|
Doctor Butts posted:Because its a waste of loving time to try to reason with family members who think Obama is a socialist and that global warming is a hoax. The only way I have managed to avoid this when it happens is just to agree with whatever dumb bullshit they say. Who cares? Everyone in the room who knows me knows that I am making fun of them but is appreciative of my simply agreeing with it. It has the added benefit of them getting mad when you agree with them because they know that they are wrong and wanted you to disagree so they could get mad at you. That's the thing: they just want to get mad. So no matter what you do, they will get mad. So by just agreeing and peacefully not arguing, their anger makes them look childish and makes even the other conservatives tell them to calm down. And makes the point that you know that this is going on and refuse to engage in it, and refuse to argue with them because they are unreasonable. It's pretty much win/win/win/win/win.
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 01:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 12:24 |
|
|
Dr Creflo A Dollar posted:I don't see why not? The stereotype of "Hollywood Liberal" refers to talent, not output. Hollywood is too business savvy to turn off middle America. The only reason Hollywood Liberal is even a thing is because of bitter childish conservatives who feel alienated if they're not being specifically catered to. ErIog posted:Have you watched any of the top-grossing movies of the past 10 years? Hollywood may be at times token socially-liberally, but overall it's quite a conservative representation of American society.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 01:44
|
|
|
Devour posted:I don't disagree, but he was implying that Hollywood had a conservative bias. There's a difference between representing the status quo then actively supporting it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 01:47
|
|
|
Funkdreamer posted:How are conservative ideas of society supported without their representations?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 01:58
|
|
|
Glenn Beck has finally cracked the code and discovered people-in-the-hospital-when-events-happen-in-the-Middle-East-plus-or-minus-several-months-gate. First, America's consulate in Benghazi was attacked. Several months later, while she was scheduled to testify before Congress, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was hospitalized to have a blood clot removed. This month, in the very same week that there was a coup in Egypt, wife-of-Secretary of State Teresa Heinz Kerry was hospitalized following a seizure. Is this a coincidence? I don't see how that can possibly be the case. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtKZMINBg28
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
Warchicken posted:The only way I have managed to avoid this when it happens is just to agree with whatever dumb bullshit they say. Who cares? Everyone in the room who knows me knows that I am making fun of them but is appreciative of my simply agreeing with it. This man is your friend, he fights for freedom. The only winning move really is is not to play with these folks since they're really just looking to you for a quick fix of anger to tide them over. It's why conservatives will throw money at anyone or any cause they think pisses off liberals. Basically it just boils down to one thing when you're debating any fan of the right wing, "You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into." The only other option I've ever seen work against Dittoheads/The Hannitized/etc., which I don't recommend to use against anyone you may be related to (or ever want to see again), is simply to get other people to laugh at them. If you're the one laughing it just feeds the flames of righteous rage, but other people joining in is about the only force I've ever seen completely obliterate that right wing bubble. It's literally the only thing I know of that will remind them that they are in fact an impotent little person angrily parroting talking points they know nothing about in a vain attempt to gain the favor of an authority figure they will never meet, or probably even speak to, who sadly is probably the only source of purpose in their miserable life.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 04:02
|
|
|
Even though this is mostly for the US, let's talk about where a lot of righties get their international news from, the Brits: While they will shrug off the centrist BBC as 'leftist government propaganda' and other papers like the left of center Guardian as '5th Column Bolsheviks", they will often flock to the poorly worded and often made up scrawling known as headlines and articles of papers such as the Daily Express and the Daily Mail, the latter of which made this great headline.  A lot of the more horrible news comes from here, quickly becomes an echo chamber, and then is often spun as some insidious scrounger Muslim, most likely paedo, plot. Cops tell bars to ban footy shirts because it causes brawls and riots? Man puts a flag pole up without proper zoning and gets told by the council to take the whole thing down? MUSLIMS DEMAND BRITISH SYMBOLS REMOVED! How do they know that? Well Muslims hate things so if we think it's true it probably is. The other fun part is not only does this give people in the US the idea that the UK has become some sort of totalitarian Stalinist Caliphate, it's also starting to ruin the UK up to the point that most people do not actually know what the gently caress is going on. There was a poll done by Ipsos MORI for the Royal Statistical Society and King’s College London that shows how wrong the UK is on matters. Here are some great ones:
