The Matrix is a Trans Allegory now

For all topics regarding speculative fiction of every stripe. Otherwise known as the Geek Cave.
User avatar
TGLS
Captain
Posts: 2916
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 10:16 pm

Re: The Matrix is a Trans Allegory now

Post by TGLS »

clearspira wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:56 am
BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:07 pm
clearspira wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 11:51 amAnd I also think that the "Neo is his chosen name" idea is badly executed, as if true, how do we explain the likes of Dozer and Tank? They are Zion born humans not pod born humans and yet they also go by chosen names?
When was it ever established that Dozer and Tank were given names by the machines?
Why would anyone name their kid Dozer or Tank? Its stupid.
No one in history has a stupid name!

https://www.boredpanda.com/funny-unfortunate-names/
Image
"I know what you’re thinking now. You’re thinking 'Oh my god, that’s treating other people with respect gone mad!'"
When I am writing in this font, I am writing in my moderator voice.
Spam-desu
User avatar
BridgeConsoleMasher
Overlord
Posts: 11583
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2018 6:18 am

Re: The Matrix is a Trans Allegory now

Post by BridgeConsoleMasher »

clearspira wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:56 am
BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:07 pm
clearspira wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 11:51 amAnd I also think that the "Neo is his chosen name" idea is badly executed, as if true, how do we explain the likes of Dozer and Tank? They are Zion born humans not pod born humans and yet they also go by chosen names?
When was it ever established that Dozer and Tank were given names by the machines?
Why would anyone name their kid Dozer or Tank? Its stupid.
As I was saying, I'm not entirely clear on your proofing setup here.

Is your position that Tank and Dozer gave themselves those names, and that that infers that Keanu Reeves's character choosing his own name is not consistent with a trans person becoming a different gender? To clarify, just in case, this isn't supposed to be an ironic dismissal or anything, I really just don't understand how it has bearing on the concept of this being a trans allegory.

Is there a hypothetical in real life terms where you could incorporate Neo, Tank, Dozer, and any other subjects as needed?
..What mirror universe?
User avatar
clearspira
Overlord
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 12:51 pm

Re: The Matrix is a Trans Allegory now

Post by clearspira »

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 2:07 pm
clearspira wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:56 am
BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:07 pm
clearspira wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 11:51 amAnd I also think that the "Neo is his chosen name" idea is badly executed, as if true, how do we explain the likes of Dozer and Tank? They are Zion born humans not pod born humans and yet they also go by chosen names?
When was it ever established that Dozer and Tank were given names by the machines?
Why would anyone name their kid Dozer or Tank? Its stupid.
As I was saying, I'm not entirely clear on your proofing setup here.

Is your position that Tank and Dozer gave themselves those names, and that that infers that Keanu Reeves's character choosing his own name is not consistent with a trans person becoming a different gender? To clarify, just in case, this isn't supposed to be an ironic dismissal or anything, I really just don't understand how it has bearing on the concept of this being a trans allegory.

Is there a hypothetical in real life terms where you could incorporate Neo, Tank, Dozer, and any other subjects as needed?
Here's how I see it: for the allegory to work, Neo is a man in the Matrix (Mr Anderson) and a woman in the real world (Neo). However, Tank is Tank regardless of whether he is in the real world or the Matrix. So why did Tank rename himself Tank in the allegorical context that this is meant to be?

Basically what I am saying is that this seems to be an allegory of one (Anderson/Neo) despite the fact that I lot of the ideas behind this allegory also apply to other characters despite the fact that it shouldn't.
User avatar
BridgeConsoleMasher
Overlord
Posts: 11583
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2018 6:18 am

Re: The Matrix is a Trans Allegory now

Post by BridgeConsoleMasher »

clearspira wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 11:17 am
BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 2:07 pm
clearspira wrote: Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:56 am
BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:07 pm
clearspira wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 11:51 amAnd I also think that the "Neo is his chosen name" idea is badly executed, as if true, how do we explain the likes of Dozer and Tank? They are Zion born humans not pod born humans and yet they also go by chosen names?
When was it ever established that Dozer and Tank were given names by the machines?
Why would anyone name their kid Dozer or Tank? Its stupid.
As I was saying, I'm not entirely clear on your proofing setup here.

