Is It Important That The Show Business Ego Awards Are Getting Eaten By Their Own Leftism? (1 Viewer)

[rockaction]

Still always about you... you got two I's in there. 

He was making fun of you, and I was taking the edge off. You can't even see when I'm being nice.

 

[The Z Machine]

He was making fun of you, and I was taking the edge off. You can't even see when I'm being nice.

My response was sarcasm...

ETA: I was riffing on the similarity between the upper case I and lower case l in this font. 

 

[squistion]

You continue to insist that nobody follows what I'm talking about, yet the debate has survived without you for two pages.

Maybe take that as a hint.

Actually I never said that, you have your devoted followers, who seem to always understand your 8 paragraph monologues and love this thread.

Sweet J said he didn't know what the thread was about and I agreed with that, which had nothing to with your vocabulary or choice of words. Rather it was your rambling OP made it difficult for us to figure out exactly what you were trying to say.  

 

[GordonGekko]

I don't really understand anything the OP is posting. Is he saying that a trans person who transitions from a man to a woman shouldn't be allowed to compete for an acting award as a woman? 

That's an awfully roundabout way of saying "I don't think we should have Trans people."

Of course, because the OP uses a lot of words to say something, I certainly could have misinterpreted his post. 

Asia Kate Dillon wants a separate new category for "non-binary"  at the Oscars.  All the other talk is fluff, that's the end goal and motive.

In no possible way will Hollywood and it's performers accept more people fighting for one award ( men and women) versus what was previously two awards. That's just not going to happen.

Dillon's competition so far?  Ruby Rose and Demi Lovato. And a handful of D Listers. I'd argue Lovato is a D Lister as well.

Dillon isn't fighting for "equality", he/she is fighting to basically win an Oscar every year for the next five years before others get into the racket where there are literally less than 20 openly "non-binary" in Hollywood currently. 

This would be like you getting into a time machine and went back to 1872 and forced your way onto a baseball team and start parading around in only your underwear and covered in chunky peanut butter and screaming out you played in Major League Baseball.

There are people here who have housepets with greater acting range than Ruby Rose. Dillon wants to treat the Academy Awards like playing a video game after hitting UP, UP, DOWN, DOWN, LEFT, RIGHT, LEFT, RIGHT, B, A, START

Feel free to go to YouTube and start watching Asia Kate Dillon clips from Orange Is The New Black and Billions and John Wick 3. Ask yourself what exactly is so special about these performances other than woke critics and pundits in the entertainment world are essentially being extorted to only praise AKD's work.

Here's part of the problem - Being treated as a true "equal" means being called out on your stupid bull ####. AKD doesn't want equality. "Equal" would be forced to be judged on actual acting ability. If you were an elite actor, you would be a contender for roles that Daniel Day Lewis gets.

Nothing would make me less surprised than if AKD forced her/his way into a free Oscar and then was ambushed by Ellen/Eliot Page in the parking lot afterwards in a no holds barred MMA style fight over who should be the the primary grifter in the new world order Identity Politics/Intersectional Madness hierarchy.

No one hates Trans people in Hollywood, just don't try to extort your way into a free Academy Award like a total ########.

 

[kwille]

These awards shows and Trump rallies are remarkably similar. Cringe worthy and righteous in all aspects and about the last things I'd spend my time or attention on. Just icky and gross displays of yuck.

 

[rockaction]

I don't think that we need to go to their motive, we need only see their proposed solution to the problem they have. I'm not worried if the Academy hands over twenty awards to Asia Kate Dillon, the question about categories is my concern.

 

[Sweet J]

It's funny, because most people other than you, squistion (who always complains I have no point and is a walking red herring in any debate), and Sweet J completely understood the point.

Well, to be fair, I was trying to be funny.

 

[rockaction]

Well, to be fair, I was trying to be funny.

Yeah, fair enough. I was just being concrete and unironic, nor was I chalking you up to getting it when you obviously had said something to the contrary. No big deal. At all.

 

[Manster]

agreed

elitist Hollywood creating awards to celebrate themselves - who does that ?

The Dundies is the only award show I care to watch

 

[kface]

I'm just happy that tech is going to destroy all this.  I have never though nor will ever think that anyone deserves anymore than a couple of hundred thousand for being in a movie.  

