It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
@SaintMark, you make some points, but in other areas you miss the bigger picture. Trump is grotesque, I've been vocal about that for two years now since he announced his run, but some people in this country, delusional though they are, viewed him as a sort of answer to the WHITE government elites you have highlighted (or rather capitalized). They mix their message at times, however, since Trump's base is also led by whites who for my money either have troubling principles or very low standards for their leaders. Anyone who takes pro white supremacist messages or cues from Trump are assuredly part of the problem and they need to wake up, read a history book and learn that America has always been a melting pot since day one. On that, we agree on. But beyond Trump, what happened in this last election cycle in the US isn't just a problem of who we have to vote for, it's also about who votes. Or, more troublesome, who doesn't vote, as the turn out was depressing to see with major groups staying home. For all our rights, we don't practice them enough and don't put enough value in them. That is also what must change, and after seeing what Trump has done in just a year I hope people wake up and see what happens when they don't vote and miss out on the chance to lead the nation onto a better path.
You seem to think the media should get off scot free with the divides that've formed between communities in the country, but if you were in the states during 2014 I think you'd have a different picture. The news organizations certainly didn't help, and have really only bounced back as a counter to Trump and his "fake news" disciples since then (one think to thank Trump for, as well as more viewers). But their effect can't be diminished and the 24 hour news cycle absolutely makes people perceive crime as higher than it is, when in reality it's lower than it's been for fifty plus years. If people took their minds away from sensational headlines and looked at statistics, they'd get a clearer picture of what is really going on. Not the absence of trouble, but a steady, trend-driven decrease in that trouble that she should be proud of as a nation. That is what @RC7 and I are getting at.
Your bloated view of racism and sexism is much like that espoused by the radicals in the #MeToo and Black Lives Matter groups, who often muddle the situation by making it an exaggerated problem. Most things in our country trend positive, and we've seen record breaking landmarks for women in jobs and places of power, especially this year as Democratic women snap up government chairs in places that the party wouldn't have won just a few years ago. Movements like #MeToo would get more respect if they focused more on actual issues of harassment, and not on the jokes people make or their attempts to smear people for daring to delineate a pat on the ass from rape. They lessen the importance of the issue by making things into witch hunts, and certain feminists don't help either with their anti-male stances, overblown outrage and the way they play the victim whenever intellectually challenged. We need mature adults to make change, not childish ones.
And as I said in another post, as long as Black Lives Matter vilifies cops there will be no hope for extending olive branches, because when you continue to divide the already present divisions you will reap what you've sowed. Community policing is needed, people coming together for a common goal across both law enforcement and the populations they serve with the knowledge that neither mean harm to the other. Cops by and large are not the enemy, and any attempts to warp that fact are immoral and delusional. BLM protestors demanding we roast the "pigs" are the problem, not the solution, and they need to check themselves and start fighting for real change unhindered by their misperceptions of life.
Nobody denies the issues that face the US, or similar issues troubling other western nations, but we're seeing a world that is more accountable, open-hearted, progressive and aware than we've seen before. If there are delusions about that, the uninformed or hyperbolic need to be educated.
:))
The whole PC and social justice obsession will collapse under it's own weight eventually if it keeps going like this.
The above post by what's her face is hilarious, as she clearly doesn't even understand the cultural touchstone the original Panther comics were for African Americans. I guess that the amazing symbol for black power that the movie represents, leading a black cast in a story that celebrates black culture and their race, just isn't enough to applaud if all the warrior chicks aren't members of a lesbian cult on top of it. I can't remember if the Amazonians of Wonder Woman got the same flack by the PC crowd, but the issue is the same. These people are complaining about a movie that is already amazingly progressive and powerful for its African American based messages, just as WW was all about the power of femininity, and finding that it still isn't enough for them. And they can vote and have children!
I also love the woman's comment, "This the most annoying generation in history" (let's forget that she's too illiterate to put an "is" between "this" and "the"). Yes, on that I agree with her.
