|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jan 19, 2023 8:08:36 GMT
That depends on the child and how they come to obtain the information. What one takes with the knowledge the other may not in the same exact way. These days such a comment isn't really seen as innocent, because there are parents who do embrace that sort of attitude and go as far as to allow their child to dress a certain way, take part in certain activities, and even pay for surgery to make it permanent, which can have a negative affect psychologically. A four-year-old shouldn't be expected to read War and Peace, though. It isn't a children's book (Missing my point). Good for you, but in my neck of the woods I haven't seen that many to come to the conclusion that the minority will become the majority not far ahead in time. The religious texts that have been preserved for centuries make it clear homosexuality, pansexuality, bisexuality, and transgenderism are acts of sinful behavior, and because so many people are attached to them they try to preserve those beliefs in their upbringing and raising of families. It is easier said than done in a lot of places and cultures in the world, I'm afraid. It still won't destroy their minds. It just means they'll have more open minds going forward and question stuff more.
That's on the parents.
But they can still do it, and it won't hurt them.
Time will tell.
Nope, those were later interpretations. Nothing really states those things are sinful, not even the Sodom and Gomorrah story.
But no reason to stop trying.
But I am not saying it would destroy their minds, I am saying because of their young age they cannot comprehend such mature concepts because they're not developmentally there to be educated, hence why it is preferred that they learn so and so in middle school than before starting kindergarten. You also cannot say for certain how a child reacts to such a foreign and mature concept because all are different and interpret things in their own way, and yes, it is on the parents, which can be good or bad for the child depending on how they comprehend such foreign messages and how the parent views the matter themselves. A four-year-old is very unlikely to grasp what War and Peace is trying to say, at their age they want to read Pete the Cat. I wasn't just referring to The Bible, other religious texts have, for long periods of analysis, spoken against atypical marriage and sexuality from what is deemed normal. Easier said than done.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jan 19, 2023 8:46:04 GMT
Progressive? Perhaps, but that doesn't make her a social justice warrior. I wouldn't really describe The Terminator franchise as being anti-war, the movies focus on man versus machine and the first two are to make sure John Connor is safe because he is the leader of the human resistance should ever the machines wage war against the human species. There is always attempt to stop Judgment Day, but it is done through violent means. You didn't specify if the female characters had to be the lead of the films or television series they come from, which appeared to be your point given your reactions to the characters I listed. The women of the Fast and the Furious franchise, minus Dame Helen Mirren, are all played as attractive, but they're also shown to be skilled in hand-to-hand combat and driving and are capable of handling their own in a fight. The franchise has incorporated more female characters over the years, and nobody has honestly had issue with them, if anything when people criticize those movies it is because of how over-the-top they have gotten when the original was trying to be sort-of grounded. Fish-out-of-water stories have existed before printed media, these kinds of screen stories are appropriate for characters like a Wonder Woman and an Alita because that is how their stories were originally told as in comic strip form. No man in the audience is threatened by them, they are impressed by them because of how they are written and performed for the screen, they are likeable warriors. She's not going around saying she can do a man's job better, and she isn't indestructible in combat, either. Neither a Mary Sue, nor a social justice warrior. Selene actually is seen as a strong female character in film, Kate Beckinsale does a lot of the heavy lifting in her performance though as the screenplays are not grade A quality though they do lay good character work for Selene. Still regarded as a good strong female character. Still regarded as a good strong female character. I have seen both films, and no they don't. The movies have progressive teachings regarding the preservation of culture and environment, but the female characters are not mouthpieces for social justice. Well, it's true, there are plenty of people are not white who often criticize wokeness in contemporary culture - i.e. Eric D. July, a musician who also produced a record selling independent comic book Isom. She wasn't unnecessary, Charlie is the one who discovers Bumblebee, wakes him up, becomes his introduction to Earth and the human race, and ultimately gives him his "voice" at the end. Before the announcement that there would be a Captain Marvel movie plenty of people did want Carol Danvers in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and were hoping it would be closer to her original line of books before DeConnick's major revamp. There was also requests for a Black Widow movie during Phase Two. Anything not Hardcore Conservative = SJW. That's how it is today. Therefore, Progressive = SJW
The Terminator series was about Skynet, originally meant as a military system, turning on and nearly destroying Humanity and the resulting Robot War after. Therefore, War is Bad because look what it leads to. Same as how Planet of the Apes is Anti-War. The violent attempts at stopping things always is shown in a negative light.
Well, they do have to be leads. Secondary sidekick women are always in the shadow of the white male lead, which to Injustice Warriors is the only "Right" way for a woman to be.
They don't complain because none of the women threaten Dom's dominance.
Fish-out-of-Water isn't the same as that disgusting "Born Sexy Yesterday" cliche, which is what Wonder Woman and Alita both are. It undermines everything else about their characters with an old sexist trope.
She's shown as better in combat than men, and she shows she's better than male agents. So what, you need her to outright say things? Her actions make her an SJW character by virtue of not being a useless damsel.
Selene is seen as a hot lady in a black leather catsuit as opposed to a real character.
Good Strong, And a sidekick. Which undermines everything else.
Good strong, and a sidekick. Which undermines everything else.
So because the women don't specifically say anything, that makes them not SJW? Sorry, but if the movie has the message the characters are part of it. Therefore, SJW.
That's not that conspiracy Theorist Rippa, is he? He's only exploiting the anti-woke movement for easy $$$.
So she's there as a starter plot device, not a character.
Nope, there was no one asking for Captain Marvel. There were hopes she'd never ever show up and an outrage whenever there were hints she would. And Widow was also a Secondary woman rather than a lead so men couldn't feel threatened by her. That's how poorly the MCU treated women before.
I think your criteria of what qualifies as social justice warrior propaganda / woke is as wrong as what the anti-woke crowd sees as such. As mentioned before, woke is taking progressivism to extreme lengths regardless of if it is appropriate for audience or if it benefits the storytelling and filmmaking so it can preach specific political and sociological rhetoric. Someone who is progressive isn't automatically a woke person (social justice warrior) by default, they may not desire such terminology applied to them and find it falsely simplifies. Because of this, I think your categorization of The Terminator, T-2, Aliens, Avatar and its sequel The Way of Water, and Atomic Blonde are false. Neither Top Gun: Maverick or RRR are considered hardcore conservative features, but they are well-liked and not regarded as social justice warrior propaganda / woke either. On the television side of things, neither Yellowstone, Mayor of Kingstown, Tulsa King, Reacher, or The Terminal List or the long-standing animation South Park are seen as hardcore conservative but are definitely not seen as social justice warrior propaganda / woke. You did not specify that the female characters had to be leads in the film or television series that they belong to, so with that given I also listed female characters that happened to be in supporting but substantial roles. The Fast and the Furious franchise is more than about Dominic Toretto at this point, he wasn't even used in 2 Fast 2 Furious, Toyko Drift, or its spin-off Hobbs & Shaw. I will admit that I am not all too familiar with the "Born Yesterday Sexy" trope, but I persist that I see the stories of Wonder Woman and Alita: Battle Angel as fish-out-of-water and true to their source material. The two ladies learn, act, react, prove themselves, and save the day with a cost. You suggested that the only people complaining about woke in media were white males, I provided an example of a person that disproves that argument. You can dislike Eric D. July as much as you wish and theorize why he makes the content that he does, but that wasn't my point in mentioning him, I mentioned him as an example of a non-white individual who has vocally expressed dislike for woke media. Charlie Watson is definitely a rounded and defined character in Bumblebee. I wasn't born yesterday, I have been active on the world wide web since before the Marvel Cinematic Universe started, your claim that no one wanted a Captain Marvel / Ms. Marvel film is completely false, as is your claim that nobody wanted to see Carol Danvers in a movie, either. People were also asking for a Black Widow solo movie after the first Avengers in 2012 and were upset that it took till only after Endgame where the character died to finally get one.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 19, 2023 13:43:28 GMT
It still won't destroy their minds. It just means they'll have more open minds going forward and question stuff more.
