Jump to content

Frozen 2 and LGBT activists


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Len B'stard said:

Aint LGBT the worst acronym ever?  I mean isn't the idea of an acronym that it sort of rolls off your tongue or has some sort of association to it that gives it a certain ring to it.  I think BLTG would've been better.  Bacon, Lettuce, Tomato...and gays :lol:

We have a better one: holebi. Doesn't include transgenders though. It's an acronym from the 90s. Maybe holebitra could be the updated version. I can only wonder what we'll have to add 20 years from now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎5‎/‎7‎/‎2016 at 5:42 PM, PappyTron said:

Sure. Can you point out the biblical passages that say that homosexuality is a sin? Can you point out anything that Jesus said about homosexuality...?

'You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

"Neither shalt you lie with any beast to defile yourself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down with: it is confusion."

- Leviticus 18:22-23
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 31illusions said:

'You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."

"Neither shalt you lie with any beast to defile yourself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down with: it is confusion."

- Leviticus 18:22-23
 

You do know that the direct translation, from Hebrew is subtly, but importantly different, don't you? The verse, in Hebrew is "V’et-zachar lo tishkav mishk’vei ishah to’evah hi" which translates as "And with a male, thou shalt not lie down in a woman's bed; it is an abomination". The point is almost certainly that two men should not sleep together in a wife's marriage bed. We can further infer this, as Leviticus uses different instructions when discussing women and beasts; it uses the word which translates as "fornicate", not "lie down with" which is a clear forbadement.

Edited by PappyTron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, PappyTron said:

You do know that the direct translation, from Hebrew is subtly, but importantly different, don't you? The verse, in Hebrew is "V’et-zachar lo tishkav mishk’vei ishah to’evah hi" which translates as "And with a male, thou shalt not lie down in a woman's bed; it is an abomination". The point is almost certainly that two men should not sleep together in a wife's marriage bed. We can further infer this, as Leviticus uses different instructions when discussing women and beasts; it uses the word which translates as "fornicate", not "lie down with" which is a clear forbadement.

So you already knew what it said, but still you asked? :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 31illusions said:

So you already knew what it said, but still you asked? :facepalm:

I must confess that I asked because, invariably, those who make the point that you did do so because that is what their pastor has taught them, or they use the verses to support their personal beliefs. In short, you used Biblical justification for your view even though the Bible does not say what you claimed. I mean, if you are going to state that something is a one way ticket to Hell then you'd better be damned sure to get it right, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Graeme said:

To the privileged, equality often feels like oppression...

This has nothing to do with equality though, there are amazing pieces of gay cinema out there and the level of creativity it took to create them and the unique stamp they have put on the medium extends a little further than someone going 'I KNOW!  Lets make Snow White and the Seven Homosexuals!' :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, PappyTron said:

I must confess that I asked because, invariably, those who make the point that you did do so because that is what their pastor has taught them, or they use the verses to support their personal beliefs. In short, you used Biblical justification for your view even though the Bible does not say what you claimed. I mean, if you are going to state that something is a one way ticket to Hell then you'd better be damned sure to get it right, no?

So basically you were counting on peoples ignorance to not call you out. I get it. No one said being gay is a one way ticket to hell. Not accepting God into your heart, and taking the free gift of forgiveness is.

Done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/05/2016 at 0:50 AM, 31illusions said:

So basically you were counting on peoples ignorance to not call you out. I get it. No one said being gay is a one way ticket to hell. Not accepting God into your heart, and taking the free gift of forgiveness is.

Done.

You have that backwards; you bible folks love to rely on people not knowing the Bible so that you can spew out your nonsense, yet when it is pointed out that you interpret text incorrectly you hate it.

 

Quote

No one said being gay is a one way ticket to hell.

 

Really? Because you did say "Preaching homosexuality to children is completely wrong and itself is a one way ticket to the burning gates" which seems pretty darned close.

EDIT - I just want to point out that 31Illusions did NOT say the above quote; someone else did and I mixed the two up.

If you'd like to discuss theological exegesis we can do that. You don't want to do that though; you'd rather keep preaching your Bronze Age nonsense and using it as a justification for your own prejudices.

