SubJeff on 9/1/2017 at 19:09
Quote Posted by Fingernail
I think in almost all these debates, it's surely better to err on the side of the assumed minority/less privileged group?
Absolutely not. Where is the fairness in that, what's to stop innocent people being labelled as prejudiced and what's to stop asshats from minority groups using this as weapon? That's a crazy idea.
Quote:
I'm not saying you can't see it. But you've never experienced it directly.
I depends who you are. If you're in another minority group it's probably pretty easy to see it.
Quote Posted by SD
That someone thought it was a good idea to use dead animals in the currency we use on a daily basis demonstrates a total lack of consideration for the ethical minority in this country.
Do you think they actually thought that though? Or did they think "this is good chemistry" and not consider the fact it's a dead animal product.
Animals die you know? They live and die. Not wanting animal products in other products because you think it cruel to kill animals kind of doesn't make sense. What if I could guarantee the leather shoes I'm selling are made from cows that died of natural causes?
Let's take it to the next level.
Are the same people who aren't going to use the fiver also not going to use ANY medication that was tested on animals. In other words, almost all of it. This is easily obtainable information so by your standards the same hoo haa should be made about the latest cancer and Alzheimer's medications. Can you make a giant "Hypocrite" sign out of tallow?
faetal on 9/1/2017 at 19:40
Quote Posted by SubJeff
Absolutely not. Where is the fairness in that, what's to stop innocent people being labelled as prejudiced and what's to stop asshats from minority groups using this as weapon? That's a crazy idea.
"Err on the side of" does not mean "assume that side is always correct". It simply means that e.g. if you have a shit, scripted skit which risks making a minority feel further marginalised, you worry more about that than whether or not it's going to rob someone of their cheap laugh.
Vivian on 9/1/2017 at 19:46
SubJeff, the money thing is slightly different to the medicine thing. You absolutely can't do much of medical research without animal models, but I imagine you can make a plastic fiver without using animal stuff. Reduce, replace, refine and all that.
SubJeff on 9/1/2017 at 19:57
Quote Posted by faetal
"Err on the side of" does not mean "assume that side is always correct". It simply means that e.g. if you have a shit, scripted skit which risks making a minority feel further marginalised, you worry more about that than whether or not it's going to rob someone of their cheap laugh.
I can go with that, but that's not what Fingernail said.
Quote Posted by Vivian
SubJeff, the money thing is slightly different to the medicine thing. You absolutely can't do much of medical research without animal models, but I imagine you can make a plastic fiver without using animal stuff. Reduce, replace, refine and all that.
Yeah, for sure. I'm just highlighting how ridiculous the reaction is. In the entire production line of new fivers how much tallow was used? It's trace amounts and tallow is a by product. Yet entire animals are used for their entire lives, hundreds of thousands of them, for scientific experiments (in macabre animals experiments by sick perverted scientists and dino botherers with crazy hair in evil lairs!) and this is okay?
I'd prefer it if no animal products were used where it's unnecessary, as long as that reduction of use reduces animal suffering. I don't mind the use of by products because they don't contribute to animal suffering. And I'd prefer it if everyone could always get what they want but this is reality and they can't.
Renault on 9/1/2017 at 20:05
The currency thing is funny - if you dig deep enough, you can always find something that offends somebody. Only 0.04 % of the population are diehard vegans (going beyond just diet), so I'd say it's just a case of not being able to please all of the people all of the time.
Fingernail on 9/1/2017 at 20:12
Quote Posted by SubJeff
Absolutely not. Where is the fairness in that, what's to stop innocent people being labelled as prejudiced and what's to stop asshats from minority groups using this as weapon? That's a crazy idea.
Then what's to stop the tyranny of the majority? I think you're crediting "asshats from minority groups" with entirely too much power here. As I say, being labelled as prejudiced by a few commentators (probably within an already self-selectively liberal bubble) doesn't seem to have harmed Richard Hammond's position at all. None of the controversies could stop Trump. Where was the weapon when we needed it?
But no, sure, we should probably treat minority classes just the same as anyone else. They're everywhere aren't they? Making us doubt ourselves and our firmly held beliefs. No matter that many of them live lives coloured by doubt, uncertainty and prejudice simply by virtue of being members of whatever group.
And I'm not so sure about simply being in another minority group as if all prejudice were comparable.
For example, I know very well the insecurity that you get when you're not sure how another person is going to react to knowledge of your sexuality. In some situations it's simply not worth taking the risk. Does any straight male feel that when simply mentioning their wife or girlfriend offhand? I don't know the feeling one might get if a stranger physically moves away eg. on public transport because of the colour of one's skin.
Of course, there's always a
reason why Leia has to be in the bikini, or Ridley has to undress. There's a
reason why our celebrated entertainments and arts concern themselves with sex, with explorations of male power, with violation, with a certain appreciation of the female form. You can twist around and refer to (probably retconned) lore about hermaphrodite Hutts, but I'd argue Jabba would have been and is perceived as male. I'm not saying Leia's portrayal isn't in some ways progressive, but ultimately she still serves to be the lever in a love triangle. There's a
reason too, I guess, about why the trilogy is mainly about Luke and Vader's relationship, not Leia and Vader.
