Tim Sweeny says to get dem poltiks out his games!

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

My worst fear is given how badly woke culture is going, that it could eventually convince the suits they need to tone back on it, which really wouldn't help the LGBT cause.

I mean in general the suits are the ones that have been stopping it going forward even as acceptance of LBGT groups reaches new highs because A) the suits are large older conservatives, and B) they want that Chinese money despite the fact that going all in on China basically gutted Paramount.

Is it, really? Stuff like marketing the lesbian kiss in TROS as a victory is meaningless when they knew they were gonna cut it in overseas markets. That rubs me the wrong way.

Right, and do you think the guys patting themselves on the back for giving a less than token gesture that bas been beaten out by literal children's cartoons are doing it because they believe in the cause? They're only doing it at all because support for gays and lesbians in the 18-48 demographic (the most profitable one) is sky high and film is badly lagging behind tv in representation.

I think we may be on fundamentally different wavelengths here. I was talking about how the push-back to the LGBT themes could lead them to scale it down. And it's not even really the LGBT themes. It's the fact modern corporate entertainment has very low expectations so that once something is hit with negative feedback, any little thing is open to getting criticized.

In film they can't scale it down because it's nonexistent. I mean in Thor Ragnarok they cut as scene implying Valkyrie is Bi allegedly for time even though it was all of 30 seconds.

Well, look to TV then. In STD they terminated the only gay couple. And while that's a landmark, I would still prefer a tight story.

30 Seconds will not make or break the pacing of a 2 hour film (there are gags, some of which hurt the tone of the film, that are longer than that), and what it says to me is that they are unwilling to state a character of any relevance as being anything other than completely straight. So instead of having a the first LGBT character in the MCU be a major supporting character that is going to be used in a fair number of future movies, it's just some guy. While the tenancy to kill off gay characters in Television has it's own problematic history, I don't actually see much chance of snap back on it because A) there is too much history of having prominent LGBT characters, and B) live action TV is still made almost entirely for the domestic market.

How is it "problematic" to kill gay characters? If you want gays on TV, some are going to die. I don't bitch every time some black guy dies on a show I like. I'm just glad it happens first to get it out of the way.

It's not problematic because guy characters die, but guy characters tend to die at a higher rate than straight characters (even if we only look from the point where openly gay characters started regularly appearing on TV), and there is a tendency to have gay characters not actually be in relationships as compared to straight characters.

Eh, there's a lot more gays on TV than there are in real life as well, so them being disproportionately represented swings both ways.

Citation needed.

[JoeThree]

My worst fear is given how badly woke culture is going, that it could eventually convince the suits they need to tone back on it, which really wouldn't help the LGBT cause.

I mean in general the suits are the ones that have been stopping it going forward even as acceptance of LBGT groups reaches new highs because A) the suits are large older conservatives, and B) they want that Chinese money despite the fact that going all in on China basically gutted Paramount.

Is it, really? Stuff like marketing the lesbian kiss in TROS as a victory is meaningless when they knew they were gonna cut it in overseas markets. That rubs me the wrong way.

Right, and do you think the guys patting themselves on the back for giving a less than token gesture that bas been beaten out by literal children's cartoons are doing it because they believe in the cause? They're only doing it at all because support for gays and lesbians in the 18-48 demographic (the most profitable one) is sky high and film is badly lagging behind tv in representation.

I think we may be on fundamentally different wavelengths here. I was talking about how the push-back to the LGBT themes could lead them to scale it down. And it's not even really the LGBT themes. It's the fact modern corporate entertainment has very low expectations so that once something is hit with negative feedback, any little thing is open to getting criticized.

In film they can't scale it down because it's nonexistent. I mean in Thor Ragnarok they cut as scene implying Valkyrie is Bi allegedly for time even though it was all of 30 seconds.

Well, look to TV then. In STD they terminated the only gay couple. And while that's a landmark, I would still prefer a tight story.

