Return Of Kings celebrate 'making The Force Awakens lose $4.2 mil'

[Zontar]

Yeah, it's weird in that you tend to see those evil feminist SJW lizardwomen do more to address men's issues than you tend to see from "MRAs." "Men's Rights" groups, at least the ones that keep coming up, seem to be almost exclusively reactionary.

Not sure how things are state-side, but in Canada and the UK this is most certainly not the case. I know it's not a "one size fits all", but in our two countries the statements that feminists are the first and loudest group working against men's rights is a factual statement, and anyone claiming that feminists are working for solving the issues faced here is lying.

Which is actually pretty ironic since it would be much easier to solve the issues of men in Canada and the UK since 90% of the problems would be solves with a stroke of a pen by parliament.

 

[runic knight]

I find it hard to believe that people didn't watch the movie because of anything said along these lines that weren't already apparent in the trailers.

Don't know who these people are, supposedly they aren't MRA but whatever.

Going to second this one. Pretty sure I heard the latest Star wars movie not only made more money that any previous record, but actually is so profitable that even the cold, cynical, manipulative, childhood-manufacturing hearts of the disney execs managed to feel a little warm and fuzzy this christmas.

Not sure how things are state-side, but in Canada and the UK this is most certainly not the case. I know it's not a "one size fits all", but in our two countries the statements that feminists are the first and loudest group working against men's rights is a factual statement, and anyone claiming that feminists are working for solving the issues faced here is lying.

Which is actually pretty ironic since it would be much easier to solve the issues of men in Canada and the UK since 90% of the problems would be solves with a stroke of a pen by parliament.

All I can think of about this side discussion is the example of the feminist driven campaign to defund men's shelter I heard a bit back in the Canadian news. Honestly, given how much Feminists demonize and scapegoat MRA (that is to say, the radicals that seem to have the respective microphones and go near-completely unchallenged by other self-proclaimed of the group), really finding it hard to take any claim that "feminists address men's issues more than MRA" seriously. Not that MRA groups have done a hell of a lot of good themselves from what I have seen of those organizations, but between the two, I can at least say I have seen some MRA trying to address men's issues, whenever I see feminists in relation to those, it is always either cutting down the issue as not important/money could be "better spent" elsewhere/women's issues more important, or resuming demonizing and attack on the MRA as some sort of great evil. So basically the same response seen of MRA toward feminists issues.

 

[RedDeadFred]

If you actually click on the link that they provide, you see that they do some pretty wild assumptions to come to that number. Only 565 people voted and out of those people 55% said that the stuff they read impacted their decision to see the movie. It's not even worded as "negatively" impacted. Just impacted... I bet they cost them a few thousand dollars at most, and I wouldn't be surprised that many of those people wouldn't have seen it anyway on the basis of the Jedi being a woman.

I'm probably reading a bit too much into this insanity. But hey, might as well start off the new year chuckling!

 

[Khrowley]

Yea verily thou art at thoest's manliest when thousts celebrate drawing a single drop of blood from thine enemy. Hip hip huzzah for the Kings!

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

ROK, MRAs, MRMs, and SJWs all sound pretty unpleasant to me. I'm sure Disney is real sad losing out on what is considered chump change to them.

And indeed never has the phrase chump change been used more appropriately.

 

[Bat Vader]

If you actually click on the link that they provide, you see that they do some pretty wild assumptions to come to that number. Only 565 people voted and out of those people 55% said that the stuff they read impacted their decision to see the movie. It's not even worded as "negatively" impacted. Just impacted... I bet they cost them a few thousand dollars at most, and I wouldn't be surprised that many of those people wouldn't have seen it anyway on the basis of the Jedi being a woman.

I'm probably reading a bit too much into this insanity. But hey, might as well start off the new year chuckling!

If on the off chance there is someone that won't see it because of a female Jedi I say good. I would rather they keep their stupid opinions away from an awesome movie and not drag it down.

 

[Drops a Sweet Katana]

'Oh no! We only made >$1 billion dollars as opposed to >$1.004 billion!'

