![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Law Professor Files Complaint over Women-Only "Wonder Woman" Showing
- Thread starter Megalith
- Start date
Geef
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2009
- Messages
- 338
Quick! Somebody call the PC police!! 
Separate is inherently unequal
Nanogrip
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2016
- Messages
- 481
How about women making Women-Only viewing of Wonder Woman in the middle east? I'd like to see how these empowered feminists last outside of their bubble.
Tsumi
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 13,758
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
I said right a wrong from 300 years ago, when slavery was common place. I intentionally choose a time from the middle of slavery. And the point is that it is in the past, well before any of the people living today was born. So dredging up that in the context of today is pointless idiocy. And I didn't even mention segregation, but that's also over, even in Africa. You cannot cure the atrocities of the past by inflicting atrocities to people living now. You only create hate and resentment.
Yeah, that's what I thought.Can't think of a single example
Last edited:
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
Any kind of forced segregation is wrong. I don't think a cripple only segregation is any better than gender segregation. So just because an establishment has a practice of doing wrong things doesn't mean they get a free pass on their next fad.
Anyone who refers to disabled veterans as a "cripple" is a sack of shit in my book--but that's just my opinion.
I'm a bit steamed right now so I'm going to just keep reminding myself that you're a worthless coward just throwing as much incendiary comments into the thread as possible because that's who you are as a person. That's your character and you have to live with that, but whatever fucked you up to the point of being this level of asshole is tragic.
JustReason
razor1 is my Lover
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2015
- Messages
- 2,483
I agree 100% with you. If you want racism/sexism/any-ism to end then stop bringing it up even from the other side. I am Cherokee and the atrocities of the past are as bad as any to any race or sex but I do not feel any reason for special treatment because of it, and probably more simply because it didn't happen to me.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
Don't worry, you're the typical SJW. Like here, attacking the messenger instead of arguing against the message. Because you have no arguments. Your only tools in a debate is trying to attack the character of the other, or trying to mention a different, completely unrelated issue. That's what every social justice warrior consistently does, what else can you do when you have no facts or reasons?
I just called SJWs out on trying to misrepresent what was said. And you do it outright again. There was no mention of disabled veterans, leave it to the SJW to mash them into one. You have zero respect for anyone but your own self, don't try to sell your virtue signalling as respect. All you care about is yourself. If you cared at all about veterans or disabled people you wouldn't have just piled them together for yet another character assassination attempt.
But the point is still the same. Organizing an event where you declare that only one specific group of people can attend is not a good thing. It creates resentment and it is exclusionist. Instead of addressing the point you yet again take words out of context and try to misrepresent them. If you think of yourself as more than a troll then I beg you to address the point. Which is why do you think it is a good thing to organize events that induce hatred. How is it helping anyone? It undermines everything, it is against every principle and every moral value I hold true.
I can't seem to figure out if you're just a troll, or legitimately this misguided.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
Thank goodness there are still sane people who get it.And want to get rid of the skeletons in the closet instead of hoarding and weaponizing them. You can't stop hate and resentment by flinging hate and resentment.
The only way forward is to stop dredging up and throwing things at the feet of people that happened in the past at the hands of people long since dead, both the victims and the perpetrators. You cannot move past slavery until you stop using it as a weapon to demonize white people. Notwithstanding the fact that there were black slave owners as well.
And you cannot move past sexism until you stop asking for privileges and protection for women based on nothing else but sex.
Your steamed? Your arguments are little more than straw man and ad hominem.
There is a legitimate issue here, what is equality? Is it women only showings? Does that mean you can have men only showings? what about gyms, clubs, political events, social events, fundraisers? It is a real issue with people on both sides.
For some examples:
a MP (Canadian Member of Parliament) hosted an event at a high end, well know, male club in Toronto, one that has hosted those events for decades. This year it became an issue, because it excluded women, a female MP did the same thing recently and the rather muted outrage that only women could attend was quickly quashed by the 'pc' crowd.
The education system here is firmly geared towards girls and how they learn, there a fewer and fewer males graduating high school and fewer going to post secondary education.
