sells.  In that context, political correctness seems petty in comparison.

 
It’s an interesting contrast, how we’ve decided that entertainment needs to be so “politically corrected”, yet when it suggested that the glorification of violence and other bad behaviors in entertainment is part of the problem so many are quick to dismiss it.  Which is it?


I think like most things, you can follow the dollars.

Many of the movies Maher showed there are incredibly popular and profitable. Movies glorifying gun violence are a cash cow. 

I do remember my dad talking about when he was a kid how you weren't able to show people getting shot on TV. If you look at old westerns, lots of time you see the guy shoot and then the next thing you see is the other guy on the ground. Some of that I'm sure is saving money on special effects. But a lot of it was what was allowed to be shown. 

 
Interesting.  I usually click with Maher and like his New Rules, but I think the last two are misguided whiffs.  Surprised at the kudos being given.    I will attempt to explain more but I am also not sober so keep that in mind.  

IMO the biggest miss was correlating the shooters with the violent movies.  I have never seen much of a correlation (in the book I mention that studied the mass shooters or other articles) between violent movies/games and the motivations of the shooters.  If I remember right it was found in 10% or so(and that wasn't even movies, it was if they played violent video games in general or not).   So I think that pie chart is pretty bad, especially if there is no mention of domestic abuse of history of child abuse.   That is way more common among shooters.  Per the link I always share and the book on shooters:

A new Department of Justice-funded study of all mass shootings — killings of four or more people in a public place — since 1966 found that the shooters typically have an experience with childhood trauma, a personal crisis or specific grievance, and a “script” or examples that validate their feelings or provide a roadmap. And then there’s the fourth thing: access to a firearm.

Now, I agree a bit with his inclusion of that cell phone/internet, because that 3rd bolded is correlated with their findings that especially school type shooters are fixated with other school shootings (especially Columbine).  I think claiming the violent movies were a big piece of the puzzle is a bit silly, and for sure not backed up by anything I've seen overall with mass shooters.  

The second thing was more of a nitpick.  IMO the ones being hypocritical are the ratings boards, not Hollywood in general.    I mean we have many examples of Hollywood going over the line with the sex, and hell - we have people on these boards complaining about how woke movies are, too much sexuality, etc...   However, when a PG-13 can show a ton of violence and especially gun violence as long as there is no blood but you better not have nudity in it or more than one F bomb - yes, 100% there is a weird disconnect there.   

That said, where he whiffs a bit again is that IMO the movies and our ratings reflect our values as a country, they don't create them.   As a whole we are sexually repressed, but are OK with violence.   Most parents I know freak about about anything sexual in media, but have little issue with their kids watching violent movies, even horror movies.   So, yes - I agree 100% that there is hypocrisy and weird values at play, but IMO that is us as a country and the ratings and the entertainment is a reflection of us, not the other way around.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think like most things, you can follow the dollars.

Many of the movies Maher showed there are incredibly popular and profitable. Movies glorifying gun violence are a cash cow. 

I do remember my dad talking about when he was a kid how you weren't able to show people getting shot on TV. If you look at old westerns, lots of time you see the guy shoot and then the next thing you see is the other guy on the ground. Some of that I'm sure is saving money on special effects. But a lot of it was what was allowed to be shown. 
Here is what I have always argued - I would much rather there be real consequences when there is violence in the movies.   I think there is more danger in a pg-13 movie where bad guys get mowed down with no blood or 2nd thought vs. a very emotional, violent shooting in an R movie.   I don't think the movies create violent people, but I've always thought it's unhealthy to see that much random violence in movies aim for teens and younger, especially when you consider the harsh divide we have for anything remotely sexual or have nudity in it.    I'd rather my kid at 14 see a couple pair of boobs vs. 40 random bloodless baddie get gunned down, but I've also been told I am weird for having that stance.  

 
Cigarettes sell too, we had no problem saying they shouldn’t be advertised and glamorized?
I'd love to see the movies put out if we changed the ratings system to reflect that gun violence can't be advertised or glamorized.    I'd also expect most people to not g.a.f and watch them anyway.   

Unless you are talking not allowing them to be made, which I doubt.  

 
I'd love to see the movies put out if we changed the ratings system to reflect that gun violence can't be advertised or glamorized.    I'd also expect most people to not g.a.f and watch them anyway.   

Unless you are talking not allowing them to be made, which I doubt.  
I’m not saying they should be legislated or regulated (age based rating system is fine) .  Just like I don’t think social media should be legislated or regulated.  By government and preferably by private entities as well.

