Yeah, I agree with this. I think this labeling mania betrays a kind of insecurity about one's preferences. I don't give two shits if there's a word for me liking women or not - I don't care whether society approves of it or not, it's what I'm going to do.
EDIT: Same thing with marriage as well. Outside of any potential tax benefits, I don't care at all whether the government gives me a piece of paper saying they condone my future marriage.
For sure, but I wonder why some levels of details are considered necessary where others aren't. I mean, I like brunettes more than blondes, but I don't need a word to describe that.
he's not particularly likable, but I don't think he's supposed to be. I agree with Champion though, it was quite a good movie I thought, despite being a little overbearing sometimes.
#4 sounds very loosely like city of god, but that's probably not it. Plus that was an awesome move...
my bottom five, from my letterboxd profile: (in no particular order) Immortals The room San Andreas Quake Three musketeers Battleship
I suppose it's good in a way that the show has diverged a lot from the books, at least some things that happen are actually a surprise now (for better or worse).
Why willingly put yourself through torture?Torture seems a bit extreme lol. Frankly, it's not difficult and has been quite rewarding. Edit: and I'm not a eunich lol. Humanity has a long history of asceticism to great benefit. I'm happy to continue that tradition
It seems to me this criticism is vague enough that it can apply to any marriage. It's an easy way to discredit them without having to provide any tangible reason. That's why I asked specific questions about specific problems later in my post and requested him to state what his overall goal is for the relationship.
Fair enough. On a similar note, is there any era, or year, or duration of a successful marriage that you would consider an acceptable role model for people seeking to get married today?
It seems to me this criticism is vague enough that it can apply to any marriage. It's an easy way to discredit them without having to provide any tangible reason.
Divorce isn't the plague, but it's hardly a good thing.
At very least, it's emotionally damaging for men, women, and children, and often financially damaging for men as well.
I agree, but I think you can still choose to have a great deal of control while committing yourself to one person. Obviously you don't have total control unless you're prepared to leave, but with the right attitude and a discerning taste you do have a good chance of getting to a point where things won't ever get that bad.
At least you're realistic about it. That's a huge problem in our society today - it's so easy to have massive amounts of sexual variety when people are young (college age), but then they think that drive can just be turned off by finding "the right one".
Marriages were much more successful before widespread promiscuity was commonplace, because people were much more likely to be satisfied by having only one partner.