Is your position that Tank and Dozer gave themselves those names, and that that infers that Keanu Reeves's character choosing his own name is not consistent with a trans person becoming a different gender? To clarify, just in case, this isn't supposed to be an ironic dismissal or anything, I really just don't understand how it has bearing on the concept of this being a trans allegory.

Is there a hypothetical in real life terms where you could incorporate Neo, Tank, Dozer, and any other subjects as needed?
Here's how I see it: for the allegory to work, Neo is a man in the Matrix (Mr Anderson) and a woman in the real world (Neo). However, Tank is Tank regardless of whether he is in the real world or the Matrix. So why did Tank rename himself Tank in the allegorical context that this is meant to be?

Basically what I am saying is that this seems to be an allegory of one (Anderson/Neo) despite the fact that I lot of the ideas behind this allegory also apply to other characters despite the fact that it shouldn't.
As far as I understood, Tank/Dozer/Link etc... can't go into the Matrix. They don't have the plugs that everybody developed with augmentationally.

The overall idea is that gender norms have a degree of social manifestation. That bit isn't very controversial IRL. And at the very least I suppose, there's no proof or innate reason to believe that all males necessarily grow as men while females/women.

People that grow up in the Matrix are synonymous with people that grow up learning that gender roles are that which is totally innate. I'm not certain that you have to presume that people leaving the Matrix are trans'ing in metaphor necessarily, but then again the movie certainly doesn't either since nobody in the story actually really changes into a naturalistic state when they leave; they're just free of the social manifestation prescribed to them. I feel like that's a bit that would go under the radar of non-liberals in general, but idunno just a thought.

Tank and Dozer are synonymous with babies that weren't given blue outfits as a boy or pink as a girl (American stereotype with blue/pink).
..What mirror universe?
User avatar
Rocketboy1313
Captain
Posts: 1127
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 6:17 pm

Re: The Matrix is a Trans Allegory now

Post by Rocketboy1313 »

I don't know what level of dumb minutia you think you are debating.
The symbolism is so obvious and naked that it is obnoxious to try and split hairs over it in some attempt to strip it of the underlying message.
I can't believe this is 8 pages of responses beyond the obvious of, "yeah, it always has been".
My Blog: http://rocketboy1313.blogspot.com/
My Twitter: https://twitter.com/Rocketboy1313
My Tumblr: https://www.tumblr.com/blog/rocketboy1313
My Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/13rocketboy13
Darth Wedgius
Captain
Posts: 2948
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:43 pm

Re: The Matrix is a Trans Allegory now

Post by Darth Wedgius »

GreyICE wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 10:14 am
Darth Wedgius wrote: Sat Aug 15, 2020 8:53 pm Just Some Guy on YouTube has what I think is overall a good take on this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zQnMmFvKNc

Though the part I found most memorable was him quoting someone proposing the trans allegory:
As a good feminist, I know there is no such thing as a woman. As a woman, I resent this.
As someone who tries to be logical, I'm wary of "and that tells me everything I need to know about you" statements I've seen from the left. But this case was tempting.
I chucked open a private mode panel - the last source you sent me to was a white supremacist magazine, so my trust level is low - and checked this guy out. *sigh*. "Yes, Superman should be white" is one of his videos. Superman is an alien, and a radical egalitarian (although we can note his origins as a Jewish 'blow off steam/revenge' fantasy). His color literally does not matter. Still, I figured I'd give it a listen.
I'm not aware of that, but then again, the left calls funny things "white supremacist." They also call funny things "fascist." Maybe in you're mind, you're making snese. :lol: :lol:
GreyICE wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 10:14 am We start off retarded. "I hate allegory, I prefer history." Uh yes. Animal Farm, Brave New World, those are terrible works. The Crucible and Walker use history itself as an allegory. Allegory and history are not at all the same thing.
He was quoting Tolkein. Tolkein was retarded? Hey, everyone is welcome to an opinion. Maybe you think Tolkein is retarded. :roll:
GreyICE wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 10:14 am The second point he makes is that the Matrix has a lot of stuff in it. Well, yes. One of the advantages of allegory over history is you can fit a lot of different things in. History you are limited by historical accuracy and the constraints of actual events. It's hard to fit subtle points about the nature of reality into a film about Dunkirk, because you're making a film about Dunkirk, and thus have to put a whole bunch of things in there. By making an allegory, you can also fit many other things in.
Well, he praises The Matrix for having a lot of nice qualities, if that's what you mean. But if you're talking about how he says The Matrix can apply to a lot of things. More on that later.
GreyICE wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 10:14 am But the third, and when we start really going off the rails, is when he defines allegory as "a 1-for-1 tradeoff." That's sheerly nonsensical. Look at his own fucking example, animal farm. For it to be a 1-for-1 tradeoff to the Russian revolution, it'd need animal Lenin, animal Stalin, animal Trotsky, etc. You'd need to recreate every historical figure 1-for-1. Because that's literally what "1-for-1 tradeoff" means. But George Orwell does no such thing. There's no Tsar, no western invasion to support the Tsar during the revolution (something that very much helped to drive the Cold War), none of the nuance and complexity of actual historical events. And it doesn't need or want them, because it is an allegory.
The things in the story stand for explicit things in what they allegorize. How hard is that to figure out?
GreyICE wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 10:14 am And that's where the entire video falls apart, because he spends the rest of the video not really comprehending what an allegory is, the difference between metaphor, allegory, and parable, or even what he's really talking about. For instance, at one point he says that leading a double life could be done by gay people, religious people, people with different politics, etc. Therefore it can't be a 1-for-1 representation. It's like saying that Pigs in Animal Farm can't be an allegory for the Party in the USSR because there's lots of elite ruling classes in history, like the nobility in Europe or white male landowners in America (prior to the 14th amendment), and anyway no one makes bacon out of the Party in Russia, so it's not 1-for-1.

