unbillievable Posted June 17, 2017 Posted June 17, 2017 CIS-PRIVILEGED TRANSPHOBIC BIGOTS! Women-only ‘full nudity’ spa’s ‘no male genitals’ rule ignites transgender debate. Look, penises are only “male genitals” if they’re attached to someone who identifies as male. If they’re attached to someone who identifies as female, they’re female genitals. I hope these bigots get put out of business. Next they’ll want to keep women with penises out of the women’s bathroom. Bigoted women who want to be naked but not be with people with penises should just keep their clothes on and stew in their own bigotry at home. “I don’t think a man is going to try and sneak in as a woman and pay $75 to go sit (in a pool). For what purpose?” The above quote from a gender studies professor proves that feminists live in their own bubble. Has she never even talked to a man?
Deranged Rhino Posted June 17, 2017 Posted June 17, 2017 I may be missing something here, but to "Godwin" something is to invoke Hitler. This guy and his stage-invading accomplice seem to be drawing a parallel between the production's choice to represent Caesar as Trump and something typical of the Goebbels propaganda machine. If that's the case, then I have to agree with the protestors. I should have clarified: I don't mind the protest (but considering what I do for a living, I side with the right to stage the play even if it's in terrible taste - which I believe it is 100%). I thought the statement she was making on the stage was powerful enough without the reporter filming wrapping it up by calling everyone Nazis. It just made me laugh and reminded me of the conversations that have been going on in a few threads here, specifically ones with Tom pointing out once you equate someone to a Nazi there's no limit to the amount of force one will use to remove them.... Which when applied to this incident, undercuts the anti-political violence the pair were trying to make with their protest. The whole thing was goofy to me.
DC Tom Posted June 17, 2017 Posted June 17, 2017 First off, the majority of Americans pry see the assassination of Trump on stage as an outrage and immediately condemns it as in poor taste. However, if you dig a little deeper Julius Caesar was a "populist" who was a military genius who earned the love of the people which led him to power (where he was an authoritarian figure) that ultimately got him killed by the rich establishment elites (the Senate). The unexpected result of them assassinating Caesar was Mark Antony lead the people of Rome to revolt and most of the Senators were killed as the lower and middle class started a Civil War. Long story short, the main take away I've always gotten out of this play is violence is not the answer when a hero of the common people comes along to threaten an oligarchy. I think I heard somewhere they did the same play with Obama being depicted as being "Julius Caesar" when he was president so perhaps this is an over reaction by a lot of people. I find it a very thought provoking play and these two protesters are idiots. They did, in fact, run the same play with a black actor as "Caesar" when Obama was president. Their point isn't a partisan statement against Trump, it's a non-partisan statement against authoritarianism, and an effort (ill-advised, I think) to ground the play in modern times and get the audience to think about the nature of power currently, rather than in a historical context. This is nothing more than Trump supporters trying to out-snowflake snowflakes. I should have clarified: I don't mind the protest (but considering what I do for a living, I side with the right to stage the play even if it's in terrible taste - which I believe it is 100%). I thought the statement she was making on the stage was powerful enough without the reporter filming wrapping it up by calling everyone Nazis. It just made me laugh and reminded me of the conversations that have been going on in a few threads here, specifically ones with Tom pointing out once you equate someone to a Nazi there's no limit to the amount of force one is permitted to use to remove them.... Fixed. Important difference.
Azalin Posted June 17, 2017 Posted June 17, 2017 I should have clarified: I don't mind the protest (but considering what I do for a living, I side with the right to stage the play even if it's in terrible taste - which I believe it is 100%). I thought the statement she was making on the stage was powerful enough without the reporter filming wrapping it up by calling everyone Nazis. It just made me laugh and reminded me of the conversations that have been going on in a few threads here, specifically ones with Tom pointing out once you equate someone to a Nazi there's no limit to the amount of force one will use to remove them.... Which when applied to this incident, undercuts the anti-political violence the pair were trying to make with their protest. The whole thing was goofy to me. Oh, it was goofy alright. Everyone involved was going out of their way to act like buffoons.
Deranged Rhino Posted June 18, 2017 Posted June 18, 2017 Fixed. Important difference. Indeed. Apologies.
