Game of Thrones

[Sillywilly]

Or... I was just asking? How can I reflect on things I have no experience with? You claimed the network as a whole does this, I don't watch the network as a whole, only a few shows, so I inquired from someone who seemed to be taking an experienced stance on the topic.




It is relevant. Your point, as I understand it as as you've stated, is that the sex scenes never advance the plot and are therefore gratuitous. You also say they could show them more tastefully if showing two people spending the night together is necessary to show for the plot/character. The reason the violence question is relevant, is because it is treated the same way. It often is not necessary to show anywhere near as much violence as shows do, to advance the plot. Do we actually need to see a severed head close up with blood? When people get shot in shows, do we really need to see the person being shot and bleeding on the floor? No, just like the "softcore porn" in Game of Thrones or Sopranos, the level of graphic violence in these shows is also gratuitous. So, since your main complaint is about gratuitous things that don't serve the plot, I don't see how you see zero connection here. Your real problem isn't boobies, it's unnecessary boobies for the sake of boobies - but all these shows don't need blood either, it's unnecessary graphic violence for the sake of graphic violence. You can show sex without nudity just like you can show someone being beheaded without holding the head infront of the crowd in a close up shot.





That's on you then, that's your own personal response, insecurities, personality, and desires. That's your own mind at work man - you can't blame the show for that haha. And there have been plenty of examples in our culture of violence in movies/video games etc being blamed for inspiring or desensitizing (etc etc) people towards violence. So although YOU might not experience that, obviously some people feel similarly to gratuitous violence as you do to gratuitous nudity/sex!



So then it's really not about the plot at all, is it? It's about your own personal preferences. You have been disingenuous in your supposedly principal stance.

You don't mind gratuitous zero-plot devices at all. From what you've said, it sounds like your complaint is more about sex and nudity than it is about gratuitous scenes, or else you'd have a stronger opinion on wasting your time with any sort of gratuitous writing/scene.




Well, I'm glad the shows don't lessen your capacity to command (yay semantics! ;D). Seriously though, you say you don't have a moral issue with it, but you hinted at sexual thoughts being induced by these sorts of scenes, and seemed to imply that you didn't exactly enjoy having those thoughts creep up. If the thoughts make you uncomfortable, you must believe they are somehow wrong or improper, no? Yes yes, I know this isn't a big moral dilemma to you where they're making you hold back from cheating on your wife - I'm not meaning to drive the point that hard - but, you did say they trigger thoughts which you apparently don't like. There's something to that!






Kudos for making me laugh without a facepalm involved.

sigh nothing new in your post, unless you count straw men re-stuffed as new. Which I don't. So short and sweet:

1. I didn't make it clear that I was stating how a parent might look at nudity vs violence and why they might separate the two. That was the "morale" lol statement I made was supposed to be about as that comparison has come up before on the boards. (nudity vs violence for youngsters). Seeing Aragorn take out an orc isn't as likely to turn a kid into a school shooter as watching fuck scenes is to make them a pervert. If the LotR makes my son wanna go out and slay an evil orc captain, well, if any orcs ever show up I hope he can. I don't want him motivated to out and doggy style rape a 14 year old while screaming "I'll put a horse lord inside of you!" though.

2. Equating "gratuitious" violence with "gratuitious" nudity is apples to oranges because the violence can be the plot of a movie. If you want a movie that has a porn plot then freaking watch porn lol. The point is that these movies use cheap talentless gratuitious nudity to lure in viewers that want to wank. GoT should not have to stoop to that level for ratings. It shouldn't have to use over done gore either.

3. There's a big difference between over done splatter movie gore and a well choreographed, intense sword duel.

4. Realistic violence has a different effect than a realistic sex scene. The "plot point" of a sex scene is to let you know there is a relationship/connection/etc there. I don't need 10 minutes of lesbian finger fucking for that. Violence in a movie can be to make you realize what it's like to be shot, and appreciate what Prvt Hero did to get his friend to safety. The extent of nudity in a movie doesn't drive any points home, where realizing how horrific an actual medi-evil battle could be can help you appreciate what they went through.

