Support NeoGAF

[snap0212]

I have no opinion either way, but I won't support anyone who wants to exclude me for something that I have no influence over. That's fucked up.

Make everyone feel welcome and hope that you can bring people on your side. By excluding them from the start you make sure that they'll turn to people who are welcoming. And there are lots of people with fucked up views, but those groups have one thing in common: they're all very welcoming. It's the reason why they're so successful.

 

[Deepwater]

There is no equality in nature, that is definitely true.

The fact is the only way we can progress, in a society, is if there is equality before the law.

That means on public land, in public venues, nobody should be able to exclude someone else based on their race.

#SkullAvi is basically the #DogAvi of GAF

 

[Nepenthe]

So the solution would be more inequality for everyone and we are all happy? Or because somebody else was like this, I reserve now the right to be like this myself?

Me wanting to meet with my black friends to lament how fucking dumb white superiority is not the same as suggesting that the solution to inequality is inequality.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Did Kid Kamikaze10 hire you to reply to me on his behalf? The lines between what is and isn't sarcasm is extremely blurred on NeoGaf.

Nah I'm getting Soros bucks for that... the line isn't so blurred as to ignore literal sarcastic rhetorical devices that were used in that post...


Yes it's totally *insert dumb accusation/argument here* an not *insert real issue here*, you got it.<--- second sarcastic rhetorical device: the false congratulations for someone blatantly missing the point.

 

[azyless]

I don't know why everybody's arguing about safe spaces when safe spaces do exist and they don't have much to do with this case.

 

[royalan]

I think two different things are being argued in this thread, and we're getting confused in the cross-up.

There's the argument of the legality of holding an event in a public space that segregates. I think this one is pretty cut and dry.

Then there's the discussion over why a minority group might want to have such an event in the first place. I think this is where a lot of the posters in this thread are coming from.

Not every moment is a teachable moment for the majority. We're not your instructors. We're not your props. Sometimes, people really just want to commune.

 

[Hux1ey]

I'm only as childish as the person talking to me.

You got pissed at my first post in this thread lamenting the fact that it inevitably, like clockwork, devolved into a shitfest against black people who express intent to meet and discuss strategies for furthering our causes and vent about our frustrations with other black people regardless of whether it was done privately or not, even though the incident in question was an open-and-shut case apparently based on French law that people who get hate boners over this kind of thing from black people could've easily jacked off in peace to had they not seen fit to go down the road of accusing black people of being weak-minded and the real racists, and all because I mentioned white people by name. Your response to my post was this:



Such maturity deserved a response equally fitting, so I piggybacked off of Enzom's sentiment where he called you out for only knowing one black person- a saintly thing!- with a hot take of my own. You then responded that I'm not worth your time.

If you were as mature as you're suddenly implying, that right there should have been the end of this nonsense regardless of whether or not I responded. But clearly you can't stand by your own conviction that I'm not worth your time (of which you didn't clarify that it was only based on the insinuation that your posts are shit) when I noted that you were making shitposts like this earlier in the thread:




Now, you are right that you didn't start out quoting anyone. Congrats! You were right on a pedantic technicality that you didn't start out shitposting by quoting anyone with hot takes. So thus, I amend my argument that you, well, started out by shitposting. If you have a problem with that, well, don't shitpost, or at least don't expect people to take you seriously when you immediately devolved the decorum of the thread of your own accord. If you can't stand the heat and all that.

By the way, I won the bet. I want my dollar by tomorrow.

Bloody hell this is going on a bit isn't it lol.

The "Those damn white people" comment was mostly tongue and cheek. Maybe I shoulda have put an exclamation mark to make it more obvious. You came in this thread shitting over white people for having a problem with this racist segregation safe space.

Also how is pointing out that this is segregation a shit post? It by definition, is. Maybe we should just stop conversing, I don't think we're going to gel :-(

And I didn't agree to that bet, sorry. I only have quids anyway.

Your one black friend had dick all to do with the conversation other than "Look a black feels the same way I do. See I am right."

So have you complained about segregation in the past? Any issue with it before these horrible "blacks" did it?

Again, go back and read the full convo with Beefy and SirRattleBalls. It was not "Look a black feels the same way I do. See I am right." at all. You just can't be bothered to put things into context.

 

[Tovarisc]

I think two different things are being argued in this thread, and we're getting confused in the cross-up.