Edited by PappyTron
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Len B'stard said:

This has nothing to do with equality though, there are amazing pieces of gay cinema out there and the level of creativity it took to create them and the unique stamp they have put on the medium extends a little further than someone going 'I KNOW!  Lets make Snow White and the Seven Homosexuals!' :lol:

That's not really the way that I see all the backlash in this thread, or the motivation behind it.

I really couldn't care less if this Disney character turns out to be gay or not, I have no personal investment either way but one of the key themes which has emerged in this thread is criticism of a perceived artificial 'shoehorning in' of gay people to popular cinema and TV in order to fill a quota because of pressure from a 'gay lobby'.

I was merely seeking to point out that gay people have probably been chronically under-represented in cinema and other media for the majority of its history. The fact that a fairly modest effort to redress the balance is attracting this degree of criticism suggests that the phenomenon I alluded to above, that a movement towards equality feels unjust for the privileged majority, holds true.

There's a difference between your prospective "Snow White and the Seven Homosexuals" and advocating an artistic decision to make one of the female leads of Frozen a Lesbian. "Snow White and the Seven Homosexuals" makes it sound like the gayness is an overt mission statement and could probably be legitimately accused of 'shoehorning in' for the sake of it. Campaigning for a character who has previously had no sexual orientation disclosed, to be gay as an organic plot point, in presumably a much larger story, is a bit different.

As I say, I really don't care, but then I'm not gay and have no personal investment. However, I can appreciate where the campaigners are coming from, people look for characters that they can empathise with and it must be a bit patronising to wish you could go to a mainstream cinema and see more characters you can relate to only to be told that you have your 'niche' and can't expect to be represented much (with some people clearly having 'moral' issues with you having any representation whatsoever and wishing you'd just go back under your rug). Having a high-profile iconic character in modern cinema in *your* corner might be a significant symbolic event.

Edited by Graeme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Graeme said:

That's not really the way that I see all the backlash in this thread, or the motivation behind it.

I really couldn't care less if this Disney character turns out to be gay or not, I have no personal investment either way but one of the key themes which has emerged in this thread is criticism of a perceived artificial 'shoehorning in' of gay people to popular cinema and TV in order to fill a quota because of pressure from a 'gay lobby'.

I was merely seeking to point out that gay people have probably been chronically under-represented in cinema and other media for the majority of its history. The fact that a fairly modest effort to redress the balance is attracting this degree of criticism suggests that the phenomenon I alluded to above, that a movement towards equality feels unjust for the privileged majority, holds true.

There's a difference between your prospective "Snow White and the Seven Homosexuals" and advocating an artistic decision to make one of the female leads of Frozen a Lesbian. "Snow White and the Seven Homosexuals" makes it sound like the gayness is an overt mission statement and could probably be legitimately accused of 'shoehorning in' for the sake of it. Campaigning for a character who has previously had no sexual orientation disclosed, to be gay as an organic plot point, in presumably a much larger story, is a bit different.

As I say, I really don't care, but then I'm not gay and have no personal investment. However, I can appreciate where the campaigners are coming from, people look for characters that they can empathise with and it must be a bit patronising to wish you could go to a mainstream cinema and see more characters you can relate to only to be told that you have your 'niche' and can't expect to be represented much (with some people clearly having 'moral' issues with you having any representation whatsoever and wishing you'd just go back under your rug). Having a high-profile iconic character in modern cinema in *your* corner might be a significant symbolic event.

Gay people have a lot of proportional representation in cinema. Have you never seen a Carry On film, Kenneth Williams?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Graeme said:

That's not really the way that I see all the backlash in this thread, or the motivation behind it.

I really couldn't care less if this Disney character turns out to be gay or not, I have no personal investment either way but one of the key themes which has emerged in this thread is criticism of a perceived artificial 'shoehorning in' of gay people to popular cinema and TV in order to fill a quota because of pressure from a 'gay lobby'.

I was merely seeking to point out that gay people have probably been chronically under-represented in cinema and other media for the majority of its history. The fact that a fairly modest effort to redress the balance is attracting this degree of criticism suggests that the phenomenon I alluded to above, that a movement towards equality feels unjust for the privileged majority, holds true.