That's on the parents.
But they can still do it, and it won't hurt them.
Time will tell.
Nope, those were later interpretations. Nothing really states those things are sinful, not even the Sodom and Gomorrah story.
But no reason to stop trying.
But I am not saying it would destroy their minds, I am saying because of their young age they cannot comprehend such mature concepts because they're not developmentally there to be educated, hence why it is preferred that they learn so and so in middle school than before starting kindergarten. You also cannot say for certain how a child reacts to such a foreign and mature concept because all are different and interpret things in their own way, and yes, it is on the parents, which can be good or bad for the child depending on how they comprehend such foreign messages and how the parent views the matter themselves. A four-year-old is very unlikely to grasp what War and Peace is trying to say, at their age they want to read Pete the Cat. I wasn't just referring to The Bible, other religious texts have, for long periods of analysis, spoken against atypical marriage and sexuality from what is deemed normal. Easier said than done. Then let them see these things and see how they react, so far no one has been mentally destroyed or hurt by it. And when they grow up they may be more open to these things than they'd be otherwise. And as time goes on, the programmers learn better ways of how to get these messages across in ways kids can understand. Also as time goes on these things will be more normalized.
Let them read it anyways and see what they get from it. It won't hurt them.
And those other texts have been altered or misinterpreted for just as long.
Still no reason to stop trying.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 19, 2023 13:52:09 GMT
Anything not Hardcore Conservative = SJW. That's how it is today. Therefore, Progressive = SJW
The Terminator series was about Skynet, originally meant as a military system, turning on and nearly destroying Humanity and the resulting Robot War after. Therefore, War is Bad because look what it leads to. Same as how Planet of the Apes is Anti-War. The violent attempts at stopping things always is shown in a negative light.
Well, they do have to be leads. Secondary sidekick women are always in the shadow of the white male lead, which to Injustice Warriors is the only "Right" way for a woman to be.
They don't complain because none of the women threaten Dom's dominance.
Fish-out-of-Water isn't the same as that disgusting "Born Sexy Yesterday" cliche, which is what Wonder Woman and Alita both are. It undermines everything else about their characters with an old sexist trope.
She's shown as better in combat than men, and she shows she's better than male agents. So what, you need her to outright say things? Her actions make her an SJW character by virtue of not being a useless damsel.
Selene is seen as a hot lady in a black leather catsuit as opposed to a real character.
Good Strong, And a sidekick. Which undermines everything else.
Good strong, and a sidekick. Which undermines everything else.
So because the women don't specifically say anything, that makes them not SJW? Sorry, but if the movie has the message the characters are part of it. Therefore, SJW.
That's not that conspiracy Theorist Rippa, is he? He's only exploiting the anti-woke movement for easy $$$.
So she's there as a starter plot device, not a character.
Nope, there was no one asking for Captain Marvel. There were hopes she'd never ever show up and an outrage whenever there were hints she would. And Widow was also a Secondary woman rather than a lead so men couldn't feel threatened by her. That's how poorly the MCU treated women before.
I think your criteria of what qualifies as social justice warrior propaganda / woke is as wrong as what the anti-woke crowd sees as such. As mentioned before, woke is taking progressivism to extreme lengths regardless of if it is appropriate for audience or if it benefits the storytelling and filmmaking so it can preach specific political and sociological rhetoric. Someone who is progressive isn't automatically a woke person (social justice warrior) by default, they may not desire such terminology applied to them and find it falsely simplifies. Because of this, I think your categorization of The Terminator, T-2, Aliens, Avatar and its sequel The Way of Water, and Atomic Blonde are false. Neither Top Gun: Maverick or RRR are considered hardcore conservative features, but they are well-liked and not regarded as social justice warrior propaganda / woke either. On the television side of things, neither Yellowstone, Mayor of Kingstown, Tulsa King, Reacher, or The Terminal List or the long-standing animation South Park are seen as hardcore conservative but are definitely not seen as social justice warrior propaganda / woke. You did not specify that the female characters had to be leads in the film or television series that they belong to, so with that given I also listed female characters that happened to be in supporting but substantial roles. The Fast and the Furious franchise is more than about Dominic Toretto at this point, he wasn't even used in 2 Fast 2 Furious, Toyko Drift, or its spin-off Hobbs & Shaw. I will admit that I am not all too familiar with the "Born Yesterday Sexy" trope, but I persist that I see the stories of Wonder Woman and Alita: Battle Angel as fish-out-of-water and true to their source material. The two ladies learn, act, react, prove themselves, and save the day with a cost. You suggested that the only people complaining about woke in media were white males, I provided an example of a person that disproves that argument. You can dislike Eric D. July as much as you wish and theorize why he makes the content that he does, but that wasn't my point in mentioning him, I mentioned him as an example of a non-white individual who has vocally expressed dislike for woke media. Charlie Watson is definitely a rounded and defined character in Bumblebee. I wasn't born yesterday, I have been active on the world wide web since before the Marvel Cinematic Universe started, your claim that no one wanted a Captain Marvel / Ms. Marvel film is completely false, as is your claim that nobody wanted to see Carol Danvers in a movie, either. People were also asking for a Black Widow solo movie after the first Avengers in 2012 and were upset that it took till only after Endgame where the character died to finally get one. Woke is anything even remotely progressive and open minded, despite what the Injustice Warriors say. They complain about anything outside the norm of "straight white male" if they can get away with it.
Let me put it this way, if the Injustice Warriors were around back in his time, they'd be demanding Sidney Poitier be banned from acting.
I haven't seen RRR, but Top Gun Maverick is Right Wing Propaganda. Military Propaganda film and therefore is very conservative. It's Pro-America/Anti-Everyone else.
I haven't seen those shows and stopped watching SP decades ago.
Supporting, therefore in the shadow of the white male lead. Which automatically cripples them.
He's still the overarching shadow over the entire series. Especially now.
They're both Born Sexy Yesterday, so is Leeloo from 5th Element. And it's perverted and takes away from everything else their characters have.
He's a Grifter, an exploitative person taking advantage of what he sees as gullible people to make $$$. An Alex Jones type.
She's superfluous.
I wasn't born yesterday either. I remember when folks were complaining about every choice the MCU made like hiring Chris Evans to play Cap and how Thor would be awful and how GOTG would bomb and destroy the MCU and get Kevin Feige fired. The second anyone mentioned Captain Marvel, the torches and pitchforks came out. And when Black Widow was mentioned, the talk was "Yes, it should be about some adventure she's having with Cap or Hawkeye and not really be about her."
