4 ms·
This is certainly part of it. There are also those who are not happy with woke content and "Anything Silicon Valley/Tech" and are walking away. Disney has the
by xyzzy21 4y ago
This is certainly part of it.
There are also those who are not happy with woke content and "Anything Silicon Valley/Tech" and are walking away.
Disney has the same thing going.
- DonHopkins 4y agoRacist homophobic bigots hate "woke" content, but so what? Who wants those snowflakes as customers anyway, who are so terrified of being exposed to cartoons of Mickey Mouse and Pluto having steamy hot gay sex? Let them try to cancel culture and walk away from scary cartoon animal sex all they want. How's Trump's "unwoke" social network working out? https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/ted-cruz-mickey-pluto-disney-dont-say-gay https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/ted-cruz-mickey-plut... >TED CRUZ WARNS DISNEY PROGRAMMING WILL SOON DEPICT MICKEY AND PLUTO F--KING >The senator from Texas thinks the company’s opposition to Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law means it’s going to introduce X-rated content featuring animated characters “going at it.”
- ehvatum 4y ago> Racist homophobic bigots hate "woke" content There’s no accounting for taste. You should not be so fast to hate; it prevents you from understanding that which you wish to change. After all, we’re talking about entertainment, not war. Aren’t we?
- Throwawayaerlei 4y agoActually, we are talking about war, a cold civil war in the US and a lot of the West, and often hot shooting ones in the countries in which we foment color revolutions, the Ukraine being the current extreme example of that.
- downrightmike 4y agoHe hopes in his heart of heart to not have to skip down to cancun to use grindr
- IMTDb 4y agoWithout being a "racist homophobic bigot", you can be tired of seing that every single TV show they produce seems to absolutely need to play the race/gender/sexual orientation bingo. To me, it feels like the "diversity" of the characters included in a script is one of the factor that is taken into account when deciding to finance a show or not. It really shouldn't be: either a script is good enough and you should finance it, or it isn't and you should reject it. But adding artificial additional criteria just means that good scripts will be rejected and less good one will be accepted. And the logical consequence is that sometimes it feels like perfectly good stories are altered in a way that ensure more "diversity" is ensured, often times making the story worse. And finally, casting is sometimes...weird to say the least. That does not help producing better shows.
- DonHopkins 4y agoNow you know how it feels to be tired of a lifetime of seeing that every single TV show they produce seems to absolutely need to play the cis heterosexual orientation bingo.
- samhw 4y agoEh, I'm gay and I still agree: those types of shows get a bit boring sometimes. I'm all for representation but it shouldn't be the only point of a show: it shouldn't be "here's Ghostbusters, the exact same film all over again, but with women!", or "here's Ocean's Eleven, the exa"- eh, you get the point. I'm sure some people will hotly contest that these shows/movies are genuinely works of art, and representation just happens to be a bonus, but that's not how it feels when watching a load of this tedious paint-by-numbers pablum. (This isn't to say that there are no instances where I feel the opposition to minority/female casting was driven more by bigotry than by people's finely-honed critical faculties. Of course there are. But I happen to think it cuts both ways in this case: many of those shows/movies are just godawful, and trade on the "you're a bigot if you don't like this!" card to drive sympathy/virtue demand, from people who want to feel like Rosa Parks for going to the cinema.)
- hiptobecubic 4y ago
- patrick451 4y agoIndeed, this is the same reason I cancelled my subscription.