I'll also be happy when the theatre cabal blows up

 

[rockaction]

I'm just happy that tech is going to destroy all this.  I have never though nor will ever think that anyone deserves anymore than a couple of hundred thousand for being in a movie.  

I'll also be happy when the theatre cabal blows up

Well, same here, but that's why I specifically limited it to having to decide about these shows on these grounds. What of the actual arguments being made?

I mean, I don't blame a lot of you for answering the way you do, but I wanted to know, if you ever had to face this exact question on its grounds, what would you do and what would you think?

Imagine there's no real choice about Hollywood and the movies to make. Imagine, like in a law school, you're writing for law review or moot court and it's a closed universe rather than an open one. That is, you have to make the choice between tradition as is and the protestation's reasons.

 

[Rich Conway]

Well, same here, but that's why I specifically limited it to having to decide about these shows on these grounds. What of the actual arguments being made?

I mean, I don't blame a lot of you for answering the way you do, but I wanted to know, if you ever had to face this exact question on its grounds, what would you do and what would you think?

Imagine there's no real choice about Hollywood and the movies to make. Imagine, like in a law school, you're writing for law review or moot court and it's a closed universe rather than an open one. That is, you have to make the choice between tradition as is and the protestation's reasons.

I didn't write the original response, but personally, unless the "tradition" side offered up something more than "that's the way it's always been", this is a no-brainer for me.  The transgender argument at least has some merit; that is, there are people who fit into non-binary, and a binary categorization excludes them.  So for me, I'm comparing and argument that legitimately claims to affect some smallish number of people against an argument that I discard on its face.

 

[rockaction]

I didn't write the original response, but personally, unless the "tradition" side offered up something more than "that's the way it's always been", this is a no-brainer for me.  The transgender argument at least has some merit; that is, there are people who fit into non-binary, and a binary categorization excludes them.  So for me, I'm comparing and argument that legitimately claims to affect some smallish number of people against an argument that I discard on its face.

That's what I'm asking for.

I disagree. I think that tradition and categorization of a fixed biological sex serves a purpose over the self-identified "gender" designation that one gives one's self.

The question we've spent the past three pages on, besides distraction, really, is why is this the case and why does one prefer it that way?

I disagree that the argument is because "it's always been that way" on the traditional side, but your mileage may vary.

 

[Rich Conway]

That's what I'm asking for.

I disagree. I think that tradition and categorization of a fixed biological sex serves a purpose over the self-identified "gender" designation that one gives one's self.

The question we've spent the past three pages on, besides distraction, really, is why is this the case and why does one prefer it that way?

I disagree that the argument is because "it's always been that way" on the traditional side, but your mileage may vary.

The bolded seems to be changing the parameters from "That is, you have to make the choice between tradition as is and the protestation's reasons."  To me, "tradition as is" literally means "because that's the way it's always been".

Surely, this will be a matter of opinion, but I'm not sure I can think of a good reason to have "best actor" and "best actress" separately, especially when they already have non-gender-split awards like "best director".  Well, actually, I can think of one good reason, in that adding more awards probably makes the show longer, adds viewer interest, and ultimately brings in more money, but I'll discard that as "not particularly relevant" for me if I were making a decision on what is "appropriate".

 

[rockaction]

The bolded seems to be changing the parameters from "That is, you have to make the choice between tradition as is and the protestation's reasons."  To me, "tradition as is" literally means "because that's the way it's always been".

Surely, this will be a matter of opinion, but I'm not sure I can think of a good reason to have "best actor" and "best actress" separately, especially when they already have non-gender-split awards like "best director".  Well, actually, I can think of one good reason, in that adding more awards probably makes the show longer, adds viewer interest, and ultimately brings in more money, but I'll discard that as "not particularly relevant" for me if I were making a decision on what is "appropriate".

Tradition as manifest, I mean. I mean that you have to make the choice between male/female categories and no categories per the reasoning that Asia requests. "Tradition as is" is not the reason, but the end result of.

You and I always have problems with how things are read. You read things very normatively, or assume a lot of arguments inherent in words that are just words.

I know I can be unclear, but you should think about that. You assume a lot of arguments are being made when what is being done are definitions or colloquial uses of words.

