|
its a funny one isnt it. Changing the way we've recorded the past. Theres an element of cancel culture stuff playing in there maybe? I really have no idea here and anyone that tells me I'm talking poo poo then yes absolutely. Again, scared of seeming glib here, but George Lucas got to change alot of stuff about star wars so i reckon we could chnage dead names as peoples credits. Although equally his adjustments weren't without argument.
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 03:16 |
|
|
NotJustANumber99 posted:its a funny one isnt it. Changing the way we've recorded the past. Theres an element of cancel culture stuff playing in there maybe? I really have no idea here and anyone that tells me I'm talking poo poo then yes absolutely. I definitely think it's something that the actors guild should review, but also getting the studios to all agree to it would be a herculean task, since in that case every new printing of a Blu-ray of, say, Juno, would need to be updated.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:17
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:And then there was Tilda Swinton in a gender-fluid role in Orlando (1992). This is a total tangent, but is Orlando (the novel) much of a Thing in the trans community? It feels like it should be something of a landmark text, since it's a work by one of the 20th century's most important novelists that deals explicitly with gender fluidity and transition and seems decades ahead of its time, but it doesn't seem to get mentioned all that much in pop culture, even in literary circles. Even amongst Modernist scholars it seems like Woolf's other works tend to get more attention (granted I've not been up on this stuff for a good long while). And it's funny! Modernism is hardly ever funny.* Or is this just too dumb a question when the answer is that no one gives a toss about novels** in 2020? * Except Joyce ** except Harry Potter still if you're a centrist pundit needing an analogy
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:21
|
|
|
mehall posted:Ehhh, that's unclear to me, the only difference (ignoring middle name) between his birth name and later acting name was dropping his mum's "Philpotts" part of "Philpotts-Page" and unless you have any detail I don't, it's unclear to me if that was an assumed name for the stage, or an actual name change. (Though either way it was likely a choice made for career progression, as I've not seen any particular indication of issues between Elliot and his mum) I think that's a good demonstration of what names are too, because surely anyone demanding that he be referred to by a dead name for whatever reason ought to insist on the birth name rather than a screen name, and if they don't it shows their intent up as what it is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:23
|
|
|
NotJustANumber99 posted:I'm going to be a bit flippant because I dunno what else to do. Does it seem a bit like Elliott feels obliged to keep a very similar name to his former deadname for societal/professional reasons? Some people do take a similar name, or even the other-gendered version of their old name, or even just keep the name and just change the pronouns. I think choosing a completely different name is a lot more common, but it's not unheard of. Also yeah after the initial "X has just transitioned, formerly known as Y" period, it's going to be kinda rude to use the old name for a person even if there's some way that it might be technically accurate. If people don't know who you're talking about by "Elliot Page" then you can either tell them when they ask or they can just google it and instantly recognise him by the photos. I mean his dead name is going to be widely known by a lot of people for ages but it's at least respectful to the fact it's not his name anymore.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:24
|
|
|
Is it really that harmful if in a conversation between friends someone says 'Hey Ellen Page is trans and goes by Elliot Page now'? Do people really prefer to say 'that person who was in Juno is now Elliot Page?' Like absolutely don't use it ever again but idk it just feels pointlessly awkward to phrase it in a private conversation that way, because it doesn't actually materially affect Elliot or indeed anyone else whatsoever. Sorry if I'm being obtuse, but I feel like this is the sort of thing that the right uses a lot as a 'see, they don't actually care about the effects or intent of what you say, there are just things that are banned in all contexts.' I guess you could say it's like the 'you can say the n word in private' argument but then I'd never have any reason or desire to say that or any other slur, whereas referring once to someone by their dead name in the context of telling someone that isn't what they go by any more just seems like a way to avoid a long game of Taboo. Likewise with people you know in person. I've never heard any of my trans mates say you can't use their dead name even to tell other close friends in private their new name, and I'm not sure if I'm reading wrong in thinking that's what posters are saying here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:34
|
|
|
Ban all award shows imo. Especially film and tv-related ones.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:35
|
|
|
NotJustANumber99 posted:I'm going to be a bit flippant because I dunno what else to do. Does it seem a bit like Elliott feels obliged to keep a very similar name to his former deadname for societal/professional reasons? Kae Tempest did the same a few months ago - literally just removed one letter (and lmao of course one of the first results when you search them is a Guardian article using their deadname). I suppose it makes sense when you have an established career under your deadname to choose something that people will recognize even if they don't know you've transitioned.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:35
|
|
|