There's a difference between your prospective "Snow White and the Seven Homosexuals" and advocating an artistic decision to make one of the female leads of Frozen a Lesbian. "Snow White and the Seven Homosexuals" makes it sound like the gayness is an overt mission statement and could probably be legitimately accused of 'shoehorning in' for the sake of it. Campaigning for a character who has previously had no sexual orientation disclosed, to be gay as an organic plot point, in presumably a much larger story, is a bit different.

As I say, I really don't care, but then I'm not gay and have no personal investment. However, I can appreciate where the campaigners are coming from, people look for characters that they can empathise with and it must be a bit patronising to wish you could go to a mainstream cinema and see more characters you can relate to only to be told that you have your 'niche' and can't expect to be represented much (with some people clearly having 'moral' issues with you having any representation whatsoever and wishing you'd just go back under your rug). Having a high-profile iconic character in modern cinema in *your* corner might be a significant symbolic event.

I see where they're coming from too, I have no problem with where they are coming from, i disagree with the method of implementing change and i don't like being lumped in with the forces of oppression just because i think this is ridiculous.  Like i said, there is gay cinema, there is dignified representation of homosexuality in cinema, yes, it is obscure but if you (not you personally me ol' china plate!) cared enough you'd know about it, i don't think this is the solution, all this is is an unimaginative and poorly thought out lobby attempting to insert something into the mainstream for it's own self aggrandisement, this is not the way you reach people, in fact it's the very opposite, it's disingenuous and lame, it suggests that the homosexual experience is just an interchangeable chessboard piece in relation to the heterosexual, which it is not, it is it's own unique experience and deserves it's own unique representation, not a 'i know, lets find something big and broad and make it gay, that'll get our point across'.  

There's something so lame and so weak and so poorly thought out about it, there's a difference between being equal and being identical.  For example, you're Scotish right, and I'm Pakistani...do you think the extent of the value of being Scottish or Pakistani is effectively represented by taking a staple of Englishness and making it Scottish or Pakistani, do you think that assists, in any sense, a better understand of what it is to be one of my lot or one of your lot?  Mate, it doesn't.  Hanging onto this idea of 'i see where they're coming from' and then co-joining it with 'i dont really care actually' just makes it seem like your priority is coming across as right on, as opposed to any kind of serious human objection to the reality of the issues at hand.

It's like this whole 'lets make Bond black' think with Idris Elba, how the fuck does that help the black experience?  I think it does the polar opposite.  It devalues it and makes it seem like the only way it can have value is by somehow associating that experience with something traditionally associated with another, like it can't stand on it's own.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PappyTron said:

Really? Because you did say "Preaching homosexuality to children is completely wrong and itself is a one way ticket to the burning gates" which seems pretty darned close.

The words you have in parenthesis I have never spoken or typed. Therefore you are a liar, and I now who I'm dealing with. So your argument is null and void.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 31illusions said:

The words you have in parenthesis I have never spoken or typed. Therefore you are a liar, and I now who I'm dealing with. So your argument is null and void.

I am so sorry! When you replied to my original post (about homosexuality in the bible) I didn't check that you weren't the person that originally made the post because it was a while ago, and then I just searched for then copy/pasted the original quote because of it. That is why I was so curt in my reply to you. I am very sorry and apologise unreservedly.

Edited by PappyTron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

I had a curry today also (true). I just need to be Imran Khan in the '80s with the beautiful women and I can out Paki you.

Whys your Mum got a nappy on her head, if i press the red dot on her head will she shut down? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Len B'stard said:

Whys your Mum got a nappy on her head, if i press the red dot on her head will she shut down? :D

Bernard Manning once told a story about how he couldn't be racist because his neighbour was a Pakistani man.

