This guy just keeps getting more and more wonderful ❤️
Pascal has been a vocal ally of the transgender community, frequently using his platform to advocate for trans rights. At the UK premiere of “Thunderbolts,” he wore a shirt reading “Protect the Dolls,” a term of endearment for transgenderism.
I wonder if the author of the article realizes “transgenderism” is a right-wing, anti-trans term?
EDIT: ah, it looks like the author of that blog is probably anti-trans and holds other right-wing views: https://old.reddit.com/r/blankies/comments/rcczql/can_someone_give_me_context_for_the_film_blog/
Considering dolls is a term applied only to trans women, he should have just said “a term of endearment for trans women”. The only reason he didn’t is because he’s anti-trans, and maybe he doesn’t even understand that “dolls” is a term specific to trans women, or that trans men even exist, a lot of anti-trans bigots are obsessed with trans women and think the only trans people are trans women; there are estimated to be equal numbers of trans men as trans women, they just don’t get the same attention.
The bathroom debate shows this mindset, anti-trans activist want trans women to use men’s restrooms, but they aren’t thinking about the fact that those same laws and policies force trans men into women’s restrooms, leading to this kind of situation:
So the anti-trans movement claims they are keeping men out of women’s restrooms, while doing exactly the opposite.
I think the anti-trans movement wants to claim that the entire idea of trans people is ideologically driven, but they have it in reverse - the gender binary and anti-trans movement is ideologically driven, while the position that trans people exists and should have gender-affirming care is based on actual empirical evidence. The science shows reality is much more complicated than the gender binary, and that being trans is biologically determined, genetically inherited, and part of natural human variation throughout our history as a species.
So it seems acknowledging the reality and gender of trans people is not so much ideologically driven as much as it is more aligned with reality than the status quo of assigning gender according to a model of binary sex based an a quick inspection of genitals at birth, which we know is ideologically driven. The only reason to reject the undisputed science is for religious and political reasons, there is no actual debate or ambiguity about the science. Every single major medical and scientific association endorses gender affirming care for minors and adults, there is a firm consensus on this. These organizations are typically conservative, not “woke”, and they only support those treatments because they are the only known effective treatments of gender dysphoria.
The anti-trans movement has more in common with young earth creationism, the anti-vaxx movement, and other anti-science movements, which are often politically motivated and intersect with conservative forms of Christianity. These are truly ideologically based movements, and they support views of reality based not on what is empirically demonstrated but rather based on a dogmatic interpretation of religious texts.
For example, Matt Walsh’s anti-trans film What is a Woman was compared to antivax films like VAXXED or the anti-evolution film Expelled!.
there are estimated to be equal numbers of trans men as trans women, they just don’t get the same attention.
And this is a stunning example of the power of male privilege.
anti-trans activist want trans women to use men’s restrooms, but they aren’t thinking about the fact that those same laws and policies force trans men women’s restrooms, leading to this kind of situation
Oh, that’s the point.
See, it’s about men protecting women from bad things. Not about women feeling uncomfortable.
It’s the same as the justification for Christian rejection of empathy (as opposed to more reserved compassion): the undertone is “women are more vulnerable to ‘falling for’ the empathee’s sin.”
Womens’ perspectives may be where the thoughts stop, but that is no accident.
This pedro pascal guy seems like kind of a good dude man
I mean… all her bullshit aside anyway; It’s too soon for a Harry Potter remake.
I still can’t wrap my head around who this is meant to be for. Fans that are old enough to have grown up with the original series are never going to like this and fans that are younger will still have seen the old series. It’s not like it’s so old it’s unwatchable.
I don’t understand how anybody in an executive position thought this was a good idea, especially because there is loads of stuff you could make a show about in the wizarding world universe (cough marauders cough).
It’s meant for the people hoping to make money off of it. Just like the LOTR series.
Well, there’s the books.
Not everything needs to be turned into a video format.
Is it?
I can’t say I have ever liked the films, so maybe they will produce something better.