Just for the record as a married adult I have no problem watching Return of the Jedi and then making my wife dress up in the slave girl outfit if that's what you were getting at. I've had her do a lot worse.

[Draconian]

If the LotR makes my son wanna go out and slay an evil orc captain, well, if any orcs ever show up I hope he can. I don't want him motivated to out and doggy style rape a 14 year old while screaming "I'll put a horse lord inside of you!" though.

Ok, but the weird thing is... are you sure everyone has such strong reactions to sex scenes? It seems like you're hit by them a bit harder than average. Just as watching violence doesn't make me want to go be violent, watching sexy scenes in a show doesn't make me want to go act out sexually. If it does to you, then that's just your impulse - not the show's fault or even their intention.

Equating "gratuitious" violence with "gratuitious" nudity is apples to oranges because the violence can be the plot of a movie.

So can sex and sexuality. Sex and sexuality is very much a part of the GoT plot.

If you want a movie that has a porn plot then freaking watch porn lol.

See your statement:

There's a big difference between over done splatter movie gore and a well choreographed, intense sword duel.

Sex in movies/TV isn't automatically equivalent to porn.

Realistic violence has a different effect than a realistic sex scene. The "plot point" of a sex scene is to let you know there is a relationship/connection/etc there. I don't need 10 minutes of lesbian finger fucking for that.

True, and we don't disagree! Remember I was never defending GoT or claiming it was tasteful, especially in season 1!

Violence in a movie can be to make you realize what it's like to be shot, and appreciate what Prvt Hero did to get his friend to safety. The extent of nudity in a movie doesn't drive any points home, where realizing how horrific an actual medi-evil battle could be can help you appreciate what they went through.

I agree completely. I don't see why you don't think nudity and sexuality aren't able to follow the same method of operation. I think you should take note here, that you're recognizing the value of imagery and expression outside of plot. Not everything has to progress plot. Character building is just as important, and evoking human feelings is how you connect people with characters. You have to be able to coax them into suspending disbelief, because they know they're watching a TV show. The 4 minute brothel scene of fisting in the background in GoT - totally agree, didn't really do anything for the show or the characters. I already knew that the shady charismatic brothel owner was... a shady charismatic brothel owner.

But, seeing a graphic scene in Sopranos of some guy fucking a whore is completely believable given the context and characters of the show. You'd expect them to be doing that sort of thing (the character). Therefore, when a scene like that comes on, I don't roll my eyes because the context of everything makes sense. It didn't seem out of place, therefore it didn't strike me as gratuitous. It also doesn't get me turned on at all or have perverted thoughts, just like a good bank robbery movie doesn't make me wanna rob a bank, nor did The Lovely Bones make me want to abuse children.

Totally agree GoT was over the top, especially season one, and actually a ton of people feel the same way, which is why it is noticeably different in Season 2. But the complaints against Sopranos and Sex and the City, you won't find that sort of response from the average person. For you personally, your values and sensibilities, the shows that explore or show sex and sexual deviancy regularly are a bit too much for you to enjoy. That doesn't mean they're gratuitous by consensus, it means you just don't like it.

You seem to think Sopranos writers purposefully throw stuff like that in purely to get a rise out of the audience. The GoT brothel scene? Yeah, I agree, I bet at the writers table there were plenty of nerds giggling and expounding on what type of response the viewership would have. For the Sopranos, dude... it's such a professionally done show, amongst some of the best drama on television. It never needed to, and never did, crowbar in sex for the sake of sex - it was always in context to the show and the characters. That is to say, not gratuitous.