Ahahahahahahahahahahahaha

 

[lionsprey]

anyone else that keeps thinking Return of Kings refer to the 3rd lord of the rings movie whenever they see this topic?

 

[Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)]

(reading a few pages)

The escapist a place were even if we agree with each other will find some way to pointlessly argue.

 

[Saltyk]

It cuts both ways.

And yet somehow, this leads to you treating a false concept with validity. That's not "cutting both ways," that's a false appeal to centrism. And I don't want to argue with that anyway. But it's fundamentally dishonest.

What false concept am I treating with validity here? The subject at hand? Because, I don't treat these guys with any validity. Their claim is a joke. As I said, they're either a (stupid) parody, or just plain stupid.

If you mean the fact that I don't dismiss the idea of SJW out of hand, that's because I have seen actual examples of what I consider SJWs both in person and on the internet. But, I also know of many people that get accused of being SJW that aren't. Jim Sterling is a perfect example.

Beyond that, it's not a false appeal to centrism. I am a politically center person. And I've always been the type to play "Devil's Advocate" anyway. Just because you don't think that is possible doesn't mean it isn't possible.

But, you're also misquoting or misunderstanding my line about things cutting both ways. I will call out anything that is wrong or stupid. I've corrected my own parents when they said something that is wrong. This has actually made conversations between my parents, my sister, and myself quite interesting. My parents are more conservative, my sister more liberal, and I am more central, so I end up correcting and agreeing with all of them at different points, never really being on anyone's side.

And even on this site, I've called out dumb actions being performed by groups with goals I support. You can't simply dismiss everything that makes your side look bad as Poe's Law and say that every group or person that says something that you disagree with is totally legit and representative of the group at large. That is intellectually dishonest.

Oh yeah? Well, I single-handedly made sure that TFA earned an extra $17.2 million!

"Prove it"? I said it on the Internet; that's proof enough!

I don't know, I saw a quote from Abraham Lincoln about not trust everything you read on the internet....

Yeah, it's like Shaka Zulu once said: "The internet is a hive of scum and villainy."

 

[THM]

*reads thread to date*

Yeesh. And RoK is the one being accused being reactionary and hateful.

It's an opinion site, nothing more; very few of the writers there act like what they post is gospel, even the site's creator. Feel free to disagree with anything (and everything) that's on there...but why the vehemence? It's a website, at the end of the day - nobody's either forcing you to visit, or take a word of it seriously. And to be honest, sometimes they do bring up subjects that are worth debating about.

OT: I don't take this particular article the least bit seriously. I mean, there's an article on the site at the moment espousing a September 11th conspiracy theory that's just...insane.

The objection of the original article about Force Awakens being SJW is centered around (IIRC) the fact that Raye is a super-powered 'grrl-power' Mary Sue character (because vagina), and that Finn is a 'beta (male) orbiter' of Raye - i.e., he's basically useless, contributes nothing, and spends most of the story sniffing around Raye's skirts. They tie that in to wider concerns about the feminisation (SJW-isation) of Hollywood, and that's about it. They also mention JJ Abram's remark about casting with regards to race (the 'whitest room in history' or whatever it was).

I have to say that the charge of Raye being a Mary Sue (at least partially) is something I agree with - but NOT because of the reasons RoK bring up. She did seem to 'get' the Force unrealistically quickly, not to mention how she was suddenly so good with a lightsabre. I don't, however, think of Finn as 'beta' or useless - he's just someone that left everything he's based his life on, and is flailing around trying to find something else - 'course he's gonna be useless compared to people who know what they're doing.

Just thought that perhaps we should discuss the substance of the articles, rather than just fling shit around.

 

[cthulhuspawn82]

I have to admit, I was a little worried about Star Wars being arbitrarily progressive. But Force Awakens is definitely not a SJW movie. I was actually in disbelief at how nice Rey was. Feminist heroes are arrogant assholes. The whole first half of the movie I was waiting for Rey to start acting like an asshole, but she never did. She even saved a male characters life without being even the slightest bit of a gloating, arrogant ass about it. Also, I dont recall Finns race ever being mentioned. No whining about how "dark skin" is a burden in the first order. This is definitely not a SJW film.

