JJ Abrams Says Ep 8 Haters May Be Threatened By Women

But JJ did not pick up a fight with anyone. He just clarified where he stands with regards to fans threatened by women... or are you saying that we should not condemn or acknowledge certain unsavoury behaviour because it makes trolls and idiots angry? Or that it is our fault if they spew venom and nonsense because we provoked them in the first place?

I would not justify those people. JJ did nothing wrong.

 

You are correct. I have gone back and reread his statement, so I guess the problem is that others have used the notion that if you dislike TLJ then you must have a problem with women and race, and while its not specifically JJ's fault people like me that have had that label placed upon them sometimes then hear what JJ said and jump to conclusions. I apologise for that, but wish that others would not jump up and down like children throwing insults at others simply because they didn't find characters or story interesting.

 

Sorry, I'm simply haven't seen much of this at all. It's the internet so I'm sure someone has done it, but the people complaining about getting lumped in with the bigots vastly outnumber the people lumping them in with the bigots. Frankly I've grown tired of hearing people complain about it. It's not happening in this thread so why even bring it up?

 

It's intentional. He's hardly the first to do this, and he'll hardly be the last.

 

I've apologised over misreading JJ and gave a partial reason for why, no need to get in a fret over it.

 

I don’t understand the big fuss about what JJ Abrams said. Yes I disagree with him but his statement was a typical SJW talking point. That’s Hollywood for you. When we get outraged over things like this we are only stooping down to the same level as SJW’s.

 

Oh for the love of....I sincererly hope this is a weak troll attempt

 

No it’s a strong troll attempt

 

Not a particularly good one

 

Sorry, what’s wrong with being a SJW exactly? ( I assume it means “social justice warrior” right?)

I don’t want to be annoying or anything but I honestly don’t understand what’s so bad about fighting for social justice... does the term has some derogatory connotation I’m missing? Isn’t it a good thing for Hollywood to display a social conscience?

--- Double Post Merged, Nov 15, 2018, Original Post Date: Nov 15, 2018 ---

Oh right, so that’s what this is. I see.

 

Well the term SJW became a derogatory term because people who self-identified as such were the people who got upset over a school having "Taco Tuesday" as cultural apropriation (yes this really happened) or the kind of people who get offended at everything whether or not they were the target of the "offense" in the first place. So it went from that, hyper-offended, type to meaning "anyone who likes or is okay with seeing women and minorities given prominent roles usually reserved for men, specifically white men".

So in theory, there's nothing wrong with being a "social justice warrior" though some obviously took it too far.

 

Exactly. People on the left take things too far and then people on the right take things too far reacting to them. It’s a viscous cycle of everybody overreacting to each other.

 

Thanks for clarifying, although there is still something i don’t get: why kill joys who worry about minutiae such as others eating tacos can be equated with people favouring the inclusion of minorities in roles reserved to white men? It’s very strange that both are lumped together ... Doesnt it sound rather like some people are using this SJW tag just to dismiss people’s legitimate desire for social justice? I find it rather suspect.

Interesting how the right are depicted here as the ones reacting to the left’s “bad behaviour” so to speak... as it is always the left that is most lkely to do weird stuff...

In my experience it’s usually people on the right who start losing brain cells and get themselves into a mess when they go too far right...

 

It's both sides really. The left went absolutely bananas in the wake of the elections of 2016. Major universities allowing students to skip class. Bringing in therapy dogs and all that crap. Like really???? Riots at Berkely. Insane.

Being neither a leftist or a rightist I see the silliness on both sides. There is nothing wrong with "social justice" except the fact that justice is never REALLY blind. As Pablo Friere (spelled his name wrong I'm sure) said in "The Pedagogy of the Oppressed" the oppressed, in order to obtain justice, end up becoming that which they hate, unjust. (this is obviously not an exact quote).

My advice to Lucas film: make GOOD characters. Don't worry about their race and sex. THEN cast people in the roles. Right now they are WAY to focused on a political agenda and they aren't focusing enough on just giving people good stories. Do that and the problem is solved.

 

Speaking generally it appears to me that the 'killjoy' is two sides of the same coin. Like the people who watch the scene in TLJ with Chewie trying to eat the porg while the other porgs are looking on and say "Vegetarian agenda vegatarian agenda!" are the mirror image of the people who see Taco Tuesday and say "Cultural appropriation cultural appropriation!" What they're both actually saying is pretty much the same thing. The fringe though act according to the exact same mindset, just having different words coming out of their mouths. Both are "fighting the cause" both are "victims" both get "triggered" by what the other says and so on. It's usually the way it is whenever you've got two opposing sides, they think they're completely different when really, they're both the exact same mindset, both operating according to the exact same procedure of faulty thinking; just different sides of the same coin.

 

I don't think both can be "legitimately" lumped together, but rather only by those who seek to diminish the importance of a young woman leading a powerhouse franchise or the first exclusively black super hero movie (as in the identity of the character is directly tied to his being black; Blade's race is largely irrelevant so that's why he doesn't count for this one)

Yes that is exactly what they are doing. It came from a place of mocking the hyper-offended.
Then it snowballed into "anyone who doesn't support this doctrine" as a means to de-legitimatize them.

--- Double Post Merged, Nov 15, 2018, Original Post Date: Nov 15, 2018 ---

People are expecting equality of outcomes not equality of opportunity. Thus the problem because outcome cannot be controlled.

I'd argue they have done a good job with this, while they may not work for you specifically and Solo withstanding, they've created a nice stable of characters that many do in fact love and relate to the way the older crowd related to the OT or PT characters.

 

This sounds actually quite mild and rather harmless really... a cosmetic “rich kids” rebellion, it appears... But I’m a European. My understanding of the left is different. There are aspects of left politics that are problematic, but for me they have to do less with social justice and more with economic underdevelopment.

Oppressed becoming the oppressor only comes about in a fierce capitalist framework. Within a mixed economy (strongly regulated capitalism) and a government sensitive to social inclusion and equality (with heavy taxes, free healthcare and education) oppression is largely reduced.

Not being a leftist or a rightist is very difficult to determine objectively... What’s leftist in North America, is not necessary leftist in Europe, Africa or South America. Just consider that most US democrats are considered centre-right in most parts of Europe... If they appear so leftist and progressive now it’s because the US conservatives in power at present are VERY conservative. Go figure.

I personally like that the sequel is more inclusive than the previous films. It’s a sign of the times. And it’s a good sign. Hollywood like society itself cannot get away anymore with casting aside the contribution of people who are not men or/and
not white.

 

What exactly is the problem? Most people like the ST and the new characters. If you don't like the film or the characters that's fine, but are you blaming politics because you don't like it? If so, that's odd. Really the strongest political statement in TLJ was "don't beat up animals" and the evils of "war profiteering." I didn't realize that was such a divisive topic.

 

What I was referring to when taking about people turning extremely right wing was much more sinister than your illustration of people moaning about vegan agendas... I was talking about politicians, leaders, people who make government policy, who take away privileges from the less fortunate, who destroy universal healthcare...

My bad really. All this came about because I did not understand the connotations of SJW... For me social justice is about equality of opportunity for everyone more than the finge aspects discussed above.

 

And I find it strange that people who didn't like this movie are lumped in with racists, bigots, sexists, etc...