There's the argument of the legality of holding an event in a public space that segregates. I think this one is pretty cut and dry.

Then there's the discussion over why a minority group might want to have such an event in the first place. I think this is where a lot of the posters in this thread are coming from.

Not every moment is a teachable moment for the majority. We're not your instructors. We're not your props. Sometimes, people really just want to commune.

Bolded part, doesn't seem that cut and dry when one reads this thread.

 

[Quixzlizx]

I'm actually very surprised that the overall tone of this thread is taking the side of the mayor, while the overall tone of the women's-only Wonder Woman screening thread was taking the side of the theater.

Maybe it's just a matter of different posters participating in the two threads, but for those who are for the women's-only WW screening, but against the black women-only spaces for the festival, can you articulate what the underlying philosophical difference is between the two?

It could very well be that I'm overlooking something that makes the comparison between these events moot (or again, it could just be different posters participating in different threads, because GAF isn't a hivemind), but it seems like both events are operating on the same principal of wanting to celebrate a specific group of people (women in the WW case, black feminists in this case) while specifically prohibiting people who don't belong to said group from participating.

One is a private business not actually stopping men from watching the movie during different showings, and one is a political organization supported by government funds?

Edit: I personally am not outraged or think this is segregation or racism, but I do think they should've done this sort of event privately.

 

[Kid Kamikaze10]

Nah I'm getting Soros bucks for that... the line isn't so blurred as to ignore literal sarcastic rhetorical devices that were used in that post...


Yes it's totally *insert dumb accusation/argument here* an not *insert real issue here*, you got it.<--- second sarcastic rhetorical device: the false congratulations for someone blatantly missing the point.

Check's in the mail regardless.


OH DEAR ME, forgot to add a /s. Just in case...



Also, again, people are acting like we already got equality WELL before it has surfaced. That thinking is dripping all over this thread, and if you curb it just a little bit, you'd see why these segregation accusations are obtuse at best. Anachronistic.

 

[Captin Quacker]

What has that to do with anything?
We use other words with a lot of historical context as well and it does not change the meaning of the word.

Cuz it isn't about being fair

black people have never been on an even playing field with white people so why should we sweat white people who are only mad cuz they aren't invited

 

[Frozenprince]

The fact that this is inspiring such vitriol when the majority of countries, towns, public events and the like are de facto segregated instead of de jure segregated (which this isn't even, really) is part of the problem.

Like for real, what possible forward progress is gained by calling a bunch of black women who, in the western world, are inarguably the SINGLE most downtrodden and oppressed group and there's no argument otherwise, racist?

What inroads do you gain for racial equity and equality?

You don't. You just wanna shout how black folks are just as bad as everybody else and just as racist and all that nonsense because it makes you feel better and helps you ratify your own preconceived notions of absolutism in regards to race.

Because once black people demand something white people in majority white countries have de facto had for decades, suddenly it's an issue. Suddenly all avenues of nuance go straight out the window with the bathwater.

The fact that this inspires more anger, vitriol and malice than de facto segregation (black families predominantly live in lower income areas), de facto income inequality (black men and black women make less money on average than white men and women), and de facto legal inequality (black men and black women are incarcerated at higher rates), should tell you something about yourself. And warrant some introspective thought about the issue.

 

[Deepwater]

the real kicker here, is that people have convinced themselves that black women meeting with each other exclusively is less productive than black women meeting with everybody.

even if we move past the the legality of the situation, you can't, in good faith, make the argument that there is bigotry in minority groups having exclusive spaces.

 

[LostMyNarbles]

I think two different things are being argued in this thread, and we're getting confused in the cross-up.

There's the argument of the legality of holding an event in a public space that segregates. I think this one is pretty cut and dry.

Then there's the discussion over why a minority group might want to have such an event in the first place. I think this is where a lot of the posters in this thread are coming from.

Not every moment is a teachable moment for the majority. We're not your instructors. We're not your props. Sometimes, people really just want to commune.

It doesn't seem cut and dry at all. People look to be arguing that it is okay for them to want to hold an event like this in public regardless if it discrimates against others or not.

 

[Frozenprince]

I think two different things are being argued in this thread, and we're getting confused in the cross-up.

There's the argument of the legality of holding an event in a public space that segregates. I think this one is pretty cut and dry.

