HorrorMovieFans.com

is it real when the right speaks up about oppression, or is that also sensationalism? what makes one more valid or true than the other?

if 99% of people do their own thing that would seem to include a large number of african americans, women, and gay, bi, trans etc and even actors and filmmakers/producers.

zombie wrote:is it real when the right speaks up about oppression, or is that also sensationalism? what makes one more valid or true than the other?

Example?

you haven't seen or heard any right leaning people claim that there is a big agenda or a lot of shit coming at white males or straight people? fair, i guess. i'll move on.

zombie wrote:you haven't seen or heard any right leaning people claim that there is a big agenda or a lot of shit coming at white males or straight people? fair, i guess. i'll move on.

Well, yes. That is true. It happens in the media all the time. Whites are attacked more than any race, by far, in the media and celebrity circles. But again, they aren't grounded in reality.

first: is it the whole "media" that does that? second: what percentage of the population does the media make up? and third: does the media count for all racism (against whatever race), sexism, oppression. etc?

and then, is it more valid to raise a fuss when it is done against a group you identify with, than some that you don't?

zombie wrote:first: is it the whole "media" that does that? second: what percentage of the population does the media make up? and third: does the media count for all racism (against whatever race), sexism, oppression. etc?

and then, is it more valid to raise a fuss when it is done against a group you identify with, than some that you don't?

First: no
Second: question should be what percent of the population does the media reach
Third: they should be held accountable for most of the spread, as they are the ones spewing it

Nah

Jason wrote:

zombie wrote:first: is it the whole "media" that does that? second: what percentage of the population does the media make up? and third: does the media count for all racism (against whatever race), sexism, oppression. etc?

and then, is it more valid to raise a fuss when it is done against a group you identify with, than some that you don't?

First: no
Second: question should be what percent of the population does the media reach
Third: they should be held accountable for most of the spread, as they are the ones spewing it

Nah

"reach" includes people pushing against the issue, including what the media personality said. those railing against media oppression have a part to play in making it a big deal. if the answer is not to bring attention to an issue, then it has to be across the board. if it's okay to gripe about it, where you see oppression, then it has to be okay for other people to gripe about it when they see it too. both are making it a big deal. we can't start deciding that one kind of voice is more valid than another.

zombie wrote:

Jason wrote:

zombie wrote:first: is it the whole "media" that does that? second: what percentage of the population does the media make up? and third: does the media count for all racism (against whatever race), sexism, oppression. etc?

and then, is it more valid to raise a fuss when it is done against a group you identify with, than some that you don't?

First: no
Second: question should be what percent of the population does the media reach
Third: they should be held accountable for most of the spread, as they are the ones spewing it

Nah

"reach" includes people pushing against the issue, including what the media personality said. those railing against media oppression have a part to play in making it a big deal. if the answer is not to bring attention to an issue, then it has to be across the board. if it's okay to gripe about it, where you see oppression, then it has to be okay for other people to gripe about it when they see it too. both are making it a big deal. we can't start deciding that one kind of voice is more valid than another.

Leads back to the media being to blame. If they approached issues with realism and honesty, there would be no identity politics epidemic. Any blowback they get is on their heads for being disingenuous.

Jason wrote:
Leads back to the media being to blame. If they approached issues with realism and honesty, there would be no identity politics epidemic. Any blowback they get is on their heads for being disingenuous.

whose responsibility is it to approach issues with realism and honesty? is it donald trump's? is it cnn's or foxnews'? is it also kanye west's or ellen page's? are people allowed to have different points of view and different opinions or ideas about the world? should they all be robots that form their opinions all in the same way, and express it in the same way?

and then, where does personal responsibility come in, as a viewer? are we just sponges without any kind of discernment? is that what we should be? or do we go beyond the tube or the print and draw our own conclusions? do we go outside, as you said?

zombie wrote:

Jason wrote:

zombie wrote:first: is it the whole "media" that does that? second: what percentage of the population does the media make up? and third: does the media count for all racism (against whatever race), sexism, oppression. etc?

and then, is it more valid to raise a fuss when it is done against a group you identify with, than some that you don't?

First: no
Second: question should be what percent of the population does the media reach
Third: they should be held accountable for most of the spread, as they are the ones spewing it

Nah

"reach" includes people pushing against the issue, including what the media personality said. those railing against media oppression have a part to play in making it a big deal. if the answer is not to bring attention to an issue, then it has to be across the board. if it's okay to gripe about it, where you see oppression, then it has to be okay for other people to gripe about it when they see it too. both are making it a big deal. we can't start deciding that one kind of voice is more valid than another.

