>>13138651>first pointIndeed. The worst part is the dynamic which is established by the trope. The villain is increasingly an agent of ideological change, a man wo presents a way of fixing the world in some way, but the intellectual underpinnings of his motives are never beaten, only the man himself. Villains are strawmen of beliefs that threaten the status quo, and in almost ritualistic fashion the villain is defeated by that status quo. The hero is physically and mentally weaker than the villain loses because he's stronger. Essentially, storytelling - particularly films like those produced by Marvel - are a sort power fantasy for mainstream, status quo slave morality to savage it's ideological opponents without ever having to actually confront those beliefs or actually overcome them. An opportunity for weak men to enjoy the power fantasy of undoing their betters.
>second pointI'm not a Christian.
Anon said:
>personnaly for me its about plowing a hole that hasnt been plowed by too many guys.The implication being that he is not interested in pair bonding with a virgin, rather that he enjoys taking the virginity but leaving the girl. He makes it exclusively about sex.
All men and women should be virgin until marriage, it is the most natural and healthy mode. So obviously wanting a virgin wife is good, and wanting a non-virgin wife varies from concerning to degenerate. But deflowering girls only to be one your way is deeply whorish and warrants punishment.
Also: if you understood my point to be that desiring virgins is wrong, why would you assume I'm Christian? Christians all want virgin wives, don't they? It's the progressives who argue men should want whores because "sexual experience makes the sex better and that's my chief concern."