30 Seconds will not make or break the pacing of a 2 hour film (there are gags, some of which hurt the tone of the film, that are longer than that), and what it says to me is that they are unwilling to state a character of any relevance as being anything other than completely straight. So instead of having a the first LGBT character in the MCU be a major supporting character that is going to be used in a fair number of future movies, it's just some guy. While the tenancy to kill off gay characters in Television has it's own problematic history, I don't actually see much chance of snap back on it because A) there is too much history of having prominent LGBT characters, and B) live action TV is still made almost entirely for the domestic market.

How is it "problematic" to kill gay characters? If you want gays on TV, some are going to die. I don't bitch every time some black guy dies on a show I like. I'm just glad it happens first to get it out of the way.

It's not problematic because guy characters die, but guy characters tend to die at a higher rate than straight characters (even if we only look from the point where openly gay characters started regularly appearing on TV), and there is a tendency to have gay characters not actually be in relationships as compared to straight characters.

Eh, there's a lot more gays on TV than there are in real life as well, so them being disproportionately represented swings both ways.

Citation needed.

Here's my citation: The fucking CW.

[JoeThree]

Disney is the great king of virtue signalling, if anyone is. Have a very brief gay kiss in the background, or two guys dancing in a split cut. Remove it for the overseas market. Have a black character, have a female character, make sure their role is supporting. Franchises getting too big? Make a film starring a black man or a woman or whatever demographic check box it's getting obvious you're avoiding. Use that as a shield whenever you need to deflect criticism (like when your toy line skips having women, because you're not marketing the toys to girls).

It's immediately obvious that they have demographic focus groups and will pander to anything that they can use to maximize their profit and avoid any controversy with well-placed fig leaves. It's not so much that they're sexist or racist, it's just that they're happy to use and even encourage those attitudes, as long as they can make money.

All Leftists are just virtue signalling. There is no consistency to their positions anymore other than "Orange man bad".

If you didn't want people pointing out how shit the president is maybe y'all shouldn't have elected the Beast.

How exactly is he bad? What has he done that you personally disapprove of?

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

"The CW network" So you've got nothing. You're big mad that there are a non-zero number of lesbians on one channel, and you decide, hey, that's more queers than are out to me in my daily life, so that must mean that LGBTQ people are over-represented in television!

You have no truth, no facts, just your own assumptions that you can't even back up. Typical.

[Draco Dracul]

Disney is the great king of virtue signalling, if anyone is. Have a very brief gay kiss in the background, or two guys dancing in a split cut. Remove it for the overseas market. Have a black character, have a female character, make sure their role is supporting. Franchises getting too big? Make a film starring a black man or a woman or whatever demographic check box it's getting obvious you're avoiding. Use that as a shield whenever you need to deflect criticism (like when your toy line skips having women, because you're not marketing the toys to girls).

It's immediately obvious that they have demographic focus groups and will pander to anything that they can use to maximize their profit and avoid any controversy with well-placed fig leaves. It's not so much that they're sexist or racist, it's just that they're happy to use and even encourage those attitudes, as long as they can make money.

All Leftists are just virtue signalling. There is no consistency to their positions anymore other than "Orange man bad".

If you didn't want people pointing out how shit the president is maybe y'all shouldn't have elected the Beast.

How exactly is he bad? What has he done that you personally disapprove of?

He's a racist, has a long history of defrauding his business partners, has destroyed historical artifacts in defiance of court orders, he has a history of credible sexual assault accusations, defrauded his customers in multiple businesses like Trump University, he set up a fake charity, and he tricked his senile father into cutting his late brother's family out of their share of the inheritance while holding his sick nephew's well being over them to prevent them from disputing the will and that's all before he was given power. As president he's put thousands into concentration camps, he's used his position to enrich himself, he's enacted policy against the LGBT community, he's engaged it open corruption including trying to pressure foreign governments into forging evidence against political rivals, he's engaged in political purges replacing those that do not bow to his every whim with incompetent cronies, and he actively delayed efforts to fight Corona virus in the US among other things.