 

[Something Amyss]

I have to admit, I was a little worried about Star Wars being arbitrarily progressive.

Did you watch any of the prior movies?

I was actually in disbelief at how nice Rey was. Feminist heroes are arrogant assholes.

Err...you just contradicted yourself.

Also, of course Star Wars is an SJW movie. "SJW" is a snarl word that means whatever you want it to. Therefore, pretty much anyone is justified in invoking the SJW bogeyman.

Do you know how you kill a vampire? Any way you want, because vampires aren't real.

-snip-

You said you weren't interested in discussing this and I agreed. I'm going to stick to that.

 

[Saltyk]

I have to admit, I was a little worried about Star Wars being arbitrarily progressive. But Force Awakens is definitely not a SJW movie. I was actually in disbelief at how nice Rey was. Feminist heroes are arrogant assholes. The whole first half of the movie I was waiting for Rey to start acting like an asshole, but she never did. She even saved a male characters life without being even the slightest bit of a gloating, arrogant ass about it. Also, I dont recall Finns race ever being mentioned. No whining about how "dark skin" is a burden in the first order. This is definitely not a SJW film.

Yeah, I kinda gotta agree with Something Amyss here. And what the Hell is a Feminist Hero? I haven't heard that one ever. Unless you're willing to provide an example, I'm calling BS on your post.

Though, I do agree that the movie never made a person's race or sex into a plot point or something that defined their character. Which is a good thing. Race and sex are pretty arbitrary things and not really worth being considered a character trait. Unless we're talking about a movie like Django Unchained race and sex shouldn't really be too important. And it's obvious that in the Star Wars universe, those things hold no weight.

Still loved Rey objecting every time Finn took her hand, though.

-snip-

You said you weren't interested in discussing this and I agreed. I'm going to stick to that.

Fine. Though this leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth. I don't dislike you or completely disagree with you from what I see on these forums. So don't treat me like an enemy.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Yeesh. And RoK is the one being accused being reactionary and hateful.

Yes. Because it is. Unless we're engaging in some tiresome "No, YOU are the judgmental one, for calling me judgmental!" rabbit hole nonsense.

Just thought that perhaps we should discuss the substance of the articles, rather than just fling shit around.

There is no substance to discuss. They're patently ridiculous, and merit ridicule. Your attempt to salvage their reputation notwithstanding. Additionally, I'm not sure that casual mockery constitutes "hatefulness" and "vehemence", although I might be missing the post you are referencing. As you're currently directing this hand-slap at the entire thread, I'll just assume you mean everyone posting in it is "hateful and vehement" for laughing at the worthies on RoK. If this is the case, I find your perspective inexplicable, but I cannot stop you from expressing it.

 

[THM]

Yes. Because it is. Unless we're engaging in some tiresome "No, YOU are the judgmental one, for calling me judgmental!" rabbit hole nonsense.

To be honest, they're bad - but a lot of the people on this thread (not all) are being worse. A lot of what gets on the site is either straight crap or stuff I don't agree with. But not all. Writing them all off as sexist cranks doesn't help matters. You want to debate them on the issues, not feed their persecution complexes. Don't care either way? Ignore them! It's easy!

(And on a related note, 'misogyny/misogynist' is just as much of a snarl word.)

There is no substance to discuss. They're patently ridiculous, and merit ridicule. Your attempt to salvage their reputation notwithstanding. Additionally, I'm not sure that casual mockery constitutes "hatefulness" and "vehemence", although I might be missing the post you are referencing. As you're currently directing this hand-slap at the entire thread, I'll just assume you mean everyone posting in it is "hateful and vehement" for laughing at the worthies on RoK. If this is the case, I find your perspective inexplicable, but I cannot stop you from expressing it.

See above; I can't stop you from being dismissive and glib, but it's not going to help. I wasn't directing a 'hand-slap' at the whole thread, just trying to inject some perspective. You (or anyone) can point and laugh at the site (and I myself do that sometimes), but if you really want to neutralise the venom, you're going to have to talk to them. I've seen the movie, and I don't think it's the least bit SJW; also, I was very annoyed that the review didn't have a spoiler warning. So I read some of it, left the rest until I'd seen the movie, and disagreed with the review. Simple.

