'Ted Cruz’s warning to ‘woke CEOs’ blasted by former government ethics boss'

[Captain Crimson]

I do believe in maximum creative freedom to artists, to dissolve the line between them and the realization of their vision, so long as it's not corporate art. Because that's an oxymoron.

Here's an example of woke, to me. The Predator was a god-awful movie, because IMO, it was trying to hit on beats from the blue checkmarks. "Empower" autism, and the whole global warming shtick (we're gonna be extinct in two generations, oh the humanity!), and yet in the process they retconned the Yautja, which is one of the dumbest moves I've ever seen that set the universe back by years. 30 years of continuity, like with SW, was just thrown out the window. There's always an easy fix for those situations, but it's left up to others to pick up the slack and fix 'em. Also the deliberate downplaying the fanservice of Ms. Munn's naked body, while a good move artistically elsewhere, strikes me as hitting to the beats of anti-sexy feminism, the term I've seen elsewhere in this forum. I was actually quite surprised they didn't shove in "orange man bad" or some anti-vaxx thing.

How about that line "he kills people so you can be a mail man?" That's almost like a diatribe against toxic masculinity if ever I've seen one, because real men feel like men when they're hacking away in a field, I guess. There was a gay couple, I think? But honestly, I can't even remember, since I've said that I felt Alien: Covenant did it better, and that movie had its own problems.

The worst woke for me often accompanies complete lore destruction, sacrificed for the need to be topical. It's one of the worst issues facing longer-running franchises right now. It's just a big mud pit to duke it out in the battle between the egos for each director. They need to be reined in.

After all, the story should belong to the fans. We do buy it, after all, and in far greater numbers than the elite.

[Riedquat]

While it can be a bit much at times, I've never seen a film become a lesser work just because the creative team was actively conscious of the makeup of their cast.

If it can be a bit much at times then you have seen that.

A big part of the problem is that so many people have been yelling about it you can't do anything straightforwardly without motives being questioned. When Red Dwarf was first made and half the main cast were non-white no-one thought anything of it because it was never raised as an issue. Now it would be "They're just casting them to make a point about how good they are." And these days sadly that might be the case. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Really it shouldn't matter as long as someone's right for the role, there shouldn't be any "We need more / less of these people."

Or more likely thier were just as many or more people that hated it, but because the internet barely existed and there was no way to monetize hate about a BBC sitcom they kept quite.

Hated what, that they were cast? For what reason? The "must fulfill those quotas and show we're not evil racists" attitude didn't really exist yet, so the only people likely to hate it were the actual racists.

[Draco Dracul]

While it can be a bit much at times, I've never seen a film become a lesser work just because the creative team was actively conscious of the makeup of their cast.

If it can be a bit much at times then you have seen that.

A big part of the problem is that so many people have been yelling about it you can't do anything straightforwardly without motives being questioned. When Red Dwarf was first made and half the main cast were non-white no-one thought anything of it because it was never raised as an issue. Now it would be "They're just casting them to make a point about how good they are." And these days sadly that might be the case. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Really it shouldn't matter as long as someone's right for the role, there shouldn't be any "We need more / less of these people."

Or more likely thier were just as many or more people that hated it, but because the internet barely existed and there was no way to monetize hate about a BBC sitcom they kept quite.

Hated what, that they were cast? For what reason? The "must fulfill those quotas and show we're not evil racists" attitude didn't really exist yet, so the only people likely to hate it were the actual racists.

Yes. For the same reason that people hate them now, that they are racist. Treating the casting of minority actors as a quota being filled is racist because you're saying that either white characters should be treated as a default while nonwhite actors must be justified or that white actors are assumed to be automatically better than nonwhite actors.

[ProfessorDetective]

While it can be a bit much at times, I've never seen a film become a lesser work just because the creative team was actively conscious of the makeup of their cast.

If it can be a bit much at times then you have seen that.

A big part of the problem is that so many people have been yelling about it you can't do anything straightforwardly without motives being questioned. When Red Dwarf was first made and half the main cast were non-white no-one thought anything of it because it was never raised as an issue. Now it would be "They're just casting them to make a point about how good they are." And these days sadly that might be the case. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Really it shouldn't matter as long as someone's right for the role, there shouldn't be any "We need more / less of these people."

Or more likely thier were just as many or more people that hated it, but because the internet barely existed and there was no way to monetize hate about a BBC sitcom they kept quite.

Hated what, that they were cast? For what reason? The "must fulfill those quotas and show we're not evil racists" attitude didn't really exist yet, so the only people likely to hate it were the actual racists.

Yes. For the same reason that people hate them now, that they are racist. Treating the casting of minority actors as a quota being filled is racist because you're saying that either white characters should be treated as a default while nonwhite actors must be justified or that white actors are assumed to be automatically better than nonwhite actors.

Two types of people: neurotypical, cisallohet, Anglo-Saxon, men and 'politics'.

This is also the intended reason for affirmative action: making it so employs don't default to the 'tried and tested'.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

While it can be a bit much at times, I've never seen a film become a lesser work just because the creative team was actively conscious of the makeup of their cast.

If it can be a bit much at times then you have seen that.

A big part of the problem is that so many people have been yelling about it you can't do anything straightforwardly without motives being questioned. When Red Dwarf was first made and half the main cast were non-white no-one thought anything of it because it was never raised as an issue. Now it would be "They're just casting them to make a point about how good they are." And these days sadly that might be the case. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Really it shouldn't matter as long as someone's right for the role, there shouldn't be any "We need more / less of these people."

Or more likely thier were just as many or more people that hated it, but because the internet barely existed and there was no way to monetize hate about a BBC sitcom they kept quite.

Hated what, that they were cast? For what reason? The "must fulfill those quotas and show we're not evil racists" attitude didn't really exist yet, so the only people likely to hate it were the actual racists.

People have been complaining about stuff being "too politically correct" and seeing the mere existence of minorities as Forced Diversity for decades. It's not a new thing, despite what you may think because of nostalgia. Sesame Street was politically controversial because it had black children and white children playing together. Hey Arnold and The Proud Family were decried in newspaper editorials because it was "forced diversity".

Basically, if it happened after you were 15, it's forced diversity and politically correct and Wokeness. If it happened before you were 15, then it's organic and authentic and something that you wish these politically correct garbage shows now would do more of.

[Captain Crimson]

White people are a majority here, and Latinos and Latinas don't owe the DNC their votes, ironic given the younger white progressives can't stand them. To go woke alienates the middle, which includes numerous POC. Because those future demographics are subject to predictions and changes we cannot possibly foresee and act upon. "Demographics is destiny" discounts random probability changes in complex systems, such as civilization.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

What the yiff does the Democratic party and Latin-American votes have to do with any of this? You're grabbing three or four different debates and sticking them together with used doublemint gum.

[Riedquat]

Hated what, that they were cast? For what reason? The "must fulfill those quotas and show we're not evil racists" attitude didn't really exist yet, so the only people likely to hate it were the actual racists.

Yes. For the same reason that people hate them now, that they are racist. Treating the casting of minority actors as a quota being filled is racist because you're saying that either white characters should be treated as a default while nonwhite actors must be justified or that white actors are assumed to be automatically better than nonwhite actors.

That's some pretty twisted logic there. The point is that if race comes in to a casting consideration when the role doesn't specify any in particular then you've got a problem. And don't try to claim that never happens.