Discuss the Ghostbusters movie that was released in 2016.
#4893997
Kingpin wrote:
JurorNo.2 wrote:Political correctness is arbitrarily censoring discourse. That is what I cannot abide.
That depends on what's being censored, some of it is reasonably justified.
That's why I specifically said censoring discourse. ;) You have a civil debate with someone who has objectionable opinions and the result can often be that you both learn something. But if you just tell someone "You should be afraid to say that," they aren't going to have a change of heart. It's just going to make them more angry and stubborn. And that was a big reason why voters turned against the Democrats. And I hope the Democrats learn a lesson because I do not want Trump to win again. :sigh:

Plus, maybe it's an American thing, we are very protective of our First Amendment. We aren't in love with the attitude of "depends on what's being censored." Plus, ultimately, we often decide with our wallets. Milo's publisher decided not to sell his book. Now, that isn't political correctness at work; Milo's words haven't been censored, he's still free to speak anytime he likes (and does so every day on Facebook). Rather, that is capitalism at work. That is a company deciding that Milo would hurt their brand, and thus they prevent him from profiting off his words. That is what truly hurt him. That's how progress is often achieved in the US, you have to convince the financial power houses that something is in their best interests.
Sav C liked this
#4893999
timeware wrote:Paul may have had good intentions with the pay gap issue but he got way to preachy, and very one sided.
Anecdotal evidence, but I have a friend in Human Resources who says he has observed women being hired for positions because the company knew they could pay women less. And he's not a feminist or anything, it's just what he's observed at work. The pay gap issue isn't as far fetched as you might think, IMO.
This is also why I left Proton Charging
Well Proton Charging was just sick of the constant negativity and mean spiritedness. If you want to enjoy talking about a movie, you shouldn't have to sift through 50 vomit (and worse) emoticons. I mean even after Leslie was hacked, people couldn't just say "Geez, I'm sorry that happened, that's awful." They just HAD to preface it with "I still don't like the movie but..." It was ridiculous. People weren't respecting the page.
Kingpin, Alphagaia liked this
#4894004
Sav C wrote:I honestly couldn't tell you if I'm politically correct or not, that's how unclear I am on its meaning, haha.
Unfortunately it gets used lazily by some folks, so it's understandable if the meaning is no longer as clear as it used to be.
Sav C liked this
#4894005
Anecdotal evidence, but I have a friend in Human Resources who says he has observed women being hired for positions because the company knew they could pay women less. And he's not a feminist or anything, it's just what he's observed at work. The pay gap issue isn't as far fetched as you might think, IMO.
Maybe. I don't see the issue where i'm employed. Not saying the issue doesn't exist.

If Paul truly believes in this instead of being a political hack maybe he should I don't know run for congress? This way he can actually affect the law instead of whining about the trumps every five minutes. Kind of seems a like a waste of time for him to be doing this photo shop campaign when he could be using his time to actually help women, and not just those he doesn't agree politically with.

( I would predict he'd run as a Republican. :cool: )
#4894008
Kingpin wrote:
Sav C wrote:I honestly couldn't tell you if I'm politically correct or not, that's how unclear I am on its meaning, haha.
Unfortunately it gets used lazily by some folks, so it's understandable if the meaning is no longer as clear as it used to be.
Yeah, I know a couple of people who are super liberal and politically correct. They're highly judgemental of people who say stuff that isn't squeaky-clean politically correct (even if there is no ill intent), but then they turn around and make politically incorrect jokes and suddenly it's OK because they're being "tongue in cheek". Oh well, there are a lot of hypocrites out there. Also at times they can be highly condescending about their views on homeschooling, but that can be said of a lot of people on both sides of the political spectrum. It's just annoying, that's all.

