Correct… I probably needed an emoji to denote joking lol
Because they are a child.
For the record, I’m fine with considering 18 an adult. You have take the plunge to the world of consequences at some point. That’s different than saying most 18 year old’s think as a mature adult, because they don’t.
Generally speaking, no. I can assure you that whatever those tests were testing, I would have passed at a very early age. You can’t test for wisdom or foresight very well.
I support the idea of independent children only in the most dire of circumstances, where no adult family member can effectively advocate for the child.
I agree in the dire circumstances I mentioned above, which generally amount to a lack of responsible adults who both have a relationship with the child and are willing and able to effectively advocate for them. In that case, I suppose it’s good luck kiddo if they can ace the test.
Because generally speaking, children are emotional, impulsive morons who’ve not yet had any meaningful experience in the adult world. This is further compounded when you put the idea in the child’s head that they are smarter than their parents. That’s some bullshit every teenager on the planet is ready to believe to begin with, now they’ve got the tests to prove it.
The example I used above with a 14 year-old becoming romantically involved with a 30 year old happened to a girl who was a few years younger than me that I grew up with. She became sexually active very young, tried to sleep with me on multiple occasions (I was 18 and considered her too young), and she was quite attractive. She was also highly intelligent, manipulative and impulsive.
If you would have asked that creep who abused her, the 14 year-old child was practically begging for it. And he’d be correct, if you believe that minors can somehow be judged competent to make decisions like who they should be able to sleep with.
If you’re like me, you reject that notion that a 14 year-old girl can consent to sexual behavior. You correctly view the child as a victim of an adult’s predatory behavior, who is entirely at fault. I don’t care if she pulls you into a bathroom, gets naked and begs for sex, you say “no”.
Not at all. Quite the opposite, in fact. That’s why you try to prepare your children for their life path by making sure they aren’t locked into lifetime of unintended consequences because of strong teenage emotions.
With regards to the trans issue, despite the cries of “oppression!!!” there are fewer ways that will guarantee that a child will receive such a tremendous outpouring of attention, admiration and validation if they decide to transition. It won’t be universal, but that won’t matter to the loner kid who never got any attention from anyone before. Now they’ll have all kinds of children and adults who never gave a shit about them before coming out in support, simply because they’ve chosen this new identity.
Children are ripe victims for anything that gives that much attention and validation, especially if it will piss off their parents. The fact that this often involves decisions of tremendous gravity, like a girl chopping off her tits or messing with a child’s hormones, further reinforces the need for the wisest, most capable adult in their life to have the final say in what’s best for the child.
Generally speaking, they’re not. When you consider the totality of situations you could apply your logic too, it amounts to a total abdication of parenting responsibility for anyone who believes that some test can correctly gauge a child’s ability to make good decisions that often involve lots of emotion, strong impulses and lifelong consequences.
Bad ideas enter children’s minds regularly, and it is a parent’s job to walk them back however they can. We fail enough as it is, we don’t need someone coming along to hand your kid the keys to life’s Ferrarri just because they pass some test.
I don’t think there’s much room for ethical abdication of parental responsibility. Not even when someone claims they have a really good test.
That was a Stephen King reference. I finally watched the most recent two film adaptation of It the weekend before, so I was on high-alert for tragic and difficult-to-explain outcomes that only seem to happen in horror stories set in Maine.
This statement can be applied to adults of all ages though. There’s generally a stark difference between ones mentality/demeanour at 20 vs 30, 30 vs 50 etc. I think 16-18 is generally when one can realistically be considered CAPABLE of behaving like an adult if times call for it, whether they actually do so is another story all together.
Goals, aspirations and social constructs change with age.
What you say is true. Perhaps a better choice of words on my part might be that most 18 year olds won’t think anything like they do as a mature adult when they’re still stuck at age 18.
I’m still good with 18 being the jumping off point. Birds must attempt flight at some point as well.
I think people generally mean well when they advocate for and encourage young transitions. It’s thought of as akin to allowing otherwise voiceless voices to be heard, though this can reinforce the notion of a victim complex.
The thing is… In secular, democratic and civilised societies trans people already have a voice, and a fairly loud one if they wish to be vocal about the cause. No one (well… Very few) is trying to stifle anyone’s identity, so the purveyed narrative of needing to stand up FOR trans people because they otherwise can’t speak for themselves is, in my opinion bullshit.
Agreed, unless circumstances are dire/serious enough as to force financial independence, fiscal responsibility and the likes. Plenty of people back in the day grew up during wars, got hitched at 18 and were raising kids by 20. I’m not saying such a paradigm was healthy or optimal, though it goes to show young adults can grow the fuck up if circumstances necessitate it.
Out of curiosity, what is your view on gender dysphoria? I have a few acquaintances who think it is flat out mental illness just as I know many who are passionate advocates for transgender rights. I’m split down the middle, I believe gender dysphoria is very real albeit perhaps not to the extent that is being showcased within the media/society today. I believe there may be an overlap between psychiatric aberrations and sudden onset gender dysphoria and the likes, though it is not my place to make that call.
I know one girl who (seriously) mentally ill. Like schizophrenic, perhaps a lil bit of BPD/NPD. She was heterosexual, identified as a female her entire life until recently wherein she suddenly came out as trans. To my knowledge she’s now dating a FTM boy and she herself is taking synthetic testosterone (may have some details mixed up). To note, this is one of the few times wherein the sexual orientation “pansexual” may be applicable.
