Funny Events of the "Woke" world

[BrawlMan]

There have been many many people trying to inject culture war nonsense into whatever to mobilize a side for support. They are often very load. But they don't actually speak for/or represent that side, just the opposite, they speak to this side and ask for agreement. Which might come but often very much does not.

And it's usually those on the far right that are the most vocal and guilty about this. Like I mentioned before with my Castlevania example, majority of these butt fucks aren't even actual fans, and are just parasitic leeches jumping on to the next popular thing, claiming to be the "true nerds" and all that crap.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

But you did make the rules, because these are rules that exist only in your fevered imagination.

https://i.redd.it/qehwve6nrib61.png

www.reddit.com

Man seems my imagination is warping reality these days or something.


Am I Azatoth?

 

[Silvanus]

Am I Azatoth?

Well, some of the epithets fit.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Does it happen sometimes? Yes. Does it happen all of the time? No. That's where the problem with these claims is. You are basically saying, or at least seeming to say, that any time something bad is made that is seen as "woke", people complaining about its quality are inevitably going to be dismissed based on a few edge cases.

Except they are, for years until finally acceptance sets in of "OK maybe Ghostbusters 2016 wasn't the best comedy film ever and was kind of not that good" take.

I apologize in advance if I'm misunderstanding what you are saying. I just want to make my position clear: there are twats on either side of the argument, and neither should be used to dismiss the other side entirely. However, it is a lot easier for the side with, let's just say, 75% of the representation to "other" the remaining 25% than vice versa. In other words, for people looking for transgender representation, there are a lot fewer places they can find it, which makes it all the worse when what we (maybe) get is poor quality, and when we (maybe) are told to essentially "Shut up and take what you get, and stop trying to get more," defensiveness tends to come out. Which is not a good thing, by any means, but it's a natural reaction. Meanwhile, if you are looking for cisgender representation...there is a plethora of options.

Welcome to the issues of demographic size etc and the reason in the present system they're trying to mash all representation into one thing rather than specifically demographically targeted stuff.

I mean Gen V is presently trying to do a trans allegory story and boy is it fucking up on so many levels with it. Character is good, just "we gave our son experimental drugs and now he wants to be a girl" probably not a plotline element that's going to really sit well with some.......

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Sure, there are such instances. But then you also have the fact that a big chunk of 'criticism' of such pieces really does boil down to 'they're girls lololol woke genderswap'.

I mean, that's what Dwarven does. He complains at length that media has girls and gay people in it, then when called out on it, insists that his legitimate criticisms of plot and writing are being deflected.

I point out that at this point it's an extremely stereotypical move...............then you and others get mad because how dare I suggest such a thing and how dare I suggest the content is bad.

I mean you realise in Atomic Blonde a woman and has a lesbian relationship right?
You know Killjoys has two gay characters right and 2 lesbian characters?
I'm literally re-watching "The Magicians" right now.

It perpetually amazes me how you can keep firing this same shot and keep missing and then thinking I won't call you out of it when you try again.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Well, some of the epithets fit.

to you maybe

 

[thebobmaster]

Except they are, for years until finally acceptance sets in of "OK maybe Ghostbusters 2016 wasn't the best comedy film ever and was kind of not that good" take.




Welcome to the issues of demographic size etc and the reason in the present system they're trying to mash all representation into one thing rather than specifically demographically targeted stuff.

And what's wrong with that? Why should there be a separation between representation for cisgender people and representation for transgender people? Why should something need to be made specifically for transgender people? An example I like to use is Bioware. Your character can be gay or straight. Characters in the world have varying sexualities and gender identities. Most of the time, you'll only know if you are trying to romance them in the case of sexuality, or it's just casually a thing in the case of Krem in Dragon Age Inquisition. No big deal.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Except they are, for years until finally acceptance sets in of "OK maybe Ghostbusters 2016 wasn't the best comedy film ever and was kind of not that good" take.

A lot of films succeed despite not being good. In fact, most successful films are not very good. We live in an age where millions of people are routinely tricked into seeing bad films because of artificial FOMO manufactured from nothing by marketing agencies.

Ghostbusters 2016 didn't fail because it was bad. The entire concept that a movie can only fail because it is bad is an idiotic premise. It failed because it was badly conceived from a marketing perspective.

