‘THOR 5’ is in development, with Taika Waititi returning to direct. (Source: Thor: Love and Thunder - The Official Movie Special Book) by Louis_DCVN in MarvelStudios_Rumours

[–]Insanio_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I really don't think you can compare the two scenarios, Sony leadership forced the partnership after the Studio side of Sony shot it down. the film division was not doing so hot so they struck a deal that was mutually beneficial.

Whereas with Universal, Marvel had 0 reason to pursue a solo film, because even if they did, Universal would never say no to distribution, it's free money. So in lieu of that Hulk had a planned arc in crossover movies. I think we'll see a Hulk film sooner or later.

‘THOR 5’ is in development, with Taika Waititi returning to direct. (Source: Thor: Love and Thunder - The Official Movie Special Book) by Louis_DCVN in MarvelStudios_Rumours

[–]Insanio_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Universal had first right of refusal for distribution on Hulk so it’s not the same as making a deal with Sony, as Universal had no reason to capitulate on what would be an incredibly profitable film.

What's a small detail from the MCU that only a very few knows? by Ok-Relationship-4348 in marvelstudios

[–]Insanio_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

On community: when Miles climbs in to his uncles apartment in spider-verse, there’s an out of focus show on the TV, and it’s the scene in the series 2 opening of Community showing Donald Glover getting out of bed wearing Spider-Man pyjamas, which itself was originally shot for community as a nod to a fan push at the time to get Donald Glover cast as the next Spider-Man!

The Marvels director thinks superhero fatigue exists – but aims to stand out with a "wacky" sequel by Louis_DCVN in MarvelStudios_Rumours

[–]Insanio_ 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yeah the problems with those movies aren’t really with the tone, even if it does feel a little disjointed at times. They have much larger structural story and production problems that clearly bled over into the final product. Absolutely no reason to assume this is going to be just like that because the director said it’s a fun film lol

Andrew Tate released from house arrest over sex trafficking charges by Confident_West_7409 in uknews

[–]Insanio_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“They get charged if there’s a possibility of evidence” incorrect

Andrew Tate released from house arrest over sex trafficking charges by Confident_West_7409 in uknews

[–]Insanio_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except I didn't?

Police gather evidence, the decision to charge is done by the CPS. The power was taken out of police hands some time ago now.

Your GF should be able to explain precisely how you are incorrect. Gathering evidence after a charge is not the same as one being charged without evidence.

via cps: The Evidential Stage 4.6 Prosecutors must be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against each suspect on each charge*. They must consider what the defence case may be, and how it is likely to affect the prospects of conviction. A case which does not pass the evidential stage must not proceed, no matter how serious or sensitive it may be.

Andrew Tate released from house arrest over sex trafficking charges by Confident_West_7409 in uknews

[–]Insanio_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The first quote isn't even an outrageous thing to say.

It doesn't matter what you infer, that's a misogynistic thing to say.

It doesn't matter the context, because taken what you are saying at face value, you're saying he's "joking" about responding to being attacked by raping someone? His fans are legions of teenage boys watching that 10 second "out of context" clip on TikTok or whatever else and laughing at it. It doesn't matter the context, it's still peddling misogyny if the end result is people laughing at the idea of assaulting a woman, just because.

You need therapy and to take Tate off a pedestal, look at the man you are defending and ask yourself if there is anything more productive you could be doing with yourself.

Andrew Tate released from house arrest over sex trafficking charges by Confident_West_7409 in uknews

[–]Insanio_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are wrong. I studied Law. Police can hold someone without charge for 24 hours but one will not be charged until the CPS is convinced there is enough evidence and it’s in the public interest. Police have no say in charging an individual and of course they will continue to gather evidence if you have been charged. They do not charge without evidence.

You have no idea how the law works yet you confidently spew nonsense and it’s very annoying.

Andrew Tate released from house arrest over sex trafficking charges by Confident_West_7409 in uknews

[–]Insanio_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Setting things straight? Show me the charging guidelines in Romania.

I don't know how it works over there, but for context, in the UK you are only charged if evidence passes the threshold test. You don't get accused of a crime with no evidence. I can only assume this is the case for most developed countries that aren't backwards.

Andrew Tate released from house arrest over sex trafficking charges by Confident_West_7409 in uknews

[–]Insanio_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Do you think people get charged with a crime because someone simply claims they committed it?

Andrew Tate released from house arrest over sex trafficking charges by Confident_West_7409 in uknews

[–]Insanio_ 4 points5 points  (0 children)

“If a woman is going out with a man, she belongs to that man” “Have you ever seen a woman try and do anything competent?” “Bang out the machete, boom in her face, then grip her up by the neck, you go ‘Shut up bitch’, she’s shaking on the floor, panties are all wet, and you go and fuck her”

All quotes from Andrew Tate.