Edit: Hey, apologies about bringing up homeschooling in this way in this conversation as I know it probably comes off borderline arrogant, it's just that being homeschooled has been a major life decision, and therefore it can be hard to be criticized by people who are misinformed on the subject.
JurorNo.2 liked this
#4894032
lol you guys should head over to the superherohype forums in the "politics" sub forum, huge debate over the Alamo Drafthouse having a "Women Only Wonder Woman screenings" (even the employees will be all women) and men will be turned away. It's getting pug fugly.
pferreira1983 liked this
#4894039
SpaceBallz wrote:lol you guys should head over to the superherohype forums in the "politics" sub forum, huge debate over the Alamo Drafthouse having a "Women Only Wonder Woman screenings" (even the employees will be all women) and men will be turned away. It's getting pug fugly.
Speaking as a woman, I personally feel like the idea is a little too on the nose, plus I had a lot of fun seeing ATC with a group of guys. But it is just one theater, one night. And ladies nights or men's only nights aren't exactly new ideas.

Frankly, I'm not seeing all THAT much complaining about it in any case. Or rather, I'm seeing more fans eager to defend WW against all the hate, than there were for ATC. I can guess why, and no, it's not because WW is somehow a better movie...

Sorry, bad mood this morning. Unrelated stuff.
#4894080
JurorNo.2 wrote:
SpaceBallz wrote:lol you guys should head over to the superherohype forums in the "politics" sub forum, huge debate over the Alamo Drafthouse having a "Women Only Wonder Woman screenings" (even the employees will be all women) and men will be turned away. It's getting pug fugly.
Speaking as a woman, I personally feel like the idea is a little too on the nose, plus I had a lot of fun seeing ATC with a group of guys. But it is just one theater, one night. And ladies nights or men's only nights aren't exactly new ideas.

Frankly, I'm not seeing all THAT much complaining about it in any case. Or rather, I'm seeing more fans eager to defend WW against all the hate, than there were for ATC. I can guess why, and no, it's not because WW is somehow a better movie...

Sorry, bad mood this morning. Unrelated stuff.
What's hilarious is that movie theatres did this EXACT same thing with the Magic Mike sequel and no one batted an eye. All of a sudden it's a big deal. Plus if a man really wants to get in that badly all he has to do is show up and say "I identify as a woman". Problem solved.

It's ridiculous how easily upset and offended people get in today's world. The world has real problems. A female screening of Wonder Woman is not one of them. This is s character who has empowered women for generations and when a big budget female driven superhero flick FINALLY gets released, what's the big deal? I swear people get upset just to get upset. It's faux anger. Don't people have more going on in their lives than to waste energy caring about this? It's time for certain individuals to grow up.
ccv66 liked this
#4894086
RichardLess wrote:
What's hilarious is that movie theatres did this EXACT same thing with the Magic Mike sequel and no one batted an eye.
"Man of Steel" is to "Magic Mike" as "Wonder Woman" is to...?
Image
I dunno. I mean, I get that "Mike" had Soderbergh going for it...but being on this forum in the past year I'm a bit hazy on the whole "intended/target audience" thing.

What kinds of charities did the "Mike" showings go towards?
#4894089
featofstrength wrote:
RichardLess wrote:
What's hilarious is that movie theatres did this EXACT same thing with the Magic Mike sequel and no one batted an eye.
"Man of Steel" is to "Magic Mike" as "Wonder Woman" is to...?
Image
I dunno. I mean, I get that "Mike" had Soderbergh going for it...but being on this forum in the past year I'm a bit hazy on the whole "intended/target audience" thing.

What kinds of charities did the "Mike" showings go towards?
I don't know what you mean regarding the whole being hazy on intended target audience. What are you talking about?