winegums posted:Gary Younge (one of the only Guardian journalists I could be hosed with) has a really interesting interview in The Hindu: Younge was wierd, he always read too good for the Guardian but for a while he was kind of a frontman for it so it wasn't 'he's better than the Guardian' it was 'the Guardian isn't that bad, Younge's okay'. He also has an open email address, I sent him a question once and he actually replied and answered it properly, seems a legit decent bloke with interesting/good politics that's also a skilled writer can't be having that the Guardian.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:37
|
|
|
Jakabite posted:Is it really that harmful if in a conversation between friends someone says 'Hey Ellen Page is trans and goes by Elliot Page now'? Do people really prefer to say 'that person who was in Juno is now Elliot Page?' Like absolutely don't use it ever again but idk it just feels pointlessly awkward to phrase it in a private conversation that way, because it doesn't actually materially affect Elliot or indeed anyone else whatsoever. Sorry if I'm being obtuse, but I feel like this is the sort of thing that the right uses a lot as a 'see, they don't actually care about the effects or intent of what you say, there are just things that are banned in all contexts.' I guess you could say it's like the 'you can say the n word in private' argument but then I'd never have any reason or desire to say that or any other slur, whereas referring once to someone by their dead name in the context of telling someone that isn't what they go by any more just seems like a way to avoid a long game of Taboo. Likewise with people you know in person. I've never heard any of my trans mates say you can't use their dead name even to tell other close friends in private their new name, and I'm not sure if I'm reading wrong in thinking that's what posters are saying here. Is it really that harmful to use what you've described as maybe an awkward phrasing instead of using his previous name? I know I'd really not like people to use my deadname ever, and the only time I put up with it is because I know people will be annoying about being asked to stop more firmly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:42
|
|
|
pie chat earlier got me in the mood to make a pot pie with the turkey drumsticks i puddled this week: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:46
|
|
|
Jakabite posted:Is it really that harmful if in a conversation between friends someone says 'Hey Ellen Page is trans and goes by Elliot Page now'? Do people really prefer to say 'that person who was in Juno is now Elliot Page?' Like absolutely don't use it ever again but idk it just feels pointlessly awkward to phrase it in a private conversation that way, because it doesn't actually materially affect Elliot or indeed anyone else whatsoever. Sorry if I'm being obtuse, but I feel like this is the sort of thing that the right uses a lot as a 'see, they don't actually care about the effects or intent of what you say, there are just things that are banned in all contexts.' I guess you could say it's like the 'you can say the n word in private' argument but then I'd never have any reason or desire to say that or any other slur, whereas referring once to someone by their dead name in the context of telling someone that isn't what they go by any more just seems like a way to avoid a long game of Taboo. Likewise with people you know in person. I've never heard any of my trans mates say you can't use their dead name even to tell other close friends in private their new name, and I'm not sure if I'm reading wrong in thinking that's what posters are saying here. Yeah I think in the context of him just coming out then it's okay to say his old name somewhere in the story, particularly as he's a known public figure and it's out there. The original example was someone said "starred in X under the screen name Y." was better - which looking back it wasn't entirely clear when or in what context that was said - but fundamentally it's not different to saying "formerly known as", i.e. you wouldn't say it unless you were talking about their transition or clarifying to someone who they are. Like, in a year or two it's going to be pretty rude to say that in like, a news article about his new movie or whatever, and the "starred in X under the screen name Y." construction is going to do absolutely nothing to disarm that rudeness that said, it can be easier than you think to talk about a mutual friend changing their name without using the old one and it can be a nice gesture. and it's also pretty easy to break the news of Elliot's transition due to him being a recognisable actor - most places I've seen don't mention the old name until the body text and I imagine nearly everyone will get what's going on from the headline. that's nice. i wouldn't say totally mandatory in all contexts and situations but it's nice if you can do it
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:48
|
|
|
Stormgale posted:Is it really that harmful to use what you've described as maybe an awkward phrasing instead of using his previous name? With the Elliot Page case it is just more awkward phrasing, but I can think of a few of my friends who've recently changed their names at different points in their transition and I literally don't know how I'd tell my partner their new name without referring to their old one. I don't really want to get into an argument over this, and if anyone ever asked me to absolutely never say their dead name even in private I'd be cool with that but yeah I just don't know if this is as standard as you're saying? E: never mind, AP p much answered above
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:48
|
|
|
mediaphage posted:pie chat earlier got me in the mood to make a pot pie with the turkey drumsticks i puddled this week: thats a good looking pie imo
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
kecske posted:thats a good looking pie imo thx friend, i like to bake as a hobby. everything got easier once i simplified my strategies (all pies made with one dough, all breads / pizza / pastry made with one of two doughs, etc).
