Wednesday, September 21, 2016

Suspension of Cassandra Liebeknecht is a festival of PC absurdity

As we all know the politically correct narrative has gays and lesbians routinely discriminated against, abused, bullied and all the rest of it. This kind of stuff still happens, of course. There are still a few arseholes out there who openly treat LGBTQI people with contempt. But it's certainly not an institutional thing any more.

The present reality is much more complicated. Gays and lesbians aren't just victims of "straight hate". Many are into hating straights. You can call me old fashioned for saying this, but two wrongs do not make a right. 

Take this recent ruckus in the Adelaide arts scene. Cassandra Liebeknecht, who was director of the Feast Festival, has been suspended for being a breeder, it seems. Looks very much like a decision based on heterophobia to me.

And it involves other right-on absurdities. For example, racism is invoked by at least one of those supporting the decision against Ms Leibeknecht. Festival co-founder Helen Bock argues that having a straight person heading a queer festival is like having a white person at the helm of an indigenous body. 

Well, that term "white" does seem to be a tad, er, problematic given the precedent set by the Andrew Bolt trial. (I won't even elaborate on exactly why lest I inadvertently commit a hate crime myself and end up prosecuted under 18C. But I think you get my drift.) 

Invoking racism is just so naff, innit? It's like when the Kumbaya crowd try to shut down any criticism of Islam by saying it's racist. FFS, when are these people gonna realize, Islam is not a race! 

And neither is sexual identity. Yet this false equivalence is applied repeatedly (and effectively) as a way of silencing any criticism of the more extreme aspects of the gay rights agenda. Take "marriage equality" for example. Supporters of this cause will often say that denying SSM is akin to outlawing interracial marriage. They do so because it sounds kinda plausible at first, and absolutely no one with any decency and compassion would be against members of different racial groups marrying each other. 

But the comparison is false. The interracial marriages they invoke involve men and women. Same sex marriage, by definition, does not!

Surely these people are aware that "oranges" are not the only fruit. So it's odd that they insist on confusing 'em with "apples", right?

As well as the incoherence inherent in the decision regarding Ms Liebeknecht, there's the sheer ugliness of the campaign against her:

'I've been spat on, I've had people scare me, I've had people contact me at work anonymously, saying 'I know where your children go to school',' she said.

'There was also a gentleman who continues to this day to slander me for my sexuality. It just gets vicious.'

I'll say.

About the only way this could get more like an episode of South Park would be if Cassandra's hunky beau (pictured in the above-linked article) gets attacked for cultural appropriation on account of his impressive dreads! 

Well, whatever happens, one thing's beyond doubt: The self-satire of this PC power-play is waaay more entertaining than any of the shows in the actual festival program. Really, they should just whop a box office outside the management offices. Could prolly recoup all their losses if they did ...

Sunday, September 18, 2016

Jimmy Fallon joking with Donald Trump seen as betrayal by liberals

It's pretty well established that comedians across the Western world tend to lean left politically. I've long found this quite odd because it's a highly individualistic performance mode. You get up there on your own and poke fun at human behaviour and the narratives we live by. You have to be a bit of a loner and an outsider to do that.

Much of leftism, on the other hand, is about being part of a collective, and conforming to narratives (e.g. class warfare) rather than questioning them.

Not saying that all comics should be conservatives, of course. Just that you'd expect to see a higher proportion of them who are ... So the question is, why so few? I think a major reason is the fact that the comedy scene (much like the rest of the entertainment industry) has been almost completely captured by the cultural Left. And they are extremely hostile to any deviation from politically correct "goodthink".

The recent segment in which the affable Jimmy Fallon yucked it up with Donald Trump is a case in point. Fallon treated him in much the same way he would any other politician. He made fun of him in a light-hearted, playful way. Trump happily played along with this and came across as a likeable guy who wasn't full of himself.

This ran counter to the image of Trump as an angry, racist, misogynist fascist that the liberal MSM has been at pains to construct and perpetuate. Not surprisingly they went ballistic on Twitter and Facebook.

There were lots of columns and blog posts as well about how Fallon failed in his duty to gut the presidential aspirant. Take this one in Esquire:

Jimmy Fallon is not a journalist, but Jimmy Fallon is a taxpaying American citizen with a minimal obligation to help keep a tyrant from reaching the most powerful position in the world. He failed that obligation last night. When you go to The Tonight Show's YouTube channel this morning, you'll find five truncated clips of Donald Trump in a red power tie sitting across from a giggling, jovial Fallon.

Eh? He had an obligation? And he failed in that? So, the implication is he's some kind of traitor to the cause.

That's not just unreasonable. It borders on creepy. And it is reminiscent of another media event related to the upcoming election. In this one celebrity shrink Dr Drew Pinsky expressed concern about Hillary's health and healthcare, and promptly lost his gig with CNN. Very alarming.

