My Asexuality and My Mini Ranting

Status
Not open for further replies.
KarissaMann05 said:
I really think movies (or others) could be successful without romance/sex (unless a small account of it).

Go and watch those moives if you don't believe me:
John Carpenter's The Thing
Terminator 2 (?)
Jaws
Cool Hand Luke
Reservoir Dogs
Unforgiven
The Great Escape
Marathon Man
Papillon
Man On Fire (?)
The Good The Bad & The Ugly
The Fugitive
Saving Private Ryan
Others

They're either a little or no romance at all.

What is why I was wondered if they "have to" put it in anything if there are actually can do without it when there are successful.

Now you know what I said?
Click to expand...

Because you are talking about Master Pieces of movies and there are only few of them. You need an average sell point for an average movie and romance is an easy way for it. If you can figure out a way Spielberg is directing 15 movies a year, you can start seeing less movies requiring romance in them.

Common people always in search of romance. What they are doing is temporary selling it to people. The whole magazine industry like cosmopolitan, teen this, fashion that is build on that.

You probably know all these, but I guess there is something else in your mind. So please you give us the answer. Why do they put romance into everything?

-
 
Fine. I will give you an answer soon (or so) since you keep spray those comments I wrote.
 
Dr. Ellen K. Rudolph - Bringing Back Romance

I read it three times two years ago, now I read it again so... I do understand their points of romance subject. Unfortunately, some people forget there are actually people who live without romance, have *no or a several* datings, or no sexual activity. Guess what? They're fine with that way. It look like they don't know about asexuality's existence... Who knows?

I tried to find some good links for your questions, I got no luck. I'm not sure what I can find it any way... But I find some good information for helping you to understand the culture of Asexuality, so here's some links.

- Is it normal to want a life without romance? - TODAY: Relationships - MSNBC.com
- Life without Romance
- Asexual Visibility and Education Network - Home

My opinion, they don't care if movies get lamer and lamer because they want money... It's not matter if it is a romance or not. :|

What is the "semi importance" is... you DO NOT know the culture of Asexuality because you are not an asexual person, and you don't know what I see in my own POV. Some entries of asexual users from some online journals (in their personal lives), they do tired of the same subject that is the way I feel. Sure I could take links and show you but I have to ask them for their pemissions first... Don't expect if you knew about asexuality when you are not an asexual person...

A lot of (semi) romance movies are quite bored, and getting so old. 'Nuff said.
 
My opinion, they don't care if movies get lamer and lamer because they want money... It's not matter if it is a romance or not.
Click to expand...


Ok, you are saying what everybody else said. They do it because of the money. They made it become a product and now selling it as long as it brings money. Most people agree on it.


Unfortunately, some people forget there are actually people who live without romance, have *no or a several* datings, or no sexual activity. Guess what? They're fine with that way. It look like they don't know about asexuality's existence... Who knows?
Click to expand...

Why does people need to remember it since asexual people are fine with the way they are. People usually acknowledge it when there is a problem (and sometimes dont acknowledge the problems either). Since you keep mentioning being asexual is not a problem, what do you really want other people to acknowledge?

KarissaMann05 said:
What is the "semi importance" is... you DO NOT know the culture of Asexuality because you are not an asexual person, and you don't know what I see in my own POV. Some entries of asexual users from some online journals (in their personal lives), they do tired of the same subject that is the way I feel. Sure I could take links and show you but I have to ask them for their pemissions first... Don't expect if you knew about asexuality when you are not an asexual person...
A lot of (semi) romance movies are quite bored, and getting so old. 'Nuff said.
Click to expand...

Nobody exactly knows what other people think or feel. It is not a supprise. So you are not attracted to another person. If its all natural for you and you are fine with it, what else do you want us to understand? Why are you giving this "you are not asexual, dont expect to understand me" reaction? Because its not clear if there is a problem we should be aware of.

Do seeing people in love bother you? Do you dislike it if you see them happy together?

It seems to me you are mixing the subjects here. If you only dislike the fact that producers use romance in every movie regardless of its genre , yes there are some bad movies like that. If you want to share with us the fact that you do not like romance movies, thats understandable. Since there is no romance in your life, you may naturally not enjoy romance movies too. But if you are angry there is no romance in your life and you cant stand seeing other people experiencing it , then its also a totally different issue.