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jan 19, 2023 19:48:51 GMT
But I am not saying it would destroy their minds, I am saying because of their young age they cannot comprehend such mature concepts because they're not developmentally there to be educated, hence why it is preferred that they learn so and so in middle school than before starting kindergarten. You also cannot say for certain how a child reacts to such a foreign and mature concept because all are different and interpret things in their own way, and yes, it is on the parents, which can be good or bad for the child depending on how they comprehend such foreign messages and how the parent views the matter themselves. A four-year-old is very unlikely to grasp what War and Peace is trying to say, at their age they want to read Pete the Cat. I wasn't just referring to The Bible, other religious texts have, for long periods of analysis, spoken against atypical marriage and sexuality from what is deemed normal. Easier said than done. Then let them see these things and see how they react, so far no one has been mentally destroyed or hurt by it. And when they grow up they may be more open to these things than they'd be otherwise. And as time goes on, the programmers learn better ways of how to get these messages across in ways kids can understand. Also as time goes on these things will be more normalized.
Let them read it anyways and see what they get from it. It won't hurt them.
And those other texts have been altered or misinterpreted for just as long.
Still no reason to stop trying.
Why not wait till they're older and have these programs focus on basic fundamentals like learning to read, write, eat right, and be polite? You shouldn't dump every single complexity of the world onto a child's lap before they're even in kindergarten. You are missing my point, I am afraid. It is all open for debate since they were written very long ago, but most cultures have preserved versions which directly state or strongly suggest such things are sinful activities, and I don't see a major change in attitude regarding that anytime soon, and definitely not within our lifetimes. It is easier said than done in some places, in some places people get severely punished if they practice such things in public.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jan 19, 2023 20:00:00 GMT
I think your criteria of what qualifies as social justice warrior propaganda / woke is as wrong as what the anti-woke crowd sees as such. As mentioned before, woke is taking progressivism to extreme lengths regardless of if it is appropriate for audience or if it benefits the storytelling and filmmaking so it can preach specific political and sociological rhetoric. Someone who is progressive isn't automatically a woke person (social justice warrior) by default, they may not desire such terminology applied to them and find it falsely simplifies. Because of this, I think your categorization of The Terminator, T-2, Aliens, Avatar and its sequel The Way of Water, and Atomic Blonde are false. Neither Top Gun: Maverick or RRR are considered hardcore conservative features, but they are well-liked and not regarded as social justice warrior propaganda / woke either. On the television side of things, neither Yellowstone, Mayor of Kingstown, Tulsa King, Reacher, or The Terminal List or the long-standing animation South Park are seen as hardcore conservative but are definitely not seen as social justice warrior propaganda / woke. You did not specify that the female characters had to be leads in the film or television series that they belong to, so with that given I also listed female characters that happened to be in supporting but substantial roles. The Fast and the Furious franchise is more than about Dominic Toretto at this point, he wasn't even used in 2 Fast 2 Furious, Toyko Drift, or its spin-off Hobbs & Shaw. I will admit that I am not all too familiar with the "Born Yesterday Sexy" trope, but I persist that I see the stories of Wonder Woman and Alita: Battle Angel as fish-out-of-water and true to their source material. The two ladies learn, act, react, prove themselves, and save the day with a cost. You suggested that the only people complaining about woke in media were white males, I provided an example of a person that disproves that argument. You can dislike Eric D. July as much as you wish and theorize why he makes the content that he does, but that wasn't my point in mentioning him, I mentioned him as an example of a non-white individual who has vocally expressed dislike for woke media. Charlie Watson is definitely a rounded and defined character in Bumblebee. I wasn't born yesterday, I have been active on the world wide web since before the Marvel Cinematic Universe started, your claim that no one wanted a Captain Marvel / Ms. Marvel film is completely false, as is your claim that nobody wanted to see Carol Danvers in a movie, either. People were also asking for a Black Widow solo movie after the first Avengers in 2012 and were upset that it took till only after Endgame where the character died to finally get one. Woke is anything even remotely progressive and open minded, despite what the Injustice Warriors say. They complain about anything outside the norm of "straight white male" if they can get away with it.
Let me put it this way, if the Injustice Warriors were around back in his time, they'd be demanding Sidney Poitier be banned from acting.
I haven't seen RRR, but Top Gun Maverick is Right Wing Propaganda. Military Propaganda film and therefore is very conservative. It's Pro-America/Anti-Everyone else.
I haven't seen those shows and stopped watching SP decades ago.
Supporting, therefore in the shadow of the white male lead. Which automatically cripples them.
He's still the overarching shadow over the entire series. Especially now.
They're both Born Sexy Yesterday, so is Leeloo from 5th Element. And it's perverted and takes away from everything else their characters have.
He's a Grifter, an exploitative person taking advantage of what he sees as gullible people to make $$$. An Alex Jones type.
She's superfluous.
I wasn't born yesterday either. I remember when folks were complaining about every choice the MCU made like hiring Chris Evans to play Cap and how Thor would be awful and how GOTG would bomb and destroy the MCU and get Kevin Feige fired. The second anyone mentioned Captain Marvel, the torches and pitchforks came out. And when Black Widow was mentioned, the talk was "Yes, it should be about some adventure she's having with Cap or Hawkeye and not really be about her."
Woke is taking progressivism to extreme lengths, what becomes the suggestion of "eat more fruit" turns into "eat nothing but fruit or else", for example in difference in approach. There are content that is considered to be woke that has straight white male leads, sir. Why would they? Top Gun: Maverick isn't right-wing propaganda, if it were why would a powerful democrat like Barack Obama list it as one of their favorite films of 2022? There are plenty of people who are not conservative in the military also so I would say this generalization is bunk. That is subjective. He is barely mentioned in 2 Fast 2 Furious and Hobbs & Shaw, only appears at the end of Tokyo Drift, and briefly shows up here and there in Spy Racers (TV series). It's a fairly recent and subjective description made by one person, as of this time it isn't seen as common and industry standard. Both 2017's Wonder Woman and 2019's Alita: Battle Angel are fish-out-of-water stories where the characters adjust to a new world and take on a role in a fight, it is true to their source material and the women are the stars of the show from start to finish. Your feelings about Mr. July are not relevant to the discussion, I cited him as an example of a non-white individual who dislikes wokeness in culture. You can call him a grifter all you wish, I am not arguing against that point of view and it was never my intention to start such debate. Have you seen Bumblebee? Charlie Watson is actually the most well-written human character that has been in a live-action Transformers feature and is even among the most well-written human characters of the franchise in general, her role in the story is very important. I don't recall there being huge outrage when Captain Marvel was announced, it wasn't long after they relaunched the book and back then people were more trusting of the Marvel Studios brand.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 19, 2023 22:11:49 GMT
Then let them see these things and see how they react, so far no one has been mentally destroyed or hurt by it. And when they grow up they may be more open to these things than they'd be otherwise. And as time goes on, the programmers learn better ways of how to get these messages across in ways kids can understand. Also as time goes on these things will be more normalized.
Let them read it anyways and see what they get from it. It won't hurt them.
And those other texts have been altered or misinterpreted for just as long.
Still no reason to stop trying.
Why not wait till they're older and have these programs focus on basic fundamentals like learning to read, write, eat right, and be polite? You shouldn't dump every single complexity of the world onto a child's lap before they're even in kindergarten. You are missing my point, I am afraid. It is all open for debate since they were written very long ago, but most cultures have preserved versions which directly state or strongly suggest such things are sinful activities, and I don't see a major change in attitude regarding that anytime soon, and definitely not within our lifetimes. It is easier said than done in some places, in some places people get severely punished if they practice such things in public. If you can teach them this stuff and the fundamentals at the same time, then why not do it? It's not hurting them.