Then what good is 40 years of American Idol and these other reality programs?

Reign in Blood wrote:

zombie wrote:

Jason wrote:

zombie wrote:first: is it the whole "media" that does that? second: what percentage of the population does the media make up? and third: does the media count for all racism (against whatever race), sexism, oppression. etc?

and then, is it more valid to raise a fuss when it is done against a group you identify with, than some that you don't?

First: no
Second: question should be what percent of the population does the media reach
Third: they should be held accountable for most of the spread, as they are the ones spewing it

Nah

"reach" includes people pushing against the issue, including what the media personality said. those railing against media oppression have a part to play in making it a big deal. if the answer is not to bring attention to an issue, then it has to be across the board. if it's okay to gripe about it, where you see oppression, then it has to be okay for other people to gripe about it when they see it too. both are making it a big deal. we can't start deciding that one kind of voice is more valid than another.

Then what good is 40 years of American Idol and these other reality programs?

better singer does not mean more valid voice.

zombie wrote:

Reign in Blood wrote:

zombie wrote:

Jason wrote:

zombie wrote:first: is it the whole "media" that does that? second: what percentage of the population does the media make up? and third: does the media count for all racism (against whatever race), sexism, oppression. etc?

and then, is it more valid to raise a fuss when it is done against a group you identify with, than some that you don't?

First: no
Second: question should be what percent of the population does the media reach
Third: they should be held accountable for most of the spread, as they are the ones spewing it

Nah

"reach" includes people pushing against the issue, including what the media personality said. those railing against media oppression have a part to play in making it a big deal. if the answer is not to bring attention to an issue, then it has to be across the board. if it's okay to gripe about it, where you see oppression, then it has to be okay for other people to gripe about it when they see it too. both are making it a big deal. we can't start deciding that one kind of voice is more valid than another.

Then what good is 40 years of American Idol and these other reality programs?

better singer does not mean more valid voice.

No one cares what someone with a shitty voice has to say. It's why people like Gilbert Gottfried and Shelley Duvall never go anywhere in life, end up getting Old Yeller'd in some van down by the river.

Reign in Blood wrote:

zombie wrote:

Reign in Blood wrote:

zombie wrote:

Jason wrote:

zombie wrote:first: is it the whole "media" that does that? second: what percentage of the population does the media make up? and third: does the media count for all racism (against whatever race), sexism, oppression. etc?

and then, is it more valid to raise a fuss when it is done against a group you identify with, than some that you don't?

First: no
Second: question should be what percent of the population does the media reach
Third: they should be held accountable for most of the spread, as they are the ones spewing it

Nah

"reach" includes people pushing against the issue, including what the media personality said. those railing against media oppression have a part to play in making it a big deal. if the answer is not to bring attention to an issue, then it has to be across the board. if it's okay to gripe about it, where you see oppression, then it has to be okay for other people to gripe about it when they see it too. both are making it a big deal. we can't start deciding that one kind of voice is more valid than another.

Then what good is 40 years of American Idol and these other reality programs?

better singer does not mean more valid voice.

No one cares what someone with a shitty voice has to say. It's why people like Gilbert Gottfried and Shelley Duvall never go anywhere in life, end up getting Old Yeller'd in some van down by the river.

aladdin is coming soon, and they couldn't even be bothered to include iago from the animated flick. so maybe you're onto something at least as far as gottfried goes.

zombie wrote:

Reign in Blood wrote:

zombie wrote:

Reign in Blood wrote:

zombie wrote:

Jason wrote:

zombie wrote:first: is it the whole "media" that does that? second: what percentage of the population does the media make up? and third: does the media count for all racism (against whatever race), sexism, oppression. etc?

and then, is it more valid to raise a fuss when it is done against a group you identify with, than some that you don't?

First: no
Second: question should be what percent of the population does the media reach
Third: they should be held accountable for most of the spread, as they are the ones spewing it

Nah

"reach" includes people pushing against the issue, including what the media personality said. those railing against media oppression have a part to play in making it a big deal. if the answer is not to bring attention to an issue, then it has to be across the board. if it's okay to gripe about it, where you see oppression, then it has to be okay for other people to gripe about it when they see it too. both are making it a big deal. we can't start deciding that one kind of voice is more valid than another.