Then there's the discussion over why a minority group might want to have such an event in the first place. I think this is where a lot of the posters in this thread are coming from.

Not every moment is a teachable moment for the majority. We're not your instructors. We're not your props. Sometimes, people really just want to commune.

And, given how people LOVE to crash these kinds of things and concern troll which dilutes the whole thing and makes it more of a struggle and pain than anything else.

I absolutely get it. Everybody should. Sometimes, people just want a break from having to be a "role model" and "teach".

 

[Mesousa]

#SkullAvi is basically the #DogAvi of GAF

Or the fact its a skull for the Orlando Pirates....you know the South African Club that existed and survived in the face of racist segregation in South Africa.

If we don't know our history we are bound to repeat it. Segregation is absurd.

 

[excelsiorlef]

It doesn't seem cut and dry at all. People look to be arguing that it is okay for them to want to hold an event like this in public regardless if it discrimates against others or not.

This thread is 90% morality vs 10% legality.

 

[Frozenprince]

This thread is 90% morality vs 10% legality.

Funny how legality only pops up when it's meant to be used as a weapon against people of color.

 

[Enzom21]

Again, go back and read the full convo with Beefy and SirRattleBalls. It was not "Look a black feels the same way I do. See I am right." at all. You just can't be bothered to put things into context.

The "Those damn white people" nonsense and you ignoring the segregation question makes it pretty clearly why you this is such a big deal to you.
It is clear that this is the first time you have had issue with any type of segregation.

If black feminist held an event like this where you live and it was open to everyone, would you attend?

 

[excelsiorlef]

Or the fact its a skull for the Orlando Pirates....you know the South African Club that existed and survived in the face of racist segregation in South Africa.

If we don't know our history we are bound to repeat it. Segregation is absurd.

Good lord this isn't remotely close to repeating history...

 

[Hux1ey]

The "Those damn white people" nonsense and you ignoring the segregation question makes it pretty clearly why you this is such a big deal to you.
It is clear that this is the first time you have had issue with any type of segregation.

Lol you are obsessed with that aren't you, how odd. Again, how is it relevant?

Funny how legality only pops up when it's meant to be used as a weapon against people of color.

Is that a fact?

 

[azyless]

black women who, in the western world, are inarguably the SINGLE most downtrodden and oppressed group and there's no argument otherwise, racist?

Saying "there's no argument otherwise" at the end of your sentence doesn't make it true but I don't want to engage in oppression olympics.

 

[Yaphett Kotto]

HOW is it not discrimination? How is it not segregation? The event is opening advertising that if you aren't black you won't be allowed in certain areas and if you aren't a black woman then areas are walled off to you.

If this were a thread about white feminists not allowing woman of any other race to enter certain areas those labels would be applied. It discrimates against white woman, muslims, asians and hispanics among others.

Black women deal with more problems than any other women deal with. From hairstyles, to the way they speak, to the shapes of their bodies, to skin color, and more. These are mostly exclusive issues that other woman do not have to deal with in their lives and its more than enough reason for black feminists to create an event where only black women can be included. Its so they can have their own place to talk about their struggle alone.

What reason would a white feminist make a festival that only allows white women? They hold more benefits than minorities and have less problems.

What is it then ? What do you call an event where you restrict access to people based on the colour of their skin and their gender ?

Don't make it so black and white. Read what I said above.

This thread is actually a good example of the sort of shit you deal with when you try and talk about black issues at one of these sorts of meetings in a mixed environment.

Like someone else said: This thread is the reason why these black feminists made it so that only black women can join in.

 

[John Kowalski]

I love how you equate "Inclusive to people of all races " with "Pretending there's no historical discrimination" so quickly.

That is essentially what i'm doing, yeah. We must accept that to some ends the premise of including all races may be such an impediment that no progress is made. Whether to that end we may rethink what "inclusive" means in any given context, that is likely true as well.

Your point of historical discrimination is not quite as specific as what i was describing, i was more pointing to the effects of historical discrimination, namely the dynamics of hierarchies in groups, specifically the perception that the "white people" group have accrued through historical discrimination a privilege that portrays them as hierarchically higher than other racial groups (i.e. black people).

