People attacking (or defending) film and television almost solely because a particular work has one or more female leads.
People attacking (or defending) film and television almost solely because a particular work has one or more person of color in it.
Two people in particular stand out for me here, for the same film (The Woman King). One’s (positive) review felt the need to include the line, “yes, it’s woman led but there a number of other side characters with interesting plots to follow…” Another’s (negative) review claimed that films like this shouldn’t exist to make white people feel bad because, “separate but equal used to be the natural (implied better) state of the world”.
On that note, I think the following review (neutral (I think?), from the same movie) perfectly sums up the state of the internet in the so-called “Age of Information”: “I’m by no means a historian, and have no knowledge of the history detailed in the film, but this film is presenting revisionist history of whatever may have actually happened.” Um, wut?
Oh, for sure! And it’s somehow nothing compared to the guy I got into a Twitter war with a few weeks ago. In an argument that had nothing at all to do with it, he just casually defends the three fifths compromise and, by implication, slavery and uses them completely unironically to defend his point like it was 1822 not 2022. I stopped engaging with him after that.
However, I was more trying to highlight how, at best, too many audience reviews nowadays have little to do with the work at hand and, at worst, are racist and/or sexist even in defense. The latter review is more overtly ugly but the former shouldn’t have felt the need to defend the existence of women. I might not have been clear enough in my OP so, I apologize and hope this clears that up a little.
I was referring to the one mentioned in the thread. I thought they were comparing a supposed sketchy past to Nazism.
I can’t mention examples, but historically this has happened to be used as a pejorative rather than to those who legitimately align to fascist ideologies. It is akin to playing the Nazi card; Hitler practised a vegan diet, therefore veganism = Nazi. But this isn’t a fair comparison because it undermines such arguments that could be refuted into something that’s already resented. You should be able to construct what you want to say without demeaning it down to calling someone a Nazi.
Fascism is an extremely documented history background that every kid learns in school. My point being is that it is irrelevant to say “this guy hates Nazism” while in the same breath say “I don’t like what this guy said”.
i don’t think reductio ad hit-whatever is quite the same as calling out someone with (perhaps ignorant) rhetoric that aligns with fascistic ideology.
now, i agree that folk do erroneously use the term ‘nazi’, which is a specific kind of fascism. that’s the point when most others chuck in their “ahhh but”. however, i think it’s generally accepted that ‘nazi’ at this point is shorthand for fascism, which comes in many various and wonderfully vile forms that don’t necessarily fit with the third reich playbook. forgive the double negative but that something doesn’t 1:1 match nazi germany does not mean something isn’t fascistic. plus, not all such comparisons are invalid.
on a side note, i take umbrage with that wiki article.
the trump section, for instance, references legitimate sources calling him out as fascist. it then gives counter examples as de facto refutations when none of them stand the slightest scrutiny: “lacking a coherent ideology” , when fascism is deliberately incoherent; “not supporting a dictatorship or political violence”, when january 6th happened; “and his rejection of interventionist foreign policy”, which simply isn’t true. i’m not going to go too deep on this, but at the very least he increased drone strikes in somalia, and bolstered us presence in saudi arabia and the persian gulf. plus, military force isn’t the only way to intervene in other country’s affairs.
it makes me question the framing of the rest of the sections.
exactly. what makes it an issue is it pretty much dulls its meaning to the point we don’t even know what it means anymore. i hate when any party jumps to it cause it throws away so many issues we can actually talk about but it all gets treated as “Communist” or “Fascist”. yes these kinds of people exist to this day. but the word at this point has become nothing but a sensationalist ad hominem buzz word. and when such a thing is said there is no reason given proving the claim to have no weight. simply cause someone is a weirdo who puts roses on a pack of meat doesn’t mean they’re the second coming of Hitler. they’re just a trend chaser. which is what most politics have become nowadays. constantly dying fads to distract us from actual real problems while more dangerous figureheads screw the common man over. like for example what the Dutch government is doing to farmers. that is the biggest example of tyranny that’s being swept under the rug.
let’s say person a accused person b of being a fascist or a nazi but then explained why they made the accusation, perhaps in a coherent and sensible way. am i then right in thinking you wouldn’t have an issue?
if that’s the case (and i appreciate i may have got it completely wrong), then it seems like you have more of a problem with people not backing up their claims than the claim itself.
exactly. the issues i have more has to do with hearsay than actual claims. including within a political climate nowadays people have ways of making up rumors or dismantling arguments for personal reasons that have nothing to do with being against fascism but everything to do with people not liking someone’s position or opinion. it has been the concern everyone has had for a long time that any side trying to silence speech through means of lies or painting the person as a grand evil with no backing reason does not have the best intentions. it’s why people give Twitter and Facebook much shit cause a lot of what they do to some peoples accounts are vague, invasive, or sometimes is just a concern people have. and with the fact they work in tandem with politicians with strongly questionable motives should worry people. no party or side is exempt from criticism in my opinion.
personally with what smoking companies get away with so much horrible shit. they shouldn’t be a protected industry. it ain’t a Nazi thing to want to ban smoking companies cause they take advantage of people at their worst moments like they did my dad. (thank god he stopped smoking when i was a small tike. it gave him a reason to quit).
so in theory it should be relatively easy to parse between nazi being used as an empty pejorative and those that are genuine calls. like with anything, you listen to the reasons for the claim rather than the claim itself, if that makes sense?
have you got any specific examples we can look at?
sure, social media is an insane fuck-pit, that’s nothing new. again, i could be completely wrong about this, but have their been a glut of cases where someone was spuriously called a nazi and it has affected their lives in a significant and negative way?
what are you referring to specifically?
i agree. i think anyone worth listening to would too.
absolutely. it is obvious for example Varg had Nazi leanings. what matters in my opinion is the evidence and the things like the person’s ideals that would give me reason if they were a Nazi. overall i mention this cause i feel at times the word Nazi is used dangerously in a pejorative way. and with growing political tensions and how people are easy to turn violent nowadays it becomes a poking of the bear that leaves a lot of shit destroyed or worse.
yeah. if i remember there was a meme in the funny pictures thread that pretty much said exactly my thoughts of the establishment politicians with some on the right not seeking to see other possibilities and a democratic party that hides its uncaring nature under hashtags and fake niceness and hit all the check boxes of diversity just so they can’t keep fooling voters over and over again for that fake kind of plastic and shallow freedom. it was @unfunnyguy who posted and i cannot say enough how accurate it really is.