The point is, we can be all "Think of the children!" as much as we want but they're tougher than we think and none of this stuff is actually going to hurt them.
But the change will happen, and it's starting to happen now. Thankfully.
Still no reason to stop trying. Otherwise, we may as well still be living in caves.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 19, 2023 22:17:13 GMT
Woke is anything even remotely progressive and open minded, despite what the Injustice Warriors say. They complain about anything outside the norm of "straight white male" if they can get away with it.
Let me put it this way, if the Injustice Warriors were around back in his time, they'd be demanding Sidney Poitier be banned from acting.
I haven't seen RRR, but Top Gun Maverick is Right Wing Propaganda. Military Propaganda film and therefore is very conservative. It's Pro-America/Anti-Everyone else.
I haven't seen those shows and stopped watching SP decades ago.
Supporting, therefore in the shadow of the white male lead. Which automatically cripples them.
He's still the overarching shadow over the entire series. Especially now.
They're both Born Sexy Yesterday, so is Leeloo from 5th Element. And it's perverted and takes away from everything else their characters have.
He's a Grifter, an exploitative person taking advantage of what he sees as gullible people to make $$$. An Alex Jones type.
She's superfluous.
I wasn't born yesterday either. I remember when folks were complaining about every choice the MCU made like hiring Chris Evans to play Cap and how Thor would be awful and how GOTG would bomb and destroy the MCU and get Kevin Feige fired. The second anyone mentioned Captain Marvel, the torches and pitchforks came out. And when Black Widow was mentioned, the talk was "Yes, it should be about some adventure she's having with Cap or Hawkeye and not really be about her."
Woke is taking progressivism to extreme lengths, what becomes the suggestion of "eat more fruit" turns into "eat nothing but fruit or else", for example in difference in approach. There are content that is considered to be woke that has straight white male leads, sir. Why would they? Top Gun: Maverick isn't right-wing propaganda, if it were why would a powerful democrat like Barack Obama list it as one of their favorite films of 2022? There are plenty of people who are not conservative in the military also so I would say this generalization is bunk. That is subjective. He is barely mentioned in 2 Fast 2 Furious and Hobbs & Shaw, only appears at the end of Tokyo Drift, and briefly shows up here and there in Spy Racers (TV series). It's a fairly recent and subjective description made by one person, as of this time it isn't seen as common and industry standard. Both 2017's Wonder Woman and 2019's Alita: Battle Angel are fish-out-of-water stories where the characters adjust to a new world and take on a role in a fight, it is true to their source material and the women are the stars of the show from start to finish. Your feelings about Mr. July are not relevant to the discussion, I cited him as an example of a non-white individual who dislikes wokeness in culture. You can call him a grifter all you wish, I am not arguing against that point of view and it was never my intention to start such debate. Have you seen Bumblebee? Charlie Watson is actually the most well-written human character that has been in a live-action Transformers feature and is even among the most well-written human characters of the franchise in general, her role in the story is very important. I don't recall there being huge outrage when Captain Marvel was announced, it wasn't long after they relaunched the book and back then people were more trusting of the Marvel Studios brand. Woke is progressiveness in any form, no matter how small or large. That's why there's never any proof of "Woke-ism taken too far".
And the Injustice Warriors are hypocritically fine with that.
Which doesn't change that they'd be up in arms over an actor like Sidney Poitier and his resume. "In the Heat of the Night" would drive them mad.
Maverick is, it's Pro-US/Anti-Everyone else Military Propaganda. That automatically makes it Right Wing.
Forcing them to be in the shadow of a straight white male cripples them as characters.
But he's still mentioned at all.
Not recent, Born Sexy Yesterday has been happening for decades. More and more people are seeing it for what it is:
WW and Alita are both examples of it, and it harms both.
He's not being honest, he's just exploiting the Injustice Warriors to make an easy $$$.
I have, and she's superfluous. Which shows how much worse all the other humans were.
I do recall it. They were howling their guts out at having to see a woman lead in the MCU.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jan 19, 2023 22:56:56 GMT
Why not wait till they're older and have these programs focus on basic fundamentals like learning to read, write, eat right, and be polite? You shouldn't dump every single complexity of the world onto a child's lap before they're even in kindergarten. You are missing my point, I am afraid. It is all open for debate since they were written very long ago, but most cultures have preserved versions which directly state or strongly suggest such things are sinful activities, and I don't see a major change in attitude regarding that anytime soon, and definitely not within our lifetimes. It is easier said than done in some places, in some places people get severely punished if they practice such things in public. If you can teach them this stuff and the fundamentals at the same time, then why not do it? It's not hurting them.
The point is, we can be all "Think of the children!" as much as we want but they're tougher than we think and none of this stuff is actually going to hurt them.
But the change will happen, and it's starting to happen now. Thankfully.
Still no reason to stop trying. Otherwise, we may as well still be living in caves.
Because they are too young to understand it and nine out of ten parents don't want to have to talk to their child about why a man feels the desire to dress as a woman. To repeat myself, I am talking about children under the age of four, do you know of any four-year-old or younger that absolutely understands the concept of transgenderism, the difference between bisexuality and pansexuality, or the appeal of drag? Why is it wrong if they learn about such things when they're in middle school? They will be hitting puberty then and will be starting to ask questions, they will have no idea what to do with knowledge of what bisexuality is if presented earlier in life. I haven't noticed it, homosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality, and transgenderism are still topics of much conversation in relation to religion and I haven't seen sudden reinterpretation of or findings of text where it states it is all sinless. As I have said, it is easier said than done in some countries. Here in the states the acceptance of all LGBTQ+ is likely to increase in the near future, but in other parts in the world where culture is much different and more strict people can see serious punishment for doing so publicly.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jan 19, 2023 23:25:45 GMT
Woke is taking progressivism to extreme lengths, what becomes the suggestion of "eat more fruit" turns into "eat nothing but fruit or else", for example in difference in approach. There are content that is considered to be woke that has straight white male leads, sir. Why would they? Top Gun: Maverick isn't right-wing propaganda, if it were why would a powerful democrat like Barack Obama list it as one of their favorite films of 2022? There are plenty of people who are not conservative in the military also so I would say this generalization is bunk. That is subjective. He is barely mentioned in 2 Fast 2 Furious and Hobbs & Shaw, only appears at the end of Tokyo Drift, and briefly shows up here and there in Spy Racers (TV series). It's a fairly recent and subjective description made by one person, as of this time it isn't seen as common and industry standard. Both 2017's Wonder Woman and 2019's Alita: Battle Angel are fish-out-of-water stories where the characters adjust to a new world and take on a role in a fight, it is true to their source material and the women are the stars of the show from start to finish. Your feelings about Mr. July are not relevant to the discussion, I cited him as an example of a non-white individual who dislikes wokeness in culture. You can call him a grifter all you wish, I am not arguing against that point of view and it was never my intention to start such debate. Have you seen Bumblebee? Charlie Watson is actually the most well-written human character that has been in a live-action Transformers feature and is even among the most well-written human characters of the franchise in general, her role in the story is very important. I don't recall there being huge outrage when Captain Marvel was announced, it wasn't long after they relaunched the book and back then people were more trusting of the Marvel Studios brand. Woke is progressiveness in any form, no matter how small or large. That's why there's never any proof of "Woke-ism taken too far".