Some movie named the red pill about male rights from a feminist's perspective was to be shown at a local cinema here, that got cancelled because it offended some people, at three different theaters!
So if you or anyone else is going to say there is no issue here, there absolutely is. I'm not saying that women do not have legitimate grievances, they do, but there are real problems here within and between genders. Dialogue is the only solution.
Of course the discussion will get heated, its a deeply personal and cultural topic, if your just going to be offended you can join all the others that just want to be offended and everyone else including the media should ignore you. Society shouldn't tolerate that level of bull shit, from left or right, taking offense does not mean the other person has done anything wrong! The current trajectory of those that take 'offense' closes the dialogue and creates a dangerous environment of us v. them, rather than us figuring out how we want to live today and in the future.
I do not :always: agree with M76, in fact if I think about it, I'm pretty sure I disagree with him more than I agree, but that does not make me right, or him wrong, or give me the right to shut him down or make a character assassination.
You shut down discussion, be prepared for a backlash. We need to talk to each other, across partisan lines, personal politics, beliefs and systems, because if we do not, we will eventually go to the mattresses with each other.
Edit: Minor grammatical correction in ::
auntjemima
[H]ard DCOTM x2
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 12,149
It's mind boggling that you would take cripple and attribute it to veterans lol.. crazy.
Throughout Texas doesn't matter by this article. The law in effect here is local to Austin.
You know me man, the law is the law. If you don't like the law, change it if you can. otherwise, deal with it, it's your law.
Design1stcode2nd
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2016
- Messages
- 704
I'm pretty sure these were billed as special screenings. It's not the only showing of WW and its women only, I'm sure they have other theaters showing it as well or at different times.
For me it's getting women to go watch a superhero movie, a comic book movie instead of some romantic comedy or other sappy movie I couldn't stand, how is that a bad thing?
There have been lots of things that have been men only for a long time, let the ladies have their fun.
I mean whats next people will get pissed off when the girls play video games and watch football? For the record a woman who wants to do all that is top of the list in my book.
For me it's getting women to go watch a superhero movie, a comic book movie instead of some romantic comedy or other sappy movie I couldn't stand, how is that a bad thing?
There have been lots of things that have been men only for a long time, let the ladies have their fun.
I mean whats next people will get pissed off when the girls play video games and watch football? For the record a woman who wants to do all that is top of the list in my book.
Sorry bro, no such thing.
Slavery has been around a hell of a lot longer than just a few hundred years and it's still around today.
It's more obvious in some venues and no so easily identified in others.
It's more brutal in some, and more benign in others.
But slavery didn't start a few hundred years ago and it didn't end with the end of the civil war.
I just felt like pointing this out.
I wasn't the one who attributed that term to veterans. Re-read his response--I merely quoted him.
The person he was responding to said that the theater has special viewings for "veterans and disabled persons" and he responded that segregating "cripples" is just as bad as doing it based on sex (ignoring for the minute that he misused segregation).
Veterans, disabled veterans, and disabled non-veterans are the only three possible categories of people he could have been applying it to. Although formal logic and English syntax dictate it it be applied inclusively when stated the way he did, even giving him the benefit of the doubt that he wasn't intending to call vets "cripples" does yours and his defense become that he was merely calling disabled non-veterans "cripples"? How is that any better in your mind? The fact that the thinks it's an adequate defense to call disabled non-veterans cripples is just as repugnant as the first interpretation everywhere except here apparently.
If you don't have any common sense, just go stand in front of a mirror and practice the sentence:
"The movie theater is going to have a special feature for vets and disabled people"
"Why are they doing something special for cripples?"
See for yourself how rancid that sounds, even if for some reason you think it's ok to apply it to disabled persons, if you said that sequence of words to anyone out loud you'd get your teeth knocked down your throat and out your asshole.
Last edited:
auntjemima
[H]ard DCOTM x2
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 12,149
You're never going to answer those questions above, are you?
