Has political correctness actually gone mad?

Of course the unwashed masses and their liberal media pals would care mightily but they'd be too busy wolfing down the latest Batgirl flick to catch it.

lPiTdoS.gif
 
I don't think that's true at the very top. Hollywood etc. actors would stay in the closet for fear of damaging their career at least until recently and most likely a fair few are still closeted.

It’s definitely been harder than it should be for out gay men (and women) to get roles playing straight characters. Thankfully that’s changing. An example being Andrew Scott getting such a great role in Fleabag. A change that, ironically, the notion gay characters must be played by gay actors would actually work against.

Hollywood probably has a way to go on this. Struggling to think of any mainstream American movies where a gay (wo)man has played a straight leading character.
 
Why wouldn't they still do it despite the homophobia/racism. feck the haters

Because I’d say it’s incredibly draining. Not everyone has the stomach for that sort of battle over a long period of time. Becoming a pro footballer is a tough enough grind as it is, without dealing with that on top of everything else.
 
Because I’d say it’s incredibly draining. Not everyone has the stomach for that sort of battle over a long period of time. Becoming a pro footballer is a tough enough grind as it is, without dealing with that on top of everything else.
It is, but getting to the top of anything is draining.

Some people have more to drain than other people, that adds to the story. You can caste a straight guy in a gay role, an able person as a differently able person, but you are going to miss something
 
Thoughts on this?

Presumably, by equal measure, gay guys should no longer be accepting straight roles or something?

Serial killer movies to become a thing of the past due to the inavailabilty of actors with multiple murder convictions.
The general sentiment behind what he said (rather than the specifics of what he said) is pretty reasonable and well-intentioned, I think, even thought it sounds a tad divisive at face value. Obviously, actors should be able to understand and empathize with the mostly fictitious characters they play; and technically, portray any one they're asked to while believably becoming someone else. And, their sexuality is no one's business unless they themselves want to publicly share the information — that goes without saying. But if a certain character is part of a traditionally under-represented or mis-represented or caricaturized or tokenized group or sub-culture, maybe the casting directors should have the sensibility to first and foremost look for actors from specific backgrounds as...
  • They might have had limited options in the industry, statistically, and you might be giving them a big breakthrough.
  • They could bring more to the table in terms of authentic lived experience — which might make a difference.
  • The core audience might feel more connected to their work because they feel personally represented in an abstract sense.
The “gay guys should no longer be accepting straight roles” argument invokes a false sense of equivalency and mostly rings hollow because straight actors (on the whole) weren't pushed to the fringes or systematically barricaded in cinema and society at large for an unfortunately long period of time — and even though progress has been made, more could and should be done to further level the playing field (including greater involvement in story-writing and development by marginalized or proportionally underrepresented voices).
 
The general sentiment behind what he said (rather than the specifics of what he said) is pretty reasonable and well-intentioned, I think, even thought it sounds a tad divisive at face value. Obviously, actors should be able to understand and empathize with the mostly fictitious characters they play; and technically, portray any one they're asked to while believably becoming someone else. And, their sexuality is no one's business unless they themselves want to publicly share the information — that goes without saying. But if a certain character is part of a traditionally under-represented or mis-represented or caricaturized or tokenized group or sub-culture, maybe the casting directors should have the sensibility to first and foremost look for actors from specific backgrounds as...
  • They might have had limited options in the industry, statistically, and you might be giving them a big breakthrough.
  • They could bring more to the table in terms of authentic lived experience — which might make a difference.
  • The core audience might feel more connected to their work because they feel personally represented in an abstract sense.
The “gay guys should no longer be accepting straight roles” argument invokes a false sense of equivalency and mostly rings hollow because straight actors (on the whole) weren't pushed to the fringes or systematically barricaded in cinema and society at large for an unfortunately long period of time — and even though progress has been made, more could and should be done to further level the playing field (including greater involvement in story-writing and development by marginalized or proportionally underrepresented voices).
You said it better.
 
Im not really a fan of Joe Lycett. But apparently he told a joke during one of his comedy shows. And apparently, someone didnt care for it. But instead of just going home and moaning the ear off whoever they went with, or going on line and having a whinge about the state of comedy or whatever. They called the police...

