The insane social justice thread

[maxmayhem]

perfect!

There is no minority smaller than the individual.

Not sure who said it.

 

[2A_Tom]

Now it all makes sense. No, not solely what "Steph" noticed, though that's part of it.

The reason their articles are so one-sided usually comes down to "confirmation bias".

Admittedly, at first glance, I'm not getting into personalities and what's truly important about a person, but I look and I see 14 copies of "Suzy Soccermommy". You don't get good discussion and opposing viewpoints to consider and improve your product if you pack your discussion forum with clones.

Conflict isn't always comfortable. The reason INGO has mods is that people forget often how to converse and how to disagree without being disagreeable. Our job here, in part, is to give that reminder. The other way to ensure that it happens is to remove the sources of conflict and make the place an echo chamber. It's an interesting balance, allowing for free discussion amongst different people, and celebrating those differences.

Sadly, they seem to have gone the other route.

Blessings,
Bill

I disagree.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

You might notice the internet is out to get game developer Markus Persson this morning because of this tweet:

They're afraid of him because he has such a reach (3.7m followers) when he speaks the truth.

Bonus:

 

[BogWalker]

For those who don't know, Markus Persson is also known as "Notch". He was the developer of the game Minecraft. He left the company that develops it in 2014, but he is still very influential with the millions who play Minecraft.

 

[poptab]

#****fusing lol wow they pissed him off

 

[spencer rifle]

Apparently Marcus found that over $2 billion does not always make one happy. I'd like to give it a try though.
Minecraft founder Markus Persson says has been ruined by too much money  | Daily Mail Online

 

[OakRiver]

You might notice the internet is out to get game developer Markus Persson this morning because of this tweet:

They're afraid of him because he has such a reach (3.7m followers) when he speaks the truth.

Bonus:

"Problematic" seems to be the SJW objection du jour rather than putting forward an argument.

 

[actaeon277]

JK Rowling gets it. Freedom of speech of other people must be protected in order to protect your own freedom of speech.

[video=youtube;8nvfvEWZEi8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nvfvEWZEi8[/video]

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Now it's time to "Ghostbuster" the Bond franchise.

There's a movement to have Gillian Anderson play James Bond in a future Bond movie.

Why not just make a new, original female spy movie? Or have her as a different 00-Agent?

No... it's best to ruin an established franchise for the sake of social justice.

https://twitter.com/BuzzFeed/status/735112132006535170

 

[Kutnupe14]

Now it's time to "Ghostbuster" the Bond franchise.

There's a movement to have Gillian Anderson play James Bond in a future Bond movie.

Why not just make a new, original female spy movie? Or have her as a different 00-Agent?

No... it's best to ruin an established franchise for the sake of social justice.

https://twitter.com/BuzzFeed/status/735112132006535170

I guess it depends. Though James Bond and 007 are not code names, and according to Fleming, James Bond is the same person throughout. The films actually support the idea that James Bond and 007 are indeed code names, and are interchangeable between different people... and I think most people view it that way. I wouldn't have an issue with a female "Jane" Bond, and it actually would probably be pretty bad ass if she was as sexist, dangerous, and funny as the male version.... but then again, if they did that, not only would she be the best Bond EVER but she would be called a whore.

 

[eldirector]

Now it's time to "Ghostbuster" the Bond franchise.

There's a movement to have Gillian Anderson play James Bond in a future Bond movie.

Why not just make a new, original female spy movie? Or have her as a different 00-Agent?

No... it's best to ruin an established franchise for the sake of social justice.

https://twitter.com/BuzzFeed/status/735112132006535170

I've got no issue with a "Double-Oh" spin off with a chick. Could even be 007, after Bond loses his '00x' status (dead or retired). Though, I think they would do better leaving the Bond/007 storyline and franchise open and start a new "first female double-oh" series.

I thought they were going to do this with a change in Moneypenny's story line in Skyfall. First black female 00x.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Now it's time to "Ghostbuster" the Bond franchise.

There's a movement to have Gillian Anderson play James Bond in a future Bond movie.