Doc Brown Posted June 18, 2017 Posted June 18, 2017 You can pretend that there was no intent behind making the Caesar character look like Trump, but if you do, you should probably refrain from calling others "idiots". Freedom of expression isn't about accepting other peoples' actions without taking offense, it's about being free to express yourself without government reproach. Anybody that storms the stage and screams at an audience are idiots.
Azalin Posted June 18, 2017 Posted June 18, 2017 Anybody that storms the stage and screams at an audience are idiots. As are those who pretend that Caesar = Trump.
DC Tom Posted June 18, 2017 Posted June 18, 2017 As are those who pretend that Caesar = Trump. Again...they've been doing this show for a while; last year they substituted Obama for Caesar.
Chef Jim Posted June 18, 2017 Posted June 18, 2017 Again...they've been doing this show for a while; last year they substituted Obama for Caesar. I'm so tired of not hearing the rest of the story.
Doc Brown Posted June 18, 2017 Posted June 18, 2017 (edited) As are those who pretend that Caesar = Trump. I'll take Caesar over Trump with our great constitution provides us with a system of checks and balances makes it impossible for any president to hold enough power to become a dictator. Again...they've been doing this show for a while; last year they substituted Obama for Caesar. The reason the play is causing more outrage with Trump as president instead of Obama is Trump's been under the worst attack by the media since GW's final years (maybe worse). Also, Kathy Griffin just held up a fake decapitated head of Trump and you have the hyperbole of the dumb people on the left comparing Trump to Hitler. Plus, the obsession with getting him impeached by screaming Russia will backfire on the Dems and will pry cost them any chance to take the House in '18. My main problem was the two people that interrupted the play are two alt right attention whores. I'm sure Fox News will gladly have the girl who rushed the stage on their show this week and it will probably be Hannity or that annoying female judge. Protest peacefully outside the play if it means that much to you. They're no better than the protesters who interrupt Trump's rallies. Edited June 18, 2017 by Doc Brown
Nanker Posted June 18, 2017 Posted June 18, 2017 I'll take Caesar over Trump with our great constitution provides us with a system of checks and balances makes it impossible for any president to hold enough power to become a dictator. The reason the play is causing more outrage with Trump as president instead of Obama is Trump's been under the worst attack by the media since GW's final years (maybe worse). Also, Kathy Griffin just held up a fake decapitated head of Trump and you have the hyperbole of the dumb people on the left comparing Trump to Hitler. Plus, the obsession with getting him impeached by screaming Russia will backfire on the Dems and will pry cost them any chance to take the House in '18. My main problem was the two people that interrupted the play are two alt right attention whores. I'm sure Fox News will gladly have the girl who rushed the stage on their show this week and it will probably be Hannity or that annoying female judge. Protest peacefully outside the play if it means that much to you. They're no better than the protesters who interrupt Trump's rallies. That's just it. There are two alt right attention whores who have the guts, low IQ, lack of common decency who acted up. The Left is awash with people like that. There are 1,000 incidents of them being abject a-holes to a smattering handful of those that behave like jerks on the right.
boyst Posted June 19, 2017 Posted June 19, 2017 I'm so tired of not hearing the rest of the story. get paul harvey. i miss him.
unbillievable Posted June 19, 2017 Posted June 19, 2017 That's just it. There are two alt right attention whores who have the guts, low IQ, lack of common decency who acted up. The Left is awash with people like that. There are 1,000 incidents of them being abject a-holes to a smattering handful of those that behave like jerks on the right. The leftist media search the fringes of society to find the rare few who everyone will deem absolute idiots, as their example of the alt-right. Meanwhile, conservatives merely point to the LEADERS of the liberal left to cite their examples. We're trying to compare celebrities, and college professors with thousands of followers, to white supremacists who's last rally drew exactly 1 person.