They could have made a shitty, pandering, unfunny sack of garbage which mindlessly repeated lines from the original ghostbusters film like it's trying to wear the skin of your childhood over its dead, corporate skeleton and the same balding millenials who criticized the 2016 film would have soyfaced so hard they'd need to play with their action figures to calm down.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

A lot of films succeed despite not being good. In fact, most successful films are not very good. We live in an age where millions of people are routinely tricked into seeing bad films because of artificial FOMO manufactured from nothing by marketing agencies.

Ghostbusters 2016 didn't fail because it was bad. The entire concept that a movie can only fail because it is bad is an idiotic premise. It failed because it was badly conceived from a marketing perspective.

They could have made a shitty, pandering, unfunny sack of garbage which mindlessly repeated lines from the original ghostbusters film like it's trying to wear the skin of your childhood over its dead, corporate skeleton and the same balding millenials who criticized the 2016 film would have soyfaced so hard they'd need to play with their action figures to calm down.

Except generally the most successful films follow the opposite trend the "This film isn't that good" kind of critical reception only for it to pick up in audience numbers and critics views seemingly changing on the film due to others pointing out the good and new ideas and perspectives on the film etc. Like how Jumanji Welcome to The Jungle started as somewhat of a critic punching bag among certain critics and then because Sony was willing to keep it in Theatres it's made close to as much profit as The Last Jedi and that was just during it's cinema run not including sales since.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

And what's wrong with that? Why should there be a separation between representation for cisgender people and representation for transgender people? Why should something need to be made specifically for transgender people? An example I like to use is Bioware. Your character can be gay or straight. Characters in the world have varying sexualities and gender identities. Most of the time, you'll only know if you are trying to romance them in the case of sexuality, or it's just casually a thing in the case of Krem in Dragon Age Inquisition. No big deal.

Because media specifically tailored to a specific audience generally actually is found to be better by said audience.

It's why a number of films tried to replicate the massive success of Twilight because damn was that a dedicated fanbase.

You can legitimately plot the course of the changes in the series Supernatural as the show and it's creators and producers realised more and more they had a majority female fanbase and not as they'd intended a probably majority male dudebro one.

 

[Schadrach]

I'm literally re-watching "The Magicians" right now.

I actually have a custom flair on the Brakebills sub on Reddit for correctly predicting something from the show. It was low hanging fruit though - I predicted the summoning in season one went exactly like the book despite it initially being presented differently and why that incongruity was there.

More on topic though, I remember when a major character dies at the end of Season 4 and people started griping about "Bury Your Gays." All I could think was that had it been a woman it would have been griping about "Women in Refrigerators" and if you needed it to be a straight, white, male character for no one to complain that wouldn't leave a lot of options, just the guy that had an episode in season 3 that's literally about how the rest of the main cast just kinda forgot about him entirely (the S3 musical episode). Seriously, everyone else in the main cast was either not straight, not white, or not male (and we'd already killed and kinda brought back the non-white straight male and kinda killed and brought back the straight white female).

 

[Trunkage]

Because media specifically tailored to a specific audience generally actually is found to be better by said audience.

It's why a number of films tried to replicate the massive success of Twilight because damn was that a dedicated fanbase.

You can legitimately plot the course of the changes in the series Supernatural as the show and it's creators and producers realised more and more they had a majority female fanbase and not as they'd intended a probably majority male dudebro one.

Legitimately, this does not answer the question....

Unless you think all dudebros are transphobes (or homophobes etc) or something

 

[Trunkage]

Offended?

I'm laughing at this awful crap, best comedy adaptation of Robin Hood since Men In Tights............. shame it was meant to be a series one.

It's like the Wizard of Oz adaptation where they tried to make it Grim Dark game of thrones stuff.


The Wicked Witch of the West is an Opium dealer who runs a brothel.

Only Emerald City was well shot and clearly had a good budget and imaginative writing team.

Well, you can blame that more on Batman than GoT

Batman is so dramatically different from its origins that I'm very suprised that they haven't had to seperate it into multiple copyright. Looking at the history of Batman is like looking at this iterative process on steriods. They pretty much write any old story then slap Batman's name on and it will sell irrelevant of it's qualtiy

 

[thebobmaster]

Well, you can blame that more on Batman than GoT

Batman is so dramatically different from its origins that I'm very suprised that they haven't had to seperate it into multiple copyright. Looking at the history of Batman is like looking at this iterative process on steriods. They pretty much write any old story then slap Batman's name on and it will sell irrelevant of it's qualtiy

Not true. Batman's always been a rich white dude. Or kid, depending on if you are talking Gotham.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Batman's always been a rich white dude.