I'm trying to point this out in a way that makes it understandable and applicable in other contexts of privilege (and some which we already take for granted). For example, i think the same is applicable for labor rights. Though i think bosses should be part of the conversation in some higher capacity, i also think laborers should be able to organize and create places of conversation where bosses are not present, because bosses have obviously different interests in the discussion that run against what laborers might want (and e.g. it's perfectly normal for higher ups in companies to exclude their employees from discussions because they are keenly aware that what they want may go against the interests of their employees).

That is in essence what i mean when i say that you can't pretend those hierarchies aren't practiced by racial groups, i don't think it's particularly wrong to say that white people can be expected to have a kind of social behavior that displays their accrued privilege (intentionally or not, racism is also propagated by systemic discrimination which may go unaware to those who benefit from it (this too is something that helps propagate systemic racism because it's inherent immorality is not immediately evident to those it puts in power)), and to say that you simply cannot make spaces where people try to protect themselves from that friction between interests coming from different perceived hierarchies in essence denies that they exist, when in fact they do.

 

[LostMyNarbles]

Funny how legality only pops up when it's meant to be used as a weapon against people of color.

Uh..no? I'm sure people on here would be questioning the legality of the situation regardless of which racial group was holding this event. Stop grasping at what isn't there.

 

[Quixzlizx]

Funny how legality only pops up when it's meant to be used as a weapon against people of color.

Front National "pork and alcohol" events were also declared illegal in France.

 

[Zautruche]

Funny how legality only pops up when it's meant to be used as a weapon against people of color.

Yes, SOS Racisme is known for using legality as a weapon against people of colour...

 

[Enzom21]

Lol you are obsessed with that aren't you, how odd. Again, how is it relevant?

I am not obsessed with it, answer the question.
You know damn well you didn't give two fucks about segregation until some black people excluded others.

If black feminist held an event like this where you live and it was open to everyone, would you attend?

 

[Xe4]

The idea is, quite strongly, that this isnt fine. It isnt fine anywhere in the modern world.

Its not acceptable in any remote way or fashion to exclude anybody from an event based solely on their race.

If you're going to hold an event in your own house, you can choose to invite whoever the hell you want. It's the only reason stuff like white supremacist groups are even legal in this day and age. But what you can't do is then extend that discrimination to the place of business, the neighborhood as a whole, or especially a public space.

Whether I agree about the discrimination or not is irrelevant. I was strictly speaking legally.

 

[royalan]

It doesn't seem cut and dry at all. People look to be arguing that it is okay for them to want to hold an event like this in public regardless if it discrimates against others or not.

I disagree. With the exception of a few outliers, most of the posts I'm seeing in this thread are similar to my own. We can't discriminate, but I understand the thinking behind this...

There are some other posters charging in and comparing this event to the rise of the Black Power State or some shit, and that's causing a lot of arguments.

 

[Hux1ey]

I am not obsessed with it, answer the question.
You know damn well you didn't give two fucks about segregation until some black people excluded others.

If black feminist held an event like this where you live and it was open to everyone, would you attend?

So I'm racist because I think it's wrong to segregate people by race? Cool.

And no I probably wouldn't, but again, it's not relevant. More power to them though, just don't discriminate.

 

[Walshicus]

This. Is. Not. Discrimination. Nor. Segregation.

How many times will that have to be said in this thread?

So how are these people wrong since that is out of the way?

It's literally segregation. Assuming the article is correct, it's setting out areas that people of certain races and genders are not allowed to enter.

I mean I don't even know how you can argue that it isn't in good conscience.

 

[Nepenthe]

You came in this thread shitting over white people for having a problem with this racist segregation safe space.

Nope. I came into this thread lamenting that white people and anti-SJWs in general (gotta account for the Paris Dennards too) couldn't keep the lid on the bottle, point out that this specific event was illegal in France and misguided in its methodologies, and call it a day. Y'all had it. Y'all had a clear open-and-shut case of misguided progressivism you could shit on.

And you fucked it up by going on to talk shit about black people for wanting safe spaces in all contexts, which inevitably has turned the thread away from the event in question to once again mostly white people wagging their fingers at us for not wanting to be race ambassadors all the damn time, ironically the same shit that black people talk about happening at events that aren't well-moderated against concern trolling, the same shit that probably led to the French event being set up the way it was at all in the first place.

The speed at which y'all will self-sabotage yourselves and inadvertently prove minorities' points is utterly fascinating.