I read all your posts in this thread, and its still not clear to me whats is the point you are trying to make. What I understand is, you dont like the way they produce movies, you also dislike romance movies as a genre, and you also are angry at something you dont want to say out loud yet.

-
 
Because asexuality refers to a total disinterest or desire for sexual activity. You don't choose to have a desire...either you have it or you don't. An asexual person is not attracted to the opposite sex, or same sex partners. They simply are not attracted to any partner. That is the meaning of the term. A-sexual means not sexual.
Click to expand...
I wonder actually....is there such a thing as TRUE asexuality? Our society seems to think that if you're not horny 24/7, there's something wrong with you. Maybe a lot of the "asexual" people out there simply haven't met the right person yet that turns them on. I know a lot of people who are sexual towards anyone and everyone, and then I know people who can only be sexual in the context of a realtionship.
Perhaps many of the "asexual" people out there just simply haven't met the right person who turns them on that way.
 
DeafDyke, not true. I suggest you to go to visit some links that I post it here.

Not all asexual people are not horny 24/7. If you are really think something's wrong with me because I'm just an asexual. That's ridiculous because I'm really fine. :)Besides, I already meet friends and chat with friends during a real time and life, but I also NEVER think of relationship subject once I meet someone else. I just prefer to be single and hang out with people I know. That is it. *Some* asexual people had done it before.
 
Karissa, no.........I think you misunderstood what I'm saying.
I wonder if asexuals are simply people who are turned on by a particualr person rather then people in general. Exactly like the way I am not turned on by women in general.......but I have had sexual feelings towards people who happen to be women.
 
deafdyke said:
Karissa, no.........I think you misunderstood what I'm saying.
I wonder if asexuals are simply people who are turned on by a particualr person rather then people in general. Exactly like the way I am not turned on by women in general.......but I have had sexual feelings towards people who happen to be women.
Click to expand...

No deafdyke, asexual people are whom that has no sexual feelings and attraction towards other people at all. Being attracted to only few people in his life time , instead of tons doesnt make one asexual.

-
 
whoa Hermes - you are going waaaaayyyyyy off the course. This is a simple complaint by Karissa. Yes I understand sex/romance in movies are needed to generate profits. Same for using hot girls in it. Like I said before - I hate seeing a good/entertaining movie like Pearl Harbor be ruined by some scenes of romance that has NO place in it.

All we're saying is that "out-of-place" romance/sex scenes ruin the quality of theatrical experience for us.
 
Yes Jiro and she got a simple response saying romance is a good product to sell because so many people are longing it in this world. Movie producers, book publishers, and other businesses simply cash on it.

If it ruins the quality of the experience you will simply choose not use their product and help them to produce more low quality stuff , right?

-
 
Hermes said:
Yes Jiro and she got a simple response saying romance is a good product to sell because so many people are longing it in this world. Movie producers, book publishers, and other businesses simply cash on it.

If it ruins the quality of the experience you will simply choose not use their product and help them to produce more low quality stuff , right?
Click to expand...

sure. Idiocracy is right on the money :ugh2:
 
Jiro said:
sure. Idiocracy is right on the money :ugh2:
Click to expand...

Do you see any other way? What is your suggestion? I would like to know how else people can make them produce quality movies too. What should we do?

-
 
Hermes said:
Do you see any other way? What is your suggestion? I would like to know how else people can make them produce quality movies too. What should we do?
Click to expand...

maybe ask MPAA to stop pressuring producers to meet the quotas? Don't they realize that quality movies are more profitable than dumb flick movies? Look at Indiana Jones.... Titanic... Star Wars.... they're about 10+ years old and STILL generating profits.

I will GLADLY pay $15... or even $20 movie ticket if it's QUALITY movie. They should at least try to make 5-10 quality movies per year instead of 30 garbage movies.
 
Jiro said:
maybe ask MPAA to stop pressuring producers to meet the quotas? Don't they realize that quality movies are more profitable than dumb flick movies? Look at Indiana Jones.... Titanic... Star Wars.... they're about 10+ years old and STILL generating profits.

