999 posts
|
Post by Backdrifter on Feb 19, 2019 15:44:10 GMT
I'm sure this won't be as unpopular as I think, but I hate alot to do with this whole "lad" culture. Most of the time, they're just assholes. I don't know if they're related, or the same/interchangeable, but I really dislike what I think of as Bloke Culture. I see it a lot on twitter - they're like watered-down Clarksons and, it gradually dawned on me, shared a number of features in their profile pics and banners: the pic often features their head, looking way too big and with a smug grin, and wearing wrap-around shades, while their banner pic will be of cars/motorbikes/footballers/football stadiums. Sometimes the profile pic will be of those things, and occasionally it's of their big grinning head and shades etc, in a car, or with a football stadium in the background. They indulge in blokey unsophisticated banter and get quite irate about anything relating to eg women's rights, gay rights, human rights, anything remotely liberal. Earlier I mentioned blokes starting ripostes with "Well, actually..." - that's something I see a lot from the ones I'm talking about. But same or not, no I don't think your choice of lad culture will be unpopular.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2019 16:54:52 GMT
Monty Python was not, and never will be, remotely funny. I like some of the films, but the TV show often made me think "This is why you try out your material on someone else first".
|
|
879 posts
|
Post by daisy24601 on Feb 19, 2019 16:55:10 GMT
If there's any type of man I wouldn't even consider going on a date with, it would be a "lad".
|
|
93 posts
|
Post by bobbybaby on Feb 19, 2019 17:30:50 GMT
I bloody love Grease ! 😼
|
|
4,029 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Feb 19, 2019 17:37:54 GMT
I just said that because you stated "man" so clearly. Because the Grease 2 example is what happens in every romantic storyline nowadays and it seems to be loved by most. That is the whole issue we are discussing here on the board. So I suggest you watch the movie first but I would also like to hear about what you think of all the other romantic movies nowadays where the man changes into a supporting prop for the desires of the woman. And all those recent movies are actually really disrespecting men. In Grease it's just a character breaking free and showing another side with a wink eye in the last scene. Danny already loved and accepted her completely before. It's nothing more than a fun effort, just as much for herself. In Grease 2 it's about really being rejected from the beginning and changing for her to create some interest and milking that for half the movie. That was the beginning of making clowns of men in romantic films. And yet, I never see posts about that, only about a girl. I think the reason for this is the way men are sexualized in society today. It is truly shocking when I read the reactions on any given Facebook post about a hot dentist or police agent and what people want to do with them. Behaviour I haven't seen on posts of females since at least 15 years. Or the way ladies pinch my male colleague (actor) in the butt, while taking a picture on a movie premiere. It is really 1 sided. But I'm glad you care so much about both sides.
I only said "man" because John Travolta/Danny is one. I can't comment on recent films as the last time I went to the cinema to see a film - as opposed to opera & ballet livestreams - was in 2002, so I haven't seen any recent films. However I would say that I agree that women overtly sexually objectifying men is just as bad as men overtly sexually objectifying women & I dislike both. I don't think I'm a particularly feminist person (apart from being very keen on abortion, but that's more because I dislike children).
Talking of dislking children, I posted on work's internal discussion forum that I dislike children (in the context of new compulsory computer screensavers that are photos of children) & today got told off by one of the managers for saying so. Apparently you're not allowed to say that you dislike chidren if you work for a company that's involved in education. However I will continue to firmly hold that evidently unpopular opinion - in fact "dislike" is a polite way of putting it!
|
|
5,707 posts
|
Post by lynette on Feb 19, 2019 17:52:04 GMT
How odd that children are the compulsory screensaver for any kind of organisation.
