[001]
pearlescence78
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I edited the description for \'\'Film/FastTimesAtRidgemontHigh\'\' because I didn\'t think the line about \
to:
I edited the description for \\\'\\\'Film/FastTimesAtRidgemontHigh\\\'\\\' because I didn\\\'t think the line about \\\"Stacy being a flawed, but mostly good person\\\", or the note that \\\"she had sex with Mike out of desperation\\\" were relevant. Also, if one has never seen that movie, the previous description can make one think Stacy suffers from a personal crisis of guilt after she has the abortion, which is not accurate, so I added some context.
Also, in the lead section, the statement, \\\"Conversely, pro-choice stories will blame society for the protagonist\\\'s woes, and use the story to soapbox about the evils of organized religion or abortion restrictions (abortion clinic protestors are a common antagonist here).\\\" This sounds like bias and does not accurately represent pro-choice films like \\\'\\\'Film/ObviousChild\\\'\\\' and \\\'\\\'Film/NeverRarelySometimesAlways\\\'\\\', which do not demonize religious anti-abortion groups. Is \\\"pro-choice stories will depict an abortion without condemnation or judgment\\\" not sufficient?
Also, in the lead section, the statement, \\\"Conversely, pro-choice stories will blame society for the protagonist\\\'s woes, and use the story to soapbox about the evils of organized religion or abortion restrictions (abortion clinic protestors are a common antagonist here).\\\" This sounds like bias and does not accurately represent pro-choice films like \\\'\\\'Film/ObviousChild\\\'\\\' and \\\'\\\'Film/NeverRarelySometimesAlways\\\'\\\', which do not demonize religious anti-abortion groups. Is \\\"pro-choice stories will depict an abortion without condemnation or judgment\\\" not sufficient?