*hits head against brick wall*
The article was written by a guy btw.
Here is the original article if anyone is interested.
But it is as pointless as you would imagine:
https://io9.gizmodo.com/marvel-misses-another-easy-representation-opportunity-w-1822929417?utm_campaign=socialflow_io9_twitter&utm_source=io9_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
I took the comment as agreeing with the article that the generation of people who made the film were annoying for not including more LGBT representation instead of a reply against it. Glad to be proven wrong in this instance.
So does this mean black people shouldn't wear a suit or be allowed to have a cuppa?
In other tediously predictable news:
https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/920949/James-Bond-25-Daniel-Kaluuya-replace-Daniel-Craig-odds
He's an actor currently in the media spotlight and he's black. QED he would be perfect to play Bond.
I don't know why people keep lumping the entirety of America together with sentiments like this, as there are a LOT of us who don't own guns and have no interest in anything but seeing stricter gun laws. There's a good portion of us who realize countries now see America as a bit of a laughing stock for many different reasons.
Can't blame 'em when I live in a country that favors political donations and cold, hard cash over actual change that could save lives.
Because on the issues our nation faces right now, regarding immigration, gun control, our president and others, the vast majority of the population chart in agreement that changes need to happen. America is not this lawless republic it's built to be where the people are as relevant to the issues as the mustache twirling politicians that sold their souls to the devil to attain control. We're very vocal, very pissed and very united on many fronts, and in some ways more than ever before. Trump's worst policies haven't gone through because of our voices and the great people in power who stopped those things coming to pass, a wonderful example of free speech and checks and balances come together.
I can be very cynical and critical of the country, as I'm critical of anything I love, but I'm quite proud of it and its people and how we've handled a lot of issues. Regular everyday people are finally sick and tired and not willing to just let the same old status quo take hold anymore. The political shakeup of 2016 was detrimental and devastating, but we've responded in kind with our own voices and aggressive responses to things we won't let America stand for; bigotry, racism, division and hate.
Blanket statements are harsh but they're hard to avoid, and I think we're all guilty of making them at some point aren't we. To use this thread as an example, isn't painting everyone who's used the #metoo hashtag as petty SJW's a bit of a blanket statement? Dunno about now but it started off as a movement for women to openly share their own stories of being objectified/discriminated/abused/whatever.
There's been polling done and there is a wave of people in favor of more gun control (66% in favor of stricter control to the minority of 31%). That doesn't mean more guns being taken away, or the second amendment being burned up or any other dramatic conspiracies we have to hear all the time that muddles the issue. What people from both sides of the political divide are willing to compromise on are more background checks and a way for those with mental illnesses to avoid getting a hold of a gun while they're in a crisis. Legislation is currently being floated that would allow for a distraught and troubled person's guns to be taken away while they get treatment, with the weapons able to be returned when the person is deemed healthy and stable. There are many solutions that are widely supported that don't water down to guns being taken away or anything like that. But I think many can agree that civilians having military weapons is ridiculous and isn't needed, and with more and more shootings of this kind the partisan wars have slipped away to find people in agreement on a lot of the issues ahead of us.
I think it's fairly ignorant to say that "if you own a gun you're part of the problem." I'm not a fan of guns at all, and I wouldn't even say that, as you're making it out that anyone anywhere with a concealed permit and handgun is somehow making it more possible for shootings to continue or for the culture to poison. We live in a world where people feel the need to be armed to defend themselves, and that's everything to do with a rise in domestic and foreign terrorism and other factors. But there's a big difference between a lawful and considerate American following the rules and getting a gun for protection and someone who gets a gun while dodging background checks and red flags and uses said guns to kill other kids in a school. One is following the law, the other exploiting it. Let's not allow this debate to be like the one over harassment, where we fail to delineate the obvious difference between a pat on the arse and full on rape.