Somehow I can't see this happening to Fallon. Still, I'm sure there are many liberals who would like to mete out similar punishment.

Really, they should acquire a sense of humour. It was just entertainment, after all.

Saturday, August 20, 2016

Ted Nugent and other artists refuse to toe PC line on Trump and Hillary

It's well established that arty types tend to dress left, so to speak. There are many reasons for this. One of the main ones is that artists are dreamers, driven by emotion. They create fictional, parallel worlds on stage, screen, canvas and other media. So it stands to, er, reason that they would identify with socialists, who also value their own feelings above all things and dedicate their lives to making society perfect, in the way they have imagined it.

Then there's the fact that many artistic forms are quite expensive to produce while having small, niche audiences. As a result they need some government funding to survive. Those who dole out this money will naturally be more left-leaning. And they tend to reward those who echo their politically correct beliefs loudest in their work, thereby making socialism the "norm" in these artistic fields.

That said, there are exceptions to the rule, particularly in the USA. I think this has much to do with that nation's history and enduring love of individualism. It's also got a big population. So if you can find your audience you can often survive and even thrive without state assistance, thereby avoiding the trap cited above. 

So, you do see well known American actors, musos and the like supporting politically incorrect candidates and causes from time to time. Ted Nugent is one of these rugged individualists. An avid hunter and outdoorsman, he posted this take on Trump a few months ago. I think he summed the situation up pretty well.

Then there's actor James Woods, who's very active on Twitter, and definitely no fan of Hillary Clinton!
Would be so great if there were some fearless, rebellious actors, rock stars and the like here in Australia! Aside from Angry Anderson -- who has pretty much retired from performing anyway -- no one else comes to mind ... 

Monday, July 11, 2016

Gay Sulu ticks off Takei like Ghostbusters galls fans

Clearly, movie-goers aplenty have had a gutful of all this politically correct retconning that's been going on lately. But now it's even pissing off industry professionals themselves.

Take the rewriting of the iconic Star Trek character Sulu as gay. An epic case of cinematic virtue signalling, it was also meant as an affectionate nod to the openly gay actor who played the role in the original TV series, George Takei.

But Takei himself is not happy with the decision. And with good reason. He says that the writer Gene Rodenberry had a very clear vision for the character, and we should honour that. Good point.

Also, it diminishes the craft of acting itself, in a way similar to the furore over casting in that Nina Simone biopic. The rewrite implies that because an actor is gay, characters he plays must have the same sexual identity. Carts and horses come to mind here ...

The politically correct alteration puts the screenwriter Simon Pegg in an invidious position, too. Given the sensitivity around the whole issue of gay rights, even defending his decision against George Takei could be seen as homophobia. No wonder he's been so careful about it.

It could bite Pegg on the bum in another way, too. If this kind of right-on retconning becomes standard, a remake of his own movie Shaun of the Dead will suffer. That's because the character of Shaun himself will have to be rewritten as a social justice warrior.

At least the publicity surrounding Star Trek has not been as bad as it has been for that other sci-fi remake, Ghostbusters. The antipathy towards this new "feminist" version has been off the scales

The SJWs who support such a lame, right-on "re-imagining" of the 1980s classic see this resistance as more evidence of the ingrained sexism it's trying to combat. But it's a lot more complicated than that. Much of it is just die-hard fans saying: "Look if you wanna create something excruciatingly PC, fine. Just come up with something new and original. Don't cynically rehash a classic, thereby destroying our memory of it!"

Sunday, May 29, 2016

Peter FitzSimons and luvvie mates want us to keep the home fires burning

Whenever there's some potential change to current trade policies that means Australian arty types will have to compete on a more equal footing with their counterparts overseas, local lefties suddenly do a massive U-turn and get all patriotic on our arses. They say we Aussies need to protect "our culture" from being flooded by imports. We need to hear "our stories" told in "our voices".

This gargle from Pirate Pete Fitzsimons is an example of this emotive, disingenuous and self-serving line of argument. He and his earnest comrades in, er, arts are spooked by the latest proposal to change territorial copyright laws

It is, I grant you, a complex issue but the bottom line is this. It is our united view that, beyond all matters of commerce, it is the  duty of the federal government – be it the Turnbull or Shorten government – to support the Australian campfire where Australian stories are told, to Australians.

Jeez. Ya couldn't get more dinky-di Strayan than that now, could ya cobber? Fair dinkum, 'ken oath!

I always find this amusing because much of the rest of the time they're zealously advocating multi-culturalism, viciously and often falsely accusing non-lefties of racist thought-crime for not kowtowing to their politically correct demands.

If they sincerely believe the pronouncements they make when in peak luvvie virtue-signalling mode then surely they would welcome all stories, from all cultures, told in all accents, wouldn't they? 

Nope. Not when their massively inflated incomes are at risk of being lowered a tad by genuine competition, they won't.  