Why not just make a new, original female spy movie? Or have her as a different 00-Agent?

No... it's best to ruin an established franchise for the sake of social justice.

https://twitter.com/BuzzFeed/status/735112132006535170

I guess it depends. Though James Bond and 007 are not code names, and according to Fleming, James Bond is the same person throughout. The films actually support the idea that James Bond and 007 are indeed code names, and are interchangeable between different people... and I think most people view it that way. I wouldn't have an issue with a female "Jane" Bond, and it actually would probably be pretty bad ass if she was as sexist, dangerous, and funny as the male version.... but then again, if they did that, not only would she be the best Bond EVER but she would be called a whore.

It seems to me that the quality of the general idea is not the problem issue. As mentioned above, there is no reason not to use the general theme with a new character. The problem is the quest to destroy the tradition identity of anything that has an identity, be it decades or millennia-old. The bottom line is that our leftists are astute enough to realize that it is much easier to create their own dystopian future if they first destroy the culture the mean to replace rather than to continue the long march which has given them the leverage which is now arguably sufficient to use for a faster destruction and replacement.

 

[Lowe0]

It seems to me that the quality of the general idea is not the problem issue. As mentioned above, there is no reason not to use the general theme with a new character. The problem is the quest to destroy the tradition identity of anything that has an identity, be it decades or millennia-old. The bottom line is that our leftists are astute enough to realize that it is much easier to create their own dystopian future if they first destroy the culture the mean to replace rather than to continue the long march which has given them the leverage which is now arguably sufficient to use for a faster destruction and replacement.

That, or they just think it'd make an interesting movie. Not everything is a conspiracy, y'know.

 

[IndyDave1776]

That, or they just think it'd make an interesting movie. Not everything is a conspiracy, y'know.

When you see the same damned theme over and over, it leads a person to the conclusion that there is a deliberate effort. I have seen little enough deviation from the brochure on the left side of the aisle to believe that it is all one huge remarkable coincidence.

 

[eldirector]

Besides, to actually call her "Bond, James Bond", you'd have to work in some sort of trans-something-or-other backstory.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

That, or they just think it'd make an interesting movie. Not everything is a conspiracy, y'know.

When you see the same damned theme over and over, it leads a person to the conclusion that there is a deliberate effort. I have seen little enough deviation from the brochure on the left side of the aisle to believe that it is all one huge remarkable coincidence.

“This is the female Link.”
“Oh what is she like?”
“She’s like Link.”

That's not a female character. That's a sex-change of an already established male character. Stop changing characters gender and race and start creating new characters. Just a few I could think of off the top of my head...

The world is full of excellent games/books/movies/shows with female leads. Their own established characters. There's no reason, outside the guise of social justice, to change an established male character to female.

How many established female or minority characters have been changed to male/white? Actually curious, I don't know

 

[OakRiver]

The world is full of excellent games/books/movies/shows with female leads. Their own established characters. There's no reason, outside the guise of social justice, to change an established male character to female.

I say let them, only because they will eat their own again over the Ms. Man trope

 

[actaeon277]

I don't think super girl qualifies. She dd not replace superman

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Not the same thing, but similar.... rather than create new characters that fit the niche they want... they want to co-opt their causes to things that already exist:

Do-gooders think it's high time Captain America got a boyfriend

And this was just today. Not too long ago, they were pushing for Jesus to be trans, or in the case of gaming... Samus Aran to be trans.

I mostly don't care about identity politics until you start forcing them on me and my hobbies.

I don't think super girl qualifies. She dd not replace superman

She was created in response to Superman. A direct copy, but without the bits 'n pieces.

"What's she like?"
"Like Superman."

 

[actaeon277]

Not the same thing, but similar.... rather than create new characters that fit the niche they want... they want to co-opt their causes to things that already exist:

Do-gooders think it's high time Captain America got a boyfriend

And this was just today.



She was created in response to Superman. A direct copy, but without the bits 'n pieces.

"What's she like?"
"Like Superman."

But she didn't "replace" him. She is "in addition" to.