I find that to be often the case with hyper-argumentative people. You're assuming contrary points are being made because you've already argued them in your own head. My unsolicited advice: Get out of your own head and read the words as words, not as potential rebuttals to your points.

I need, on my end, to be more utterly clear.

 

[squistion]

Nice theoretical discussion, but does anyone seriously believe that the Oscars will ever have have a separate new category for "non-binary" actors? 

 

[Rich Conway]

I find that to be often the case with hyper-argumentative people. You're assuming contrary points are being made because you've already argued them in your own head. My unsolicited advice: Get out of your own head and read the words as words, not as potential rebuttals to your points.

With all due respect, that's exactly what I did originally by reading "tradition as is" and NOT assuming there was some hidden meaning to it.

 

[rockaction]

Nice theoretical discussion, but does anyone seriously believe that the Oscars will ever have have a separate new category for "non-binary" actors? 

I must be really unclear. My choice is between "male/female" and no category for Best Actor at all, which is what Asia Kate Dillon wants.

She wants it on the grounds that it excludes "non-binary" actors.

 

[rockaction]

With all due respect, that's exactly what I did originally by reading "tradition as is" and NOT assuming there was some hidden meaning to it.

No, "tradition as is" in that context means you keep the male/female categories. I'm beginning to see a pattern. We always have this problem. I have it with nobody else.

squistion never gets why I'm starting threads I do or what I'm saying. Most people can follow along. There's a pattern there. His gripe is also constantly normative.

It's a constant complaint/problem with both of you, it's logistical, and I'm going to place it on my abstractness and your guys' propensity not to read like most other humans.

You're like 2/40ths or 2/50ths of this forum and I never hear the complaints so specific or run into the same problem with other people. This also never happens in the FFA now that politics is removed. People know exactly what I'm saying and when I'm saying it. You have a problem with the normative arguments being presented.

 

[Rich Conway]

No, "tradition as is" in that context means you keep the male/female categories. I'm beginning to see a pattern. We always have this problem. I have it with nobody else.

squistion never gets why I'm starting threads I do or what I'm saying. Most people can follow along. There's a pattern there. His gripe is also constantly normative.

It's a constant complaint/problem with both of you, it's logistical, and I'm going to place it on my abstractness and your guys' propensity not to read like most other humans.

You're like 2/40ths or 2/50ths of this forum and I never hear the complaints so specific or run into the same problem with other people. This also never happens in the FFA now that politics is removed. People know exactly what I'm saying and when I'm saying it. You have a problem with the normative arguments being presented.

You're kidding, right?  People constantly note that they have no idea what you're getting at because your posts are all over the place without a definitive point.

That said, if I instead replace "tradition as is" with "keep male/female categories", it doesn't help the argument.  The question was which argument makes more sense.  "Do X" isn't a good argument.  "Do X because of Y" is an argument.  "Keep male/female categories" is missing the why.  For me, personally, "Eliminate separate categories because it disenfranchises an admittedly small number of people" is a better argument than "keep male/female categories just because".

 

[rockaction]

You're kidding, right?  People constantly note that they have no idea what you're getting at because your posts are all over the place without a definitive point.

That said, if I instead replace "tradition as is" with "keep male/female categories", it doesn't help the argument.  The question was which argument makes more sense.  "Do X" isn't a good argument.  "Do X because of Y" is an argument.  "Keep male/female categories" is missing the why.  For me, personally, "Eliminate separate categories because it disenfranchises an admittedly small number of people" is a better argument than "keep male/female categories just because".

Yeah, happens all the time in the FFA and the Shark Pool. People get so confused.

No, people here complain because they disagree with my points. It's generally you and squistion, and then other people kid about my political-esque jargon. But I've noticed something. I've noticed that as I write for specific people on different issues, people understand very #### the well what I'm talking about. It's like...magic! As soon as I agree with people, the people understand tha #### I'm saying.

Simply put: It's not me, Conway, it's you.

 

[Rich Conway]

Simply put: It's not me, Conway, it's you.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[rockaction]

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Massive high five in return for you even taking the time, brother. To try and parse anything abstract or confusing on this board deserves a

I mean that.

 

[squistion]

I must be really unclear. My choice is between "male/female" and no category for Best Actor at all, which is what Asia Kate Dillon wants.

She wants it on the grounds that it excludes "non-binary" actors.

Thank you for the clarification. 