As far as I know it wasn't a charity thing, it was just female-only screenings. Pretty sure the same thing also happened with the Sex and the City sequel. No one cared then. No one should care now.
#4894094
People were threatening Alamo Drafthouse with legal action for discrimination/segregation until they announced that "all the proceeds will go towards local women's charities" which is a loophole. This wouldn't have been a big deal a few years ago, but everything is gender politics these days. Sure enough if there were an all-men screening of a big blockbuster film complete with all-male staff the shit would be hitting the fan.
#4894095
Doesn't bother me in the slightest that Wonder Woman is given an all female viewing. I can guarantee however, that when Ecto Force does show up the fem bloggers are going to make a big deal about any exclusive male screenings. It would be nice however to get reviews from both male and female audience.
#4894096
SpaceBallz wrote:People were threatening Alamo Drafthouse with legal action for discrimination/segregation until they announced that "all the proceeds will go towards local women's charities" which is a loophole. This wouldn't have been a big deal a few years ago, but everything is gender politics these days. Sure enough if there were an all-men screening of a big blockbuster film complete with all-male staff the shit would be hitting the fan.
Christ, this whole post is so stupid. Not you for posting it, Space. Just the idea People are actually so hurt about such a thing that they will sue. (And vice versa).

In the Netherlands we have​ a monthly ladies night in our favorite cinema. No one batted an eye.

It seems people are so sensitive, looking for a podium, while forgetting what's really important: living together with respect.
#4894098
timeware wrote:I can guarantee however, that when Ecto Force does show up the fem bloggers are going to make a big deal about any exclusive male screenings.
Ecto Force is a television series, not a film, so none of that scenario is likely ever going to happen.
Alphagaia, deadderek liked this
#4894102
SpaceBallz wrote:People were threatening Alamo Drafthouse with legal action for discrimination/segregation until they announced that "all the proceeds will go towards local women's charities" which is a loophole.
The Kansas City Alamo Drafthouse proceeds are going to Hope House: "Hope House is dedicated to making sure every man, woman, and child affected by domestic violence can find refuge and freedom. "

Alphagaia wrote: It seems people are so sensitive, looking for a podium, while forgetting what's really important: living together with respect.
Image
Thank Science we have the UN looking out for us all!
pferreira1983 liked this
#4894105
Kingpin wrote:
timeware wrote:I can guarantee however, that when Ecto Force does show up the fem bloggers are going to make a big deal about any exclusive male screenings.
Ecto Force is a television series, not a film, so none of that scenario is likely ever going to happen.
Doesn't mean the people in charge won't put together a focus group viewing before releasing the series to make last minute changes.
#4894112
timeware wrote:Doesn't mean the people in charge won't put together a focus group viewing before releasing the series to make last minute changes.
It's their prerogative to put together focus groups, still, there's nothing suggesting any of them would be all-male.