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:57
|
|
|
mediaphage posted:pie chat earlier got me in the mood to make a pot pie with the turkey drumsticks i puddled this week: kecske posted:thats a good looking pie imo 
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:57
|
|
|
i can see wilted leaves loving lmao what a joke
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:58
|
|
|
this is erasure and I won't stand for it!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 00:59
|
|
|
NotJustANumber99 posted:its a funny one isnt it. Changing the way we've recorded the past. Theres an element of cancel culture stuff playing in there maybe? I really have no idea here and anyone that tells me I'm talking poo poo then yes absolutely. Elliot shot first!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 01:00
|
|
|
i mean it’s normal pie crust. that’s what it does when you don’t poke holes in it. i blind baked a bottom crust and put it in the container then filled it, put the top crust on and baked. but cool?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 01:09
|
|
|
Boris pushing for government to rule over parliament and the courts. That's going to end well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 01:09
|
|
|
anthropomorphised fray bentos would kick the poo poo out of those pies
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 01:48
|
|
|
crispix posted:anthropomorphised fray bentos would kick the poo poo out of those pies That goes without saying, doesn’t it? If pies could fight, Frey Bentos would be the meanest pie in the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 02:21
|
|
|
Can't help feeling Ms Abbott is cruisin' for a (metaphorical) bruisin' as they used to say. Good for her. https://twitter.com/HackneyAbbott/status/1332660060217094144?s=20 Pie cha(r)t: 
Jaeluni Asjil fucked around with this message at 02:36 on Dec 2, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 02:33
|
|
|
Shepherd's Pie exclusion which neither has a base or pastry
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 04:08
|
|
|
I think mash counts as a kind of pastry, for legal purposes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 08:18
|
|
|
Anyone in the thread in line for the Pfizer vaccine (assuming hospital / surgery workers are up first) ?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 08:59
|
|
|
keep punching joe posted:Anyone in the thread in line for the Pfizer vaccine (assuming hospital / surgery workers are up first) ? My wife works in a care home for adults with severe learning disabilities. I think she and her colleagues are all pretty high priority, but given that there aren't any elderly people there it might still take a while.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 09:10
|
|
|
The Perfect Element posted:My wife works in a care home for adults with severe learning disabilities. I think she and her colleagues are all pretty high priority, but given that there aren't any elderly people there it might still take a while. Wasn't there a stat that ALD homes had death rates almost as high as elderly care homes?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 09:17
|
|
|
Endjinneer posted:What Guava said makes more sense if you swap "character name" for "stage name". The former being associated with a temporary role while the latter is more like their identity as a performer? I'm not in NIP, but given the Morecambe Bay Independents are reactionary little Englander shitheads they shouldn't want anything to do with them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 09:25
|
|
|
Is it tinfoil to really want some government that isn't ours to approve this vaccine before you'd consider getting it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 09:35
|
|
|
Is it generally considered to be A Good Thing™ that we're getting the vaccine so quickly? It's hard to pick apart genuine concerns from anti-vax dog whistles and  .
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 09:38
|
|
|
This is a disease that was unknown at the start of the year and at the end we've got a working vaccine. That's a miracle of modern biochemistry.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 09:52
|
|
|
stev posted:Is it generally considered to be A Good Thing™ that we're getting the vaccine so quickly? It's hard to pick apart genuine concerns from anti-vax dog whistles and I've gubbed many a bag of gear from disreputal sources, so will not shrink in fear from a new vaccine which appears to be effective.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 10:02
|
|
|
It can't be fully safe since it hasn't been tested long enough and it's being distributed to us by one of the most incompetent and corrupt regimes in the world. But what else are we gonna do?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 10:03
|
|
|
peanut- posted:Is it tinfoil to really want some government that isn't ours to approve this vaccine before you'd consider getting it? If you’re not a pensioner or nhs then that’s a pretty academic question
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 10:03
|
|
|
peanut- posted:Is it tinfoil to really want some government that isn't ours to approve this vaccine before you'd consider getting it? I would say a bit, the decision was made by the MHRA and nothing to do with Boris and co. Other countries are likely to approve in next couple of weeks though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 10:04
|
|
|
Noxville posted:Wistfully thinking back to 5+ years ago when this would be an explosive story that would destroy a party leader’s career I know time is funny in 2020 but Corbyn was still leader earlier this year
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 10:08
|
|
|
ANYTHING YOU SOW posted:I would say a bit, the decision was made by the MHRA and nothing to do with Boris and co. Other countries are likely to approve in next couple of weeks though. That's a nice ideal but if the something does end up going wrong the emails and Whatsapp messages from the government pushing the regulator to cut corners for speed will be leaking within a month. I will just feel a lot better once the EU signs it off is all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 10:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 03:16 |
|
|
The Pfizer vax at least has better and more convincing trial data than the Oxford-AstraZeneca vax (which is a total shitshow), so the UK government hyping it up over the home-grown stuff is a bit of good news.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 10:15
|
|