[JoeThree]

Disney is the great king of virtue signalling, if anyone is. Have a very brief gay kiss in the background, or two guys dancing in a split cut. Remove it for the overseas market. Have a black character, have a female character, make sure their role is supporting. Franchises getting too big? Make a film starring a black man or a woman or whatever demographic check box it's getting obvious you're avoiding. Use that as a shield whenever you need to deflect criticism (like when your toy line skips having women, because you're not marketing the toys to girls).

It's immediately obvious that they have demographic focus groups and will pander to anything that they can use to maximize their profit and avoid any controversy with well-placed fig leaves. It's not so much that they're sexist or racist, it's just that they're happy to use and even encourage those attitudes, as long as they can make money.

All Leftists are just virtue signalling. There is no consistency to their positions anymore other than "Orange man bad".

If you didn't want people pointing out how shit the president is maybe y'all shouldn't have elected the Beast.

How exactly is he bad? What has he done that you personally disapprove of?

He's a racist, has a long history of defrauding his business partners, has destroyed historical artifacts in defiance of court orders, he has a history of credible sexual assault accusations, defrauded his customers in multiple businesses like Trump University, he set up a fake charity, and he tricked his senile father into cutting his late brother's family out of their share of the inheritance while holding his sick nephew's well being over them to prevent them from disputing the will and that's all before he was given power. As president he's put thousands into concentration camps, he's used his position to enrich himself, he's enacted policy against the LGBT community, he's engaged it open corruption including trying to pressure foreign governments into forging evidence against political rivals, he's engaged in political purges replacing those that do not bow to his every whim with incompetent cronies, and he actively delayed efforts to fight Corona virus in the US among other things.

Ok, here's where I blow your mind: You're right about a lot of that... and wrong about a little of it. He's not a racist, he's very much the opposite. That's my first contention.

The only action he's taken against the LGBT that I'm aware of is the no-Trans in the military thing. Is there anything else?, because I personally see no issue in that order.

I disagree. He wanted to have the Bidens investigated because Biden and his son are corrupt. But I doubt we'll see eye to eye on this.

You know nothing of concentration camps, so don't throw that term around.

He immediately wanted to close borders with China and the Left called him a racist for it. So he didn't. Now they complain he delayed.

All the rest? Yeah, he's a ruthless, nasty, manipulative son of a bitch. That's why I'm glad he's on our side.

[GreyICE]

Trump's first brush with being called racist was back in 1973 when a little thing called the Department of Justice received reports that Trump's properties were deliberately not renting to black residents. They did a nice sting, where a black person came in and asked to rent, was told they were full up, and then a white person came in and discovered yup, lots of apartments. After doing this on a few properties, Trump got charged, and ended up settling for a lot of cash and a promise to stop doing that.

So that was an awesome 50 years ago. There's been a lot since then. For instance, back in the 90s a tell all book was published, giving us this wonderful quote:

“Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day. … I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault, because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that. It’s not anything they can control.”

You can argue whether that quote is accurate or not. What you can't argue is the facts - namely that once again he was charged $200,000 for being a racist, this time for moving black women dealers off the casino floor.

Then there was the long series of "grassroots" ads he secretly paid to have ran against Native American casinos, accusing them of "looking suspicious", while in interviews complaining they didn't "look like indians". Ah, Trump.

Remember, this was all before his presidential bid, where it was revealed he followed and retweeted white supremacists on Twitter, made racist comments about a Latino judge, tweeted a picture of Hillary in front of a star of david (courtesy of the white supremacists he just loved retweeting), and bitching that members of congress who were born in America should "go back to their home country", apparently assuming their home country wasn't America because of their skin color.

In short, if Trump isn't a racist, he's done a damn good job of hiding that fact.

[GreyICE]

Trump's anti-LGBT record is much the same.

Trump, for instance, stopped tracking LGBT foster kids on a national level. Just deleted the database. This means that local foster programs are free to discriminate against lgbt children - who more frequently face abuse and violence than their straight counterparts. The administration has stepped aside, and simply made it impossible for anyone to track, on a systemic level, if a state's foster program is failing LGBT children.