[Valec]

sigh nothing new in your post, unless you count straw men re-stuffed as new. Which I don't. So short and sweet:

1. I didn't make it clear that I was stating how a parent might look at nudity vs violence and why they might separate the two. That was the "morale" lol statement I made was supposed to be about as that comparison has come up before on the boards. (nudity vs violence for youngsters). Seeing Aragorn take out an orc isn't as likely to turn a kid into a school shooter as watching fuck scenes is to make them a pervert. If the LotR makes my son wanna go out and slay an evil orc captain, well, if any orcs ever show up I hope he can. I don't want him motivated to out and doggy style rape a 14 year old while screaming "I'll put a horse lord inside of you!" though.

2. Equating "gratuitious" violence with "gratuitious" nudity is apples to oranges because the violence can be the plot of a movie. If you want a movie that has a porn plot then freaking watch porn lol. The point is that these movies use cheap talentless gratuitious nudity to lure in viewers that want to wank. GoT should not have to stoop to that level for ratings. It shouldn't have to use over done gore either.

3. There's a big difference between over done splatter movie gore and a well choreographed, intense sword duel.

4. Realistic violence has a different effect than a realistic sex scene. The "plot point" of a sex scene is to let you know there is a relationship/connection/etc there. I don't need 10 minutes of lesbian finger fucking for that. Violence in a movie can be to make you realize what it's like to be shot, and appreciate what Prvt Hero did to get his friend to safety. The extent of nudity in a movie doesn't drive any points home, where realizing how horrific an actual medi-evil battle could be can help you appreciate what they went through.

Just for the record as a married adult I have no problem watching Return of the Jedi and then making my wife dress up in the slave girl outfit if that's what you were getting at. I've had her do a lot worse.

Both the nudity and violence serve purposes in the show. Could they have toned it down? Sure. Is there any real reason for them to? No, we're not puritans. The scenes with the 'lesbians'? Definitely had a point. People who hadn't read the series understand one of the major characters better now having seen that scene. Just because you couldn't connect the (very obvious)dots on that one doesn't make it gratuitous or unnecessary.

[Sillywilly]

Both the nudity and violence serve purposes in the show. Could they have toned it down? Sure. Is there any real reason for them to? No, we're not puritans. The scenes with the 'lesbians'? Definitely had a point. People who hadn't read the series understand one of the major characters better now having seen that scene. Just because you couldn't connect the (very obvious)dots on that one doesn't make it gratuitous or unnecessary.

I like how anyone that didn't jack to the lesbians couldn't "connect the dots". WTF did those lesbians have to do with dickshit saving himself for Stark's wife? NOTHING lol.

If the LotR makes my son wanna go out and slay an evil orc captain, well, if any orcs ever show up I hope he can. I don't want him motivated to out and doggy style rape a 14 year old while screaming "I'll put a horse lord inside of you!" though.

Ok, but the weird thing is... are you sure everyone has such strong reactions to sex scenes? It seems like you're hit by them a bit harder than average. Just as watching violence doesn't make me want to go be violent, watching sexy scenes in a show doesn't make me want to go act out sexually. If it does to you, then that's just your impulse - not the show's fault or even their intention.

ENOUGH THAT HBO AGREED TO TONE IT DOWN THE 2ND SEASON HUH DUMBASS?

Equating "gratuitious" violence with "gratuitious" nudity is apples to oranges because the violence can be the plot of a movie.

So can sex and sexuality. Sex and sexuality is very much a part of the GoT plot.

OK EXPLAIN TO ME HOW A NAKED ASS HEAVING IN MY FACE IS GETTING A MESSAGE ACROSS THAT I'D HAVE MISSED OTHERWISE. THERE IS NOT A DAMN THINK YOU CAN SAY IS PORTRAYED IN A FULL NUDE SEX SCENE THAT COULDN'T BE PORTRAYED WITHOUT SOMEONE SEEING ASS CRACK. RHETORICAL QUESTION, DON'T BOTHER BECAUSE YOU CAN'T.

If you want a movie that has a porn plot then freaking watch porn lol.

See your statement:

There's a big difference between over done splatter movie gore and a well choreographed, intense sword duel.

