Funny Events of the "Woke" world

Agema

Do everything and feel nothing
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
9,215
6,485
118
Well, I would say systematic racism is usually accidental. Like home loan interest rates change based on your credit history. It's way harder to get a home loan when you or your parents (as a potential guarantor) had little chance to create a credit history. The intent is to make appropriate loan choices and mitigate risk but ends up hurting minorities disproportionately. No one is intentionally doing this
Well... I'm not really sure that it's uninitentional.

I think the people who hold societal power know perfectly well what benefits them, whilst also having the knowledge these systems disproportionately disadvantage minorities. So whilst it's not necessarily done with the explicit desire to disadvantage minorities, I would suggest there's a great deal of deliberately turning a blind eye to the disadvantage of minorities.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
I'm just letting you know what I said. And now you are pretending I'm saying what you think they said.

Isn't this the EXACT thing you think other people
And I pointed out others very much were saying different.

I guess a WHOLE lot of people perceive what you are doing as attacking gay people then. Have you ever thought about why that is?
Yes and it would be at best impolite and at worst probably close to if not fully violating the forum rules to express the precise thoughts as to why some of them are doing it.

The most appropriate and polite way I can say it is some people have narratives to maintain and don't like the idea of preconceptions being challenged or ideas from their echo chambers being allowed to be challenged.

You dont want them in media until they meet your 'representation' metric. Which is impossible

Also, good example of strawman
Yes it is a good strawman you just made.
Burns very well too when reality is applied to it.

I said I'm not interested in media which is going to make that the focus of their character such that they aren't characters so much as props to tick boxes to try and look good.

Also pretty sure when I've given examples of characters done well it means it's not impossible to do the characters well...

Unwillingness? We are just copying how you treat us. If it comes off as unwillingness than guess what... you did it first. It's like Rowling. She clearly bullied people first and wants to ban them from doing things. No wonder the twitter people are bullying her back

On these topics and anything to do with whatever you deem as woke culture, you have always been unwilling and always strawmanning.

That is not hyperbole. This whole conservation on this thread is just you strawmanning.
Oh right literally being able to point to fucking things said in this fucking thread towards me is now strawmanning is it?

Turn off the fucking gaslight that shit hasn't worked on me for years.

When the first lot of replies to me and spurious insinuations then you want to cry I'm not playing fair or engaging in good faith when I choose to call out that bullshit and take it to task. No you don't get to pull that gaslighting crap.

I didn't do it first.

People got offended and chose to strike because I dared to not tow some line.

Oh and you're strawmanning again here too. Thank you for telling me what I want to do because I couldn't possibly fucking know that myself and have explained that. No I must be fucking lying and secretly working to push the agenda of "The No Good Nicks" or something and being paid of Trump coin or whatever.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
You do not have to believe anything blindly. You just don't have to attack them for it.

Also, good example of strawman
What was my attack again?

You are going to have to provide evidence of you playing nice
Before you and others started crying I was being unfair and mean.

Look, I dont know whether Atomic Blonde would be a poster child of 'representation' or whatever. I found it average
Oh how the strange tales get written down in history by those with socio-political angles and how odd it is to see what they choose to throw praise at and ignore.

Two women Kiss in Star Wars and it's everywhere.

Two women get together in a spy film and are shown to actually care somewhat for one another and it's barely mentioned.

Funny how it's so much not about actual representation and progress now so much as the illusion of it and making a big song and dance about it.

I am definitely predicting what you might say here. As I stated in that sentence
So arguing it's not a strawman just the position I'm going to take despite the fact it would make no logical sense for me to take that position or move to it from my given stated position other than to entertain the argument you wish to have not the one we're having.

Yeh that's a strawman.

I am under no illusion that you are going to accept anything I say

Funny, you think this is me demanding things. You SHOULD see me actually demanding things.
Why would I accept strawmen as my actual position?

When did amount of influence become a metric. Oh, when you decided I had a point and moved the goal posts

Also, this is an example. You can find plenty of example in Disney since we have to doing an influence check now
I didn't set the fucking rules. Whenever I've posted fairly well known people and accounts the replies have always been how they're "Not influential enough so you're posting bullshit". These are the rules the people you side with set out. Don't like them, too bad I'm done being told to play by an entirely different set of rules.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
Someone actually crunched the numbers here, funnily enough, for both references and explicit depiction of romance/sexuality among Dr. Who companions.