Trump has had the justice department submit many briefs arguing that it is okay to discriminate against LGBT employees, and generally reversed federal protections for LGBT employees and LGBT employees of government contractors. He's expanded protections for violating the law in the name of 'religious liberties' and pushed heavily for the right to discriminate.

Trump also undid healthcare protections, freeing healthcare providers to discriminate against LGBT patients, health insurance to discriminate against LGBT beneficiaries, and providing funding for organizations that discriminate against LGBT people.

In virtually all areas of the government, Trump's administration has removed LGBT protections, and championed 'right to discriminate' laws passionately.

Now, unlike Trump's racism, there's no evidence his anti-LBGT stance is longstanding. There's every evidence this is just blatant pandering on his part. Unlike his interest in white supremacy and racism, all of his anti-LGBT positions seemed much less organic, and he rarely has his signature outbursts about the issue (unlike his rants about how white supremacists are good people, mexican rapists, or his "go back to your home country" twit). Which doesn't mean it's not happening of course. Trump's presidency has been a disaster for LGBT rights, and if Trump doesn't personally care, he doesn't personally care to halt the elements of his administration that are rabidly homophobic.

[Draco Dracul]

Disney is the great king of virtue signalling, if anyone is. Have a very brief gay kiss in the background, or two guys dancing in a split cut. Remove it for the overseas market. Have a black character, have a female character, make sure their role is supporting. Franchises getting too big? Make a film starring a black man or a woman or whatever demographic check box it's getting obvious you're avoiding. Use that as a shield whenever you need to deflect criticism (like when your toy line skips having women, because you're not marketing the toys to girls).

It's immediately obvious that they have demographic focus groups and will pander to anything that they can use to maximize their profit and avoid any controversy with well-placed fig leaves. It's not so much that they're sexist or racist, it's just that they're happy to use and even encourage those attitudes, as long as they can make money.

All Leftists are just virtue signalling. There is no consistency to their positions anymore other than "Orange man bad".

If you didn't want people pointing out how shit the president is maybe y'all shouldn't have elected the Beast.

How exactly is he bad? What has he done that you personally disapprove of?

He's a racist, has a long history of defrauding his business partners, has destroyed historical artifacts in defiance of court orders, he has a history of credible sexual assault accusations, defrauded his customers in multiple businesses like Trump University, he set up a fake charity, and he tricked his senile father into cutting his late brother's family out of their share of the inheritance while holding his sick nephew's well being over them to prevent them from disputing the will and that's all before he was given power. As president he's put thousands into concentration camps, he's used his position to enrich himself, he's enacted policy against the LGBT community, he's engaged it open corruption including trying to pressure foreign governments into forging evidence against political rivals, he's engaged in political purges replacing those that do not bow to his every whim with incompetent cronies, and he actively delayed efforts to fight Corona virus in the US among other things.

Ok, here's where I blow your mind: You're right about a lot of that... and wrong about a little of it. He's not a racist, he's very much the opposite. That's my first contention.

Then you are in active denial because his history of racism goes back to the 70s when he was sued for racist rental policies. He's made comments on not wanting black accountants and has said that he cannot be tried fairly by a judge just because said judge is Latino.

The only action he's taken against the LGBT that I'm aware of is the no-Trans in the military thing. Is there anything else?, because I personally see no issue on that order.

You don't see any problem denying people fit for service the right to serve?

I disagree. He wanted to have the Bidens investigated because Biden and his son are corrupt. But I doubt we'll see eye to eye on this.

No he wanted the appearance of an investigation to smear a rival, not only extorting the investigation out of Ukraine, but specifically demanding the announcement of the investigation.

You know nothing of concentration camps, so don't throw that term around.

It's calling a spade a spade and people Americans put in concentration camps in the 40s, like George Takei, agree with me on that point. They aren't death camps, but they are the textbook definition of concentration camps and have been deliberately been allowed to degrade in quality because Trump sees them a weapon of terror against immigrants.

He immediately wanted to close borders with China and the Left called him a racist for it. So he didn't. Now they complain he delayed.

