CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › Western Society, Pop Culture, and the Cacophony of Social Media
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Western Society, Pop Culture, and the Cacophony of Social Media - Page 91

post #4501 of 4678

Yeah.  It's funny how that seems to go with those who take this stuff the most seriously.

post #4502 of 4678
I can understand his parents being wilfully blind to his mental illness until it got too much for them to handle, but what about the people who published his “work?”

I guess they just shrugged and thought it was okay for him to spout complete lunacy as long as it was at their chosen targets.
post #4503 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

"Lack of civil discourse" is routinely employed to stifle dissent. Look at some of the statements from the time about MLK. 

 

Earlier this week I engaged someone on SM who was bemoaning how "nothing was sacred anymore." I called Trump "Cheeto" and he was all "See? You're proving my point." I responded with a very short list of things Cheeto has said and done that demonstrate a complete lack of respect for himself, the nation (especially women), and the office of the president. This guy just insisted that the presidency is sacred and deserves our respect regardless.

 

The conversation went nowhere after that, even with some great input from our own Richard Dickson.

 

So short version: yep. Appeals to "keeping things sacred" and "being respectful" are generally oblique redirects by the privileged to keep discussions safe and nonthreatening to the status quo.

post #4504 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post

Earlier this week I engaged someone on SM who was bemoaning how "nothing was sacred anymore." I called Trump "Cheeto" and he was all "See? You're proving my point." I responded with a very short list of things Cheeto has said and done that demonstrate a complete lack of respect for himself, the nation (especially women), and the office of the president. This guy just insisted that the presidency is sacred and deserves our respect regardless.

The conversation went nowhere after that, even with some great input from our own Richard Dickson.

So short version: yep. Appeals to "keeping things sacred" and "being respectful" are generally oblique redirects by the privileged to keep discussions safe and nonthreatening to the status quo.
The President has to respect the Presidency too.
post #4505 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post
 

 

Earlier this week I engaged someone on SM who was bemoaning how "nothing was sacred anymore." I called Trump "Cheeto" and he was all "See? You're proving my point." I responded with a very short list of things Cheeto has said and done that demonstrate a complete lack of respect for himself, the nation (especially women), and the office of the president. This guy just insisted that the presidency is sacred and deserves our respect regardless.

 

The conversation went nowhere after that, even with some great input from our own Richard Dickson.

 

So short version: yep. Appeals to "keeping things sacred" and "being respectful" are generally oblique redirects by the privileged to keep discussions safe and nonthreatening to the status quo.

This is what happens when a country is filled with idiots with the morality of a 10 year old. A lot of the things we discuss--discrimination, police brutality, sexism, racism, homophobia, etc--actively make people uncomfortable. There is no quick fix to any of these topics, and no one is going to agree on any one way to deal with it. But that's too hard, complicating, and upsetting for a large majority of people. Instead, having blind loyality for our idiot president is easy because you don't have to think. Patritiosm: good! saying bad things about America: Bad!  There's none of that icky ambiguity to worry about.

 

This is literally how a child thinks.

post #4506 of 4678

Well I agree but...if this were still the Obama Era, do you think MichaelM and his chat companion's positions would be reversed? 

 

Also calling the President "Cheeto" is doing the same thing as saying "respect the Office": it's intended to shut down conversation. 

post #4507 of 4678

Oh, look, I agree with Cylon on something! 

 

I think people cope with this nightmare administration the way they cope, and I'm fine with using names like Cheeto, Drumph, Immortan Don, 45*, or djt (which is what I usually go to) when you're playing to an audience. But I think there is a difference between "respectability politics" (which is tied into "lack of civil discourse") and trying to have a conversation with someone with the goal of changing minds - particularly if you're a white person talking to another white person. I think in those situations, you can argue that he shouldn't be afforded the respect of the office of the Presidency without calling him names. Maybe. 

post #4508 of 4678

...and you should maybe be open to being receptive to the other person's opinions, not across the board, but when they make good points. 

