Theater bans Gone With The Wind for being "Insensitive"

[Barnack]

11 minutes ago, straggler said:

We need to be careful with polls. The poll is a survey of 1014 adults. Of that a total of nine (9 out of 1014) expressed the view that it was acceptable to hold neo-nazi views. Of these only 3 said they believed this strongly. Further, the question is ambiguous. There is no attempt to clarify what is meant by "acceptable." They did not ask for example "notwithstanding the legal right to hold such views, do you approve of such views." Saying something is acceptable and having approval for it are not the same thing. The question should have been "do you personally approve of those views."  

Between 86 and 96 no ?, just nine would be 0.9%, not 9 percent, or I'm missing something here.

 

Fully agree about the misleading question.

 

It is true that there is only 3% that say strongly acceptable on a poll with a 3.5% margin of error and does not say it the person answering share the views at all can be misleading, but poll about stuff like that will always be misleading, many people would certainly lie about this on the phone.

Edited August 27, 2017 by Barnack

[James]

Just my opinion, but to me it is scary that nowadays I always have to be careful not to offend someone. Like, I am actively trying to say all the right things at all times, even though I know myself and I know I hold no prejudices towards anyone. And this is a classic ffs. It is a damn movie. Are we seriously going to judge it after almost 100 years and change our minds about it? I find it ridiculous. People and society in general are too sensitive. I know a lot of prejudice is out there, but alongside with fighting for what's right, people need to grow a thicker skin. 

[Water Bottle]

8 minutes ago, Barnack said:

In that era ?, not sure conscription worked that well.

 

The United States first employed national conscription during the American Civil War. The vast majority of troops were volunteers; of the 2,100,000 Union soldiers, about 2% were draftees, and another 6% were substitutes paid by draftees

 

http://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences-and-law/political-science-and-government/military-affairs-nonnaval/confederate-army

At the outset, the South had more volunteers than it could arm and equip, forcing the army to turn away some 200,000 volunteers that it would soon sorely miss. In June 1863, the army peaked at almost 475,000 men; it declined steadily thereafter. By comparison, some 2.3 million men served in the Union army, with more than 1 million in uniform in 1865. As martial enthusiasm waned in late 1861, the Confederate government was forced to resort to conscription for the first national draft in American history. On 16 April 1862, the Confederate Congress enacted the First Conscription Act, which declared all able‐bodied, unmarried white men between the ages of eighteen and thirty‐five liable for the draft. One‐year volunteers already in the army were enjoined to serve for two additional years but were allowed to return home on a sixty‐day furlough and to elect new field‐ and company‐grade officers. The Second Conscription Act of September 1862 and the Third Conscription Act, adopted seventeen months later, extended the ages of liability from seventeen to fifty, although exemptions greatly weakened the draft law. The stigma of conscription induced potential draftees to volunteer before they were called, so that only 82,000 were actually conscripted.

 

Sure but nonetheless the reasons a common soldier fought are never taken as the reason the war itself was fought.

[grey ghost]

46 minutes ago, AndyK said:

 

There are some calling for Christopher Columbus statues in NYC and Nelson Column in Trafalgar Square London to be pulled down.

 

Presumable people would want the statues in Rome pulled down as well.

 

Who needs ISIS when when we can do their work for them?

Hmm, I didn't realize ISIS simply moves statues and monuments to museums to give them the proper historical context.

 

Either that or someone is using hyperbole to make it seem unreasonable to remove statues and monuments that glorify people who fought to continue human atrocities.

[grey ghost]

4 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Between 86 and 96 no ?, just nine would be 0.9%, not 9 percent, or I'm missing something here.

 

Fully agree about the misleading question.

 

It is true that there is only 3% that say strongly acceptable on a poll with a 3.5% margin of error and does not say it the person answering share the views at all can be misleading, but poll about stuff like that will always be misleading, many people would certainly lie about this on the phone.

 

So you're saying people lied and said they were racist when they weren't?

 

Wouldn't it be much more likely for people to lie to hide their racism?  

 

 

 

 

[Kvikk Lunsj]

4 hours ago, Noctis said:

 

Religion and politics are incredibly interconnected, especially when it comes to Christianity and Islam (particularly the latter). The vast majority do these charities in order to try and convert people to their religion. Look at the societal destruction in many parts of Africa because of Christian and Muslim missionaries where they'd rather shove their religious books down their throats instead of properly giving them food, water, aid, and a proper education. 

 

 

I been on Christians mission trips and undergrad college was a Christian college.  We never brought up the Bible when we built a house for family, when help out a neighborhood in New Orleans or helped cleaned out a graveyard to in San Antonio area. My college hand out blankets during the cold winters in Iowa. We never said anything about God to people who need the blankets, i helped with a Holiday charity drive for one of my classes. Any family regardlessvof religion could go. We offered free meals to the families and holiday meal they bring home. In fact we did not have a Bible at the charity drive. I know that since I ordered all the thousands of books  

[Barnack]

9 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

 

So you're saying people lied and said they were racist when they weren't?

