James Gunn fired from "Guardians of The Galaxy" for offensive tweets

Let us get the exact information on the page. Rosanne said:

"Ms. Barr wrote if the “muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes had a baby=vj.”.

Valerie Jarrett, an African-American woman who was a senior adviser to Barack Obama throughout his presidency and considered one of his most influential aides.

The tweet could either be racist or not depending upon intentions (these days the vast majority of people do not know about how black people were compared to apes in the 1800's). Was it a racist tweet? I don't know, but it was taken as such.

And, yes, Rosanne Barr defended the tweet as a joke as well.



Then, here is what Kathy Griffith posted:





It is a picture of her holding the bloodied, beheaded head of President Trump.

There is a lot less room to maneuver here as to the meaning. Partly because it is a picture and partly because of the graphicness of the picture. Griffin defended the picture as a joke.

Both women lost their careers immediately. However, Barr lost a lot more. Barr's show was the number one show on ABC (which is owned by Disney, I believe). It was cancelled immediately (although it may be brought back soon without the titular character with a different name but most of the old cast). Griffin lost her career, but she was a "C" lister at best at the time.


Anyways, there is some context and the actual tweet and the actual photo.

You are so wrong here. So incredibly wrong. Show me some examples of this happening, please. From this century.

OfYoda is correct tis time for a reckoning off with the joke tellers and merry makers!

I think I mentioned this somewhere here. Roseanne is a certified crazy person. It is not called "multiple-personality disorder" anymore, I think it is now "dissociative identity disorder" . Multiple anti-psychotic medicines she is taking. I don't support any of her stuff and don't feel bad for anyone catching a burn from twitter. Just saying it's not an open and shut case with her.


How many of us have been really crazy? In the weeds, don't know wtf is going on crazy. She had a show that was making money and she was being exploited. Is she a crappy person? I'm pretty sure of it.



Kathy Griffin (I use to watch her reality show) is just trying to stay relevant and there is no excuse for anti-Trump propaganda, because I am coming from a "don't defame the POTUS" stance.


On topic: People can support James Gunn all they want with this online petition, but he's not getting his gig back. Right or wrong, the backlash and precedence setting for Disney almost guarantees it.

Manufactured outrage is pretty much the SOP of social media these days, especially twitter, which is a shame. Meanwhile, Disney is free to associate or not with whomever they want, for whatever reasons they wish. I think they sort of made their bed as far as zero-tolerance is concerned with the whole Rosanne fiasco. At least events like these are shedding light on a larger social problem - one that can be solved easily with the old adage, "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything."

Personally, I don't give a **** about any of these idiots.

I do know one thing. I certainly won't follow any precedent set by giant, faceless corporations and far as my speech is concerned. Luckily, no one cares who I am except people the people who matter (friends, family) in my life.

__________________

He didn't get fired for not liking Trump. He got fired for the tweets.

Trying to disregard this because a Trump supporter dug them up is, frankly, exactly the kind of deflection-but-not-a-defense, ad hominem fallacy that Trump uses all the time. It's like when a politician is investigated, and things are uncovered, and they say the investigation is "politically motivated." Well, yeah, maybe so...but you still did those things. The motives of the people pointing it out are immaterial to that. You might as well say "Objection, Your Honor! The prosecution is being paid to try to put my client in jail!"

I guess I'm glad so many liberals are awakening to how cheaply exploitable weaponized outrage can be, though it's kinda lame that it took someone like Cernovich doing it to drive the point home. I hope everyone remembers this when someone they disagree with is targeted.

The sad thing in that statement (IMO) is that I half expected the left to be more self-aware based on my own limited perspective. Weaponized outrage. Destroying Beatles albums over the "more popular than Jesus" comment. That was before my time, of course, but it stood out reading about it in my youth and has become a moral landmark for me in how I (try to) approach similar positions in my life. Similarly, watching people protest and boycott The Dixie Chicks over comments made against W. Bush disappointed me. It was surreal watching friends and family go reverse-evolution ape **** making such efforts to destroy someone's life for stating an opinion that differed from their own. What country were we in?

For me, things that play out like that have generally acted as cautionary road signs, warning of slippery cliffs ahead. Cliffs that are too easy to lose rational footing from through externally induced emotion and anger combined with a lack of proper reflection or consideration. For nearly two decades of my life I've found myself siding with more left-leaning rationale and thought processes. Since I've started paying attention (late teens, I suppose), it has always been the so called "right" that I see taking pride in knee-jerk reactionary speech and actions. That has only gotten worse in my experience, at least in here the south.

Now, here we are though, and the left seems to be all but losing their own grip. I don't know if they are taking plays that have seemingly worked so well for the other team in the past in an "if they can do it, so can I" type attitude, but it is crazy to me.