 

I really despise the Administration's Immigration policy and the way they are implementing it. But, I know people who do business across the US/Mexico border who tell me US border cities are benefiting from all the US and Mexicans who used to live in Mexico and work in the US (cost of living yo!) who are now buying homes in the US and contributing to the local economy and increasing the Tax Base, which in turn leads to better civic services, schools etc. 

 

I can take the point while still disagreeing with the overall policy and hating the implementation. 

post #4509 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon Baby View Post
 

...and you should maybe be open to being receptive to the other person's opinions, not across the board, but when they make good points. 

 

I really despise the Administration's Immigration policy and the way they are implementing it. But, I know people who do business across the US/Mexico border who tell me US border cities are benefiting from all the US and Mexicans who used to live in Mexico and work in the US (cost of living yo!) who are now buying homes in the US and contributing to the local economy and increasing the Tax Base, which in turn leads to better civic services, schools etc. 

 

I can take the point while still disagreeing with the overall policy and hating the implementation. 

Real talk:  There are civilized, rational, non-crazy ways to argue for and against a number of these issues. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing with how the ACA or immigration policies have been implemented. Shocker: you can disagree with feminists! Shocker x2: You can disagree with BLM! You can absolutely have your say without seeming like a crazy person.

 

The problem, of course, is social media. It's the fact that every fucking opinion has to be so fucking extreme with little to no room for ambiguity that it just becomes noise. Yes, I'm aware it's both sides; I am also partial to liberal ideology, so it bothers me way more when I hear a conservative loon go batshit.

post #4510 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon Baby View Post
 

Well I agree but...if this were still the Obama Era, do you think MichaelM and his chat companion's positions would be reversed? 

 

Also calling the President "Cheeto" is doing the same thing as saying "respect the Office": it's intended to shut down conversation. 

 

I think trying to draw an equivalence between Obama's words and behavior and Trump's is complete bullshit. I've never had a problem with anyone expressing disagreement with Obama's policies and actions. And as annoying as "Obummer", "NoBama," and "Barry," were/are, fine, whatever. They're dumb, playground nicknames. People stressing his middle name, using racially tinged nicknames, equating him with Hitler, Mao, and other things....not the same.

 

"Cheeto" isn't intended to shut down the conversation. It's meant to highlight the ridiculous, disrespectful and childish nature of this president, including his actions, words, and lifestyle.

post #4511 of 4678
I feel like presidents have been treated reasonably fairly in terms of the public understanding how presidentially they behave.

Trump’s just getting back what he puts out into the world. Obama was, amongst everything else, a very dignified and well-spoken guy, so extreme characterizations of him rang false. See also: Tricky Dicky Nixon. Everybody knew he was shifty, so the zeitgeist accepted that name.
post #4512 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post
 

 

 

 

"Cheeto" isn't intended to shut down the conversation. It's meant to highlight the ridiculous, disrespectful and childish nature of this president, including his actions, words, and lifestyle.


So, completely dismissing him at POTUS and person isn't shutting down a conversation with someone who thinks differently? 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightning Slim View Post

I feel like presidents have been treated reasonably fairly in terms of the public understanding how presidentially they behave.

Trump’s just getting back what he puts out into the world. Obama was, amongst everything else, a very dignified and well-spoken guy, so extreme characterizations of him rang false. See also: Tricky Dicky Nixon. Everybody knew he was shifty, so the zeitgeist accepted that name.

 

I think this is a great point and why a lot of people have visceral hatred of Trump. He's turned the most powerful political office in the world into a WWE shouting match 24/7.

 

With Obama, the common themes among his haters were: He's not really  American, he's really a Muslim, AKA he's Not One Of Us (BLACK). 

I keep flashing back to that numb nuts at a Town Hall in the 08 election who told John McCain that he was afraid of Obama getting elected, and McCain trying to talk him down. 

post #4513 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon Baby View Post

With Obama, the common themes among his haters were: He's not really  American, he's really a Muslim, AKA he's Not One Of Us (BLACK). 