Which ones? As far as I know, I quoted your post in its entirety.
auntjemima
[H]ard DCOTM x2
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 12,149
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
That's besides the point. This should be opposed on principle. I never wanted to go to that theatre, but if they say I cannot go because it is a women only event, then I want to go just to reinforce my rights. Because they have no right to tell us what we can do or cannot do.
And why on earth can't they go into a regular showing of the movie? Making it a women only event won't get women into the theatre that didn't want to watch the movie anyway. How or why would that work? Unless we're talking about men haters who refuse to go into a cinema with men.
But equality doesn't mean they need to inflict years of injustice on men because women of the past suffered injustices. That is completely morbid. And no self-respecting sane and morally intact person should sign up for that. If anything that mentality prevents sexism from becoming a thing of the past.
Your analogy is completely wrong. Noone gets mad for women wanting to play games or watch whatever sport they want to watch. But we do get mad if they say "now it's women's turn to watch football men are not allowed in the pub!"
For the record that counts as virtue signalling. Noone here is pro women's oppression. But we don't feel the need to say it every ten seconds, because it is a given if you're a well adjusted 21st century man.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
We're not talking about wage slaves here. But people owning other people as property. Indebted servitude is a completely different thing. And I don't see how it this even remotely relevant to the point I was making.
OR are you referring to sex slaves and such things? Who is not against modern forms of slavery, raise your hands!
This is right off the regressive agenda:
"mention another problem because two wrongs make a who cares"
I'm pretty sure organizing sex segregated screenings of movies won't solve the problem of modern slavery.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
You,re mind numbingly pathetic. Even after you were called out on it by multiple people you're still trying to give words in my mouth, and try to misrepresent what I was saying. And you're still trying to argue against the messenger and not the message. I've had just about enough of your stupidity and disingenuous bullshit.
And as a bonus here is a few thoughts about the word "cripple"
Words are not evil. We used to say cripple for hundreds of years, it is the context of usage that makes words evil. So If I say "you fucking cripple why are you holding me up in the escalator!" That's evil. Using a more politically correct word won't make the message any less sinister.
The same goes for innocent situations: using a different word only makes you feel better, it won't change the persons condition. And besides nowadays saying "disabled" isn't PC enough either. You have to say differently abled! It's a load of bullshit, that won't help the people suffering, only makes for good virtue signalling for social justice warriors. What's next? We won't even be able to name them, because it's offensive? This world has gone to shit, and you're among the people pulling it deeper in the sewage.
I give money to charities helping disabled people and women's rights in Asia and Africa. Can you say the same? As far as I'm concerned you no longer exist, take your virtue signalling to whoever wants to deal with it, I certainly don't.
Last edited:
Man go to India if you don't think Slavery is alive and well and it's not sugar coated slavery or indebted servitude, it's just your plain old basic slavery. Some of those people come to the US for different reasons and guess what, they get caught here with slaves as well.
Now you are incorrect that I am trying to say it doesn't matter, etc. I am just pointing out that slavery has been around since the earliest recorded history of man and it's never gone away.
So kindly keep your words out of my mouth.
And I don't do agendas, you should know better by now.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
You're clearly mentioning another problem that is irrelevant to the issue being discussed. So what words did I give in your mouth? I was merely contemplating what you might refer to when you say slavery is not over. It certainty is over in the first world where the sjw lunacy is taking place.
Without trying to weigh in on either side of this, I see some wiggle room here. There is another category that the term "cripple" could have been intended for that the poster did overtly specify, and that is disabled persons.
As you correctly quoted, he said "veterans and disabled persons" therefor it's up to him to tell us who he meant to call a cripple.
Instead of arguing that between yourselves, maybe you should come straight out and ask him what he intended with his comment?
This M76;
All I was doing was correcting you on an incorrect statement. I was not calling on other issues, trying to cloud the discussion or distract anyone. You said something that was false and that is all I was addressing.
I don't care about your point and I said so.
\
If you make statements to support your argument that are false, it is not irrelevant to point them out.
And bringing up agendas, tactics, and buzz words like SJW will get you no where with me, because I am not taking a side in this, or trying to influence the discussion, other than to point out what I did in fact specifically point out.