Honestly it was just kind of stupid. The entire video was just filled with shit like this. I started skipping ahead after the ten minute mark because it was just all full of missing the point, and it's 20+ minutes of him missing the point because "it's not a 1-for-1 translation." Which is not what an allegory is.

There's one point around minute 17 where he just literally fails to understand anything, quoting an article he's mad about, misunderstanding it as saying "there's nothing good about knowledge", and then misunderstanding trans people. It's truly astonishing. The quote he's mad about is "What good is truth if nothing grows there?" which is a truism about the value of knowledge. Value of knowledge is only valuable in motion - in its growth. "I had a bowl of oatmeal with a little bit of salt and some cinnamon this morning" might be a truth, but it's a truth of little application. Truth is valuable in motion - when it reveals new truths, when it grows into new things. It's not a destination, it's a journey. You never arrive at "the absolute truth", but a series of truths that grow into more. We call that search "science".

The reviewer then rolls this misunderstanding of the meaning of "truth as a search" rather than "truth as a destination" into a misunderstanding of what "social construct is" (language itself is one, all forms of communication are social constructs, as are any abstract categories we create to communicate broader ideas) and decides all social constructs are made up, and therefore meaningless. Social constructs are indeed "made up", but try explaining to a US border agent that "countries" are a made up social construct and therefore you don't need a passport. He then rolls this into "therefore transgender people aren't real."
Let's see. Here is what Chu says:
For to exit the Matrix is not to know the truth but to discover the poverty of knowledge. “Welcome to the desert of the real,” Morpheus intones after Neo takes the red pill. There’s a reason the real is a desert. What good is the truth if nothing grows there? The notion that gender was socially constructed, instead of biological fact, was intended to free people like me from our assigned sexes. It did this, perhaps, but only at the cost of the very categories into which we sought entry. As a good feminist, I know there’s no such thing as a woman. As a woman, I resent this.
/quote]

That's not truth as a way to find deeper truths. That's saying that they discovered a truth and didn't like it, followed by a bit of complete nonsense. The video creator noted that you can't be something if it doesn't exist. I don't think that's complicated. Maybe Chu meant, "As someone suffering the delusion of being a woman, I resent this." But it's not what she said. She said there's no such thing as a woman.
GreyICE wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 10:14 am This sort of shit was what the term "sophomoric" was created to describe. As an aside, it's why I hate video essays (the worst parts of SF debris are the video essays, as opposed to the video reviews). Video Essays allow some truly terrible reasoning to float because people just string words together with no actual logical connection between them. It encourages sophomoric reasoning, because it is spoken rather than written, therefore errors in logic and reasoning are harder to detect. If we were actually reading this shit, we'd realize it was fallacious nonsense very quickly, because none of the points actually parse as logic.


