FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Pansexual Deadpool
Pansexual Deadpool
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing?" Why wouldn’t it be? "Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. " There are LGBT people in real life, and it has no age-rating. It’s almost as though kids can understand that we’re all different. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44921284 "In 2015, Tim Miller, who directed the first Deadpool movie, confirmed the anti-hero would be pansexual in the X-Men universe. "Pansexual. I want that quoted. Pansexual Deadpool," he said in an interview at the time. Pansexual is when a person is attracted to someone for their personality regardless of their sex or gender." Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. " Can we just make a movie, where unless the story is about sexuality or race, gender etc that we don't make an issue of it? I don't turn up for work and introduce myself as white hetrosexual before I do anything? Not every black person I work with says good morning, I'm black before continuing their day, and the men who are gay don't tell me they are before they ask if I want sugar in my cuppa. Just get on with it and treat everyone the same? The issue shouldn't be about people's sexuality or gender or race, but about the unacceptable behaviour/attitudes of people.  I've gone off track! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Can we just make a movie, where unless the story is about sexuality or race, gender etc that we don't make an issue of it?" There are loads. "Just get on with it and treat everyone the same? The issue shouldn't be about people's sexuality or gender or race, but about the unacceptable behaviour/attitudes of people." The difficulty is that white straight people are well represented, so we don’t think about what it’s like to rarely see characters we identify with in those respects. We need to see minority representation. And, given how he behaves, Deadpool’s sexuality -is- important. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Can we just make a movie, where unless the story is about sexuality or race, gender etc that we don't make an issue of it? There are loads. Just get on with it and treat everyone the same? The issue shouldn't be about people's sexuality or gender or race, but about the unacceptable behaviour/attitudes of people. The difficulty is that white straight people are well represented, so we don’t think about what it’s like to rarely see characters we identify with in those respects. We need to see minority representation. And, given how he behaves, Deadpool’s sexuality -is- important." Does sexuality define you as a human? If under representation in movies is an issue, then it's a separate issue to entertainment, which is what I want from a movie. I'm in different to lead characters race or sexuality if it's a good movie, but this is more of a publicity stunt than the director feeling the need for equality and representation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44921284 "In 2015, Tim Miller, who directed the first Deadpool movie, confirmed the anti-hero would be pansexual in the X-Men universe. "Pansexual. I want that quoted. Pansexual Deadpool," he said in an interview at the time. Pansexual is when a person is attracted to someone for their personality regardless of their sex or gender." Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. " Except he falls for a gorgeous, sexy, sex mad brunette..... Hardly breaking the Hollywood mold are they  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Can we just make a movie, where unless the story is about sexuality or race, gender etc that we don't make an issue of it? There are loads. Just get on with it and treat everyone the same? The issue shouldn't be about people's sexuality or gender or race, but about the unacceptable behaviour/attitudes of people. The difficulty is that white straight people are well represented, so we don’t think about what it’s like to rarely see characters we identify with in those respects. We need to see minority representation. And, given how he behaves, Deadpool’s sexuality -is- important." How was deadpool's sexuality expressed any differently to almost every other film in the first one? (not seen the second one yet) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Why wouldn’t it be? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. There are LGBT people in real life, and it has no age-rating. It’s almost as though kids can understand that we’re all different." Deadpool kills a lot of people. (Not by fucking them.) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44921284 "In 2015, Tim Miller, who directed the first Deadpool movie, confirmed the anti-hero would be pansexual in the X-Men universe. "Pansexual. I want that quoted. Pansexual Deadpool," he said in an interview at the time. Pansexual is when a person is attracted to someone for their personality regardless of their sex or gender." Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. Can we just make a movie, where unless the story is about sexuality or race, gender etc that we don't make an issue of it? I don't turn up for work and introduce myself as white hetrosexual before I do anything? Not every black person I work with says good morning, I'm black before continuing their day, and the men who are gay don't tell me they are before they ask if I want sugar in my cuppa. Just get on with it and treat everyone the same? The issue shouldn't be about people's sexuality or gender or race, but about the unacceptable behaviour/attitudes of people. I've gone off track!" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does sexuality define you as a human?" Not entirely, but it is one of the things which defines me. "If under representation in movies is an issue, then it's a separate issue to entertainment, which is what I want from a movie." I see. There is no reason why one should affect the other. Did Deadpool’s pansexuality have a negative impact on the film’s entertainment value? Does reading this quote from the director somehow retrospectively affect the film’s quality? Secondly, it’s easy for you to separate the issue when you are so well represented. "I'm in different to lead characters race or sexuality if it's a good movie, but this is more of a publicity stunt than the director feeling the need for equality and representation." Your opinion here is largely informed by the fact that, as a straight, white man, you are very well represented in pretty much all films. That allows you to not think about how rarely you are represented. Of course we can enjoy characters of all sorts, of course we can identify with aspects of their character. But we identify more strongly with those who represent us. Don’t believe me? Look at the reactions of the black audience to Black Panther. Then come back and tell me that representation isn’t important. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Deadpool kills a lot of people. (Not by fucking them.)" I know. But you quoted the age rating in the context of his sexuality, not the violence. The age rating has to do with the violence and the graphic portrayal of sex, but NOT his sexuality. Don’t try to worm your way out of that one. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How can the script writers convey him as pansexual? I'm wondering how the dialogue will go." 1) By having him attracted to people regardless of sex or gender. 2) Will go? The film came out in 2016. . "How was deadpool's sexuality expressed any differently to almost every other film in the first one? (not seen the second one yet) " Sorry, can you clarify? Every other film? There have only been two... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44921284 "In 2015, Tim Miller, who directed the first Deadpool movie, confirmed the anti-hero would be pansexual in the X-Men universe. "Pansexual. I want that quoted. Pansexual Deadpool," he said in an interview at the time. Pansexual is when a person is attracted to someone for their personality regardless of their sex or gender." Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. " No, Gender politics is why hollywood has created rubbish for the last 5 years. It has no place on movies, keep it out of entertainment. Can't turn on the tv now without hearing trump bashing, corbyn , brexit or 57 genders. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44921284 "In 2015, Tim Miller, who directed the first Deadpool movie, confirmed the anti-hero would be pansexual in the X-Men universe. "Pansexual. I want that quoted. Pansexual Deadpool," he said in an interview at the time. Pansexual is when a person is attracted to someone for their personality regardless of their sex or gender." Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. Can we just make a movie, where unless the story is about sexuality or race, gender etc that we don't make an issue of it? I don't turn up for work and introduce myself as white hetrosexual before I do anything? Not every black person I work with says good morning, I'm black before continuing their day, and the men who are gay don't tell me they are before they ask if I want sugar in my cuppa. Just get on with it and treat everyone the same? The issue shouldn't be about people's sexuality or gender or race, but about the unacceptable behaviour/attitudes of people. I've gone off track!"Exactly | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. No, Gender politics is why hollywood has created rubbish for the last 5 years." You seem to be confusing gender politics and sexuality. Did you mean identity politics? "It has no place on movies, keep it out of entertainment." Right. So, entertainment should only be about things that you, personally, have approved? There’s only space in the cinema for mindless popcorn fodder? "Can't turn on the tv now without hearing trump bashing, corbyn , brexit or 57 genders." So, now you want to keep politics out of politics, too? Righty-ho. What’s this got to do with movies, btw? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? " Absolutely. Yes, please. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Deadpool kills a lot of people. (Not by fucking them.) I know. But you quoted the age rating in the context of his sexuality, not the violence. The age rating has to do with the violence and the graphic portrayal of sex, but NOT his sexuality. Don’t try to worm your way out of that one." I won't bother explaining why I mentioned the age rating. You know what everyone thinks much better than they do. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. No, Gender politics is why hollywood has created rubbish for the last 5 years. You seem to be confusing gender politics and sexuality. Did you mean identity politics? It has no place on movies, keep it out of entertainment. Right. So, entertainment should only be about things that you, personally, have approved? There’s only space in the cinema for mindless popcorn fodder? Can't turn on the tv now without hearing trump bashing, corbyn , brexit or 57 genders. So, now you want to keep politics out of politics, too? Righty-ho. What’s this got to do with movies, btw?" The op was askimg a general question about if something was a good idea , I said no. Take care and enjoy your day | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Deadpool kills a lot of people. (Not by fucking them.) I know. But you quoted the age rating in the context of his sexuality, not the violence. The age rating has to do with the violence and the graphic portrayal of sex, but NOT his sexuality. Don’t try to worm your way out of that one. I won't bother explaining why I mentioned the age rating. You know what everyone thinks much better than they do. " I think that’s a little unfair, it did read that way to me too, whether it was intentional or not, Steels. Please *do* clarify if it wasn’t supposed to, and yes perhaps a question could have been asked, but it was posed as the age rating linked to his sexuality was being questioned as correct. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. No, Gender politics is why hollywood has created rubbish for the last 5 years. You seem to be confusing gender politics and sexuality. Did you mean identity politics? It has no place on movies, keep it out of entertainment. Right. So, entertainment should only be about things that you, personally, have approved? There’s only space in the cinema for mindless popcorn fodder? Can't turn on the tv now without hearing trump bashing, corbyn , brexit or 57 genders. So, now you want to keep politics out of politics, too? Righty-ho. What’s this got to do with movies, btw? The op was askimg a general question about if something was a good idea , I said no. Take care and enjoy your day " Nah. You said no, then spouted some opinions that I found displayed a massive whiff of dismissive attitude to the concept of the importance of representation of LGBT community in entertainment. You got challenged on it, and didn’t like it. Enjoy your day, nice couple is it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. No, Gender politics is why hollywood has created rubbish for the last 5 years. You seem to be confusing gender politics and sexuality. Did you mean identity politics? It has no place on movies, keep it out of entertainment. Right. So, entertainment should only be about things that you, personally, have approved? There’s only space in the cinema for mindless popcorn fodder? Can't turn on the tv now without hearing trump bashing, corbyn , brexit or 57 genders. So, now you want to keep politics out of politics, too? Righty-ho. What’s this got to do with movies, btw? The op was askimg a general question about if something was a good idea , I said no. Take care and enjoy your day Nah. You said no, then spouted some opinions that I found displayed a massive whiff of dismissive attitude to the concept of the importance of representation of LGBT community in entertainment. You got challenged on it, and didn’t like it. Enjoy your day, nice couple is it?" I'm sorry my opinion upset you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The op was askimg a general question about if something was a good idea , I said no. Take care and enjoy your day " Actually, the OP asked a fairly specific question which, as Estella pointed out, you’ve used as a springboard to air your self-centred views. I see that your straight, white privilege is working out for you. Maybe it’s time to learn that the world doesn’t belong to you, ‘nice’ couple. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I won't bother explaining why I mentioned the age rating." “I’ve been called out on something and I can’t work out how to work my way out of it, so I’ll pretend I can’t be bothered explaining, when I clearly can still be bothered posting.” "You know what everyone thinks much better than they do. " I don’t. But I do think. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. No, Gender politics is why hollywood has created rubbish for the last 5 years. You seem to be confusing gender politics and sexuality. Did you mean identity politics? It has no place on movies, keep it out of entertainment. Right. So, entertainment should only be about things that you, personally, have approved? There’s only space in the cinema for mindless popcorn fodder? Can't turn on the tv now without hearing trump bashing, corbyn , brexit or 57 genders. So, now you want to keep politics out of politics, too? Righty-ho. What’s this got to do with movies, btw? The op was askimg a general question about if something was a good idea , I said no. Take care and enjoy your day Nah. You said no, then spouted some opinions that I found displayed a massive whiff of dismissive attitude to the concept of the importance of representation of LGBT community in entertainment. You got challenged on it, and didn’t like it. Enjoy your day, nice couple is it? I'm sorry my opinion upset you. " It’s not upset me. Just own what it really was. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The op was askimg a general question about if something was a good idea , I said no. Take care and enjoy your day Actually, the OP asked a fairly specific question which, as Estella pointed out, you’ve used as a springboard to air your self-centred views. I see that your straight, white privilege is working out for you. Maybe it’s time to learn that the world doesn’t belong to you, ‘nice’ couple." Straight / white / male Sexiest & racist in one swoop. Congrats | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The op was askimg a general question about if something was a good idea , I said no. Take care and enjoy your day Actually, the OP asked a fairly specific question which, as Estella pointed out, you’ve used as a springboard to air your self-centred views. I see that your straight, white privilege is working out for you. Maybe it’s time to learn that the world doesn’t belong to you, ‘nice’ couple. Straight / white / male Sexiest & racist in one swoop. Congrats " He is sexy, I’ll give you that. He’s not racist though. And I don’t think you understand the terms you’re trying to use by the way. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The op was askimg a general question about if something was a good idea , I said no. Take care and enjoy your day Actually, the OP asked a fairly specific question which, as Estella pointed out, you’ve used as a springboard to air your self-centred views. I see that your straight, white privilege is working out for you. Maybe it’s time to learn that the world doesn’t belong to you, ‘nice’ couple. Straight / white / male Sexiest & racist in one swoop. Congrats He is sexy, I’ll give you that. He’s not racist though. And I don’t think you understand the terms you’re trying to use by the way. " Once u bring someones colour into it i want nothing to do with it. And I'm bi ffs so far from straight | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How can the script writers convey him as pansexual? I'm wondering how the dialogue will go. 1) By having him attracted to people regardless of sex or gender. 2) Will go? The film came out in 2016. . How was deadpool's sexuality expressed any differently to almost every other film in the first one? (not seen the second one yet) Sorry, can you clarify? Every other film? There have only been two..." You're quoting this the way you do is confusing lol I meant almost every other film produced, not just deadpool ones. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Straight / white / male Sexiest & racist in one swoop. Congrats Once u bring someones colour into it i want nothing to do with it. And I'm bi ffs so far from straight" Way to totally miss the point. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The op was askimg a general question about if something was a good idea , I said no. Take care and enjoy your day Actually, the OP asked a fairly specific question which, as Estella pointed out, you’ve used as a springboard to air your self-centred views. I see that your straight, white privilege is working out for you. Maybe it’s time to learn that the world doesn’t belong to you, ‘nice’ couple. Straight / white / male Sexiest & racist in one swoop. Congrats He is sexy, I’ll give you that. He’s not racist though. And I don’t think you understand the terms you’re trying to use by the way. Once u bring someones colour into it i want nothing to do with it. And I'm bi ffs so far from straight " I’m sorry my opinion has upset you. It’s important to understand about privilege though and yes, it’s hard to hear when it makes us look at ourselves and our sometimes ugly views. I feel for you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You're quoting this the way you do is confusing lol" By quoting the words you wrote and responding to them? I’m not sure what’s confusing about that. "I meant almost every other film produced, not just deadpool ones. " I see. Well, it’s a while since I saw the first. But, in general, Deadpool acts in a sexualised way. That’s what I meant when I said that his sexuality is important. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In regards to deadpool. I don't think it made a difference if he was pansexual or not. He only loved one person in the entire film. Would anyone have known he was pansexual if the director hadn't said it?" . I'd have guessed because of the way he walks. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In regards to deadpool. I don't think it made a difference if he was pansexual or not. He only loved one person in the entire film. Would anyone have known he was pansexual if the director hadn't said it?. I'd have guessed because of the way he walks. " #answerforeverything | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In regards to deadpool. I don't think it made a difference if he was pansexual or not. He only loved one person in the entire film. Would anyone have known he was pansexual if the director hadn't said it?. I'd have guessed because of the way he walks. #answerforeverything " #followingTHEfableader | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In regards to deadpool. I don't think it made a difference if he was pansexual or not. He only loved one person in the entire film. Would anyone have known he was pansexual if the director hadn't said it?. I'd have guessed because of the way he walks. #answerforeverything #followingTHEfableader " #iknowwhoiam | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We’re aware of most movies heroes’ sexual orientation even when the movie is not about their romantic life or sex life: - Spider-Man - Superman - James Bond - Indiana Jones - Harry Potter - Star Wars Etc etc etc. White, straight men are almost always the heroes. Why? There’s no justification whatsoever but it send a shitty message to girls and women and black people and LGBT people when they’re never the hero, only the sidekick. " Black Panther Wonder Woman Steel Magnolias Sex in the City Shaft Spawn Blade Hollywood is a business concerned with making huge amounts of money, so they concentrate on their best-selling products which currently happen to be mostly white men. Blame audiences for having preferences! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In regards to deadpool. I don't think it made a difference if he was pansexual or not. He only loved one person in the entire film. Would anyone have known he was pansexual if the director hadn't said it?. I'd have guessed because of the way he walks. #answerforeverything #followingTHEfableader #iknowwhoiam " #heknowswhoheis | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We’re aware of most movies heroes’ sexual orientation even when the movie is not about their romantic life or sex life: - Spider-Man - Superman - James Bond - Indiana Jones - Harry Potter - Star Wars Etc etc etc. White, straight men are almost always the heroes. Why? There’s no justification whatsoever but it send a shitty message to girls and women and black people and LGBT people when they’re never the hero, only the sidekick. Black Panther Wonder Woman Steel Magnolias Sex in the City Shaft Spawn Blade Hollywood is a business concerned with making huge amounts of money, so they concentrate on their best-selling products which currently happen to be mostly white men. Blame audiences for having preferences!" My point, in response to someone saying Deadpool's sexual orientation was irrelevant. was that we tend to know the sexual orientation (relevant or not) when the character is straight. You've answered a point I wasn't making. Your examples of films are very much the exception, not the rule. But your list includes some really successful movies, lets hope they spawn many, many more with more diverse heroes. Because it does matter the black people and women and LGBT people etc can be the hero too. And we'll never know the breadth of what audiences would enjoy while the self fulfilling prophecy exists - "Films with straight, white, male characters sell so let's pump more money into films about straight, white, men and commission more of those films and groom white men for leading roles..." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion." #youropinionisvaluedhere | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44921284 "In 2015, Tim Miller, who directed the first Deadpool movie, confirmed the anti-hero would be pansexual in the X-Men universe. "Pansexual. I want that quoted. Pansexual Deadpool," he said in an interview at the time. Pansexual is when a person is attracted to someone for their personality regardless of their sex or gender." Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. Can we just make a movie, where unless the story is about sexuality or race, gender etc that we don't make an issue of it? I don't turn up for work and introduce myself as white hetrosexual before I do anything? Not every black person I work with says good morning, I'm black before continuing their day, and the men who are gay don't tell me they are before they ask if I want sugar in my cuppa. Just get on with it and treat everyone the same? The issue shouldn't be about people's sexuality or gender or race, but about the unacceptable behaviour/attitudes of people. I've gone off track!"Bloody well said...but that won't stop the minority agenda brigade flooding the post with their messages for their agendas. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44921284 "In 2015, Tim Miller, who directed the first Deadpool movie, confirmed the anti-hero would be pansexual in the X-Men universe. "Pansexual. I want that quoted. Pansexual Deadpool," he said in an interview at the time. Pansexual is when a person is attracted to someone for their personality regardless of their sex or gender." Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. " Get the definition of Panse ual right first of all. And given the level of graphic violence in Deadpool I think him being Pansexual is way down the list of things to be concerned abut for a 15 y.o | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means." I find it disappointing when people post narrow-minded, self-involved bullshit that doesn’t stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. "This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying." Congratulations on not understanding the first thing about debate. "I don't like being dictated to." Bully for you. Maybe post an argument that holds water. "I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment." I don’t like having to read ill-informed tripe, and yet here we are. "My opinion is just that. My opinion." I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again; this is a foolish mantra. It does not make you immune from scrutiny. Quite the opposite; you should be able to demonstrate why your opinions are informed, based on something. “It’s my opinion,” tells us nothing. It suggests (although it may not be the case) that you can’t back it up. That you have no rational explanation for it. So, what we have is a thread with some people explaining why representation is important, and others crying into their cornflakes because they’ve got everything they want and need, and can’t bear to think that others should hope for the same thing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Bloody well said...but that won't stop the minority agenda brigade flooding the post with their messages for their agendas." Are you capable of forming and communicating anything approaching a valid point, or are you just here to call people names? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one reason we haven't seen more LGBT superheroes is that these films (and associated merchandise) are designed and marketed to make big money. Having a non heterosexual lead makes it harder to sell in certain markets where homosexuality is still stigmatized." Is the answer, then, to pander to bigotry? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44921284 "In 2015, Tim Miller, who directed the first Deadpool movie, confirmed the anti-hero would be pansexual in the X-Men universe. "Pansexual. I want that quoted. Pansexual Deadpool," he said in an interview at the time. Pansexual is when a person is attracted to someone for their personality regardless of their sex or gender." Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. Get the definition of Panse ual right first of all. And given the level of graphic violence in Deadpool I think him being Pansexual is way down the list of things to be concerned abut for a 15 y.o" Easy way to think of pansexual: like bisexual but including everything “in between”. BIsexual by definition assumes two binary conditions. PANsexual acknowledges there is a significant nonbinary element between the two. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How can the script writers convey him as pansexual? I'm wondering how the dialogue will go. 1) By having him attracted to people regardless of sex or gender. 2) Will go? The film came out in 2016. . How was deadpool's sexuality expressed any differently to almost every other film in the first one? (not seen the second one yet) Sorry, can you clarify? Every other film? There have only been two..." Did it tie in to the plot? Or was it gratuitous sexuality? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion." Haven’t you just done exactly what you say you don’t like? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion." I've never understood that argument. There are some people who have opinions, who don't analyse them and don't like them being challenged. They are perfectly entitled to be like that and are also perfectly free to keep out of threads which are explicitly about discussing opinions and analysing and challenging them. What I can't understand is people who are like that and come on threads like this and criticise people who like discussing and challenging opinions... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one reason we haven't seen more LGBT superheroes is that these films (and associated merchandise) are designed and marketed to make big money. Having a non heterosexual lead makes it harder to sell in certain markets where homosexuality is still stigmatized. Is the answer, then, to pander to bigotry?" Like every industry that sells things, Hollywood panders to the biggest customer base. On a side note, Deadpool was pegged by his hot girlfriend, so he's at least experimental if not bi-curious  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion. I've never understood that argument. There are some people who have opinions, who don't analyse them and don't like them being challenged. They are perfectly entitled to be like that and are also perfectly free to keep out of threads which are explicitly about discussing opinions and analysing and challenging them. What I can't understand is people who are like that and come on threads like this and criticise people who like discussing and challenging opinions... " And moan when asked to back it up. And call people dictators for having their opinion. It’s really very unintelligent, but that’s just my opinion, yo. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion. Haven’t you just done exactly what you say you don’t like? " Also, this. "dictation" point. Dictators tend to kill or throw people in prison if they don't agree with them. Disagreeing with someones opinion on the Internet seems a bit different... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion. I've never understood that argument. There are some people who have opinions, who don't analyse them and don't like them being challenged. They are perfectly entitled to be like that and are also perfectly free to keep out of threads which are explicitly about discussing opinions and analysing and challenging them. What I can't understand is people who are like that and come on threads like this and criticise people who like discussing and challenging opinions... And moan when asked to back it up. And call people dictators for having their opinion. It’s really very unintelligent, but that’s just my opinion, yo. "In this context "being dictated to" means. "I disagree with you but can't think up a counter argument".... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one reason we haven't seen more LGBT superheroes is that these films (and associated merchandise) are designed and marketed to make big money. Having a non heterosexual lead makes it harder to sell in certain markets where homosexuality is still stigmatized. Is the answer, then, to pander to bigotry? Like every industry that sells things, Hollywood panders to the biggest customer base. On a side note, Deadpool was pegged by his hot girlfriend, so he's at least experimental if not bi-curious "I really think I should watch this film. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion. I've never understood that argument. There are some people who have opinions, who don't analyse them and don't like them being challenged. They are perfectly entitled to be like that and are also perfectly free to keep out of threads which are explicitly about discussing opinions and analysing and challenging them. What I can't understand is people who are like that and come on threads like this and criticise people who like discussing and challenging opinions... And moan when asked to back it up. And call people dictators for having their opinion. It’s really very unintelligent, but that’s just my opinion, yo.