I shudder at what a similar poll in the US would be.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 04:07
|
|
|
LP97S posted:I shudder at what a similar poll in the US would be. It has been done, I forget by who. The results are very similar to the UK poll with American issues instead of British issues.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 04:26
|
|
|
LP97S posted:I shudder at what a similar poll in the US would be. Not as bad as you think:  EDIT: Misread the chart, the respondents were pretty reasonable except for a plurality going over 100% by a good bit. PostNouveau fucked around with this message at 04:32 on Jul 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 04:29
|
|
|
Devour posted:I get what you're saying if they want to stay relevant, but I think most of us agree we want them to just die off. Well, yes, obviously I agree. But if you're actually a conservative wanting to combat your slowly shrinking influence, it's probably the best place to start. Of course that's not going to change their current popular culture strategy of buying hashtags on twitter and paying consultants millions of dollars to jerk off, but the actual idea is sound. Fulchrum posted:How the hell can anyone possibly think that there's no conservative bias in Hollywood? The action genre may as well be called the gun porn genre. Women are marginalized by default, minorities are pushed to the sidelines, and when they actually do show up, more often than not its as the most appalling stereotype, gay men are treated as absolute freaks, if not outright evil half the time, the issue of religion, whenever it actually is brought up, always sides with Christians being pure and good heroes...... Eh, I agree to an extent but (and this will sound incredibly simplistic but I think it's true) I think a lot of shows and movies having gay characters that aren't just limp-wristed fluttery perverts played for a laugh has helped normalize homosexuality for a lot of people. I never saw much of Will & Grace but what little I saw definitely played up that one guy as a fluttery, dramatic, sex-crazed queen but it was still inviting you to laugh with, not at. A small distinction, but at least enough to plant the seeds in middle America. I mean, even a movie as brain dead and full of grossly offensive stereotypes as I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry had a general message of "Hey, discriminating against gays is actually a bad thing?" and that's enough to make it fascist homo propaganda to many conservatives. The gun porn thing is true, but it's kind of set apart from the right wing in that they're quick to scapegoat violent movies and video games as the real reason kids shoot each other, not the completely unrestricted arms market. Women being marginalized and over-sexualized is completely accurate, but I think that's a problem men in general struggle with, not just conservatives. I mean, it's sexism by degrees; only conservatives want to punish those whores with forced pre-abortion sonograms, but even a majority of non-conservative men consume media rife with misogyny without any real objection. Basically, I don't disagree that a lot of popular media is conservative on the surface, but that still doesn't make it conservative enough for the right wing. After you've been mainlining Rush, Beck and Hannity I just don't see a movie where Bruce Willis fights the bad guys being on the same level.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 04:51
|
|
|
LP97S posted:the Daily Mail, the latter of which made this great headline. They were pretty much right, here. I didn't know that they eventually convicted Dobson and Norris; that's loving awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 04:55
|
|
|
IrvingWashington posted:They were pretty much right, here. I didn't know that they eventually convicted Dobson and Norris; that's loving awesome. When it comes to accusations of murder, "pretty much" is good enough for me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 05:02
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:When it comes to accusations of murder, "pretty much" is good enough for me. Pretty much in that they did it, and everyone knew they did it - they just couldn't be convicted at the time. Are you familiar with the case? It's the one that started the inquiry that found the Metropolitan Police were institutionally racist. After a ruling was made that double jeopardy need not apply in the case of murder (and other serious crimes) when there is new and substantial evidence, two of those lovely lads stood trial and were convicted last year. Both good things, yet 'pretty much' still marred by the fact that Stephen Lawrence is still dead and the only reason his murderers were not convicted at the time was due to that pesky institutional racism. There's a lot more to it than just throwing out a headline calling them murderers. It's a weird article to hold up as an example of the Daily Mail's right-wing bent. Especially given that it's the Daily Mail, and even more-so with absolutely zero context. Last year the Paul Foot award committee gave one of the Mail's journalists an award for his persistent coverage of the Lawrence case - an award set up by The Guardian and Private Eye.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 07:36