And the Injustice Warriors are hypocritically fine with that.
Which doesn't change that they'd be up in arms over an actor like Sidney Poitier and his resume. "In the Heat of the Night" would drive them mad.
Maverick is, it's Pro-US/Anti-Everyone else Military Propaganda. That automatically makes it Right Wing.
Forcing them to be in the shadow of a straight white male cripples them as characters.
But he's still mentioned at all.
Not recent, Born Sexy Yesterday has been happening for decades. More and more people are seeing it for what it is:
WW and Alita are both examples of it, and it harms both.
He's not being honest, he's just exploiting the Injustice Warriors to make an easy $$$.
I have, and she's superfluous. Which shows how much worse all the other humans were.
I do recall it. They were howling their guts out at having to see a woman lead in the MCU.
But people have pointed out examples of woke being taken too far in the culture, I have already provided example in another topic highlighting a segment from the recent Blue's Clues revival on Nickelodeon where the titular character goes to a pride parade and everything pertaining to the LGBTQ+ community is discussed in detail when the target audience of such a program (four and younger) are much too young to understand and comprehend such things in whole absolute. People who criticize such media are often labeled as bigoted, ignorant, and out-of-touch with the times. On the flip side of things, people who defend such media are often labeled as groomers and bad people, so neither side is likely to come to agreement based on label itself. And the woke crowd is just as guilty as getting unruly as the anti-woke crowd, as evidenced by walkout and protests at Netflix over the release of Dave Chappelle's comedy special The Closer. No, they aren't. Why would they take issue with Poitier? He was a great filmmaker and made many solid films. People who are generally against woke in culture are not racially prejudice, I have provided an example of a person of color often criticizes woke in culture in Eric D. July - and what you believe are his motives and the debate on if he is a grifter is completely irrelevant to the point I was making, please stay focused. Top Gun: Maverick isn't right-wing, it is based in the United States and is about NAVY pilots but it isn't telling the viewer that they should register to the air force or that America is the best country in the world. The enemy isn't even emphasized much, it's a story largely about Maverick dealing with the next generation and making amends for past mistakes. Not to mention many of the filmmakers are left leaning politically - why agree to be on a film that promotes the other side? And, as mentioned, Barack Obama lists it as one of his favorites of 2022, and he's a democratic politician. That's your opinion and a highly subjective one at that. And? It's not his story being told. The trope, as explained in the video, is coined by its author. It isn't a generally accepted description of trope in storytelling and it is open for interpretation and discussion. I didn't feel the set-up and the general storytelling of either film harmed the characters of Wonder Woman or Alita in any way, nor did the people who enjoyed both feel that way, either. Charlie Watson isn't superfluous in Bumblebee, she buys him, awakens him, connects with him, acts his teacher to the world, saves him, becomes the first example of a good human being he has met, and ultimately gives him his 'voice'. I think our conversation about these female characters would have taken a different direction if only you had specified that you were talking about females that are the main characters of their media and clarified in response. As a result, you are coming across as rather desperate to be proven right. I don't, if I missed anything then they were a minority (I don't consider 20 or so people online as majority, by the way).
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jan 20, 2023 2:02:47 GMT
I'd like a proper quote please on where it's confirmed in the show that the GRC intentionally left people to die. Because I certainly don't recall that. What the GRC did was relocate people in camps because they had nowhere else to put them. Far better than just leaving them out in the streets yes? And if resources were difficult to distribute during that time, well what did you expect? The population just doubled overnight. The main problem with Karli is that she was attacking a government that already had its hands full trying to deal with an impossible situation. The government was not doing anything evil or even immoral. She was just pissed off that her people were getting the raw end of an impossible situation. And what did she do to retaliate? Kill civilians who were in the middle of distributing much needed resources. Luke on the other hand attacked the Death Star so they could stop it from killing more planets. If he did kill civilians in the death star (and there's no proof that there were any) they were still in the middle of trying to kill another planet. Just drop the comparison already. It's a ridiculous analogy. Magneto is a better comparison to Luke. Karli is one of the pettiest and most unreasonable villains in the MCU. Almost as unreasonable as Todd Phelps. The GRC could have built new housing for the people, but they left them in camps where we're told they didn't get food or medicine until the Flag Smashers started getting them those supplies. That's why there was a viral outbreak that killed that lady whose Funeral Karli went to. They tell us that the GRC abandoned them and gave them nothing.
Resources weren't hard to distribute. If they had pamper all the returned they could help those who stayed as well. The Senator at the GRC says they can't house them all, but he never explains why they can't.
It wasn't an impossible situation, the GRC people never explained why they couldn't just build new homes. They were hardly hurting for money or resources, the show stated they weren't.
She killed Guards who were helping the GRC hoard resources that the GRC wasn't even using, this was clearly stated. They were complicit in the deaths in the camps by hoarding that stuff.
Karli attacked them to save her people from death camps, she's comparable to Magneto too. But because she's called a "terrorist" and killed people complicit in the deaths of innocent people, that makes her "pure evil".
Luke killed innocent people, no matter how noble the cause was. Yet no one brings this up, nor does he ever feel bad about it. There had to be Civilian Techs and Laborers working on the Death Star. Folks who didn't like the Empire but had to work there against their wills.
You want petty and unreasonable, look at Riddler from "The Batman" or Arthur Fleck.
Like I said, I'd like a proper quote from the movie please where it was confirmed that they completely weren't getting food or medicine in the camps. Because if you're basing this all from what Karli said, well, she isn't exactly the most objective source of info now is she? As for creating housing for all these people, are you nuts?? You're talking about hundreds of thousands of people, maybe even millions. No country in the world has enough resources to build brand new housing for that many people in such a short time period. As for food and other resources, you have to remember that their population pretty much doubled overnight. Are you really telling me that you don't think that will strain a country's resources? As for this nonsense: "Karli attacked them to save her people from death camps" - Karli killed people who were trying to distribute food and resources. How exactly does killing them save people from death camps? Karli killed them to make a point, not because they were actively threatening other people's lives. Luke killed people in the death star because the death star was in the middle of trying to destroy a planet. Again, massive difference between these two. Karli is unreasonable because she wants the government to "do better" about an impossible situation where she doesn't even have a realistic solution to suggest.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 20, 2023 13:39:29 GMT
If you can teach them this stuff and the fundamentals at the same time, then why not do it? It's not hurting them.
The point is, we can be all "Think of the children!" as much as we want but they're tougher than we think and none of this stuff is actually going to hurt them.
But the change will happen, and it's starting to happen now. Thankfully.
Still no reason to stop trying. Otherwise, we may as well still be living in caves.
Because they are too young to understand it and nine out of ten parents don't want to have to talk to their child about why a man feels the desire to dress as a woman. To repeat myself, I am talking about children under the age of four, do you know of any four-year-old or younger that absolutely understands the concept of transgenderism, the difference between bisexuality and pansexuality, or the appeal of drag? Why is it wrong if they learn about such things when they're in middle school? They will be hitting puberty then and will be starting to ask questions, they will have no idea what to do with knowledge of what bisexuality is if presented earlier in life. I haven't noticed it, homosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality, and transgenderism are still topics of much conversation in relation to religion and I haven't seen sudden reinterpretation of or findings of text where it states it is all sinless. As I have said, it is easier said than done in some countries. Here in the states the acceptance of all LGBTQ+ is likely to increase in the near future, but in other parts in the world where culture is much different and more strict people can see serious punishment for doing so publicly. Maybe not, they aren't going to understand marriage and romance either but it doesn't stop kids shows from having those too. And kids dress up all the time so when they see someone doing in it a show they're not going to think its weird either.
