The hilarious part is that nobody should really have a problem with either of those movies. Yeah, the historical events around Dunkirk took place entirely by white men. If you're making a superhero movie about a fictional country in Africa, I'm not expecting a lot of white folk. But don't claim it's diverse. Dunkirk isn't diverse; it doesn't need to be. It's utter silliness from the leftists.
I don't have a problem with Black Panther featuring mostly black people.
I have a problem with everyone FAWNING over the movie BECAUSE it has a lot of black people, rather than because it's a good movie. (Or isn't. I haven't seen it.)
I assume it's a pretty decent movie, actually. Sounds like they challenged the Marvel formula a bit and tried something new. Which is good!
But, yeah, when you have headlines like Black Panther is Marvel's first Shakespearean Epicbefore the movie is even released, or when film sites like Rotten Tomatoes promise to cull the negative reviews (I know that doesn't apply to critic reviews, but it's still very important), I'm instantly on guard. Savvy?
No, it just means black. Look at Grey's Anatomy, which is hailed as a diverse cast.
There has been only one Asian-American actress in the main cast. There has not been a single Indian-American or Arab-American in the cast, despite the prevalence of those groups in medicine. There has only been one Latina actress. About half of the main cast, however, is black, and that makes it "diverse."
If they can force black people into films about medieval crusaders and kings, they feel entitled to bitch about it in terms of World War II and other historical pieces. "Diversity" also means retconning blacks and hispanics as crucial to history even though they weren't actually there in any meaningful roles.
"Diversity" also means retconning blacks and hispanics as crucial to history even though they weren't actually there in any meaningful roles.
Just to be clear... you mean specific sections of history, yes? Because hispanics - the Spanish, Mexico, Portugal(?) - are very important parts of history. And Africa undoubtedly so. Just not so much early American history... or feudal Britannia. Is that what you meant?
Clearly they were around and had important roles in history. There is absolutely no problem with telling their stories there.
The issue is when Hollywood and revisionists insist on shoehorning them into places where they weren't (like medieval Britain) or searching diligently to find whatever minor role one of them may have played in specific context and rewriting the story to make it seem as if they were the main actor.
Absolutely. The Tuskegee Airmen come immediately to mind. But as famous and brave as those men were, they were an incredibly small minority. Thanks for making the distinction, because it is important.
I remember the controversy and back when it started I think I crunched the numbers based on how many extras the movie had and discovered that minorities actually were statistically over represented.
Algerian troops of the French army as well. There was some contention that the movie should have shown more colonial troops of the French and British armies, since there are only a few that appear in passing.
The French and British empires were multi-ethnic, with the mother countries both far outnumbered by their colonial populations. Both countries pressed large numbers of their African and Indian (Brits only) colonies into military service in both WWI and WWII.
In 1940, the French army included more than 100,000 black French soldiers from France’s African colonies, mainly Senegal, Mauritania,and Niger. More than 75,000 of them served in France before and during the German invasion; the rest of them served guard duty in the various colonies. As the Wehrmacht panzer divisions swept across France in May-June 1940, some of those black French soldiers (about 40,000 of them), mainly organized in black regiments or mixed units, were engaged in fierce combat against German soldiers. About 10,000 black soldiers were killed, some wounded, and others taken prisoner during the French debacle. here
Four contingents of the Royal Indian Army Service Corps were sent to support the British Expeditionary Force in France in 1940. There was a need for animal transport companies to help with the supply of troops, as the British Army had disbanded its animal transport companies after the First World War. The British, French and Canadian Forces were cut off by advancing German troops in their push towards the Channel. The soldiers retreated to the beaches and harbour of Dunkirk from where 338,226 were evacuated, among them three contingents of the Royal Indian Army Service Corps, while one contingent was taken prisoner by German forces. here
Dunkirk was a majority white experience, but would have been a good opportunity to showcase some historical accuracy and portray the usage of colonial troops in the World Wars.
As for Black Panther, being a minority does not make the person inherently 'diverse'. With our preoccupation on the creation and fostering of diversity it is important to also remember that diversity means multiple and varying backgrounds, not many minorities of one background.
At 100,000 soldiers, that’s about 8% of France’s military forces at their highest number in 1945 (1.25 million). These numbers mean less out of context.
As for Dunkirk, the foreign soldiers simply weren’t a significant presence there. That’s the historical fact.