I would say yes.
The amount of media coverage and fandom the series got pretty much immortalized the actors within their roles. Animated stuff, fine. But live-action, not for the next quarter-century, at least.
Aside from that. We need more new stories, ideas, and tales; not just rebooted/regurgitated slop, made just to bleed a successful franchise dry.
I agree with your last point, but is seems to me that people are enchanted with this setting and would really like to revisit Hogwarts. So I would say I disagree with you on that it is not soon enough.
90s kids will hate to hear this but it’s actually been 38 years since the first movie debuted. Wild huh
Joanne’s really milking this cash cow for all it’s worth, and then some. Guess that’s your only option when you’re a one-hit wonder, though. Must not have stumbled across any new content she’s interested in plagiarizing.
You say that like anyone else wouldn’t. If life gives you a golden cow, milk the shit out of it. Lol
Let’s focus on her being a terrible person instead of making up nonsense reasons to further dislike her. There’s no need.
No, I think most people wouldn’t. Most people would be happy with literally becoming a fucking billionaire, and would be satisfied at that point.
I don’t know any billionaires myself, but judging from what I read and see online that is not what people do when they literally become a billionaire.
I mean, you could tell the point in book 4 where they said “Fuck it, bring in the ghost writers”.
I doubt she’s probably written anything in 30 years that wasn’t drunkenly pounded out on Twitter
CouLd you point me to what original she plagiarized? I need some light reading material and this sounds promising.
Here is a pretty decent list: https://elftor.medium.com/harry-potter-and-the-possible-plagiarism-of-one-j-rowling-c19f1b05595c
I’m not a fan of Harry Potter, and don’t like Rowling, but I read that whole damn essay and was not at all convinced. Half the examples could be said to be plagiarising each other by the standard they’re using. They say at the start the coincidences are too strong to be attributed to tropes, but I really disagree with that. Almost everything they list are common tropes, many even outside magical wizard settings. Mean adoptive family? Did she also plagiarise Cinderella?
Sure, her books generally aren’t original themes, but to say they’re so similar that they are direct plagiarism is a real stretch in my opinion. Especially when you have to list like 30 books that have one or two things in common each, and mostly in a general sense.
I think they’re referring to A Wizard of Earthsea? It’s been on my reading list for a few years now, but I still haven’t gotten around to it.
And especially “the worst witch” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Worst_Witch?wprov=sfla1
She’s a terrible person, but saying she’s a one-hit wonder is unfair. Here’s a list of famous and acclaimed authors who only wrote one novel. And she wrote several, even if all in the same series. Criticize for for her true faults: being a hateful hag that makes the world a worse place and isn’t worth the O2 she consumes.
HBO previously did a adaption of The Casually Vacancy. I never watched it but I read the book which is terrible.
Oh, what did you find terrible about the book? I thought it was sad but written with a lot of empathy. I liked the gray characters. It was even worse for me to realize what JKR was like after reading this book that seemed so right to me. But maybe I overlooked something.
i’ve been a harry potter fan since 2000. i went to multiple leakycons and pottercast tapings. i posted on leaky. i went to midnight shows. i discovered starkid bc of it. i used to pay international shippings for the uk books. hp saved my life before i was out of the closet.
i would have been so excited for this if it happened 15 years ago. now? i just don’t care. i want it to go away. i’m much more interested in the twilight anniversary. hp is just go away heat now.
also anyone who is looking for an alternative; chris colfer’s land of stories series is AMAZING.
An even better anniversary thats happening rn is the 20th anniversary of Revenge Of The Sith. Hard to believe that episode 3 is 20 years old.
i’m much more interested in the twilight anniversary.
Since we got Life and Death on the 10th anniversary I hope we get Edythe’s Midnight Sun this year. We won’t but it would be nice.
Edit: Better yet give us the sapphic vampires we deserve with a retelling of Twilight with Edythe and Bella. Do it, Steph, you coward.
