|
It would seem to me - without getting into the science of the mind, of which I am rather ignorant - that there is a significant difference between what is implied by "transracialism," and the myriad of social and cultural phenomena that may result in a person being 'assigned' a certain race while identifying with another. Both race/culture and gender/sexuality are performative constructs, yes - and in both cases there is a need for a critical recognition of individual and collective identities that do not conform to the narrow confines in which these constructs are typically assigned. But there's a big difference between, say, someone who, by virtue of where they are raised or who their parents are, are unable to adequately reconcile their conscious to typically assigned constructs; and how the current conversation of "transracialism" has manifested, which is in response to an individual who was not simply lying by omission about her own history, but was literally attempting to pass off a man to whom she was not related as her own father. There's a reason that when someone converts from one religion to another, we don't call them "trans-theist," or whatever. Then again, the whole issue probably brings up an important question of the inherent limitations of claiming that there is in fact "transgenderism" or "transexualism," thus implicitly defining gender and sexual constructs as performances that must be transitioned into, rather than being immutable. Conversely, so-called cisgender males and females 'transition' in their form of gender and sexual performance all the time, but this is obviously not treated (at least to nearly the same level of) social and cultural scrutiny.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 03:24 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 08:29 |
|
While I see why it got there I'd really rather this thread stay on the topic it was made for and not get into this conversation
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 03:26 |
|
The twitter account of the author who published the Gadot article on Medium doesn't seem to strike the proper tone with their replies. It all just feels a bit off? Don't know how else to describe it. Read for yourself: https://twitter.com/imasurvivor4eva/with_replies [edit] Should note that I'm still not dismissing it, but I feel like major media outlets would have picked up this story by now and have it blasted all over the web. teagone fucked around with this message at 03:44 on Nov 16, 2017 |
# ? Nov 16, 2017 03:40 |
|
teagone posted:The twitter account of the author who published the Gadot article on Medium doesn't seem to strike the proper tone with their replies. It all just feels a bit off? Don't know how else to describe it. Read for yourself: https://twitter.com/imasurvivor4eva/with_replies SOme of the responses seem a bit flippant. As I said in my first comment on the story, we need to see how Gal reacts to this.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 03:45 |
|
We’re talking about something that happened like 15 years ago outside the United States. Investigating it wouldn’t take just two days. Give it some time, people.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 03:54 |
|
Someone did some digging on Twitter and linked the author of the Gadot article to an account on Kinja under the username Kateri. This link between hasn't been verified however, and the author on twitter denies any association with that account, but the Kateri user on Kinja did post this comment on a Jezebel article about Gadot 3 days before the Medium article was published that seems kinda suspect: https://twitter.com/xwondergal/status/930673263423959041 After that was brought up, from what I've read either the Kateri account on Kinja was deleted by the user, or they changed their username. The same twitter user who found the Kinja account also presented more info on the alleged author. Again, not verified, but the twitter thread below is pretty interesting (click on the time/date to bring up the whole thread with replies): https://twitter.com/xwondergal/status/930820227088216064 teagone fucked around with this message at 04:05 on Nov 16, 2017 |
# ? Nov 16, 2017 04:03 |
|
That really throws a whole lot of shade on the entire thing.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 04:20 |
|
Vegetable posted:Give it some time, people. That should honestly be applied to most of this stuff.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 04:25 |
|
GonSmithe posted:While I see why it got there I'd really rather this thread stay on the topic it was made for and not get into this conversation While you're here I would like to politely suggest you clamp down on awful awful posts like the one from kaworu. It's just worthless speculation that accuses people of pedophile with zero loving evidence.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 04:27 |
|
kaworu posted:I'm still waiting for the Spielberg domino to fall. That's bound to be a big one. In many of Spielbergs films there is no children at all. In even more children are nothing but peripheral characters. You lazily accused the man of pedophilia based on you piss poor reading of his filmography and some worthless post that may or may not have been written by an embittered ex -coworker. gently caress off kaworu
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 04:45 |
|
Rhyno posted:That really throws a whole lot of shade on the entire thing. Definitely does make you stop to consider that the story is fabricated, but yeah, I won't dismiss it until facts drop and official statements are made. Though either way, the situation is messed up.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 04:50 |
