TCTTS said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Hollywood is full of capitalists who favor conservative fiscal policies/efforts over the those on the left. That is a fact. Just because a bunch of movie stars hate Trump doesn't mean all of Hollywood is "hostile" toward conservative views. If they were, why do people like Clint Eastwood continue to work? Trust me, the actual people writing the checks are more conservative than you know.

As for your random evangelical Christianity aside, its core tenant literally argues that only those who agree with its version of the truth can be saved. In other words, it is the very thing you accuse Hollywood of being. That's why all of this same old song and dance coming from people such as yourself is hypocrisy of the highest order. "How dare Hollywood preach and wave its finger at me and my religion that constantly waves its finger at anyone who doesn't fall in line with our preaching!" Different ideologies, same intolerable bullsh*t.

---

You've always had a tendency toward supercilious and defensive , but you've more recently just become flat out angry and ugly. It's a bad look and should probably be a wake up call for you. Maybe shake up your bubble a bit.

Regarding your first paragraph, you can try to pretend all you want, but people in Hollywood feel like they have to hide their conservative views and adopt liberal views simply to get along or get ahead. That's not really an opinion by anyone's account, despite your attempts to bigtime it to the contrary.

Your second paragraph is just an anti-Christian rant, nonsensical and angry. Let's start with the very first line, which makes it clear you're either not willing, or maybe not capable, of engaging in anything close to good faith:

Quote:

---

As for your random evangelical Christianity aside

---

There's nothing "random" about it, nor is it an aside. The discussion is ideological diversity vs check the box superficial diversity. I gave a clear example of a lack of ideological diversity. Your bizarre and hostile response underscores my point.

I don't even know where to begin with the rest of that paragraph. I'm not going to speculate about the nature of your anger and hostility toward the Bible and Christianity.

The topic is ideological diversity. Nowhere am I asking for a Christian faith and worldview to dominate movies in front of or behind the cameras, nor for the removal of beliefs and ideologies which differ. I'm just talking about diversity of ideology, instead of a steady stream of, well, people like yourself with overt hostility toward Christianity. If the standard "paint by numbers" Hollywood approach is to overrepresent gays by 2-3 times, then can't we get at least 1/2 of the evangelical Christian representation, given that the numbers of the latter dwarf the numbers of the former in the population? There's nothing hypocritical in my stance whatsoever.

And that's merely one example of a lack of ideological diversity, as I said in my original post.

You clearly brought a lot of baggage into that response. Hope you feel better after that at least. And if you want to try to pretend like you're equally exasperated by "people like me" (replete with whatever stereotypes you, in your extreme open-mindedness, want to color me with) and the ideologically homogenous Hollywood crowd, maybe save some anger for that Hollywood crowd, instead of directing it only at the people who point out the obvious insular, close-minded nature of Hollywood in general.

---

I harbor zero hostility toward the Bible or Christianity in and of itself. I come from a deeply Christian family, literally grew up going to First Christian Church, was heavily involved with Young Life, and have many close friends who still are. I simply despise hypocrites and they way they b*tch about Hollywood pushing its ideals, having zero tolerance for differing opinions, etc, when many Christians literally do the exact same thing; constantly push their ideals and have zero tolerance for differing opinions. Based on your desire to see evangelicals depicted accurately on screen, I assume you're Christian yourself, so I was merely calling attention to the fact that you were bad mouthing one set of "beliefs" while adhering to another set that are known for being just as intolerant of ideals not in lockstep with your own.