Sex in movies/TV isn't automatically equivalent to porn.

IT IS WHEN IT'S DONE TO THE LEVEL THAT SOME OF THE GoT WAS DONE.

Realistic violence has a different effect than a realistic sex scene. The "plot point" of a sex scene is to let you know there is a relationship/connection/etc there. I don't need 10 minutes of lesbian finger fucking for that.

True, and we don't disagree! Remember I was never defending GoT or claiming it was tasteful, especially in season 1!

Violence in a movie can be to make you realize what it's like to be shot, and appreciate what Prvt Hero did to get his friend to safety. The extent of nudity in a movie doesn't drive any points home, where realizing how horrific an actual medi-evil battle could be can help you appreciate what they went through.

I agree completely. I don't see why you don't think nudity and sexuality aren't able to follow the same method of operation. I think you should take note here, that you're recognizing the value of imagery and expression outside of plot. Not everything has to progress plot. Character building is just as important, and evoking human feelings is how you connect people with characters. You have to be able to coax them into suspending disbelief, because they know they're watching a TV show. The 4 minute brothel scene of fisting in the background in GoT - totally agree, didn't really do anything for the show or the characters. I already knew that the shady charismatic brothel owner was... a shady charismatic brothel owner.

But, seeing a graphic scene in Sopranos of some guy fucking a whore is completely believable given the context and characters of the show. You'd expect them to be doing that sort of thing (the character). Therefore, when a scene like that comes on, I don't roll my eyes because the context of everything makes sense. It didn't seem out of place, therefore it didn't strike me as gratuitous. It also doesn't get me turned on at all or have perverted thoughts, just like a good bank robbery movie doesn't make me wanna rob a bank, nor did The Lovely Bones make me want to abuse children.

Totally agree GoT was over the top, especially season one, and actually a ton of people feel the same way, which is why it is noticeably different in Season 2. But the complaints against Sopranos and Sex and the City, you won't find that sort of response from the average person. For you personally, your values and sensibilities, the shows that explore or show sex and sexual deviancy regularly are a bit too much for you to enjoy. That doesn't mean they're gratuitous by consensus, it means you just don't like it.

You seem to think Sopranos writers purposefully throw stuff like that in purely to get a rise out of the audience. The GoT brothel scene? Yeah, I agree, I bet at the writers table there were plenty of nerds giggling and expounding on what type of response the viewership would have. For the Sopranos, dude... it's such a professionally done show, amongst some of the best drama on television. It never needed to, and never did, crowbar in sex for the sake of sex - it was always in context to the show and the characters. That is to say, not gratuitous.

YOU MADE A JUMP FROM OVERLY EXPOSED NUDITY TO SEX SCENES IN GENERAL. NOW YOU'RE PLAYING TETHERBALL WITH YOUR ARGUMENT. I NEVER SAID A SEX SCENE OR AT THE VERY LEAST IMPLIED SEX WASN'T NECESSARY TO SOME PLOT BUILDING OR CHARACTER BUILDING. HOWEVER PUTTING THE CAMERA RIGHT UP SOMEONES ASS CRACK DOES NOT ADD TO THE PLOT. THE EXTENT OF NUDITY IN THE SCENE DOES NOT PORTRAY ANY PART OF THE PLOT.

For some, though, sexposition is a diminution of the screenwriter's craft. "There's a great Hollywood saying," says Craig Warner, writer of TV dramas Britain's Greatest Codebreaker and Maxwell, among others. "'Breasts are still our cheapest special effect.'" He feels that a writer who needs to lay out huge chunks of detail in monologues or dialogues has usually failed. "I work hard to make sure there's no information that feels like it's just being given to the audience. Actually, I just never put in any expository material that one character doesn't need to tell another."