|
teagone posted:Definitely does make you stop to consider that the story is fabricated, but yeah, I won't dismiss it until facts drop and official statements are made. Though either way, the situation is messed up. I'm just not entirely convinced a thing Gal Gadot did when she was 19 or something matters all that much either way.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 05:15 |
|
The Spielberg stuff has been a rumour/theory for some time, in kaworu's defense. That he's the big household name Feldman is sitting on, or whatever. That said, I don't think this thread is the place for discussing or theory crafting about people who haven't had substantial, or recent, claims about them. No need to kind of drag Spielberg through the mud unless someone comes forward to accuse him properly.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 05:21 |
|
dont even fink about it posted:I'm just not entirely convinced a thing Gal Gadot did when she was 19 or something matters all that much either way. I mean sure, when you're a teen your morality can be skewed since you're so young. But that doesn't make shaming an alleged rape victim something that's dismissable, especially for someone high profile like Gadot who has been championed as a feminist icon in Hollywood's current climate.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 05:23 |
|
According to wiki Spielberg didn't write ET so how would he be responsible for penis breath?
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 06:06 |
|
Darko posted:People do a weird thing where they want to binary categorize people as good/bad as opposed to judging specific actions at the time. While not doing it to themselves and adding all kinds of excuses and nuance for all the bad they did in their lives. Gadot's stance on Israel is hugely problematic and probably based on her background and being exposed to one-sided information. Her making a stance against Ratner in public is good. You (as in people, not you) should be able to simultaneously judge her harshly for Zionism while being positive about her stance on abuse, but people have a problem doing that and default to all good/all bad. Probably the most insightful post in the thread right here. People should read it again. I've argued the same in D&D and it's a fascinating aspect of how humans categorize information. Interestingly enough, computers can only comprehend 1 or 0, and are based on circuits which can only have one of two states; on or off. Consider the difficulty in conceptualizing a lamp that can exist in a state where it is both on and off or a door that is both open and closed. Or alternatively a lamp that is neither on nor off, and a door that is neither open nor closed. And that's without even getting into the possibility of additional states that would be, for visualization purposes, perpendicular to the existing binary scale. -Blackadder- fucked around with this message at 18:39 on Nov 16, 2017 |
# ? Nov 16, 2017 08:14 |
|
Spielberg makes a lot of children films (ET, Hook), as well as films that are for families that children will enjoy (Jurassic Park, Indiana Jones). Shockingly, these often feature children as characters. Spielberg has a child-like sensibility in the way he utilizes wonder and understands children's psychology, but this is not a weird thing if your job is making entertainment for children Spielberg's historical dramas for an adult audience, apart from one exception, do not really feature children in major roles. The shark eats a kid in Jaws because it's an effective way to raise the stakes, communicate the animal ferocity and machine like horror of the shark and is a potent way to make the lead character feel the guilt that motivates him throughout the rest of the film. It is not evidence that Spielberg is a secret pedo. If we go after Spielberg on the evidence supplied, we might as well start going after the entire Pixar and Disney Animation creative teams. Karloff fucked around with this message at 08:23 on Nov 16, 2017 |
# ? Nov 16, 2017 08:17 |
|
Yeah, if that counts as grounds for suspicion, then Todd Solondz should get the guillotine.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 08:20 |
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:"Society" making a decision that would invalidate and re-traumatize their victims would still be wrong. People being able to make a living (by working in the field they've worked in their entire life) does not 'invalidate' their victims anymore that people leaving prison after a sentence does.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 10:08 |
|
Super Fan posted:In many of Spielbergs films there is no children at all. In even more children are nothing but peripheral characters. You lazily accused the man of pedophilia based on you piss poor reading of his filmography and some worthless post that may or may not have been written by an embittered ex -coworker. I'm not the only one to view some of his films through that context and find them disturbing. There have been whispers about Spielberg within the industry for a while now. The 'accusation' was not lazy, and I haven't given anything close to a 'reading of his filmography, beyond stating that kids are often conspicuously featured in either the background or foreground of nearly all of his films - which is true regardless of whether it matters or means anything. If you'd like, I will literally go through everything feature he directed, film-by-film, pointing things out. I