Ultimately, this back-and-forth predates me. It's human nature and my timeline only started when I one day became aware, so the context of my starting point was clearly based on the political climate of the time. I would like to think I've tried to measure both (as if both represents a spectrum, but you get my meaning hopefully) to the same standard, but clearly we are all biased, so I do not know how much I can trust my own observations given my perspective. I know what I see, though that's anecdotal. I believe I understand human nature to some minimal degree, so it all confounds me. I expected that the left would be more self-critical. I mean of our own self, not of those around us whether they side with or without our individual opinions. Reflect on our own thoughts and actions and be mindful of how *I* affect those around me, rather than what appears to be happening in which I reflect on *your* thoughts and actions and how those affect my opinion of right or wrong.

This is truly bizarre and terrifying if I let my thoughts run down where this all may lead. wtf is going on?

__________________
"My Dionne Warwick understanding of your dream indicates that you are ambivalent on how you want life to eventually screw you." - Joel

"Ever try to forcibly pin down a house cat? It's not easy." - Captain Steel

"I just can't get pass sticking a finger up a dog's butt." - John Dumbear

lmao that's real nice of you

(also yeah great for you that you can supposedly opt out with this too-cool-to-care attitude, but as has been noted repeatedly not everyone has that opportunity so maybe)

I think the other problem is that social justice types already called Gunn on jokes like that around the time that he originally got attached to the first Guardians, at which point a) he apologised and worked to make up for them and b) still got to make the movies anyway so Disney clearly didn't have that much of a problem with them to fire him during a time where they fired Edgar Wright over something much more trivial like creative differences (that or the left-wingers of then didn't wield the sheer aggression and numbers of right-wingers of now). It doesn't speak well of Disney that they are only just treating this like a problem, especially when the timing makes it look like they are playing into the hands of Cernovich and his ilk rather than making their own decision.

As for everyone who keeps referring to it as "weaponised outrage", I think it's important to distinguish between pointing out a person's past mistakes as a means of getting them to be better in future (which is what originally happened to Gunn) and doing it in order to shut them down once and for all (which is what's happening to him now). It's not meant to be about being angry for its own sake (even if you do get individuals who treat it that way), but ultimately about encouraging others to improve and the first step to that is acknowledging where one initially went wrong. Of course, I know that this is idealistic to the point of being borderline-impractical since it's all up to the person as to whether or not they do actually admit they're wrong and make the effort to change and, well, it's often hard for people to admit that. As a result, while it's certainly easy to dig up Cernovich's own awful tweets, the difference comes when he isn't made to face consequences for them so he doesn't have any reason to apologise for them.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

Time is changing and the things that were funny few years ago are not funny anymore. Popular people should know about it. Do you remember "MAD MEN" show, guys? The jokes there were more or less close to the jokes of the actual people from 1960s - most of them look at least not funny anymore, even offensive. That's the reality and we need to be aware of it

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

Probably not the best choice of image considering that a) Rick and Morty's reputation as the current poster-child for pseudo-intellectual f*ck-your-feelings arrogance (regardless of what the actual show does to contradict that) and b) Dan Harmon getting the same treatment as James Gunn over his own tweets.

Which is why I posted it.

Anyways...


I don't know where the line is to be drawn, but maybe someone making a offensive joke isn't as bad as someone committing the act. I'm not sure if I should be surprised or not that people like Chris Brown who beat women continue to have a career. I guess the cliched comment about America being afraid of anything sex related is true, but they embrace violence. Chris Brown continues to sell records, sell out shows and earn Grammy nominations. Meanwhile someone like Louis C.K. who never touched a woman but jerked off in front of them loses everything. I'm not condoning C.K.'s act, I just see the train rolling over anyone and everyone and people jump on the 'moral' bus.

So what's going to happen to someone who tweets offensive stuff? Roseanne lost her job for attacking an actual person based on their race. Gunn loses his job for making an inappropriate joke (which was tasteless, not funny and he's apologized for years before this even happened). Will Disney try to blacklist him? With their Fox take over and basically owning 40% of what film entertainment is in theatres, it could be a possibility.

Since when offensive can't be funny?

I'm rather tired of hearing about people being offended. I find today's PC fascism offensive, but apparently my offense doesn't matter, so why should I give a crap about anyone else's?

I need to quit procrastinating on the R. Kelly campaign.

Seeing as how this is kinda the current social digital activity thread. Hardwick reinstated by AMC.



My cynic says they had this planned for a while, but were not gonna risk any flak at Comic-Con.

His new 19 minute song is the equivalent of OJ's If I Did It.

I mean, if this isn't a perfect case for innocent until proven guilty, then I don't know what is. All these people getting fired over accusations is a bit weird to me. She was asked to provide the so-called proof she had and she never did.

Online people were pretty divided, but I distinctly remember a portion of people claiming this guy was always scum, fake, a pervert, abusive, etc. Now what are they going to say? Are they going to stick by those original comments?

I feel like AMC must be pretty confident in their findings to reinstate him. The question is will this have any bearing on future accusations?