Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

did we just wake up in Nazi Germany? KEVIN SPACEY blacklisted!!!!!


Recommended Posts

Just now, GordonCole said:

I'm not one to pray usually, but I pray you never change, DB! Now don't you let them send you to Anger Management classes or anything, as I would so miss your sophisticated raconteur qualities. I haven't enjoyed myself this much reading such intellectually stimulating posts by you, since I met Professor Irwin Corey once on the train.

Hope he was wearing his running shoes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, darkblue said:

Hope he was wearing his running shoes.

5 minutes ago, darkblue said:

Hope he was wearing his running shoes.

26 minutes ago, darkblue said:

 

Speaking of "running shoes", did it hurt when someone let the air out of your Nike Air Windrunners and you hit your head on the cement? Those frontal lobe injuries can be a real killer on one's mental abilities.

26 minutes ago, darkblue said:

No need for my permission.

Live free or die.

If that's who I think it is, I consider the comparison quite a compliment, DB.

And as usual, yes you are right.

Can I also say how entertaining I find your posts.

 

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is unfamiliar territory for me.  It's kind of strange.  I don't wander over here to the Chit-Chat Club.  I guess it's right for this thread to have been movied--moved over here because the discussion has left movies far behind.  Of course there is still tremendous relevance to movies, but it's hard to keep the focus on that.

 

 

21 hours ago, limey said:

As I read that, Spence states

  1. that he initially believed the allegations
  2. that there are now too many
  3. that they seem to be jumping on the financial bandwagon

1 is self explanatory.

2 could either be taken as there are an awful lot of reports emerging, or to imply that these reports may be invalid. I read it as the former, you apparently read it as the latter.

3 could be taken either as some of the reports the media are picking up are probably motivated by money, or that all those reports are. Again I gave it the benefit of the doubt, especially since he used 'seem'.

These are just my interpretations of what I'd read - Spence is the only person who can confirm/deny.

However, I honestly don't believe that there was enough in Spence's comment to categorize it as rhetoric - that is, persuasive dialog designed to infer that all, or even that the majority of the reports are false. To me, it sits more as a simple opinion that some of the reports emerging have some probability of being suspect - which I think is fair comment.

Some of the posts in the thread probably do qualify as rhetoric (in terms of black & white thinking that one side is always right and the other always wrong), but some of your responses seemed to follow their own rhetoric - that any suggestion that some reports could be false equals an assertion that all reports are false. That's the point I was trying to make & I apologize if I failed to make that clear.

 

 

 

The culture of sexual abuse in our country is closely linked with it's hierarchical and power structures.  The individuals and institutions with power are fierce in maintaining that power.  To allow charges of abuse and violation to come forward would threaten the power structure, because it's members would be eliminated, also discrediting the institutions from association.  Part of the means of maintaining the status quo is establishing a range of ideas, and attitudes that provoke conditioned responses.  A vocabulary, or rhetoric, is supplied to voice these responses.  This rhetoric is designed to forestall public accusation through threats, intimidation, and creation of a sense of futility in the victim.  It is also designed to delegitimize the victims in the case of public accusations by charging them with base motives of retribution or mercenary self-interest.  We have seen a lot of this rhetoric in this thread, Spence's comments included.  

Very telling evidence of the intent of the existing power structure to maintain itself, not only through cultural biases, but deliberate action came to light today.  A woman came to a major newspaper with a fake accusation of a current political figure.  The obvious intent was to cast doubt on others who have come forward in recent weeks with stories of abuse.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If enough men wise up and start going their own way, the issue of "sex abuse" will be greatly diminished.

The many women who have used sex to their advantage in getting ahead in life will fight to keep this change in culture marginal, of course - but hopefully men have become ready enough as a consequence of feminist law to improve their lot, what with so much education and support being provided to them by already enlightened men.

Independence for all, both men and women alike.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, slaytonf said:

This is unfamiliar territory for me.  It's kind of strange.  I don't wander over here to the Chit-Chat Club.  I guess it's right for this thread to have been movied--moved over here because the discussion has left movies far behind.  Of course there is still tremendous relevance to movies, but it's hard to keep the focus on that.

 

 

The culture of sexual abuse in our country is closely linked with it's hierarchical and power structures.  The individuals and institutions with power are fierce in maintaining that power.  To allow charges of abuse and violation to come forward would threaten the power structure, because it's members would be eliminated, also discrediting the institutions from association.  Part of the means of maintaining the status quo is establishing a range of ideas, and attitudes that provoke conditioned responses.  A vocabulary, or rhetoric, is supplied to voice these responses.  This rhetoric is designed to forestall public accusation through threats, intimidation, and creation of a sense of futility in the victim.  It is also designed to delegitimize the victims in the case of public accusations by charging them with base motives of retribution or mercenary self-interest.  We have seen a lot of this rhetoric in this thread, Spence's comments included.  