Actually, sexposition goes back further than that, but there's no doubt the US cable channels – such as HBO – that specialise in long-form dramas requiring a serious commitment of both time and mental energy have raised the bar.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-rad...story-tv-drama

The article sums it up. Titties and all these full on sex scenes are just ways to keep people from getting bored or to entertain pervs. How much titties in LotR? How many sex scenes in LotR? 37 oscar nominations, 18 or so oscars. Good writing and story telling doesn't need a bare ass or a naked chick jumping up and down screaming "Fuck me Tony" to tell the story, sell a plot, etc.

TL;DR Stop making stupid arguments that normal, non internet virgin dork wads know is stupid.

[Draconian]

YOU MADE A JUMP FROM OVERLY EXPOSED NUDITY TO SEX SCENES IN GENERAL. NOW YOU'RE PLAYING TETHERBALL WITH YOUR ARGUMENT. I NEVER SAID A SEX SCENE OR AT THE VERY LEAST IMPLIED SEX WASN'T NECESSARY TO SOME PLOT BUILDING OR CHARACTER BUILDING.

You listed Sex & The City as a primary example of a gratuitous show. Woops!




.... aaaaaaand /scene.



You're no fun to debate with because you just wanna get mad/defensive. Plus all the caps, poor choice of highlighting colors, misplaced quotations and formatting...

Wasn't even trying to troll but I guess we'll just leave it as involuntary trollslaughter.

[Valec]

I like how anyone that didn't jack to the lesbians couldn't "connect the dots". WTF did those lesbians have to do with dickshit saving himself for Stark's wife? NOTHING lol.

You're quite right. It had nothing to do with saving Stark's wife. Thank you for proving your ignorance on the matter once and for all.

[Boxy Brown]

I don't view the nudity as excessive at all. It's a part of the book that they included in the show and people would be pissed if they didn't. And quite frankly, it's nice to be able to watch a show that owns really hard AND has titties every episode.

I mean, you could say the exact same thing about the violence that you're saying about the sex. You could argue that showing people getting cleaved in half and horses being decapitated is incredibly excessive and adds nothing to the show, but it's gritty, real, in the book, and the show is made that way.

[Dumah]

Haven't really kept much track of the back and forth, but I'll toss one off on this cookie.

I think sex is a huge part of life, and art/entertainment is supposed to capture things like that in its product. I don't feel any more reason to blame a producer for gratuitous pandering when I see a pair of tits bobbing around on TV than I would from seeing a litter of puppies being murdered en masse. The fact that so many folks are drawn to sex and nudity is a telling statement about humanity, and avoiding it in our pop culture probably causes more harm than good.

Although I will say that a line can be drawn for what is tastefully done. I think Spartacus was over the top, but that doesn't mean that my opinion on the matter is right. Y'all get too fired up.

[Draconian]

Oh, look, more virgins.

[Valec]

Although I will say that a line can be drawn for what is tastefully done. I think Spartacus was over the top, but that doesn't mean that my opinion on the matter is right.

I won't lie, I didn't mind it, but i'd have to agree that Spartacus was beyond excessive. To be fair, the violence was equally excessive.

[Sillywilly]

You listed Sex & The City as a primary example of a gratuitous show. Woops!




.... aaaaaaand /scene.



You're no fun to debate with because you just wanna get mad/defensive. Plus all the caps, poor choice of highlighting colors, misplaced quotations and formatting...

Wasn't even trying to troll but I guess we'll just leave it as involuntary trollslaughter.

Yeah I certainly did. Because it's an example of HBO creating an entire series around gratuitious sexual content. They just like to throw it into their other series in doses as a cheap shot for getting viewers.

The rest of your post is just a moron that made a stupid, uninformed argument trying to cover his ass. Didn't know hollywood/TV admits to the tactic did ya slick? ;-)

You're quite right. It had nothing to do with saving Stark's wife. Thank you for proving your ignorance on the matter once and for all.