Given Trump's involvement in all of the above attempts to delegitimize his predecessor, I can live with a little Cheeto shouting on my conscience. It's not trying to shout down, it's raising my voice to shout back.

_
Edited by Reasor - 10/26/17 at 1:47pm
post #4514 of 4678
It’s also a case of ‘know your audience’. If you’re talking to a Trump supporter and actually trying to have a good faith conversation, you should be able to anticipate that calling him ‘Cheeto’ is going to shut down the discourse.
If you’re just venting frustration or making a political joke, then fire away.
post #4515 of 4678
So calling him "Cheeto" is insulting to a group of people who, for almost a year, screamed "Crooked Hillary" while wearing shirts that said "Trump that Bitch"...

Got it.
post #4516 of 4678

I think there are varying degrees of Trump voters. All of them are loathesome. But some of them are convincable, and, as has been said, it's about knowing your audience. Someone with a TTB shirt you're probably not going to convince, but if you know someone voted for him because, I don't know, the economy, and you know that they're generally reasonable, then that's something you can consider maybe adjusting your approach for. 

post #4517 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

I think there are varying degrees of Trump voters. All of them are loathesome. But some of them are convincable, and, as has been said, it's about knowing your audience. Someone with a TTB shirt you're probably not going to convince, but if you know someone voted for him because, I don't know, the economy, and you know that they're generally reasonable, then that's something you can consider maybe adjusting your approach for. 

 

According to recent, polls, there is an increasing number of people who are convincable. 

 

I really believe a lot of people voted for Trump out of single issues like Abortion, or tax cuts, regulatory reform, and most of all, he was a Celebrity who nonetheless comes off as "authentic". 

 

Trump's behavior in office is turning people off except the die hards. The Die Hards vote, esp in Primaries, but they are an increasing minority. 

 

So I think it's valid to "Go high when they go low" and address issues where common sense intelligent people will reconsider their support if addressed with respect. 

post #4518 of 4678

Cylon, stop agreeing with me, you know how I hate that bro. :D

post #4519 of 4678

The title makes it a pretty good talk for this thread  (yeah it's Ted, which is kinda making people suspicious these days.  But Tufekci has been studying this stuff for ages and more grounded than the usual Wired sci-fi writers and tech evangelists who used to be seemingly the only people talking about this topic back in the day.)

 

We're building a dystopia just to make people click on ads

post #4520 of 4678

Trump is an absolute nightmare on every level, I still can't believe that thing is president. It i

Quote:
Originally Posted by Muzman View Post
 

The title makes it a pretty good talk for this thread  (yeah it's Ted, which is kinda making people suspicious these days.  But Tufekci has been studying this stuff for ages and more grounded than the usual Wired sci-fi writers and tech evangelists who used to be seemingly the only people talking about this topic back in the day.)

 

We're building a dystopia just to make people click on ads

Thanks for linking this. None of it is surprising, but it is nice to see it being put out there. 

post #4521 of 4678
I wish TED would,realise that some people would much rather read an article than watch a video.
post #4522 of 4678

Pretty sure you can read the transcript.

post #4523 of 4678

Yeah, I just read the transcript. Fascinating stuff! 

post #4524 of 4678
post #4525 of 4678

Speaking of facebook....

 

Quote:

Confirming what you basically know, but probably don’t want to think about too closely, Parker explained just how he and the other early Facebookers built the platform to “consume as much of your time and conscious attention as possible.” 

 

He described the system of users posting content and receiving likes as “a social-validation feedback loop … exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology.” 

 

He also noted that he and Zuckerberg, and later Instagram’s Kevin Systrom, were very much aware of this and “did it anyway.”

 

Sean Parker basically doesn't give a fuck.

