Comrade Sophia
Well-known member
I thought you wanted to have a discussion on the science? Why is your first move to appeal to a colloquial dictionary instead of a sociological dictionary?
"Woke" Franchises
- Thread starter Seth Vatamaris
- Start date
Terthna
Professional Lurker
And I though you were going to prove your assertions. You're the one who asked me to define female; that is how I define it. In a strictly biological sense.
Navarro
Well-known member
Meanwhile, actual scientists have discovered that newborn infants - pre-verbal and not yet socialised - play with gender-stereotypical toys. The same effect extends to the higher primates. When were they "socially constructed"?
Terthna
Professional Lurker
About the same time they started interacting with their peers on a meaningful level. There's actually a lot of toys that are gender neutral, or have crossover appeal; but "social construction" happens every time your peers makes fun of you for not playing with the same toys they're playing with.
Navarro
Well-known member
This is newborn, pre-verbal infants and nonhuman mammals.
Terthna
Professional Lurker
Well yes, but you asked when people are "socially constructed"; which usually starts long after that early stage of growth. It's even possible for toys that an infant gravitates towards during infancy, to become distasteful during childhood; depending of course on the expressed opinions of their peer group and authority figures.
Navarro
Well-known member
The point is that unsocialised pre-verbal infants display gender-based disparities which our dear friend here claims are the result of social constructs.
Terthna
Professional Lurker
I don't think they've specifically asserted that claim; but if they do believe such, I agree that it's complete nonsense. Biological genders do have innate disparity between them; it's just that social constructs also have a great deal of influence later in life. Back in my day though, everything was about rejecting those social constructs, and letting people be themselves; instead of forcing them to adhere to some sort of label. Unfortunately, it seems that the modern left has abandoned that path in favor of simply creating more labels, in the form of a "spectrum" of gender identities.
It's funny, because shit like this shows how people like you are every bit as much science deniers as people who deny evolution and flat-Earthers.
On the subject of the franchises being referenced, never watched old She-Ra, as a child my quotient of "girly" shows was taken up by a tape of Rainbow Brite episodes, IIRC. Then came Disney Afternoon and Ninja Turtles, then Batman and the X-Men and Gargoyles, and my fate was sealed into SF devotion.
As for new She-Ra, I find it fun, and I greatly enjoy the magitech, SF elements, and the B5ish "First Ones" elements. Also, I like Entrapta, she's just adorably geeky and has an insatiable curiosity I find endearing. Just give her a robot helper that can impart some safety standards into her projects and she's golden.
However one wants to define "wokeness", I think the critical thing is that a franchise doesn't have a concept pushed into it without making it feel organic to the themes and world as presented. Otherwise it doesn't feel right to the viewer/reader. They can feel that it's something pushed into the work instead of a natural addition to it.
Some franchises will be more flexible than others in that regard, but with some good creative thinking, even the less flexible ones can see something new added into them.
As for new She-Ra, I find it fun, and I greatly enjoy the magitech, SF elements, and the B5ish "First Ones" elements. Also, I like Entrapta, she's just adorably geeky and has an insatiable curiosity I find endearing. Just give her a robot helper that can impart some safety standards into her projects and she's golden.
However one wants to define "wokeness", I think the critical thing is that a franchise doesn't have a concept pushed into it without making it feel organic to the themes and world as presented. Otherwise it doesn't feel right to the viewer/reader. They can feel that it's something pushed into the work instead of a natural addition to it.
Some franchises will be more flexible than others in that regard, but with some good creative thinking, even the less flexible ones can see something new added into them.
What about women who have lost the ability to have children? Or seahorses?
ShieldWife
Marchioness
Pink for girls and blue for boys is a social construct. Who has ovaries and who has testicles is not. Who gets pregnant and who can impregnate are not.
How much weight people can bench press is a bimodal distribution, with two modes at the male and female averages. There are likely many other abilities that can be represented this way, but biological sex cannot. I don’t buy into the “gender” vs “sex” jargon, I don’t believe in letting my ideological foes define the language we use. You don’t play a game where the opponent gets to make up the rules.
I also don’t believe in automatically accepting anything that comes out of the university sociology departments, any more than I would argue with a theist and automatically accept their holy book as absolute truth.
How much weight people can bench press is a bimodal distribution, with two modes at the male and female averages. There are likely many other abilities that can be represented this way, but biological sex cannot. I don’t buy into the “gender” vs “sex” jargon, I don’t believe in letting my ideological foes define the language we use. You don’t play a game where the opponent gets to make up the rules.
I also don’t believe in automatically accepting anything that comes out of the university sociology departments, any more than I would argue with a theist and automatically accept their holy book as absolute truth.
