Wokeism of the day *Revised Mod Note in OP and threadbanned users*

Quantum Erasure

Geuze wrote: »

Has this been posted here already?

Gardening/horticulture is racist.

https://twitter.com/erinnthered/status/1337808959151906816

biko

The fascination with the Soviet Union amongst idiots is truly perplexing

_Whimsical_

Heard a new one on the radio today, recently coined by The Guardian.

"Gayface" is when a straight actor plays a flamboyant gay character and is the LGBT equivalent to an act of Blackface.

I thought the purpose and sign of a good actor was that they were able to portray roles which they, themselves, weren't naturally/biologically/whatever.

Like Daniel Day-Lewis, in My Left Foot. Amazing movie, and incredible acting. But with the way things are going, we won't be "allowed" to have actors stretch themselves beyond certain accepted norms.

Makes me sad. Some people really badly want to limit human expression, and innovation.

Sonic the Shaghog

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

Heard a new one on the radio today, recently coined by The Guardian.

"Gayface" is when a straight actor plays a flamboyant gay character and is the LGBT equivalent to an act of Blackface.

Remember when the straight actor that played Elton John caught flack for not giving it to a gay actor?

I remember good old Elton's response to the wokes viewpoint "it's all bull****" :pac:

Dyr

IAMAMORON wrote: »

You are not responsible for anyone, apart from your own kids.

But you are responsible for your opinion on other people. You need to own that at least.

People or humans? Both terms are so general that they're just a collection of individuals, not sure you can have an opinion on that. You'd need to be more specific but that won't suit your argument.

Wibbs

I can see good logic being applied where Black characters should be played by Black actors, same for Asian, European characters. Black and Yellowface is well dodgy and happened way too much in Hollywood and beyond(OK Eddie Murphy and the Wayan brothers did Whiteface, but I think we can give them that after the decades of it going the other way and Eddie's were bloody well observed and funny). Then again a part of me would be concerned at making things too rigid even there, because it could limit expression. I dunno imagine a director wanted to do a different angle on Shakespeare's Othello and made Othello White, but with all the rest of the cast Black and see how that shifted things around, but being too hard and fast on the "rules" would stop that. OK crap example but you know what I mean?

Plus you could get too anal about it as social media eejits and hacks looking for clickbait almost certainly would. IE Only an Italian actor could play an Italian and so on.

IAMAMORON

Bambi wrote: »

People or humans? Both terms are so general that they're just a collection of individuals, not sure you can have an opinion on that. You'd need to be more specific but that won't suit your argument.

I thought I put things fairly succinctly to be honest.

You have no control over other people ( or humans now you are being specific ), but you do have control over your perception of them and attitude towards them.

the purple tin

Geuze wrote: »

Has this been posted here already?

Gardening/horticulture is racist.

https://twitter.com/Botanygeek/status/1337692740268777473

First the countryside is racist, now gardening
Stone the crows. What next?

The seaside is racist!
The sky is racist!
The moon is racist!

Wibbs

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

https://twitter.com/erinnthered/status/1337808959151906816

Good jaysus. :eek: Just read that. If that's not a parody account and it seems it's not we have a thread winner today.

Absolutely U.K. gardening culture has racism baked into its DNA.

It’s so integral that when you point out it’s existence, people assume you are against gardening, not racism.

Epitomised, for example, by the fetishisation (and wild misuse) of words like ‘heritage’ and ‘native’.

ExMachina1000

the purple tin wrote: »

First the countryside is racist, now gardening
Stone the crows. What next?

The seaside is racist!
The sky is racist!
The moon is racist!

Theres used to be an telecom eireann phone box down the road from me that was known to be racist. Thankfully it's long gone

EmmetSpiceland

Wibbs wrote: »

Epitomised, for example, by the fetishisation (and wild misuse) of words like ‘heritage’ and ‘native’.[/I]

They forgot ‘invasive’.

the purple tin

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Theres used to be an telecom eireann phone box down the road from me that was known to be racist. Thankfully it's long gone

I was only messing but come to think of it the Wokeys will probably be gunning for the Man In The Moon next :eek:

EmmetSpiceland

the purple tin wrote: »

I was only messing but come to think of it the Wokeys will probably be gunning for the Man In The Moon next :eek:

The Jim Carey film?

the purple tin

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

The Jim Carey film?

The huge grinning patriarch in the night sky.

EmmetSpiceland

the purple tin wrote: »

The huge grinning patriarch in the night sky.