In this context "being dictated to" means. "I disagree with you but can't think up a counter argument".... "It would appear so, | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one reason we haven't seen more LGBT superheroes is that these films (and associated merchandise) are designed and marketed to make big money. Having a non heterosexual lead makes it harder to sell in certain markets where homosexuality is still stigmatized. Is the answer, then, to pander to bigotry? Like every industry that sells things, Hollywood panders to the biggest customer base. On a side note, Deadpool was pegged by his hot girlfriend, so he's at least experimental if not bi-curious
I really think I should watch this film. "It's a great movie I found it quite multi-layered and watched it a couple of times to get all of the nuances. Not seen number 2 yet. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-44921284 "In 2015, Tim Miller, who directed the first Deadpool movie, confirmed the anti-hero would be pansexual in the X-Men universe. "Pansexual. I want that quoted. Pansexual Deadpool," he said in an interview at the time. Pansexual is when a person is attracted to someone for their personality regardless of their sex or gender." Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing? Deadpool is age rated '15' in the UK. Get the definition of Panse ual right first of all. And given the level of graphic violence in Deadpool I think him being Pansexual is way down the list of things to be concerned abut for a 15 y.o" Teenagers are desensitised to violence, blood and gore. Him being pegged by his girlfriend (as someone pointed out earlier) may be a tad too much for some parents. Although, they are in a loving relationship. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion. I've never understood that argument. There are some people who have opinions, who don't analyse them and don't like them being challenged. They are perfectly entitled to be like that and are also perfectly free to keep out of threads which are explicitly about discussing opinions and analysing and challenging them. What I can't understand is people who are like that and come on threads like this and criticise people who like discussing and challenging opinions... And moan when asked to back it up. And call people dictators for having their opinion. It’s really very unintelligent, but that’s just my opinion, yo.
In this context "being dictated to" means. "I disagree with you but can't think up a counter argument"....
It would appear so, "Thing is is that some people are good at arguing and some people aren't. I argue for a living and have done so for twenty years so like to think I am pretty good at it. If you don't like arguing and aren't any good at it, my advice would be not to do it. I dislike cooking and am shit at it, so I wouldn't enter a cake baking contest... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one reason we haven't seen more LGBT superheroes is that these films (and associated merchandise) are designed and marketed to make big money. Having a non heterosexual lead makes it harder to sell in certain markets where homosexuality is still stigmatized. Is the answer, then, to pander to bigotry? Like every industry that sells things, Hollywood panders to the biggest customer base. On a side note, Deadpool was pegged by his hot girlfriend, so he's at least experimental if not bi-curious
I really think I should watch this film.
It's a great movie I found it quite multi-layered and watched it a couple of times to get all of the nuances. Not seen number 2 yet."I think we're talking about number 2 aren't we? I've seen 1 and didn't notice anything regarding his sexuality. It may have gone unnoticed by me though; or I've forgotten.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion. I've never understood that argument. There are some people who have opinions, who don't analyse them and don't like them being challenged. They are perfectly entitled to be like that and are also perfectly free to keep out of threads which are explicitly about discussing opinions and analysing and challenging them. What I can't understand is people who are like that and come on threads like this and criticise people who like discussing and challenging opinions... And moan when asked to back it up. And call people dictators for having their opinion. It’s really very unintelligent, but that’s just my opinion, yo.
In this context "being dictated to" means. "I disagree with you but can't think up a counter argument"....
It would appear so,
Thing is is that some people are good at arguing and some people aren't. I argue for a living and have done so for twenty years so like to think I am pretty good at it.
If you don't like arguing and aren't any good at it, my advice would be not to do it. I dislike cooking and am shit at it, so I wouldn't enter a cake baking contest... "I thought you were debating. And, you're not being very inclusive are you. Make a cake, put it into a contest, you won't get ridiculed for trying. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You're quoting this the way you do is confusing lol By quoting the words you wrote and responding to them? I’m not sure what’s confusing about that. I meant almost every other film produced, not just deadpool ones. I see. Well, it’s a while since I saw the first. But, in general, Deadpool acts in a sexualised way. That’s what I meant when I said that his sexuality is important." The way you break people's posts up is confusing. Makes the conversation thread difficult to follow. Why do you have to answer in such a condescending/antagonistic manner all the time? (imp obviously) But he is only sexual with a sexy, slim, nymphomaniac woman. Now I agree that could simply be his manifestation of being pan sexual however its remarkably close to almost every other sexual/romantic coupling in almost every other major blockbuster from Hollywood. Nothing ground breaking despite what the director claims. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion. I've never understood that argument. There are some people who have opinions, who don't analyse them and don't like them being challenged. They are perfectly entitled to be like that and are also perfectly free to keep out of threads which are explicitly about discussing opinions and analysing and challenging them. What I can't understand is people who are like that and come on threads like this and criticise people who like discussing and challenging opinions... And moan when asked to back it up. And call people dictators for having their opinion. It’s really very unintelligent, but that’s just my opinion, yo.
In this context "being dictated to" means. "I disagree with you but can't think up a counter argument"....
It would appear so,
Thing is is that some people are good at arguing and some people aren't. I argue for a living and have done so for twenty years so like to think I am pretty good at it.
If you don't like arguing and aren't any good at it, my advice would be not to do it. I dislike cooking and am shit at it, so I wouldn't enter a cake baking contest...
I thought you were debating.
And, you're not being very inclusive are you. Make a cake, put it into a contest, you won't get ridiculed for trying. "I use "arguing" as a synonym for "debating". My point is that people moan about people discussing and challenging opinions. If you don't like that sort of thing don't get involved in it. I don't want cake baking to be inclusive of me, thanks very much as I don't like doing it. Ditto Morris dancing, Christian services, precision engineering and Conservative politics. Life's short, don't do stuff you don't like. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion. I've never understood that argument. There are some people who have opinions, who don't analyse them and don't like them being challenged. They are perfectly entitled to be like that and are also perfectly free to keep out of threads which are explicitly about discussing opinions and analysing and challenging them. What I can't understand is people who are like that and come on threads like this and criticise people who like discussing and challenging opinions... And moan when asked to back it up. And call people dictators for having their opinion. It’s really very unintelligent, but that’s just my opinion, yo.
In this context "being dictated to" means. "I disagree with you but can't think up a counter argument"....
It would appear so,
Thing is is that some people are good at arguing and some people aren't. I argue for a living and have done so for twenty years so like to think I am pretty good at it.
If you don't like arguing and aren't any good at it, my advice would be not to do it. I dislike cooking and am shit at it, so I wouldn't enter a cake baking contest...
I thought you were debating.
And, you're not being very inclusive are you. Make a cake, put it into a contest, you won't get ridiculed for trying.
I use "arguing" as a synonym for "debating".
My point is that people moan about people discussing and challenging opinions. If you don't like that sort of thing don't get involved in it.
I don't want cake baking to be inclusive of me, thanks very much as I don't like doing it. Ditto Morris dancing, Christian services, precision engineering and Conservative politics.
Life's short, don't do stuff you don't like. "I cant stand morris dancers | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion. I've never understood that argument. There are some people who have opinions, who don't analyse them and don't like them being challenged. They are perfectly entitled to be like that and are also perfectly free to keep out of threads which are explicitly about discussing opinions and analysing and challenging them. What I can't understand is people who are like that and come on threads like this and criticise people who like discussing and challenging opinions... And moan when asked to back it up. And call people dictators for having their opinion. It’s really very unintelligent, but that’s just my opinion, yo.
In this context "being dictated to" means. "I disagree with you but can't think up a counter argument"....
It would appear so,
Thing is is that some people are good at arguing and some people aren't. I argue for a living and have done so for twenty years so like to think I am pretty good at it.
If you don't like arguing and aren't any good at it, my advice would be not to do it. I dislike cooking and am shit at it, so I wouldn't enter a cake baking contest...
I thought you were debating.
And, you're not being very inclusive are you. Make a cake, put it into a contest, you won't get ridiculed for trying.
I use "arguing" as a synonym for "debating".
My point is that people moan about people discussing and challenging opinions. If you don't like that sort of thing don't get involved in it.
I don't want cake baking to be inclusive of me, thanks very much as I don't like doing it. Ditto Morris dancing, Christian services, precision engineering and Conservative politics.
Life's short, don't do stuff you don't like.