It's not wrong, it's not wrong to close their minds at a young age either.
I have noticed it, I've seen how it's become more recognized and accepted over the last 20 years or so. And in relation to religion too.
Easier said than done, no excuse to do nothing.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 20, 2023 13:48:18 GMT
Woke is progressiveness in any form, no matter how small or large. That's why there's never any proof of "Woke-ism taken too far".
And the Injustice Warriors are hypocritically fine with that.
Which doesn't change that they'd be up in arms over an actor like Sidney Poitier and his resume. "In the Heat of the Night" would drive them mad.
Maverick is, it's Pro-US/Anti-Everyone else Military Propaganda. That automatically makes it Right Wing.
Forcing them to be in the shadow of a straight white male cripples them as characters.
But he's still mentioned at all.
Not recent, Born Sexy Yesterday has been happening for decades. More and more people are seeing it for what it is:
WW and Alita are both examples of it, and it harms both.
He's not being honest, he's just exploiting the Injustice Warriors to make an easy $$$.
I have, and she's superfluous. Which shows how much worse all the other humans were.
I do recall it. They were howling their guts out at having to see a woman lead in the MCU.
But people have pointed out examples of woke being taken too far in the culture, I have already provided example in another topic highlighting a segment from the recent Blue's Clues revival on Nickelodeon where the titular character goes to a pride parade and everything pertaining to the LGBTQ+ community is discussed in detail when the target audience of such a program (four and younger) are much too young to understand and comprehend such things in whole absolute. People who criticize such media are often labeled as bigoted, ignorant, and out-of-touch with the times. On the flip side of things, people who defend such media are often labeled as groomers and bad people, so neither side is likely to come to agreement based on label itself. And the woke crowd is just as guilty as getting unruly as the anti-woke crowd, as evidenced by walkout and protests at Netflix over the release of Dave Chappelle's comedy special The Closer. No, they aren't. Why would they take issue with Poitier? He was a great filmmaker and made many solid films. People who are generally against woke in culture are not racially prejudice, I have provided an example of a person of color often criticizes woke in culture in Eric D. July - and what you believe are his motives and the debate on if he is a grifter is completely irrelevant to the point I was making, please stay focused. Top Gun: Maverick isn't right-wing, it is based in the United States and is about NAVY pilots but it isn't telling the viewer that they should register to the air force or that America is the best country in the world. The enemy isn't even emphasized much, it's a story largely about Maverick dealing with the next generation and making amends for past mistakes. Not to mention many of the filmmakers are left leaning politically - why agree to be on a film that promotes the other side? And, as mentioned, Barack Obama lists it as one of his favorites of 2022, and he's a democratic politician. That's your opinion and a highly subjective one at that. And? It's not his story being told. The trope, as explained in the video, is coined by its author. It isn't a generally accepted description of trope in storytelling and it is open for interpretation and discussion. I didn't feel the set-up and the general storytelling of either film harmed the characters of Wonder Woman or Alita in any way, nor did the people who enjoyed both feel that way, either. Charlie Watson isn't superfluous in Bumblebee, she buys him, awakens him, connects with him, acts his teacher to the world, saves him, becomes the first example of a good human being he has met, and ultimately gives him his 'voice'. I think our conversation about these female characters would have taken a different direction if only you had specified that you were talking about females that are the main characters of their media and clarified in response. As a result, you are coming across as rather desperate to be proven right. I don't, if I missed anything then they were a minority (I don't consider 20 or so people online as majority, by the way). If a 4 year old can understand heterosexuality, nothing about seeing other orientations will hurt them. And it's a work in progress, as time goes on the TV people will figure out other ways to tell those stories too.
I don't see any difference between this and how people complained about movies like "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?" or "In the Heat of the Night".
Yes, they are.
Because his movies were "Positive Discrimination" stories and had progressive messages. And were quite controversial back in their day. Seeing the reactions certain people had to things like Ms Marvel shows that the Injustice Warriors movement has attitudes that speak for themselves.
It is, by being Military Propaganda that takes no issues with the military it automatically is.
The whole "See, they're strong women!" thing invalidates itself if they have to shackled themselves to being in a straight white leads' shadow.
It's his shadow being cast over their stories, holding them back.
That just shows how ingrained this offensive, lecherous form of storytelling is. Plenty of viewers honestly see nothing wrong with it, and that's bad.
So she's less a character, more a plot device.
Well I meant real leading ladies. Sorry.
But yes, they were very much against any female leads in the MCU. Ones who didn't need to begin as secondaries.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 20, 2023 13:52:02 GMT
The GRC could have built new housing for the people, but they left them in camps where we're told they didn't get food or medicine until the Flag Smashers started getting them those supplies. That's why there was a viral outbreak that killed that lady whose Funeral Karli went to. They tell us that the GRC abandoned them and gave them nothing.
Resources weren't hard to distribute. If they had pamper all the returned they could help those who stayed as well. The Senator at the GRC says they can't house them all, but he never explains why they can't.
It wasn't an impossible situation, the GRC people never explained why they couldn't just build new homes. They were hardly hurting for money or resources, the show stated they weren't.
She killed Guards who were helping the GRC hoard resources that the GRC wasn't even using, this was clearly stated. They were complicit in the deaths in the camps by hoarding that stuff.
Karli attacked them to save her people from death camps, she's comparable to Magneto too. But because she's called a "terrorist" and killed people complicit in the deaths of innocent people, that makes her "pure evil".
Luke killed innocent people, no matter how noble the cause was. Yet no one brings this up, nor does he ever feel bad about it. There had to be Civilian Techs and Laborers working on the Death Star. Folks who didn't like the Empire but had to work there against their wills.
You want petty and unreasonable, look at Riddler from "The Batman" or Arthur Fleck.
Like I said, I'd like a proper quote from the movie please where it was confirmed that they completely weren't getting food or medicine in the camps. Because if you're basing this all from what Karli said, well, she isn't exactly the most objective source of info now is she? As for creating housing for all these people, are you nuts?? You're talking about hundreds of thousands of people, maybe even millions. No country in the world has enough resources to build brand new housing for that many people in such a short time period. As for food and other resources, you have to remember that their population pretty much doubled overnight. Are you really telling me that you don't think that will strain a country's resources? As for this nonsense: "Karli attacked them to save her people from death camps" - Karli killed people who were trying to distribute food and resources. How exactly does killing them save people from death camps? Karli killed them to make a point, not because they were actively threatening other people's lives. Luke killed people in the death star because the death star was in the middle of trying to destroy a planet. Again, massive difference between these two. Karli is unreasonable because she wants the government to "do better" about an impossible situation where she doesn't even have a realistic solution to suggest. The people in the camps who wouldn't talk to Sam and Bucky, they said they needed stuff from the GRC and were abandoned until the Flag Smashers started giving them needed supplies.
It's better than using people and then throwing them away in camps to die when they're no longer "necessary". There's plenty of empty spaces that can be repurposed.
So ethnic cleansing is a better solution?