 

Bravo.

post #4526 of 4678
post #4527 of 4678

The future doesn't look bright for I Heart Radio. Even if they go down, I don't see terrestrial radio becoming what it once was. I don't have any facts to back that up, just my cynicism. Maybe I just thought radio was cooler in my teens because I didn't know any better.  

http://news4sanantonio.com/news/local/bleak-predictions-for-future-of-iheartradio

Back when in was called Clear Channel I was at a Bret Michaels show. The singer from the opening act thanks Bret for letting them open, the crowd cheers. He thanks the Hard Rock Café for letting them play, the crowd cheers. He thanks Clear Channel, the crowd boos.

post #4528 of 4678
Thanks bruh

post #4529 of 4678

hahahahahah 

 

JORDAN!

post #4530 of 4678
Hearkening back to that magical time we were a fully monogamous society with zero sex predators.
post #4531 of 4678

hahaha his tweet sounds like one of those

 

"YOU'LLLL SEEEEEE!!!!" passive-aggressive threats

post #4532 of 4678
It never gets unfunny.

post #4533 of 4678

just look at how happy he is!

post #4534 of 4678

Wasn't the OK symbol being a white supremacy thing a bit of trolling by 4Chan back in May? Has that news not reached Canada MSM yet? And why is there a Jewish person in the white supremacy rally?

post #4535 of 4678
So, the right wing trolls weren’t right wing trolling because that’s old news?
post #4536 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by flint View Post
 

Wasn't the OK symbol being a white supremacy thing a bit of trolling by 4Chan back in May? Has that news not reached Canada MSM yet? And why is there a Jewish person in the white supremacy rally?

post #4537 of 4678
I ask again: so these guys weren’t white supremacists but they were pretending to be white supremacists to upset people and sow discontent in the popular imagination. How is this a good thing?
post #4538 of 4678

yeah, that's what I was wondering

 

but at the very least, I assume Peterson had little idea of who and what he was posing with?

post #4539 of 4678
Peterson is such a pompous ass he’d take a selfie with Idi Amin if he paid to see his talk.

I’d respect the Pepe crowd more if that was what they were satirizing instead of this vague, anti-left provocateurism.
post #4540 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightning Slim View Post

I ask again: so these guys weren’t white supremacists but they were pretending to be white supremacists to upset people and sow discontent in the popular imagination. How is this a good thing?

 

It continues to astound me how there's all this supposed rationalist opposition to corrosive leftist postmodernism, when the right -all of it pretty much- are the most postmodern thing politics has had to contend with a long time.  I'm just going to keep saying it.

 

Is it a known thing that Peterson is a christian conservative of some stripe? He'd be the milder Canadian sort, but after watching some of his talks I got the impression his critiques left only one unspoken option, morally and philosophically : relativism is self defeating and destructive so we all must submit to a higher authority.  And ones ultimately seen to be crafted by mere humans are by nature relativistic. Soo...  (plus he likes Solzhenitzyn and Tolstoy a whoooole bunch.  Probably Dostoyevsky too, I'd wager)

 

But I've never seen it stated plainly if he's coming from there (he might like to keep on the down low as it dilutes his academic authority.  Which would be fair enough in some ways. )

 

In any case, he'd probably line up for a picture like this because he's a Swell Guy who doesn't blacklist people like all that poisonous cultural marxism that's taking over the world insists we do (apparently).

 

The symbolism thing is kinda complicated, as mentioned.  Even Pepe's status as a nazi thing is uncertain. Clearly nazis adopted it.  But making it all nazi was part of the usual extreme internet stupidity and lol at Hillary et al for taking it serious. It's just proof to some that "they just don't get us, man!" and they're wild and free internet rebels incomprehensible to the wider world.  The hand gesture is the same sort of thing, as seems to be known.  "We can make them say anything is nazi!".  But nazis will probably adopt it then.  So then what is it?  The swaztika itself was no different, really, when it comes to this process.

 

 

The video guy patting himself on the back for 'triggering the radical left' is kind of pointless.  Did he really do that?  Or did he find a blog or two all about this dueling extremities and the 'radical left' is paying little attention? Are such blogs really for the benefit of "the left" or for the validation of the right, or both?