The other way around (not sure why you would think that I was saying that), pollster will try to give a little bonus to the unpopular answer, specially on a phone poll like that one), but it is hard to estimate.

Edited August 27, 2017 by Barnack

[grey ghost]

9 minutes ago, James said:

Just my opinion, but to me it is scary that nowadays I always have to be careful not to offend someone. Like, I am actively trying to say all the right things at all times, even though I know myself and I know I hold no prejudices towards anyone. And this is a classic ffs. It is a damn movie. Are we seriously going to judge it after almost 100 years and change our minds about it? I find it ridiculous. People and society in general are too sensitive. I know a lot of prejudice is out there, but alongside with fighting for what's right, people need to grow a thicker skin. 

 

If I tell a joke about gays, I have the constitutional right to do so.

 

But people have the right to criticize me or show disapproval.

 

And I'd rather live in a world where most people criticize me than be comfortable and satisfied with homophobia.

 

Maybe in your perfect world everyone applauds a nasty joke that mocks gays but if you think that world wouldn't be problematic for gays then you don't see the big picture.

 

If bigotry is less taboo it means discriminatory laws are less taboo, it means bigoted ideology is less taboo, it means persecuting those who are different is less taboo.

 

I don't know where this idea that if everyone can express the N-word freely it will help racial relations and society will be more tolerant and thoughtful. No, it's just a greenlight for racists to open the floodgates of prejudice and hatred.

 

Bigotry needs to be taboo. Why, because racist aren't going to stop at gay jokes or the N-word once their ideology is popularized.

[Valonqar]

1 hour ago, Amadeus said:

Its a masterpiece the world deserves, but not really what IT needs right now

Key word being the World. Nobody outside of America cares to ban it. Contrary to popular opinion in US, the country's race relations from history to present are of no big interest to non-US countries that have their own problems that don't concern Americans. Sure, you'll always find foreign  SJW (or whatever PC term for them is unoffensive right now) on social media cause that's a fad but the majority really doesn't care. 

[FantasticBeasts]

Things are really out of control lately. I feel like both sides have just gone too far. The right in America for me feels in majority more like far right nowadays, adopting some deeply conservative beliefs which is very alarming. What is even more alarming is that the left is doing a shameful job, having entirely lost their reliability. I understand that social issues are increasingly important but the way the left has approached the issue is absolutely terrible. The whole political correctness thing has just gone so far that it is laghauble. By finding offensiveness in everything you are just underming the issue yourself. 

A new approach is needed. By continuing this one you are just increasing the tension between both sides without having any result.

By calling people uneducated racists you are not helping in any way. You need to hear what they have to say and realize what is making them adopt such beliefs. And no, I am obviously not talking about something as extreme as neo nazis.

 

[James]

25 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

 

If I tell a joke about gays, I have the constitutional right to do so.

 

But people have the right to criticize me or show disapproval.

 

And I'd rather live in a world where most people criticize me than be comfortable and satisfied with homophobia.

 

Maybe in your perfect world everyone applauds a nasty joke that mocks gays but if you think that world wouldn't be problematic for gays then you don't see the big picture.

 

If bigotry is less taboo it means discriminatory laws are less taboo, it means bigoted ideology is less taboo, it means persecuting those who are different is less taboo.

 

I don't know where this idea that if everyone can express the N-word freely it will help racial relations and society will be more tolerant and thoughtful. No, it's just a greenlight for racists to open the floodgates of prejudice and hatred.

 

Bigotry needs to be taboo. Why, because racist aren't going to stop at gay jokes or the N-word once their ideology is popularized.

Overreacting much? Where did I say anything about lgbtq people or poc particularly? It is just a general truth that there needs to be a balance between respecting your fellow man and having freedom of speech. In today's world anything can be interpreted in a negative way. What's next? Banning LOTR because it's too white? My point was: this is a movie. A movie made tens of years ago. Why the sudden interest in crucifying it? 

Edited August 27, 2017 by James

[James]

1 minute ago, FantasticBeasts said:

Things are really out of control lately. I feel like both sides have just gone too far. The right in America for me feels in majority more like far right nowadays, adopting some deeply conservative beliefs which is very alarming. What is even more alarming is that the left is doing a shameful job, having entirely lost their reliability. I understand that social issues are increasingly important but the way the left has approached the issue is absolutely terrible. The whole political correctness thing has just gone so far that it is laghauble. By finding offensiveness in everything you are just underming the issue yourself. 

A new approach is needed. By continuing this one you are just increasing the tension between both sides without having any result.

By calling people uneducated racists you are not helping in any way. You need to hear what they have to say and realize what is making them adopt such beliefs. And no, I am obviously not talking about something as extreme as neo nazis.

 

Thank you! You said it better than I could!

[Walt Disney]

4 hours ago, Chaz said:

I live in Louisiana and am a huge history buff. I don't give a shit if every Confederate statue gets taken down. 

 

The majority of the South fought to keep the federal government from telling them what to do. They had no stake in slavery because they were all poor white people. 

