I’m one of a comparatively small number of people who has actually seen The Interview and I’m frustrated because the movie is funny and now it is up in the air if anyone else will ever see it.
When people accuse Sony of cowardice, I think they fail to understand the extent of the hack that was perpetrated against them. Besides, why put a movie into release if nobody is going to show it? Remember, the whole idea behind the film industry is to make a profit. You don’t make a profit if your movie is only showing in five theaters.
Paramount, on the other hand, shouldn’t give a flying fuck about allowing exhibitors to show a film that was released years ago. I have no idea why they went belly up on this one. The only theaters showing it were theaters that wanted to show it and didn’t give a crap about terroristic threats that are considered unfounded. So let ‘em show it. What the hell?
Anyone out there who thinks terrorism doesn’t work should use this attack as exhibit one. Whoever did this torpedoed a film. Two films, really. The terrorists won this round with a remarkably minimal effort.
And hey, if this is really North Korea getting a stick up its ass about a less than flattering portrayal of their glorious leader, I have a really good idea. They can make a film about some North Korean journalists trying to kill a US President.
I guarantee that no matter how much effort they put into making Obama look like a buffoon, he still won’t look any worse than the average Tea Partier’s concept of him.
Duggar, who thinks her rights to free speech are being infringed every time someone disagrees with her, characterized transgender women as “males with past child predator convictions that claim they are female to have a legal right to enter private areas that are reserved for women and girls.”
Seems like she was speaking freely right there.
And her fear mongering worked as Fayetteville voters overturned an ordinance meant to protect those dudes with past child predator convictions who, in fact, don’t have any convictions for being child predators.
Fuck you transgender people! Michelle Duggar is uncomfortable with the idea that one of you might be peeing in the stall next to her so she made up some shit about you being a pedophile.
And it worked.
Let’s be fair, though. She didn’t make that shit up. Someone else did. She just affixed her name to it because, apparently, she agreed.
Man, I hope one of her kids is gay or transgender. She needs to hate someone close to her so she can truly understand what kind of person she is.
I don’t suggest clicking on the link above. I know very few people who would sympathize with what is written there.
As someone who tries very hard to support feminism, I see nothing of value in this woman’s rant about how men are clearly inferior to women. They aren’t. They are different. In some (mostly physical) ways men have certain advantages. In other ways they do not. When you remove the obstacles society creates for women, men and women are mostly equal.
The problem is people viewing this extreme point of view and calling it feminism. As if all feminists are out there just despising men for having the misfortune to exist.
When, in truth, hardly any of them are.
Every point of view has it’s extremes. The problem becomes people viewing the extreme position as representative of the entire position. Feminism is about working to fix a society that is off balance. It is not about creating a “utopia” where men don’t exist.
I didn’t know who this guy was until I clicked the wrong link. Now I know all about him.
I would hope you don’t need to be a feminist to think he’s a complete sleaze bag who deserves to be maced on a regular basis. He makes money holding seminars telling guys how to be awful to their partners. He doesn’t respect women and he also doesn’t respect men because he thinks guys are supposed to treat women like shit because they are women.
Thing is, he may not even be the asshole he pretends to be. He just says this stuff to get lonely suckers to come to his seminars.
Then you have the guys who pay money because they want to be like the person he pretends to be. You have to be a pretty awful human being for this kind of thing to be worth your time.
Holy shit guys, it isn’t that hard. You want women to like you? Be fucking nice to them. And don’t get angry if they don’t want to have sex with you because that isn’t what they are there for.
For those unfamiliar with the term, doxxing is when people take personal information (like home address and private e-mail accounts) and share them with everyone on the internet. The intent is to encourage others to harass the individual in question either online or in person.
Because people are assholes.
Chris Kluwe wrote a profanity ridden rant against GamerGaters earlier in the week. Was his contact information splashed all over the internet? Of course not.
What is interesting about the Gamergate phenomenon is that they claim this issue is not about women in gaming and yet when women speak up, they suffer harassment almost immediately. I’m not saying Kluwe didn’t get called names. He probably did.
The difference, though, is Kluwe (and Wil Wheton) were called names. Day had her personal information tweeted out within an hour.
Now I’m fairly certain a brief internet search could have yielded her home address. That information may be private but it is hard to protect. Her personal e-mail would take a little more digging but probably isn’t too hard to get. Privacy is an illusion the internet is rapidly dispelling.
None of that changes the fact doxxing is an asshole move. The only purpose is to harass the victim rather than engage in civil discourse.
GamerGate is not about ethics. It is about being pissy because female gamers (and their allies) would like a few games for themselves. It also has an unoriginal and stupid name.
She didn’t cancel the talk because she was threatened, you understand. She was still going to speak.
But she asked for protection against someone who claimed he was going to open fire on her and Utah law prevented police from patting down attendees at the event.
So a guy (I’m assuming it was a guy) threatens to shoot her and the police can’t even stop anyone from carrying a gun to her talk. Because the right to carry a firearm wherever the fuck you want is more important than the right to keep people with firearms out of a place where someone has threatened to kill people with a firearm.
And spare me the good guy with the gun/bad guy with a gun thing. If the bad guy with a gun gets into the event, he (again I’m assuming it is a guy) will be able to kill his target before anyone kills him. And that’s all he cares about.
So best case scenario is this asshole (who was probably making empty threats but they still worked) would have died after accomplishing his stated goal. Which is what he expected would happen anyway. Great solution, Utah!
Please note that I’m not talking about Gamergate for a few reasons. First, it has been talked to death and the people doing most of the talking are assholes who don’t deserve my time.
And second, we need to stop naming every scandal after Watergate. It is just so completely unoriginal. Have you guys heard of the Teapot Dome Scandal? That’s a great name for a scandal! Now everything is NounGate.
Nixon is dead, folks. We need to move on.
An appeals court had to overturn this idiotic ruling so I guess sometimes the judicial system works. Eventually.
If we are to believe this “irrational” mother’s story, she chose to give her child her own last name after the father abused her during the pregnancy. The judge in the case felt that she just wasn’t in the right mind to make that sort of decision and, I guess, thought it would case harm to the child if the child didn’t have his father’s last name.
An appeals court saw it differently and apparently felt the judge in the case was far more irrational than the mother.
This last name thing is problematic to begin with. I like my last name so when I got married, I kept it. That’s totally fine because I’m a dude and nobody questions when a man wants to keep his name.
Nobody questions when parents given their child the father’s last name.
But if a woman wants to keep her last name or give her last name to a child, well then it is time to take the case to court, I guess.
It’s a double standard. And a stupid one.