Call me a soft leftist apologist unable to face the truth about his team  (which might be the case), but I find increasingly we don't know anymore.

post #4541 of 4678

this doesn't really belong here since it doesn't really involve WESTERN SOCIETY or SOCIAL MEDIA (at least not primarily)...

 

but I really do think this is still the best thread for it, because hoooo-boy....

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/11/paying-for-fake-friends-and-family/545060/

 

Quote:
 

Money may not be able to buy love, but here in Japan, it can certainly buy the appearance of love—and appearance, as the dapper Ishii Yuichi insists, is everything. As a man whose business involves becoming other people, Yuichi would know. The handsome and charming 36-year-old is on call to be your best friend, your husband, your father, or even a mourner at your funeral.

 

His 8-year-old company, Family Romance, provides professional actors to fill any role in the personal lives of clients. With a burgeoning staff of 800 or so actors, ranging from infants to the elderly, the organization prides itself on being able to provide a surrogate for almost any conceivable situation.

 

Yuichi believes that Family Romance helps people cope with unbearable absences or perceived deficiencies in their lives. In an increasingly isolated and entitled society, the CEO predicts the exponential growth of his business and others like it, as à la carte human interaction becomes the new norm.

onesheet.jpg 

+

 

Bernard-Fallon.jpg?resize=852%2C480


Edited by mcnooj82 - 11/13/17 at 7:07pm
post #4542 of 4678

Oh my god.

post #4543 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post
 

onesheet.jpg 

 

 

Oh shit what's going on with her legs? Is the plot of the movie that she's an Arrival alien?

post #4544 of 4678
All of their lower bodies are kinda wrong, now that I look at it. Josh Gad's apparently disappearing into a vanishing point a couple dozen yards below the frame, if his tiny, weirdly-angled feet are anything to go by, and Kevin Hart appears to have had both his legs broken, or possibly just replaced with someone else's.
post #4545 of 4678
It looks like they were altered to make them all the same height, and it's such a trifling reason to digitally alter someone that I wonder if someone's agent didn't insist on it.
post #4546 of 4678

You guys want some social media cacophony? The latest Tumblr drama has got you: 

https://www.tumblr.com/search/hivliving 

To sum up: 
 

Quote:
 Hivliving was a semi-popular tumblr blog that talked about serophobia (discrimination against people with HIV), gave resources on HIV, and discoursed. There were two mods, Israa and Naj.

Israa (supposedly) was a married, nonbinary and bisexual Chinese-Pakistani human trafficking survivor living in India with HIV. Naj (supposedly) was a lesbian of color from the United States with congenital HIV whose main was @allolesbean. They presented themselves as experts on HIV and have asked for donations before to help them survive.

None of these things are true. Oneperson ran Hivliving, a white American college student that did not have HIV. They pervasively lied about their entire identity for years, betrayed many people’s trust, and made money off of it. Hivliving has since confessed to their actions on both that bloand their main.

Why did they fabricate an entire identity? Because they wanted to justify themselves writing an HIV-centric modern high school AU Hamilton fanfiction. They then posited themselves as an expert on HIV for discourse credentials.

Their actions are deeply immoral and crude: the blatant lying about sensitive topics and identities for years, the financial gain, the abuse of followers’ trusts.  I’m having trouble expressing how tactless, upsetting, and wrong their actions are, but that’s the gist of it. All over some fanfic.

 

And I thought the Alison Mack Branding Sex Cult story was the craziest shit I read this year. 

post #4547 of 4678
Yup.

That's fanfic for ya.
post #4548 of 4678
post #4549 of 4678
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelios View Post

Who in the motherfuck bought this? 
Yeah, that sounds like someone tried to combine the entire cast of Sense8 into one character.
post #4550 of 4678
That whole HIV-centric modern high school Hamilton fan fiction craze is so last season anyway.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movie Miscellany
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › Western Society, Pop Culture, and the Cacophony of Social Media