Even if one ended up being all-male, there's no guarantee word would get out, so there's no current worry about there being some sort of backlash. We've had enough storms in teacups this last year, no need to go looking for more where the currently aren't any.
Sav C, Alphagaia liked this
#4894183
Kingpin wrote:That's a pretty ignorant oversimplification of the transitioning process, transitioning isn't something you can get done in a weekend or a couple of weeks, or on a drunken night out.
From what I've seen so far it seems to be partly gender political. You're absolutely right: transitioning shouldn't be done on a whim but amongst some die hard left it has become a bit of a fad. These are men that really hate themselves for being men. It's crazy and I hope that mentality doesn't spread.
Kingpin wrote:Transitioning is about helping those who feel they were born as the wrong gender reach something that helps them feel more comfortable in their own skin.
My point is that that doesn't always seem to be the case with some individuals.
Kingpin wrote:There are members of the right who bellyache just as much and as long as similar members of the left, it's just on different topics.
Which is why I'm in favour of balanced politics. I find it good to listen to both sides instead of vilifying one or the other.
Kingpin wrote:Since when has anybody here asked you to do that? (the answer clearly is nobody) I'm asking you to condemn the more despicable claims he's made, and maybe not to quickly tie yourself to his standard, just because he may say a few things that resonate with you.
You're saying Milo doesn't have a right to discuss homosexual topics when he's gay. The thing is he didn't have to state he was gay or abused in the first place. If anything he should have a right to talk about these things.
Kingpin wrote:He's a professional victim, not to mention a troll and a bully. As someone who was the victim of bullying in school, I can see a genuine victim and I can see someone who acts the part as part of a persecution complex.
The guy came out as having been sexually abused. That takes a lot of guts. I see no self-victim complex going no here.
Kingpin wrote:Then permit me to lay out what Milo appears to standsfor (in no particular order):
Homophobia
Transphobia
Racism
Sexism
Anti-femism
Internet harassment and abuse
That's a pretty big generalisation mate. You're associating every single thing wrong in this world with him because you're on the other side of the political debate. I could easily say all those things about Anita Sarkeesian. Doesn't mean I'm right, it means I'm vilifying her because she's left wing.
Kingpin wrote:You may not be his biggest fan, but your willingness to lend some of your support to him when I feel there is a strong argument to leave him standing alone is something I personally find concerning.
Have you ever thought that like with a lot of social media that complaints about Milo have been blown out of proportion? Social media isn't exactly a humble place to post in. All I'm doing is from my own experience seeing both sides of the argument. The fact you worrying I'm not vilifying Milo is telling me more about your politics than his. (shrugs) I guess I would need to see more examples of his crimes.
Kingpin wrote:After how long we've been talking issues like these and others? I do believe we can.
You can't really because you've been quick to put me in a group without understanding I'm in neither one or the other. You can't see me, talk to me face to face so all you're relying on are my Internet posts that could be interpreted anyway. I could say to Juror for instance "what a great post" and being absolutely sarcastic as well as rude. This is why I use emojis a lot. So people understand my intention behind my comments. It's very difficult to get yourself across clearly on the Internet.
Kingpin wrote:Respectfully, while it isn't the total sum of your parts, I do think you've given us a good insight into your approach with a lot of things. It's a sketch, rather than a finished oil painting... but I don't believe it to be an inaccurate one.
Sorry but I think you need to go back to the drawing board. :-|
Kingpin wrote:Reactionary would've been me describing you as "right wing" in the very first response I'd ever made to a post of yours, it's been months now and I think that time has allowed you to paint/sketch a very telling portrait of yourself.
Reactionary is jump to conclusions with understanding anything properly. A few months of me posting here tells people nothing unless they're willing to dig deeper. A lot of posts here are only surface level in showing what they mean. We're all human after all.
Kingpin wrote:Happy Birthday, by the way.
Thank you. :)
Kingpin wrote:I appreciate that political correctness sometimes gets it wrong, goes a little overboard, or is incorrectly implemented by people who had a misguided, but well-meaning approach.
The fact is political correctness is now overboard. Anyone with a social media account can cry sexism or racism for anything and of course no one except the brave or stubborn are going to argue those particular cases. Didn't Simon Cowell get into trouble because he didn't see the point of the BGT contestant's feminist narration? Her social justice (or should be social injustice?) narration pulled her down. The proof is in the act, in this case the magic show. Dressing it up in feminism PC doesn't make it better:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/0/britain ... de-remark/