Very telling evidence of the intent of the existing power structure to maintain itself, not only through cultural biases, but deliberate action came to light today.  A woman came to a major newspaper with a fake accusation of a current political figure.  The obvious intent was to cast doubt on others who have come forward in recent weeks with stories of abuse.

These are seismic power shifts-- like what we've seen in the Civil Rights Movement and the same sex marriage push.

The trump Administration is a direct response-- backlash--to all of this-- something of a nasty death rattle.

We're at the point of no return. All the criticism and negativity hurled at these women is only going to make them and all other women stronger.

For every woman who speaks out, there could be hundreds in the shadows who have the same story but have been silenced over the years for numerous reasons.

This will be a powerful societal transformation of a cultural movement that started in the 60s.

There's just no telling where it will end and who's going to end up at the bottom of it.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, slaytonf said:

The culture of sexual abuse in our country is closely linked with it's hierarchical and power structures.  The individuals and institutions with power are fierce in maintaining that power.  To allow charges of abuse and violation to come forward would threaten the power structure, because it's members would be eliminated, also discrediting the institutions from association.  Part of the means of maintaining the status quo is establishing a range of ideas, and attitudes that provoke conditioned responses.  A vocabulary, or rhetoric, is supplied to voice these responses.  This rhetoric is designed to forestall public accusation through threats, intimidation, and creation of a sense of futility in the victim.  It is also designed to delegitimize the victims in the case of public accusations by charging them with base motives of retribution or mercenary self-interest.  We have seen a lot of this rhetoric in this thread, Spence's comments included.  

Very telling evidence of the intent of the existing power structure to maintain itself, not only through cultural biases, but deliberate action came to light today.  A woman came to a major newspaper with a fake accusation of a current political figure.  The obvious intent was to cast doubt on others who have come forward in recent weeks with stories of abuse.

You are obviously very passionate about your cause - however, you do it no service by reading every dissenting opinion as designed to do anything other than be a dissenting opinion. You're not going to change individual or societal thinking in any positive way by doing so - only alienate people and cause them to regard your own comments as same kind of conditioned response rhetoric you yourself seek to criticize.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Princess of Tap said:

This will be a powerful societal transformation of a cultural movement that started in the 60s.

There's just no telling where it will end and who's going to end up at the bottom of it.

Yep - men are gonna go their own way, and women will end up on the bottom of it.

As the wealth transference from men to women becomes more and more rare, the "societal transformation" will be a happy one for men, but for women maybe not so much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've worked with woman who were attractive and men actually did hit on them and were harassing them by being out of line, and I've worked with women who were delusional and thought men were hitting on them if they even just said hello to them in the morning. The hard thing is separating the sane women who know the difference between harassment and being congenial, and the women who see come-ons where there are none. Not to only criticize women for this attitude as I've known men who think every woman smiling at them like a waitress or server, thinks they are a hunk. My wife used to work as a waitress in college and said she would continually get old men writing on the back of their receipts, their name and phone numbers and a message to call them. She was like "I'm twenty, why would this old codger of 76 think I am interested in him."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, limey said:

You are obviously very passionate about your cause - however, you do it no service by reading every dissenting opinion as designed to do anything other than be a dissenting opinion. You're not going to change individual or societal thinking in any positive way by doing so - only alienate people and cause them to regard your own comments as same kind of conditioned response rhetoric you yourself seek to criticize.

Well, now, I don't have a cause, or an opinion so much.  I don't fool myself into thinking I will have any effect on people's thinking, let alone on a larger scale.  This is a very small cul-de-sac in an out-of-the-way Web site for a limited number of enthusiasts.  I am just presenting my conclusions based on my education, observation, and experience.  I'm not wedded to them emotionally, and I'm willing to change my position.  But I don't come to conclusions lightly, and it takes a good argument to convince me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, slaytonf said:

Well, now, I don't have a cause, or an opinion so much.  I don't fool myself into thinking I will have any effect on people's thinking, let alone on a larger scale.  This is a very small cul-de-sac in an out-of-the-way Web site for a limited number of enthusiasts.  I am just presenting my conclusions based on my education, observation, and experience.  I'm not wedded to them emotionally, and I'm willing to change my position.  But I don't come to conclusions lightly, and it takes a good argument to convince me.