A rich white dude who beats up the poor and the insane. ASPIRATIONAL!

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I actually have a custom flair on the Brakebills sub on Reddit for correctly predicting something from the show. It was low hanging fruit though - I predicted the summoning in season one went exactly like the book despite it initially being presented differently and why that incongruity was there.

More on topic though, I remember when a major character dies at the end of Season 4 and people started griping about "Bury Your Gays." All I could think was that had it been a woman it would have been griping about "Women in Refrigerators" and if you needed it to be a straight, white, male character for no one to complain that wouldn't leave a lot of options, just the guy that had an episode in season 3 that's literally about how the rest of the main cast just kinda forgot about him entirely (the S3 musical episode). Seriously, everyone else in the main cast was either not straight, not white, or not male (and we'd already killed and kinda brought back the non-white straight male and kinda killed and brought back the straight white female).

But Q is Bi not gay............ it's made very very clear in the show hell him and Elliot don't really have a relationship much even in the alternative timeline of trying to solve the Fillory puzzle. Q has a relationship with Alice, he sleeps with the crazy dragon lady, implied to sleep with the white lady of Fillory, had a 3 some with Elliot and Margo, married and had kids with the Fillory apple girl and I think the only relationship he has with Elliot is the one in the Fillory alt timeline before he falls for the apple girl.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Legitimately, this does not answer the question....

Unless you think all dudebros are transphobes (or homophobes etc) or something

Actually it does because why try to tell all stories at one through one piece of media?

Hence tailoring stuff to specific demographics.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

A rich white dude who beats up the poor and the insane. ASPIRATIONAL!

Fun fact some-one who claims to be a professional economist on Tumblr actually basically buried this line of arguing about how Bruce Wayne being Batman doesn't help Gotham and he just runs round doing it to beat up poor people.

Basically Gotham is economically deprived and stays that was due to massive social issues way beyond the scope of what throwing money at it even for Bruce Wayne could solve.

The basic explanation is this

You have the dug in crime gangs.
You have the court of Owls who don't want things to change because they might lose some of their status.
You have the assorted wackos Gotham has attracted.

It means people don't want to live there so much because random wacko / gang/ terrorist / cult attacks happening. But also thanks to Wayne enterprises money there's good jobs going with good salaries and training perfect for people started out because your apartment will cost 1/3rd or less of your salary hell for 1/3 of your salary in Gotham you can get a mortgage on a house.

The issue is the gangs and wackos aren't going anywhere so once people are trained and have themselves mostly set up they can leverage their training and experience outside of Gotham to get jobs there
"Can you work under pressure?"
"Yes I'm from Gotham I had to get my work done while a gang of clowns tried to rob the place and a man in a bat costume fought them off"
and just like that talent and skills move out of Gotham because now they can and they no longer want to have to deal with random jungles sprouting up round town.

And thus they sell up and move and are replaced by some-one else with no-where else to really go looking to get a foothold somewhere.

 

[Hawki]

Literary Submission Policies Shouldn’t be Color-Coded

Some American journals now have two fee structures—one for white applicants, and one for everybody else

quillette.com

University of Edinburgh academics demand cancellation of book on sex and gender

One thing that seems clear, at least to me, is that Scotland is woker than England, for you see more stuff like this happening to the North of Blighty than from its south. But even if you disagree wit

whyevolutionistrue.com

https://unherd.com/thepost/why-did-trans-activists-try-to-shut-down-my-feminist-event/

 

[Trunkage]

Actually it does because why try to tell all stories at one through one piece of media?

Hence tailoring stuff to specific demographics.

That's not what I said.

Pretending dudebros are against LBGT stuff is nonsense. See also, Christians, Muslims, or anyone else that is stereotyped as being against LBGT stuff. Just because there are shouty fundamentalists, does not mean they speak for all religious people. Most don't care either way and many are for LBGT stuff. It's a made-up stereotype

It's not about 'telling all stories through one piece of media'. It's about not falling for stereotypes