|
|
|
Well thank god the Daily Mail did it for those reasons and not so they could sell their lovely rag.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 08:31
|
|
|
Devour posted:If people in Hollywood had a conservative bias then they would support the republican party which at this point does nothing but to maintain the FYGM status quo of society. Sure, Hollywood may be hypocritical in the sense that they don't intend to advocate for that position, when they really do. Basically it goes back to the point about how conservatism in popular culture is non-existent, Hollywood has to say and give off the impression that they are liberal in order to appeal to a huge demographic on an international scale to be relevant. It's not 'people in hollywood' so much as the studio machines and those running them. Combine this with lazy hack-writers not doing their homework or just regurgitating lovely opinions the same way we see in the political cartoons thread and it becomes clear that hollywood is very often 'part of the problem.' As an example of the damage they do, it's primarily thanks to Hollywood that we have poo poo like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnJxqRLg9x0 Personally I blame this trope as the chief causation for MRAs and general apathy and misunderstanding regarding what feminism is. Other civil rights groups face similar strawman-caricaturing. Left wing and socialist groups also get similar treatment - reinforcing negative fears of socialism/unions/etc. Also let's not forget the myth that 'torture works' largely coming from Hollywood, largely as a lazy writer's device to keep a story moving (because a realistic interrogation scene would eat up a huge amount of screen time, and not be very exciting) - and then right wingers going on to take Hollywood's fictional depiction of torture working as reality, who then go on to implement horrible pro-torture policy. You also have to look critically at everything that comes out of hollywood - and I mean everything. Do so and you'll find that stuff which espouses a progressive point of view are exceptions to the rule of ignorant and prejudicial. You'll also see examples of it within things that you thought were progressive before until you noticed they're, for example, being really loving racist in parts. Also, don't get me started on how Hollywood's generally backwards and simplistic view of morality has been adopted by Ronald Reagan and also the neoliberals as a useful narrative to maintain social order - all bullshit of course, because if you are going to use old 'black hat versus white hat' hollywood tv shows & films as a basis for how the world works, you're going to basically always be the black hat villain by default because you're the one trying to impose fictional bullshit on reality. Spacedad fucked around with this message at 09:55 on Jul 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 09:43
|
|
|
Spacedad posted:It's not 'people in hollywood' so much as the studio machines and those running them. Combine this with lazy hack-writers not doing their homework or just regurgitating lovely opinions the same way we see in the political cartoons thread and it becomes clear that hollywood is very often 'part of the problem.' I think they missed the point of Y the Last Man. White House Down is not only pretty funny and filled with good action, but the bad guys are right wing nut jobs and the military industrial complex. I was shocked that they actually called out the companies using war to enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 12:02
|
|
|
Spacedad posted:It's not 'people in hollywood' so much as the studio machines and those running them. Combine this with lazy hack-writers not doing their homework or just regurgitating lovely opinions the same way we see in the political cartoons thread and it becomes clear that hollywood is very often 'part of the problem.' Off-topic, but is this the woman who asked for kickstarter funds to produce her youtube videos? I don't want to reignite that topic, but I remember everyone saying she would need money to produce videos for youtube is so she could have "good production", and now that I see one of her videos for the first time it has horribly lovely audio and bad lighting in front of a purple wall. Just saying. Get a clip on mic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 13:33
|
|
|
Gozinbulx posted:Off-topic, but is this the woman who asked for kickstarter funds to produce her youtube videos? I don't want to reignite that topic, but I remember everyone saying she would need money to produce videos for youtube is so she could have "good production", and now that I see one of her videos for the first time it has horribly lovely audio and bad lighting in front of a purple wall. Just saying. Get a clip on mic. This was a video done before the Kickstarter funding.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 14:07
|
|
|
pacerhimself posted:This was a video done before the Kickstarter funding. Ah. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 14:38
|
|
|
Spacedad posted:It's not 'people in hollywood' so much as the studio machines and those running them. Combine this with lazy hack-writers not doing their homework or just regurgitating lovely opinions the same way we see in the political cartoons thread and it becomes clear that hollywood is very often 'part of the problem.' Great video, although she missed the point of Y.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 14:54