As for my tendency to be "supercilious and defensive," I come to the Entertainment board to talk to movies and television and share in my excitement for both with posters who, for the most, are either able to check their political leanings at the door, or simply don't let their political leanings dictate their every thought. And there are so many great posters and conversations to be had here in that regard. But the unfortunate reality is that this place resides next to a radically right political forum that, for some reason, increasingly feels the need to inject its politics into seemingly every last sports and entertainment conversation on this site. For all the b*tching about how Hollywood injects its politics into the movies and shows it creates, F16 is just as guilty for doing the same, in much the same fashion, into more and more discussions outside of itself. And one of its primary targets, no doubt, is this board and the "Hollywood elite" in general. So, of course I'm going to be defensive as this place turns more and more into an F16 minefield, constantly under the barrage of F16 frequenters looking to virtue signal and use this place as their own, personal soap box. Moreover, it's funny to me that F16 is literally one of the angriest and ugliest sites I've ever encountered online, and spews its hate constantly, many times in my direction, and when I retaliate in kind, *I'm* the one who gets called out for being "angry and ugly" and in need of a "wake up call." Again, it's such exhausting, hypocritical bullsh*t, and I can only extend so much patience and ignore so many trolls before I say the things I do in response.

---

Quote:

---

But the unfortunate reality is that this place resides next to a radically right political forum...

---

DTP02 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

DTP02 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Hollywood is full of capitalists who favor conservative fiscal policies/efforts over the those on the left. That is a fact. Just because a bunch of movie stars hate Trump doesn't mean all of Hollywood is "hostile" toward conservative views. If they were, why do people like Clint Eastwood continue to work? Trust me, the actual people writing the checks are more conservative than you know.

As for your random evangelical Christianity aside, its core tenant literally argues that only those who agree with its version of the truth can be saved. In other words, it is the very thing you accuse Hollywood of being. That's why all of this same old song and dance coming from people such as yourself is hypocrisy of the highest order. "How dare Hollywood preach and wave its finger at me and my religion that constantly waves its finger at anyone who doesn't fall in line with our preaching!" Different ideologies, same intolerable bullsh*t.

---

You've always had a tendency toward supercilious and defensive , but you've more recently just become flat out angry and ugly. It's a bad look and should probably be a wake up call for you. Maybe shake up your bubble a bit.

Regarding your first paragraph, you can try to pretend all you want, but people in Hollywood feel like they have to hide their conservative views and adopt liberal views simply to get along or get ahead. That's not really an opinion by anyone's account, despite your attempts to bigtime it to the contrary.

Your second paragraph is just an anti-Christian rant, nonsensical and angry. Let's start with the very first line, which makes it clear you're either not willing, or maybe not capable, of engaging in anything close to good faith:

Quote:

---

As for your random evangelical Christianity aside

---

There's nothing "random" about it, nor is it an aside. The discussion is ideological diversity vs check the box superficial diversity. I gave a clear example of a lack of ideological diversity. Your bizarre and hostile response underscores my point.

I don't even know where to begin with the rest of that paragraph. I'm not going to speculate about the nature of your anger and hostility toward the Bible and Christianity.

The topic is ideological diversity. Nowhere am I asking for a Christian faith and worldview to dominate movies in front of or behind the cameras, nor for the removal of beliefs and ideologies which differ. I'm just talking about diversity of ideology, instead of a steady stream of, well, people like yourself with overt hostility toward Christianity. If the standard "paint by numbers" Hollywood approach is to overrepresent gays by 2-3 times, then can't we get at least 1/2 of the evangelical Christian representation, given that the numbers of the latter dwarf the numbers of the former in the population? There's nothing hypocritical in my stance whatsoever.

And that's merely one example of a lack of ideological diversity, as I said in my original post.

You clearly brought a lot of baggage into that response. Hope you feel better after that at least. And if you want to try to pretend like you're equally exasperated by "people like me" (replete with whatever stereotypes you, in your extreme open-mindedness, want to color me with) and the ideologically homogenous Hollywood crowd, maybe save some anger for that Hollywood crowd, instead of directing it only at the people who point out the obvious insular, close-minded nature of Hollywood in general.

---

I harbor zero hostility toward the Bible or Christianity in and of itself. I come from a deeply Christian family, literally grew up going to First Christian Church, was heavily involved with Young Life, and have many close friends who still are. I simply despise hypocrites and they way they b*tch about Hollywood pushing its ideals, having zero tolerance for differing opinions, etc, when many Christians literally do the exact same thing; constantly push their ideals and have zero tolerance for differing opinions. Based on your desire to see evangelicals depicted accurately on screen, I assume you're Christian yourself, so I was merely calling attention to the fact that you were bad mouthing one set of "beliefs" while adhering to another set that are known for being just as intolerant of ideals not in lockstep with your own.