What the hell did the extent to which they showed those nude girls finger fucking each other have to do with Starks wife? NOTHING. It could have just been them making noises in the background for all that goes, etc. The only thing pertaining to Starks wife in that scene was the asshole giving his speech about how hung up on her he still was. Having two lesbians finger fuck in a brothel has nothing to do with that. It was only because it required a lot of dialogue that the scene was in there and the ADHD fantasy loving virgins can't sit through some meaningful dialogue without something to wank to.

Which is exactly what the article I posted said, with a producer saying that's exactly what they use it for lol.

[Boxy Brown]

Yeah I certainly did. Because it's an example of HBO creating an entire series around gratuitious sexual content. They just like to throw it into their other series in doses as a cheap shot for getting viewers.

The rest of your post is just a moron that made a stupid, uninformed argument trying to cover his ass. Didn't know hollywood/TV admits to the tactic did ya slick? ;-)



What the hell did the extent to which they showed those nude girls finger fucking each other have to do with Starks wife? NOTHING. It could have just been them making noises in the background for all that goes, etc. The only thing pertaining to Starks wife in that scene was the asshole giving his speech about how hung up on her he still was. Having two lesbians finger fuck in a brothel has nothing to do with that. It was only because it required a lot of dialogue that the scene was in there and the ADHD fantasy loving virgins can't sit through some meaningful dialogue without something to wank to.

Which is exactly what the article I posted said, with a producer saying that's exactly what they use it for lol.

The only thing gratuitous about Sex and the City is Sarah Jessica Parker's face.

[Draconian]

The rest of your post is just a moron that made a stupid, uninformed argument trying to cover his ass. Didn't know hollywood/TV admits to the tactic did ya slick?

Yes yes, you won! You are literally undefeated and the crowned champion in every discussion you've ever had. I should've known better before I even tried to have a conversation!


The reality is that you're just kindof a limp dick sparring partner when it comes to interesting debates about subjective topics and social norms. Nothing is subjective you to and your way is the only way worth considering. You just yell your same point louder when people don't agree. Kinda boring. =/

[Bragi]

Haven't really kept much track of the back and forth, but I'll toss one off on this cookie.

I think sex is a huge part of life, and art/entertainment is supposed to capture things like that in its product. I don't feel any more reason to blame a producer for gratuitous pandering when I see a pair of tits bobbing around on TV than I would from seeing a litter of puppies being murdered en masse. The fact that so many folks are drawn to sex and nudity is a telling statement about humanity, and avoiding it in our pop culture probably causes more harm than good.

Although I will say that a line can be drawn for what is tastefully done. I think Spartacus was over the top, but that doesn't mean that my opinion on the matter is right. Y'all get too fired up.

/thread

[Valec]

What the hell did the extent to which they showed those nude girls finger fucking each other have to do with Starks wife? NOTHING. It could have just been them making noises in the background for all that goes, etc. The only thing pertaining to Starks wife in that scene was the asshole giving his speech about how hung up on her he still was. Having two lesbians finger fuck in a brothel has nothing to do with that. It was only because it required a lot of dialogue that the scene was in there and the ADHD fantasy loving virgins can't sit through some meaningful dialogue without something to wank to.

Which is exactly what the article I posted said, with a producer saying that's exactly what they use it for lol.

Remind me again what your hatred of the nude female form is about?

It's already been explained to you that there is more than just the main plot to consider. There's character and world development that (have to)occur. You don't get the benefit of narration when you're watching the show. Thus both the characters and world need to be explained through dialogue and imagery.

[Sillywilly]

Yes yes, you won! You are literally undefeated and the crowned champion in every discussion you've ever had. I should've known better before I even tried to have a conversation!


The reality is that you're just kindof a limp dick sparring partner when it comes to interesting debates about subjective topics and social norms. Nothing is subjective you to and your way is the only way worth considering. You just yell your same point louder when people don't agree. Kinda boring. =/

If that was an attempt to make me feel guilty for not throwing myself headlong into every debate without knowing what I'm getting into beforehand then your ploy has failed sir.

