We have two major political parties in this country. One is run by the extreme right. The other is run by the moderate left. Trying to equate the extremes by pretending they wield equal power is dishonest, and incredibly lazy. One extreme runs a major political party. The other extreme gets laughed at on twitter.
"stop puting you idiotic liberal words into my mouth"
-ynnady
Not what I said, at all.
I said they were both slurs. That's it. Everything past that, you're inventing. I only compared them in that both originated from a neutral term that was, originally, not objectionable. Their use has made them objectionable. "Woke" far more recently, but still. There's a reason I backed that up with sourcing, for that matter. It was never about trying to say they were "equally bad" or some horseshit; the other word has centuries of brutally violent racism behind it to the extent I won't even say it. If you've got two words and you're trying to figure out which is the "worse word", and you won't even say one of the words, I think that's answering that question.
It's a slur. I've backed that up. You've made no counter-argument. You're just gaslighting me at this point.I'm not here to argue about the show or semantics but I will lastly just point out that that dude wasn't calling you a slur
1> The "freedom of speech for me or go kill yourself" is what appears to be a willful misrepresentation of reality. Nobody gets banned for speech that people don't agree with. They get banned of social media or the like for being abusive shitmongers to other users and breaking site rules. Which isn't a free speech issue, in the first place. Far-right fascy types lie about that, to try and get special protections for their abuses, and they get told, deservedly, to fuck off when they do so.There are plenty examples of extremists on BOTH SIDES of the political agenda that are equally as close-minded. For every white surpremacist racist, there is also someone on the extreme liberal end of things that is "Freedom of speech, unless you don't agree with me then go kill yourself". The media sensationalizes both.
There is a reason elections are chosen by a handful of swing states and independent voters.
2> We're talking about "woke". Which just means having an active level of respect for everyone, regardless of their race/culture/creed/whatever. A lack of open bigotry. That's what you're labelling "extreme". Honey, no, bigotry's the extreme position. It's an irrational, baseless expression of hatred that has no purpose or goal other than enjoying the infliction of harm upon innocents. "Woke" isn't an opposing extreme pole, it's just the absence of bigotry. This is why nobody uses the term for its original meaning; it's so bland and normal a position it really just doesn't mean a lot, which is why the alt-right types picked it up to use it as a slur for anyone opposing their bigotry.
- - - Updated - - -
The Democrats are in no way "moderate left", dude. "Moderate left" is democratic socialism, like Tommy Douglas up here in Canada was. Even Bernie Sanders isn't far enough left to qualify for that. Democrats are center-right with a smattering of center-left types who really don't hold a lot of power in the party.
I have literally quoted the rules of the forum from that "Rules" tab on the top of the screen about someone doing exactly what the rules say you cannot do and nothing has been done about it. As long as you're on the "right" side of an argument and don't start spewing vulgarities you can pretty much do whatever you want on these forums.
This is why, whether it's to the benefit of my opinions or not, I rarely bother posting here anymore. I don't want people on "my side" getting away with things simply because the mods believe it to be the correct "side", because that just shows lurkers that the side being shown preference can't stand on its own merits.
I anticipate my infraction for talking about moderation in a thread, since that's another one they actually enforce, as well, if you're complaining about the moderation. I'll take it, they know they're clowns.
Didn't Jen's dad played in some kind of 80's sitcom, where he lives together with his Greek(?) cousin?
You don't know who Cousin Larry Appleton is? Perfect Strangers is peak 80s TV.
Maybe yes, maybe not.
The trick is if I were to stop watching them, I'd be instantly cudgeled by NPCs with the "if you haven't watched it - your opinion is null and void" argument.
- - - Updated - - -
His "humor" is kind of...specific, I guess.
If you're not laughing at Ali Wong "jokes", you won't laugh at Taika's, I suppose.
- - - Updated - - -
Why not?
I abhor american sitcom genre to a certain level barring Friends, and a few more which I cannot recollect at the moments notice.
I couldn't care less for this forced couple of Wanda and Vision and her emotional struggles of the loss of a cyborg look cheap and strained at best, as marvel failed to establish their relationship to begin with.
Her grief over the loss of said cyborg look even cheaper considering she didn't grief over her brother, who, being her only close and blood relative, was(at least in my opinion) a much more severe loss.
So, plot aside, I don't like W/V series, and Loki is another can of worms which simply cannot feasibly be rated higher than 5/10 simply through the fact that it has Crookface in it.
- - - Updated - - -
Why's the movie "Dr.Strange" , then?
All I ever wanted was the truth. Remember those words as you read the ones that follow. I never set out to topple my father's kingdom of lies from a sense of misplaced pride. I never wanted to bleed the species to its marrow, reaving half the galaxy clean of human life in this bitter crusade. I never desired any of this, though I know the reasons for which it must be done. But all I ever wanted was the truth.
Allow me to re-quote myself:
I got a response to that that wanda is the main villain.
My question was not about who's protagonist and who's antagonist, as you've noticed.
What I asked was why he's not even a 2nd violin in his own movie.
And my question has nothing to do with the screentime.
- - - Updated - - -
Why would you imply I demand that?
Then you don't have a point. He's playing "2nd fiddle" the same way basically every single protagonist in nearly every literary adventure story always playss second fiddle. The antagonist is, pretty much inevitably, the one driving the story, the one with a plot or mission that he hero has to try and stop. If the Empire and Darth Vader and Palpatine weren't pushing their agendas in Star Wars, there'd be no Rebellion for Luke to join, his uncle and aunt wouldn't be collateral damage driving him to join the fight, the story wouldn't happen. That's how stories generally work. There are exceptions; heist movies are nearly always driven by the protagonists' actions against a static antagonist and their "vault", but adventure stories are nearly always driven by the antagonist, primarily. Without the antagonist's action, there's nothing for the hero to take action against.
That's the only way Strange is "2nd fiddle"; that he's reacting to Wanda's actions (and others'). In every other way, no, he's not, and you do not have an argument to support that claim, and haven't made any effort to do so, meaning it can simply be dismissed out of hand anyway.
There's no implication; you questioned why Multiverse of Madness was titled a Doctor Strange movie, rather than a Wanda movie. Despite Doctor Strange being the central protagonist and the character with the most screen time by a wide margin. You made that argument, openly. And now you don't want to take responsibility for the posts we can still see you having made.Why would you imply I demand that?
- - - Updated - - -
What else could you possibly have been talking about?
When you take great pains to not explain your points and people leap to the only reasonable conclusions about what you could possibly have meant, the fault's with you. If nobody's getting what you're trying to say, it's because you aren't communicating it properly. We have to go by the words you actually post, we can't read your secret inner thoughts about what you really meant.