Bill Potts is below the average for Nu-Who female companions. 7 out of 12 eps have a mention, and 4 out of 12 have a depiction. As opposed to 21 & 13 out of 35 for Clara, and 24 & 19 out of 31 for Rose.
You forget that's mentions and in some episodes Bill doesn't need to mention it because it's shown not told to the audience (no really) it would probably come to 10 our of 12 in reality
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
Neither of these have sexuality/romance as front-and-centre as much as literally any main character from Friends.
Ok then tell me the character / personality of Bill or Supergirl's sister then and I will go through all the friends main cast to define their personalities and other characteristics. etc.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
'You mean, of all the LGBTQ+ people in the world some of them do terrible things? Well geez, I guess that must mean we should keep a close eye on all of them and be very careful when leaving them with children. Maybe not leave them with children at all, you know, just to be sure. That's not bigoted at all. I mean, you wouldn't want the Klu Klux Clan educating our children, right?' (Though considering Florida and Texas at the moment, they probably really wouldn't mind.)

Yeah, that's one hell of a pathetic reach. Unsurprisingly. Nice job comparing the LGBTQ+ community to an actual hate group that wants gay people dead. Super classy right there.
Except every time people say "Hey maybe we should keep a close eye on this stuff" then people yell that sad person is a bigot.

Lets see the Wi Spa Incident that turned out to have happened.
How about the guy whose daughter was raped at school and it was being somewhat covered up?
How about some of the people involved in drag queen story hour being found to be offenders?
How about that time a certain activist had a multiple felony sex offender as a chat mod?
How about the large number of times it happened in MTG?
OR That time the literal Church in Ireland was being called out for covering up sex abuse and activists turned up to call the crowd fascists?

Maybe if there was vetting happening to begin with an anyone asking didn't just get called a bigot to deflect from it then people wouldn't be getting a little annoyed?
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
I mean, most action blockbusters are starred by Gruff Straight White Guy and there's no "but they have to be better written or including them is useless" argument.

Why're they the default and anybody else needs a reason?
You realise even "The Last Action Hero" a film parodying those kind of films had the main character tropes be more fleshed out that "Gruff Straight White Dude" right? Kinda proving there is more to such film character than that just by the fact they had to do more with the character to do the parody and eventual deconstruction.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
12,096
6,376
118
Country
United Kingdom
You forget that's mentions and in some episodes Bill doesn't need to mention it because it's shown not told to the audience (no really) it would probably come to 10 our of 12 in reality
Uhrm, by "shown not told", do you mean... having a girlfriend? Because if so, we can count literally every appearance of Rory as making "heterosexuality" his personality.

Ok then tell me the character / personality of Bill or Supergirl's sister then and I will go through all the friends main cast to define their personalities and other characteristics. etc.
What on earth purpose would this serve?

You'd just downplay it for one and exaggerate it for the other, as per.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,133
3,873
118
Oh, actually, having watched a bunch of Supergirl recently (all of season 3, and about half of season 1), Sugergirls' (adopted) sister, Alexandra Danvers is an agent of the FBI/DEO, who has a surrogate daughter relationship with her boss as her own dad is dead, an anger problem, is over-protective of her sister, and likes to violate the rights of US citizens as much as possible to make her law enforcement job easier. I think she's trying to channel DS9's Kira Nerys, but that might be because the two actresses look sorta similar.

Far more important to her character than her sexuality is her championing of police brutality. Not cool. And her relationships with her boss or sister are more important than with her GF.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,175
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
IS this the one where they then had to stop doing blind auditions cause they were hiring more white people?

I'm not even sure how one has a moral standpoint with rejecting blind auditions. The only opposition seems to be that diversity is the end goal, or rather, a goal in of itself.

It reminds me of the resume issue. For instance, it's established that resumes with non-Anglo names are less likely to be looked at than Anglo ones. Far as I'm aware, the data there's reasonably conclusive. So, how about blind resumes then? Anyone?

Usually, the answer is "no." :(

Oh, actually, having watched a bunch of Supergirl recently (all of season 3, and about half of season 1), Sugergirls' (adopted) sister, Alexandra Danvers is an agent of the FBI/DEO, who has a surrogate daughter relationship with her boss as her own dad is dead, an anger problem, is over-protective of her sister, and likes to violate the rights of US citizens as much as possible to make her law enforcement job easier. I think she's trying to channel DS9's Kira Nerys, but that might be because the two actresses look sorta similar.

Far more important to her character than her sexuality is her championing of police brutality. Not cool. And her relationships with her boss or sister are more important than with her GF.
Since you've skipped to season 3 and watched some of season 1, I'll raise you a season 2.