I’m not stating this individual isn’t trans; though this individual suffers from serious, serious psychiatric pathology and probably shouldn’t have been given the greenlight to take testosterone until it had been verified she was stable.
What did you think? I loved the first one, hated the second one. The ending was trash compared to the book and even the 1990’s tv mini series
If Maine is still scenic as shown in the movie I’m certainly going to check it out next time I’m in the USA (if I play my cards/savings right and our federal government decides to actually do their job that could be as early as like January next year).
I don’t want to turn 21 in Aus, I want to be with a large portion of my extended family.
That’s re-assuring to hear. Forget conservative/liberal for a moment. I think the right thing to do if you consider yourself a trans advocate is to ensure friendship or family continuity with anyone in your circle who comes out as trans. Or whatever behavior that’s not violently criminal. The other side of that coin is to advocate against complete deference to the most outlandish of demands, which in my opinion means speech codes of any kind right alongside the notion of a 43 year-old women’s Olympic weightlifting champion with a schlong.
People who believe in speech codes ought to consider the notion that the offences they are perceiving are nothing more than polite people’s best efforts at being polite. I’ve tried playing the pronoun game and I do not like it. Not due to any ill will towards my friend, but because when I use “it” to refer to a person or “she” to a clear “he”, I feel like I’m lying with my words.
I don’t like playing the pronoun game. I like the speech conventions I’ve grown accustomed to.
That’s my lived experience, as the woke would say. I’m living my truth, or some other vapid phrase to describe normal subjective experience.
I enjoyed both, btw.
Maine is one of the more interesting places to visit on the East coast. Don’t forget to get a moose sweatshirt that says “Maine”, so people will know you went to Maine.
The new IT films were awful
I won’t say they weren’t, but I did enjoy both of them!
Stephen King is just one of those guys who can fart in a microphone and fool me into thinking I just heard a sonic masterpiece. I’ll probably watch every retelling of IT that gets released.
I think The Stand is ready for a re-make.
For a moment I was wondering what information technology had to do with anything.
tis a bit soon to remake it again
also… the 1990’s tv miniseries of IT was better than the remake; and the book was better than both of them.
The new IT was hyped up because it was age restricted, unlike the 1990’s tv adaptation. Thing is, if you’ve read the book you know there’s a ton of stuff they could never adapt into film. The original director (Cary Fukunaga) of the IT remake left the studio over “creative differences”.
Had he stayed and directed the remake we would’ve had a different movie on our hands, likely one that wouldn’t have made it to cinemas. Purportedly Cary’s vision of IT was one of which kept a lot of the sick shit in the book in-tact, including graphic sexual content involving minors. If you look around you can find the original script, the film would have never made it to theatres; or if it did it’d have been confined to a limited theatrical release with an NC-17 rating.
What we got instead was a watered down version of it that had an “R” rating because it had a few swear words and one or two brief scenes of graphic violence. Apparently repetitive jump scares coupled with poor cgi equates to a horror film within my demographic, then I keep hearing “oooo it’s soooo scary”. No… it isn’t… The Poughkeepskie tapes (gotta be the uncut version) is scary, IT is a childrens movie in grown up shoes.
They removed a lot of the “alternate universe” stuff from the book which I thought was unfortunate, other than that I won’t include spoilers for those who haven’t seen the it. Cary Fukunaga’s vision was… odd, they could’ve easily stripped the sex/rape stuff involving kids and kept the graphic violence and incredibly dark undertones.
The way they defeated pennywise in the film was also pathetic… Despite the ending of the book being almost universally disliked… I liked it
And it was lame. I gave up after the 5th episode. AHS showed us you can get away with so much shit on TV nowadays. The stuff in the novel that they couldn’t show in the original TV series could beat anything in AHS hands down and they didn’t capitalize on this.
Part 1 of the remakes was great IMO. They should have left it at that. A safe, competently made coming-of-age tale with likable characters. The only problem is that the clown didn’t make any sense. The idea was to lure kids to him by dressing up as a clown and then scaring the fuck out of them, not the other way around.
Part 2 is what you get when the filmmakers have an endless supply of some really good uppers and hallucinogens on hand lol. I wanted to walk out of the cinema halfway through the movie.
After reading a handful of King novels in the early 80s, l became frustrated by the hundreds of pages of plot/character development turning into lame endings - like he couldn’t wrap up the story.
I’ve never noticed the terrible endings until people started talking about them. Probably because I never completed IT and admittedly haven’t read most of his books. The Shining, Carrie, Salem’s Lot and Misery were fine. The Stand already went off track after the 2nd act when he killed off half of all the characters but the ending still did fit the shift in the narrative.
The only really silly endings I can recall were in his short stories where a dude eats himself while stranded on a desert island with a giant bag full of heroin and another dude can’t shake hands because anyone he shakes hands with dies so he ends up committing suicide by shaking his own hand.
Btw, Hearts in Atlantis is still my favorite book. Why the fuck did the movie adaptation decide to only use the first story? That one was the lamest of the lot.
I do not care to consider any of your opinions about the writing or film adaptations of Stephen King’s many masterpieces.
I have my fond memories of enjoying these apexes of American cultural expression. Go watch the Turkish Rambo Killcount video on Youtube, and then come back and complain that our best horror fiction writer is somehow anything less than a modern Shakespeare.
Hey, Carrie was almost a legit masterpiece. Anyone who disses DePalma… I bury the cockroach!
And Sleepwalkers was a masterpiece of bad movies. With that said, I need to check out this Turkish Rambo.
I just did. It was worth the 2 minutes.
Are you talking about the killcount video? Got a link?