Life experience, that seems to play a large role in people's opinions about anything. I would say so much more so with this subject.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I had another long and enlightening conversation with my daughter last night.
Today she sent me an email with a link to an article that I feel is highly share-worthy for this thread.
So I have posted it here for those of us interested in this topic to read and ponder.

Yes it is quite long, so I expect that those with extremely short attention spans will not peruse any further.
However, for the rest of us, read on...
 

Moral Panics

The Warlock Hunt Claire Berlinski

The #MeToo moment has now morphed into a moral panic that poses as much danger to women as it does to men.

[...]

 

Wow....

For those that abhor the auto-censor, here is the link:

https://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/12/06/the-warlock-hunt/

Because there is a similar dialogue in another thread (that I have also commented in) I have repeated this post there as well.

http://forums.tcm.com/topic/157676-i-will-miss-matt-lauer/?tab=comments#comment-1617581

Edited by TCMModerator1
Copyright concerns
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Stephan55 said:

knock it off? Women, I’m begging you: Please.

They won't. 

Women aren't capable of taking responsibility for anything bad that happens. Ever.

The only way to bring an end to gyno-centrism now is to cease funding it. The system of wealth-transference from males to females, through the institutions of marriage, divorce, family courts, and criminal law must be ended by men refusing to marry, live with, impregnate, and possibly even "date" women.

Men must go their own way, leaving women to take care of themselves. There's no other way to bring back rationalism or fairness.

Independence for everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2017 at 11:11 PM, darkblue said:

They won't. 

Women aren't capable of taking responsibility for anything bad that happens. Ever.

The only way to bring an end to gyno-centrism now is to cease funding it. The system of wealth-transference from males to females, through the institutions of marriage, divorce, family courts, and criminal law must be ended by men refusing to marry, live with, impregnate, and possibly even "date" women.

Men must go their own way, leaving women to take care of themselves. There's no other way to bring back rationalism or fairness.

Independence for everyone.

Gosh DB, you sound as jaded and angry as most of the "MeToo" women.
If you are right, then that will mean a severe drop in the human population.
Not a bad thing, as the fewer of us there are the less we stress the environment.

That is a far less painful way to "do away" with humanity than most I can think of.
So, I guess it's about time, and can't happen soon enough!

Link to post
Share on other sites

why is it the prerogative of the left who decides just who is stressing the planet and who is not?

the zero population growth nazis are waiting in the wings.

do we exist for the planet or does the planet exist for us?

God has given us dominion over all things upon this earth.

of course we should not irrevocably compromise our earth environment but let there come a concensus from all sectors and not an arbitrary dictate of action imposed by a few self-appointed demogogues.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NipkowDisc said:

why is it the prerogative of the left who decides just who is stressing the planet and who is not?

the zero population growth nazis are waiting in the wings.

do we exist for the planet or does the planet exist for us?

God has given us dominion over all things upon this earth.

of course we should not irrevocably compromise our earth environment but let there come a concensus from all sectors and not an arbitrary dictate of action imposed by a few self-appointed demogogues.

Overpopulation is a serious threat that could not only impact the Earth but human life as well. You need clean land in order to grow things.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Gershwin fan said:

Overpopulation is a serious threat that could not only impact the Earth but human life as well. You need clean land in order to grow things.

oh fudge! I will just eat kit kats, pepperidge farm milano cookies with plenty of refreshing milk.:D

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NipkowDisc said:

why is it the prerogative of the left who decides just who is stressing the planet and who is not?

the zero population growth nazis are waiting in the wings.

do we exist for the planet or does the planet exist for us?

God has given us dominion over all things upon this earth.

of course we should not irrevocably compromise our earth environment but let there come a concensus from all sectors and not an arbitrary dictate of action imposed by a few self-appointed demogogues.

Left, Right, or in the Middle, the planet can get along just fine without US, but WE cannot get along without this planet!

It's about time we acknowledged that and started taking better care of the only planet we have, instead of crapping in the very place we lay our heads!

The prime directive for Adam and Eve was to "care for, and tend" the very beautiful and self-sustaining "garden" in which they were placed. NOT to turn it into a hell unfit for beast, plant or man.
Dominion was a charge of responsibility, not a license for abuse.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Stephan55 said:

Gosh DB, you sound as jaded and angry as most of the "MeToo" women.

That's what you infer.

All I can tell you is that I don't feel angry.

But I do know the system in which we're presently living and I've had a lot of experience with women throughout my life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Gershwin fan said:

Overpopulation is a serious threat that could not only impact the Earth but human life as well. You need clean land in order to grow things.

A huge reduction of the number of people in the world would be great.

Not for Corporate capitalism, of course. It depends on constant consumer growth for its survival.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...