I cant stand morris dancers"Grown men dancing around like silly bastards | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You're quoting this the way you do is confusing lol By quoting the words you wrote and responding to them? I’m not sure what’s confusing about that. I meant almost every other film produced, not just deadpool ones. I see. Well, it’s a while since I saw the first. But, in general, Deadpool acts in a sexualised way. That’s what I meant when I said that his sexuality is important. The way you break people's posts up is confusing. Makes the conversation thread difficult to follow. Why do you have to answer in such a condescending/antagonistic manner all the time? (imp obviously) " I know you said it’s just in your opinion, but I have seen as many people have that view point or respond to your posts, Evie, similarly over time. People ascribe tone. You could hear each word said in a different tone if you chose to, and form a very different impression. And if condescension to a point was an intent, well, you know, sometimes (and I’m not specifying the conversation you were having but other comments more so) just sometimes perhaps the idiocy of the point being responses to warrants it. Sometimes the opinions on here floor me with just how dumb they are, in terms of argument. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anywayyyyyyyy i thought the second film was shite #justsaying" I might still watch it. I really enjoyed the first one. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion. I've never understood that argument. There are some people who have opinions, who don't analyse them and don't like them being challenged. They are perfectly entitled to be like that and are also perfectly free to keep out of threads which are explicitly about discussing opinions and analysing and challenging them. What I can't understand is people who are like that and come on threads like this and criticise people who like discussing and challenging opinions... And moan when asked to back it up. And call people dictators for having their opinion. It’s really very unintelligent, but that’s just my opinion, yo.
In this context "being dictated to" means. "I disagree with you but can't think up a counter argument"....
It would appear so,
Thing is is that some people are good at arguing and some people aren't. I argue for a living and have done so for twenty years so like to think I am pretty good at it.
If you don't like arguing and aren't any good at it, my advice would be not to do it. I dislike cooking and am shit at it, so I wouldn't enter a cake baking contest...
I thought you were debating.
And, you're not being very inclusive are you. Make a cake, put it into a contest, you won't get ridiculed for trying.
I use "arguing" as a synonym for "debating".
My point is that people moan about people discussing and challenging opinions. If you don't like that sort of thing don't get involved in it.
I don't want cake baking to be inclusive of me, thanks very much as I don't like doing it. Ditto Morris dancing, Christian services, precision engineering and Conservative politics.
Life's short, don't do stuff you don't like. "Are they moaning or do they have a problem with the way some people reply to them? It's as if some are trying to turn a debate into an argument. An argument isn't a debate. There is no subtle difference. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You're quoting this the way you do is confusing lol By quoting the words you wrote and responding to them? I’m not sure what’s confusing about that. I meant almost every other film produced, not just deadpool ones. I see. Well, it’s a while since I saw the first. But, in general, Deadpool acts in a sexualised way. That’s what I meant when I said that his sexuality is important. The way you break people's posts up is confusing. Makes the conversation thread difficult to follow. Why do you have to answer in such a condescending/antagonistic manner all the time? (imp obviously) I know you said it’s just in your opinion, but I have seen as many people have that view point or respond to your posts, Evie, similarly over time. People ascribe tone. You could hear each word said in a different tone if you chose to, and form a very different impression. And if condescension to a point was an intent, well, you know, sometimes (and I’m not specifying the conversation you were having but other comments more so) just sometimes perhaps the idiocy of the point being responses to warrants it. Sometimes the opinions on here floor me with just how dumb they are, in terms of argument. " I'm can't work out if you're having a pop at me or not lol I'll go back to my original point.... Unless the second film is wildly different from the first I cannot see how deadpool illustrates his pansexuality on screen. As with almost every other major film the white male lead falls in love with a sexy (often white) female and has lots of sex with them. Very possibly that HD fell in love with her personality rather than her stunning figure of course. Is the director just jumping on a band wagon to carry favour? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The way you break people's posts up is confusing." If you can’t follow a simple conversation, there’s not a lot I can do to help you. But, in reference to the initial post of yours that I quoted, I didn’t break up what you wrote, so I’m not sure why you’re suggesting that caused any issue. "Makes the conversation thread difficult to follow." On the contrary, it makes it acutely obvious -exactly- what I’m responding to at any given time. Without the need to constantly scroll past screens of text to find one line added. "Why do you have to answer in such a condescending/antagonistic manner all the time? (imp obviously)" I don’t agree that I do. I post in a fairly straightforward manner. It says more about you than me that you read them that way; is having things pointed out so offensive to you? (Like, pointing our that saying ‘imp’ is pointless in that context, and achieves nothing.) "But he is only sexual with a sexy, slim, nymphomaniac woman. Now I agree that could simply be his manifestation of being pan sexual however its remarkably close to almost every other sexual/romantic coupling in almost every other major blockbuster from Hollywood. Nothing ground breaking despite what the director claims." Did the director claim that it was groundbreaking? The quotes in the OP suggest that it was -important-, but not ground-breaking. Yes, the overt relationship displayed is straight (it’s worth pointing out, contrary to a post above, that enjoying being pegged has got fuck all to do with being bi). Given that it’s a while since I’ve seen the film I can’t recall exactly, and may be conflating with the second film, the video game, or any printed material I’ve read, but he does flirt pretty universally. That said, the success or failure of the film in portraying his sexuality has little to do with the OP’s question about whether more LGBT characters in movies would be welcome. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ascribing tone!!! " It's obvious by what you have written as to the tone of this post. The choice of words sets the tone on some comments. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The way you break people's posts up is confusing. If you can’t follow a simple conversation, there’s not a lot I can do to help you. But, in reference to the initial post of yours that I quoted, I didn’t break up what you wrote, so I’m not sure why you’re suggesting that caused any issue. Makes the conversation thread difficult to follow. On the contrary, it makes it acutely obvious -exactly- what I’m responding to at any given time. Without the need to constantly scroll past screens of text to find one line added. Why do you have to answer in such a condescending/antagonistic manner all the time? (imp obviously) I don’t agree that I do. I post in a fairly straightforward manner. It says more about you than me that you read them that way; is having things pointed out so offensive to you? (Like, pointing our that saying ‘imp’ is pointless in that context, and achieves nothing.) But he is only sexual with a sexy, slim, nymphomaniac woman. Now I agree that could simply be his manifestation of being pan sexual however its remarkably close to almost every other sexual/romantic coupling in almost every other major blockbuster from Hollywood. Nothing ground breaking despite what the director claims. Did the director claim that it was groundbreaking? The quotes in the OP suggest that it was -important-, but not ground-breaking. Yes, the overt relationship displayed is straight (it’s worth pointing out, contrary to a post above, that enjoying being pegged has got fuck all to do with being bi). Given that it’s a while since I’ve seen the film I can’t recall exactly, and may be conflating with the second film, the video game, or any printed material I’ve read, but he does flirt pretty universally. That said, the success or failure of the film in portraying his sexuality has little to do with the OP’s question about whether more LGBT characters in movies would be welcome." Ok . I'll leave you to have the last word...you seem to like that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Deadpool is pansexual in word but not really in deed. Landing crotch first on a male adversary’s face and hollaring ‘ Teabagged’ is funny though. " That's what I love about his character; his humour. I couldn't give a fuck about who he's attracted to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You're quoting this the way you do is confusing lol By quoting the words you wrote and responding to them? I’m not sure what’s confusing about that. I meant almost every other film produced, not just deadpool ones. I see. Well, it’s a while since I saw the first. But, in general, Deadpool acts in a sexualised way. That’s what I meant when I said that his sexuality is important. The way you break people's posts up is confusing. Makes the conversation thread difficult to follow. Why do you have to answer in such a condescending/antagonistic manner all the time? (imp obviously) I know you said it’s just in your opinion, but I have seen as many people have that view point or respond to your posts, Evie, similarly over time. People ascribe tone. You could hear each word said in a different tone if you chose to, and form a very different impression. And if condescension to a point was an intent, well, you know, sometimes (and I’m not specifying the conversation you were having but other comments more so) just sometimes perhaps the idiocy of the point being responses to warrants it. Sometimes the opinions on here floor me with just how dumb they are, in terms of argument. I'm can't work out if you're having a pop at me or not lol I'll go back to my original point.... Unless the second film is wildly different from the first I cannot see how deadpool illustrates his pansexuality on screen. As with almost every other major film the white male lead falls in love with a sexy (often white) female and has lots of sex with them. Very possibly that HD fell in love with her personality rather than her stunning figure of course. Is the director just jumping on a band wagon to carry favour? " Having a pop? No, I wasn’t. Were you having a pop at DO, then? I was trying to show how you were ascribing a tone to somebody and making a judgement based on that and the fact it could be entirely incorrect. And showing how I’ve seen that you’ve had the same done to you before. All that meant that I was absolutely not showing a judgement that you *were* or have ever been condescending whether or not you may have ever intended to be or not. So no, I was not having a pop. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one reason we haven't seen more LGBT superheroes is that these films (and associated merchandise) are designed and marketed to make big money. Having a non heterosexual lead makes it harder to sell in certain markets where homosexuality is still stigmatized. Is the answer, then, to pander to bigotry?" I'd rather not. Progress is good. I was simply pointing out that the blockbuster industry exists to make money and from a bean counters perspective having a non straight lead could damage profit margins which puts pressure on the creative side to play it safe. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. I don't like being dictated to. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. My opinion is just that. My opinion. I've never understood that argument. There are some people who have opinions, who don't analyse them and don't like them being challenged. They are perfectly entitled to be like that and are also perfectly free to keep out of threads which are explicitly about discussing opinions and analysing and challenging them. What I can't understand is people who are like that and come on threads like this and criticise people who like discussing and challenging opinions... And moan when asked to back it up. And call people dictators for having their opinion. It’s really very unintelligent, but that’s just my opinion, yo.
In this context "being dictated to" means. "I disagree with you but can't think up a counter argument"....
It would appear so,
Thing is is that some people are good at arguing and some people aren't. I argue for a living and have done so for twenty years so like to think I am pretty good at it.
If you don't like arguing and aren't any good at it, my advice would be not to do it. I dislike cooking and am shit at it, so I wouldn't enter a cake baking contest...
I thought you were debating.
And, you're not being very inclusive are you. Make a cake, put it into a contest, you won't get ridiculed for trying.
I use "arguing" as a synonym for "debating".
My point is that people moan about people discussing and challenging opinions. If you don't like that sort of thing don't get involved in it.
I don't want cake baking to be inclusive of me, thanks very much as I don't like doing it. Ditto Morris dancing, Christian services, precision engineering and Conservative politics.
Life's short, don't do stuff you don't like.
Are they moaning or do they have a problem with the way some people reply to them?
It's as if some are trying to turn a debate into an argument.
An argument isn't a debate.