Monday, May 23, 2016

Elijah Wood's paedophilia claims run counter to MSM's anti-Catholic narrative

It's interesting that there's such a strong association between Catholicism and paedophilia these days. The way the MSM focuses on this issue and hounds prominent figures in the Catholic Church (such as George Pell) you'd think that this was where most of it occurs.

There's obviously long been a serious problem there. But is it any worse than in other denominations? The evidence seems to imply it isn't. It also appears that the priesthood in general is no more full of paedophiles than any other section of society.

I think it's fair to say that the perception that every second Catholic priest is a kiddy fiddler has much to do with the left-leaning media's enduring animosity towards Christians in general and Catholics in particular.

Which is probably why we have heard so little about how the scourge afflicts other sections of society, such as the film industry. If Elijah Wood's claims are to be believed Hollywood is chockas with child abusers who've been getting away with their crimes for years. Notably he compares this alleged massive, ongoing cover-up to the one that allowed Jimmy Savile to escape scrutiny for so long and ultimately escape justice.

Sounds plausible to me. The place is known for its decadence. And money is power, after all.

Politics is also a possible factor. Tinseltown movers and shakers are left-liberals more often than not. And this ideological bent aligns with the rest of the MSM in America. So it makes sense that high profile journalists wouldn't be too keen on venturing into Hollywood's secretive nooks and crannies in search of scuttling rock spiders. As a dutiful cultural change agent you wouldn't want to make your fellow travellers look bad, now would you?

Then there's the vanity aspect. If you're a big name reporter who gets known for shining a light on the film capital's underbelly you could easily become persona non grata amongst its elites. No more A-list parties for you! Given that ego drives journos nearly as much as it does actors, singers, dancers and directors this would be a significant discouragement to many of them IMO.

Saturday, May 21, 2016

Ghostbusters 3 is a toxic mix of PC feminism and corporate cynicism

This new ultra-PC version of Ghostbusters is stirring up an absolutely massive negative reaction. The trailer for it is the most disliked YouTube video in history. The rightier reaches of the blogosphere are getting stuck into it with gusto. And more than a few film critics are saying it'll be a train wreck without a doubt.

Needless to say, this criticism is met with howls of "misogyny!" from the usual suspects, and there are squillions of those. I'm sure that if the social justice warriors weren't so fired up about it, there'd be even more condemnation of the whole project, even from left-leaning cinephiles.

The desperation with which right-on feminist types are defending the project and attacking its critics is as pathetic as it is extreme. This is a good takedown of one of them, Marisa Kabas.

As well as illustrating the falsehood and nastiness of her attack on popular film critic James Rolphe, it has a good summary of the motivations of the movie's defenders:

What’s fascinating with criticisms of new Ghostbusters vs SJW defenders, is it’s all projection from the defenders. People defending new Ghostbusters believe people hate it because gender, and can only defend the film based on gender. Criticisms are based on how the jokes are bad, how the effects are bad, how it’s a cheap cash in on a much loved classic. SJWs are absolutely obsessed with identity politics to the point that they project their obsession onto everyone else. They don’t listen to criticisms, they don’t consider Occam’s Razor, they jump straight to the conclusion that all those down votes, all the negative reaction videos and comments, are based on the literal hatred of women.

Bang on the money!

Look at everything else the PC Left are arcing up about and you see the same primitive psychology at work. They simply cannot see people as individuals. They see only group identities. (Gawd. What a sad, stunted view of humanity!) So they think that anyone who disagrees with them must be doing the same thing from another direction. Consequently they are doomed to perpetuate the very bigotry they so often falsely accuse others of inflicting on society.

Both the production of Ghostbusters 3 and the vicious sliming of those who criticize it are motivated by this rigid ideology. But there's another toxic ingredient in the mix: corporate greed. Clearly, Hollywood money men (and women) thought it was time to rehash this classic. It had a ready made brand that could be leveraged for sure fire bucks. But that soulless goal is why so many people are saying it has "turkey" written all over it:

The reaction to the “Ghostbusters” reboot is the unsurprising, and dare I say long overdue, response from a generation of fans that have repeatedly watched their most iconic childhood memories cut up and sold for parts. Directors, producers, and writers are more focused on the shiny new reboot or sequel, dishing out forced fan-service callbacks with the belief that success is intrinsically tied to more of the same, that a feeling cannot be replicated without replicating that which brought on the feeling in the first place.

Movie lovers resent being taken for granted. And they're saying so now. Their displeasure will also be expressed in low box office figures, I suspect.

Actually, the whole phenomenon is a bit like local conservatives who are really pissed off about Turnbull and his, er, malcoholics seizing control of their party and steering it leftward. Vote whisperer Mark Textor says these people don't matter. But they have different ideas. Just as film fans will probably stay away from Ghostbusters 3 in droves, a large percentage of the Liberal Party's traditional support base will not vote as its strategists predict, I reckon.