Theme: Alien refugees should all be welcomed to Earth, and any suspicion of alien refugees is just biased.

Plot Point At End: Alien refugees conduct an invasion of Earth.

Me: Um...

I actually like season 2 a fair bit, but it's so committed to its theme, that it can't seem to see when it undermines its own theme. For instance:

Plot Point 1: Not!Trump isn't elected to the US, and a female president is.

Plot Point 2: The president is an alien in disguise, but don't question as to how that might introduce bias, or raise questions of deception.

Plot Point 3: "The future is female," and alien president is flying Air Force 1 directly to the alien mother ship.

Me: YOU ARE FLYING AIR FORCE ONE TO AN ALIEN MOTHERSHIP! IF THE FUTURE IS FEMALE, WHY ARE YOU COMITTING THE DUMBEST TACTICAL BLUNDER IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES? Christ, it's like if Eisenhower flew directly to Japan after the Pearl Harbour attack and was so 'woke' that he was confident that the Japanese wouldn't shoot him down.

Spoiler alert, Air Force One is attacked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dwarvenhobble

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
9,049
3,037
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
And I pointed out others very much were saying different.
I'm pointing out they are copying you
Yes and it would be at best impolite and at worst probably close to if not fully violating the forum rules to express the precise thoughts as to why some of them are doing it.

The most appropriate and polite way I can say it is some people have narratives to maintain and don't like the idea of preconceptions being challenged or ideas from their echo chambers being allowed to be challenged.
Ah. You said yes, you attacked people. Why are you surprised people attacked back then?
Yes it is a good strawman you just made.
Burns very well too when reality is applied to it.

I said I'm not interested in media which is going to make that the focus of their character such that they aren't characters so much as props to tick boxes to try and look good.

Also pretty sure when I've given examples of characters done well it means it's not impossible to do the characters well...
What was that you said about Bill? She had to show but not tell anyone that she was gay.
All character in media tick boxes your so concerned about. From Deadpool to Carrie Bradshaw to Han Solo to the Power Puff girls.
You aren't interested in media which focuses on their character that tick boxes that you don't like.

If you want to call that misrepresenting strawman you, absolutely fine. Still doesn't make it untrue.
Oh right literally being able to point to fucking things said in this fucking thread towards me is now strawmanning is it?
Perhaps if you stop strawmannig people, they wont do it back to you
Turn off the fucking gaslight that shit hasn't worked on me for years.
I am very aware that you cant see what you are doing.

When the first lot of replies to me and spurious insinuations then you want to cry I'm not playing fair or engaging in good faith when I choose to call out that bullshit and take it to task. No you don't get to pull that gaslighting crap.
Spurious? You've already made strawmming arguments in this very quote
I didnt say anything about good faith to you in this thread. I didnt say anything about playing fair.
I've been pointing out when you are strawmanning so you can see what you do
If "No Strawmanning' is part of your desire for arguments on here, sure I can follow that. But I am going to be pointing out every single time you fail to meet your own standard. If you cant follow your own standard, it's not my problem
Remember, YOU were first in this thread that said to me strawmanning was bad and we shouldn't do it. Not anyone else
I didn't do it first.
False. At least from our interaction in this thread
People got offended and chose to strike because I dared to not tow some line.
They believe you are attacking them. Towing lines has got nothing to do with it

Oh and you're strawmanning again here too.
A strawman is where you replace an a person argument with a false one. I can probably point out where you do that with all your quotes. I can sure do it with every single quote on this page.

Thank you for telling me what I want to do because I couldn't possibly fucking know that myself and have explained that. No I must be fucking lying and secretly working to push the agenda of "The No Good Nicks" or something and being paid of Trump coin or whatever.
You're going to have to point out where I did any of that.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
Murder at any excuse is wrong.

Though i wonder why it has become a stereotype, is it because of a self-generated reputation from trans people actually doing that? Or something from the movies like making fun of Asains by making a chang-chung comment which asian people don't actually ever say.
Well at the risk of pissing off more people in here there have been two fairly well known trans people in the woke crowd who have admitted to lets say being less than honest / upfront with partners.

Kat Blaque
and
Brianna Wu

That's what a lot of creators are trying to do, by portraying gay relationships in the same way they would straight ones, but you keep complaining anyway.
Strawman.

Uhrm, by "shown not told", do you mean... having a girlfriend? Because if so, we can count literally every appearance of Rory as making "heterosexuality" his personality.
Yes but also funnily enough part of one of those relationships hinged on how being a lesbian relationship it was different due to bigotry. The relationship didn't even last 1 full episode but bigotry in the catholic church came up pretty quick.