As for my tendency to be "supercilious and defensive," I come to the Entertainment board to talk to movies and television and share in my excitement for both with posters who, for the most, are either able to check their political leanings at the door, or simply don't let their political leanings dictate their every thought. And there are so many great posters and conversations to be had here in that regard. But the unfortunate reality is that this place resides next to a radically right political forum that, for some reason, increasingly feels the need to inject its politics into seemingly every last sports and entertainment conversation on this site. For all the b*tching about how Hollywood injects its politics into the movies and shows it creates, F16 is just as guilty for doing the same, in much the same fashion, into more and more discussions outside of itself. And one of its primary targets, no doubt, is this board and the "Hollywood elite" in general. So, of course I'm going to be defensive as this place turns more and more into an F16 minefield, constantly under the barrage of F16 frequenters looking to virtue signal and use this place as their own, personal soap box. Moreover, it's funny to me that F16 is literally one of the angriest and ugliest sites I've ever encountered online, and spews its hate constantly, many times in my direction, and when I retaliate in kind, *I'm* the one who gets called out for being "angry and ugly" and in need of a "wake up call." Again, it's such exhausting, hypocritical bullsh*t, and I can only extend so much patience and ignore so many trolls before I say the things I do in response.

---

We're on a thread talking about Hollywood enforcing some arbitrary racial quota in the name of superficial diversity, and your rant(s) were set off by someone pointing out the complete lack of ideological diversity.

The nerve of people talking about diversity in Hollywood on this thread about diversity in Hollywood, I must become unhinged! It's only the right, I mean correct, forms of diversity that are worthy of discussion; hulk smash !

You may need to think about investing in a mirror, because your impression of what you look like, how you come across, bears little resemblance to reality. The "my anti-Christian anger and rant is really okay, because I had Christian friends once" line is just too perfect. If you were critiquing that line in a script, you'd probably say it was "too on the nose."

Your entire response is filled with bigoted stereotypes, and is a hostilely unaware admission that you can't carry on a conversation without losing it because you harbor so much bitterness from your prejudices toward entire groups. And you want to talk about hypocrisy?

Or, if you want to continue on in your not-so-blissful lack of self- awareness, instead of a mirror just invest in an "ACAB" shirt. ACAB works for either of your apparent two favorite boogeymen (going to do the Hollywood thing here and spell it out for the LCD members of the audience): Christians and Conservatives. And, bonus, it would be worth some solid street cred in Hollywood circles to boot.

---

mazag08 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

mazag08 said:

---

TXAG 05 said:

---

What is so wrong about awarding Oscars to the best movie or actor's performance simply because it was the best? Having to meet a quota of different skin colors or lifestyles shouldn't be a part of the equation. It should be who told the best story in the best way possible.

I remember someone famous saying something about how we should judge people not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

---

It's the soft bigotry of low expectations.

Hollywood has to correct the lack of black winners by awarding trophies to people because of the color of their skin since they don't believe they can win on their own merit.

---

It's because the system itself is "rigged."

I'm not saying there are white people in Hollywood actively or maliciously trying to keep people of color out. That's not the issue here. Nor is it "the soft bigotry of low expectations" or that white people "don't believe [people of color] can win on their own merit." It's that the "merit" of people of color isn't provided equal purchase. Not because of any conscious, sinister force keeping it at bay, but because the overwhelming number of white people telling white stories in Hollywood makes it WAY, WAY harder for stories to be told by people of color. It's just a simple, mathematical fact. The system itself doesn't work for people of color in the same way it works for white people. Which is as true for Hollywood as it is for myriad other industries. So, because their numbers are fewer, and thus exists a smaller chance of their stories being told, why shouldn't we do what we can to help them? Why shouldn't we tip the scales, so to speak, to give their voices as much of a platform as white voices have? I refuse to subscribe to this idea that because they're the minority, so too should be the number of their stories or jobs in proportion to whites. Representation matters, and I simply don't know what else to say to those who refuse to acknowledge, for instance, how *seen* black kids felt when they saw Black Panther, or Asians felt watching Crazy Rich Asians. So why can't we do what we can to provide them more opportunities and experiences like that? Why can't we "step aside" in the even the smallest of ways to help people who don't get to see themselves on the screen in the same ways and frequency white people do?

