The number is going down, it is not going to zero.

So, how about out of 20 movies, 18 cut the crap, and the other two put some fuckin effort into their sex scenes.

And that's kids how you make an argument about capitalist suppression of sex. Netflix can probably get a 10% revenue boost if they just cut out all the "stimulating" sex scenes.

So is peeing and shitting. And yet somehow you don't get a 5 minute scene of someone on a shitter and then the exact shot of their turds being flushed down.

Sex and nudity are normal. And yet I don't wanna watch my friends have sex. Do you? Wierd huh?

So, why exactly is it so unbelievable that people just don't wanna watch actors pretend to do the most intimate thing we all got?

Feels awkward, yes. Feels akward when it's bad and feels even more awkward when it's good. And it would be most akward if they actually properly showed the entire process and it was real.

The world didn't do shit.

It was as normal in Europe to be naked and talk about sex as it is now. Actually, it probably got even a bit more normal.

Your stupid Hollywood is somehow watched by everyone around the world while it's produced to cater to your dumb average American. And they're religious and prudent. And that has been the case since forever. Which is why having naked breasts in your cinema is something wild.

In the meantime french movies would casually have people full naked every second movie.

Am I really on a movies community?

--

Now, your dumb Hollywood realized their cringe sex scenes aren't appreciated by about anyone, and so they cut them out. Big deal.

Definitely not the world shifting, and not even your moronic populace. Proportion of religious prudes is still dropping even in the dumbfuckistan. And yet no more sex in the movies. Go figure.

The disappearance of the sex scene in American cinema, the suppression of the body under the moral imperative of commodities in neoliberal capitalism, and Verhoeven as antagonizer.

Bro, you gotta stop reading shit like this. It's bad for your brain. Not everything is capitalistic plot to suppress your whatever.

Why wouldn't you be able to see it as "the viewers didn't enjoy our cringe sex scenes, so we got rid of them, cuz we sure as hell couldn't put real sex scenes into movies". And no, not because of purity. But because even good porn is cringe and fake.

So maybe it's really a decomcratic decision and it's only possible because through capitalism there's monetary pressure on the film industry to do the things people want.

Whichever it is, you gotta stop reading BS that starts with a conclusion in the first sentence, and no matter the subject it's the same conclusion: capitalism oppressing the working class. You'd make Lenin cringe.

Because engineering is precise, measurable, and easily reproducible. You should be testing your things in a way that all you need is a simple two-sample Z-test.

Experiments on the humans, on the hand, unfortunately, have been outlawed. So all you get is a bunch of shitty noisy data, and yet you're supposed to somehow make sense of it. Most people with a degree in stats would tell you not to even try, and yet those fucks at phycology departments always do while having had about one undergrad-level class as part of their masters.

TL;DR good psychology programs nowdays train decent statisticians as they should.

Kitty kitty kitty!

They got arrested, but made hella of statement.

Hasn't aged a day:

2 seconds assumes an instantaneous reaction and perfect road conditions. In the EU they'll teach you about 3s and at least +1 in poor conditions.

Lemmy is too obsessed with elections and swallowed the bait. Seeing everyone's reaction I did.

Luckily I've looked a bit further down the thread to find something not about elections, and saw this comment.

The title is hella misleading and clickbait. We should restrict people from posting such BS.

Say the line, anon!

And you're the Cesar's centurion. In armor and with the crowd cheering for you.

What a sight.

That's disgusting!

Where?

Cars, car infrastructure, people preferring to live far out and drive to work -- those are choices that can be made individually and collectively in a society-respecting way.

Driving an ICE car is a choice that affects the entire planet. When you do that, you're doing something immoral no matter what.

Driving electric essentially illuminates the most immoral aspect of the entire driving your car thing. It is a moraly superior choice, and you should feel good about it.

And now that we removed "if we all drive the world will end" from the discussion, we can in a civilized manner discuss and decide how many cars and where do we want.

--

Oh, sorry, this is lemmy, lemme quickly correct myself: burn every Tesla you see to stick it to the billionaires! Revolution starts today!

Is it you, lemmy, brigading that GitHub gist? @ZendeskTeam is being is already dead, but don't worry, you can still come and give them another kick.

Even greentext is a US presidential campaign now.

I think, it's time to take a break from lemmy till December.

Lemmy, open the article. It's 6k vehicles per year in a continent of half a billion people.

It's on the rise, as in before it was nobody, and now 0.1% of the farmers bought one. And a 100 lunatics.

It's still illegal to drive and park in most places due to size, so as a pesky city dweller, I probably still won't get to see any.