The disagreement you seem to perceive over this part of the gun issue seems to be down to what we call lobbying and special interests in the states that manipulate the ability of laws to be passed favoring the public majority. The citizens of America have wanted more restrictions for a while, as the murder of kids isn't exactly a partisan issue or something anyone wants, but the issue is with the representation at the top of our government. Obama tried to get better restrictions in place, but the NRA backed Republicans made sure that the NRA's bottom line wasn't effected by more restrictions and the Democratic proposal was shot down. And then Trump comes along and gets rid of an Obama era order that lessened the ability of mentally ill people to get guns, then has the f*cking temerity to complain about how the shooting in Florida was a mental health issue and not a gun one (he also got millions upon millions from the NRA during his 2016 campaign, coincidentally enough). Trump helped to create this unsettled gun climate, and the Republicans and Democrats owned by the NRA have only prolonged it before him. When the people of the US want stricter gun control far over the majority, it is on the lawmakers to make policies to support that majority, instead of constantly bowing to their donors. Hardly a 50/50 issue, no? I don't think generalizations should ever be welcomed or excused. If one doesn't have authority on an issue, they shouldn't speak on it. I wouldn't dare to speak on the culture of Britain post-BREXIT, for example, because I'm not there and don't have an inkling of the feeling the nation's people have no matter how much I read on it. I'd instantly be speaking from an ignorant and uninformed position with little observational data to work from.
I can understand how hard it would be for an island of people to wrap their heads around the unique state by state lawmaking of the US, but part of the reason there is a gun culture in my country and a protection of that culture founded in our second amendment is precisely because of your ancestors who compelled us to revolt against oppression. Guns were a means of rebellion and a vital tool of protection for preserving the nation we'd forged out of a war we had to fight to achieve freedom, and that tradition has continued on. So the islanders may not get why America is at it is, but they were as responsible for its birth as anything.
I don't agree with how the second amendment is held over our heads and how everything about it must never be questioned, but it is what it is. Who is generalizing here, @thelivingroyale (I know you're implying me, here)? I take great lengths to avoid anyone's annoying presumptions of generalizations in my posts and always take the time to give credit to those of the "PC culture" that are doing good work to meet that standard. But I call these good people "activists" instead, as those of the PC culture who would rather complain about meaningless bullshit on Twitter and torch peoples' lives for a joke they made should never be conflated with the true change makers who are forging a global charge for change every day to demand more representation for women, African Americans and other minorities in addition to seizing more progressive and compassionate access to rights for all.
If I were to rope these activists in with those of the PC crowd who complain about cereal boxes or how a blockbuster film isn't gay friendly enough, I would be insulting their selfless and inspirational actions. In comparison to these pillars of humanity, those who subscribe to the outrage, childishness and ignorance represented by some of the most vocal in the PC crowd are quite worthless and in fact impede their own misguided missions because they never focus on what's more pressing and important.
I think I can be in support of those leading #MeToo the right way by attacking real abusers and not those who are treating Aziz Ansari like another Weinstein, surely? Surely we can agree that intellectual barrenness is intellectual barrenness and certain types of activism are less viable or moral than others? Surely? Because you can't make a blanket statement when you are paying attention to both sides of a debate and criticizing them on their own merits using logic, common sense and directness. Then you're just thinking critically.
I'll just finish by saying this: much like I don't think I should have to put "in my opinion" after every subjective point I make on this forum, I certainly hope that we are intellectually honest enough to realize when someone is speaking about types of people from a group instead of speaking for all of them. It's only when fudged or unreliable facts and figures are imposed by a person in an argument that a true retort can be mounted against their generalizations, where you can clearly see that they are working on presumption and not concrete data to make their conclusions. Like you presuming Americans were 50/50 on the gun control debate when, in reality, those in favor of stricter controls doubled those not in favor of it. When one spots a generalization, one can then strike it down.
I can understand why you're annoyed but at the end of the day, you wouldn't have us outsiders giving our opinions if there wasn't a new mass shooting for people to dish out their "thoughts and prayers" making the news every few months. If there's a tragedy like this being publically reported people are going to comment on it.