---

But you said that the people in Hollywood writing checks were nothing but conservative capitalists. If that were true, and it were also true that black stories weren't being told proportionally, and it were also true that there was crazy demand for these stories, then why aren't your Hollywood conservative capitalist check writers pulling the trigger for more black movies that will only make them richer? Why do artificial quotas need to be put in place?

Either Hollywood is racist, or there isn't as much demand or money to be made from these movies as seems to be suggested. In that case, Hollywood needs artificial quotas to overcome its own racism, or its needs them to force more supply on a small level of demand, as known as phony economics, as known as Hollywood isn't full of money loving conservative capitalists as you claim

---

YouBet said:

---

For the record, when I come to this board I do my utmost not to bring my politics. I try to practice "when in Rome" while I'm over here because I frankly don't want to discuss politics either. This board is an escape for me and I enjoy movies as much as most people on here.

However, the stubbornness in me is pretty much always going to respond on a stand alone thread, like this one, where Hollywood injects itself into politics or a topic that can be construed as politics.

I also want to point out that the following comment is ludicrous and an example of a stereotypical argument you've railed against on this thread:

Quote:

---

But the unfortunate reality is that this place resides next to a radically right political forum...

---

Just because the left side of the political spectrum has moved into full blown support of anarcho-communism which would kill your industry as fast as every other industry doesn't make F16 "radically right".

The vast, vast majority of that board has held the same line we always have: freedom, liberty, and capitalism. Hell, we really don't even have a few of the "alt-right" boogeymen that post anymore that got folks all up in arms a year or so ago.

In other words, the left moving even further left doesn't make us radical - they are. Just asinine comment while we watch core downtowns burn because of radical leftists.

---

Quote:

---

I simply despise hypocrites and they way they b*tch about Hollywood pushing its ideals, having zero tolerance for differing opinions,

---

Saxsoon said:

---

YouBet said:

---

For the record, when I come to this board I do my utmost not to bring my politics. I try to practice "when in Rome" while I'm over here because I frankly don't want to discuss politics either. This board is an escape for me and I enjoy movies as much as most people on here.

However, the stubbornness in me is pretty much always going to respond on a stand alone thread, like this one, where Hollywood injects itself into politics or a topic that can be construed as politics.

I also want to point out that the following comment is ludicrous and an example of a stereotypical argument you've railed against on this thread:

Quote:

---

But the unfortunate reality is that this place resides next to a radically right political forum...

---

Just because the left side of the political spectrum has moved into full blown support of anarcho-communism which would kill your industry as fast as every other industry doesn't make F16 "radically right".

The vast, vast majority of that board has held the same line we always have: freedom, liberty, and capitalism. Hell, we really don't even have a few of the "alt-right" boogeymen that post anymore that got folks all up in arms a year or so ago.

In other words, the left moving even further left doesn't make us radical - they are. Just asinine comment while we watch core downtowns burn because of radical leftists.

---

I have seen posters lament that fact that universal suffrage exists on that forum. QAnon thread being the most active thread on this website. Please.

---

Saxsoon said:

---

YouBet said:

---

For the record, when I come to this board I do my utmost not to bring my politics. I try to practice "when in Rome" while I'm over here because I frankly don't want to discuss politics either. This board is an escape for me and I enjoy movies as much as most people on here.

However, the stubbornness in me is pretty much always going to respond on a stand alone thread, like this one, where Hollywood injects itself into politics or a topic that can be construed as politics.

