Let's get down to brass tacks... (SJWs/influence in movies)

[Mecha82]

Sadly both extremes have those but that seems to be nature of people like that. I have seen terms like SJW and snowflake thrown around un-ironically over even smallest thing just as way to dismiss opposing opinions. Yes, even I have been called SJW by some idiot and it was over opinion about comic books.

[clearspira]

I'm putting this here primarily because I feel, it's most relevant in this section, with sci-fi and fantasy, but if not, the mods can put it anywhere, right? Apologies if I'm wrong. With that said, let's get down to it.

Been browsing YouTube comments section, and... I feel really annoyed whenever I see people bitching about the influence of "SJWs in movies," sentiments people on this very board have expressed, so I feel I really wanna call this out/get a good discussion going on this... those whining about SJWs in movies, are imo, no different than other type of fanboy, angry the product they love isn't going their way, aren't they? Because at the end of the day, I doubt those in charge are being influenced in any way unduly by "evil SJWs ruining society" that those YouTube commentators love to regard as nebulously weaving their threads to force propaganda down their throat. No more than a company ever has been in the past. When it comes to bad PR, a corporation will try and fix it, even if that means sacrificing the employee or more than one employee. For one thing... it seems less like they're complaining about the direction those in charge are taking it, and more about demonizing the left (because they seem to hardly ever acknowledge there can be right-wing SJWs, the terms are not mutually exclusive). I mean, they/you do understand that the moviemakers ultimately make their own decisions, correct? It's not a tiny handful of hard-left fanatics forcing those in charge of Hollywood to change something to fit their agenda, those in charge, past not wanting to attract bad PR (or perhaps wanting to do so in some cases, because that sells), are free to make up their own mind. So overall, it seems less like sincere criticism and more like complaining that the world has changed, and you're feeling left behind because you're in a minority where you're too right-leaning for the world. All of which is fine, tbh. But those preaching this seem to have no genuine sense of self-awareness, as far as I see it. I think people should be honest with each other, and themselves. So in conclusion, I think the anti-SJW crowd when it comes to making movies are just another breed of entitled fanboy. Convince me otherwise.

California is left wing. This is not even arguable. Unfortunately they also happen to make the bulk of our films which means that the bulk of our films have left wing agendas because they are made by people with left wing agendas. Left wingers are not likely to make films that cast the right wing in a good light.
And may I remind you Yuka that you have a right wing president. To say that right wing views are somehow ''in the minority'' or that others ''lack self awareness'' is comical tbh.

[Yukaphile]

I don't think it's an agenda, though. There I wanna contest you. I just think they truly believe that left-wing policies are more mainstream then they wish it was.

I said that in the context of how, I think most Americans are pure centrists. They seem to be beyond center of right in how they become anti-SJWs.

[Draco Dracul]

In general the primary motivation seems to be that including people other than white men as the leads of action films can make a lot of money outside of traditional demographics. Part of the reason why gay representing remains largely non existent for leading roles is that the cost of getting banned in China is deemed too high.

[Mecha82]

In general the primary motivation seems to be that including people other than white men as the leads of action films can make a lot of money outside of traditional demographics. Part of the reason why gay representing remains largely non existent for leading roles is that the cost of getting banned in China is deemed too high.

At end of day that's what they want to do. Get they film showed for as wide audience as possible for optimal profit rather than being focused on small demographic. Small demographic like right wing people that complain on internet about movies not having white men at leads and talking about "agenda pushing" and "SJWs".

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

In general the primary motivation seems to be that including people other than white men as the leads of action films can make a lot of money outside of traditional demographics. Part of the reason why gay representing remains largely non existent for leading roles is that the cost of getting banned in China is deemed too high.

I think inclusion does come in on the artistic level. Issues of whitewashing for instance get heavily criticized to the point where actors make public apologies for doing such. It just gets talked about a lot and it starts to not look good, especially as the public becomes more and more aware of things like this.

Specifically we're talking right here about inclusion and representation as somewhat more direct conditions that establish diversity, and it gets a lot of attention.

Then there's things such as tropes that expose things like the "black friend to white star" trope.

And also, I'm not sure if the Bechdel test is adhered to for feminist commercialization so much as realizing that it can come off a bit as lazy writing, to the point where an artist might take it upon themselves to craft a more considerable character.

[Karha of Honor]

In general the primary motivation seems to be that including people other than white men as the leads of action films can make a lot of money outside of traditional demographics. Part of the reason why gay representing remains largely non existent for leading roles is that the cost of getting banned in China is deemed too high.

At end of day that's what they want to do. Get they film showed for as wide audience as possible for optimal profit rather than being focused on small demographic. Small demographic like right wing people that complain on internet about movies not having white men at leads and talking about "agenda pushing" and "SJWs".

You think politically aware people are not a small audience?

[Darth Wedgius]

Jordan Peele said he wouldn't cast a white person as a lead in one of his movies. The second season of Jessica Jones wouldn't hire a male director. SJWs go past putting women or minorities into their works, into outright sexism and racism. I don't see any reason not to call that out. People who believe that it's OK to discriminate against men or white people are going to disagree, of course.

Then there is criticism that gets called sexism or racism. People could dislike Rey for various reasons, but were called out as being afraid of strong women in their films. That's simply ridiculous, as there are many female-led movies that have done very well with male audience members. When entertainment executives provide bullshit, they can be called out for it.

And when a consumer of entertainment suspects that a minority or female might be being presented as if being a woman or black or LGBTQ*.* is their primary characteristic, they have a right to question that, as well. See also the new Batwoman trailer, but please wear facepalm protection when doing so.

When people suspect white, male, or heterosexual characters are being made to look stupid or less capable to make women or minorities look better, they have every right to question that as well. It's probably not good to jump to that conclusion as some people do, but questioning as to if it is happening is entirely reasonable. Again, sexism and racism isn't nice.

In short, people who demand fair treatment of all races, sexes, sexual orientations, hair colors, etc., are, IMHO, in the right.

And in the original sense "snowflake" does not apply. Who is demanding protection from opinions or ideas they don't like? Responding to opinions isn't the same as demanding protection of your feelings.

[Yukaphile]

They only demand it when it comes movies. Other than that, they go out of their way to systematically make life a lot harder for minorities and women. It doesn't help most people in the GOP leadership are, primarily, white guys. Older religious white guys from a more archaic time, and they want to take us back to those times.

[Darth Wedgius]

They only demand it when it comes movies. Other than that, they go out of their way to systematically make life a lot harder for minorities and women. It doesn't help most people in the GOP leadership are, primarily, white guys. Older religious white guys from a more archaic time, and they want to take us back to those times.

Point to any legislation conservatives have introduced to give minorities or women fewer rights than whites or men. If you can't do that, point to legislation proposed. If you can't do that, point to conservatives saying that minorities or women should have fewer rights than whites or men.

Yukaphile, you're buying into what people tell you about conservatives than looking into this for yourself. I want people treated the same regardless of race or sex, as do all conservatives except for a fringe. Meanwhile, a high proportion of liberals don't want people treated the same regardless of race or sex, and I can point you toward many cases of that.