|
|
|
Feminist Frequency is like having college essays on feminism in popular culture written by a particularly enthusiastic student made into a web series. I don't mean that in a derisive way. The core of the analysis is generally solid, and the sources used can be provocative, but she sometimes wiffs on the details in ways that make you question whether she fully grasps the material.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 23:07
|
|
|
Soonmot posted:I think they missed the point of Y the Last Man. At this point, I doubt anyone in Hollywood gives a poo poo about what plots Roland Emmerich puts into his movies. Or anyone watching for that matter. I'm here to laugh, like the characters, and watch poo poo get blowed up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 03:04
|
|
|
So I caught a little bit of Herman Cain today. He seems to have real hard on for Obamacare, but in addition to that, he was beating the perennial dead horse of lowering corporate tax rates and de-regulating so that jobs. He had a little rant about single payer too, citing a case in the UK where a woman got her boobs done paid for by the UK's supposedly single payer system (it's not single payer) and then changed her mind because they were too big and now she wants the government to pay to have her boobs shrunk back down. This was presented with the ultimate level of seriousness as to why single payer is bad. First of all, the UK doesn't have single payer health care, so there's that. Second of all, there were no citations or sources given as to whether this story is even true or the details surrounding it. Lastly, Herman cited this story as if it was commonplace and amounted to an epidemic in a single payer system, rather than the anomaly that it probably represents once you learn the whole story. How does Herman Cain not know that the UK does not have single payer health care though? They have a combination of private and public options.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 19:50
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:So I caught a little bit of Herman Cain today. A ton of American conservatives are pretty painfully clueless about the rest of the world. Remember last year, when fuckloads of conservatives were talking about how they'd move to Canada or the UK or Australia or wherever to escape Obamacare?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:How does Herman Cain not know that the UK does not have single payer health care though? They have a combination of private and public options. Why should he care? His audience doesn't care, whether they know it or not. He doesn't get paid for factual analysis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 20:00
|
|
|
Dr Creflo A Dollar posted:Why should he care? His audience doesn't care, whether they know it or not. He doesn't get paid for factual analysis. Nothing is True, Everything is Permitted. Strauss is rolling in his grave.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 20:18
|
|
|
Soonmot posted:I think they missed the point of Y the Last Man. Mitchicon posted:Great video, although she missed the point of Y. Having literally JUST read Y the Last Man, what is the "point" she is missing about the Amazons? I'm not asking this out of malice, just curiosity. Sorry if this if too off-topic, but I'd love to know the subtext/deeper meaning of it. E: VVV Thanks! That's exactly what I was looking for, and I agree. They're clearly portrayed as completely insane terrorist and not "this is feminism, see how awful it is?" WampaLord fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Jul 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 20:22
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Having literally JUST read Y the Last Man, what is the "point" she is missing about the Amazons? The Amazons are a hyper reactionary backlash to the devastation of the disaster, they're not feminists. Just look at his traveling companions, the doctor can easily said to be a feminist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 20:30
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Having literally JUST read Y the Last Man, what is the "point" she is missing about the Amazons? Sarkeesian doesn't really spend any time talking about Y, just tossing it out there as another example, so there isn't really enough content to say why she's wrong. The Amazons aren't straw feminists. As I understand straw feminism, the trope is to present a heavily flawed but deeply feminist character as an implicit critique of feminism. The Amazons are not feminists though. They talk big game about feminism but they're clearly just some hosed up cult/gang with radical feminist influences, because the charismatic leader is a raging misandrist. They mutilate themselves for god's sake! Hero is quite explicitly brainwashed and later deprogrammed after she leaves the cult. If Y were any other comic this would be a little suspicious as perhaps a veiled critique of feminism but since it's a comic where every single protagonist and antagonist (with one exception) is a strong female character then it's hard to look at the Amazons as a feminist stereotype. Sarkeesian basically just skips right on past the Amazons, seemingly just to pull an example from a comic book. She doesn't