|
|
999 posts
|
Post by Backdrifter on Feb 19, 2019 18:49:02 GMT
I posted on work's internal discussion forum that I dislike children (in the context of new compulsory computer screensavers that are photos of children); today got told off by one of the managers for saying so. Apparently you're not allowed to say that you dislike chidren if you work for a company that's involved in education. However I will continue to firmly hold that evidently unpopular opinion - in fact "dislike" is a polite way of putting it! Two things there: that children should be a compulsory screensaver (in what way? What sort of images?), and that your opinion should be reacted to the way you describe. I suspect others share your view but will now shy away from expressing it. I love children, but have never wanted any of my own, and being an uncle to several nieces and nephews has been great. But possibly like you, there are types of children and baby images I really dislike, one being babies in adverts especially where there are loads of them. There are sometimes baby-related products that have ads featuring a series of babies or a load of them all together. Which is of course logical as ads go, but I can't bear to look at it. I don't why but I find it very offputting. In fact it freaks me out a bit. Another children-related thing I don't like is children's choirs. Those fluting, piping voices singing things like Lord Of The Dance.... yeeuurrgggh. It takes me back to primary school when we had to regularly sing (as a class) stuff like that and I didn't even like it then. I was off sick one week and when I came back I found the class had been taught another horrible song, Where Have All The Flowers Gone and of course I was the only one who didn't know it. Not that I'd want to - ghastly load of soppy rubbish. Then there are the occasional pop and rock songs where children's choirs are crowbarred in and they're usually pretty bad too. Another Brick In The Wall, Grandad, and maybe worst of all that Grocer Jack one. In case @cardinalpirelli is around, I will say one rare example of this I don't mind is in Supper's Ready by Genesis when the children sing, nursery rhyme style, "We will rock you, rock you, little snake." At least it has the merit of sounding a bit worrying. But otherwise - kids singing? No thanks.
|
|
4,029 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Feb 19, 2019 19:08:26 GMT
I posted on work's internal discussion forum that I dislike children (in the context of new compulsory computer screensavers that are photos of children); today got told off by one of the managers for saying so. Apparently you're not allowed to say that you dislike chidren if you work for a company that's involved in education. However I will continue to firmly hold that evidently unpopular opinion - in fact "dislike" is a polite way of putting it! Two things there: that children should be a compulsory screensaver (in what way? What sort of images?), and that your opinion should be reacted to the way you describe. I suspect others share your view but will now shy away from expressing it. I love children, but have never wanted any of my own, and being an uncle to several nieces and nephews has been great. But possibly like you, there are types of children and baby images I really dislike, one being babies in adverts especially where there are loads of them. There are sometimes baby-related products that have ads featuring a series of babies or a load of them all together. Which is of course logical as ads go, but I can't bear to look at it. I don't why but I find it very offputting. In fact it freaks me out a bit. Whenever you leave your computer you're supposed to lock it & it's the lock screen images that are photos of children. They're all supposed to be students so some of them are kind of okay - 2 students in a library, a boy doing a science experiment - but there are a couple that are just close-ups of groups of about 5 children staring at the camera. Personally I find that bloody offputting when it's on a largish screen a couple of feet in front of me! It doesn't help that I don't really like photos of people full stop. Whenever I'm visiting a tourist attraction I put in a lot of effort to get photos with no people in. The lock screen used to be a selection of landscapes from Microsoft which were much, much nicer in my opinon.
I pretty much dislike children full stop. I don't even like the ones that are related to me. Among other reasons, I resent that children are younger than me.
|
|
2,859 posts
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Feb 20, 2019 2:52:51 GMT
annabillersblog.blogspot.com/2018/02/lets-stop-calling-movies-feminist.html?m=1I just read this very interesting blog post on what makes a movie feminist, I'm posting the link here since there's been a lot of talking about the topic in this thread. "In recent years, people tend to mistake movies in which female characters “show badass broads avenging themselves” (to quote an article in BUST magazine), as feminist. But again, people think that everything that is not misogynistic is feminist. Just because a movie features female protagonists does not mean that it’s feminist."
|
|
999 posts
|
Post by Backdrifter on Feb 20, 2019 7:25:59 GMT
I agree with the above. But I'm scurrying off for now ahead of the inevitable. Maybe I'll go watch LaLa Land.
But before I do, let me just say, I don't get all the fuss about George Ezra, I find most of his songs annoying.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2019 9:29:24 GMT
Whenever you leave your computer you're supposed to lock it & it's the lock screen images that are photos of children. They're all supposed to be students so some of them are kind of okay - 2 students in a library, a boy doing a science experiment - but there are a couple that are just close-ups of groups of about 5 children staring at the camera. Personally I find that bloody offputting when it's on a largish screen a couple of feet in front of me! It doesn't help that I don't really like photos of people full stop. Whenever I'm visiting a tourist attraction I put in a lot of effort to get photos with no people in. The lock screen used to be a selection of landscapes from Microsoft which were much, much nicer in my opinon. If that were my lock screen, I'd be sorely tempted to switch my monitor off as well every time I left my desk. If I can't get rid of the unwanted lock screens, I can at least limit the amount of time I'm forced to look at them. Is yours an office where members of the public might visit or pass through? If you're not customer-facing, then surely there's not a lot of point in forcing the professional branding to the point of lock screens and wallpaper and the like, and I would be very very sad if I were no longer allowed to customise my work PC in the way I like.
|
|
|
Post by MrsCondomine on Feb 20, 2019 10:41:55 GMT
I wish Ariana Grande would disappear - good voice and a great mimic, but wasted as her songs are total sh*t.
