mistercrayon wrote:

Man that new Quentin Tarantino film feels like it’s a Quentin Tarantino film made up of Quentin Tarantino films.

I've always had problem with Tarantino's casual racism.

and the fact he's shit.

nick_md wrote:

Dark Soldier wrote:

Or perhaps at the end of the day there's no malice in it and its been completely misread partridgeshrug

No malice in it doesn't mean it isn't damaging or doesn't need to be called out. Oh I didn't mean to do xyz so xyz doesn't matter don't always fly, chief. Calling shit out doesn't have to mean an attack that needs to be defended.

No it doesn't but I've always gone with leeway in this place, if its obviously cuntish, fair fucks. I've known pretty much every poster for long enough to know if they're coming on like a transphobe/racist/bell. I'd rather it be as it is than each post being checked carefully for fear of offense.

Call away, I'll continue to wobble me head. Its why I stay out of the misogyny and serious threads, fuck that noise.

If any post here should be moderated it is reg's careless and wanton accusation of transphobia Vs kow.


I mean, kow's no saint (I have told him off myself for racist language). But reading that post and then reg, it's honestly fucking out of order from reg, that. Shame on you, man.

To be fair though, saying that somebody has written something transphobic / racist / misogynistic is not the same as saying that the person who wrote it is.

nick_md wrote:

Dark Soldier wrote:

nick_md wrote:

Dark Soldier wrote:

Or perhaps at the end of the day there's no malice in it and its been completely misread partridgeshrug

No malice in it doesn't mean it isn't damaging or doesn't need to be called out. Oh I didn't mean to do xyz so xyz doesn't matter don't always fly, chief. Calling shit out doesn't have to mean an attack that needs to be defended.

No it doesn't but I've always gone with leeway in this place, if its obviously cuntish, fair fucks. I've known pretty much every poster for long enough to know if they're coming on like a transphobe/racist/bell. I'd rather it be as it is than each post being checked carefully for fear of offense. Call away, I'll continue to wobble me head. Its why I stay out of the misogyny and serious threads, fuck that noise.

But that's exactly the point; the intentionay not be there, but it's important to highlight when, intention aside, something that's said may not be cool, and to try to highlight why it isn't cool. It doesn't have to be obviously cuntish. Reg's post was pretty confrontational and I have a lot of time for the argument against it (people feel they're under attack for something that I genuinely don't feel they intend). It's still worth calling out, in a civilised manner wherever possible.

Pfft, far too rational.  We need to be more polarised in here.  Haven’t you read Animal Farm?

nick_md wrote:

Dark Soldier wrote:

nick_md wrote:

Dark Soldier wrote:

Or perhaps at the end of the day there's no malice in it and its been completely misread partridgeshrug

No malice in it doesn't mean it isn't damaging or doesn't need to be called out. Oh I didn't mean to do xyz so xyz doesn't matter don't always fly, chief. Calling shit out doesn't have to mean an attack that needs to be defended.

No it doesn't but I've always gone with leeway in this place, if its obviously cuntish, fair fucks. I've known pretty much every poster for long enough to know if they're coming on like a transphobe/racist/bell. I'd rather it be as it is than each post being checked carefully for fear of offense.

Call away, I'll continue to wobble me head. Its why I stay out of the misogyny and serious threads, fuck that noise.

But that's exactly the point; the intention may not be there, but it's important to highlight when, intention aside, something that's said may not be cool, and to try to highlight why it isn't cool. It doesn't have to be obviously cuntish.

Reg's post was pretty confrontational and I have a lot of time for the argument against it (people feel they're under attack for something that I genuinely don't feel they intend). It's still worth calling out, in a civilised manner wherever possible.

There is absolutely nothing to call out. He said their gender doesn't affect the fact that in his opinion, their movies are shit. In the context of a discussion of their having transitioned, it would have been entirely odd to say, the wachoskis movies are shit. The reference to what their gender was then, and now, reinforced the point. It wasn't transphobic. It did not "deadame" them. And it wasn't schoolground bullying, the wachoskis aren't here, so the whole moralising teacher shite didn't need to come into it. We're adults here, not children. Deadnaming is harmful in the school ground because it denies the kid's gender identity, undermines it by reminding them, to their face or via Chinese whispers, that it is viewed as dodgy or illegitimate. Same for @ing on twitter.