 

[rockaction]

Thank you for the clarification. 

No sweat, squis. Keep on keepin' on.

Conway gets the high five, and I hope you're having some good like I am. Enjoy the morning.

 

[jhib]

The Dundies is the only award show I care to watch

Spot on.

Wait, is there an actual show for the Darwin Awards?  That would be awesome, too. "The Darwin Committee accepts this award on behalf of..." every time, with no speeches.  Well, except maybe for the winners who were only sterilized.

 

[jhib]

Thanks for linking to this.  It's delicious.

I do actually agree that there's no obvious reason for having separate categories for men and women when it comes to acting awards -- I don't think men have any sort of natural advantage here that women need to be protected from.  But it's also fun to read Really Dumb Arguments From Unserious People, and I think this persxn's letter represents the genre quite well.

I tend to agree. However, is there any doubt that - at least in the short term - reducing them to one combined set of awards will bring more attention than ever to the differences by gender?  The sex/gender (sorry, I'm bad at using the right term at the right time) of the nominee will matter when it comes time to pick a winner.  How many of each have won so far, whose "turn" it is, when will a non-binary performer win, etc., seem to have the strong potential to further decrease the relative weight of the actual acting itself.

Also, as an aside, and at the risk of showing off my naivety / lack of education on the matter / how out of touch I am / my laziness in not using google to figure it out... can anyone explain the reason they use 'male/female' but 'man/womxn'?  Why is the 'male' in 'female' not treated the same way as the 'man' in 'woman'?   

 

[GordonGekko]

I must be really unclear. My choice is between "male/female" and no category for Best Actor at all, which is what Asia Kate Dillon wants.

She wants it on the grounds that it excludes "non-binary" actors.

Asia Kate Dillion wants to be Hollywood's version of the champion of the Cross Fit Games.

Does most of America care about who can push the hardest and the fastest on a Rogue Echo Bike? No, they don't.  Does most of America want to watch a field of virtue signaling PEDs loaded elitist substandard athletes against the professional baseline where one person is usually tiers above in ability against the rest? No, they don't.

All of America isn't outraged that there is not a non-binary Oscar category. AKD just wants to crush Ruby Rose and Demi Lovato and the little girl from the first Hunger Games movie to win a statue.

Be an elite performer like a Meryl Streep and/or a Daniel Day Lewis and you don't need to try to push Hollywood to make the Cross Fit Games into the top card event at the next Olympics.

What AKD is doing is cheap. The people who are truly the best want to compete and dominate against the very best. You want a statue? Beat Meryl Streep at her own game, that would actually be impressive.

The history of film is interwoven into our cultural and social fabric in this country. AKD wants to reduce it to his/her own personal toilet because he/she knows there is almost a nearly absolute personal immunity you get for being non-binary and open about it. If anyone in Hollywood calls this a bunch of cheap bull ####, which it is, then they will be marked as bigots.

The basic principles of extortion don't change just because the person doing it is slam fisting woke down everyone's throats.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Asia Kate Dillion wants to be Hollywood's version of the champion of the Cross Fit Games.

Does most of America care about who can push the hardest and the fastest on a Rogue Echo Bike? No, they don't.  Does most of America want to watch a field of virtue signaling PEDs loaded elitist substandard athletes against the professional baseline where one person is usually tiers above in ability against the rest? No, they don't.

All of America isn't outraged that there is not a non-binary Oscar category. AKD just wants to crush Ruby Rose and Demi Lovato and the little girl from the first Hunger Games movie to win a statue.

Be an elite performer like a Meryl Streep and/or a Daniel Day Lewis and you don't need to try to push Hollywood to make the Cross Fit Games into the top card event at the next Olympics.

What AKD is doing is cheap. The people who are truly the best want to compete and dominate against the very best. You want a statue? Beat Meryl Streep at her own game, that would actually be impressive.

The history of film is interwoven into our cultural and social fabric in this country. AKD wants to reduce it to his/her own personal toilet because he/she knows there is almost a nearly absolute personal immunity you get for being non-binary and open about it. If anyone in Hollywood calls this a bunch of cheap bull ####, which it is, then they will be marked as bigots.

The basic principles of extortion don't change just because the person doing it is slam fisting woke down everyone's throats.

You didn't read the article.