No American comedies are funny. Seriously, none.
Doctor Who is terrible and I have no idea why the BBC continue to throw funding at it. None of the currently ensemble, apart from Jodie Whittaker, can actually act.
|
|
999 posts
|
Post by Backdrifter on Feb 20, 2019 11:10:51 GMT
Frances de la Tour isn't very good and is massively overrated. As far as I can tell, in everything I've seen her in she's pretty much just Frances de la Tour. I wish Ariana Grande would disappear - good voice and a great mimic, but wasted as her songs are total sh*t. Mimic?
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Feb 20, 2019 11:20:17 GMT
I just said that because you stated "man" so clearly. Because the Grease 2 example is what happens in every romantic storyline nowadays and it seems to be loved by most. That is the whole issue we are discussing here on the board. So I suggest you watch the movie first but I would also like to hear about what you think of all the other romantic movies nowadays where the man changes into a supporting prop for the desires of the woman. And all those recent movies are actually really disrespecting men. In Grease it's just a character breaking free and showing another side with a wink eye in the last scene. Danny already loved and accepted her completely before. It's nothing more than a fun effort, just as much for herself. In Grease 2 it's about really being rejected from the beginning and changing for her to create some interest and milking that for half the movie. That was the beginning of making clowns of men in romantic films. And yet, I never see posts about that, only about a girl. I think the reason for this is the way men are sexualized in society today. It is truly shocking when I read the reactions on any given Facebook post about a hot dentist or police agent and what people want to do with them. Behaviour I haven't seen on posts of females since at least 15 years. Or the way ladies pinch my male colleague (actor) in the butt, while taking a picture on a movie premiere. It is really 1 sided. But I'm glad you care so much about both sides.
I only said "man" because John Travolta/Danny is one. I can't comment on recent films as the last time I went to the cinema to see a film - as opposed to opera & ballet livestreams - was in 2002, so I haven't seen any recent films. However I would say that I agree that women overtly sexually objectifying men is just as bad as men overtly sexually objectifying women & I dislike both. I don't think I'm a particularly feminist person (apart from being very keen on abortion, but that's more because I dislike children).
Talking of dislking children, I posted on work's internal discussion forum that I dislike children (in the context of new compulsory computer screensavers that are photos of children) & today got told off by one of the managers for saying so. Apparently you're not allowed to say that you dislike chidren if you work for a company that's involved in education. However I will continue to firmly hold that evidently unpopular opinion - in fact "dislike" is a polite way of putting it!
Thanks for the explanation! It is very frustrating to hear people complain about a female role changing while the opposite is getting out of hand in a bizarre way at the moment and it is not even mentioned by them. But if you haven't seen any recent films you are forgiven. Yes, it is strange that we live in a sort of brain-washed society where you can't have a certain opinion, while the most ridiculous things are socially accepted. I feel you.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Feb 20, 2019 14:14:37 GMT
Just because a movie features female protagonists does not mean that it’s feminist." It's a good and timely essay - thanks for posting! I've been frustrated by the way The Favourite is being described (by many commentators) as a 'feminist' film. It isn't. It has three female central characters, which is unusual, but there's no solidarity - it's a bitchy cat fight, two characters exploiting the weakness (mental and physical disability) of a third to gain favour and power, while also being abusive to each other. The 'badger' scene, much used in trailers, and the character's later defence of it - I was only being nasty to you for your own sake - is more like Rob Titchenor-style emotional abuse: it's not 'loving' just because it's spoken by a woman. Similarly, Fleabag. It's a well written, entertaining sitcom but dear god, it isn't feminist: it has a main character who is obsessed with being validated by male attention, willing to endure whatever undignified acts these males demand of her. And it's written by a woman - well, a well-connected-in-theatre, wealthy, photogenic young West Londoner getting into TV is hardly 'shattering the glass ceiling' stuff.