There is no subtle difference. "Reminds me of the Month Python Argument sketch where they debate what constitutes an argument... I an using "argument" in its philosophical and legal meaning where it does basically means the same as "debate". It doesn't imply aggression or bad feeling. I accept that in everyday use, "argument" does imply those kind of things, so I will use. "debate" from now on... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok . I'll leave you to have the last word...you seem to like that. "“I have encountered an argument I have no answer to, and realise I’ve missed the point of the thread, so I’ll try to take some sort of high ground.” | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ascribing tone!!! It's obvious by what you have written as to the tone of this post. The choice of words sets the tone on some comments. " Totally disagree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You're quoting this the way you do is confusing lol By quoting the words you wrote and responding to them? I’m not sure what’s confusing about that. I meant almost every other film produced, not just deadpool ones. I see. Well, it’s a while since I saw the first. But, in general, Deadpool acts in a sexualised way. That’s what I meant when I said that his sexuality is important. The way you break people's posts up is confusing. Makes the conversation thread difficult to follow. Why do you have to answer in such a condescending/antagonistic manner all the time? (imp obviously) I know you said it’s just in your opinion, but I have seen as many people have that view point or respond to your posts, Evie, similarly over time. People ascribe tone. You could hear each word said in a different tone if you chose to, and form a very different impression. And if condescension to a point was an intent, well, you know, sometimes (and I’m not specifying the conversation you were having but other comments more so) just sometimes perhaps the idiocy of the point being responses to warrants it. Sometimes the opinions on here floor me with just how dumb they are, in terms of argument. I'm can't work out if you're having a pop at me or not lol I'll go back to my original point.... Unless the second film is wildly different from the first I cannot see how deadpool illustrates his pansexuality on screen. As with almost every other major film the white male lead falls in love with a sexy (often white) female and has lots of sex with them. Very possibly that HD fell in love with her personality rather than her stunning figure of course. Is the director just jumping on a band wagon to carry favour? Having a pop? No, I wasn’t. Were you having a pop at DO, then? I was trying to show how you were ascribing a tone to somebody and making a judgement based on that and the fact it could be entirely incorrect. And showing how I’ve seen that you’ve had the same done to you before. All that meant that I was absolutely not showing a judgement that you *were* or have ever been condescending whether or not you may have ever intended to be or not. So no, I was not having a pop. " Ok thanks for clarifying. I know the written word can be misconstrued from time to time depending on the readers frame of mind at the time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok . I'll leave you to have the last word...you seem to like that.
“I have encountered an argument I have no answer to, and realise I’ve missed the point of the thread, so I’ll try to take some sort of high ground.”"Told you  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Is the answer, then, to pander to bigotry? I'd rather not. Progress is good. I was simply pointing out that the blockbuster industry exists to make money and from a bean counters perspective having a non straight lead could damage profit margins which puts pressure on the creative side to play it safe." As Mrs. Trellis pointed out, that’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. How things are and how things could or should be are very different points. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm quoting here Estella: Nah. You said no, then spouted some opinions that I found displayed a massive whiff of dismissive attitude to the concept of the importance of representation of LGBT community in entertainment. You got challenged on it, and didn’t like it. Enjoy your day, nice couple is it? What tone would you say you wrote this in? " Ok, I didn’t know you were specifically talking about my comment. Go on then - what “tone” is it? You’ve just said the tone is clear from the words. You tell me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Told you "It wouldn’t be the last word if you, instead of just poking at me, actually made a point that wasn’t easily deconstructed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think it is difficult when someone posts something stupendously stupid on a subject you happen to know lots about not to appear condescending or belittling, but it's always best avoided. Play the ball, not the man/person as they say... " True. Similarly though, there’s many times that people take a post and ascribe a tone that they’ve selected regardless of words chosen - someone they dislike they’ll hear it one way and if it was their mate they’ll hear it another way. Like your point about use of the word argument even, the need to clarify that through to a level playing field and understanding of usage just shows how words alone are always open to fitting the narrative of the reader whatever the poster does. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm quoting here Estella: Nah. You said no, then spouted some opinions that I found displayed a massive whiff of dismissive attitude to the concept of the importance of representation of LGBT community in entertainment. You got challenged on it, and didn’t like it. Enjoy your day, nice couple is it? What tone would you say you wrote this in? Ok, I didn’t know you were specifically talking about my comment. Go on then - what “tone” is it? You’ve just said the tone is clear from the words. You tell me. " Mocking? Condescending? Taking the piss? It wasn't a nice, debating tone was it. The point I'm trying to get across is, your choice of words and the syntax sets the tone. It's not always ascribed tone; the tone is there on the paper. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Deadpool is pansexual in word but not really in deed. Landing crotch first on a male adversary’s face and hollaring ‘ Teabagged’ is funny though. That's what I love about his character; his humour. I couldn't give a fuck about who he's attracted to." I don’t think he can either he doesn’t discriminate, even a Unicorn gets it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm quoting here Estella: Nah. You said no, then spouted some opinions that I found displayed a massive whiff of dismissive attitude to the concept of the importance of representation of LGBT community in entertainment. You got challenged on it, and didn’t like it. Enjoy your day, nice couple is it? What tone would you say you wrote this in? Ok, I didn’t know you were specifically talking about my comment. Go on then - what “tone” is it? You’ve just said the tone is clear from the words. You tell me. " I'll have a go. You're not discussing the actual issue but making normative comments about the persons motivation . ("dismissive attitude"). You are also using words that are inherently pejorative ("spouted" rather than "put forward"). You then finished off with a sarcastic take on their name. You obviously disagree with these people strongly, but your post has a." massive whiff"of playing the person rather than the ball. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ascribing tone!!! It's obvious by what you have written as to the tone of this post. The choice of words sets the tone on some comments. Totally disagree." You're taught in English from year 7 to set the tone. When someone uses inflammatory language the reader will become inflamed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think it is difficult when someone posts something stupendously stupid on a subject you happen to know lots about not to appear condescending or belittling, but it's always best avoided. Play the ball, not the man/person as they say... True. Similarly though, there’s many times that people take a post and ascribe a tone that they’ve selected regardless of words chosen - someone they dislike they’ll hear it one way and if it was their mate they’ll hear it another way. Like your point about use of the word argument even, the need to clarify that through to a level playing field and understanding of usage just shows how words alone are always open to fitting the narrative of the reader whatever the poster does. " Tone is by definition what people perceive. Part of emotional intelligence is realising how people who are likely to perceive what you say and adjusting accordingly. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm quoting here Estella: Nah. You said no, then spouted some opinions that I found displayed a massive whiff of dismissive attitude to the concept of the importance of representation of LGBT community in entertainment. You got challenged on it, and didn’t like it. Enjoy your day, nice couple is it? What tone would you say you wrote this in? Ok, I didn’t know you were specifically talking about my comment. Go on then - what “tone” is it? You’ve just said the tone is clear from the words. You tell me. I'll have a go. You're not discussing the actual issue but making normative comments about the persons motivation . ("dismissive attitude"). You are also using words that are inherently pejorative ("spouted" rather than "put forward"). You then finished off with a sarcastic take on their name. You obviously disagree with these people strongly, but your post has a." massive whiff"of playing the person rather than the ball. " Much better explained than I could have done. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think it is difficult when someone posts something stupendously stupid on a subject you happen to know lots about not to appear condescending or belittling, but it's always best avoided. Play the ball, not the man/person as they say... True. Similarly though, there’s many times that people take a post and ascribe a tone that they’ve selected regardless of words chosen - someone they dislike they’ll hear it one way and if it was their mate they’ll hear it another way. Like your point about use of the word argument even, the need to clarify that through to a level playing field and understanding of usage just shows how words alone are always open to fitting the narrative of the reader whatever the poster does. Tone is by definition what people perceive. Part of emotional intelligence is realising how people who are likely to perceive what you say and adjusting accordingly. " The problem there is also not knowing your audience. For instance me; it's really difficult to make me angry, but I can read an inflammatory comment and know what it is. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm quoting here Estella: Nah. You said no, then spouted some opinions that I found displayed a massive whiff of dismissive attitude to the concept of the importance of representation of LGBT community in entertainment. You got challenged on it, and didn’t like it. Enjoy your day, nice couple is it? What tone would you say you wrote this in? Ok, I didn’t know you were specifically talking about my comment. Go on then - what “tone” is it? You’ve just said the tone is clear from the words. You tell me. Mocking? Condescending? Taking the piss? It wasn't a nice, debating tone was it. The point I'm trying to get across is, your choice of words and the syntax sets the tone. It's not always ascribed tone; the tone is there on the paper. " My tone there was indignant, and then at the end condescending. It wasn’t to debate, much as the poster I replied to had just confirmed they weren’t debating by commenting that they’d only said “no”, which was a lie of omission, but demonstrated they were not prepared to debate. Also, the undertone of their opinion I didn’t like. My original commentary about ascribed tone (and what I had incorrectly thought you were talking about too when I made the further comment about ascribing tone) was about Evie’s post to DubiousOatcake. I still disagree that words alone allow one to know tone which was what I was disagreeing with you about. Unless, like in the comment cited it’s bleeding obvious what I’m saying, but *even* then it’s kinda good to check it out, as Evie did with me a minute ago when she might have made the assumption that I was being condescending too, so that she was clear and to establish that I wasn’t being and that I certainly wasn’t having a pop at her. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Told you