It's you, that is mistakenly attributing my comments as regarding your position. I am neither arguing for or against "your point".
Do you require further clarification?
Design1stcode2nd
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2016
- Messages
- 704
Yes yes I get the whole on principle thing, I'm being told I can't go to something therefore I'm offended...all lives matter etc, etc. Yes on principle it should be open to all its just so small of a thing to get triggered over.
Maybe the ladies would be more inclined to go because they won't have some douche hitting on them or eye Fing them when they take a bathroom break.
By all means get all fired up about it if that is your inclination to do so.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
I'm quoting the regressive agenda, not you. How am I giving words into your mouth? If I intended to attribute that quote to you I'd have used regular quote tags.
I get it, you didn't want to contribute to the discussion constructively just wanted to polish your ego, by pointing out something that is not relevant, and I clearly wasn't referring to. I was talking about the slavery happening in the US, where cotton farmers used imported workers from Africa to work their lands. Mission accomplished, now we know that you don't think every form of slavery is completely eradicated, even though it was not in question. You didn't have to be a douche about it if it was unclear that the only slavery I referred to was the US one.
Intentionally or not, you managed to derail the conversation from the point.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
I don't even know how this is still in question. There were two groups mentioned. veterans and disabled people. And I took one of the two to use as an example. Why would I consider veterans to be included in the "crippled" group? That's complete nonsense. Talk about giving words this is more like giving thoughts to someone else. And yes I intentionally used the non-PC word because I'm sick and tired of the PC police who are more concerned with not calling things what they are, rather than helping the people that are in that category. My grandmother on my father's side was a cripple, she lost both her legs, yet the word "cripple" doesn't offend me at all, it's a perfectly clear world to describe a condition, where someone lost part or all their mobility.
You can call taking a shit "evacuating organic waste" but the process is still the same and just as smelly.
D
Deleted member 204526
Guest
I believe any business should have the right to discriminate however they please. BUT, if these laws against such must be in place, then they should be equally enforced. None of this having your cake and eating it too for certain groups.
God damn man, take a breath and back up. Read what I am saying ........ I think Mope54 and yourself have gotten way too wrapped up in this "cripple" comment. So much so, you can't even identify that I am not attacking you on it.
And it's still an issue cause you keep coming back at me for what I have said even though I am not really in this discussion between you and mope54.
Take a pill, re-read things, and back off on your deflector shields a notch because you are starting to thrash around and you are just knocking over the furniture.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
You still don't see the big picture. It's not about me, and my feelings. It's about the message being sent. Which is "segregation is a good thing if it's against men". No, segregation is not a good thing, not in any form or context. Segregated groups and identity politics lead to hate and at times even genocide. What do you think the Nazis were about? Or more recently the Bosnian genocide? Iidentity politics. And creating women only events or men only events for that matter is also identity politics, and does no good to anyone involved. And I don't oppose this because of men's rights, I think this is more damaging to women than men. Because it builds misogyny in men who are excluded. It doesn't affect me at all I live on the other side of the world.
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,039
I didn't say you were attacking me. I just explained one final time how things are, you don't have to take everything on yourself. And I'm not angry at all, you seem to misunderstand the situation. Now that mope is safely tucked away on my ignore list I probably won't even get mad again. We went back and forth a couple of times in other topics as well, and time and time again he demonstrated his complete unwillingness to a constructive conversation. And now I'm saying enough in enough.
Darunion
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 5,344
What if you were born male but identify as a woman? Which bathroom do you use at the theater?
I already mentioned that category, lcpiper.
Using "crippled" to refer to disabled veterans or disabled non-veterans is equally repugnant.
There isn't any way he can logically argue that he was using "cripple" to refer to disabled persons but not disabled veterans, because disabled veterans fall within the more general disabled category. That is, disabled veterans are a subset of the disabled population. When the theater has a special screening for "disabled people" they are including disabled veterans, as well as, disabled firemen, disabled policemen, and disabled homeless people.