There is nothing subjective about a Hollywood producer saying they put tits in the back/fore ground because it'll keep people interested when they otherwise might lose their attention. Everything in life is not subjective, it just doesn't work that way in the real world. I know some people would like it that way (liberals for one, which is why they hate Ann Coulter so), because in a world were everything is subjective then nobody is ever wrong, but it's not.

Remind me again what your hatred of the nude female form is about?

It's already been explained to you that there is more than just the main plot to consider. There's character and world development that (have to)occur. You don't get the benefit of narration when you're watching the show. Thus both the characters and world need to be explained through dialogue and imagery.

I'm quite fond of the female form kiddo, I'm just not found of cheap parlor tricks to keep ratings up because lonely perverts will watch anything that has the potential to show tits.

Yes I realize your ignorant ass and Drac have spewed your ridiculous, idiotic and ill informed bullshit. I have read it. I just prefer to take the word of a Hollywood producer over you or Drac cause I don't know, I'm just a rebel like that I guess.

[Valec]

If that was an attempt to make me feel guilty for not throwing myself headlong into every debate without knowing what I'm getting into beforehand then your ploy has failed sir.

There is nothing subjective about a Hollywood producer saying they put tits in the back/fore ground because it'll keep people interested when they otherwise might lose their attention. Everything in life is not subjective, it just doesn't work that way in the real world. I know some people would like it that way (liberals for one, which is why they hate Ann Coulter so), because in a world were everything is subjective then nobody is ever wrong, but it's not.



I'm quite fond of the female form kiddo, I'm just not found of cheap parlor tricks to keep ratings up because lonely perverts will watch anything that has the potential to show tits.

Yes I realize your ignorant ass and Drac have spewed your ridiculous, idiotic and ill informed bullshit. I have read it. I just prefer to take the word of a Hollywood producer over you or Drac cause I don't know, I'm just a rebel like that I guess.

Hi, no, that scene wasn't saying that. Now shut up about it already.

[Pyrrhus]

Trying to deny that prostitution and whoring was not commonplace in the GOT setting is sillier than a willy being silly

[Draconian]

But LOTR didn't have to show boobs to get accolades!


Don't you get it? It doesn't matter what the tone and atmosphere of a story is, nor does it even matter that Tolkien never introduced sexuality in his story - that's all irrelevant because we're virgins.


I don't think Silly can internalize the fact that plenty of people can see nudity and sex and not get a boner or need to jack off. Just like some people are repulsed by it, and some people are excited by it, there's a wholllllllllle section of society that doesn't have a strong reaction to it one way or another, because it's really not that big of a deal to see some tits. :P


Why can't he accept that many, many well-adjusted people don't think like him? Well, that's for you to decide.

[Valec]

But LOTR didn't have to show boobs to get accolades!


Don't you get it? It doesn't matter what the tone and atmosphere of a story is, nor does it even matter that Tolkien never introduced sexuality in his story - that's all irrelevant because we're virgins.


I don't think Silly can internalize the fact that plenty of people can see nudity and sex and not get a boner or need to jack off. Just like some people are repulsed by it, and some people are excited by it, there's a wholllllllllle section of society that doesn't have a strong reaction to it one way or another, because it's really not that big of a deal to see some tits. :P


Why can't he accept that many, many well-adjusted people don't think like him? Well, that's for you to decide.

Shut up, virgin.

[Sillywilly]

That's cute how you little girlies deny the article I posted and then continue to try and make the same stupid argument lol. You're embarrassing yourselves at this point and you're reaching BAD.

I don't think Silly can internalize the fact that plenty of people can see nudity and sex and not get a boner or need to jack off. Just like some people are repulsed by it, and some people are excited by it, there's a wholllllllllle section of society that doesn't have a strong reaction to it one way or another, because it's really not that big of a deal to see some tits. :P


Why can't he accept that many, many well-adjusted people don't think like him? Well, that's for you to decide.

