Categories
alt-lite alt-right evil SJWs misandry MRA twitter

Just William Shatner yelling about “misandry” on Twitter

William Shatner is shocked by some of the things you ladies say and do

By David Futrelle

It’s not exactly news that former space show actor William Shatner can be something of a dick. And in the year of our dark lord 2017 all dicks end up on Twitter, so it really shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that Shatner has been acting like a dick on Twitter.

But I have to say I was a little bit taken aback to see Capt. Kirk adopting not only some of the opinions but the lingo of the terrible people who congregate in or around the Alt Right. In a series of recent tweets, Shatner has railed against so-called SJWs and castigated his opponents as “snowflakes,” a term that seems to have almost replaced what seems to have been his previous favorite patronizing putdown, “sunshine.”

He’s also picked up one of the favorite terms of the Men’s Rights movement: “misandry.” He started using it earlier this year, slipping it into his disquisitions on the evils of political correctness and feminism and whatnot.

Needless to say, his thoughts on the subject are not particularly enlightening, consisting mostly of assertions that “misandry exists.”

He is also keen for his Twitter followers to know that, yes, he in fact sometimes uses the word.

Tweets reiterating these two points pretty much make up the entirety of his commentary on the evils of misandry.

I look forward to his further contributions to misandry theory.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

158 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JS
JS
3 years ago

Yep, “Man learning to fight quickly in a few minute training montage” is “heroic archetype”. Woman doing the same, but without as much montage? “couldn’t have happened that way”

Extremely Unlikely Spoilers (aka totally guesswork): Kylo and Rey are step-siblings of the Force. Kylo and Rey were both at the Jedi Temple, but Rey forgot due to the traumatic death of the others. Or: JJ Abrams is an ass, and they are completely un-related aside from “can use the Force”

Duct Tape: Like the Force, has a dark side, a light side, and holds the universe together.

Gussie Jives
Gussie Jives
3 years ago

So my feeling was they’re hinting that Rey is incredibly instinctively Force attuned. So she’s going to end up being a super-powerful Jedi. Hence the Force Awakening.

Exactly, that was the sense that I had as well. Beyond the Skywalkers, possibly even beyond Yoda in terms of Force sensitivity, the full potential of the Light side in a single person. And Ren is her Dark side counterpart, clearly proficient and somewhat trained, but emotionally unstable and torn in his devotion, whereas Rey is emotionally grounded and self-assured (with some natural trepidation) but hasn’t been trained, so her use of the Force is just as unpredictable as Ren’s for the time being. It’s possible their proximity on Starkiller is what allowed Rey to tap into her abilities without the training that an ordinary Jedi would have received, so I’m willing to give the film a pass on that one.

I’m sure The Last Jedi is going to clear up some of these questions, but that seemed to be what the film was trying to get across in terms of Rey’s and Ren’s roles in the unfolding events.

Parse The Potatoes
Parse The Potatoes
3 years ago

I’m also on Team Sisko.
Kirk comes across as your generic Action Captain™. Entertaining, but not engrossing.
Janeway, well, Kate Mulgrew did the best she could with the scripts she was given. Unfortunately, those were the scripts for Voyager, and I don’t think anybody could have salvaged those.
Picard is great, and honestly has influenced me on the type of person I want to be – act with honor, stand up for others, but don’t let your honor get in the way of your compassion. It also helps that Patrick Stewart could deliver the scripts fed to him with such amazing force – I could picture Mulgrew delivering the speech about truth, or about four lights, but Shatner? Never!
But Sisko – he’s my favorite, and the most relatable captain to me. He’s not the paragon of virtue that Picard is, but he tries his best. He’s complex, as Latsot has said. He has to live with his consequence of his choices – as compared to the other series, where they just fly off to the next planet.

dlouwe
dlouwe
3 years ago

Yep, “Man learning to fight quickly in a few minute training montage” is “heroic archetype”. Woman doing the same, but without as much montage? “couldn’t have happened that way”

Not to mention, we’re talking about fictional space magic. Space magic that has been established to “work in mysterious ways.” As if there aren’t a million ways that this sort of thing could be written in as a plot point that expands on the existing lore?

