505
Sean Connery in 1964 (on the set of Goldfinger) and Thomas Brodie-Sangster in 2024. Both age 34 in their respective photos.
(lemmy.world)
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2026
505 points (97.0% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
42546 readers
3837 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean… it’s based? Beating anyone is wrong, of course - but if you have to do it, for example, for a defence, should you stop just because it’s a woman?
Right, because advocating hitting women for being hysterical screams gender equality.
Could be worse is a shitty sentiment. Just stop at beating anyone is wrong.
Punch Nazis in the face.
I am, in fact, willing to make exceptions for extrememe circumstances... like that
Wrong. People like you live in a pink cotton-candy bubble universe.
Wow, you're that way all the way round, good luck with that incel stuff. blocked!
These hypotheticals always boil down to 'I just want to hit women'. It's not based. You're just telling on yourself.
No, I don’t want to beat anyone. But I can imagine the situations, so do you.
And, you know, gender here don’t matter at all. It’s bad to use any kind of physical force to another human, especially on weaker one. But there can be situations where it’s justified.
Which one of these is grounds for self defense again?
I already wrote about my opinion in another root. Any physical force applied to another human is bad, especially to a weaker one. But we live in a crazy, mad world.
For example, If I’d see someone dangerous on a stree, in a state of psychosis (or just aggressive), approaching me - I would not look at gender. And, in general, if anyone is aggressive to me, I would be aggressive in the return - that’s all.
I agree that Sean words seems very misogynistic, but personally I’m doubting that he meant “I would beat woman that annoyed me”.
Or maybe he was, we’ll never know.
Connery’s stance on violence as a means of control, not self defense, is documented in a pretty famous Barbara Walters interview.
You may not be familiar with all of this, which is entirely fair because it’s not reasonable to have watched every celebrity interview in history, but I would encourage you to watch it as context. He was inarguably talking about hitting women in his life to shut them up.
First time I saw that interview, I remember being shocked by how blunt and honest it was, because like most people I liked Connery as a movie star. He did not sanitize his opinions. Outside a card game with the boys on a Thursday night, you’re not going to hear a more honest endorsement of violence in a relationship.
I judge his words based on what he actually said instead of using them to make an entirely unrelated point justifying violence.
In no way does what he said about striking a woman for being disagreeable suggest he's talking about self defense.
He very much did mean he beats women who annoy him.
1987, he elaborated on his quotes to Playboy. "I haven't changed my opinion... If you have tried everything else – and women are pretty good at this – they can't leave it alone. They want to have the last word and you give them the last word, but they're not happy with the last word. They want to say it again, and get into a really provocative situation, then I think it's absolutely right,"
Six years after THAT
"Sometimes there are women who take it to the wire. That's what they're looking for, the ultimate confrontation—they want a smack."
Stop trying to defend him, mythologise him or bring fcking self defense into this. It's disgusting
In a world of Cornell predators, I have to agree, there’s primal elements of his comment I do not sit well with.
Then I look at Israel - a case of someone playing a World’s Biggest Victims card so hard they get away with the most reprehensible thing (to the point they’re harming the rest of said victims)
Chances are, none of us will ever run into a person acting so horrible, so evil, they deserve violence even though they’re enacting none. But I don’t think it’s impossible. I think some really evil people bank on everyone thinking such a person/situation is impossible.
And yeah, as a side note, said evil people could be women. I agree in almost any plausible situation anyone can come up with, even to the point of yelling, arguing, and slinging insults, violence is just about never justified, regardless of the person’s gender. But I will not say “never” - not 100.00% of the time.
We are talking about domestic abuse.