PC gone wrong.
Kingpin wrote:And in retrospect, I'll still have had it easier than someone who is not white, or not male - they'd have every right to school me on how my benefit from political correctness doesn't even come up to how they've benefitted from it.
I have been told a number of times over at the Runners Facebook page by black women about my 'white privilege'. To me it's total nonsense. I have never received jobs non-white people have had, I've had just a hard a time as black people in life for example, I have had a couple of racist comments come my way, I've in the past been treated quite below by every race. I don't understand this 'white privilege' because I have never been 'privileged'.
JurorNo.2 wrote:Happy Birthday!
Thank you! :)
JurorNo.2 wrote:Primarily, that means I'm against knee jerk reactions that older movies like Trading Places are "racist."
Y'know people find elements of DuckTales: The Movie and the Short Circuit films racist due to what they consider stereotypes? It's quite crazy.
JurorNo.2 wrote:I know he's a victim himself, which leads me to say he needs help, not a Twitter account.
He kept it a secret he was abused until he resigned from his job. Making jokes about abuse is no laughing matter, it just may have been his way of coping with that and showing face. Still wasn't right though.
JurorNo.2 wrote:As for David Wise, don't take it too personally, some artists are just ornery sort of people and since he's not super famous he's probably not used to putting on a friendly PR face. And he's not the only one who is worried about Trump (and it's not just the left). I'd personally just avoid talking politics and be supportive of his work.
Sorry Juror but he's crossed the line many times, shaming me to other people on his Facebook posts, swearing at me, talking about me to others in a derogatory way and saying I have poor 'reading comprehension skills'. Past couple of years I have wished him a happy birthday. Not once to my end. The fact that I have defended him and the cartoon on the Technodrome forum every week and got online harassment from it's users is me saying I don't deserve special treatment, just for him to give me a break sometimes. Now remember, I'm supposed to be a fan. I guess maybe he gets greedy with his FB fan followers and forgets what he has?
Last edited by pferreira1983 on June 11th, 2017, 3:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
deadderek liked this
#4894186
pferreira1983 wrote:From what I've seen so far it seems to be partly gender political.
pferreira1983 wrote:These are men that really hate themselves for being men. It's crazy and I hope that mentality doesn't spread.
Do you know anyone who is transgender? Who has gone through the transitioning process? If you do then I'm surprised by what you're saying, and if you don't, then I think you've just adequately displayed your ignorance on the subject.

Transitioning is not about gender politics, as I've said previously it is about allowing the person to feel more comfortable in their own skin, and to present the identity they feel is the most genuine one.
pferreira1983 wrote:My point is that that doesn't always seem to be the case with some individuals.
Do you recall which individuals have led you to this conclusion?
pferreira1983 wrote:You're saying Milo doesn't have a right to discuss homosexual topics when he's gay.
To sum it up in my own words: he has lost the right to talk about gay rights due to describing the pursuit of better rights for gay (and by extension L,B & T) individuals as "detrimental to humanity", and remarking that gay men "should get back into the closet".
He has described my (and his) orientation as "a lifestyle choice" (which is a popular lie) and "aberrant". Milo seems to happily sell out his own community in order to pander to those who consider themselves the conservative right-wing of politics - so I honestly do feel that not only has he lost his right to comment on gay rights and the LGBT community, he consciously perpetuates spreading misinformation and alternative facts about it. His actions only reinforce negative stereotypes, and build himself up as a figurehead for those who are conservatively politically-leaning. He is, for the lack of a better word, a traitor.

So yeah, he has lost every right to talk about the LGBT community even though he's gay.
pferreira1983 wrote:The guy came out as having been sexually abused. That takes a lot of guts. I see no self-victim complex going no here.
If he was abused, and what may (or may not) have happened in his past doesn't excuse or justify his actions nowadays. The sad thing is I can even believe he might've invented the whole account regarding the abuse so that it might engender sympathy for him.
pferreira1983 wrote:That's a pretty big generalisation mate.
Please elaborate, as his tweets, articles, television appearances and public talks would appear to suggest he is guilty of pretty much everything I've listed. The above quotations alone prove either a genuine, or pantomime case of internalised homophobia.
pferreira1983 wrote:all those things about Anita Sarkeesian.
Yet we're not talking about Anita, please don't change the subject.
pferreira1983 wrote:Have you ever thought that like with a lot of social media that complaints about Milo have been blown out of proportion?
Have you ever thought that maybe, just maybe, most of the reports about Milo's aberrant habits are true?
pferreira1983 wrote:The fact you worrying I'm not vilifying Milo is telling me more about your politics than his.
I like to believe that sometimes we can put politics aside to denounce a person who can be commonly described by both sides of the political divide as reprehensible, who falls so far short of the standard that should be considered a reasonable and decent human being.
pferreira1983 wrote:You can't really because you've been quick to put me in a group without understanding I'm in neither one or the other.
My "being quick to put" you in a group would've been me effectively saying "you're alt-right" the first time you posted here. Again, we've been caught in discussion for months (if not getting closer to a year now), I stand by my feeling that that has been enough time to build a reasonable guess as to your political leanings. But let's look further, you've been generally opposed to feminism and political correctness in your views, fairly unsympathetic... or even dismissive in regards to transgender issues, you've gone out of your way to defend someone who can be reasonably described as an anti-gay social media troll...
One of the few things we haven't really covered are your views on the environment... but still, you just seem to be more right than middle, as I honestly struggle to think of an issue in which you've presented an opinion that was even minimally liberal.