It wouldn’t be the last word if you, instead of just poking at me, actually made a point that wasn’t easily deconstructed."It's futile having any sort of 'debate' with you as you have already decided you are the superior intellect on any given subject. There's a few of you who post on the forums in a similar way. That's why you discect posts as you do. You think you're bettee than anyone else. I do feel that your responses to me are belittling at times and perhaps, as estella points out, I am projecting there. Perhaps I find you intimidating. I don't know, maybe it's my issue to work through. The only point I have made is that deadpool does not appear to be pansexual, even though the director claims him to be. As for more LBGT characters in movies... Sure, why not. More disabled people (actually disabled and not able bodied actors using green screen technology to lose limbs). These people are part of everyday life. Why shouldn't they be part of the films we watch? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm quoting here Estella: Nah. You said no, then spouted some opinions that I found displayed a massive whiff of dismissive attitude to the concept of the importance of representation of LGBT community in entertainment. You got challenged on it, and didn’t like it. Enjoy your day, nice couple is it? What tone would you say you wrote this in? Ok, I didn’t know you were specifically talking about my comment. Go on then - what “tone” is it? You’ve just said the tone is clear from the words. You tell me. I'll have a go. You're not discussing the actual issue but making normative comments about the persons motivation . ("dismissive attitude"). You are also using words that are inherently pejorative ("spouted" rather than "put forward"). You then finished off with a sarcastic take on their name. You obviously disagree with these people strongly, but your post has a." massive whiff"of playing the person rather than the ball. " Yes, but I wasn’t bringing up the ascribing tone comment about this one comment! Syb and I started from different convos, as per my post explaining. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ascribing tone!!! It's obvious by what you have written as to the tone of this post. The choice of words sets the tone on some comments. Totally disagree. You're taught in English from year 7 to set the tone. When someone uses inflammatory language the reader will become inflamed. " Referring you to the conversation I was having re tone... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm quoting here Estella: Nah. You said no, then spouted some opinions that I found displayed a massive whiff of dismissive attitude to the concept of the importance of representation of LGBT community in entertainment. You got challenged on it, and didn’t like it. Enjoy your day, nice couple is it? What tone would you say you wrote this in? Ok, I didn’t know you were specifically talking about my comment. Go on then - what “tone” is it? You’ve just said the tone is clear from the words. You tell me. Mocking? Condescending? Taking the piss? It wasn't a nice, debating tone was it. The point I'm trying to get across is, your choice of words and the syntax sets the tone. It's not always ascribed tone; the tone is there on the paper. My tone there was indignant, and then at the end condescending. It wasn’t to debate, much as the poster I replied to had just confirmed they weren’t debating by commenting that they’d only said “no”, which was a lie of omission, but demonstrated they were not prepared to debate. Also, the undertone of their opinion I didn’t like. My original commentary about ascribed tone (and what I had incorrectly thought you were talking about too when I made the further comment about ascribing tone) was about Evie’s post to DubiousOatcake. I still disagree that words alone allow one to know tone which was what I was disagreeing with you about. Unless, like in the comment cited it’s bleeding obvious what I’m saying, but *even* then it’s kinda good to check it out, as Evie did with me a minute ago when she might have made the assumption that I was being condescending too, so that she was clear and to establish that I wasn’t being and that I certainly wasn’t having a pop at her. " On the post in question, I'm an on your side on the general issue, but I am afraid it is bleeding obvious that the post was aggressive and condescending. If people aren't prepared to debate, don't debate. There's a phrase about wrestling with chimney sweeps... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm quoting here Estella: Nah. You said no, then spouted some opinions that I found displayed a massive whiff of dismissive attitude to the concept of the importance of representation of LGBT community in entertainment. You got challenged on it, and didn’t like it. Enjoy your day, nice couple is it? What tone would you say you wrote this in? Ok, I didn’t know you were specifically talking about my comment. Go on then - what “tone” is it? You’ve just said the tone is clear from the words. You tell me. I'll have a go. You're not discussing the actual issue but making normative comments about the persons motivation . ("dismissive attitude"). You are also using words that are inherently pejorative ("spouted" rather than "put forward"). You then finished off with a sarcastic take on their name. You obviously disagree with these people strongly, but your post has a." massive whiff"of playing the person rather than the ball. Yes, but I wasn’t bringing up the ascribing tone comment about this one comment! Syb and I started from different convos, as per my post explaining. " The point I was making was how tone is obvious on some posts. You said people had been ascribing tone to OC', comments. My point is , perhaps the tone was in his style of writing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm quoting here Estella: Nah. You said no, then spouted some opinions that I found displayed a massive whiff of dismissive attitude to the concept of the importance of representation of LGBT community in entertainment. You got challenged on it, and didn’t like it. Enjoy your day, nice couple is it? What tone would you say you wrote this in? Ok, I didn’t know you were specifically talking about my comment. Go on then - what “tone” is it? You’ve just said the tone is clear from the words. You tell me. I'll have a go. You're not discussing the actual issue but making normative comments about the persons motivation . ("dismissive attitude"). You are also using words that are inherently pejorative ("spouted" rather than "put forward"). You then finished off with a sarcastic take on their name. You obviously disagree with these people strongly, but your post has a." massive whiff"of playing the person rather than the ball. Yes, but I wasn’t bringing up the ascribing tone comment about this one comment! Syb and I started from different convos, as per my post explaining. The point I was making was how tone is obvious on some posts. You said people had been ascribing tone to OC', comments. My point is , perhaps the tone was in his style of writing. " And I was disagreeing on that specific point. About DO. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ascribing tone!!! It's obvious by what you have written as to the tone of this post. The choice of words sets the tone on some comments. Totally disagree. You're taught in English from year 7 to set the tone. When someone uses inflammatory language the reader will become inflamed. Referring you to the conversation I was having re tone..." You forgot to quote. That would have helped me out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe one reason we haven't seen more LGBT superheroes is that these films (and associated merchandise) are designed and marketed to make big money. Having a non heterosexual lead makes it harder to sell in certain markets where homosexuality is still stigmatized. Is the answer, then, to pander to bigotry? Like every industry that sells things, Hollywood panders to the biggest customer base. On a side note, Deadpool was pegged by his hot girlfriend, so he's at least experimental if not bi-curious
I really think I should watch this film.
It's a great movie I found it quite multi-layered and watched it a couple of times to get all of the nuances. Not seen number 2 yet.
I think we're talking about number 2 aren't we? I've seen 1 and didn't notice anything regarding his sexuality. It may have gone unnoticed by me though; or I've forgotten.."It's a segment in the first movie where they're having themed sex to the day of the year - vampire fangs for halloween, Christmas jumpers etc The pegging bit is to celebrate International Women's Day.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The only point I have made is that deadpool does not appear to be pansexual, even though the director claims him to be. " I can understand where you're coming from with that point. It would have been nice to have seen clearer indications of his pansexuality and a move away from the standard Hollywood beauty he shacked up with. On the superhero diversity note, CW's Batwoman will be a lesbian (a jewish one at that!) and I think that's a fantastic step in the right direction - it will be nice (yeah, that's a wishy washy term but fuck it) to have superheroes who reflect the diversity of society. And also, who mini me's can look up to/identify with. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's futile having any sort of 'debate' with you as you have already decided you are the superior intellect on any given subject. There's a few of you who post on the forums in a similar way." I don’t consider myself superior in any respect. Making that comment highlights how little you know about me, or my personality. I would, however, say this: I have countered a few points in this thread, and offered my own. That is the very essence of debate. In return, I have been told I am condescending. That is not debate. If I were to argue that it’s futile trying to debate with others, I’d be the one in the stronger position. "That's why you discect posts as you do. You think you're bettee than anyone else." No, I dissect posts because that is what debating is. It is about scrutinising and questioning the individual points that others have made in support of their overall argument. If those points don’t hold up, neither does their overall argument. People just stating opinions without that analysis is not debate. And, no, I don’t think I’m better than anyone. I refer you back to my point above. The fact that you’ve chosen to repeat your attack at me, the person, rather than my arguments, is noted, though. "I do feel that your responses to me are belittling at times and perhaps, as estella points out, I am projecting there. Perhaps I find you intimidating. I don't know, maybe it's my issue to work through." I would suggest you do. I like a lot of what you post, and certainly bear you no ill-will. "The only point I have made is that deadpool does not appear to be pansexual, even though the director claims him to be." A point I have conceded but which, we seem to agree, is a little beside the point. "As for more LBGT characters in movies... Sure, why not. More disabled people (actually disabled and not able bodied actors using green screen technology to lose limbs). These people are part of everyday life. Why shouldn't they be part of the films we watch? " In that case, on this subject, we are in full agreement, and your rhetorical question at the end makes the point beautifully succinctly. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Taking in circles. You appear to think I don’t think I was being condescending to the poster who I thought was being untruthful in reframing their original post back to “it was just a no” after being challenged. I *was* being condescending. I wasn’t trying to debate them. My conversation about tone was on a different tangential post. And on that, no Syb, I still think you could read DO in tones that don’t say he’s being whatever the words Evie first used. I really don’t. That’s all my point was. I thought you’d joined that conversation. " I wasn't referring to anything Evie said, as I didn't know you had aimed your comment at her. I'll respect your opinion on how I see tones on here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On a side issue, what is it with super heroes? When I was a kid, if you were still interested in them when you were 14 you were a bit sad. Now they appear to have huge cultural meaning for adults... " We’ve begun to realise that a homogenous what’s cool and what isn’t, is fundamentally limiting, finally? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Taking in circles. You appear to think I don’t think I was being condescending to the poster who I thought was being untruthful in reframing their original post back to “it was just a no” after being challenged. I *was* being condescending. I wasn’t trying to debate them. My conversation about tone was on a different tangential post. And on that, no Syb, I still think you could read DO in tones that don’t say he’s being whatever the words Evie first used. I really don’t. That’s all my point was. I thought you’d joined that conversation. I wasn't referring to anything Evie said, as I didn't know you had aimed your comment at her. " Which I realised latterly! Which is why I think there were cross purposes. " I'll respect your opinion on how I see tones on here. " I’m not sure now what opinion you think I have or don’t because you’ve referenced a point about DO in your previous comment that left me not sure if you followed my point in the difference between my posting and his, but, okay. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On a side issue, what is it with super heroes? When I was a kid, if you were still interested in them when you were 14 you were a bit sad. Now they appear to have huge cultural meaning for adults... We’ve begun to realise that a homogenous what’s cool and what isn’t, is fundamentally limiting, finally? " I think kids still generally think some things are cool and some not, just what is cool and what is not has changed. It's cool to be sexually diverse now, and uncool to be a homophobe. It was the other way round when I was at school. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On a side issue, what is it with super heroes? When I was a kid, if you were still interested in them when you were 14 you were a bit sad. Now they appear to have huge cultural meaning for adults... " What are James Bond, Rambo, any Arnie role from the 80s, even Sherlock Holmes, but superheroes? People have always enjoyed seeing outlandish heroes beating up baddies. It's just that Marvel made a success of introducing comic book characters to that action movie genre. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On a side issue, what is it with super heroes? When I was a kid, if you were still interested in them when you were 14 you were a bit sad. Now they appear to have huge cultural meaning for adults... What are James Bond, Rambo, any Arnie role from the 80s, even Sherlock Holmes, but superheroes? People have always enjoyed seeing outlandish heroes beating up baddies. It's just that Marvel made a success of introducing comic book characters to that action movie genre. " Indeed, but the difference is that the characters you mentioned from the eighties didn't have any "super" powers. The premises of their stories were essentially naturalistic. The difference with super heroes is that they have some sort of power which takes them outside naturalism and into non naturalistic fantasy.. One might say it's all a part of the advance of a general subjectivism we've seen in Western societies over the past forty years. - reality is your head, not outside it. Or one might say. Super heroes are just cool. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There are many movies made centring or involving the LGBT and disabled community, but they're mostly shown at fringe movie showings, like Sundance. As I said before, money is the great motivator for Hollywood and if any of these "fringe" movies had the potential to make big bucks, Hollywood would grab them. So far, Priscilla, Queen of the Desert has been the most lucrative, but bombed in Africa and Asia. There was never a Priscilla Queen of the Desert 2." Indeed. Hollywood is interested in money. Nothing more, nothing less. If Hollywood is producing films with Lgbt characters and so on, it's because they think that changing cultural mores means there's money to be made from them. It's capitalism in its purest form. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On a side issue, what is it with super heroes? When I was a kid, if you were still interested in them when you were 14 you were a bit sad. Now they appear to have huge cultural meaning for adults... What are James Bond, Rambo, any Arnie role from the 80s, even Sherlock Holmes, but superheroes? People have always enjoyed seeing outlandish heroes beating up baddies. It's just that Marvel made a success of introducing comic book characters to that action movie genre. Indeed, but the difference is that the characters you mentioned from the eighties didn't have any "super" powers. The premises of their stories were essentially naturalistic. The difference with super heroes is that they have some sort of power which takes them outside naturalism and into non naturalistic fantasy.. One might say it's all a part of the advance of a general subjectivism we've seen in Western societies over the past forty years. - reality is your head, not outside it. Or one might say. Super heroes are just cool. " James Bond et al aren't so naturalistic though, really. To believe that one man can defeat dozens of enemies, perform incredible stunts without breaking a sweat let alone a limb, and save the world single-handedly requires just as much a suspension of disbelief whether he's wearing a tuxedo or spandex. I'm not sure the proliferation of superheroes say anything about modern culture other than that we now have the CGI to do superhero stuff in a way that doesn't look totally silly. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There are many movies made centring or involving the LGBT and disabled community, but they're mostly shown at fringe movie showings, like Sundance. As I said before, money is the great motivator for Hollywood and if any of these "fringe" movies had the potential to make big bucks, Hollywood would grab them. So far, Priscilla, Queen of the Desert has been the most lucrative, but bombed in Africa and Asia. There was never a Priscilla Queen of the Desert 2." However, you make the mistake of talking on the one hand about films addressing minority issues, and films which happen to have minority characters. There isn’t a mass market for films about minority issues. The mass appeal for comic book heroes could include minority representation while maintaining mass appeal. See Black Panther as an example. Sure, we had War Machine and Falcon, but they were playing second (and third)fiddle to Iron Man. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On a side issue, what is it with super heroes? When I was a kid, if you were still interested in them when you were 14 you were a bit sad. Now they appear to have huge cultural meaning for adults... What are James Bond, Rambo, any Arnie role from the 80s, even Sherlock Holmes, but superheroes? People have always enjoyed seeing outlandish heroes beating up baddies. It's just that Marvel made a success of introducing comic book characters to that action movie genre. Indeed, but the difference is that the characters you mentioned from the eighties didn't have any "super" powers. The premises of their stories were essentially naturalistic. The difference with super heroes is that they have some sort of power which takes them outside naturalism and into non naturalistic fantasy.. One might say it's all a part of the advance of a general subjectivism we've seen in Western societies over the past forty years. - reality is your head, not outside it. Or one might say. Super heroes are just cool. James Bond et al aren't so naturalistic though, really. To believe that one man can defeat dozens of enemies, perform incredible stunts without breaking a sweat let alone a limb, and save the world single-handedly requires just as much a suspension of disbelief whether he's wearing a tuxedo or spandex. I'm not sure the proliferation of superheroes say anything about modern culture other than that we now have the CGI to do superhero stuff in a way that doesn't look totally silly. " I think the difference is that's it's at least theoretically possible, given current scientific knowledge, for James bond to do his thing. It's not even theoretically possible for a man to be able to climb unaided up a tall building because he was bitten by a spider. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it disappointing when a few people tell everyone else what they're supposed to be feeling and thinking and what they've just written actually means. I find it disappointing when people post narrow-minded, self-involved bullshit that doesn’t stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. This doesn't encourage debate no matter how you dress up what you're saying. Congratulations on not understanding the first thing about debate. I don't like being dictated to. Bully for you. Maybe post an argument that holds water. I don't like having my every thought and word ripped apart and dissected for someone else's entertainment. I don’t like having to read ill-informed tripe, and yet here we are. My opinion is just that. My opinion. I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again; this is a foolish mantra. It does not make you immune from scrutiny. Quite the opposite; you should be able to demonstrate why your opinions are informed, based on something. “It’s my opinion,” tells us nothing. It suggests (although it may not be the case) that you can’t back it up. That you have no rational explanation for it. So, what we have is a thread with some people explaining why representation is important, and others crying into their cornflakes because they’ve got everything they want and need, and can’t bear to think that others should hope for the same thing." I think you just made my point really well. Thank you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having read though the whole thred I can see why people are put off commenting their opinion on anything. Such aggression. I'll not be bothering with the forums again." I know,its the only reason im on fab aswell,maybe time fir me to leave | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There are many movies made centring or involving the LGBT and disabled community, but they're mostly shown at fringe movie showings, like Sundance. As I said before, money is the great motivator for Hollywood and if any of these "fringe" movies had the potential to make big bucks, Hollywood would grab them. So far, Priscilla, Queen of the Desert has been the most lucrative, but bombed in Africa and Asia. There was never a Priscilla Queen of the Desert 2. However, you make the mistake of talking on the one hand about films addressing minority issues, and films which happen to have minority characters. There isn’t a mass market for films about minority issues. The mass appeal for comic book heroes could include minority representation while maintaining mass appeal. See Black Panther as an example. Sure, we had War Machine and Falcon, but they were playing second (and third)fiddle to Iron Man." The movie I mentioned contains elements of both addressing minority issues and introduces minority characters. You need to actually watch the movie before commenting erroneously
Do you sometimes live in Canada by any chance??!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having read though the whole thred I can see why people are put off commenting their opinion on anything. Such aggression. I'll not be bothering with the forums again." Okily dokily | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When watching a film, I've never once sat there and thought "You know, this film would be better if he was gay" or "this film should have more white guys" Just enjoy the story that the film crew are trying to tell " That’s cool. Although entirely missing the point being discussed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Taking in circles. You appear to think I don’t think I was being condescending to the poster who I thought was being untruthful in reframing their original post back to “it was just a no” after being challenged. I *was* being condescending. I wasn’t trying to debate them. My conversation about tone was on a different tangential post. And on that, no Syb, I still think you could read DO in tones that don’t say he’s being whatever the words Evie first used. I really don’t. That’s all my point was. I thought you’d joined that conversation. I wasn't referring to anything Evie said, as I didn't know you had aimed your comment at her. Which I realised latterly! Which is why I think there were cross purposes. I'll respect your opinion on how I see tones on here. I’m not sure now what opinion you think I have or don’t because you’ve referenced a point about DO in your previous comment that left me not sure if you followed my point in the difference between my posting and his, but, okay. " This opinion: "And on that, no Syb, I still think you could read DO in tones that don’t say he’s being whatever the words Evie first used" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When watching a film, I've never once sat there and thought "You know, this film would be better if he was gay" or "this film should have more white guys" Just enjoy the story that the film crew are trying to tell That’s cool. Although entirely missing the point being discussed. "
Fine, I'll put it another way.
"Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing?"
My answer, it doesn't matter to me. When watching a film, I've never once sat there and thought "You know, this film would be better if he was gay" or "this film should have more white guys" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why did he want it quoted that Deadpool was pansexual? Anyone have any ideas?" Not a clue. It's not even mentioned or hinted to in the movie | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Taking in circles. You appear to think I don’t think I was being condescending to the poster who I thought was being untruthful in reframing their original post back to “it was just a no” after being challenged. I *was* being condescending. I wasn’t trying to debate them. My conversation about tone was on a different tangential post. And on that, no Syb, I still think you could read DO in tones that don’t say he’s being whatever the words Evie first used. I really don’t. That’s all my point was. I thought you’d joined that conversation. I wasn't referring to anything Evie said, as I didn't know you had aimed your comment at her. Which I realised latterly! Which is why I think there were cross purposes. I'll respect your opinion on how I see tones on here. I’m not sure now what opinion you think I have or don’t because you’ve referenced a point about DO in your previous comment that left me not sure if you followed my point in the difference between my posting and his, but, okay. This opinion: "And on that, no Syb, I still think you could read DO in tones that don’t say he’s being whatever the words Evie first used"" Ahh, that we disagree that he can only be read one way. Okay, yes we do respectfully disagree. Thanks for clarifying. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When watching a film, I've never once sat there and thought "You know, this film would be better if he was gay" or "this film should have more white guys" Just enjoy the story that the film crew are trying to tell That’s cool. Although entirely missing the point being discussed.
Fine, I'll put it another way.
"Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing?"
My answer, it doesn't matter to me. When watching a film, I've never once sat there and thought "You know, this film would be better if he was gay" or "this film should have more white guys""Yes. I understood. You didn’t have a view either way. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why did he want it quoted that Deadpool was pansexual? Anyone have any ideas? Not a clue. It's not even mentioned or hinted to in the movie" Who gives a fuck,i mean really,who gives a flying fuck | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Taking in circles. You appear to think I don’t think I was being condescending to the poster who I thought was being untruthful in reframing their original post back to “it was just a no” after being challenged. I *was* being condescending. I wasn’t trying to debate them. My conversation about tone was on a different tangential post. And on that, no Syb, I still think you could read DO in tones that don’t say he’s being whatever the words Evie first used. I really don’t. That’s all my point was. I thought you’d joined that conversation. I wasn't referring to anything Evie said, as I didn't know you had aimed your comment at her. Which I realised latterly! Which is why I think there were cross purposes. I'll respect your opinion on how I see tones on here. I’m not sure now what opinion you think I have or don’t because you’ve referenced a point about DO in your previous comment that left me not sure if you followed my point in the difference between my posting and his, but, okay. This opinion: "And on that, no Syb, I still think you could read DO in tones that don’t say he’s being whatever the words Evie first used" Ahh, that we disagree that he can only be read one way. Okay, yes we do respectfully disagree. Thanks for clarifying." You're welcome. It's hot and it's easy to lose track of what is going on on threads, especially with lots of quoting. It happens to me frequently. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why did he want it quoted that Deadpool was pansexual? Anyone have any ideas? Not a clue. It's not even mentioned or hinted to in the movie Who gives a fuck,i mean really,who gives a flying fuck" I don't really, but as it was in the OP, it made me wonder. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Taking in circles. You appear to think I don’t think I was being condescending to the poster who I thought was being untruthful in reframing their original post back to “it was just a no” after being challenged. I *was* being condescending. I wasn’t trying to debate them. My conversation about tone was on a different tangential post. And on that, no Syb, I still think you could read DO in tones that don’t say he’s being whatever the words Evie first used. I really don’t. That’s all my point was. I thought you’d joined that conversation. I wasn't referring to anything Evie said, as I didn't know you had aimed your comment at her. Which I realised latterly! Which is why I think there were cross purposes. I'll respect your opinion on how I see tones on here. I’m not sure now what opinion you think I have or don’t because you’ve referenced a point about DO in your previous comment that left me not sure if you followed my point in the difference between my posting and his, but, okay. This opinion: "And on that, no Syb, I still think you could read DO in tones that don’t say he’s being whatever the words Evie first used" Ahh, that we disagree that he can only be read one way. Okay, yes we do respectfully disagree. Thanks for clarifying. You're welcome. It's hot and it's easy to lose track of what is going on on threads, especially with lots of quoting. It happens to me frequently. " Completely!  sorry to not have been able to catch up with you Saturday, btw. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When watching a film, I've never once sat there and thought "You know, this film would be better if he was gay" or "this film should have more white guys" Just enjoy the story that the film crew are trying to tell That’s cool. Although entirely missing the point being discussed.