With the #metoo thing, all I was saying is that in some of your posts here you've used that as a blanket term for overly PC/SJW types (e.g. the ones giving Matt Damon shit). When as far as I remember it started off as a way for women to share their experiences about genuine harassment didn't it? Sorry if I've misread it but that wasn't really what I was on about, I don't want to get into all that now and I don't even have an issue with it. Was just trying to say that we're all guilty of generalisations and blanket terms aren't we. To use a better example, you made my mention of my ancestors being involved in the American revolution because of me being British, but I'm in fact of Jamaican and Nigerian descent, so isn't that using Britishness as a blanket term in a way? Don't know if that works but my point is that we all make generalisations about people and places we're not familiar with, and I don't think it's a huge deal. To someone who's never been there, America is just America, and it's easier to say "I don't understand why Americans own guns" than "I don't understand why x% of the population of the state of wherever are gunowners". I wouldn't take it so harshly is all I'm saying. I don't think anyone genuinely sees all of you lot as crazed assault rifle waving rednecks.
Given there are often no outward signs someone is totally mental until they, say, shoot up a classroom full of kids how is this going to work exactly?
Does anyone have any statistics to hand of how many people are saved from certain death each year due to being able to protect themselves? I'd be interested to see the comparison.
I should've guessed the English were to blame. Presumably said ancestors were also all white, heterosexual and male too?
" Crazy Americans "
Not all obviously ... although this won't matter as . If my other posts are to be the example.
Only the Crazy Americans part will be quoted.
;-)
On to more serious matters. No chicken at
KFC how will the world survive !
They will go back to using rat,just like the old days ;)
Classic stuff.
It intrigues me how you are supposed to refer to Mohammed in any sort of media since writing his name or having pictures of him results in followers of the religion of peace going mental and torching stuff? Can you mime his name or is that offensive and they would cut off your hands? Semaphore or would they burn your flags in the town square?
There seems to be far more outrage poured against these 'professional outrage artists' than we seem to get from the said artists.
Percentage wise it feels like about 95% of everybody in the world is hacked off with these prissy whingers and screeching feminists, so why do these awful people have a voice at all?
Is it the media who whip the frenzy up? I suspect so, as the broadsheet newspapers use twitter to whip anti-anything hysteria. If you follow The independent on twitter they serve up a daily dose of rabble rousing with their taunting headlines.
I read something recently where it was suggested teenagers today had it harder than any generation before.
So I asked, 100 years ago the majority of teenagers, assuming they survived the war and the Spanish Flue epidemic, lived in poverty, worked 16 hours a day in dangerous factories or down the mines with no health and safety and no union representation, and barely earned enough to eat.
And if they were gay they went to prison, and if they had babies out of wedlock they were put in mental asylums (and lost the said baby).
But of course they were far better off than the offended generation of the 21st century.
Not to mention an infinity of porn on tap.
In my day you had to settle for a rain sodden copy of Razzle foraged in a layby or run the gauntlet of buying a mag in the newsagents and hoping someone who knew your mum didn't come in as you were halfway through the transaction.
They really don't know they're born these days.
Although to be fair their music is shite and they only get one new Bond film every 4 years so I guess it's not all that.
My bets mate had a big brother (I was never thus blessed), so he could always provide a steady stream of Razzles at school for the rest of us.
Safe to say he was very popular and eventually became captain of the football team. I can only surmise he supplied the Games Teacher with said publications as well.
Every school always had one kid who had access to a supply of porn who would rent it out.
Was always more of a Mayfair man myself though. The quality of Razzle birds was a bit low rent.
That said in those days you took whatever you could get.
I think this as well, but I don't know if that's just because of my social circle (30s, no kids, wife and mates all around my age and the younger guys at my work are just normal lads and pretty much the opposite of the PC/SJW types). Maybe there are loads of snowflakes about but I just haven't really come across them outside of a couple on the internet.