Of course the fact this is a video essay meant he wrote it all out, read it through, said "yep, that makes sense" and then read it to us. So I'm viewing the work of an idiot.
Let's see if he had any logical points.

* Many of the points that are used to indicate a trans allegory could be interpreted as other things. Compare that to Animal Farm.

* That Neo sense that something's off about the world is a reference to being trans but that
doesn't work because transgender people don't think that there's something off about the world,
but that there's something off about themselves. It's not the world that is wrong
but that their body and or mind is wrong.

* The Matrix is how people see themselves, but the real world is how they are? But if they see themselves as the other gender, and the Matrix is a lie, that makes their internal view of themselves a lie.

* Chu says that Neo has dysphoria about his role and tries to avoid it by violence. But Neo embraces that humans have to be free, and his violence is either self-defense or in pursuit of that.

* Chu says that the Matrix is a gender binary. However that doesn't fit once you watch the aniMatrix shorts, especially second renaissance and the sequels you're literally told numerous times that humans and programs have a more nuanced relationship in the real world and the Matrix than previously thought. It's not that one side is inherently good or evil; that there is a binary, the Manichaean
dichotomy of the first film is repeatedly shown to be false, as is the prophecy: just another system of
control.

But maybe those don't make sense to you. Maybe Tolkein was stupid or, to use what seems to be your go-to insult, "retarded." Maybe you're the smart one. :lol: :lol:
User avatar
BridgeConsoleMasher
Overlord
Posts: 11583
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2018 6:18 am

Re: The Matrix is a Trans Allegory now

Post by BridgeConsoleMasher »

Rocketboy1313 wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:34 pm I don't know what level of dumb minutia you think you are debating.
The symbolism is so obvious and naked that it is obnoxious to try and split hairs over it in some attempt to strip it of the underlying message.
I can't believe this is 8 pages of responses beyond the obvious of, "yeah, it always has been".
I am really curious where the breakdown is though.
..What mirror universe?
User avatar
Madner Kami
Captain
Posts: 4018
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2017 2:35 pm

Re: The Matrix is a Trans Allegory now

Post by Madner Kami »

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 8:27 pm
Rocketboy1313 wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:34 pm I don't know what level of dumb minutia you think you are debating.
The symbolism is so obvious and naked that it is obnoxious to try and split hairs over it in some attempt to strip it of the underlying message.
I can't believe this is 8 pages of responses beyond the obvious of, "yeah, it always has been".
I am really curious where the breakdown is though.
The breakdown is one side arguing that gender-dysphoria is the primary or outright only theme of the piece and is obvious to see, while the other side argues that gender-dysphoria is a subset of the theme(s) raised in the movie and can be missed or is poorly implemented. One side calls the other nazis, retards, blind and other such nice things and the other side just shakes their head and rolls their eyes.
"If you get shot up by an A6M Reisen and your plane splits into pieces - does that mean it's divided by Zero?
- xoxSAUERKRAUTxox
GreyICE
Captain
Posts: 1011
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: The Matrix is a Trans Allegory now

Post by GreyICE »

Madner Kami wrote: Mon Aug 24, 2020 9:36 am
BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 8:27 pm
Rocketboy1313 wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:34 pm I don't know what level of dumb minutia you think you are debating.
The symbolism is so obvious and naked that it is obnoxious to try and split hairs over it in some attempt to strip it of the underlying message.
I can't believe this is 8 pages of responses beyond the obvious of, "yeah, it always has been".
I am really curious where the breakdown is though.
The breakdown is one side arguing that gender-dysphoria is the primary or outright only theme of the piece and is obvious to see, while the other side argues that gender-dysphoria is a subset of the theme(s) raised in the movie and can be missed or is poorly implemented. One side calls the other nazis, retards, blind and other such nice things and the other side just shakes their head and rolls their eyes.
Ah yes, anyone can see this happening in this thread where... oh right, you make shit up.

If people are calling you a retard, maybe spend less time huffing glue.
Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs

- Republican Party Platform
User avatar
Madner Kami
Captain
Posts: 4018
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2017 2:35 pm

Re: The Matrix is a Trans Allegory now

Post by Madner Kami »

:roll:

q.e.d.
"If you get shot up by an A6M Reisen and your plane splits into pieces - does that mean it's divided by Zero?
- xoxSAUERKRAUTxox
Post Reply