That straw man isn't helping your case at all chump. Especially when the article I posted had about 3 people from Hollywood saying that's exactly why they place there lol.

EDIT:

Oh yea, and...............................VIRGINS

[Valec]

That's cute how you little girlies deny the article I posted and then continue to try and make the same stupid argument lol. You're embarrassing yourselves at this point and you're reaching BAD.





That straw man isn't helping your case at all chump. Especially when the article I posted had about 3 people from Hollywood saying that's exactly why they place there lol.

EDIT:

Oh yea, and...............................VIRGINS

You do realize producers do not actually write the scripts or scenes, right? So in short, your argument is irrelevant. I know more about the series than that producer. Most of us here do, since you know, we actually read the source material.

You're in way over your depth.

[Stalis]

I think explicit sex scenes in shows are there for both setting and entertainment. I also don't think you need to be a pervert virgin and/or have to jack off to find sex scenes entertaining, just like every guy in the arena/stadium at sporting events doesn't start jacking off to cheerleaders(and don't say they're there for their sweet dance moves). As far as the setting goes, yea the audience could get the idea that it is a scene in a brothel maybe with some women standing around in skimpy clothes and stuff, but you could also get the idea that people are killing each other with swords if they used cardboard cutouts in the shape of swords with no blood and stuff like that. Adding in "gratuitous" sex to the scene is akin to replacing the cardboard swords with metal ones and adding special effects to show blood and wounds.

[Boxy Brown]

Had a whole response typed up, drawing parallels between art, nudity, sex, violence, character development and all that shit. Promptly deleted it because even the most eloquently crafted argument isn't going to make one iota of difference.

So... Screw it, I'll be a virgin internet dorkwad perv if it means I keep getting to watch Game of Thrones as it is, and not the NBC version that Silly wants to see. I like the tits, I like the people getting cleaved in twain, and I'm certainly mature enough to handle images of both without them influencing my behavior.

[Sillywilly]

You do realize producers do not actually write the scripts or scenes, right? So in short, your argument is irrelevant. I know more about the series than that producer. Most of us here do, since you know, we actually read the source material.

You're in way over your depth.

Lol "that" producer and "the" series? You didn't even read the article fucktard.

Thanks for that little gem though, I couldn't have made you look like more of a bigoted ass myself.

Can you really not just accept that they are putting tits and ass in these shows just because lesser intellectuals can't stay focused on dialogue/monologue without some tits to distract them? Is this where your aspergers prevents you from admitting cheapness/flaws in something that you like?

Some of you aspergers kids and your denial of the cheapness or flaws in your "train collections" remind me of that woman who just can't accept that her boyfriend is fucking around on her. "No no he's not cheating! He's taking her internal temperature with his dick!! That's all!!"

Face it bi-faggot, the truly epic and talented material done by good directors doesn't need titties to sell. Stars Wars, the Lord of the Rings, etc don't need cheap tricks to get viewers.

Had a whole response typed up, drawing parallels between art, nudity, sex, violence, character development and all that shit. Promptly deleted it because even the most eloquently crafted argument isn't going to make one iota of difference.

So... Screw it, I'll be a virgin internet dorkwad perv if it means I keep getting to watch Game of Thrones as it is, and not the NBC version that Silly wants to see. I like the tits, I like the people getting cleaved in twain, and I'm certainly mature enough to handle images of both without them influencing my behavior.

I'm not sure what you're on about because no one has argued otherwise. Are you saying the tits 'n shit isn't gratuitous? If no you don't have an argument with me. When I compared the effects of sex scenes to violence I said KIDS, as to why I would rather my kid watch Lord of the Rings than say Slither.

I didn't say anything about adults or my personal behavior as an adult lol.

But do jinx me on the nudity is art bullshit. I don't want to associate you with my idiot mother in law. Extremity/shock value is for people that can't cut it talent wise and have to do something shocking to get noticed. There's a reason people with dying careers release sex tapes, decided to brawl on airplanes, etc.