I will GLADLY pay $15... or even $20 movie ticket if it's QUALITY movie. They should at least try to make 5-10 quality movies per year instead of 30 garbage movies.
Click to expand...

Yes but number of people who can produce (directors, writers etc..) those kind of movies are low, and producing a movie takes around 1-2 years from beginning to end. For example you dont see a Spielberg movie each year, how many movies James Cameron have? George Lucas doesnt even make new movies anymore. Peter Jackson doesnt make one movie a year either (list can go on) On the other hand studios are required to put a certain number of movies theaters every year because they all have deals with theater companies as distributors. Otherwise dont you think they would love to bring movies that is going to turn into blockbusters like the movies you told all years long?

So when they can not do it, they do the next best thing. They put the materials (romance, violance, high tech effects etc..) known as better selling in the movies for increasing their chance of profit. They would only stop when it stop selling .

Increasing the prices is not a solution either because many families may not be able to afford paying 60-80 dollars for a movie night.

So number of great movies will not increase anytime soon. But if you want to see less romance in average quality movies then showing them romance doesnt sell anymore may work. The problem is, romance still sells.

-
 
Hermes said:
Yes but number of people who can produce (directors, writers etc..) those kind of movies are low, and producing a movie takes around 1-2 years from beginning to end. For example you dont see a Spielberg movie each year, how many movies James Cameron have? George Lucas doesnt even make new movies anymore. Peter Jackson doesnt make one movie a year either (list can go on) On the other hand studios are required to put a certain number of movies theaters every year because they all have deals with theater companies as distributors. Otherwise dont you think they would love to bring movies that is going to turn into blockbusters like the movies you told all years long?

So when they can not do it, they do the next best thing. They put the materials (romance, violance, high tech effects etc..) known as better selling in the movies for increasing their chance of profit. They would only stop when it stop selling.
Click to expand...
perhaps they don't produce movies much because they're fed up with MPAA's pressure and unreasonable demands. They probably said to executives - "go f--- yourself and see how you do without me" :dunno:

but hey.... look at Pixar and Dreamworks... they've produced quite a handful of quality movies

Hermes said:
Increasing the prices is not a solution either because many families may not be able to afford paying 60-80 dollars for a movie night.

So number of great movies will not increase anytime soon. But if you want to see less romance in average quality movies then showing them romance doesnt sell anymore may work. The problem is, romance still sells.
Click to expand...
families? i haven't seen families in theaters for a long while except if it's some Disney Walt movies. it's mostly young people.
 
Jiro said:
families? i haven't seen families in theaters for a long while except if it's some Disney Walt movies. it's mostly young people.
Click to expand...

For many, "cinema" is code word for "babysitter" or, as I like to say, "off the streets."
 
asexual people are whom that has no sexual feelings and attraction towards other people at all. Being attracted to only few people in his life time , instead of tons doesnt make one asexual.
Click to expand...
I know...I am aware of that. I'm just saying that I think that true asexuals are probaly extremely rare. Virtually every human condition exists on a continum. I really do think that many so called asexuals simply haven't met the right person that "turns them on" that way.
Exactly like the way my Hannah started out (in high school) thinking that she just liked girls. Then she met a boy and fell in love.
I really do think that they are just kind of mixed up. Society insists that you have to be "sexually receptive" ALL the time.........
It's just like how I'm attracted to Hannah and not my friend Amanda. Make sense?
 
Asexual people are highly suspicious by the general and sub-general population. We are, by human development, inclined to be sexual. Anyone, who is different, is suspect. The sexual suspect (re: Miss Garth) has no business within a society that can only understand, by majority, what it understands.
 
Please read this since I noticed some ADers do not understand asexual people... so I post it for explanation why they re an asexual person. Rest of other links that I already post it here...

Actually, asexuality is a normal. Nothing's wrong with being asexual... I can't believe that some ADers said like that and shrugged off... By the way, outside or inside of AllDeaf, whosoever claims the asexuality is not a rare, which is not true.

I think I now get it why reasons here, and I am done with this thread and nothing else. *shakes head* =/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top