Fine, I'll put it another way.
"Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing?"
My answer, it doesn't matter to me. When watching a film, I've never once sat there and thought "You know, this film would be better if he was gay" or "this film should have more white guys"
Yes. I understood. You didn’t have a view either way."My view is, if the sexuality of the charactor doesn't have an impact on the story, then I don't think about it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why did he want it quoted that Deadpool was pansexual? Anyone have any ideas? Not a clue. It's not even mentioned or hinted to in the movie Who gives a fuck,i mean really,who gives a flying fuck" Fuck knows. A characters sexuality should depend on the story, for example, Philadelphia wouldn't have been as good if Tom Hanks was straight. Green mile, was John Cofee gay or straight? Don't know, because it didn't matter | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When watching a film, I've never once sat there and thought "You know, this film would be better if he was gay" or "this film should have more white guys" Just enjoy the story that the film crew are trying to tell That’s cool. Although entirely missing the point being discussed.
Fine, I'll put it another way.
"Do you think having more LGBT characters in big movies is a good thing?"
My answer, it doesn't matter to me. When watching a film, I've never once sat there and thought "You know, this film would be better if he was gay" or "this film should have more white guys"
Yes. I understood. You didn’t have a view either way.
My view is, if the sexuality of the charactor doesn't have an impact on the story, then I don't think about it"Yes. No view on the need for representation in movies of underrepresented groups, because you don’t think about it. Understood. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why did he want it quoted that Deadpool was pansexual? Anyone have any ideas? Not a clue. It's not even mentioned or hinted to in the movie Who gives a fuck,i mean really,who gives a flying fuck" Agreed mate | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having read though the whole thred I can see why people are put off commenting their opinion on anything. Such aggression. I'll not be bothering with the forums again. Okily dokily "Patronising much? Thanks for the welcome. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why did he want it quoted that Deadpool was pansexual? Anyone have any ideas?" From "Screenrant":- "Speaking at the Deadpool 2 panel during Comic-Con, star Ryan Reynolds said he'd love to see more of Wade Wilson's pansexuality on display in future movies. The character has a reputation for dirty jokes and a high libido, and the recent sequel expanded on the hints laid out in 2016's Deadpool - particularly when it comes to the relationship between Wade and his long-suffering on-again-off-again friend Colossus. The source for Deadpool being "officially" pansexual in the comics is writer Gerry Duggan, who had a several years-long stint on Deadpool comics and characterized the irreverent antihero on Twitter as "omnisexual" and "ready and willing to do anything with a pulse." Even the pulse requirement is apparently flexible; in the comics, Deadpool had a romantic relationship with Death - something that made Thanos so wild with jealousy that he cursed Deadpool with immortality." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having read though the whole thred I can see why people are put off commenting their opinion on anything. Such aggression. I'll not be bothering with the forums again. Okily dokily
Patronising much?
Thanks for the welcome."Welcome sweety | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having read though the whole thred I can see why people are put off commenting their opinion on anything. Such aggression. I'll not be bothering with the forums again. Okily dokily
Patronising much?
Thanks for the welcome.
Welcome sweety "Dont know why i said "sweety"  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having read though the whole thred I can see why people are put off commenting their opinion on anything. Such aggression. I'll not be bothering with the forums again. Okily dokily
Patronising much?
Thanks for the welcome.
Welcome sweety
Dont know why i said "sweety" "I don't either, but I'll take it.   | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having read though the whole thred I can see why people are put off commenting their opinion on anything. Such aggression. I'll not be bothering with the forums again. Okily dokily
Patronising much?
Thanks for the welcome.
Welcome sweety
Dont know why i said "sweety"
I don't either, but I'll take it. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having read though the whole thred I can see why people are put off commenting their opinion on anything. Such aggression. I'll not be bothering with the forums again. Okily dokily
Patronising much?
Thanks for the welcome."Projecting much? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think you just made my point really well. Thank you." I don’t think you understand, at all. "I'll not be bothering with the forums again." Our loss, no doubt. . "When watching a film, I've never once sat there and thought "You know, this film would be better if he was gay" or "this film should have more white guys" Just enjoy the story that the film crew are trying to tell" White male in ‘not getting why minorities feel underrepresented’ shocker. . "The movie I mentioned contains elements of both addressing minority issues and introduces minority characters. You need to actually watch the movie before commenting erroneously" I have watched it. I think you’ve massively missed the point. "Do you sometimes live in Canada by any chance??!!" What’s your point? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . When watching a film, I've never once sat there and thought "You know, this film would be better if he was gay" or "this film should have more white guys" Just enjoy the story that the film crew are trying to tell White male in ‘not getting why minorities feel underrepresented’ shocker. " He’s mixed race. Although, the not getting it point stands. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think you just made my point really well. Thank you. I don’t think you understand, at all. I'll not be bothering with the forums again. Our loss, no doubt. . When watching a film, I've never once sat there and thought "You know, this film would be better if he was gay" or "this film should have more white guys" Just enjoy the story that the film crew are trying to tell White male in ‘not getting why minorities feel underrepresented’ shocker. . The movie I mentioned contains elements of both addressing minority issues and introduces minority characters. You need to actually watch the movie before commenting erroneously I have watched it. I think you’ve massively missed the point. Do you sometimes live in Canada by any chance??!! What’s your point?" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having read though the whole thred I can see why people are put off commenting their opinion on anything. Such aggression. I'll not be bothering with the forums again. Okily dokily
Patronising much?
Thanks for the welcome."Its just how she is. Eventually she becomes a white noise | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having read though the whole thred I can see why people are put off commenting their opinion on anything. Such aggression. I'll not be bothering with the forums again. Okily dokily
Patronising much?
Thanks for the welcome.
Its just how she is. Eventually she becomes a white noise "Oh you wound me!  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you sometimes live in Canada by any chance??!! What’s your point? "Are you going to clarify, or hide behind emojis? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you sometimes live in Canada by any chance??!! What’s your point?
Are you going to clarify, or hide behind emojis?"Now you're the one missing the point, which was???? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you sometimes live in Canada by any chance??!! What’s your point?
Are you going to clarify, or hide behind emojis?
Now you're the one missing the point, which was????"I’m not convinced you’ve made a point, and if you have it’s unclear - that’s why you’re being asked for clarification. By default of your not explaining though, I’m inclined to think you were being silly and had nothing of worth to say. Cool beans. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you sometimes live in Canada by any chance??!! What’s your point?
Are you going to clarify, or hide behind emojis?
Now you're the one missing the point, which was????
I’m not convinced you’ve made a point, and if you have it’s unclear - that’s why you’re being asked for clarification. By default of your not explaining though, I’m inclined to think you were being silly and had nothing of worth to say. Cool beans. "Yeah, I don't really care if you're convinced or not. Your abrasive personality shows through in your posts, and because of it, you've bullied people and put them off posting. Are you proud of yourself? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you sometimes live in Canada by any chance??!! What’s your point?
Are you going to clarify, or hide behind emojis?
Now you're the one missing the point, which was????
I’m not convinced you’ve made a point, and if you have it’s unclear - that’s why you’re being asked for clarification. By default of your not explaining though, I’m inclined to think you were being silly and had nothing of worth to say. Cool beans.
Yeah, I don't really care if you're convinced or not. Your abrasive personality shows through in your posts, and because of it, you've bullied people and put them off posting. Are you proud of yourself?"Don't bother mate. I've already told her I don't care about anything she has to say but she'll carry on to get a rise out of you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you sometimes live in Canada by any chance??!! What’s your point?
Are you going to clarify, or hide behind emojis?
Now you're the one missing the point, which was????"Are you going to explain the Canada question? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you sometimes live in Canada by any chance??!! What’s your point?
Are you going to clarify, or hide behind emojis?
Now you're the one missing the point, which was????
Are you going to explain the Canada question?"Thought it was pretty obvious myself | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you sometimes live in Canada by any chance??!! What’s your point?
Are you going to clarify, or hide behind emojis?
Now you're the one missing the point, which was????
I’m not convinced you’ve made a point, and if you have it’s unclear - that’s why you’re being asked for clarification. By default of your not explaining though, I’m inclined to think you were being silly and had nothing of worth to say. Cool beans.
Yeah, I don't really care if you're convinced or not. Your abrasive personality shows through in your posts, and because of it, you've bullied people and put them off posting. Are you proud of yourself?"So my disagreeing with someone is bullying? My being patronising is bullying? I’ve been tough and abrasive because I think there’s been a fair amount of bullshit commentary on the thread, I’ll own that. I apologise for hurt feelings. Yeah, I’ll own my condescension too. Do they? Do you? Others name calling and rudeness, do you call that out? Is that justified and mine not? I wish people would be more consistent. And, still no actual point to the Canada comment? Righty-ho. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Thought it was pretty obvious myself" And yet, given the opportunity, you have neglected to demonstrate that it was. Funny, that. It’s almost as though you fancied having a dig, without having to back it up. Who would’ve thought you’d do such a thing? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my disagreeing with someone is bullying? My being patronising is bullying? I’ve been tough and abrasive because I think there’s been a fair amount of bullshit commentary on the thread, I’ll own that. I apologise for hurt feelings. Yeah, I’ll own my condescension too. Do they? Do you? Others name calling and rudeness, do you call that out? Is that justified and mine not? I wish people would be more consistent. And, still no actual point to the Canada comment? Righty-ho. " Yeah ok, love - whatever floats your boat. And the Canada comment wasn't to you, why do you personally feel you're owed an explanation? You have a strong sense of self-entitlement too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Oh dear. I know it wasn’t to me. It was a dig at someone else, you should really be careful by the way that could be construed as bullying. Also I don’t feel entitled to an explanation, I was simply asking for one. It’s okay that you don’t want to defend or explain the comment. That’s fine. We all understood that it was daft." Asking if someone sometimes lives in Canada can be construed as bullying? Don't be "daft"
That's possibly the wettest thing I've read on these forums, and I've read all the watersports and squirting threads
By the way, keep replying using your history pages if you want, you obviously have much more time on your hands than you know what to do with, I, however don't - I work for a living, so have to go now. Please feel free to have the last word. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"...keep replying using your history pages if you want, you obviously have much more time on your hands than you know what to do with, I, however don't - I work for a living, so have to go now." He says, while doing exactly the same thing. You can’t try to take some sort of moral high ground while behaving the same way. Still no explanation for the Canada comment. Surprise surprise. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
