1. Welcome to NoFap! We have disabled new forum accounts from being registered for the time being. In the meantime, you can join our weekly accountability groups.
    Dismiss Notice

Predator movie - Olivia Munn discussion

Discussion in 'Off-topic Discussion' started by Jason_Tesla_19, Sep 9, 2018.

  1. u376

    u376 Fapstronaut

    2,643
    6,458
    143
    That too on a forum like this
     
  2. I think my point about judging was misunderstood, although that might be my own fault by not expressing it clearly: I completely agree with you that we shouldn't be judged and punished for our past mistakes. But: I'm still not talking about a person's "dirty secrets" here (I'm still a bit confused by the word "secret" as I don't see how there is anything secretive about someone being publicly registered as a sex offender), nobody should care or judge if someone did something bad in the past that they might or might not want others to know, because we're all humans and we all make mistakes in life and can only learn from our past mistakes. This is not about calling someone out about their past mistakes and make them look bad and punish them, it's about being aware of a potential danger, which was my initial point. I think parents have a right and responsibility to protect their children, if a person has a history of sexually offensive behavior towards children because they feel sexually attracted to pubescent girls, then such information can be valuable information, because actors and actresses and film crews happen to have families that might be present at the set on a regular basis, not to mention there were actual children cast as actors on the movie. If this is a debate about a person not deserving to be "judged" for having shown sexually offensive behavior at some point in their past and we shouldn't be judged for our past mistakes and deserve a second chance, then I can only repeat that a person's sexual attraction disorder towards pubescent children doesn't just go away with time and a prison sentence. But again, I'm not a criminal psychologist.

    Sorry if this is a lot of repeating, but I seemed to have caused confusion about what I already said in previous posts. And I'm confused as to what this is about now, as I thought it was a discussion about legality.
     
    u376 and Gotham Outlaw like this.
  3. I'm not sure what's confusing about that. Clearly theres a difference between being registered on a list people rarely see and having your employer announce your past to all of your coworkers.

    I get what you're saying. I understood all of that already, I just still disagree. I could see an argument to be made for informing the parents of the children cast in the film, possibly, but as far as actors bringing their families to set, that's their choice and it's irrelevant. Anybody can bring their kids into work to visit them at any time. People also bring their kids to grocery stores and malls and all kinds of other places where sex offenders might be. I dont think the company has any obligation or right to tell everybody about the guy's past because people might bring their families there.

    It is. That's what I've been talking about from the beginning. But theres only so much to be said about that, which is that in fairly certain it's not legal for an employer to tell their employees about another employee's criminal history. They can choose not to hire them, but they can't just go tell everybody who works for them. I've already said that, but you dont seem to want to accept it, so I tried a different approach.
     
  4. There is a difference, but that still doesn't make publicly available information a secret. It's publicly made available for that exact reason, to not make someone's destructive personality a secret, to make other people aware of someone's dangerousness, not to publicly shame them for their past so everyone can judge them for it.

    If you disagree, that's fine, we can agree to disagree. I just felt like there was some confusion or misunderstanding, because you asked me why I need to know something about someone's past and judge them for it, especially if it doesn't affect me, which had nothing to do with anything I said. But as said, me using the word 'judgement' in the wrong context might have lead to that confusion, so my apologies. All I tried to say is that people have a right to know something that affects their lives significantly for the worse.

    How did I not want to accept it, I thought we both came to the realization that we don't have the required legal knowledge to judge the situation from a legal correctness standpoint. Then I only pointed out that apparently a lawyer was approached to handle the situation, although I agree that has limited significance. So I guess the legality issue remains uncertain. If by different approach you mean you said we shouldn't judge someone for their past mistakes and personal secrets and punish them forever, then I guess I don't see the connection to legality when something is already legally made public through a sex offender registry.

    What makes this discussion about what Olivia Munn did is so controversial for me personally is that knowing her true intentions (which might have very well been under the guise of "doing the right thing") would affect the meaning of her actions in different ways, the thing is nobody can know her true intentions, except herself, which makes it hard to judge someone for only assuming someone's intentions.
     
    sev94 likes this.
  5. Okay, whatever. You're just nit picking at this point because I used the word "secret." Its semantics, and you understand what I mean.

    Actually, I did not use those words. I asked why you think you deserve to know anything about a person if they dont want you to know it.

    *might* effect their lives. I didnt watch this video, but I'm assuming nothing actually happened and this was all preemptive.

    I'm like 99.9% sure employers aren't allowed to do that.

    I've already addressed this... being on the registry and having your employer announce that to all your new coworkers are two completely different things.

    If shes mad about the company not telling her or something, then that's dumb and her intentions dont really matter much to me. They aren't allowed to divulge that kind of stuff to everybody. If she wants to change the law, she can pursue means to do that in a different way.

    I think we are kind of just going in circles at this point.
     
  6. I would still argue that labour law also requires an employee not to jeopardize their employer's reputation. If someone chooses to be a movie actor as their profession, then they have the responsibility of being a public figure. If an actor is aware that they are publicly registered as a sex offender, then they should also be aware that such information will cause bad publicity and financial loss for the movie studio. Which is probably why the scenes the actor participated in were deleted from the movie.

