Like I said, your posts never have any substance and you never clearly explain your position or thoughts on anything, ever.
Incorrect. You have to go alllllllll the way to post 103, a little way up this page to find my position and thoughts.
But that's harder than flinging out vacuous dismissals and accusations, in spite of it being on the very same page your post is on.
Your first post in this thread is basically just a joke
My first post was both jokey and serious. Because, given the anaemic information provided and the projection and assumptions of familiar bad-actors that could be predicted to jump on this (that'd be you and some cohorts), I felt it would be enjoyable to subvert the assumption that the portrayal would automatically be a positive one. So I played up both sides of that equation referencing entirely relevant people that this community would know.
I'm glad you grasped all that nuance.
What a shame I have to 'word-salad' it out to make it all clear to those who would seek to dismiss
what was saying as some simple blasé joke.
and then your 2nd post talks about people thinking "nothing to see here". If that 2nd post was aimed at me, I wrote a pretty lengthy post about my thoughts on the situation.
You can assume this is all about you if it gives you the validation you clearly believe you deserve.
But you can write one word or you can write a thousand words. It hasn't taken me very long to see the length and breadth of your argument on these topics. Nor has it taken me very long to see the integrity - or lack thereof - in your engagement with everyone who challenges you. I've called you out on it before and you keep doing it. You keep doing it and I'll keep calling you out for it. If this complex chain of events is too difficult for you to follow then please ask a parent or guardian to help you out with the longer words.
Disney/Marvel haven't promoted anything about the Eternals having a gay character, they have simply answered questions when asked about it.
This has precisely no bearing on anything I've said or your shallow efforts to dismiss it.
I mean, you also ask people to provide proof in the politics thread, like when you asked someone to provide proof on Trump cheating with a woman.
No. Get it right:
I specifically ask for objective, verifiable evidence.
I ask for this when an accusation is asserted as evidence, or when an opinion is asserted as fact.
This is an incredibly low
standard to set.
That we live in a time where the application of critical thinking
is so rare and so upsetting to those who won't practice it is no justification to do away with it.
What is telling is how objectionable people find this base
standard simply because proof
are such inconvenient obstructions to agenda
You sit there on your high horse with your word salad but what proof do you have to back up your thoughts and feelings about this situation in regards to "Hollywood indoctrination"?
Every thread I've engaged in - where you have played your charade of shrugging, dismissing, objecting, disqualifying and yelping that "THERE'S NOTHING TO SEE HERE". That there are there are so many of these threads is the substance to my argument.
That you dismiss substantiation that you don't like as 'word salad' (reading the detailed opinions of other is people is hard, why won't they just shut up and agree with you??) and that you, who are notoriously active in all those threads to the to point where you have earned yourself a reputation that multiple
people call you out on - will try your virtual shrug and do the "THERE'S NOTHING TO SEE HERE" when you've been there, making a scene, shows why you have no credibility.
How many movies out of literally hundreds per year contain gay/trans "indoctrination"?
If you actually wanted to engage with people you would read their posts which answer questions before you ask them.
But you don't do that. You'll quote someone, such as me, only to lazily dismiss what you're quoting as 'word salad'. Dismissing isn't the same as addressing. Dismissing in the manner that you are fond of doing is a practice of attempting to control the conversation. To silence and de-value the contributions of those that challenge you.
Because, if you had read and absorbed instead of dismissed and ignored, you wouldn't now be asking questions that have already been answered.
And, no, I'm not going to repeat things I've already stated just to jump through your lazy hoops. If you want the answer, read the posts that answer it. That's a pretty big IF though, isn't it?
And, no, I'm not going to gift-wrap my opinions into a rigid size and shape that you consider digestable. People with narrow views often fail the grasp the full meaning of those with broader views. You're just going to have to deal with that like a grown-up instead of a petulant name-calling child. If this notion is objectionable to you or offends you then I'm afraid you'll find my well of fucks runneth dry. Your sub-standard level of engagement and demonstrable lack of integrity puts your credit with me at zero. I owe you nothing.
You sit there on your high horse saying that you'll make your own decisions for your own film but mock and belittle people who make their own creative choice to write a gay character in a script.
This is a very telling amount of projection on your part.
I am not on my high horse about [shock horror] making my own decisions about my own things.
I was responding to a deliberately leading question and refusing to be lead. Because I know what leading questions are designed to do. They are not some subtle and Machiavellian work of intellectual under-appreciated genius. They are obvious set-ups that are dishonestly presented as innocuous questions. Those employing them advertise more about their own methods than they realise.
As for "mock and belittle people who make their own creative choice to write a gay character in a script." I haven't done this.
In fact, there is not enough substance provided in this topic to hang such mockery on.
There has been no evidence of creative choice.
There has been no mention of a character.
There has been no evidence of a script.
All that has been declared is the identity politic.
Again, you simply can't stick to what has been said without extrapolating or adding things into it in an effort to prop up your petulant, wafer-thin argument.
And, as others have pointed out to you, the issue is that NOTHING is known other than the identity politic and that, when going with what is known (rather than fabricating contexts and details that have no evidence or proof (
uh oh!) to support them) and that celebrating such hollow sycophancy (again) is as worthwhile as you arguing the quality of the Emperor's New Clothes when everyone can see he doesn't have a stitch on.
This has even been pointed out to you by others on this page.
You, in your typical display of dismissal and 'no u' level of engagement have decided that the best way for your pretence at having a valid argument is for you to be regarded as ignorant.
The "Treat me like I'm an idiot" ploy is not subtle, it's not clever but it's far closer to the truth than the one making the demand would ever admit to.
WE KNOW you're being dishonest when you play that setup.
WE KNOW you're being lazy.
WE KNOW you're trying to get your challenger to do all the work for you, just so you can be dismissive.
WE WILL, however, treat you like an idiot.
Be careful what you wish for.
You talk about people valuing logic, if you ask me, jumping to over reactionary conclusions based on a 2 sentence answer that look less than 30 seconds to answer defies logic. You need more pieces of the puzzle before you can come to a definite conclusion. Waiting for the extra pieces of the puzzle is what I would call logical.
What a good job I didn't do any of that then.
What a shame you haven't read my posts properly.
What an idiot (see above) you are to set up straw-men fallacies so obviously and so abundantly.
I'm not bothered, just hoping that at some point your posts contain some substance.
Yes. Of course.
Your multiple posts attempting to stifle and cut-down views that don't align with yours in this thread, and in every other thread I've seen where this type of evidence is shown, shows how spectacularly unconvincing your "I'm not bothered" protests are.
I've engaged with more sincerety than you are due.
It's good to see your "Why don't you just let other people have their opinions" effort that you directed at me earlier (a cute "why don't you just fuck off" plea) is something you're so ready to put into practice yourself.
Go back and read my response to that. You've shown me to be quite the prophet.