And the claim they cost the film money is ludicrous from any angle, full stop. Even I don't disagree with that.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

You want to debate them on the issues, not feed their persecution complexes.

Persecution complexes are the province and responsibility of the people holding them. There is no maxim that suggests censure always results in a worsening of behavior.

And on a related note, 'misogyny/misogynist' is just as much of a snarl word.

It can be employed as such, but it's also a long established and widely employed word used to describe a behavior or system of belief. It's not a flattering term, but language is full of unflattering designations. It's not a question of the word itself, but rather how it is employed.

I'm also not sure why it's being brought up at this juncture, as I didn't level that specific charge (although I'm quite confident it's not unwarranted in the case of RoK), nor did I previously use the term "snarl word" in this thread.

If you really want to neutralise the venom, you're going to have to talk to them.

I think you'll find that highly polarized individuals seldom respond to discourse, and attempting to shift or remedy their beliefs will frequently result in them becoming more calcified. Additionally, it is the responsibility of all adults to educate themselves and think critically, not the responsibility of those around them to do the leg work for them while engaging their prejudices.

I've seen the movie, and I don't think it's the least bit SJW

It's entirely SJW, and also not SJW in the slightest, because SJW is a colloquialism less than five years old that originated as a one-size-fits-all pejorative. You'll have a hard time finding two people who agree on the definition. At this point it's become a term that generates far more insight into the people employing it than the people it's being aimed at.

And the claim they cost the film money is ludicrous from any angle, full stop. Even I don't disagree with that.

Any disgruntled customer can hypothetically cost a business or a product money. You're never going to please everyone. For a mass market product like Star Wars, it becomes a question of identifying what demographics you want to appeal to and which you are prepared to antagonize. If I was Kathleen Kennedy and attempting to figure out who to fashion my new 4 billion dollar IP to appeal to, I'm not sure RoK would be high on my list.

 

[MishaK]

*reads thread to date*

Yeesh. And RoK is the one being accused being reactionary and hateful.

It's an opinion site, nothing more; very few of the writers there act like what they post is gospel, even the site's creator. Feel free to disagree with anything (and everything) that's on there...but why the vehemence? It's a website, at the end of the day - nobody's either forcing you to visit, or take a word of it seriously. And to be honest, sometimes they do bring up subjects that are worth debating about.

OT: I don't take this particular article the least bit seriously. I mean, there's an article on the site at the moment espousing a September 11th conspiracy theory that's just...insane.

The objection of the original article about Force Awakens being SJW is centered around (IIRC) the fact that Raye is a super-powered 'grrl-power' Mary Sue character (because vagina), and that Finn is a 'beta (male) orbiter' of Raye - i.e., he's basically useless, contributes nothing, and spends most of the story sniffing around Raye's skirts. They tie that in to wider concerns about the feminisation (SJW-isation) of Hollywood, and that's about it. They also mention JJ Abram's remark about casting with regards to race (the 'whitest room in history' or whatever it was).

I have to say that the charge of Raye being a Mary Sue (at least partially) is something I agree with - but NOT because of the reasons RoK bring up. She did seem to 'get' the Force unrealistically quickly, not to mention how she was suddenly so good with a lightsabre. I don't, however, think of Finn as 'beta' or useless - he's just someone that left everything he's based his life on, and is flailing around trying to find something else - 'course he's gonna be useless compared to people who know what they're doing.

Just thought that perhaps we should discuss the substance of the articles, rather than just fling shit around.

I never accused them of being reactionary and hateful, just pathetic losers.

 

[THM]

I never accused them of being reactionary and hateful, just pathetic losers.

Again - whatever, man. Think what you want; I pretty much lost all enthusiasm for this subject after BloatedGuppy's last reply - no offence, BG.

 

[Silverbeard]

I still don't get it. What's all this noise about Force Awakens? I haven't seen the movie yet (and probably won't for a while- finance issues) but I heard some guy played by a white actor dies at the end... is that really it? Am I missing something? Does a woman drug a man and then rape him? And then lightsaber his balls off? What am I missing?