|
|
999 posts
|
Post by Backdrifter on Feb 20, 2019 14:23:59 GMT
Just because a movie features female protagonists does not mean that it’s feminist." It's a good and timely essay - thanks for posting! I've been frustrated by the way The Favourite is being described (by many commentators) as a 'feminist' film. It isn't. It has three female central characters, which is unusual, but there's no solidarity - it's a bitchy cat fight, two characters exploiting the weakness (mental and physical disability) of a third to gain favour and power, while also being abusive to each other. The 'badger' scene, much used in trailers, and the character's later defence of it - I was only being nasty to you for your own sake - is more like Rob Titchenor-style emotional abuse: it's not 'loving' just because it's spoken by a woman. Similarly, Fleabag. It's a well written, entertaining sitcom but dear god, it isn't feminist: it has a main character who is obsessed with being validated by male attention, willing to endure whatever undignified acts these males demand of her. And it's written by a woman - well, a well-connected-in-theatre, wealthy, photogenic young West Londoner getting into TV is hardly 'shattering the glass ceiling' stuff. I believe there's a strong element of there being a reaction to women becoming more visible in films and as writers/distinctive lead characters in TV shows. It's only relatively recently stopped being quite unusual. There's often a very one-zero/join-the-most-obvious-dots basis in cultural discourse and in this case it results in "here's a film with all female leads, therefore it's a feminist film."
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Feb 20, 2019 14:51:19 GMT
relatively recently stopped being quite unusual There were far more strong women on screen in the early-to-mid 20thc than in recent decades. When you think of the big, classic screen stars, you think of women, and despite what went on behind the scenes, their on-screen personas were generally powerful - much more so than today.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Feb 20, 2019 15:40:56 GMT
There were far more strong women on screen in the early-to-mid 20thc than in recent decades. When you think of the big, classic screen stars, you think of women, and despite what went on behind the scenes, their on-screen personas were generally powerful - much more so than today. True. Back then both men and women could be strong personas in on screen. Because strength lies in other things then what is assumed today.
|
|
4,029 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Feb 20, 2019 21:05:38 GMT
If that were my lock screen, I'd be sorely tempted to switch my monitor off as well every time I left my desk. If I can't get rid of the unwanted lock screens, I can at least limit the amount of time I'm forced to look at them. Is yours an office where members of the public might visit or pass through? If you're not customer-facing, then surely there's not a lot of point in forcing the professional branding to the point of lock screens and wallpaper and the like, and I would be very very sad if I were no longer allowed to customise my work PC in the way I like. Unfortunately the off button is broken on my primary monitor so it refuses to switch off! Otherwise I would certainly be switching it off. No, we're not customer facing. I'm not sure why the branding is considered necessary. As one person pointed out in the discussion, if we need images on lock screens to remind us what the company does then that's hardly a good sign! I really miss all the beautiful landscapes.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2019 20:18:46 GMT
I'm reading everywhere how Gaga and Cooper were perfect last night at the Oscars.
They weren't perfect.
BOOM!
|
|
848 posts
|
Post by duncan on Feb 25, 2019 20:34:59 GMT
...and now awards season is over he, and Rami, can get rid of their beards.
|
|
999 posts
|
Post by Backdrifter on Mar 4, 2019 10:41:47 GMT
Horses. What's all the fuss?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2019 10:42:29 GMT
Horses. What's all the fuss? Horses for courses.
|
|
19,797 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Mar 4, 2019 11:12:08 GMT
If that were my lock screen, I'd be sorely tempted to switch my monitor off as well every time I left my desk. If I can't get rid of the unwanted lock screens, I can at least limit the amount of time I'm forced to look at them. Is yours an office where members of the public might visit or pass through? If you're not customer-facing, then surely there's not a lot of point in forcing the professional branding to the point of lock screens and wallpaper and the like, and I would be very very sad if I were no longer allowed to customise my work PC in the way I like. Unfortunately the off button is broken on my primary monitor so it refuses to switch off! Otherwise I would certainly be switching it off. No, we're not customer facing. I'm not sure why the branding is considered necessary. As one person pointed out in the discussion, if we need images on lock screens to remind us what the company does then that's hardly a good sign! I really miss all the beautiful landscapes. Solution: 1. Get a copy of your favourite landscape photo and paste it to a piece of cardboard. 2. Store under desk 3. When leaving desk, prop cardboard up against monitor - image facing outwards. 4. Enjoy. For an enhanced solution you could paste a different landscape to the other side of the cardboard and alternate the view. You’re welcome.
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Mar 4, 2019 13:12:35 GMT
...and now awards season is over he, and Rami, can get rid of their beards. Is it very wicked of me that I have wondered how long past the end of awards season that is going to last? I mean, I try to take people at their word, usually, but Hollywood does seem particularly conservative in that area. Their attitudes seem to be stuck in the 1990s - even while they're claiming to be inclusive and progressive.
|
|