"Oh, he's a very nice man, is my neighbour. Mr Khan. However, he can be a right arrogant bastard sometimes. He told me just the other day that he's better than me. I asked him why he thought that, and he said "Well, I haven't got a Paki for a neighbour, for one thing!"..."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Len B'stard said:

I see where they're coming from too, I have no problem with where they are coming from, i disagree with the method of implementing change and i don't like being lumped in with the forces of oppression just because i think this is ridiculous.  Like i said, there is gay cinema, there is dignified representation of homosexuality in cinema, yes, it is obscure but if you (not you personally me ol' china plate!) cared enough you'd know about it, i don't think this is the solution, all this is is an unimaginative and poorly thought out lobby attempting to insert something into the mainstream for it's own self aggrandisement, this is not the way you reach people, in fact it's the very opposite, it's disingenuous and lame, it suggests that the homosexual experience is just an interchangeable chessboard piece in relation to the heterosexual, which it is not, it is it's own unique experience and deserves it's own unique representation, not a 'i know, lets find something big and broad and make it gay, that'll get our point across'.  

There's something so lame and so weak and so poorly thought out about it, there's a difference between being equal and being identical.  For example, you're Scotish right, and I'm Pakistani...do you think the extent of the value of being Scottish or Pakistani is effectively represented by taking a staple of Englishness and making it Scottish or Pakistani, do you think that assists, in any sense, a better understand of what it is to be one of my lot or one of your lot?  Mate, it doesn't.  Hanging onto this idea of 'i see where they're coming from' and then co-joining it with 'i dont really care actually' just makes it seem like your priority is coming across as right on, as opposed to any kind of serious human objection to the reality of the issues at hand.

It's like this whole 'lets make Bond black' think with Idris Elba, how the fuck does that help the black experience?  I think it does the polar opposite.  It devalues it and makes it seem like the only way it can have value is by somehow associating that experience with something traditionally associated with another, like it can't stand on it's own.  

I'm not just saying what I'm saying to "come across as right on", pal. I do legitimately care about social justice, and more so that those of my friends who're gay will one day get to the point where they never experience any life challenges or are subject to negative social phenomena of any variety, be that abuse, ridicule, marginalisation or neglect from anyone, because of their sexuality... What I meant was that I have never seen Frozen, I have no attachment to the story or the characters, so while I can appreciate the sentiment, if this character is gay or not ultimately has no real bearing on my non-existent artistic appreciation for the franchise.

I think you've got to watch that you don't stray too far into the "equal but different" rhetoric that establishments frequently use to try and deflect movements for social reform from achieving real equality. "Oh, women and men are equal but different, women can run the creche and do Biblical readings, they're just not suited to ministry" say those who are opposed to females becoming pastors in various churches around the world... and then there are other churches in which women have been ordained for decades and now fulfil exactly the same role as males and nobody bats an eyelid any more.

You seem to be arguing that gay people should never expect to be represented in the cinematic mainstream in the way that straight people are, which is, I guess, the ethos behind this campaign... I think these people feel that their sexuality should be viewed the same way as heterosexuality, to the end that we eventually lose the labels altogether and just have sexuality, where people fall in love with whoever they want and there is no 'homosexual experience'...

I'm quite sceptical of the idea that a sexuality should have a 'culture' I think the existence of 'LGBT culture' as it currently stands is probably down to an 'us against the world' mentality, a sense of community artificially created because these people have collectively been subject to so much institutionalised adversity throughout history. You strip that away and you just have individuals falling in love with one another... Do you feel like part of a 'straight culture'? Do you feel some sort of bond with me over the fact we both find females attractive? Do you think that every film which contains heterosexual relationships is reflects a 'heterosexual experience' to which you feel a strong affinity? I sure don't...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

I'm not just saying what I'm saying to "come across as right on", pal. I do legitimately care about social justice

I appreciate that, which is why i was careful to put 'makes you come off as' because in our conversing on this forum I've gathered that you're not like that.

Quote

and more so that those of my friends who're gay will one day get to the point where they never experience any life challenges or are subject to negative social phenomena of any variety, be that abuse, ridicule, marginalisation or neglect from anyone, because of their sexuality

I don't think that'll happen for a great many centuries yet but i agree with the principle.

Quote

I think you've got to watch that you don't stray too far into the "equal but different" rhetoric that establishments frequently use to try and deflect movements for social reform from achieving real equality. "Oh, women and men are equal but different, women can run the creche and do Biblical readings, they're just not suited to ministry" say those who are opposed to females becoming pastors in various churches around the world... and then there are other churches in which women have been ordained for decades and now fulfil exactly the same role as males and nobody bats an eyelid any more.