So do we say, well disabled veterans aren't cripples, but those others ones are? How is that a defensible position? Using "cripple" as a noun to describe anyone with disabilities is pejorative. It just so happens that this site has a bunch of vets and he knows better than to cross that line, at least. Not so true for the public safety officials who lost full use of their bodies in service to their communities or just the mundane citizen born or otherwise tragically harmed in an accident. That's why even he hasn't gone so far as to blatantly state that he thinks it's perfectly acceptable to call disabled veterans "cripples." Instead, he's trying to dance around the subject by claiming that he never referred to disabled veterans at all, yet anyone with an 8th grade understanding of English can grasp that disabled vets are part of the "disabled persons" group that was mentioned in the original post. And if it's unclear for some ridiculous reason, it would have been cleared up by simply visiting the theater's Facebook page, which is what the original post encouraged him to do so he could inform himself on the subject he's working himself up about--yet clearly he didn't do that because his position isn't based on facts and it's not about facts at all. It's about regurgitation rancid ideas and woefully misplaced values and the attempt to proliferate those positions in a forum where he can't be censured by socially adjusted individuals who would otherwise shun his nonsense. That's part of being in a society and part of what Emile Durkheim wrote about when he described the importance of social values and norms (and the functional aspects of deviance).
There isn't any reason for me to clear anything up with him because his points are intentionally inflammatory. He wouldn't talk like this in public so he's getting his rocks off by intentionally inflaming the conversation in a pseudo-annonymous venue. Ordinarily this would be considered trolling but for whatever reasons it's being allowed here, on our front page news, of all places.
It's not a point worth deciphering. There isn't an acceptable resolution to whatever he was trying to say. He has no interest in constructive discourse. You and I have both corrected him on his inaccurate assessment of both US and global slavery. He consistently misuses segregation. He ignores that slavery was removed from US society a mere generation ago while the same principles of subjugation were perpetuated through law (and then later informally) well up until a few decades ago. It's simply factually, historically incorrect to make a statement that both slavery and racial segregation have no affect on modern day US society--or that no one alive has personally witnessed the impacts of racial injustice. That's just false.
In order to try and bolster his point, he incorrect claimed that slavery ended in the US "hundreds of years ago" and, when I called him out on that incorrect statement, he tried to backpedal it to "300 years" but tried to play it off as merely referring to the "middle of slavery." You pointed out that he was wrong about all of those statements and then the conversation has somehow shifted to whether slavery is relevant to the conversation. It isn't, it wasn't, which begs the question of why he introduced it to the conversation in the first place!
He made a similar ridiculous claim that people can't come up with a single place in US society where women are disadvantaged. Since the claim is ludicrous on its face, there's no reason to consider it a legitimate question. Since he believes that despite objective, documented, historical and legal evidence to the contrary, the question was rhetorical in order to launch into some other pseudo-argument. But no one took the bait so he posted that refusing to take the bait somehow validated his opinion in one last ditch to troll any rational adult reading the post into engaging in a pointless "discussion" with him about his bullshit.
The reason he continues to make these arguments is twofold: he doesn't understand the facts of what he's trying to talk about and he compounds the negative impact this has on the conversation by introducing rancid commentary whenever possible.
So while you are left trying to whack-a-mole his bizarre, inaccurate points about the history of whatever he vomits onto the forum, if you don't kowtow to his sensibilities he's quick to call foul and pout about personal attacks and adhering to political correct terms.
He's vomiting nonsense all over the forum thread and the correct response was to let it die because it's clear there is no "conversation" to be had here, which it was doing until a few people started bumping it again.
Last edited:
Design1stcode2nd
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2016
- Messages
- 704
That's a reach, going from a special screening of a comic book movie in a few select locations to segregation and Nazi Germany.
In the U.S. we have many greater issues that need attention than something this trivial.
Again I get the point that this is being exclusive based on gender i just don't care. It's one or two screenings of a popcorn flick which is on thousands of screens nationwide.
Tsumi
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 13,758
It's an inherent problem with law. Once you start giving a little, at what point do you stop, and who gets to decide where to stop?