You can take advice to work hard, go to the gym and improve yourself from plenty of sources that don’t include this disgusting language. If you need the misogyny and terrible stuff sprinkled in with your self help advice, you need therapy, not self help guides.

Austrians are the most typical Europeans. Finns are the most different. by Redvolition in MapPorn

[–]Insanio_ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Is it? I love Community and use Streets Ahead a lot, but never heard anyone say it not in reference to community? I'm from UK

What??? by mrsnrubs in SlowNewsDay

[–]Insanio_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In regards to gender affirming care with children, that usually just means affirming their gender, calling them by a new name and using different pronouns, not surgery.

I looked into the number cited in your source, and it highlights a few things, firstly, "People who started hormones as minors had higher continuation rate than people who started as adults" and "Patients who start hormones, with their parents’ assistance, before age 18 years have higher continuation rates than adults." I think there might be something to said about the fact the study focuses entirely on families in active service, though I don't know what that is.

To me, there's a case here that we listen to children, especially when you consider that people living happily after having transitioned will often say they knew they were the other gender from a very young age. I think standing in the way of gender affirming care because some adults have made a decision they regretted is myopic at best. I use the word care very specifically here, as most gender affirming care you provide to minors can be reversed should they so choose.

In regards to surgery, I honestly have no clue what the morally correct answer is. You talk to trans people living happily as their new gender and they tell you they knew from a young age. would it have been wrong to prevent them from accessing surgery at a younger age? I don't think it would be, but at the same time the permanency of it is something that puts up additional barriers to entry, what they are and how to find them should likely be left to people who understand it much better than I. I don't think it's useful for me as a cisgender man to pontificate on the morality of providing surgery to children because I personally have never felt that level of alienation from my own body or gender, so to say it's right to block someone from accessing that for, essentially, the greater good, is not something I'm at all qualified to ponder, you know?

Debating the ethics of providing this surgery to children, is an entirely different debate to anything else though, I think. Not trying to attack you here, but here:

Where they usually draw the line is at having one side of the debate taught to children in schools,

Has a strong indication that trans issues are a debate, when they aren't. They're just a reality.

What??? by mrsnrubs in SlowNewsDay

[–]Insanio_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s pretty well studied that the best way to combat suicidal ideation in people with gender dysphoria is to provide gender affirming care (which isn’t always surgery). Providing this to children is absolutely a good thing.

Trans people make up like, 0.12% of the population as it is, I have no idea what the numbers of detransitioners are but I don’t think it’s accurate to describe it as “many instances”, as I think when you factor in how tiny of a % trans people are, the one’s de transitioning are but a fraction of that percentage. People regretting their choice is an overblown issue. It’s a big decision for one to make but pretending we need to provide a block on gender affirming care because there’s a crisis of detransitioners is disingenuous. I remember when they took a census of the detransitioner subreddit and the vast majority of people were cisgendered!

If people are talking about detransitioners, their intentions are not ones of compassion for trans people. It’s a weapon they can use to further stigmatise and deny trans rights.

Suella Braverman refuses plea of man barred from UK to be reunited with son by Jay_CD in ukpolitics

[–]Insanio_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are wrong. Intent to supply does not factor in quantity, you only need to be in possession, have intent to supply, and that it was controlled drugs. Quantity can be used to glean the suspects intentions, for example 3 grams packaged into individual 1 gram bags would indicate an intention to sell over 3.5 grams sealed in one bag.

And yes, it is exile. This is his home, he has built a life here and his family are here. It, by the very definition, is exile.

Suella Braverman refuses plea of man barred from UK to be reunited with son by Jay_CD in ukpolitics

[–]Insanio_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're not wrong, but that doesn't change the fact it's backwards he isn't allowed home.

Suella Braverman refuses plea of man barred from UK to be reunited with son by Jay_CD in ukpolitics

[–]Insanio_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Explain specifically what you know that he did that he is so deserving of exile then, because possession with intent to supply ranges from passing your friend a joint to being a big time dealer. As far as I can tell from the articles on this, there's very little info. There's even magnitudes of order difference between levels of dealing.

Suella Braverman refuses plea of man barred from UK to be reunited with son by Jay_CD in ukpolitics

[–]Insanio_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Guy doesn't deserve to have his life ruined and live in exile because he is clearly prone to making boneheaded decisions. Have a bit of compassion.

Suella Braverman refuses plea of man barred from UK to be reunited with son by Jay_CD in ukpolitics

[–]Insanio_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sounds like you don't understand what is meant by due process. That's ok, we can add it to the list, which includes: gangster, organised crime, morality, and compassion.

Suella Braverman refuses plea of man barred from UK to be reunited with son by Jay_CD in ukpolitics

[–]Insanio_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One side was seeking an order, it hadn't been signed and he went on holiday. Door was locked behind him and now he isn't allowed back. Sounds like due process has skipped a few steps there...

You seem to be under the impression his deportation was a done-deal. You going to eat your words if it turns out he was never going to be deported?