I don't think a desire for a more valid representation of homosexuality in cinema, over and above cheap hack jobs that consist of taking the pre-existing iconography and replacing it with something homosexual quite constitutes the upholding of prejudice.

Quote

You seem to be arguing that gay people should never expect to be represented in the cinematic mainstream in the way that straight people are

No, what I'm saying is they deserve a valid representation.  Not The A Team turning into The Gay Team or re-doing Alfie as Pink Alfie, the homosexual lothario or whatever. 

Quote

I think these people feel that their sexuality should be viewed the same way as heterosexuality, to the end that we eventually lose the labels altogether and just have sexuality, where people fall in love with whoever they want and there is no 'homosexual experience'...

Right well i think thats ridiculous, the past was as it is, the fact is homosexuality wasn't viewed as acceptable until recently.  Now is that right?  No, it's not but that doesn't mean we should forget history in a sort of a misguided bid to somehow make the world equal, it doesn't work like that.  There will ALWAYS be a homosexual experience, just like there will always be a black experience, a white experience, a Scotish experience etc etc etc and maybe one day when there are no races left anymore through inter-marriage or no gay/straight prejudice well then the human race will just turn to other ways to define itself, these things aren't necessarily a blueprint for evil, people want to be equal, everyone does...but there's a difference between equality and basically draining the uniqueness from every facet of human society, that to me is like the death of culture. 

Quote

I'm quite sceptical of the idea that a sexuality should have a 'culture' I think the existence of 'LGBT culture' as it currently stands is probably down to an 'us against the world' mentality, a sense of community artificially created because these people have collectively been subject to so much institutionalised adversity throughout history.

I think an us against the world thing is a part of it but not all of it, nobody understands you like your own, do they?  I'm not calling for mass segregation here I'm just saying the human race has a certain predeliction for gathering together according to common interest.

Quote

You strip that away and you just have individuals falling in love with one another..

You can't pick and choose which parts of reality to strip away in some reductivists attempt to make everything and everyone the same.

Quote

Do you feel like part of a 'straight culture'?

Yes, definitely.  And it's been the dominant culture since forever, gender politics up until very recently have been centred around it.

Quote

Do you feel some sort of bond with me over the fact we both find females attractive?

I feel a bond with you over more than that sailor :D

Quote

Do you think that every film which contains heterosexual relationships is reflects a 'heterosexual experience' to which you feel a strong affinity? I sure don't...

No i don't, some are absolute shite just like there are films of all sorts that are absolute shite but then other films get very much to the heart of things that are important.  And those sorts of films are important that, when looking at a marginalised group, are important to make because if you don't you run the risk of dehumanizing people and eventually making them a laughing stock and setting the cause back a great deal.  The homosexual contribution to contemporary culture is IMMENSE.  I mean, just taking it from a musical perspective for a moment, gay people were instrumental in the inception of Disco music, which for a time was THE contemporary music of the day, or House music, the entire Dance scene of the late 80s, arguably the most radical musical revolution since Reggae or Punk, has it's roots in the gay community, clubland nowadays still follows the template of what basically gay clubs used to be.  This is just an example I'm pulling out of my arse here but it's a valid one i think, how about a movie about that, if the idea here is to address a historical inaccuracy or something thats been sort of swept under the carpet in the historical re-telling, how about that, how about some valid like that, something challenging, something an entire generation of straight people can look at and think wow, OK, so the roots of that culture that fuckin' defined my youth and was there during all these transformative expereinces comes from gay culture.  Y'know, challenge people and their preconceptions, now thats just one example from an ordinary lad thinking from his limited cultural perspective but i tell you what it's a damn sight more functional and valid that making Snow White and the Seven Benders.  There are hundreds of thousands of intelligent creative people out there, writers, directors etc etc who I'm sure can come up with a million different better ideas that aren't some patronising load of drivel.  I think they deserve better and this will not be achieved by adjusting something heterosexual and making it homosexual because you are essentially defining yourself in regards to where you stand in relation to heterosexuality, which is getting off on the wrong foot to start with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...