would *really* rather not considering how exhaustively creepy flicks Hook or Jurassic Park or even A,I, are when read from that point of view. I posted an excerpt from the Crispin Glover article because I thought it was batshit-insane and hilarious and this is ACTUALLY a comedy site and I thought the whole essay was a goddamn ruit. It is also a notable accusation from one famous person to another very famous people, and again it is *not* the only accusation or whisper about Spielberg having these inclinations. it's disturbing and it's something we don't want to be true at all because pretty much EVERYONE across all class levels and ages and genders tend to like many of his films - he is a *truly* great American filmmaker - a juggernaut. I suppose that's why even in a thread like this, I am literally told to "gently caress off" directly simply because I brought up the possibility that this particular man might have committed some impropriety. This is why I think Corey Feldman *never* admits the "big powerful untouchable guy" whom he knows is a pedophile. It's probably why he is asking for $10,000,000 to try and make a major motion picture to even MAKE the accusation at all, which (if it is Spielberg) makes sense on a certain level. The other big name who could be a pedophile IMO is Francis Ford Coppola. It would break my loving heart and be absolutely awful, but I would not be one bit surprised. Coppola was the guy who always supported Victor Salva and was an Exec Producer on the first Jeepers Creeper. Coppola loving *produced* Clownhouse, which IMO shouldn't even be available given that the director was molesting/raping the lead star (a 12 year old Nathan Winters) throughout the film - and for gently caress's sake there is even a shot of this boy *naked* and then in white briefs within the first 10 minutes of the film which is when I turned it the gently caress off. I can only imagine how horrifying and exploitative the film is an how many shorts there were of an absolutely loving terrified-looking Nathan Winters who frankly looks pretty drat scared even before the bad guys show up The whole infernal film was on Youtube, last time I checked. I just don't fuckin' trust Coppola as a guy who *produced* a film where something that like that was ongoing and continuous, and to then continue lauding Salva as a "fine young director" and working with him later in his career! My loving god. This article sums it all up pretty well: https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-pedophile-director-embraced-by-hollywood (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 14:07 |
|
Spielberg cheated on his wife with his star actress and then divorced his wife and married star actress. That is the known dirt in Spielberg's past. Kids in his movies seem to be centered around his obvious daddy issues, if we are getting into his psyche. No reason to "suspect" him or anyone else until named.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 15:03 |
|
Asia Argento has been really determined in this poo poo (for a really good reason, the Italian press is full of animals) but what I'm extremely surprised by is that she doesn't indict her own dad. I gotta think there's something there.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 16:06 |
|
Twenty more harassment allegations have been filed against Kevin Spacey from during his tenure at the Old Vic. That brings his total number of accusers up to the mid-thirties, if I'm not mistaken. Truly horrific.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 16:17 |
|
The Spielberg and Schneider theories are very popular but there haven't been any evidence or allegations for either, and their origins are highly suspect (Spielberg originates from Glover's bizarre, vaguely antisemitic essay and Schneider is from 4Chan, which means there's probably nothing there beyond iCarly "fans" projecting). Don't get me wrong--if someone actually came forward accusing either of them I would believe the accuser, but to date no one has.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 16:18 |
|
Pedro De Heredia posted:People being able to make a living (by working in the field they've worked in their entire life) does not 'invalidate' their victims anymore that people leaving prison after a sentence does. There's a difference between being able to live your life and getting back the old job that you used to leverage your position to abuse people
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 16:27 |
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:There's a difference between being able to live your life and getting back the old job that you used to leverage your position to abuse people This.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 16:29 |
|
Add Al Franken to that list
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 16:50 |
|
lelandjs posted:The Spielberg and Schneider theories are very popular but there haven't been any evidence or allegations for either, and their origins are highly suspect (Spielberg originates from Glover's bizarre, vaguely antisemitic essay and Schneider is from 4Chan, which means there's probably nothing there beyond iCarly "fans" projecting). Nah, Schneider is 100% an exploitative pervert.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 16:53 |
|
Predicting a lot of real bad takes from comedians on this Franken one
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 17:18 |
|
Hat Thoughts posted:Predicting a lot of real bad takes from comedians on this Franken one Why? Because he's one of them? Have a lot of comedians been defending Louie?