Permit me to make a few extra guesses: you're for smaller government and less regulation, you would support a greater right to bear arms in one form or another, you'd be in favour of greater influence by the church in the way the government runs/is crafter, and you'd prefer less influence from special interests?
pferreira1983 wrote:To me it's total nonsense.
Well, you might be inclined to think that... given you're white. :)

Anyway, I must admit I'm getting a little sick of spending so much time talking about Milo, and note (that I'm just as bad at this happening) that we're straying quite far from the topic.
Alphagaia, RichardLess liked this
#4894261
Kingpin wrote:He has described my (and his) orientation as "a lifestyle choice" (which is a popular lie)
I've never understood why anyone, gay or straight, would think of anyone's sexuality as a "lifestyle choice". I'm straight and it's not a lifestyle choice, why would it be any different for someone who is gay? Like I said the other day, hypocrites make me sick.
Alphagaia, RichardLess, Kingpin and 1 others liked this
#4894291
Sav C wrote:I've never understood why anyone, gay or straight, would think of anyone's sexuality as a "lifestyle choice".
If you can convince people that something is a conscious decision, rather than an innate, uncontrollable trait, you can then undermine the thing you're campaigning against and the arguments of your opponents by suggesting said thing is a mental disorder, "teenage rebellion" or "a phase".
It doesn't make any sense scientifically, but then a large portion of the people perpetuating the pseudoscience/junk science are rather ignorant when it comes to genuine science.
Sav C wrote:I'm straight and it's not a lifestyle choice, why would it be any different for someone who is gay? Like I said the other day, hypocrites make me sick.
And have consistently failed to prove it's all a conscious choice, when asked to temporarily turn themselves gay to prove their own point. :)
RichardLess, Sav C, Alphagaia and 1 others liked this
#4894299
Sav C wrote:
Kingpin wrote:He has described my (and his) orientation as "a lifestyle choice" (which is a popular lie)
I've never understood why anyone, gay or straight, would think of anyone's sexuality as a "lifestyle choice". I'm straight and it's not a lifestyle choice, why would it be any different for someone who is gay? Like I said the other day, hypocrites make me sick.
I wish I could like this comment more than once.