try to explain or contextualize their actions at all, just saying "These ladies are villans and say radical things that stereotype feminists" when it's made very clear to the reader that the Amazons are beyond the pale and not typical of any acceptable mindset even in the world of the comics. I guess it's easy to confuse a straw feminist with a post-apocalyptic cult that uses radical feminism as a unifying ideology. Valerie Solonas was a real person, you know, and very few people look to her as anything but a historical curio. EDIT: Honestly I'm curious as to why she chose Y as an example at all. Y isn't explicitly feminist by any means but it's a critically regarded, well known comic full of realistic female characters and no unnecessary sexualization. Given the deplorable state of mass-market comics I'm sure she could have found a more appropriate example of straw feminism. EDIT 2: Here's her goodreads review of Y, looks like she was just so annoyed by the concept of the Amazons that she couldn't get over how feminist-y they were. http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/178901501 boner confessor fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Jul 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
I'm not looking forward to Zimmerman being found not guilty and having to listen to Hannity's smugness climb ten-fold.... "See I told you America I was right all along about George, I am a Great American!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
poor nose posted:I'm not looking forward to Zimmerman being found not guilty and having to listen to Hannity's smugness climb ten-fold....
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 21:51
|
|
|
Devour posted:If Zimmerman is found guilty it's likely it would be because of Hannity. What do you mean?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 23:38
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:What do you mean? Prosecution was using the inconsistencies between his multiple interviews with police and his one with Hannity to paint him as a lying liar who being the only witness to what went down means his version of what happened can't be trusted.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 23:42
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:What do you mean? Last year, Zimmerman went on Hannity and answered a bunch of questions. During closing arguments today, the Hannity stuff was shown. One of the questions Hannity asked was "In retrospect, would you have done anything different?" to which Zimmerman responds "No." Also as noted above, he gives Hannity a different account of events than the one he gave the police. That looks pretty loving bad. So good job, Hannity! Keep preserving damaging statements for the record!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2013 00:08
|
|
|
I haven't been following the trial, and I'm not proud to admit it, but I have to work hard to remind myself that convicting Zimmerman is a matter of him being proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, not a matter of spiting the racist assholes who seem to view Trayvon as a proxy for all Democrats. Then I'd be like them. Dr Christmas fucked around with this message at 00:48 on Jul 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
I read that thread and hate myself for it, it's pretty good if you want to see how far we've matured as a species though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2013 00:23
|
|
|
XyloJW posted:Last year, Zimmerman went on Hannity and answered a bunch of questions. During closing arguments today, the Hannity stuff was shown. One of the questions Hannity asked was "In retrospect, would you have done anything different?" to which Zimmerman responds "No." Also as noted above, he gives Hannity a different account of events than the one he gave the police. That looks pretty loving bad. Didn't Zimmerman's first lawyer ditch him because of the interview as well?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2013 01:52
|
|
|
I think his first lawyer had a cyanide filled tooth and he chomped on it during that interview.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2013 02:16
|
|
|
Spun Dog posted:I read that thread and hate myself for it, it's pretty good if you want to see how far we've matured as a species though. I haven't looked at it because I fear it'd make me consider suicide but I'm curious... Just how bad is it in there?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2013 03:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 12:24 |
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:I haven't been following the trial, and I'm not proud to admit it, but I have to work hard to remind myself that convicting Zimmerman is a matter of him being proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, not a matter of spiting the racist assholes who seem to view Trayvon as a proxy for all Democrats. I'm just fearing that if he does manage to get off it will empower a bunch of wanna be dirty harry busybodies to wave their conceal and carry with abandon. Even if a majority might be sane and trustworthy, dick holes and idiots abound. Considering Kansas managed to triple the number of people applying for them this year and widened where they can be carried, the only thing I'm paranoid about is getting caught up in suburbanites looking for their big hero moment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2013 03:15
|
|