B-Man Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 It’s only a “ban” until it becomes inconvenient.... California “bans” state travel to even more states over LGBT issues Ah, California. Is there nothing you can’t make more ideological with every passing week? In the Golden State’s latest effort to prove that they’re really not interested in being part of the rest of the nation, California’s state government – which viciously opposes President Trump’s travel ban – has expanded their own travel ban. Of course, it only applies to state funded travel, and rather than restricting traffic with terrorist hot spots, it blocks airline tickets to states which it deems insufficiently “woke.” In this case, that would be Texas, Alabama, Kentucky and South Dakota. California didn’t invent this idea, though they’re clearly working on being a leader in the travel ban field. New York enacted a ban on “non-essential” state funded travel to North Carolina in 2015 in response to their so-called bathroom bill. Of course, we later learned that was mostly a stunt, and any travel, be it for SUNY school purposes, “fact finding” trips or most anything else was quickly deemed to be “essential” and little actually changed. Hey, here’s an idea. How about if everyone gets in on this game? Maybe all of the states with a more sensible approach to immigration and law enforcement can ban state funded travel to all of the states that have sanctuary cities in them. States with no state income tax can ban travel to those which levy such taxes because of their anti-freedom agenda. And why stop there? Hell, let’s just have all of the states that voted for Trump ban travel to states that voted for Hillary and vice versa. Wouldn’t that be great? No.. that would be stupid. The states have various reasons to do business with each other which sometimes require travel. (Though in the era of internet technology and video conferencing, voters in all states would be justified in asking why people are still taking so many trips in person and running up all those bills.) We have different states which each make their own rules because that’s how the founders planned it. They even insisted that the states respect each other’s individual choices, giving us a good hint in that direction by including the Full Faith and Credit Clause. We were never intended to be uniform nor to start these pissing contests over differences between state laws. If any of those laws are unconstitutional they will be struck down in due order through the normal process. If they hold up under challenge then the states are doing as they wish within the limits of the law and it’s not California’s job to reprimand them. Of course, there’s a quicker solution available which could probably satisfy everyone. Calexit anyone?
/dev/null Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 It’s only a “ban” until it becomes inconvenient.... California “bans” state travel to even more states over LGBT issues Ah, California. Is there nothing you can’t make more ideological with every passing week? In the Golden State’s latest effort to prove that they’re really not interested in being part of the rest of the nation, California’s state government – which viciously opposes President Trump’s travel ban – has expanded their own travel ban. Of course, it only applies to state funded travel, and rather than restricting traffic with terrorist hot spots, it blocks airline tickets to states which it deems insufficiently “woke.” In this case, that would be Texas, Alabama, Kentucky and South Dakota. How long until the People's Republic of California bans citizens and businesses from relocating to an insufficiently 'woke' state?
bbb Posted June 25, 2017 Posted June 25, 2017 I'm so tired of not hearing the rest of the story. Exactly. And, I know there's always a rest of the story. I always find it when I have the time to look into it...........Which usually I don't.
B-Man Posted June 29, 2017 Posted June 29, 2017 SYMBOLIC OF THE LEFT’S STRUGGLE AGAINST REALITY: New Christopher Nolan WWII Movie ‘Dunkirk’ Portrays White People as White, Runs Afoul of Diversity Police. It used to be that high-profile Hollywood World War II movies got called out for taking liberties with the facts. These days, they’re getting in trouble for being too historically accurate. Take The Dark Knight director Christopher Nolan’s new movie Dunkirk, which recreates the defense and evacuation of British and Allied forces from Northern France in May-June 1940 during the early stages of the World War II. The blockbuster stars Jack Lowden, Mark Rylance, Tom Hardy and, er, Harry Styles. It is set to be released July 21. Plenty of people have taken to social media to express why they won’t be seeing it, and it’s all to do with the movie being “too white.” (Not sure if they’re aware, but the vast majority of British and Allied forces were white.)
Azalin Posted June 29, 2017 Posted June 29, 2017 SYMBOLIC OF THE LEFT’S STRUGGLE AGAINST REALITY: New Christopher Nolan WWII Movie ‘Dunkirk’ Portrays White People as White, Runs Afoul of Diversity Police. It used to be that high-profile Hollywood World War II movies got called out for taking liberties with the facts. These days, they’re getting in trouble for being too historically accurate. Take The Dark Knight director Christopher Nolan’s new movie Dunkirk, which recreates the defense and evacuation of British and Allied forces from Northern France in May-June 1940 during the early stages of the World War II. The blockbuster stars Jack Lowden, Mark Rylance, Tom Hardy and, er, Harry Styles. It is set to be released July 21. Plenty of people have taken to social media to express why they won’t be seeing it, and it’s all to do with the movie being “too white.” (Not sure if they’re aware, but the vast majority of British and Allied forces were white.) This might have surprised me five years ago, Now I see something like this and entertain myself by reading all the hysterical comments. I'm so glad that I'll be dead and gone by the time these sanctimonious, idiotic children are in charge.
Recommended Posts