But it is totally possible to say that and at the same time acknowledge the deleterious impacts inundating audiences with all of this content has.  I think its laughable to lament the impact social media has on people, or saying we need more racial diversity in media or that cigarette advertising is bad….but nope the glorifying of violence, criminality and misogyny in all forms of entertainment, for sure that stuff doesn’t get absorbed at all.

 
I’m not saying they should be legislated or regulated (age based rating system is fine) .  Just like I don’t think social media should be legislated or regulated.  By government and preferably by private entities as well.

But it is totally possible to say that and at the same time acknowledge the deleterious impacts inundating audiences with all of this content has.  I think its laughable to lament the impact social media has on people, or saying we need more racial diversity in media or that cigarette advertising is bad….but nope the glorifying of violence, criminality and misogyny in all forms of entertainment, for sure that stuff doesn’t get absorbed at all.
Agree.  I just think it's a step to far with him correlating it to mass shootings so much.  I have seen no such common trait in anything I have read.  

Like I said, I think the movies are a reflection of us and our values.    The take away should be some self reflection as to why we can't show smoking and boobs, but we can show dozens of people being blown away.   We should think about why we all consume that (IMO the movies are no different than other things - it's a money making business, and they largely give us what we want).    Hell, in these threads there is a strong sentiment of "the cops aren't going to do something, so I am going to".   We like those revenge tales.    This is a reflection of us.   

My interpretation reading stuff on the shooters, I think more likely what is happening is these kids largely go through a lot of trauma in the home and at school, have no tools to deal with that and their impulses,  seclude with other like minded people (largely online), fetishize and study other school shootings, then act.     I don't deny there is some mimicing of things in entertainment going on (ie maybe the Columbine guys liking the look from The Crow or the Matrix and copying that), but that is a far cry from saying that people are watching The Matrix or John Wick, and because of that wanting to shoot up their schools and other places.   And that is what I feel like Maher was doing, especially with that dumb pie chart.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Agree.  I just think it's a step to far with him correlating it to mass shootings so much.  I have seen no such common trait in anything I have read.  

Like I said, I think the movies are a reflection of us and our values.    The take away should be some self reflection as to why we can't show smoking and boobs, but we can show dozens of people being blown away.   We should think about why we all consume that (IMO the movies are no different than other things - it's a money making business, and they largely give us what we want).    Hell, in these threads there is a strong sentiment of "the cops aren't going to do something, so I am going to".   We like those revenge tales.    This is a reflection of us.   

My interpretation reading stuff on the shooters, I think more likely what is happening is these kids largely go through a lot of trauma in the home and at school, have no tools to deal with that and their impulses,  seclude with other like minded people (largely online), fetishize and study other school shootings, then act.     I don't deny there is some mimicing of things in entertainment going on (ie maybe the Columbine guys liking the look from The Crow or the Matrix and copying that), but that is a far cry from saying that people are watching The Matrix or John Wick, and because of that wanting to shoot up their schools and other places.   And that is what I feel like Maher was doing, especially with that dumb pie chart.  
I’m mostly on the same page.

 I don’t think it is as simple as somebody watches John Wick and then wants to kill people. It is the gradual impact of continuous absorption of all of this entertainment that overtime must impact how a person thinks and what they think is acceptable.  
 

I think it’s less notable in mass shootings, because that itself is such an extreme and so rare, my bigger concern is how it impacts the small multitude of decisions that young people make and how that collectively adds up in a negative way in their lives over time.

Is it a reflection of who we are…I dunno, are we John Wick and John Rambo?  I dont think so, but they sure are ####### cool in the movies.

 
I’m mostly on the same page.

 I don’t think it is as simple as somebody watches John Wick and then wants to kill people. It is the gradual impact of continuous absorption of all of this entertainment that overtime must impact how a person thinks and what they think is acceptable.  
 

I think it’s less notable in mass shootings, because that itself is such an extreme and so rare, my bigger concern is how it impacts the small multitude of decisions that young people make and how that collectively adds up in a negative way in their lives over time.

Is it a reflection of who we are…I dunno, are we John Wick and John Rambo?  I dont think so, but they sure are ####### cool in the movies.
I mean it's stylized and taken to the extreme, but these movies are largely for males and young males.   Yes - I think that demographic are largely prone to violence to solve problems,  have a lean towards taking care of things on our own (my example about the posts in these threads), and as a country have a ton of guns.   Are we those people? no  Do we think about and talk about doing those things if somebody hurt our family?  Hmmm.   