Let's just perceive what actually is: western culture created the environment where a film like Star Wars could be made, largely by men, largely from and for a male perspective. And achieve enormous success. I'm not saying women can't enjoy it, or didn't enjoy it. They were raised to accept that the male perspective was the right or only way to view the world, and art, too.
Even today, with the huge advances that have been made, most big-budget movies are also made by men, and a few people try to point out issues with any of this, or create something alternative, and suddenly things have gone too far??
Fingernail on 9/1/2017 at 20:15
Quote Posted by SubJeff
I can go with that, but that's not what Fingernail said.
Yes it was, I said "err on the side of" and I ended saying "listen to others?" which really just implies not dismissing people's arguments along the lines of "everyone is too sensitive these days". Listen to them, listen to their reasons. We don't have nearly as much to lose as they.
SubJeff on 9/1/2017 at 20:44
Quote Posted by Fingernail
Then what's to stop the tyranny of the majority? I think you're crediting "asshats from minority groups" with entirely too much power here.
I think you're missing the power this has. There are indeed people that are largely immune, but there are plenty of people for whom even a tenuous suggestion they are homophobic can be devastating for their career and thus life. Look at the guy from Mozilla. Did anyone even bother to ask him what he thought now?
Just the term "tyranny of the majority" is loaded. What? Because I'm straight I'm somehow part of a tyranny? This is what gets my goat; I'm as liberal as you get but even I feel under attack by this type of thing. Whilst it's true that no straight male feels odd mentioning their gf (mostly) gay men SHOULD just mention their boyfriend in the same way. That's how we'll get through this, with everyone just being chill about it. Yes, there will be some idiots who can't cope that omg homos at first but once everyone is out it'll be just part of the norm.
I don't think you'll ever get totally get rid of prejudice though - you cannot get rid of stupidity and that's the sad reality of it. The continued existence of sexism is proof of that, and we can't blame religion all the time.
Fingernail on 9/1/2017 at 22:23
Quote Posted by SubJeff
I think you're missing the power this has. There are indeed people that are largely immune, but there are plenty of people for whom even a tenuous suggestion they are homophobic can be devastating for their career and thus life. Look at the guy from Mozilla. Did anyone even bother to ask him what he thought now?
I think this is the unfortunate coincidence of two things - it's a GOOD THING that people these days feel freer about calling others out on their prejudice, but it's a BAD THING that we have a current trend towards witch-hunts, twitter crusades and scapegoating.
You're absolutely right about stupidity in that regard. But the good thing shouldn't be lost because of the silly bad thing?
On a personal level nobody is part of a tyranny, that's not exactly what I mean. But it is true that often people don't confront their privilege or even realise that others face prejudice unless it's pointed out - why would they? It's all well and good saying, for instance, that gay men SHOULD do this or that, but could it be one of those things that's easier said than done? After all, a straight person would never normally have to summon up any courage to do so. It's already massively more normalised than it was even 10 years ago. I'm just pointing out small differences which can easily be swept aside, yet still hold some significance.
It's like cases where people with Muslim sounding names don't get job interviews. I can advise my friend to just neaten up and send off the CV everywhere, get some interviews, get a job - perfect, worked for me - why doesn't it just work for them?
I'm afraid we're just not at the stage where we can just assume that if everybody acted the same, they'd get the same opportunities or results from it.
The change for me is not that we are close to, or will ever as you say, totally get rid of prejudice, but that maybe now as a larger conversation people are starting to see it, talk about it, a bit more, which I hope is a good thing.
Kolya on 10/1/2017 at 14:50
I don't remember starting this 5 page thread...? Oh damn you TTLG and your inability to let go.
Fine then. While Carrie Fisher was indeed a smart and funny person most people will be hard pressed to name other films she was involved in besides that space opera. Maybe this is part of the reason that bikini had such an impact on her life. There didn't come much after it, so everyone saw her through the lens of these films and that's something you cannot escape, just learn to deal with, as time goes by. I'm sure she didn't see the bikini as sexist when she filmed the scene, but as she became a mature woman who was still exclusively identified with Star Wars, this bikini didn't fit her anymore, figuratively speaking. And when she told Daisy Ridley not to wear it, Don't become a slave like me! I couldn't help but think of (
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2013/oct/03/sinead-o-connor-open-letter-miley-cyrus) Sinéad O'Connor's open letter to Miley Cyrus. The old woman telling the young woman not to rely on her sexiness -to which the young woman will turn, laugh and scoff, eternally. Of course she will use all she can to get everything she wants. And eventually curse that image when it has become static, unchangeable and a reminder of her former self, which she will then deem stupid.
Boy, am I glad to be a man and of no great interest to the world. Of course at some point I would have liked if everyone thought I was an irresistible pop star, but I can see this and me getting old and less fun. That doesn't change the fact that I'd rather bang young Leia than old Fisher! We men are visually sexcitable monkeys and that's tough for the ladies, I get it. I don't think putting Sting in a metal mankini will solve this, as it won't thrill women as much as Leia does for us. What we can do is try and understand that we are not equal but still need each other's respect and sometimes a helping hand.