What on earth purpose would this serve?

You'd just downplay it for one and exaggerate it for the other, as per.
To prove you can actually do it and prove that the characters have personalities far beyond their sexuality. You claimed Friends characters were just their sexuality in response and I'm more than willing to prove you wrong so will you prove me wrong on the characters I mentioned?
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
I'm pointing out they are copying you
After I was copying them.

Ah. You said yes, you attacked people. Why are you surprised people attacked back then?
What was my attack again?

What was that you said about Bill? She had to show but not tell anyone that she was gay.
All character in media tick boxes your so concerned about. From Deadpool to Carrie Bradshaw to Han Solo to the Power Puff girls.
You aren't interested in media which focuses on their character that tick boxes that you don't like.
Actually I quite liked The Magicians because it was well written.
Also Carnival Row


If you want to call that misrepresenting strawman you, absolutely fine. Still doesn't make it untrue.
As I've already explained. IT DOES.

Perhaps if you stop strawmannig people, they wont do it back to you
I am very aware that you cant see what you are doing.
How is it a strawman when I point out that it actually had happened.

Spurious? You've already made strawmming arguments in this very quote
I didnt say anything about good faith to you in this thread. I didnt say anything about playing fair.
I've been pointing out when you are strawmanning so you can see what you do
If "No Strawmanning' is part of your desire for arguments on here, sure I can follow that. But I am going to be pointing out every single time you fail to meet your own standard. If you cant follow your own standard, it's not my problem
Remember, YOU were first in this thread that said to me strawmanning was bad and we shouldn't do it. Not anyone else
Then point out why it's a strawman by dismantling it.
Also you didn't have to say it out loud just imply it.


False. At least from our interaction in this thread
Which then comes down to semantics and shifting the goal posts.

They believe you are attacking them. Towing lines has got nothing to do with it
Because they see not towing the line as an attack on them. Anything not perfectly in line is seen as an attack.

You're going to have to point out where I did any of that.
You yourself admitted to saying you brought it up because that's where my argument would go in your opinion. That would be a strawman.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
12,096
6,376
118
Country
United Kingdom
Yes but also funnily enough part of one of those relationships hinged on how being a lesbian relationship it was different due to bigotry. The relationship didn't even last 1 full episode but bigotry in the catholic church came up pretty quick.
Right, so "shown not told" actually adds 1 episode, and all the rest is no different to straight relationships.


To prove you can actually do it and prove that the characters have personalities far beyond their sexuality. You claimed Friends characters were just their sexuality in response and I'm more than willing to prove you wrong so will you prove me wrong on the characters I mentioned?
No, I didn't say Friends characters were "just their sexuality". You're the only one claiming characters have nothing to them but sexuality. I said that sex and romance are more prominent for Friends characters than they are for Bill Potts or Supergirl's sister.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
Right, so "shown not told" actually adds 1 episode, and all the rest is no different to straight relationships.
Except I don't think in the history of Doctor Who a character has said 7 times in a series "I'm straight".



No, I didn't say Friends characters were "just their sexuality". You're the only one claiming characters have nothing to them but sexuality. I said that sex and romance are more prominent for Friends characters than they are for Bill Potts or Supergirl's sister.
So not what I was arguing that makes your point a non sequitur
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
12,096
6,376
118
Country
United Kingdom
Except I don't think in the history of Doctor Who a character has said 7 times in a series "I'm straight".
K, so you're moaning about a joke.

None of this is really any more sophisticated than "wah there's a gay person in this program".

So not what I was arguing that makes your point a non sequitur
Have you forgotten what you were arguing already?

Might be a record.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
K, so you're moaning about a joke.

None of this is really any more sophisticated than "wah there's a gay person in this program".
Except it wasn't done as a joke it was done to make sure no-one missed the fact she was a lesbian to say "Look we have a lesbian character here" to try and look good to a certain audience who will blindly flock to support a character and attack any-one who dares say the character isn't very well written or complex.

Have you forgotten what you were arguing already?

Might be a record.
That often in media gay characters are reduced to having being gay be a main core character trait with little other personality.

So I do wonder if you forgot that or didn't realise it when your argument has seemingly shifted to "But the Friends characters despite being characters with their own personalities and characterisation talk about relationships and sex too often for my liking"

I mean you can see the difference there right?
I'm sure you can on some level considering you apparently can't really define Bill or Supergirl's sister as characters.