I get your point about the constantly adding up if that's all you watch.   IMO social media is  waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more of a concern than fictional movies.   But I think if there was a stronger correlation we would have seen it by now (with a sharp spike with the onset of more violent video games or a relaxing in the types of violence shown) or these people would have found it when studying shooters.   

 
Interesting.  I usually click with Maher and like his New Rules, but I think the last two are misguided whiffs.  Surprised at the kudos being given.    I will attempt to explain more but I am also not sober so keep that in mind.  

IMO the biggest miss was correlating the shooters with the violent movies.  I have never seen much of a correlation (in the book I mention that studied the mass shooters or other articles) between violent movies/games and the motivations of the shooters.  If I remember right it was found in 10% or so(and that wasn't even movies, it was if they played violent video games in general or not).   So I think that pie chart is pretty bad, especially if there is no mention of domestic abuse of history of child abuse.   That is way more common among shooters.  Per the link I always share and the book on shooters:

A new Department of Justice-funded study of all mass shootings — killings of four or more people in a public place — since 1966 found that the shooters typically have an experience with childhood trauma, a personal crisis or specific grievance, and a “script” or examples that validate their feelings or provide a roadmap. And then there’s the fourth thing: access to a firearm.

Now, I agree a bit with his inclusion of that cell phone/internet, because that 3rd bolded is correlated with their findings that especially school type shooters are fixated with other school shootings (especially Columbine).  I think claiming the violent movies were a big piece of the puzzle is a bit silly, and for sure not backed up by anything I've seen overall with mass shooters.  

The second thing was more of a nitpick.  IMO the ones being hypocritical are the ratings boards, not Hollywood in general.    I mean we have many examples of Hollywood going over the line with the sex, and hell - we have people on these boards complaining about how woke movies are, too much sexuality, etc...   However, when a PG-13 can show a ton of violence and especially gun violence as long as there is no blood but you better not have nudity in it or more than one F bomb - yes, 100% there is a weird disconnect there.   

That said, where he whiffs a bit again is that IMO the movies and our ratings reflect our values as a country, they don't create them.   As a whole we are sexually repressed, but are OK with violence.   Most parents I know freak about about anything sexual in media, but have little issue with their kids watching violent movies, even horror movies.   So, yes - I agree 100% that there is hypocrisy and weird values at play, but IMO that is us as a country and the ratings and the entertainment is a reflection of us, not the other way around.  
He very explicitly says it’s part of the problem and we don’t know how big the pie prices are - he’s right on the money, IMO.  Many of the folks for gun control (hell, I voted numerous times around here I’d eliminate guns) are saying that people can’t be myopic and only discuss mental health or single points of entry or whatever.  In that same vein, we can talk about the glorification of guns, violence and revenge in TV/movies.  

 
I’ve always found it absurd that people say things like “I play Call of Duty and I’ve never wanted to go shoot a bunch of people” as if that anecdotal evidence means anything.

Gun violence is a complex problem and we need to address any and every element of it we can.  Even if easy access to guns is mostly to blame and mental health is right behind it (or vice versa) doesn’t mean other aspects shouldn’t be addressed.

Also, I’d argue and infatuation with guns and gun violence in movies, games and TV is a portion of the mental illness issue.

 
He very explicitly says it’s part of the problem and we don’t know how big the pie prices are - he’s right on the money, IMO.  Many of the folks for gun control (hell, I voted numerous times around here I’d eliminate guns) are saying that people can’t be myopic and only discuss mental health or single points of entry or whatever.  In that same vein, we can talk about the glorification of guns, violence and revenge in TV/movies.  
I get that, but then he proceeds to talk about it as though it was a main factor and only lists 4 things in the pie graph. . I am just tired of not actually talking about the bigger slices of that pie, and didn't like that it was only 1 if 4 things.   Imo this is such a small piece of the puzzle that focusing on it too much distracts from the big issues.  

Talk about it sure, but be honest about the actual %s and correlations.  Otherwise it's mostly just a distraction from things that would make a big impact.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
One thing that crossed my mind that is different than when i was growing up... . Music.  Music has a much greater generational impact on young people. Listen to the music, Guns/killing etc  in songs can't influence and desensitize a young person's brain. Add in depression and the recipe is there.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top