Media companies should just focus on making high quality entertainment instead of preaching politics. I think it's obvious the damage it's done to their brand by not adhering to that principle.
Is it? It's obvious that it upset the people who run the state of Florida, but high quality entertainment very frequently comes bundled with some kind of politics, because that entertainment is usually a snapshot of the feelings of the people in the age that created it. I'm not sure which properties you find preachy, but the last thing I remember conservatives being upset about was a gay kiss in a Buzz Lightyear movie or something.
Disney knew what they were doing and that it went too far or they wouldn't have made this statement. The company never cared about LGBTQ, diversity or feminism, they were just pandering and it backfired.
They knew that they were implementing a gay kiss because there's such a thing as gay couples in the world? Including parents of plenty of kids who'd go to see that movie? What part was too far?
If I were to guess, people have a problem with sexuality and what they consider advanced sexual topics, on the nose diversity, and feminism at the cost of incompetent or subservient male characters being in their family films.
I think people prefer content such as Toy Story, Bugs Life, Monsters Inc, Finding Nemo, etc. These were good films that had a universal, moral message without having to do with politics or controversies.
Is it an advanced sexual topic when a hetero married couple, like a child protagonist's parents, have a similar quick peck on the lips? Because if so, that seems overly prudish, and if not, the people who have a problem with it can grow up. To my knowledge, having not seen the movie, that kiss was really only showing that they had someone important in their lives, and I know that Bo Peep could get away with kissing Woody in Toy Story 1 with no controversy at all. There's also still politics within Monsters Inc and Finding Nemo without looking very hard, and I seem to remember the extremely political Wall-E being wildly popular with audiences and critics, even if I didn't care for it.
It's okay to be prudish when it comes to families and children. They don't need to grow up. If you want to make movies that are not overly prudish and targeted at children you are more than welcome to. No one is stopping you.
Disney movies have had pecks on the lips since the beginning of time. Presumably these children's parents kiss in front of them the same way all the time.
He's a fascist troll. Block him. Check his history. Classic "rack up reputation in game subs and then spam right wing hate speech everywhere else". Dude is a total fash troll, again, block him. Fedi works best when we block those guys because just responding to them is spreading their messages through your network.
Agreed. These people are psychotic fascists that need to push their sexual obsessions onto children or "they will die." It's sickening. I'm glad this site is not a reflection of the real world.
Lmao they are definitely in financial trouble. They've admitted it themselves and this statement is clearly a result of their financial troubles. Keep dreaming though. If this direction was so profitable then they wouldn't be publicly making this statement.
They are more than welcome to, but clearly there isn't a large enough audience who wants to see those types of movies, let alone subject their children to it.
Remember folks, there's one cultural detail you can already see emerging at mastodon, firefish, bluesky, lemmy, kbin, beehaw, etc. A much more vocal advocacy for "block first, ask questions later."
Don't engage. Block. Let the fascist bigots find themselves with no one to talk to but each other.
In the old days we called that "don't feed the trolls."
You mean like how individuals are supposedly forced to raise their grandchildren for 18+ years?
In the US you aren’t even forced to raise your own children, you can surrender them to the state if you really can’t take care of them.
Yeah, the dishonesty is depressing. Let’s just ignore that they are implying that a parent should be able to decide if their children reproduce, wouldn’t want people to become grandparents against their wishes!
Yes, the only two options. You realise we are talking about grandparents? Grandparents have no innate legal guardianship over there grandchildren, it’s simply a social norm that they take care of them (often eagerly).
The second option isn’t even required of biological parents who are innate legal guardians let alone grandparents. I already said this once so the fact that you willfully ignored it is telling.
Also 18 years isn’t life, leave it to pro-abortion people to lie about the severity of everything simply to justify a personal convenience.
Nothing said here is true, and it’s so ironic that the Guardian makes a sob piece about this when what they did is illegal in most countries. (Including the UK where the Guardian is based).
The side of reality? Even if you support an outcome, you are under zero obligation to support everything that leads to that outcome either directly or incidentally.