I also want to point out that the following comment is ludicrous and an example of a stereotypical argument you've railed against on this thread:

Quote:

---

But the unfortunate reality is that this place resides next to a radically right political forum...

---

Just because the left side of the political spectrum has moved into full blown support of anarcho-communism which would kill your industry as fast as every other industry doesn't make F16 "radically right".

The vast, vast majority of that board has held the same line we always have: freedom, liberty, and capitalism. Hell, we really don't even have a few of the "alt-right" boogeymen that post anymore that got folks all up in arms a year or so ago.

In other words, the left moving even further left doesn't make us radical - they are. Just asinine comment while we watch core downtowns burn because of radical leftists.

---

I have seen posters lament that fact that universal suffrage exists on that forum. QAnon thread being the most active thread on this website. Please.

---

Duncan Idaho said:

---

Don't really understand what is so funny about pinochet helicopter rides.

---

TCTTS said:

---

Quote:

---

For the record, when I come to this board I do my utmost not to bring my politics. I try to practice "when in Rome" while I'm over here because I frankly don't want to discuss politics either. This board is an escape for me and I enjoy movies as much as most people on here.

However, the stubbornness in me is pretty much always going to respond on a stand alone thread, like this one, where Hollywood injects itself into politics or a topic that can be construed as politics.

---

Like I said, this thread, and threads like it, are fair game, IMO. Topically, I have no issue with the discussion being had here.

Quote:

---

Just because the left side of the political spectrum has moved into full blown support of anarcho-communism which would kill your industry as fast as every other industry doesn't make F16 "radically right".

The vast, vast majority of that board has held the same line we always have: freedom, liberty, and capitalism. Hell, we really don't even have a few of the "alt-right" boogeymen that post anymore that got folks all up in arms a year or so ago.

In other words, the left moving even further left doesn't make us radical - they are. Just asinine comment while we watch core downtowns burn because of radical leftists.

---

F16 is a board that...

- hosts a mile-long QAnon thread -

- features people literally celebrating the deaths of Kyle Rittenhouse's victims -

- is full of second amendment extremists who've shifted from fantasies of self defense against a tyrannical government to fantasies of assisting police in using force against other civilians -

- bends over backwards to rationalize police shooting Jacob Blake in the back seven times -

- STILL rants endlessly about Obama, and putting Hilary in jail, while un-ironically labeling anyone with a remotely negative thing to say about Trump as having "TDS" -

- constantly refers to CNN as an "enemy of the state," while turning a blind eye to the lies and sensationalism of Fox News -

... among the myriad other, hate-filled rants and extremist conspiracy theories expressed on that board daily. I'm sorry, but under any objective assessment, a forum meeting those criteria absolutely falls under "radically right."

I'm not denying that the left hasn't escalated things, or isn't to partially blame. Clearly, they have, and are. But to tell me, with a straight face, that F16 hasn't increasingly become radically right in kind, you're deeper in the muck and grime of that place than you realize. Again, I'm not saying there aren't good people there and that there aren't good, constructive conversations to be had. Of course there are on both accounts. But, by and large, that place is filled with relentless mocking and utter hate and vitriol for anyone who dares express opinions to the contrary. That, and it is purely delusional thinking to constantly blame EVERY negative thing about this country on the left, while NEVER admitting to the role Trump and the right have in the escalation as well, something F16 also continually excels at.

---

TCTTS said:

---

NO ONE deserves to be shot SEVEN TIMES in the back, in that particular scenario. I don't care if he was reaching for a knife. There are more civil and humane ways to de-escalate a situation like that. Non-compliance in that matter should NOT equal attempted execution. No matter what Blake did, he didn't deserve seven bullets. I'm not saying he didn't deserve punishment, but not punishment of that kind. Especially in comparison to the vastly different handling of the entire Kyle Rittenhouse situation, that very same week.

---

TCTTS said:

---

I've watched the same videos as you. We clearly see things differently.

---