Hacker Cinema
40 Days and 40 Nights
2002 · Film · 94 min
Directed by Michael Lehmann
Matt Sullivan's last big relationship ended in disaster and ever since his heart's been aching and his commitment's been lacking. Then came Lent, that time of year when everybody gives something up. That's when Matt decides to go where no man's gone before and make a vow: No sex. Whatsoever. For 40 straight days. At first he has everything under control. That is until the woman of his dreams, Erica, walks into his life.
1 negativefrom 1 commenter
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
3 comments on Hacker News
>So? They are as free to express and act on their opinion of private actors expressing pro-LGBT messages as people who believe otherwise are to express the opposite.
The last time someone didn't want to bake a cake, they had to fight their way to supreme court... so yeah, expressing your beliefs is not an easy task to do.
The problem with beliefs is, that they're arbitrary, and a tiny variable can make a good thing a bad thing. Rape in a movie? Bad thing. Crime, thriller, etc. Rape jokes, bad. But wait, if you just change the gender of the rape victim to a male, you've got a hollywood "satirical erotic romantic comedy" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/40_Days_and_40_Nights ).
So, rape jokes are bad, and deleted ( https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-15641998 -here facebook even stood with free speech, but bent down soon after), but if the victim is a man, you can shoot a comedy and make $95M. And it's far from being the only movie with such cntent ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nheskbsU5g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uc6QxD2_yQw ).
Why is one (morally) ok, and the other isn't? Who decides that? If we censor one, shouldnt we also censor the other? Or if we let one online, why not let the other? Is it just a personal choice of a trigger happy moderator? Or is there a written, official moderation rule, where content with rape is ok, if the victim is a man?
But the problem here is the political bias in censorship. If facebook existed 100 years ago, you could say the same thing as now, just the 'good' and the 'bad' groups would be a lot different.
And you don't have to wait a 100 years, in my country, if we overly applied the same rules, at the start of the first covid wave, facebook would censor all the science-deniers, and crazy preppers for using masks (because "masks don't help" - our doctors, depending on where you live, probably yours too). Then one random saturday, our government decided you need a mask and gloves to enter any indoor public place (stores,...), and facebook would censor the anti-mask people.
We also live in a culture, where we have a few "protected groups", where we censor anything (even jokes) about that (eg. rape jokes), but even those rules, we apply very arbitrarily.... in movies, rape bad, rape jokes bad, unless the person raped is a man, then it's not a crime/thriller, but a "satirical erotic romantic comedy" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/40_Days_and_40_Nights ). Again, rape jokes are censorship worthy, unless you change one tiny variable, and that makes it all ok. Today atleast.
It's not that simple.
You have your usual bucket of nutcases, who get offended by everything, and everything is sexist (airconditioning), racist (milk) or *-phobic.
But then you have cases, where a mere accusation of anything even without proof) can destroy peoples lives, eg:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_lacrosse_case
You also have (somewhat) mainstream media spreading such fake news:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Rape_on_Campus
You also have individuals, eg. Johnny Depp getting acused by Amber Heard, losing his upcoming acting roles, and after a time (and 87 cctv videos), she's found to be the crazy/violent one.
You have people like Pewdiepie getting accused of being a racist many times:
https://www.vox.com/2018/12/13/18136253/pewdiepie-vs-tseries-links-to-white-supremacist-alt-right-redpill
Pewdiepie has a special 'power', that he gets more views than Vox does, so he can atleast present his side of the story ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjCsOmDmjEU ).
Some people don't have that media presence, but the media atleast scewed up enough, so they're no settling multimillion dollar lawsuits (Nick Sandmann, the 'smirking guy').
Now imagine, you're not a famous person, and you're not in a position of being able to sue CNN. Just one mere accusation (whout proof, without anything), can totally destroy your life, and you have no way to fight back. No police report, no judge, no jury, just one "he said, she said", one complaint, and there's nothing you can do... you lose your job, maybe even your carreer, you might get thrown out of your college, or worse. The accuser can lie to the media, say you said something -ist, or -phobic, and there's literally nothing you can do.
Now combine the "nutcases" with accusations, and your code using master/slave terminology is racist (as a slav, i have no idea why 'slave' is considered racist), boy/girl in character selection screen and never after is transphobic, and i have no idea what "not implementing all the pronouns" is.
Now, we have two options... either we become sensitive to everytihing, and destroy normal human relations and comedy (although, we've gone most of the way there, because of so many protected groups and actions, not allowed to be joked about, the only group you can target your jokes at are white men (with movies like 40 days and 40 nights, where a rape of a man is a comedic high point, and many other examples)), or we can just grow up, not get offended by something someone somewhere said or did (especially if it was a joke), and not "cancel" people because of that.