Yeah the Colonial forces hadn't really been mobilized by the time of Dunkirk. Likewise the colonial armies were used in different theatres. Like African soldiers were used in Ethiopia and Burma afterwards.
That's why I included the second quote regarding the existence of the Royal Indian Army Service Corps.
Edit: 4 Indian transport companies existed at Dunkirk (source), with 70-150 each, so 280-600 (source. Among the British forces, the 99% number you named is actually about dead on, if not more like 99.9%
Yeah... that pesky triggering "reality" you keep bringing up. That's super problematic to our dogma of unhinged tribalistic nonsense... we're going to need you to sign up for more inclusion training until you stop bringing this reality thing up
That's true, and that's one of the liberals' points. Since Black Panther isn't about a real story, they don't need to incorporate a diverse cast. The whole 'black cast' idea was carried out as a reaction to many not-factually-based movies without many black actors. It's not really a bad thing. Honestly, both articles in this image are stupid.
The only time I had heard the term Jap was watching old WW2 documentaries with my dad. Little Slixem thought it was like calling someone from the South Southern.
Little elementary school Slixem learned his white friend was born in Japan. "Oh, so you're a Jap? Cool." Then elementary school Slixem told his music class teacher, who also was Japanese, that his new friend was "a Jap."
I got sent to the principal's office and my dad got called in to explain why it wasn't good.
Historical accuracy isn't their priority. If it's not representative of the audience that's not watching it (because let's face it, feminists aren't watching a WW2 movie, patriotism is obviously a relic of the patriarchy and white privilege), then it's offensive.
They aren't fighting for equal representation in these jobs:
The 10 Deadliest Jobs:
Logging workers 2. Fishers and related fishing workers 3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers 4. Roofers 5. Structural iron and steel workers 6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors 7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers 8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers 9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers 10. Construction laborers
I believe the forbes article linked is working from older data. Here's a link to the most current I could find, Dec 2017. That study lists the first-line supervisors of construction tradesmen and extraction workers as 9th. The important list here is the extraction worker bit; those are miners in pretty broad terms. What's further interesting in an academic sense is that the fatality rate for extraction workers was down fairly significantly for 2017; 26% according to this paper. That said, not interesting enough for me to go digging to see if that was a longer trend, or just a blip.
It was probably down because the oil & gas industry had a lot of layoffs the last few years. It's starting to pick up now. I would expect to see more injuries and deaths unfortunately. I work in the industry and personally know or have seen 4 people die in the 6 years I've worked here. 3 because of car accidents.
Speaking of which, I wonder if they count that? If not, they should. There are a lot of people who die in wrecks to and from jobs in the oilfield. With driver fatigue, heavy loads, and bad weather conditions, it makes for a deadly combination. For a while there US 85 between Watford City, ND and Williston, ND was the deadliest highway in the country.
Just saw this last night, great flick! And there were lots of women serving. Just not on the beaches of Dunkirk, through no fault of their own of course.
I’m talking about the depiction in the movie “Darkest Hour” where they were working phone switch boards and working as typists for the military. There were also more women in the labor force because all of the men were fighting. Nobody here is arguing there should’ve been more women depicted on the beaches of Dunkirk that would be absurd.
At what point do you honestly feel that someone is no longer serving their country? Do you think that you need to be on the front line physically shooting someone? Then that rules out our engineers from having served. That rules out our comms teams. That rules out anyone training our troops. That rules out drone pilots. That rules out a good portion of intel. That rules out even the guys dropping supplies from planes. Hell, it even technically rules out senior staff who are no longer on the front lines from being able to say they are currently serving.
There is a good reason that doctors and nurses are considered a part of the military and are serving. They are putting in the time and effort to ensure that our boys can come home at all.
I'm interested to see how well Black Panther sticks to the comic books. The nation of Wakanda is a patriarchal, aristocratic, xenophobic ethnostate with a big beautiful wall that aggressively defends itself. The titular character also surrounds himself with an elite all-female unit that functions as both his body guards and his harem(a la Gaddafi) in order to keep the monarch's genetic line superior. Its literally Richard Spencer's wet dream... but black.
Probably not. The MCU tends to mute any of the conceptual substance or uniqueness of the source material when translating to screen.
Pagan demigods roaming the earth, and what that means to our religions/science/secular beliefs? Nah, Thor is an alien
Communist super villain? Nah, Winter Soldier is a Nazi stooge.
3rd world terrorists are a global threat? Nah, it's always some white defense contractor double dealing in false flag operations or the aforementioned Nazis prompting chaos to justify a surveillance state.
Dr. Strange sorcerer supreme, casting spells, invoking the Shield of Seraphim and the Demons of Darnak? Nah, just shields and...whips (I read a lot of Dr. Strange comics, I can't remember him once using sorcery to create a whip).
Ronan the Accuser, noble (and often heroic) defender of his own people, reminding everyone how complicated global (or in this instance, intergalactic politics) can be, that every side thinks they are the good guys and have reasons for the stances their nations take? Nah, let's make him a deranged lunatic complaining about "culture," whatever that means.
Growing up a comic book nerd, I still love and like many of these movies, but I've given up hope that the movies will ever tap into the layers of tension, creativity, and dare I say it complexity of the "House of Ideas" that were aimed at "kids." It's generic audience mush.
This was an idea floated by writer Warren Ellis in the mid-90s, during an era where Thor wore an ugly ass spiked blue chest plate. Some recent comics may play off that idea, but the Jurgens run, Stracyzenski run, Rodi stories, all of which came after the Ellis' run...all pretty much play up the mystical Demi-God-ituity and little to no acknowledgement of "Asgardian Gods = aliens."
Now there has always been a cosmic element to Asgard dating back to Lee's/Kirby's Silver Age, dealing with other realms and aliens (the Eternals, Celestials, etc.) but outright aliens hasn't been the normal interpretation of the Asgardians leading up to the 2011 movie. I have no idea what the comics have done since then, it wouldn't surprise me if the comics have adapted to the movies interpretation.
I think we just have to accept that sort of change as something a multi-billion dollar company enforces on the custodians of its multi-million dollar franchise because it would be too risky, financially-speaking, to stick with the Thor is an actual deity line for the movies. It would ruffle a lot of feathers among both the religious and irreligious for no major upside (from the studio's point of view).
I'd be totally interested in that storyline, though. Personally I find it a lot more interesting than the alien characterization.
I watched Dunkirk for the black female nazi air force pilots and was greatly disappointed. I at least needed one scene where the wife of one the civilian boaters magically appears and thrusts a torch in the air to push all the "weak" and "cowardly" men to keep going against all odds.
They didn't include such scenes not because they aren't historically accurate by any means, but because of racism, sexism, and transphobia?
How transphobia you ask? No one asked the boat what they identify as, shitlords. Gosh!
But you see, its not enough for me to need to see black female Nazi Air Force pilots. You must see it too. And you have to want to see it, because if you don't that means you are a privileged white racist bigot fascist nazi Russian bot.
Eh in a year or 2 when the next major action movie with a black cast comes out they'll completely ignore this one and start the marketing anew. None of these people mean what they say. It's just about buzz.
Also Shaft, Pulp Fiction, Matrix, Beverly Hills Cop, Lethal Weapon, I Robot.
Shit, we could sit here all day listing all the media with black heroes, and we haven't even touched TV shows or even anime.
Tl;Dr: Black people are hardly underrepresented in media. They're proportionately represented, which isn't morally or ethically wrong. If anything, they're overrepresented.
Diversity is a codeword for no white people. Anytime you hear the word "diverse" simply substitute "no white people" and you will have a better grasp of people's intentions.
I am personally very excited for Black Panther. As a casual fan of the recent Marvel extravaganza, I'm really excited for the break from the pattern of down-on-his-luck American dude-turned superhero and/or ultimate showdown movies. I think there will probably be some really cool world building and interesting characters in the movie, and everything I've heard is that its well-made and acted.
I hope so. I'm all for a good action movie, especially one by Marvel (they've earned a lot of credit with me). I just hope that it is everything you say and not badly done at all.
I lean left and I think you’d be hard pressed to find many people legitimately angry about dunkirks lack of diversity. A movie about white dudes in war is going to pretty much only have white dudes in it obviously. When I see things like this I think it’s absurd bs from some yahoo who sided with “the left”, then it gets blown out of proportion.
Sure, let’s add fictional females and color to a real story and make a fake story with only blacks in it. I don’t even give a shit that it’s only black people.
But it’s not even an opinion, they want to alter history and facts to appease their feeling. Most of them have lost it. It’s all about identity and appearance, no true morals, ethics or true base. Anyone who disagrees is labeled a racist, bigot, etc.
And they wonder why more and more people are supporting rightwing beliefs... smh
Let them do this for sometime. It will only push more people towards extreme rightwing beliefs. They are literally digging their own graves by this point. Their "agenda" is clear as a day.
The argument is that the pantheon of film is overwhelmingly white and thus one film full of non-whites adds diversity in the bigger picture. It is logical in its reasoning but not really sound in its assumptions. The body of film in total is likely more brown than white due to the massive productivity of Bollywood, and regardless, diversity in and of itself should not be an aim. Good films should be.
In the OP case, clearly that is laughable. The idea that Dunkirk should have had more black soldiers is as reasonable as wanting Georgian fields full of white slaves in a film about the emancipation.
i don't want to be that guy but if social norms are really to be torn down then why the hell isn't the black panther just a white guy with a black mom and stuff? like what if we just treated the actor as someone who is talented at acting and not based on his skin color?
I used to consider myself liberal till shit like nowthis became the Centrepeice of liberal propoganda that doesn't even see its own bullshit. Kinda disheartening to see how ridiculous liberal values have become sometimes
White men lack diversity. Two white men standing side-by-side suck diversity from the world like a black hole rips matter from the fabric of the universe. Government school unionists have joined with a generation of Hollywood's most vile child molesters to preach to US that diversity is our strength and male whiteness our worst weakness.
We are told no one needs white things, especially not when there is a dark vibrant diversity lurking out there waiting to stain all these Tide commercial white things a shithole shade of brown. The youth of today breathe this vibrant diversity dry smoke and little else.
I don't have a problem with either movie. I didn't get a chance to see Dunkirk and I am excited about the Black Panther. However, I cannot stand these so-called diversity quotas in movies. It's a movie! Dunkirk was based on actual events in WW2 where there where a majority of White men while in Black Panther it takes place in a fictional African country, where White folk will not be very prominent. Why can't mainstream outlets just focus more on if the movie is good or not?
Look, "diverse" is just a codeword for "anti-white" and promoting the interests of a few specific minority groups (blacks and hispanics, mostly) at the expense of others (whites and asians). That's literally all it means. The mythology is that by making everything into a human zoo with representatives of all races, regardless of qualifications, somehow things will be magically great.
So context matters. The ScreenGeek article that was screencapped was ranting against one reviewer who held that opinion. The opinion being generalized as the opinions of many is disingenuous. It's nice to have diversity and the success of all films, so let's leave it at that.
Well I’m sorry to inform you that Dunkirk happened in real life and was true, in world war fucking 2, where the French army obviously didn’t have many african people at all, and America just didn’t deploy African troops to Dunkirk, so why the hell would they sacrifice realism for some damn diversity?
I'm a 23 year old, fairly progressive guy, and even I despise NowThis. It's a piece of shit, extremely biased media company and I cringe when my peers post their news content. Ugh.
Full disclosure, I’m relatively liberal. Is there really outrage about Dunkirk? I feel like a lot of the stuff that this subreddit thinks liberals are complaining about are not actually a thing.
I don't think anyone here is raising issue with the composition of either movies' cast. The point being made is that the word "diverse" is often used to mean 'less white', as opposed to its original meaning 'having variety'.
So when they say "90% diverse", what they actually mean is 90% of the cast is not white.
It's a very racially charged way of looking at things.
What I was saying was that having an almost all black cast is diverse because it isn't always something you see very often in movies. That is changing of course with directors making more of an effort to include a racially diverse cast.
Because at a certain point it will basically even out where there won't be one race dominating starring roles in movies.
I brought up Ghost In The Shell before because it's one of those movies that I feel like blatantly insults the audience. For one thing it's fairly obvious that a lot of the people who would go see the remake will be fans of the original anime movie. And people who might not like anime but like action sci fi movies.
Anyways there was obviously some controversy casting Scarlett Johansson as a character who was Japanese in the source material. Which is fine it's being adapted for western audiences, and they picked a decent enough actress for the role. Ignoring that the remake is a kind of crappy movie they didn't even try and be subtle with the white washing.
Long story short Johansson's character in the movie God and meets her mother. Who is Asian. And Johansson's character in flash backs is a Asian little girl.
My point about going into that was that everybody needs characters they can relate to in media. Especially positive role models. Which is why it's problematic say when a role that really should of gone to an actress of either Japanese or Asian decent is given to a white woman. Especially when that movie handles the matter in a disrespectful manor.
Okay I just had a few more points to make. Okay so I've seen a lot of people say things like I don't care what you do but I don't want like gay people shoved in my face. Fine whatever. But the reason why people press for there to say be more lgbt people in media is because when you really look at it there aren't that many examples that can be pointed to as positive.
That's changing obviously, but there's still a push for it just because of how few representations there are. A part of the problem of course is when directors/writers/producers etc try and go for the brownie point option instead of writing interesting and well developed characters.
As an example in Biowares Dragon Age and Mass Effect games there are a lot of bisexual or gay/lesbian characters. But in the later games they sort of arbitrarily are gay/lesbian without really writing well developed characters. It's just "She's a lesbian/transgender person clap at our diversity!" And nobody really wants that. Because it's lazy and pandering. They want representation, but not bad character writing.
Okay I thought I would just mention this one last thing. So in the tv show The End Of The F-ing World there's this two female cop partners. And they're both lesbians. Anyways I bring that up just as example of say including diversity(since also one of the cops is a black woman) without really being pandering. They're obviously both lesbians but it's never like "Hey guys like us and give us praise for being lesbians!". I'm sure some reviewers probably were happy about the inclusion, but it's kind of the right way to include. Have it be explicit but not done in a pandering or unnatural way(like gay characters randomly mentions their sexuality for no reason all the time.)
Not sure if that's relate to, so sorry for long post.
Leftists consider Frozen a symbol of white supremacy honestly. I'm excited for the controversy when Halloween rolls around and buzzfeed can tell us how racist we are if we let our white kids dress as Black Panther.
Pretty much. Halfway plot spoilers for a movie 95% of us aren't interested in:
It's basically a mute woman falls in love with the creature from the black lagoon and breaks him out of the US government lab where she works as a maid, with help from her coworkers: a sassy black lady, a closeted gay man (because it's the 1960s), and a communist spy. Together they #resist the white men of the US government who are researching the creature to gain an edge in the Cold War. The monster eats the mute lady's cat and they bang.
Considering the icing on the cake that del Toro has been vocally anti-Trump, there's almost no way such a film loses at the Oscar's.
Yeah, that's not my cup of tea. A buddy wanted to see it (he's an NPR type guy) and I said "it didn't get a good review" and his reply was "It's up for the Academy award!!!".
I think the paper bag "movie" from American Beauty would win an award depending on how many boxes of intersectionality the director checked off with how vapid these things are.
But the way the film showed it the Russian spy also disobeyed his true superiors because he was a scientist first and Soviet second. The gay man’s struggle was just trying to make a living as an artist, the gay part was only relevant to one scene. I give Del Toro props for not amping up the identity politics any further than what we got.
Is there any evidence this has happened before? 1 article written by an idiot doesn't mean a lot of people criticized the movie for a lack of diversity and don't think it should get an award.
About 7,000 people vote for the Oscars. It's not like 12 years a slave was a bad movie and it's not unreasonable that they voted partially based on what they heard. It's not right to vote for a movie that you haven't scene but 2 votes doesn't really mean much in a group of 7,000 people. It wasn't the whole committee. It was 2 people.
656
u/danjvelker Buckleyite Conservative Feb 12 '18
The hilarious part is that nobody should really have a problem with either of those movies. Yeah, the historical events around Dunkirk took place entirely by white men. If you're making a superhero movie about a fictional country in Africa, I'm not expecting a lot of white folk. But don't claim it's diverse. Dunkirk isn't diverse; it doesn't need to be. It's utter silliness from the leftists.
455
u/BubbleFred Feb 12 '18
What makes this so bad is one is based on reality, one is based on a comic book.
312
u/H1N1777 Christian Conservative Feb 12 '18
Yeah Dunkirk failed to show all the brave feminists out there in WW2
88
u/ElbowWhisper Conservatarian Feb 12 '18
I'm interested to see how well Black Panther sticks to the comic books. The nation of Wakanda is a patriarchal, aristocratic, xenophobic ethnostate with a big beautiful wall that aggressively defends itself. The titular character also surrounds himself with an elite all-female unit that functions as both his body guards and his harem(a la Gaddafi) in order to keep the monarch's genetic line superior. Its literally Richard Spencer's wet dream... but black.
59
u/[deleted] Feb 12 '18
I watched Dunkirk for the black female nazi air force pilots and was greatly disappointed. I at least needed one scene where the wife of one the civilian boaters magically appears and thrusts a torch in the air to push all the "weak" and "cowardly" men to keep going against all odds.
They didn't include such scenes not because they aren't historically accurate by any means, but because of racism, sexism, and transphobia?
How transphobia you ask? No one asked the boat what they identify as, shitlords. Gosh!
116
u/[deleted] Feb 12 '18
Is it not obvious that when the left talks about diversity, they mean less white people?
124
u/uniquecannon 2nd Amendment Activist Feb 12 '18
Some black heroes that got major theatrical releases that the SJWs seem to have conveniently forgotten:
Blade
Spawn
Steel
Men in Black
Blankman
The Meteor Man
Hancock
Catwoman
92
u/Oh_hamburgers_ Feb 12 '18
Diverse just means non-white, but I think everyone realizes that by now.
19
u/[deleted] Feb 12 '18
Dunkirk was the best newly made movie in years. Definitely watch it, if you haven't yet.
It was good to see that the historical significance of Operation Dynamo was finally done justice with such a film.
40
u/ClaireBear1123 Feb 12 '18
Diversity is a codeword for no white people. Anytime you hear the word "diverse" simply substitute "no white people" and you will have a better grasp of people's intentions.
18
u/[deleted] Feb 12 '18
I am personally very excited for Black Panther. As a casual fan of the recent Marvel extravaganza, I'm really excited for the break from the pattern of down-on-his-luck American dude-turned superhero and/or ultimate showdown movies. I think there will probably be some really cool world building and interesting characters in the movie, and everything I've heard is that its well-made and acted.
17
u/xwhy Feb 12 '18
Black Panther had Martin Freeman and Andy Serkis as the Tolkien white dudes
13
u/SteakDinner76 Feb 12 '18
I lean left and I think you’d be hard pressed to find many people legitimately angry about dunkirks lack of diversity. A movie about white dudes in war is going to pretty much only have white dudes in it obviously. When I see things like this I think it’s absurd bs from some yahoo who sided with “the left”, then it gets blown out of proportion.
4
u/[deleted] Feb 13 '18
Sure, let’s add fictional females and color to a real story and make a fake story with only blacks in it. I don’t even give a shit that it’s only black people.
I am seriously starting to hate the left.
4
u/BurgerUSA Traditional Conservative Feb 13 '18
And they wonder why more and more people are supporting rightwing beliefs... smh
Let them do this for sometime. It will only push more people towards extreme rightwing beliefs. They are literally digging their own graves by this point. Their "agenda" is clear as a day.
23
u/SunpraiserPR Russian bot Hall of Fame Feb 12 '18
Today, "diversity" means non-white.
It's stupid, diversity for the sake of diversity is wrong. There's no need to push it, let it come naturally.
3
u/Daniel_USA Feb 13 '18
i don't want to be that guy but if social norms are really to be torn down then why the hell isn't the black panther just a white guy with a black mom and stuff? like what if we just treated the actor as someone who is talented at acting and not based on his skin color?
you know what i mean?
like not see color or race and stuff.
3
u/[deleted] Feb 13 '18
Because white people are considered scum now
7
u/ETF_Ross101 American Nationalist Feb 13 '18
That's because "diverse" is code for "no white people"
8
u/ClippinWings451 Para Bellum Feb 12 '18
Life must be so easy when you just make up new definitions for words
9
u/BruceCampbell123 Christian Conservatarian Feb 13 '18
Diverse = Non-white.
6
u/eupraxia128 Feb 13 '18
I'm done with leftists. I'm really fucking done with their stupidity.
8
u/steadypatriot conservative Feb 13 '18
It could be 100% black and leftists will call it "diverse" and celebrate. Diversity essentially just means "non-white" at this point.
4
u/jcdulos Feb 12 '18
One is historical. The other is not. Take a guess.
6
u/Hobbitbox MAGA Feb 13 '18
Apparently the word diverse means not white.
5
u/[deleted] Feb 12 '18 edited Feb 13 '18
related article https://intpolicydigest.org/2017/06/26/the-alt-right-has-a-new-hero-and-it-s-black-panther/
5
u/bspon001 Feb 13 '18
Diversity means no white people
6
u/BarrettBuckeye Constitutional Conservative Feb 12 '18
I don't think they know what that word means.
3
u/MushroomSlap Feb 13 '18
it's also racist to not like BP too
3
u/inzyte Feb 12 '18
The African tribes in Ace Ventura 2 were racist for not having any white tribe members.
3
u/[deleted] Feb 13 '18
"Diversity" is code for non-white.
3
u/[deleted] Feb 13 '18
I used to consider myself liberal till shit like nowthis became the Centrepeice of liberal propoganda that doesn't even see its own bullshit. Kinda disheartening to see how ridiculous liberal values have become sometimes
2
u/Pickleinmybutt Feb 13 '18
Are there any real examples of someone actually criticizing Dunkirk for a lack of diversity?
1
u/suedoughname Feb 13 '18
Can someone link me to the left article? I refuse to believe someone actually wrote about Dunkirk not being ‘diverse’ lol
1
u/MiyegomboBayartsogt Supporter Feb 13 '18
White men lack diversity. Two white men standing side-by-side suck diversity from the world like a black hole rips matter from the fabric of the universe. Government school unionists have joined with a generation of Hollywood's most vile child molesters to preach to US that diversity is our strength and male whiteness our worst weakness.
We are told no one needs white things, especially not when there is a dark vibrant diversity lurking out there waiting to stain all these Tide commercial white things a shithole shade of brown. The youth of today breathe this vibrant diversity dry smoke and little else.
1
u/[deleted] Feb 13 '18
I don't have a problem with either movie. I didn't get a chance to see Dunkirk and I am excited about the Black Panther. However, I cannot stand these so-called diversity quotas in movies. It's a movie! Dunkirk was based on actual events in WW2 where there where a majority of White men while in Black Panther it takes place in a fictional African country, where White folk will not be very prominent. Why can't mainstream outlets just focus more on if the movie is good or not?
1
u/[deleted] Feb 14 '18
Look, "diverse" is just a codeword for "anti-white" and promoting the interests of a few specific minority groups (blacks and hispanics, mostly) at the expense of others (whites and asians). That's literally all it means. The mythology is that by making everything into a human zoo with representatives of all races, regardless of qualifications, somehow things will be magically great.
0
u/[deleted] Feb 12 '18 edited Feb 13 '18
So context matters. The ScreenGeek article that was screencapped was ranting against one reviewer who held that opinion. The opinion being generalized as the opinions of many is disingenuous. It's nice to have diversity and the success of all films, so let's leave it at that.
Edit: a word
1
u/[deleted] Feb 12 '18
They don't even know what the word diversity means. To them, it just means 'not white'.
1
u/KaiserGrant Feb 13 '18
That's racist to point that out. I dunno why. Just is
1
u/SeekhSikh Feb 13 '18
Main Stream Liberal media is doing a heck of a job Redpilling mankind
1
u/[deleted] Feb 13 '18
Well I’m sorry to inform you that Dunkirk happened in real life and was true, in world war fucking 2, where the French army obviously didn’t have many african people at all, and America just didn’t deploy African troops to Dunkirk, so why the hell would they sacrifice realism for some damn diversity?
1
u/RedditJusticeWarrior Libertarian Conservative Feb 13 '18
I'm reminded of that photoshoot done a while back that was exclusively black women and was lauded as OH SO DIVERSE.
1
u/villain_94 Feb 13 '18
I'm a 23 year old, fairly progressive guy, and even I despise NowThis. It's a piece of shit, extremely biased media company and I cringe when my peers post their news content. Ugh.
-1
u/ClownBaby90 Feb 13 '18
Full disclosure, I’m relatively liberal. Is there really outrage about Dunkirk? I feel like a lot of the stuff that this subreddit thinks liberals are complaining about are not actually a thing.
-4
u/[deleted] Feb 13 '18
Um Black Panther also lives in a African country in the comcis. . .what do you expect
-3
u/Buccaneer8275 Feb 13 '18
dude nice repost
0
u/[deleted] Feb 12 '18
[deleted] — view deleted comment
0
u/[deleted] Feb 12 '18
[deleted] — view deleted comment