It may be a fact that the Earth is somewhat spherical, but someone that comes to this conclusion using astronomical data is not equivalent to someone to determines that the Earth is a sphere because oranges are also spheres.
Even if you support the pro-choice position it’s easy to see that many claims and assumptions made are simply false. This is true for essentially every commonly held belief, the vast majority of people couldn’t even develop the scientific method independently.
I’m actually not being purposely vague, you can tell pretty easily. The fact is that it doesn’t matter, so long as the actual criticism is valid.
“Should the person go to jail”- legally, of course.
Practically, probably not. Even though it was a clearly premeditated action, people are simply more sympathetic to certain types of people. This is why people will save their friends before strangers, it is not a question of morality that determines if your friends are more valuable, it’s purely psychology. Likewise people are more concerned about the person they see complaining about a minor inconvenience than the death toll of a famine. People will always fall for a victimisation narrative (everyone on this post is doing just that) so long as the “victim” is more appealing to them. Adult humans are just simply more appealing than fetuses, so incidents like these serve to whip up a frenzy despite the fact that virtually everyone agrees with the moral arguments against late-term abortion. (The majority of people openly oppose it, and those that don’t probably agree with a formal description of the argument, and just want to white knight).
“For or against a woman’s ability to have an abortion”
Nobody has any right to take conscious action to deprive others of future conscious experience, so long as it does not deprive themselves of future conscious experience. This is a fairly succinct claim that addresses the permissibility of killing the temporarily comatose, the suicidal, and individuals with ambiguous self-worth. (None of it is permissible, and consequently neither is abortion of a healthy fetus).
I adore that you either didnt read or didn’t comprehend the first paragraph of the article and then twist it to fit into your delusions. Its really cute. No critical thinking skills, just vibes. What a life. Honestly enviable.
“We have to be truthful, not neutral,” she urged. “I would make sure that you don’t just give a platform … to those who want to crash down the constitution and democracy.”
The importance of this cannot be overstated. Here’s hoping the press rises to the challenge of responsible journalism.
Please report companies when they are breaking this law! People think this is unenforceable, but that’s incorrect. Each state has a way to report law breaking companies. Lack of pay transparency causes substantial illegal discrimination against all different classes.
Folks, pay attention. This is how long the gears of justice take to turn. This couple was wronged almost 10 years ago and only now are they getting some compensation.
Do not let these people into power, their atrocities will be dust in the wind by the time they face a jury.
Ranked choice voting is what we need at all levels of government. But Republicans will never allow this, especially at the President level because they know it will lead to them never being elected again. And ratification of any possible amendment to the Constitution at this point in our history is so unlikely it’s probably easier to just attempt a coup again and continue the attacks on voting rights.
Perhaps in fifty years, if the US lasts that long.
The search function is nice and really appreciated. But, from my experience, the biggest problem with Mastodon is how much work you have to put into curating a feed, something traditional social media has done some of the work for you. I mean it's fairly simple once you get the hang of it, but a lot of people are used to having their hand held.
Also, I'm not looking to piss people off, but I think in terms of the users on the platform it is extremely progressive, and non-progressive people will be less likely to engage with that.
Or will change that. I suspect in their infancy most of the popular corporate owned social media platforms probably had a more left leaning clientele to begin with.
Personally, I'd like to see Tim Gurner's properties rise to a 40-50% vacancy rate to remind him that properties require people to be of any use or value.
I don't know how he thinks 40-50% unemployment rate would lead to a functional economy. If half the population can't afford to buy anything, does he really think that's going to be good for businesses? Unless he's an advocate for universal basic income, of course, but something tells me he's not...
"A police spokesperson said Friday that investigators believe they have arrested everyone who is involved and are not looking into Soldiers of Christ any further."
Not sure which prewritten response to choose from... Do I make a joke about how if we defund the police, there won't be any police around to decline to investigate possible human trafficking rings? Or do I make one about QAnon ignoring yet another case of human trafficking coming from there own bizarre christofascist orbit?
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.