 

It was a war fought with many different ideologies. The narrative from the Left has always wanted to make it 100% about slavery, but the facts speak for themselves. 

 

Slavery is gone and the North won. Those are both great things. But you can't just wash over all of the causes.

You are 100% correct. I have a B.A. in history and I know that your facts are correct. I only wish that I could like your post twice.

[Water Bottle]

1 minute ago, Walt Disney said:

You are 100% correct. I have a B.A. in history and I know that your facts are correct. I only wish that I could like your post twice.

 

Except he isn't right unless you seriously want to argue that if you take out slavery, the Civil War would have happened anyways.

[Barnack]

4 minutes ago, Water Bottle said:

 

Except he isn't right unless you seriously want to argue that if you take out slavery, the Civil War would have happened anyways.

It would depend what the federal government would have asked them to do, that is a bit of a strange debate and I would imagine hard to really separate what was asked to do vs being asked to do it, seem impossible, the nature of what is asked will always taint the reaction about being asked to do something.

[Water Bottle]

@Cmasterclay

 

I think your taking things a bit far by the way. Gone with the Wind was very much a product of it's time, yes, but there is artistic value in that as well.

[Valonqar]

20 minutes ago, James said:

Overreacting much? Where did I say anything about lgbtq people or poc particularly? It is just a general truth that there needs to be a balance between respecting your fellow man and having freedom of speech. In today's world anything can be interpreted in a negative way. What's next? Banning LOTR because it's too white? My point was: this is a movie. A movie made tens of years ago. Why the sudden interest in crucifying it? 

You already have John Boyega trash LOTR for being too white. Nevermind that LOTR was based on Medieval Europe so everyone looking like and living like Medieval Europe add to authenticity and is understood without saying. Same like Wakanda doesn't need diverse residents but only Africans cause it's based on African countries and is in Africa.

 

He and Oyellowo were also trashing GoT for the same reason, uneducated criticism again, cause Westeros is a Europe-like continent set in times that also correspond with Medieval Europe. Essos is the continent that corresponds with Africa (especially Middle Eastern part) and its inhabitants are brown or black (Dothraki, Meereen, etc) but GRRM focused on Westeros characters so main ones are white and that's fitting because of what I've just said. Because of stupid fucks like these two I cheer every time GoT breaks viewing records.

 

I'm so happy that PJ got LOTR made before affirmative action craze otherwise the movies would have been ruined. It's bad enough that someone was tinkering with making Sam a girl back when LOTR was filming, but fandom outcry saved it from disaster. Nowdays, there would be a Twitter outcry if Sam wasn't a girl, and if any the Fellowship member wasn't PoC even though that wouldn't fit with the allegory to Medieval England and WW2 that Tolkien was going for. 

 

 

Edited August 27, 2017 by Valonqar

[Water Bottle]

5 minutes ago, Barnack said:

It would depend what the federal government would have asked them to do, that is a bit of a strange debate and I would imagine hard to really separate what was asked to do vs being asked to do it, seem impossible, the nature of what is asked will always taint the reaction about being asked to do something.

 

The Confederate government violated state rights more than the Union did. There is no issue before or after the Civil War as divisive as slavery. None, not even segregation and certainly not an issues today. There was a point where the US didn't want to accept a new state simply because it would have been a free or slave state and they didn't want to upset the balance between the two.

[Webslinger]

Its depiction of its setting hasn't aged well, for sure, but I'm willing to give it a pass for the fact that it's a well-meaning sweeping drama rather than a piece of objectively hateful propaganda. There are plenty of race-related items far worthier of outrage in America today.

[FantasticBeasts]

33 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

 

If I tell a joke about gays, I have the constitutional right to do so.

 

But people have the right to criticize me or show disapproval.

 

And I'd rather live in a world where most people criticize me than be comfortable and satisfied with homophobia.

 

Maybe in your perfect world everyone applauds a nasty joke that mocks gays but if you think that world wouldn't be problematic for gays then you don't see the big picture.

 

If bigotry is less taboo it means discriminatory laws are less taboo, it means bigoted ideology is less taboo, it means persecuting those who are different is less taboo.

 

I don't know where this idea that if everyone can express the N-word freely it will help racial relations and society will be more tolerant and thoughtful. No, it's just a greenlight for racists to open the floodgates of prejudice and hatred.

 

Bigotry needs to be taboo. Why, because racist aren't going to stop at gay jokes or the N-word once their ideology is popularized.

The problem is exaggeration.  

And the whole PC thing has gone too far a lot of times. People say a lot of things without thinking about them. I have said things that I am ashamed of. People should be judged by their actions and not their worlds. I have met leftists who are terribly undemocratic with their family and vice versa.

By labelling people as "racists" you are not helping. You need to approach them and talk with them.

What I do believe is that the PC thing has contibuted  in undermining issues such as racism/sexism and generally discrimination. It is a fact. You can see that it has failed miserably.

I have been an immigrant as a child and I have been discriminated a lot. I am talking only about myself sure, but I had bigger issues than people telling "jokes" about my country.