 

[rockaction]

You didn't read the article.

I've said once that Gekko didn't need to go to motive and that he was incorrect. I don't think I need to say it again.

This isn't by way of a response to you or a disagreement with you as much as an affirmation of what you're saying.

Dillon is not arguing for a separate, "non-binary" category. They are arguing for a generalized "Best Actor" category that includes, male, female, non-binary.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I tend to agree. However, is there any doubt that - at least in the short term - reducing them to one combined set of awards will bring more attention than ever to the differences by gender?  The sex/gender (sorry, I'm bad at using the right term at the right time) of the nominee will matter when it comes time to pick a winner.  How many of each have won so far, whose "turn" it is, when will a non-binary performer win, etc., seem to have the strong potential to further decrease the relative weight of the actual acting itself.

True, but I feel kind of contemptuous of these people in general, and idea of them fighting with one another over whether this year's award should go to a person with this particular set of reproductive organs or that other set of reproductive organs is amusing to me.  It's like snapping the pool cue in half, dropping the two pieces on the floor, and saying how much you look forward to working with the winner.

 

[djmich]

True, but I feel kind of contemptuous of these people in general, and idea of them fighting with one another over whether this year's award should go to a person with this particular set of reproductive organs or that other set of reproductive organs is amusing to me.  It's like snapping the pool cue in half, dropping the two pieces on the floor, and saying how much you look forward to working with the winner.

True, but then we'll have to hear for the next decade how the country is genderist because there have been no women or nonbinary award winners. 

They should just make a bunch of micro categories, everyone gets a trophy.  I would win the trophy for worst performance at pretending they give a #### about the award shows.

 

[GordonGekko]

Dillon is not arguing for a separate, "non-binary" category. They are arguing for a generalized "Best Actor" category that includes, male, female, non-binary.

AKD is absolutely arguing for a separate non binary category but cannot do so directly.

This is free advertising for AKD's acting career. This is all these Hollywood people do, not just the men, not just the women, not just the straight, not just the gay, not just the non-binary - they all scheme on how to get more attention and how to get more cameras in their faces and how to boost their career. The motive is always the same - if the public isn't talking about you right now, your career is dead, so you need to do anything possible to get people talking about you.

How did Florence Pugh and Anya Taylor Joy boost their careers?

Pugh got critical acclaim (including an Oscar nomination) in several roles, including Midsommar and Little Women, and stole a Marvel movie right from under an actual Avenger. ATJ got critical acclaim in a money maker in Split, then got raves for The Miniaturist and The Queen's Gambit and is now aiming to be David O'Russell's new muse.

Notice a difference? The latter two got a boost from actual acting, not woke, not campaigning for roles, not virtue signaling.

Asia Kate Dillion is a mediocre performer who picks up the game controller to Hollywood's insane desire to be the guiding light of identity politics and is slam fisting Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A as fast as possible.

 

[rockaction]

You can go to motive all you want, and that's where you run into the most trouble. Because bad intent generally can't be proved from actions that could otherwise be explained away by other motivations.

That's why motive is the last thing they tell you to go to as a trial lawyer. Because it's the flimsiest of things.

 

[BladeRunner]

True, but then we'll have to hear for the next decade how the country is genderist because there have been no women or nonbinary award winners. 

They should just make a bunch of micro categories, everyone gets a trophy.  I would win the trophy for worst performance at pretending they give a #### about the award shows.

The real question is why are we even letting a minority of a minority of a minority group dictate anything at all?  These people make up .000004% of the population.  They should be conforming to us and it should not be the other way around.

IMO, all of this is a result of people having too much time on their hands.  Back in the old days, you had to worry if you could eat, whether you survived child-birth or any number of things that could kill you. 

This is how civilizations collapse - from having it too good to the point where people actually have the time and audacity to say that a female really isn't a female and a male really isn't a male.  And there are 1 billion sexes and genders not because there are actually one billion sexes and genders but because they just don't want to conform like a spoiled ####### child.

Too much time on their hands.  We need to mandate that all 18 years old's serve 4 years in the military.  Maybe that will stop this nonsense as people realize there is more to life than sitting around making things up and trying to force that as a reality upon everyone else.  And everyone needs to stop catering and pandering to these idiots.

Maybe forcing people to see the realities of life will wake them up.