Then what good is 40 years of American Idol and these other reality programs?

better singer does not mean more valid voice.

No one cares what someone with a shitty voice has to say. It's why people like Gilbert Gottfried and Shelley Duvall never go anywhere in life, end up getting Old Yeller'd in some van down by the river.

aladdin is coming soon, and they couldn't even be bothered to include iago from the animated flick. so maybe you're onto something at least as far as gottfried goes.

See, Iago was a formidable presence to a whole generation of impressionable young minds. Now cast away like garbage. Couldn't even get Morgan Freeman to do some voice work for this shit, it's that tainted. Bless Gottfried and Duvall for being shining beacons of what we must do with all liberals.

Reign in Blood wrote: See, Iago was a formidable presence to a whole generation of impressionable young minds. Now cast away like garbage. Couldn't even get Morgan Freeman to do some voice work for this shit, it's that tainted. Bless Gottfried and Duvall for being shining beacons of what we must do with all liberals.

i'll take the place as first to befall that liberal fate.

zombie wrote:

Jason wrote:
Leads back to the media being to blame. If they approached issues with realism and honesty, there would be no identity politics epidemic. Any blowback they get is on their heads for being disingenuous.

whose responsibility is it to approach issues with realism and honesty? is it donald trump's? is it cnn's or foxnews'? is it also kanye west's or ellen page's? are people allowed to have different points of view and different opinions or ideas about the world? should they all be robots that form their opinions all in the same way, and express it in the same way?

and then, where does personal responsibility come in, as a viewer? are we just sponges without any kind of discernment? is that what we should be? or do we go beyond the tube or the print and draw our own conclusions? do we go outside, as you said?

Perhaps everyone? Not just the media, not just the celebrities. How about the people who are influenced by them? How about Jussie Smollett? I realize he is a celebrity, but instead of being so quick to say "Oh, well he's a jackass. Let's move on", imagine if it was never proven that he lied. Look at all the leftist celebrities who jumped on it and used Jussie's faked incident as a platform to further divide the country. Empathize with Jussie, here. Why would you go out of your way to fake a hate crime? He clearly hates white people.

"You do such a disservice when you lie about things like this", says Jussie Smollett. lol. I just watched the interview where he was explaining the story on national television. You can clearly tell by his body language and the way he's talking explaining the story that he's being dishonest. The same way I called out Trevor Noah when he sat in front of camera and explained ten completely different scenarios in different cities in different cars by different cops how many times he's been pulled over because he's black. They both deserve an ass-beating, regardless of what race they are. Thanks for proving that America is such a great country that you have to stage hate crimes.

Staging a hate crime to make a certain race look bad is in fact, a hate crime.

They are saying he paid those guys with a check a signed fucking chat

Tiggnutz wrote:They are saying he paid those guys with a check a signed fucking chat

That motherfucker grow up on Coconut Grove or summat? Ain't nobody teach him shit from the streets?

Jason wrote:
Perhaps everyone? Not just the media, not just the celebrities. How about the people who are influenced by them? How about Jussie Smollett? I realize he is a celebrity, but instead of being so quick to say "Oh, well he's a jackass. Let's move on", imagine if it was never proven that he lied. Look at all the leftist celebrities who jumped on it and used Jussie's faked incident as a platform to further divide the country. Empathize with Jussie, here. Why would you go out of your way to fake a hate crime? He clearly hates white people.

"You do such a disservice when you lie about things like this", says Jussie Smollett. lol. I just watched the interview where he was explaining the story on national television. You can clearly tell by his body language and the way he's talking explaining the story that he's being dishonest. The same way I called out Trevor Noah when he sat in front of camera and explained ten completely different scenarios in different cities in different cars by different cops how many times he's been pulled over because he's black. They both deserve an ass-beating, regardless of what race they are. Thanks for proving that America is such a great country that you have to stage hate crimes.

Staging a hate crime to make a certain race look bad is in fact, a hate crime.

jussie smollett is where the fault lies, in this case. he tried to leverage something that is actually a serious problem for his own gain.

you want to make it about ellen page. linking her video in the chat and in this thread at least twice. that's where i took issue. ellen page has a wacky viewpoint, but she's not the problem. jussie smollett is the problem, in this particular situation. if you want to talk it from the larger perspective, we can do that too. but i'm not sure you're actually willing.