This is a red herring as by the time Trump first proposed closing boarders it was already in Washington state. Additionally trump delayed our testing apparatus to the point that we only found out that community transmission was occurring by doctors in Washington defying CDC guidelines set by the administration.

All the rest? Yeah, he's a ruthless, nasty, manipulative son of a bitch. That's why I'm glad he's on our side.

I assume you mean the Republican side as he is very clearly not on Americans side as he has actively damaged our institutions and our standing on the world stage.

[JoeThree]

Disney is the great king of virtue signalling, if anyone is. Have a very brief gay kiss in the background, or two guys dancing in a split cut. Remove it for the overseas market. Have a black character, have a female character, make sure their role is supporting. Franchises getting too big? Make a film starring a black man or a woman or whatever demographic check box it's getting obvious you're avoiding. Use that as a shield whenever you need to deflect criticism (like when your toy line skips having women, because you're not marketing the toys to girls).

It's immediately obvious that they have demographic focus groups and will pander to anything that they can use to maximize their profit and avoid any controversy with well-placed fig leaves. It's not so much that they're sexist or racist, it's just that they're happy to use and even encourage those attitudes, as long as they can make money.

All Leftists are just virtue signalling. There is no consistency to their positions anymore other than "Orange man bad".

If you didn't want people pointing out how shit the president is maybe y'all shouldn't have elected the Beast.

How exactly is he bad? What has he done that you personally disapprove of?

He's a racist, has a long history of defrauding his business partners, has destroyed historical artifacts in defiance of court orders, he has a history of credible sexual assault accusations, defrauded his customers in multiple businesses like Trump University, he set up a fake charity, and he tricked his senile father into cutting his late brother's family out of their share of the inheritance while holding his sick nephew's well being over them to prevent them from disputing the will and that's all before he was given power. As president he's put thousands into concentration camps, he's used his position to enrich himself, he's enacted policy against the LGBT community, he's engaged it open corruption including trying to pressure foreign governments into forging evidence against political rivals, he's engaged in political purges replacing those that do not bow to his every whim with incompetent cronies, and he actively delayed efforts to fight Corona virus in the US among other things.

Ok, here's where I blow your mind: You're right about a lot of that... and wrong about a little of it. He's not a racist, he's very much the opposite. That's my first contention.

Then you are in active denial because his history of racism goes back to the 70s when he was sued for racist rental policies. He's made comments on not wanting black accountants and has said that he cannot be tried fairly by a judge just because said judge is Latino.

The only action he's taken against the LGBT that I'm aware of is the no-Trans in the military thing. Is there anything else?, because I personally see no issue on that order.

You don't see any problem denying people fit for service the right to serve?

I disagree. He wanted to have the Bidens investigated because Biden and his son are corrupt. But I doubt we'll see eye to eye on this.

No he wanted the appearance of an investigation to smear a rival, not only extorting the investigation out of Ukraine, but specifically demanding the announcement of the investigation.

You know nothing of concentration camps, so don't throw that term around.

It's calling a spade a spade and people Americans put in concentration camps in the 40s, like George Takei, agree with me on that point. They aren't death camps, but they are the textbook definition of concentration camps and have been deliberately been allowed to degrade in quality because Trump sees them a weapon of terror against immigrants.

He immediately wanted to close borders with China and the Left called him a racist for it. So he didn't. Now they complain he delayed.

This is a red herring as by the time Trump first proposed closing boarders it was already in Washington state. Additionally trump delayed our testing apparatus to the point that we only found out that community transmission was occurring by doctors in Washington defying CDC guidelines set by the administration.

All the rest? Yeah, he's a ruthless, nasty, manipulative son of a bitch. That's why I'm glad he's on our side.

I assume you mean the Republican side as he is very clearly not on Americans side as he has actively damaged our institutions and our standing on the world stage.

I disagree that he's exclusively on the Republican side. I was a Libertarian before Trump. What he's done for the Black community that wants to work has been amazing. He might be a racist, but I thank the man that got me off the vote plantation.