Those people were hoarding resources, not using them. That makes them complicit. The point was that the GRC did have resources but just didn't care enough to use them right. Luke didn't have a problem thinking "Oh well, there were probably people on the Death Star who didn't want to be there and I killed them."
The GRC Senator, he was the unreasonable one because he figured "Ugh, these foreigners infesting our country. Have to get rid of them, no matter what they did for us during the 5 years."
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Jan 20, 2023 14:16:31 GMT
I keep forgetting that the Falcon and the Winter Soldier was a series on Disney+.
I still wish it was a Captain America movie.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 20, 2023 17:27:44 GMT
I keep forgetting that the Falcon and the Winter Soldier was a series on Disney+. I still wish it was a Captain America movie. It's okay, we'll have "New World Order" soon enough.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jan 21, 2023 1:56:09 GMT
But people have pointed out examples of woke being taken too far in the culture, I have already provided example in another topic highlighting a segment from the recent Blue's Clues revival on Nickelodeon where the titular character goes to a pride parade and everything pertaining to the LGBTQ+ community is discussed in detail when the target audience of such a program (four and younger) are much too young to understand and comprehend such things in whole absolute. People who criticize such media are often labeled as bigoted, ignorant, and out-of-touch with the times. On the flip side of things, people who defend such media are often labeled as groomers and bad people, so neither side is likely to come to agreement based on label itself. And the woke crowd is just as guilty as getting unruly as the anti-woke crowd, as evidenced by walkout and protests at Netflix over the release of Dave Chappelle's comedy special The Closer. No, they aren't. Why would they take issue with Poitier? He was a great filmmaker and made many solid films. People who are generally against woke in culture are not racially prejudice, I have provided an example of a person of color often criticizes woke in culture in Eric D. July - and what you believe are his motives and the debate on if he is a grifter is completely irrelevant to the point I was making, please stay focused. Top Gun: Maverick isn't right-wing, it is based in the United States and is about NAVY pilots but it isn't telling the viewer that they should register to the air force or that America is the best country in the world. The enemy isn't even emphasized much, it's a story largely about Maverick dealing with the next generation and making amends for past mistakes. Not to mention many of the filmmakers are left leaning politically - why agree to be on a film that promotes the other side? And, as mentioned, Barack Obama lists it as one of his favorites of 2022, and he's a democratic politician. That's your opinion and a highly subjective one at that. And? It's not his story being told. The trope, as explained in the video, is coined by its author. It isn't a generally accepted description of trope in storytelling and it is open for interpretation and discussion. I didn't feel the set-up and the general storytelling of either film harmed the characters of Wonder Woman or Alita in any way, nor did the people who enjoyed both feel that way, either. Charlie Watson isn't superfluous in Bumblebee, she buys him, awakens him, connects with him, acts his teacher to the world, saves him, becomes the first example of a good human being he has met, and ultimately gives him his 'voice'. I think our conversation about these female characters would have taken a different direction if only you had specified that you were talking about females that are the main characters of their media and clarified in response. As a result, you are coming across as rather desperate to be proven right. I don't, if I missed anything then they were a minority (I don't consider 20 or so people online as majority, by the way). If a 4 year old can understand heterosexuality, nothing about seeing other orientations will hurt them. And it's a work in progress, as time goes on the TV people will figure out other ways to tell those stories too.
I don't see any difference between this and how people complained about movies like "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?" or "In the Heat of the Night".
Yes, they are.
Because his movies were "Positive Discrimination" stories and had progressive messages. And were quite controversial back in their day. Seeing the reactions certain people had to things like Ms Marvel shows that the Injustice Warriors movement has attitudes that speak for themselves.
It is, by being Military Propaganda that takes no issues with the military it automatically is.
The whole "See, they're strong women!" thing invalidates itself if they have to shackled themselves to being in a straight white leads' shadow.
It's his shadow being cast over their stories, holding them back.
That just shows how ingrained this offensive, lecherous form of storytelling is. Plenty of viewers honestly see nothing wrong with it, and that's bad.
So she's less a character, more a plot device.
Well I meant real leading ladies. Sorry.
But yes, they were very much against any female leads in the MCU. Ones who didn't need to begin as secondaries.
But the average four-year-old doesn't understand heterosexuality, they don't understand romance, their minds are too underdeveloped. Television and film writers in the pasty already proved that they can present mature topics of conversation in subtle ways, the Disney animated series Lloyd in Space had an episode where the boy characters and the female characters try to convince a sexless alien to decide their gender on the eve of their birthday, and in the end, they don't reveal a thing. It's a clever way to go about sexual identity because the character is an alien with a very simple design, and voice artist Pamela Adlon delivers the right amount of boy and girl in her vocal performance. Unfortunately, many of the writers for film and television lack the creativity and originality to produce something as clever or creative, and as a result you get something like the pride parade sequence from the recent Blue's Clues series. You can't really compare a progressive work from back then to today, and you can't really compare the filmmaking of them, either. Racial equality was something most people agreed with and saw racism as problematic in the country. Both movies handled the topic of race very effectively and created compelling dramas, and one was an original work while the other was a genuine adaptation of a novel. This argument honestly feels like you're trying to suggest all those in opposition of woke in media are bigoted, and it isn't a good look on you friend because you come across as ignorant and don't want anyone to change your worldview, which among other things suggests any person opposed to wokeness in culture can only be white, and that is just not the case per example of one Mr. Eric D. July. Being about those in service of the country doesn't make Top Gun: Maverick right-wing propaganda, and the movie at no point tells the viewer that they should register after the picture is over. You seem to ignore my comment about democratic politician Barack Obama being fond of the film, why is that? If you only meant leading female characters, then I don't see why you have decided to engage in discussing the merits of the mentioned characters in film and television when all you have have stated originally was you were referring to those that have led a motion picture. Instead, you have spent most of your time trying to debunk any merit that the mentioned have and are trying to perform what appear to be mental gymnastics to explain why people are fond of them, this includes the "Born Sexy Yesterday" argument which feels like a poor attempt in my opinion to discredit both Wonder Woman and Alita from Alita: Battle Angel and also paint those that like them and their source material (where their films are very close to in the basics) are either bad or ignorant. It is getting really ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Jan 21, 2023 1:59:51 GMT
Because they are too young to understand it and nine out of ten parents don't want to have to talk to their child about why a man feels the desire to dress as a woman. To repeat myself, I am talking about children under the age of four, do you know of any four-year-old or younger that absolutely understands the concept of transgenderism, the difference between bisexuality and pansexuality, or the appeal of drag? Why is it wrong if they learn about such things when they're in middle school? They will be hitting puberty then and will be starting to ask questions, they will have no idea what to do with knowledge of what bisexuality is if presented earlier in life. I haven't noticed it, homosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality, and transgenderism are still topics of much conversation in relation to religion and I haven't seen sudden reinterpretation of or findings of text where it states it is all sinless. As I have said, it is easier said than done in some countries. Here in the states the acceptance of all LGBTQ+ is likely to increase in the near future, but in other parts in the world where culture is much different and more strict people can see serious punishment for doing so publicly. Maybe not, they aren't going to understand marriage and romance either but it doesn't stop kids shows from having those too. And kids dress up all the time so when they see someone doing in it a show they're not going to think its weird either.
It's not wrong, it's not wrong to close their minds at a young age either.
I have noticed it, I've seen how it's become more recognized and accepted over the last 20 years or so. And in relation to religion too.
Easier said than done, no excuse to do nothing.