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...ews/joe-lycett-joke-police-tour-b2105836.html

I thought we reformed section 5 of the public order act? Didnt we get passed criminalisation of being insulted? Didnt Rowan Atkinson make a famous speech that got lots of publicity and we got the thing reformed so that we couldn't call the police and get someone done just because our feelings got hurt? But here we are in 2022, someone tells a joke, someone else gets offended, and then the police are duty bound to investigate. Surely this is political correctness gone mad, when you can have someone visited by the police for telling a crap joke.
 
It’s definitely been harder than it should be for out gay men (and women) to get roles playing straight characters. Thankfully that’s changing. An example being Andrew Scott getting such a great role in Fleabag. A change that, ironically, the notion gay characters must be played by gay actors would actually work against.

Hollywood probably has a way to go on this. Struggling to think of any mainstream American movies where a gay (wo)man has played a straight leading character.
There was that one with harrison ford and anne something or other (think shes dating / married to ellen?). They crash land on an island. Ross from friends was in it too.
Anne Heche
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120828/?ref_=nm_knf_i1

Funnily enough i remember it because my frequently bigoted dad was whinging about them casting a lesbian. I dont think he cared so much as enjoyed being an asshole and picking fights with people
 
It's really ugly. It's also not hard to see why Native Americans find it offensive.

Hopefully whatever they come up with for the replacement turns out well. I think you'd have to be doing it deliberately to produce something worse.
 
It’s definitely been harder than it should be for out gay men (and women) to get roles playing straight characters. Thankfully that’s changing. An example being Andrew Scott getting such a great role in Fleabag. A change that, ironically, the notion gay characters must be played by gay actors would actually work against.

Hollywood probably has a way to go on this. Struggling to think of any mainstream American movies where a gay (wo)man has played a straight leading character.

Some Jodie Foster roles I guess? Though even then she was famously very guarded about her private life throughout her career, even while she was in a long term relationship with another woman, which maybe underlines the point.
 


Where do people stand on this?


Sounds like he’s a complete prick. Although begs the question why/how she was reading his WhatsApp messages? I’ve never once inadvertently seen a stranger’s whatsapp message on their phone screen.

If they had a row before the whole whatsapp thing that would explain a lot. And in that scenario she’s the prick for doxxing him on Twitter.

Basically always take one person’s version of events when two people have clashed with a pinch of salt.
 
Where do people stand on this?

Depends on if he actually took her picture or not.

If someone insults a stranger on a private message that's their business. Not something you have a right to try to ruin their life over. Stealthing photos is a bit different, since that's an invasion of privacy.

There's no actual evidence of anything though, this could just as easily be her spying on his messages and starting a fight and then carrying it online and doxing him with an embellished story.
 


Where do people stand on this?


Both people are assholes. Looking into someone's phone, which isn't meant for you, then getting pissed because he called you fat and trying to shame him are pretty shitty things as well.

Then calling someone you don't know a fat cow is also shitty. Though I'm sure there's a story behind this given that she knows his name.
 
Imagine posting a comment complaining in a thread about political correctness ruining the world after everything that has happened over the last few years.
 


Where do people stand on this?


Hard to know. If what she says is accurate then calling him out seems fair. However, seems odd that (a) she’d be able to read his phone so easily; (b) that anyone would randomly describe someone in that way without some prior interaction to cause them to do so and (c) she was able to work out who he was. Feels we’d need to hear both sides.
 
I think he’s a massive prick but does it warrant her tracking him down and trying to get him fired? I really don’t think so.
 
If it makes a difference she has leg tattoos which automatically makes her sus

(judgmental I know but it be what it be, I don't write the rules)
 
I think he’s a massive prick but does it warrant her tracking him down and trying to get him fired? I really don’t think so.
You’ll be surprised at how petty and vindictive people can be, sending emails to company managers trying to get people sacked over the most minuscule of things.
 
Hard to say. A collision of toxic masculinity and toxic social media? My main question is how this is related to the issue of political correctness?

Your main question has me befuddled too.

Yer wan’s Twitter account is interesting. She’s really going after him. Tweeting at the airline and journalists who’d recently written about his business. Going all in because someone wrote something mean about her in a message to his wife. Bit mad really.

Wonder if she has a leg to stand on legally. Not slander or defamation. You’ve no legal right to not be slagged off in a private conversation. Is it illegal to photograph someone without consent in a public place? I don’t think it is.