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 17:18 |
|
This one's got photo evidence:
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 17:29 |
|
Rhyno posted:Why? Because he's one of them? Have a lot of comedians been defending Louie? Cuz he used the "It's just a joke" excuse & when a comedian says that Adam Carolla, Penn Jilette and Jim Norton appear like Bloody Mary
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 17:29 |
|
Rhyno posted:Why? Because he's one of them? Have a lot of comedians been defending Louie? I mean a lot of them did until the flood of evidence became too much to deny
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 17:34 |
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I mean a lot of them did until the flood of evidence became too much to deny I know they did in the past, I meant over the last few weeks. I should have been clear on that. I didn't see many people stepping up to defend hi when the floodgates opened.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 17:35 |
|
Come on, even after the flood of evidence came out, comedians have barely poked at Louis CK. The talk show hosts haven't done poo poo. John Oliver cracked one joke about it on his show. Jon Stewart's been comparing the sexual harassment to alcoholism, like the real victim of all this poo poo was Louis CK. I don't think Hollywood's going to do a drat thing about Al Franken. I have no faith at all that he will resign, that there will be any kind of sustained media outrage about his actions. He's a progressive firebrand, hugely popular, seen as a presidential hopeful, with powerful friends in the media. There have been articles about how liberals got it wrong with Bill Clinton. I think it's going to be the same thing here. Political exigency is going to win the day.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 17:48 |
|
Vegetable posted:There have been articles about how liberals got it wrong with Bill Clinton. I think it's going to be the same thing here. Political exigency is going to win the day. It won't be quite the same thing here, because Bill Clinton straight-up raped people. But, yeah, I don't see Franken going anywhere. edit: I want to be clear I'm not defending Franken. What he did was hosed up. Sir Kodiak fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Nov 16, 2017 |
# ? Nov 16, 2017 17:57 |
|
Vegetable posted:Come on, even after the flood of evidence came out, comedians have barely poked at Louis CK. The talk show hosts haven't done poo poo. John Oliver cracked one joke about it on his show. Jon Stewart's been comparing the sexual harassment to alcoholism, like the real victim of all this poo poo was Louis CK. To be fair to Stewart, he did also state that it's a problem in the comedy world that these women were ignored or felt like they couldn't speak up. I think trying to reconcile someone you know and like is bound to muddy the waters on your answer. Of course there's going to be people taking a scorched earth approach and there's going to be people who are more lenient and say well clearly there's something mentally wrong with him. For some people that's going to be the wrong answer, as we saw with Bryan Cranston even though I don't think his full quote ultimately said anything that unreasonable. It might not be a position I personally agree with, but it's one I understand someone having.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 18:13 |
|
Fox news will be living off the Franken things for years. McConnell just asked for in investigation into Franken.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 18:16 |
|
I think Franken resigns. He has a Democratic governor and would be replaced with a Democrat, people are already calling for him to (no major Democrats, publicly, yet, but they probably are privately).
|
# ? Nov 16, 2017 18:20 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 08:29 |
|
I imagine comedians, particularly stand up comics, are much more likely to have a history of doing crass poo poo(which makes me think we're going to see a lot more of them show up in this thread) so in hindsight Franken being outed does make logical sense, but I have to admit I didn't see that one coming. It's a shame, every time I saw videos of him in congress he seemed to be doing a great job taking lovely politicians to task. Oh well. -Blackadder- fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Nov 16, 2017 |
# ? Nov 16, 2017 18:48 |