    I agree, I think we'll have to conclude the issue by agreeing to disagree. I just felt the need on my part to clarify the misunderstanding I caused, especially after others joined in, that I'm somehow a horrible person who wants to reveal or know other people's secrets so they can be judged and punished for their past mistakes. I don't think I'm a horrible person for wanting to be aware of a person's criminal history if it is based on destructive urges in their personality and/or sexuality, which is not a question of past mistakes and being judgemental of them. And also you're right, nothing happened, it was only Olivia Munn finding out and informing the studio that one of the actors had a past of sexual child abuse.
     
  7. Yeah, which is why I said the employer is perfectly free to not hire that person if they dont want them working on their set.

    I dont think you are either, and I never said that you were.
     
  8. TIMMY0110

    TIMMY0110 Fapstronaut

    433
    1,484
    123
    What you say could be true. What could also be true is he could (its possible)have learned his lesson and has become a better man. Under such circumstance, it is our duty to give him that benefit of the doubt.

    I understand that you are more concerned about the safety of the child actors.

    Just to explain my point:

    I am a recovering porn addict.
    Lets say in 5 years I have healed myself, I no longer objectified women.
    Does that mean I should mention "I was a porn addict" my dating profile for the rest of my life. Going by your logic, I should introduce myself to any woman I meet from now, like this"I am Timmy, I was a porn addict. I used to objectify women ". According to you, "all women deserve to know the true.... becoz Timmy could objectifying them"....is there no escape from my past mistakes.
     
  9. u376

    u376 Fapstronaut

    2,643
    6,458
    143
    Timmy.....porn addiction is not harming others
    But rape is a very serious crime....
    And I think co workers...... specially women should be aware of a potential threat
     
  10. TIMMY0110

    TIMMY0110 Fapstronaut

    433
    1,484
    123
    I think porn addiction does harm others. In an interview, Ted Bundy (Serial killer...google him) did mention that pornography has a vital role for sex crimes. Back then porn was not even an epidemic like it is now. I donot have the time right now to elaborate on that, but I will get back to that some other time.

    Maybe, the sex offender did start by watching porn or some other similar visual aid.
     
    Contentful T and Jason_Tesla_19 like this.
  11. Contentful T

    Contentful T Fapstronaut

    The guy should have been in therapy right after serving his sentence.

    Incarceration is punishment, and does not mean one necessarily learns their lesson and reforms by that alone, but often punishment is necessary to break someone in enough to be receptive to reformation.
     
  12. Contentful T

    Contentful T Fapstronaut

  13. Contentful T

    Contentful T Fapstronaut

    Hollywood is already full of professional pedophiles, GET HIM OFF THE SET NOW AND INTO THERAPY.
     
    AngelofDarkness and Taylor25 like this.
  14. Contentful T

    Contentful T Fapstronaut

    Oh I just got the title of this thread.

    How'd I miss that the first time?

    Predators often remain predators after prison. These people usually need intensive help, help that is not provided behind bars.
     
    AngelofDarkness likes this.
  15. u376

    u376 Fapstronaut

    2,643
    6,458
    143
    Off course it cause harm
    But every person watching porn is not a molester ....
    But yes most of the rapists are porn addicts
     
    AngelofDarkness likes this.
  16. u376

    u376 Fapstronaut

    2,643
    6,458
    143
    But I will tell you all you a different story
    Two hours ago I was watching a video on YouTube. ..
    A 15 year old girl accused a boy of raping her....
    Below comments I read that she was flirting with him after that incident through texts
    And she was repeating the word regret a lot....
    Then I saw another video titled that same guy was proved innocent after 3 years trial....and he was crying
    That was quite confusing
     
  17. Themadfapper

    Themadfapper Fapstronaut

    704
    860
    93
    C'mon the movie is called "PREDATOR". How can this guy not be in the movie?
     
  18. Gotham Outlaw

    Gotham Outlaw Fapstronaut

    579
    3,902
    123
    Lol. You have a point there.
     
    AngelofDarkness likes this.
  19. u376

    u376 Fapstronaut

    2,643
    6,458
    143
    Ok sir my mistake
     
  20. I'm not sure if my way of thinking is just so abnormal that it's hard to follow or if I simply fail to express myself clearly. But I just feel like I'm repeating myself over and over again.

    First of all, objectifying women (= disrespecting a woman's personal value with your eyes and thoughts) is clearly nowhere near the same as physically and emotionally hurting other people that will carry those scars until the rest of their lives, if they even are still alive. Secondly, if you have beat your porn addiction, if you have made your brain re-wire and learned not to objectify women anymore, then I don't see why you should disclose to anyone that you used to objectify women in the past if you don't want to. I think I've made it very clear at this point that I'm not talking about judging people for their past mistakes. I'm also the significant other of a porn addict, so I don't need to be told about forgiving other people's mistakes and moving on and letting the past be the past.

    I've also said that I'm not a criminal psychologist (as most people aren't) and that I don't possess the expert knowledge to certify an ex-convict as being "a better person" after their time in prison and I think it's narrow-minded to generalize all criminals and the motivations for their crimes if it means there is still a risk for others or myself to get hurt. Being afraid of danger and wanting to self-protect are natural human instincts. If I know that a person has shown criminal behavior because they have a dysfunctional inhibition threshold that keeps normal people from murdering or raping or otherwise physically hurting other people, including children, then I will not risk my own life or someone else's life just to give someone "the benefit of the doubt". If there is a ticking time bomb in a building, I'd rather not risk my life and enter that building. It could be plenty of time for me to get in and get out, it could also not be enough time to get out, but I definitely won't risk my own life and safety to find out. Maybe this analogy helps to clarify my point of view.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 15, 2018
    sev94 and u376 like this.

Share This Page