Who, god?

storker

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Theres used to be an telecom eireann phone box down the road from me that was known to be racist. Thankfully it's long gone

Someone must have called it out.

(Sorry)

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

The one that always gets me is those feminists who are self identifying fashionistas. An industry that regularly pimps insecurity to women and is anything but diverse in its portrayal of women in general. The same feminists are usually anti porn and there's good reasons why they would be, but the same genre aimed mostly at the "male gaze" shows more diversity of size, shape, colour and age in a week than any fashion outlet has in decades.

The whole thing with OnlyFans and porn-isation of so many young ones is depressing.
I think the most helpful way to view it to understand the nonsensical and befuddled "feminist" response to it lies in the idea of "shame". Because no-one should shame anyone, especially a woman, for making a choice. So how can you say that there's anything in any way wrong (or just not good) about 18 year olds making a coupla bucks for flashing their tits to the world? You can't. You can kind of criticise the consumers but it makes basically no sense.

whysobecause

biko wrote: »

The fascination with the Soviet Union amongst idiots is truly perplexing

Doesn't this guy realize, that back in the days of the USSR, he would be sent to a Gulag, for looking the way he does.

Wibbs

I think they're being "ironic". Though the swastika doesn't get a look in. Equal rights for totalitarian symbols!!

Biker79

biko wrote: »

The fascination with the Soviet Union amongst idiots is truly perplexing

Because unless you make an effort to learn about it, most will never know the true horrors of the soviet system ( or the CCP in China for that matter )

Should be required reading for aspiring commies:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/70561.The_Gulag_Archipelago_1918_1956

Sonic the Shaghog

Wibbs wrote: »

I think they're being "ironic". Though the swastika doesn't get a look in. Equal rights for totalitarian symbols!!

Unfortunately I don't think that's the case for a lot of them. Just plain oul stupidity covers most

Biker79

Biker79 wrote: »

Because unless you make an effort to learn about it, most will never know the true horrors of the soviet system ( or the CCP in China for that matter )

Should be required reading for aspiring commies:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/70561.The_Gulag_Archipelago_1918_1956

Most people don't care. Problems for other people, far far away. Now, anything that obstructs their need to posture and preen? Major news.

Dr. Bre

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/dec/13/bha-to-review-procedures-horse-runs-with-racial-slur-as-name-wolverhampton

sbsquarepants

Snickers Man wrote: »

But assuming it isn't, the question it ponders: "Are you transphobic if you refuse to date a woman just because she has a penis?" is one for the ages.

Hmmm, one to ponder for sure:D:D

Salvation Tambourine

Dr. Bre wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/dec/13/bha-to-review-procedures-horse-runs-with-racial-slur-as-name-wolverhampton

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdvVpijAsiE&ab_channel=ReeveFFXI

The horse itself might have been racist, it can happen.

EmmetSpiceland

Snickers Man wrote: »

But assuming it isn't, the question it ponders: "Are you transphobic if you refuse to date a woman just because she has a penis?" is one for the ages.

An interesting “conundrum”, alright. Would all come down to attraction, really.

Raises another question on whether you’d think it was gay to have sex with a fully transitioned male to female, with a brand new gash, breasts and face or if you were to bum a fully transitioned female to male who’s got new “junk”, balls and all, and a beard?

Which do you think you’d pick? Gun to your head like? And which would you “consider” to be gay?

Wibbs

The only willie I like is my own and I'm even in two minds about that. So if you have or have had meat and two veg, then nope. I'm quite sure a Gay woman wouldn't be too happy either if out popped a langer in the course of events, or a Gay man was faced with a ladygarden.

EmmetSpiceland

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

An interesting “conundrum”, alright. Would all come down to attraction, really.

Raises another question on whether you’d think it was gay to have sex with a fully transitioned male to female, with a brand new gash, breasts and face or if you were to bum a fully transitioned female to male who’s got new “junk”, balls and all, and a beard?

Which do you think you’d pick? Gun to your head like? And which would you “consider” to be gay?

If I had to, and the choice is be transphobic or homophobic, ill go with the one where there's funbags and no penis

EmmetSpiceland

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

An interesting “conundrum”, alright. Would all come down to attraction, really.

Raises another question on whether you’d think it was gay to have sex with a fully transitioned male to female, with a brand new gash, breasts and face or if you were to bum a fully transitioned female to male who’s got new “junk”, balls and all, and a beard?

Which do you think you’d pick? Gun to your head like? And which would you “consider” to be gay?

Either scenario doesn't bother me. It's more about personality, and behavior than the physical.