Also how is pointing out that this is segregation a shit post? It by definition, is. Maybe we should just stop conversing, I don't think we're going to gel :-(

Because when conversations about really complicated sociopolitical realities are boiled down to terms' technical or dictionary definitions, broader points can easily be lost, concern trolling is allowed to pass the sniff test much more easily, and the conversation inevitably tips back into favoring the status quo as minorities are held to higher moral standards on average. So, yes, there was technically segregation going on, but you would be remiss to try and equate it out loud or through implication of tone to the way segregation has been historically and systematically carried out by white people on non-white peoples. It's like I said to another person, black people wanting to vent to other black people about being followed in the store that day without white people grilling them on whether or not it happened because they're black, and thus "segregating" themselves, is not the same segregation advocated by white supremacist types who say inequality and separation is what we need on a societal level.

And I didn't agree to that bet, sorry. I only have quids anyway.

Interest has been added.

 

[Yaphett Kotto]

It's literally segregation. Assuming the article is correct, it's setting out areas that people of certain races and genders are not allowed to enter.

I mean I don't even know how you can argue that it isn't in good conscience.

If you want to argue semantics and say it is the very definition of the word, yes. You are correct.

But NO ONE uses the literal definition of the word and always uses it with the loaded historical context and as if black women are on social and economic equal grounds as their counterparts when it is totally not the case.

So for the third time, no, this is not segregation.

 

[Imm0rt4l]

The speed at which y'all will self-sabotage yourselves and inadvertently prove minorities' points is utterly fascinating.

The overwhelming whiteness and obtuseness of it all. Zero self-awareness.

 

[Enzom21]

So I'm racist because I think it's wrong to segregate people by race? Cool.

And no I probably wouldn't, but again, it's not relevant. More power to them though, just don't discriminate.

Who called you a racist? You're not being honest here, segregation was not an issue for you until black people excluded people from an event.

Do you also have issue with the Alamo screening of Wonder Woman being for women only?

 

[LostMyNarbles]

I disagree. With the exception of a few outliers, most of the posts I'm seeing in this thread are similar to my own. We can't discriminate, but I understand the thinking behind this...

There are some other posters charging in and comparing this event to the rise of the Black Power State or some shit, and that's causing a lot of arguments.

The last page and this page is full of people saying "It isn't racism" or "It isn't segregation" when that is exactly what it is. Separating people by race is what segregation was all about. Obviously the historical context of the word is important but people are trying to downplay it as being not the same because it isn't as significant. Regardless if people want it called it doesn't change what is going on.

 

[Mesousa]

Good lord this isn't remotely close to repeating history...

The idea that someone would even feel comfortable, in 2017, of saying aloud they plan to segregate an area on race is a step back towards the unsavory parts of history.

I can sympathize with the sisters putting on this festival, but this isnt how we win.

 

[Gun Animal]

Far-Right groups shooting themselves in the foot by trying to shut this down rather than use it to try and open up the possibility for white-only events, tbh.

 

[excelsiorlef]

The idea that someone would even feel comfortable, in 2017, of saying aloud they plan to segregate an area on race is a step back towards the unsavory parts of history.

I can sympathize with the sisters putting on this festival, but this isnt how we win.

It is not...

There is no logic to claiming so... zero....

 

[Grimm Fandango]

Sort of reminds me of that news story a year ago where a BLM group wanted to hold a library room for blacks only.

http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1188407

 

[Tovarisc]

Far-Right groups shooting themselves in the foot by trying to shut this down rather than use it to try and open up the possibility for white-only events, tbh.

You are saying that mayor of Paris is part of far-right? Some receipts on that.

 

[Nepenthe]

You are saying that mayor of Paris is part of far-right? Some receipts on that.

That's not what he joked about at all.

 

[Mesousa]

It is not...

There is no logic to claiming so... zero....

If it wasn't a step back in history this thread wouldnt have been posted at all. It would have just been "Another day in paris"

Even more so when the fact a socialist mayor of the city has to come out and condemn it. This isnt how the world works now, and any attempt to move back will be faced with resistance and outrage.

We won't win like this.

 

[Tovarisc]

That's not what he joked about at all.

I can't tell sarcasm, jokes and seriousness apart anymore in this thread.

 

[azyless]

You are saying that mayor of Paris is part of far-right? Some receipts on that.