CarlManvers2019
Writers Blocked Douchebag
It’s still taking quite awhile, I am pretty sure most of the entertainment industry will be FarLeft still, even past 2024
Expect every comic from the USA to have art like this for the next few years
Whoever drew this should be ashamed. Miss Marvel look like a female cosplayer of Jay from clerks than... well, Miss Marvel.It’s still taking quite awhile, I am pretty sure most of the entertainment industry will be FarLeft still, even past 2024
Expect every comic from the USA to have art like this for the next few years
Maybe it's the angle, but she doesn't even have a chest.
we are going through another dork age of comics, give it time and all of this shit will vanish and they will probally head in the other direction.
CarlManvers2019
Writers Blocked Douchebag
She hasn’t been Miss Marvel since 2012 and they were planning on having Brie Larson play her as far as back as then as I recall.....really creepy how much all those MCU Phases look detailed to occur
As I said before, the majority of entertainment creators look to lean left, they may have even before the 2010s if guys like Alan Moore and Mark Waid are any indication
Expect more Trump Derangement Syndrome to occur, some even having their own “impeachment” occur in-universe
Chaos Marine
Well-known member
Nah, I wouldn't consider it the Dork Age of Comics, I'd consider it the Rust Age of Comics.
what I don't get is why the director is bitching about it being mens fault.
Were not her audiance or target demographic, its an action movie for women and thats perfectly fine. If its failing then it could be because it was released at a bad time, or had bad marketing, or because maybe the movies not that great. We don't have an obligation to watch a movie that isn't targeted to us.
As for Terminator dark fate, the francise still hasn't recovered from the disaster that was part 3 and honestly they should have stopped at 2.
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
It's funny to read what Tim has to say about it.
‘Terminator’ Director Tim Miller Reflects on Box Office Trauma and James Cameron Fights: “I’m Processing”
'Dark Fate' director Tim Miller notes he is unlikely to work with James Cameron again — noting it's about wanting to be in control and "has nothing to do with whatever trauma I have from the experience."
www.hollywoodreporter.com
What a boomer. Proud of a movie that bombed.
And the creative differences. John Fucking Kennedy. Sometimes I can imagine a comedy show like South Park doing an episode where one of the characters go to Hollywood to personally ask why they're getting the story direction wrong instead of concluding it in a good way.
Instead it's just more and more time travel. How many times are they going to kill John Connor?
Argent
Well-known member
So here is an example of the newest woke movie flopping hard.
Charlie's Angels best known for being about a team of three sexy super spys has met feminism and truned into a multimillion dollar flop.
While the movies with Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz, and Lucy Liu were mainly fun popcorn action fics and the T.V. show is your standard 70's action show the franchise overall is has little staying power. It popped up with some remakes and is spoffed but has not has the staying power of Bond or other larger franchises.
Overall the acting is O.K. but nothing to write home about. The general villain plot is dumb science but about standard for most spy movies so I can give it a pass. There are some plot holes but not enough to kill a popcorn action film.
The new one has gone though some transformations. Frist the guy in the chair is no longer a guy but a random agent. We also get plenty of scenes of the Angel's doing the standard women power scenes and having random scenes about LGBT stuff.
Overall it lost charm and funny scene that made of the older movies fun rainy day movies. Instead it falls into the same category of Ghostbusters 2016. It has average acting, a meh plot with some plot holes. But the jokes fell felt and the preaching was obvious and painful to watch at times. So not the worst movie ever it falls into the worst category for a movie can; forgettable. Not good enough to rewatch or bad enough to be fun like Sharknado.
Charlie's Angels best known for being about a team of three sexy super spys has met feminism and truned into a multimillion dollar flop.
While the movies with Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz, and Lucy Liu were mainly fun popcorn action fics and the T.V. show is your standard 70's action show the franchise overall is has little staying power. It popped up with some remakes and is spoffed but has not has the staying power of Bond or other larger franchises.
Overall the acting is O.K. but nothing to write home about. The general villain plot is dumb science but about standard for most spy movies so I can give it a pass. There are some plot holes but not enough to kill a popcorn action film.
The new one has gone though some transformations. Frist the guy in the chair is no longer a guy but a random agent. We also get plenty of scenes of the Angel's doing the standard women power scenes and having random scenes about LGBT stuff.
Overall it lost charm and funny scene that made of the older movies fun rainy day movies. Instead it falls into the same category of Ghostbusters 2016. It has average acting, a meh plot with some plot holes. But the jokes fell felt and the preaching was obvious and painful to watch at times. So not the worst movie ever it falls into the worst category for a movie can; forgettable. Not good enough to rewatch or bad enough to be fun like Sharknado.
Last edited: