18 hours ago, Lace Jetstreamer said:

Its another clear hit piece of the Disney/Lucas Film anti-fan propaganda. Disney Star Wars movies are now starting to lose money and instead of accepting the reality that Disney has produced bad movies that aren't selling to their expectations, they instead have created a campaign to blame the audience. I think this type of marketing/propaganda will end star wars movies for at least a few years.

Here is a much better article on this topic: https://www.flickeringmyth.com/2018/07/the-most-disappointing-blaming-star-wars-fans-for-disneys-failures/

"Its another clear hit piece of the Disney/Lucas Film anti-fan propaganda."

I don't think you read the article.

"Disney Star Wars movies are now starting to lose money and instead of accepting the reality that Disney has produced bad movies that aren't selling to their expectations, they instead have created a campaign to blame the audience."

Solo made money from an ROI perspective. It didn't make as much money as they wanted, which one could argue has more to do with scheduling. (4 months after another Star Wars and a week or 2 after Infinity Wars).

"Here is a much better article on this topic: https://www.flickeringmyth.com/2018/07/the-most-disappointing-blaming-star-wars-fans-for-disneys-failures/"

I read the article, I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take from this. That the director and actors shouldn't respond to criticisms of the Movie? I'm not sure I buy that, especially for twitter. Either way, I'm not sure I'd say the article was better than the Film Crit Hulk article. 1. because it didn't actually dig into any issues. 2. It didn't do any research.

Thanks for your response though, I'm sorry you didn't like the episode or the movie. Hopefully you appreciate Blair and I's take that there were at least some spots for criticism.

4 minutes ago, Kelvan said:

Thanks for your response though, I'm sorry you didn't like the episode or the movie.

I don‘t think you want to be pulled into the mud. Check his post history, this guy looks like a new incarnation of PGS, or an alt account of someone, or a dedicated troll account.

He showed up out of nowhere and jumped into the most promising topics trying to fan flames. I‘m all for giving people the benefit of the doubt, but this has to be my fastest ignore on the forum to date.

On 7/14/2018 at 12:51 PM, HolySorcerer said:

I didn't like TLJ, and it has nothing to do with misogyny. My biggest issues are that the pacing was terrible, all the characters are idiots, and absolutely nothing has changed from the start of the film to the end. Rey and Kylo were the only interesting parts, and it was a huge missed opportunity to not have them join up at the end. Rey and Kylo trying to figure everything out and make their own way in the galaxy could have been an interesting film, instead we're going to get more stupid Rose + Finn nonsense instead.

Also, Solo might have been a box office failure, but it was more fun and enjoyable than TLJ, which is largely responsible for Solo's failure.

" My biggest issues are that the pacing was terrible"

Agree somewhat. It was the longest Star Wars movies and I think they probably could have cut some. I would say that it was average to slightly above average.

"all the characters are idiots"

If you were a krayt you'd say at least DJ wasn't an idiot. I'd say this point isn't helping the discussion.

"absolutely nothing has changed from the start of the film to the end"

Luke Dies, Rey Learns the force, The resistance is almost wiped out, Snoke dies, Poe learns to be a leader, Finn learns to join ca cause, Kylo becomes the new version of the emperor, Luke learns that he needs to pass on his failures, Rose learns that she needs to become a leader.

"Rey and Kylo were the only interesting parts, and it was a huge missed opportunity to not have them join up at the end. "

Agree somewhat. Luke was also really good in this. Additionally them joining doesn't make sense for Rey's character. Her whole story was learning independence and that she has her own place on her own. I think Kylo's is eventually going to be learning to accept that he cannot control everything.

"instead we're going to get more stupid Rose + Finn nonsense instead. "

This is conjecture, we have no idea what we're going to get. It's probably bad practice to judge the third movie before it comes out.

Either way I'm sorry you didn't like the movie. Hopefully you like the next one.

13 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

"He adds dignity to what would otherwise be an ugly brawl."

He does have a significantly more dignified way of presenting and speaking compared to the rest of us. I try to bring as many variant entertaining voices as possible on the show to break up the monotony. Sometimes we all sound the same, that's true especially for xwing podcasts.

5 hours ago, Kelvan said:

I don't think you read the article.

That is very rude making such an assumption. If you want to discuss the topic, then make your points. There is no reason to try and attack the person using logical fallacies such as these.

5 hours ago, Kelvan said:

Solo made money from an ROI perspective. It didn't make as much money as they wanted, which one could argue has more to do with scheduling. (4 months after another Star Wars and a week or 2 after Infinity Wars).

Solo is losing money at the box office.

Quote

one Wall Street analyst expects Solo to lose the studio an estimated $50 million.

Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/solo-a-star-wars-story-disney-loss-box-office-sales-latest-a8384151.html

6 hours ago, Kelvan said:

I read the article, I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take from this. That the director and actors shouldn't respond to criticisms of the Movie? I'm not sure I buy that, especially for twitter. Either way, I'm not sure I'd say the article was better than the Film Crit Hulk article. 1. because it didn't actually dig into any issues. 2. It didn't do any research.

The article discusses the attack on the audience and critics. Its a direct counter to the article that was a clear hit piece on the movie's criticism.

In response to film criticism. If you are a professional, you need to respond to criticism professionally. Calling your customers names and just being rude to them is incorrect behaviour. Looks like ArenaNet (Guild Wars 2) did the right thing and fired a game developer because she was very rude to one of their customers on twitter. And the customer was very polite to her saying he only 'slightly disagreed'. Of course, the media is now spinning it as a sexism in gaming just like Disney spins valid criticism as sexism and racism.

Trolling is different to criticism. Disney is currently lumping criticism into the trolling category. As the media spins it, anyone providing criticism to Disney Star Wars is now just trolling. This is incorrect and will doom the franchise as this stance will more and more divide the community. ArenaNet knows this and has decided to take action on their employee. Their CEO has made statements saying WE MAKE THE GAME FOR THE COMMUNITY. YOU ARE OUR CUSTOMER.

Basically, Disney should not allow their creators to get on twitter and respond to trolling. That should be the #1 rule. There is plenty of VALID criticism where again, creators should just listen and then fix the problems. 'We are listening' should be their stance. Saying things like, YOU ARE NOT OUR CUSTOMER. Or you didn't like star wars b/c your sexist, etc is very bad for the star wars brand. JJ Abrams, Kathleen Kennedy, and Rian Johnson should all be fired for handling of their customers via social media just as ArenaNet has done to one of their developers.

6 hours ago, Kelvan said:

Thanks for your response though, I'm sorry you didn't like the episode or the movie. Hopefully you appreciate Blair and I's take that there were at least some spots for criticism.

I have no problem with your podcast discussing Star Wars movies or other content related to star wars. The problem is using inflammatory language that is divisive especially towards your audience. My advice is to stick to the content. Talk about what happened in the movies. There is no reason to name call and use of logical fallacies.

1 hour ago, Lace Jetstreamer said:

That is very rude making such an assumption. 

Well, have you read the article? What do you think about it?

1 hour ago, Lace Jetstreamer said:

That is very rude making such an assumption. If you want to discuss the topic, then make your points. There is no reason to try and attack the person using logical fallacies such as these.

Solo is losing money at the box office.

Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/solo-a-star-wars-story-disney-loss-box-office-sales-latest-a8384151.html

The article discusses the attack on the audience and critics. Its a direct counter to the article that was a clear hit piece on the movie's criticism.

In response to film criticism. If you are a professional, you need to respond to criticism professionally. Calling your customers names and just being rude to them is incorrect behaviour. Looks like ArenaNet (Guild Wars 2) did the right thing and fired a game developer because she was very rude to one of their customers on twitter. And the customer was very polite to her saying he only 'slightly disagreed'. Of course, the media is now spinning it as a sexism in gaming just like Disney spins valid criticism as sexism and racism.

Trolling is different to criticism. Disney is currently lumping criticism into the trolling category. As the media spins it, anyone providing criticism to Disney Star Wars is now just trolling. This is incorrect and will doom the franchise as this stance will more and more divide the community. ArenaNet knows this and has decided to take action on their employee. Their CEO has made statements saying WE MAKE THE GAME FOR THE COMMUNITY. YOU ARE OUR CUSTOMER.

Basically, Disney should not allow their creators to get on twitter and respond to trolling. That should be the #1 rule. There is plenty of VALID criticism where again, creators should just listen and then fix the problems. 'We are listening' should be their stance. Saying things like, YOU ARE NOT OUR CUSTOMER. Or you didn't like star wars b/c your sexist, etc is very bad for the star wars brand. JJ Abrams, Kathleen Kennedy, and Rian Johnson should all be fired for handling of their customers via social media just as ArenaNet has done to one of their developers.

I have no problem with your podcast discussing Star Wars movies or other content related to star wars. The problem is using inflammatory language that is divisive especially towards your audience. My advice is to stick to the content. Talk about what happened in the movies. There is no reason to name call and use of logical fallacies.

4/10, reiterating points already made elsewhere and poor use of font size. (Also, fun fact, people can not be someone customers. If someone comes to where I work and asks to buy a pizza I will happily tell them they are not our customer).

@everyone

The longer everyone stays here the worse it gets.

volvo, pls lock.

2 hours ago, Lace Jetstreamer said:

That is very rude making such an assumption. If you want to discuss the topic, then make your points. There is no reason to try and attack the person using logical fallacies such as these.

Solo is losing money at the box office.

Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/solo-a-star-wars-story-disney-loss-box-office-sales-latest-a8384151.html

The article discusses the attack on the audience and critics. Its a direct counter to the article that was a clear hit piece on the movie's criticism.

In response to film criticism. If you are a professional, you need to respond to criticism professionally. Calling your customers names and just being rude to them is incorrect behaviour. Looks like ArenaNet (Guild Wars 2) did the right thing and fired a game developer because she was very rude to one of their customers on twitter. And the customer was very polite to her saying he only 'slightly disagreed'. Of course, the media is now spinning it as a sexism in gaming just like Disney spins valid criticism as sexism and racism.

Trolling is different to criticism. Disney is currently lumping criticism into the trolling category. As the media spins it, anyone providing criticism to Disney Star Wars is now just trolling. This is incorrect and will doom the franchise as this stance will more and more divide the community. ArenaNet knows this and has decided to take action on their employee. Their CEO has made statements saying WE MAKE THE GAME FOR THE COMMUNITY. YOU ARE OUR CUSTOMER.

Basically, Disney should not allow their creators to get on twitter and respond to trolling. That should be the #1 rule. There is plenty of VALID criticism where again, creators should just listen and then fix the problems. 'We are listening' should be their stance. Saying things like, YOU ARE NOT OUR CUSTOMER. Or you didn't like star wars b/c your sexist, etc is very bad for the star wars brand. JJ Abrams, Kathleen Kennedy, and Rian Johnson should all be fired for handling of their customers via social media just as ArenaNet has done to one of their developers.

I have no problem with your podcast discussing Star Wars movies or other content related to star wars. The problem is using inflammatory language that is divisive especially towards your audience. My advice is to stick to the content. Talk about what happened in the movies. There is no reason to name call and use of logical fallacies.

I still don't think you read the article. I apologize if that's rude, but that's my opinion.

Solo cost 250 million to make (source screen rant). Solo brought in a box office of 380million (source box office mojo). That may be under expectations, but it's not a loss in the sense you mean.

I don't believe Disney should limit people from posting on twitter. That seems crazy.

I've responded to legitimate criticism of the movie every time. I have plenty for it. This is hardly the case.

"My advice is to stick to the content."

I won't be taking that advice but thank you for your feedback.

9 minutes ago, Kelvan said:

Solo cost 250 million to make (source screen rant). Solo brought in a box office of 380million (source box office mojo). That may be under expectations, but it's not a loss in the sense you mean.

How much was the marketing budget? How much does the movie theatres take (60% of ticket sales is normal but apparently Disney strong armed deals of 40%)? Please post your sources as I have done.

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/11/disney-makes-a-bigger-ask-of-theaters-than-ever-before-with-the-last-jedi/

9 minutes ago, Kelvan said:

I don't believe Disney should limit people from posting on twitter. That seems crazy.

Strawman.

9 minutes ago, Kelvan said:

I won't be taking that advice but thank you for your feedback.

Using slander such as misogynist will lose you viewers. If you target specific people with such slander, you could open yourself up to a defamation lawsuit.

13 hours ago, Kelvan said:

I don't like claiming all people who criticize the movie are misogynists. That being said if you drew up a venn diagram of people who disliked the movie and people who are sexist, there's be some overlap.

Do you think Gamergate was about ethics in gaming journalism?

and here comes the gasoline

I guess now that a certain YouTube personality passed away in the recent months, internet drama from 2014 is now completely relevant.

On 7/12/2018 at 11:35 AM, Kelvan said:

I've posted this elsewhere on facebook but I found this after recording the episode and found it to be fascinating.

http://observer.com/2018/07/film-crit-hulk-the-beautiful-ugly-and-possessive-hearts-of-star-wars/

Kelvan, I enjoyed this read so much. Thanks for sharing it!

The internet's persecution complex will never cease to amaze me.

Also, this thread must have the highest density of confused reacts I have ever seen.

Edit: lol dammit Kelvan

3 hours ago, Marinealver said:

and here comes the gasoline

We definitely lite the fire....

Forums been burning since the worlds been turning..

I haven't heard this song in a while...

Rhyme schemes are for punks...

1 hour ago, defkhan1 said:

Also, this thread must have the highest density of confused reacts I have ever seen.

Edit: lol dammit Kelvan

12 minutes ago, Kelvan said:

You didn't give us content, so you got this. We sure showed you!

(Also while it may not be super relevant yet, it might be interesting to talk about the way 2.0 changes tournaments, as it is now much harder to reach a draw state.) [Might also be interesting to revisit the tournament structure in general, and how it plays completely differently from a casual game night, and whether or not that is a good thing] {Or I'm just on a tournament structure high right now, I dunno}

On 7/12/2018 at 8:35 AM, Kelvan said:

I've posted this elsewhere on facebook but I found this after recording the episode and found it to be fascinating.

http://observer.com/2018/07/film-crit-hulk-the-beautiful-ugly-and-possessive-hearts-of-star-wars/

Wow. This article was exceptionally well-written* meaningful for me. The thing that really stuck out to me was that he was able to put into words how I felt about both "Rogue One" and "The Last Jedi". I walked out of "Rogue One" rather down, and I can't say I really loved it. I knew it would take a couple of viewings, so I wasn't about to go bad mouth it, especially with how much everybody said they loved it. I loved the first half, but to me, the second half of "Rogue One" was just sort of...there. When the author of the essay mentioned "indulgence" it finally clicked in my head why so many people said the second half of the movie was fantastic if you could just get through the first half, but why I wasn't quite sold: I wanted more character-focused moments like we had in the beginning (Jyn viewing her father's message was one of the highlights of the movie for me), and I took it really, really hard when EVERYBODY DIED! So sad.

The Last Jedi" was different. It felt so kinetic. It had a sense of movement as we followed characters around, and saw many of them make some, frankly, terrible mistakes. But I loved that! It felt like Star Wars, you know? People make some pretty bad mistakes. The thing about "The Last Jedi" is that those mistakes have REALLY big consequences. But the message is that people can change, no matter how badly they have messed up. I think it was that message of hope that really shone through and overshadowed some of the things that I didn't like about the movie (like Canto Bight, which although I found a little frustrating, didn't make me angry the way it seems to have incensed other fans). I don't think it was a perfect movie, but a) the good parts far outweighed the bad parts, and b) the characters acted completely within their personalities. You might say, if it were a roleplaying game, that they got bonus points from the GM for excellent roleplaying, even though the choices were not ideal. Now, that's just my opinion, and it's one that others may have a completely different opinion about. And my thoughts are nowhere NEAR as eloquent as the author's, but his point of view allows me to enjoy the movie even more.

Ah, I really didn't mean to write this much, but that essay really got me thinking. And I know there are people that disliked the movie, but I agree with the author that we need to be equipped with the vocabulary to discuss (not argue) what it is we liked/disliked about it. When people call the "TLJ haters" all sorts of mean names, if that name doesn't describe you, then don't get upset about it. Okay, so we shouldn't name-call in the first place, but getting angry only makes you look more like one of the "misogynistic crybabies". When people say that those who like The Last Jedi are just "Disney apologists" or "they can't think for themselves", I just have to let it roll off my back because I'm neither of those things, so why should I get upset?

Anyway, thanks for sharing the article. Very enlightening. Now I need to listen to your episode ?

P.S. Loved, LOVED what he pointed out about the Marvel Cinematic Universe heroes. My wife and I had a good discussion about that.

*Yeah, the article wasn't really "well-written" with all the typos, but it was certainly well-structured and thought provoking.

5 hours ago, Parakitor said:

Wow. This article was exceptionally well-written* meaningful for me. The thing that really stuck out to me was that he was able to put into words how I felt about both "Rogue One" and "The Last Jedi". I walked out of "Rogue One" rather down, and I can't say I really loved it. I knew it would take a couple of viewings, so I wasn't about to go bad mouth it, especially with how much everybody said they loved it. I loved the first half, but to me, the second half of "Rogue One" was just sort of...there. When the author of the essay mentioned "indulgence" it finally clicked in my head why so many people said the second half of the movie was fantastic if you could just get through the first half, but why I wasn't quite sold: I wanted more character-focused moments like we had in the beginning (Jyn viewing her father's message was one of the highlights of the movie for me), and I took it really, really hard when EVERYBODY DIED! So sad.

The Last Jedi" was different. It felt so kinetic. It had a sense of movement as we followed characters around, and saw many of them make some, frankly, terrible mistakes. But I loved that! It felt like Star Wars, you know? People make some pretty bad mistakes. The thing about "The Last Jedi" is that those mistakes have REALLY big consequences. But the message is that people can change, no matter how badly they have messed up. I think it was that message of hope that really shone through and overshadowed some of the things that I didn't like about the movie (like Canto Bight, which although I found a little frustrating, didn't make me angry the way it seems to have incensed other fans). I don't think it was a perfect movie, but a) the good parts far outweighed the bad parts, and b) the characters acted completely within their personalities. You might say, if it were a roleplaying game, that they got bonus points from the GM for excellent roleplaying, even though the choices were not ideal. Now, that's just my opinion, and it's one that others may have a completely different opinion about. And my thoughts are nowhere NEAR as eloquent as the author's, but his point of view allows me to enjoy the movie even more.

Ah, I really didn't mean to write this much, but that essay really got me thinking. And I know there are people that disliked the movie, but I agree with the author that we need to be equipped with the vocabulary to discuss (not argue) what it is we liked/disliked about it. When people call the "TLJ haters" all sorts of mean names, if that name doesn't describe you, then don't get upset about it. Okay, so we shouldn't name-call in the first place, but getting angry only makes you look more like one of the "misogynistic crybabies". When people say that those who like The Last Jedi are just "Disney apologists" or "they can't think for themselves", I just have to let it roll off my back because I'm neither of those things, so why should I get upset?

Anyway, thanks for sharing the article. Very enlightening. Now I need to listen to your episode ?

P.S. Loved, LOVED what he pointed out about the Marvel Cinematic Universe heroes. My wife and I had a good discussion about that.

*Yeah, the article wasn't really "well-written" with all the typos, but it was certainly well-structured and thought provoking.

I think his breakdown of tlj was good. What I found fascinating was the takes on why Star Wars matters to us.

Related, I love his takes on marvel movies.

4 hours ago, Kelvan said:

I think his breakdown of tlj was good. What I found fascinating was the takes on why Star Wars matters to us.

Related, I love his takes on marvel movies.

I largely agreed with it, and definitely helped a few things click for me.

I think his approach, unfortunately did more to lock the doors and board the windows of the "Tower of Babel".

Framing the issue first as a "white Male" issue and then numerous mentions of toxic masculinity (even referring to a stage in men's lives when they are "young and toxic".

The issues with that approach are:

1) It implies that there are no female racists, or no minority sexists. This is obviously untrue, and if you really want to address and solve these problems, laying it all at the feet of one group will only foster resentment and unchecked issues.

2) What exactly is "toxic masculinity" beyond a common buzzword? How much masculinity until it's toxic? Is it just a know it when you see it thing? What is "masculinity" in the first place? I thought we are trying to shed the narrow minded views of typical gender roles. Are women capable of being toxic, if so, is there such a thing as toxic femininity?

I'm all for calling out toxic behavior when you see it. Toxic behavior is toxic behavior, but it has nothing inherently to do with anyone's gender.

3) Further implying that "young and toxic" is a stage that all young men go through is frankly just ****** up. That is a horrible mentality to have. Is that the wisdom we want to impart on the next generation? Unless society is fixed in the next few years, you will inevitably become a toxic person, at least for a while.

I think his probing into the nature of fandom and his analysis of the film were all spot on. I agreed with his goal of opening Star wars up to everyone so we can all participate and learn to understand ourselves and each other better through it.

I just think using the same gender stereotyping and completely un-nuanced expression of the cultural issues actively works to drive a wedge between groups. That is the exact opposite of what he was attempting to do.

8 hours ago, Sekac said:

I largely agreed with it, and definitely helped a few things click for me.

I think his approach, unfortunately did more to lock the doors and board the windows of the "Tower of Babel".

Framing the issue first as a "white Male" issue and then numerous mentions of toxic masculinity (even referring to a stage in men's lives when they are "young and toxic".

The issues with that approach are:

1) It implies that there are no female racists, or no minority sexists. This is obviously untrue, and if you really want to address and solve these problems, laying it all at the feet of one group will only foster resentment and unchecked issues.

2) What exactly is "toxic masculinity" beyond a common buzzword? How much masculinity until it's toxic? Is it just a know it when you see it thing? What is "masculinity" in the first place? I thought we are trying to shed the narrow minded views of typical gender roles. Are women capable of being toxic, if so, is there such a thing as toxic femininity?

I'm all for calling out toxic behavior when you see it. Toxic behavior is toxic behavior, but it has nothing inherently to do with anyone's gender.

3) Further implying that "young and toxic" is a stage that all young men go through is frankly just ****** up. That is a horrible mentality to have. Is that the wisdom we want to impart on the next generation? Unless society is fixed in the next few years, you will inevitably become a toxic person, at least for a while.

I think his probing into the nature of fandom and his analysis of the film were all spot on. I agreed with his goal of opening Star wars up to everyone so we can all participate and learn to understand ourselves and each other better through it.

I just think using the same gender stereotyping and completely un-nuanced expression of the cultural issues actively works to drive a wedge between groups. That is the exact opposite of what he was attempting to do.

Let me unpack a few things.

I think from the perspective that attempting to make a point, even mentioning misogyny or masculinity cuts off people who will flip out just seeing the word. You lose those people immediately. I agree with you that of course there are female racists, POC sexists etc. But I think we can agree that on the whole white guys run the majority of everything and there are subsets of that group that have issues. Sure it's not all men, but I think we'd be kidding ourselves to think that it's an issue that doesn't exist.

As to what the **** it even means...
Decent video link:

At this point, it's impossible to discuss rationally as its become so politicized, but there are points there that are valid to consider. I'll probably get 8 angry responses to this just for posting the video.

In regards to a young and toxic period. I don't think everyone goes through that, but many do. If I'm being honest with myself, I did.

"I just think using the same gender stereotyping and completely un-nuanced expression of the cultural issues actively works to drive a wedge between groups. That is the exact opposite of what he was attempting to do."

I agree in general although I tend to agree with the author in broad strokes while wishing he'd have presented his ideas differently.

I hate talking about this stuff online, its so hard to have a reasonable discussion. The fact that people get up in arms over it while talking TLJ makes it almost impossible to discuss the film from a critical perspective. That makes me sad as I quite enjoy discussing film and television critically.

Thank you for your thoughts on this.

28 minutes ago, Kelvan said:

I think from the perspective that attempting to make a point, even mentioning misogyny or masculinity cuts off people who will flip out just seeing the word. You lose those people immediately.

That's essentially my issue with the approach. If one is purporting to hope to open a dialogue, then don't use language that preemptively shuts down a dialogue.

28 minutes ago, Kelvan said:

But I think we can agree that on the whole white guys run the majority of everything and there are subsets of that group that have issues. 

I can mostly agree with that.

I'm just saying it's far more productive to attack racism/sexism in all its forms and sources, not just the group that is mostly in control of Western Culture. The problem is not white males, the problem is racism.

It's not as if the victims of ethnic cleansing in Africa, the Middle East, or Asia are cool with what's happening because the genocidal maniacs aren't white.

Racism is bad, full stop.

Focusing on one, and only one group gives all the racists that don't belong to that small group a free pass to keep acting the same way. It divides it into an arbitrary distinction between evil racism, and acceptable racism.

Imagine if this call to action for all white male racists works and there are no more white male racists in the world. Do we then just cross our fingers and hope everyone else just follows suit?

If we attack it as a concept, then we can create an opportunity for everyone to look within themselves and for everyone to improve together and simultaneously.

The pervasive "we will fix none of our issues until you fix all of yours" mentality is absolutely guaranteed to fail. It's not progress by any definition.

3 hours ago, Kelvan said:

But I think we can agree that on the whole white guys run the majority of everything and there are subsets of that group that have issues

• China - Population 1.3 billion
• India - Population 1.3 billion

3 hours ago, Kelvan said:

In regards to a young and toxic period. I don't think everyone goes through that, but many do. If I'm being honest with myself, I did.

Citation needed. This is the very problem with this topic and supporters of these ideas. Do you have valid scientific evidence like you did with the claim that 'white men run everything'?

TIL how to ignore users in your profile. Productive day.

2 minutes ago, Kelvan said:

TIL how to ignore users in your profile. Productive day.

When proven incorrect, ignore those people. Another reason these topics are impossible to discuss with TLJ supporters.

Since when does population equate to ruling everything? That's not true at all. ****, the British ruled India for a long time despite being massively outnumbered. Just look at Western Imperialism in general.