204
There are more blockbuster movies with real life sex predators as the main lead, than female leads
(self.showerthoughts)
this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2025
204 points (87.0% liked)
Showerthoughts
37679 readers
269 users here now
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.
Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:
- Both “200” and “160” are 2 minutes in microwave math
- When you’re a kid, you don’t realize you’re also watching your mom and dad grow up.
- More dreams have been destroyed by alarm clocks than anything else
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
- Posts must be original/unique
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS
If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.
Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
None of those links do anything to discredit the claim, though.
That's if you automatically assume the claim is true without evidence, though. Which wasn't the original commenter's position. The original position was whether you could prove OPs titular claim with data.
Thus far? The answer seems to be "Nope."
That's because thus far no one has provided any data that's relevant to either side of the argument.
Aggregated lists of the "best" blockbusters with women leads are irrelevant to the discussion.
Then why take it as given that the claim needs to be proven false, rather than the other way around? Your mind seems to be made up before any reliable proof has even been presented.
I did no such thing. That's you extrapolating incorrectly.
Literally all I said was that the provided information isn't relevant to the discussion.
No, you said it doesn't prove that the claim is false. Which isn't even what they did. They expressed doubt and provided links supporting their doubt.
And my point was that their links didn't support their doubt.
Pointing out someone's argument is flawed doesn't mean you support the other side of the argument.
Did it not? It showed, at the very least to them, that there were a large number of female led blockbusters. To have more sexual predators in lead roles than that would take quite a significant amount. Certainly leads to doubt in my mind.
Why, in your opinion, is their opinion invalid because of this?
Again, a "best of" list of 20 some odd movies spanning many years based on the author's opinion doesn't support the doubt they were expressing because it doesn't provide enough information.
Of course it does. The links show there's a huge number of blockbusters with women leads. So the onus is on the person making the original claim for it to be believed
But a high number of blockbusters with female leads still doesn't contradict the claim.
The claim wasn't that there aren't any blockbusters with female leads, it was that there are more with men who are also sexual predators.
And those links don't even show that there's a high number of blockbusters with female leads. They're just an aggregated list of the best profitable movies with female leads. You need to have the grand total of blockbusters, and the total number of blockbusters with female leads to draw that conclusion.
So youre saying it doesn't prove anything, and thus OPs original claim is yet to be proven false. Or more importantly, proven true.
Yes, I'm saying the data provided has no relevance to the discussion one way or the other.
You mostly seem to be saying that OPs claim is absolute truth until proven otherwise. Which is a wild stance to take when, thus far, no proof has been given.
Please provide a quote of me making a statement regarding the validity of either side of the claim.
Why do they need to contradict a claim you purport not to support?
I answered that in the comment you quoted.
You need to learn that criticizing the validity someone's argument isn't support for the other side.
You need to learn to figure out what an argument is after you read a comment. They never purported to prove that OPs assertion was absolutely false, as you claim, it was to express doubt that it was real.
Your argument was as valid as the argument you imagined they had was.
You need to learn what an argument is.
Saying you doubt a claim and providing evidence for your doubts is an argument against the validity of the claim.
My saying that the evidence you provided doesn't support your doubt is a valid criticism and doesn't mean I support the claim you're doubting.