Hey Sav C, can I ask you a personal query? If it makes you uncomfortable don't answer. I'm just wondering, how old are you?
Sav C, Kingpin liked this
#4894301
pferreira1983 wrote:
Kingpin wrote:That's a pretty ignorant oversimplification of the transitioning process, transitioning isn't something you can get done in a weekend or a couple of weeks, or on a drunken night out.
From what I've seen so far it seems to be partly gender political. You're absolutely right: transitioning shouldn't be done on a whim but amongst some die hard left it has become a bit of a fad. These are men that really hate themselves for being men. It's crazy and I hope that mentality doesn't spread.
Kingpin wrote:Transitioning is about helping those who feel they were born as the wrong gender reach something that helps them feel more comfortable in their own skin.
My point is that that doesn't always seem to be the case with some individuals.
Kingpin wrote:There are members of the right who bellyache just as much and as long as similar members of the left, it's just on different topics.
Which is why I'm in favour of balanced politics. I find it good to listen to both sides instead of vilifying one or the other.
Kingpin wrote:Since when has anybody here asked you to do that? (the answer clearly is nobody) I'm asking you to condemn the more despicable claims he's made, and maybe not to quickly tie yourself to his standard, just because he may say a few things that resonate with you.
You're saying Milo doesn't have a right to discuss homosexual topics when he's gay. The thing is he didn't have to state he was gay or abused in the first place. If anything he should have a right to talk about these things.
Kingpin wrote:He's a professional victim, not to mention a troll and a bully. As someone who was the victim of bullying in school, I can see a genuine victim and I can see someone who acts the part as part of a persecution complex.
The guy came out as having been sexually abused. That takes a lot of guts. I see no self-victim complex going no here.
Kingpin wrote:Then permit me to lay out what Milo appears to standsfor (in no particular order):
Homophobia
Transphobia
Racism
Sexism
Anti-femism
Internet harassment and abuse
That's a pretty big generalisation mate. You're associating every single thing wrong in this world with him because you're on the other side of the political debate. I could easily say all those things about Anita Sarkeesian. Doesn't mean I'm right, it means I'm vilifying her because she's left wing.
Kingpin wrote:You may not be his biggest fan, but your willingness to lend some of your support to him when I feel there is a strong argument to leave him standing alone is something I personally find concerning.
Have you ever thought that like with a lot of social media that complaints about Milo have been blown out of proportion? Social media isn't exactly a humble place to post in. All I'm doing is from my own experience seeing both sides of the argument. The fact you worrying I'm not vilifying Milo is telling me more about your politics than his. (shrugs) I guess I would need to see more examples of his crimes.
Kingpin wrote:After how long we've been talking issues like these and others? I do believe we can.
You can't really because you've been quick to put me in a group without understanding I'm in neither one or the other. You can't see me, talk to me face to face so all you're relying on are my Internet posts that could be interpreted anyway. I could say to Juror for instance "what a great post" and being absolutely sarcastic as well as rude. This is why I use emojis a lot. So people understand my intention behind my comments. It's very difficult to get yourself across clearly on the Internet.
Kingpin wrote:Respectfully, while it isn't the total sum of your parts, I do think you've given us a good insight into your approach with a lot of things. It's a sketch, rather than a finished oil painting... but I don't believe it to be an inaccurate one.
Sorry but I think you need to go back to the drawing board. :-|
Kingpin wrote:Reactionary would've been me describing you as "right wing" in the very first response I'd ever made to a post of yours, it's been months now and I think that time has allowed you to paint/sketch a very telling portrait of yourself.
Reactionary is jump to conclusions with understanding anything properly. A few months of me posting here tells people nothing unless they're willing to dig deeper. A lot of posts here are only surface level in showing what they mean. We're all human after all.
Kingpin wrote:Happy Birthday, by the way.
Thank you. :)
Kingpin wrote:I appreciate that political correctness sometimes gets it wrong, goes a little overboard, or is incorrectly implemented by people who had a misguided, but well-meaning approach.
The fact is political correctness is now overboard. Anyone with a social media account can cry sexism or racism for anything and of course no one except the brave or stubborn are going to argue those particular cases. Didn't Simon Cowell get into trouble because he didn't see the point of the BGT contestant's feminist narration? Her social justice (or should be social injustice?) narration pulled her down. The proof is in the act, in this case the magic show. Dressing it up in feminism PC doesn't make it better:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/0/britain ... de-remark/