Programming for four-year-olds or younger doesn't really touch base on marriage or romance, programming for slightly older children yes. Once again, I am talking about media targeted towards children who are not even in kindergarten yet. I am not talking about children of the age of eight or 10. I haven't seen a change in attitudes towards religion, not in the sense that the entire view of one text has been radically altered and pastors are going on apology tours asking for forgiveness of dated interpretation. I am not saying nothing shouldn't be done, I am saying accomplishing so isn't going to be as easy in other parts of the world.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jan 21, 2023 7:26:05 GMT
Like I said, I'd like a proper quote from the movie please where it was confirmed that they completely weren't getting food or medicine in the camps. Because if you're basing this all from what Karli said, well, she isn't exactly the most objective source of info now is she? As for creating housing for all these people, are you nuts?? You're talking about hundreds of thousands of people, maybe even millions. No country in the world has enough resources to build brand new housing for that many people in such a short time period. As for food and other resources, you have to remember that their population pretty much doubled overnight. Are you really telling me that you don't think that will strain a country's resources? As for this nonsense: "Karli attacked them to save her people from death camps" - Karli killed people who were trying to distribute food and resources. How exactly does killing them save people from death camps? Karli killed them to make a point, not because they were actively threatening other people's lives. Luke killed people in the death star because the death star was in the middle of trying to destroy a planet. Again, massive difference between these two. Karli is unreasonable because she wants the government to "do better" about an impossible situation where she doesn't even have a realistic solution to suggest. The people in the camps who wouldn't talk to Sam and Bucky, they said they needed stuff from the GRC and were abandoned until the Flag Smashers started giving them needed supplies.
It's better than using people and then throwing them away in camps to die when they're no longer "necessary". There's plenty of empty spaces that can be repurposed.
So ethnic cleansing is a better solution?
Those people were hoarding resources, not using them. That makes them complicit. The point was that the GRC did have resources but just didn't care enough to use them right. Luke didn't have a problem thinking "Oh well, there were probably people on the Death Star who didn't want to be there and I killed them."
The GRC Senator, he was the unreasonable one because he figured "Ugh, these foreigners infesting our country. Have to get rid of them, no matter what they did for us during the 5 years."
Again, I'm looking for actual quotes from the show. Right now you're just giving me your interpretation of what happened in the show. I mean, was there actually any proof that the GRC were hoarding supplies or is that simply Karli's justification for murder? Again, and I don't know how many times I need to repeat this before you understand it, Luke killed people who were clearly in the middle of trying to kill others. Karli killed people who were NOT in the middle of trying to kill others. Do you see the difference? As for having plenty of empty spaces that could be repurposed, what empty spaces? All the people who were blipped came back in the blink of an eye. All of a sudden you had millions of people who had no place to stay in. What empty spaces are you talking about that could have been repurposed to house millions of people? And you're still ignoring the fact that the government all of a sudden had to provide food and resources for double their population.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jan 21, 2023 14:21:05 GMT
If a 4 year old can understand heterosexuality, nothing about seeing other orientations will hurt them. And it's a work in progress, as time goes on the TV people will figure out other ways to tell those stories too.
I don't see any difference between this and how people complained about movies like "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?" or "In the Heat of the Night".
Yes, they are.
Because his movies were "Positive Discrimination" stories and had progressive messages. And were quite controversial back in their day. Seeing the reactions certain people had to things like Ms Marvel shows that the Injustice Warriors movement has attitudes that speak for themselves.
It is, by being Military Propaganda that takes no issues with the military it automatically is.
The whole "See, they're strong women!" thing invalidates itself if they have to shackled themselves to being in a straight white leads' shadow.
It's his shadow being cast over their stories, holding them back.
That just shows how ingrained this offensive, lecherous form of storytelling is. Plenty of viewers honestly see nothing wrong with it, and that's bad.
So she's less a character, more a plot device.
Well I meant real leading ladies. Sorry.
But yes, they were very much against any female leads in the MCU. Ones who didn't need to begin as secondaries.
But the average four-year-old doesn't understand heterosexuality, they don't understand romance, their minds are too underdeveloped. Television and film writers in the pasty already proved that they can present mature topics of conversation in subtle ways, the Disney animated series Lloyd in Space had an episode where the boy characters and the female characters try to convince a sexless alien to decide their gender on the eve of their birthday, and in the end, they don't reveal a thing. It's a clever way to go about sexual identity because the character is an alien with a very simple design, and voice artist Pamela Adlon delivers the right amount of boy and girl in her vocal performance. Unfortunately, many of the writers for film and television lack the creativity and originality to produce something as clever or creative, and as a result you get something like the pride parade sequence from the recent Blue's Clues series. You can't really compare a progressive work from back then to today, and you can't really compare the filmmaking of them, either. Racial equality was something most people agreed with and saw racism as problematic in the country. Both movies handled the topic of race very effectively and created compelling dramas, and one was an original work while the other was a genuine adaptation of a novel. This argument honestly feels like you're trying to suggest all those in opposition of woke in media are bigoted, and it isn't a good look on you friend because you come across as ignorant and don't want anyone to change your worldview, which among other things suggests any person opposed to wokeness in culture can only be white, and that is just not the case per example of one Mr. Eric D. July. Being about those in service of the country doesn't make Top Gun: Maverick right-wing propaganda, and the movie at no point tells the viewer that they should register after the picture is over. You seem to ignore my comment about democratic politician Barack Obama being fond of the film, why is that? If you only meant leading female characters, then I don't see why you have decided to engage in discussing the merits of the mentioned characters in film and television when all you have have stated originally was you were referring to those that have led a motion picture. Instead, you have spent most of your time trying to debunk any merit that the mentioned have and are trying to perform what appear to be mental gymnastics to explain why people are fond of them, this includes the "Born Sexy Yesterday" argument which feels like a poor attempt in my opinion to discredit both Wonder Woman and Alita from Alita: Battle Angel and also paint those that like them and their source material (where their films are very close to in the basics) are either bad or ignorant. It is getting really ridiculous. Is the average 4 year old doesn't understand heterosexuality, then they shouldn't be exposed to the heterosexual stuff in kids programming. But they are, with no one complaining. If that happens, then there should either be a ban on heterosexual content in kids programming or those people are simply hypocrites. The Blue Clues "Controversy" being a prime example.
I can and I do make that comparison. Racism is still a big problem in society today, as much as people want to say otherwise. I've seen both films and both would be seen as "SJW Propaganda" and "Heavy Handed" if they came out today.
I do think that Injustice Warriors are Reactionaries, yes.
Eric D July isn't opposed to "Wokeness", he's just exploiting those who are to make $$$. It's just him being a part of Outrage Culture, like Alex Jones.
It glorifies the military, it doesn't show the Armed Forces as being in the wrong in anything they do and shows their Air Force stuff as cool looking. That Military Propaganda.
Obama also loves "The Wire", as left wing as a show can get. He never said WHY he likes Top Gun either, so for all we know it could be that he's a Tom Cruise fan. Until he does explain, it's superfluous.
You mentioned them, I brought up how they are actually all held back. And "Born Sexy Yesterday" is a valid stance to take against Wonder Woman and Alita.
Which still doesn't change that "fans" were up in arms the moment a Captain Marvel film was announced in the MCU, because the thought of a female lead who didn't start out as an oversexed secondary character simply repulsed them.
|
|