This was clearly not deadnaming.Kow was referring to the wachowski brothers then, and the sisters now. If that's wrong, well, I watched the matrix 11 days ago on a flight to Helsinki, and I guess the wachoski's own film is guilty of deadnaming them - because its end credits say made by the wachowski brothers. By that logic, Warner Bros should have reedited every film and changed that description?

I can't believe I have to explain this shit. It's fucking simple.

The Matrix was fucking amazing in the day.

Edited cos tequila

I can’t agree with that.

Armitage_Shankburn wrote:

nick_md wrote:

Dark Soldier wrote:

nick_md wrote:

Dark Soldier wrote:

Or perhaps at the end of the day there's no malice in it and its been completely misread partridgeshrug

No malice in it doesn't mean it isn't damaging or doesn't need to be called out. Oh I didn't mean to do xyz so xyz doesn't matter don't always fly, chief. Calling shit out doesn't have to mean an attack that needs to be defended.

No it doesn't but I've always gone with leeway in this place, if its obviously cuntish, fair fucks. I've known pretty much every poster for long enough to know if they're coming on like a transphobe/racist/bell. I'd rather it be as it is than each post being checked carefully for fear of offense. Call away, I'll continue to wobble me head. Its why I stay out of the misogyny and serious threads, fuck that noise.

But that's exactly the point; the intention may not be there, but it's important to highlight when, intention aside, something that's said may not be cool, and to try to highlight why it isn't cool. It doesn't have to be obviously cuntish. Reg's post was pretty confrontational and I have a lot of time for the argument against it (people feel they're under attack for something that I genuinely don't feel they intend). It's still worth calling out, in a civilised manner wherever possible.

There is absolutely nothing to call out. He said their gender doesn't affect the fact that in his opinion, their movies are shit. In the context of a discussion of their having transitioned, it would have been entirely odd to say, the wachoskis movies are shit. The reference to what their gender was then, and now, reinforced the point. It wasn't transphobic. It did not "deadame" them. And it wasn't schoolground bullying, the wachoskis aren't here, so the whole moralising teacher shite didn't need to come into it. We're adults here, not children. Deadnaming is harmful in the school ground because it denies the kid's gender identity, undermines it by reminding them, to their face or via Chinese whispers, that it is viewed as dodgy or illegitimate. Same for @ing on twitter. This was clearly not deadnaming.Kow was referring to the wachowski brothers then, and the sisters now. If that's wrong, well, I watched the matrix 11 days ago on a flight to Helsinki, and I guess the wachoski's own film is guilty of deadnaming them - because its end credits say made by the wachowski brothers. By that logic, Warner Bros should have reedited every film and changed that description? I can't believe I have to explain this shit. It's fucking simple.

Well I would expect a re-release of the film to update their names, tbh.

The 'they were shit as men, just as shit as women' thing is not necessary and was done as a jokey quip. I didn't use the term 'deadnaming', but if you can't see why maybe thinking about how words like that can be taken by people, and instead feel the need to 'explain this shit' to those pointing it out, then I can't help you really. I shouldn't have to 'explain this shit' either.

poprock wrote:

I’m sure we can all agree on one thing: The Matrix sequels were both shit.

I don’t know.

I never watched them.

Now there's a film I have watched and completely forgot existed.

I was the one who brought up the trans thing.  I was genuinely surprised that both brothers were trans. But my post was over the top with the healthy side order of dickishness. 

Where that came from was the distress I feel about trans people because I cannot imagine how unhappy anyone must be who doesn't have a fundamental thing like that sorted out for themselves and may be wrong here but I don't think they can ever be happy. I'd like to be wrong about that though.

The apparant volume is alarming. Maybe that's a perception thing but the thought that for centuries large numbers of people have felt that way is depressing.

I liked the Matrix and couldn't care less about the status of its creator(s).

I liked the sequels too.

I don't think Matrix 4 is a good idea but I'd still go and see and call it out if it's shit.

What people need not be fearful of is if someone is an arsehole or poor at something then it should be called out whether they are wheelchair bound, blind, Muslim, Catholic, gay, trans or whatever. I'm not entirely sure that can be done about certain groups without there being underlying fear of being called out as something bad.

Your shit at foaming pont binary.

Lord_Griff wrote:

Your shit at foaming pont binary.

How dare you, I fucking rock at foaming.

@Davy You're shit at recognising drugs.