PC gone wrong.
Kingpin wrote:And in retrospect, I'll still have had it easier than someone who is not white, or not male - they'd have every right to school me on how my benefit from political correctness doesn't even come up to how they've benefitted from it.
I have been told a number of times over at the Runners Facebook page by black women about my 'white privilege'. To me it's total nonsense. I have never received jobs non-white people have had, I've had just a hard a time as black people in life for example, I have had a couple of racist comments come my way, I've in the past been treated quite below by every race. I don't understand this 'white privilege' because I have never been 'privileged'.
JurorNo.2 wrote:Happy Birthday!
Thank you! :)
JurorNo.2 wrote:Primarily, that means I'm against knee jerk reactions that older movies like Trading Places are "racist."
Y'know people find elements of DuckTales: The Movie and the Short Circuit films racist due to what they consider stereotypes? It's quite crazy.
JurorNo.2 wrote:I know he's a victim himself, which leads me to say he needs help, not a Twitter account.
He kept it a secret he was abused until he resigned from his job. Making jokes about abuse is no laughing matter, it just may have been his way of coping with that and showing face. Still wasn't right though.
JurorNo.2 wrote:As for David Wise, don't take it too personally, some artists are just ornery sort of people and since he's not super famous he's probably not used to putting on a friendly PR face. And he's not the only one who is worried about Trump (and it's not just the left). I'd personally just avoid talking politics and be supportive of his work.
Sorry Juror but he's crossed the line many times, shaming me to other people on his Facebook posts, swearing at me, talking about me to others in a derogatory way and saying I have poor 'reading comprehension skills'. Past couple of years I have wished him a happy birthday. Not once to my end. The fact that I have defended him and the cartoon on the Technodrome forum every week and got online harassment from his users is me saying I don't deserve special treatment, just for him to give me a break sometimes. Now remember, I'm supposed to be a fan. I guess maybe he gets greedy with his FB fan followers and forgets what he has?
It's funny how you constantly contradict your own opinions. You hate how PC everything has become and yet you don't want to vilify someone who is clearly a villian? That seems pretty 2017 PC to me. Milo is evil. He's a snake and he knows it and he plays it up. Just because he is gay and was molested and dates black men does not mean his very low opinion about these groups of people are valid. Infact I would argue Milo would go so far as to lie about being molested just to make a point. That's his M.O. This isn't a right wing vs left wing thing. It's a good vs evil thing.

And if you don't understand what white privilege is, read a book. You may not have recieved a job because you are white but guess what? I can guarantee you've never been turned down a job because you are white. That's white privilege. I've seen more people of colour get turned down for a job due to the colour of their skin than I care to admit. I benefit from white privilege and so do you. Do you get afraid to the point of shaking, when a cop pulls you over? No. That's white privilege. Do you get looked at funny when you enter a store because you are wearing a turban? No.
Kingpin liked this
#4894303
First ive been clear on my feelings about the Douchebusters Milo and Cassidy. Second, white privelage? Really Richardless? Must not be working for me since ive been turned down for numerous job interviews over the years. Could be my ADD, or could be that i'm an asshole. Who knows. :whatever:
pferreira1983 liked this
#4894307
Kingpin wrote:And have consistently failed to prove it's all a conscious choice, when asked to temporarily turn themselves gay to prove their own point. :)
Yeah, that's a good point. You just can't win with some people.
RichardLess wrote:
Sav C wrote: I've never understood why anyone, gay or straight, would think of anyone's sexuality as a "lifestyle choice". I'm straight and it's not a lifestyle choice, why would it be any different for someone who is gay? Like I said the other day, hypocrites make me sick.
I wish I could like this comment more than once.
Thanks!
Hey Sav C, can I ask you a personal query? If it makes you uncomfortable don't answer. I'm just wondering, how old are you?
Teenager. I'd rather not give out my exact age. To make a long story short one user (who knew my age) got banned for posting something that was sick, and that was too close for comfort for me. Ever since I've kept my age to myself.
  • 1
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16

Someone ID'd them on Facebook first, there w[…]

Two specific ideas I have are basically holiday sp[…]

While waiting impatiently for Frozen Empire to rel[…]

Make it that pack, sell it for $599. (While I […]