No he's talking about the FN dickheads who were denouncing it.
Anne Hidalgo is from the socialist party, and btw, she said the festival would go on with the mixed area, black and racialised women only events will move to private locals.

 

[Hux1ey]

Nope. I came into this thread lamenting that white people and anti-SJWs in general (gotta account for the Paris Dennards too) couldn't keep the lid on the bottle, point out that this specific event was illegal in France and misguided in its methodologies, and call it a day. Y'all had it. Y'all had a clear open-and-shut case of misguided progressivism you could shit on.

And you fucked it up by going on to talk shit about black people for wanting safe spaces in all contexts, which inevitably has turned the thread away from the event in question to once again mostly white people wagging their fingers at us for not wanting to be race ambassadors all the damn time, ironically the same shit that black people talk about happening at events that aren't well-moderated against concern trolling, the same shit that probably led to the French event being set up the way it was at all in the first place.

The speed at which y'all will self-sabotage yourselves and inadvertently prove minorities' points is utterly fascinating.



Because when conversations about really complicated sociopolitical realities are boiled down to terms' technical or dictionary definitions, broader points can easily be lost, concern trolling is allowed to pass the sniff test much more easily, and the conversation inevitably tips back into favoring the status quo as minorities are held to higher moral standards on average. So, yes, there was technically segregation going on, but you would be remiss to try and equate it out loud or through implication of tone to the way segregation has been historically and systematically carried out by white people on non-white peoples. It's like I said to another person, black people wanting to vent to other black people about being followed in the store that day without white people grilling them on whether or not it happened because they're black, and thus "segregating" themselves, is not the same segregation advocated by white supremacist types who say inequality and separation is what we need on a societal level.



Interest has been added.

I'm guessing "Y'all" is referring to white people and not just me? Because I didn't say a lot of the stuff you're talking about. I am aware there are different levels of segregation, but the word isn't exclusively used to refer to the awful shit that happened moons ago. It just baffles me that in 2017 we have events that want to segregate by race, this is not a black thing, if it was the other way around it would be just as ridiculous.

Who called you a racist? You're not being honest here, segregation was not an issue for you until black people excluded people from an event.

Do you also have issue with the Alamo screening of Wonder Woman being for women only?

"You know damn well you didn't give two fucks about segregation until some black people excluded others." This kind of implies it no? Yet you know zero about me and just assume this. I have to think back to time to discussions I've had on segregation to make you feel better? Why do you care so much if I've argued about segregation before? I fail to see the relevance, you're the only person obsessing over that.

And I had no idea that was even a thing, but again, why is it relevant? Why do you keep asking these odd questions? To try and catch me out?

 

[Frozenprince]

I'm guessing "Y'all" is referring to white people and not just me? Because I didn't say a lot of the stuff you're talking about. I am aware there are different levels of segregation, but the word isn't exclusively used to refer to the awful shit that happened moons ago. It just baffles me that in 2017 we have events that want to segregate by race, this is not a black thing, if it was the other way around it would be just as ridiculous.

Man, that's certainly some presumptuous leap.

I mean, it does seem like you're making a concerted effort to try and find anything in any statement you can to make it to be racist against you. Which kinda defeats the whole "argument in good faith" thing.

Also, "awful shit that happened moons ago" is actually still happening.

Race based segregation still openly and outwardly exists.

 

[Nepenthe]

I'm guessing "Y'all" is referring to white people and not just me? Because I didn't say a lot of the stuff you're talking about.

Correct. Edit: Well, partly correct. Again, white people and anti-SJWs.

I am aware there are different levels of segregation, but the word isn't exclusively used to refer to the awful shit that happened moons ago. It just baffles me that in 2017 we have events that want to segregate by race, this is not a black thing, if it was the other way around it would be just as ridiculous.

If you are aware that there are different levels of segregation, surely you should realize why it would be less kosher for white people to have a festival on white empowerment (<-- that right there is your clue) where blacks wouldn't be able to freely attend most if any of the event.

 

[N7.Angel]

Who called you a racist? You're not being honest here, segregation was not an issue for you until black people excluded people from an event.

Do you also have issue with the Alamo screening of Wonder Woman being for women only?

Why the fuck did you bring WW in this mess ? women and men from all races will watch the same movie with the same scenes everywhere, what they wanted to do in that fucking festival was showing the first 20 minutes to men and only the half for white girls...