“Luke couldn’t do it!” isn’t a very convincing argument (for obvious reasons I hope), and it borders on hypocritical when accompanied by criticisms of “It was too much like Ep IV!”

Jesalin
Jesalin
3 years ago

@Scildfreja & WWTH

Nailed. It.

On a side note: I could barely stand Sisko. I really liked Garak though he was a very well played and complex character, quite funny at times too.

Scildfreja Unnyðnes
Scildfreja Unnyðnes
3 years ago

I had some serious shower thoughts on Janeway and why people don’t like her. Im’a share! First, though, @latsot, I’m not pickin’ on you! Lots of people think her voice is annoying and she’s a bad character. I’d just like to give you something to think about I guess. Whenever someone says “x is annoying” or “I just don’t like x”, it can be a sign that there are deeper things creeping underneath. I don’t know whether that’s true in your case, but Im’a talk about the generic phenomenon. So don’t take it as an attack on you, it isn’t!

Here’s how it goes down. New Star Trek series about a grand space adventure! Awesome! People are eager to watch, and the first thing they see/hear is – space captain woman with an annoying voice. They think “ugh, her voice is annoying.” This sensitizes the brain to be more aware of other things that could-be-construed-as-bad about the character (and, since she’s such a central character, the whole show). This makes it easier to interpret things about the character as bad, inferior, improper, etc. A character that didn’t have that “annoying” trait wouldn’t sensitize the viewer towards interpreting that character as annoying-in-general. So, Janeways’ character development is shallow and inconsistent, the show has boring characters, the scripts are terrible, they don’t do things the way they should be done.

An important point to note is that none of these factors are anything but personal observations. Her voice isn’t actually annoying, it’s just a voice. The character development may or may not be shallow depending on your interpretation. The plot may or may not be well constructed. All of these problems can be and are overlooked in other shows for a huge number of reasons, but they aren’t for Voyager. Why?

Slide backwards. Her voice is annoying. Why is it annoying? There’s nothing annoying about a voice – there’s no biological bad-note. (errata: there might be, but there’s no evidence for that sort of thing. Null hypothesis is that there’s no biological basis for emotional interpretation of voice.)

When we are born, we see faces and hear voices. These patterns develop into the foundation of our face-and-voice-recognition systems. They’re the foundation of how we think and behave socially, because they help us identify our kin group. (Another shakeup happens during puberty, it’s unknown what happens to this system during that period. My guess is that you get significant changes then too, helping the person adapt to an adult societal role.) People who fit that mold quickly will be accepted as “kin” and help activate the complex social interaction structures to help us gauge our position to them. People who don’t fit that mold take extra time to match (on the order of hundreds of milliseconds I believe). This delay creates stress and can stimulate the fight-or-flight systems. It’s believed to be a biological source of racism.

We live in a patriarchal society. Our role model women that form our recognition systems often speak in certain ways – softer, higher pitched, more deferential, with more linguistic softeners. This ‘bakes in’ a concept of “woman” that fits that role, and when we meet a woman that doesn’t fit that role, we balk. The delay in recognition increases production of stress hormones (those hormones being the primary neurotransmitter in memory recall). A knock-on effect (or potentially designed in) is that it stimulates anxiety and threat detection. We feel annoyed.

Slide forwards again. We see Janeway in the Voyager pilot. Her voice doesn’t fit our person-categorization system very well. Stress hormones spike. We’re annoyed. Those hormones activate our threat evaluation system. This makes us evaluate things more negatively than we otherwise would. We dislike the show. Our forebrain constructs reasons for why we dislike the show, so as to create a compelling narrative that casts us as being good, reasonable, capable people, because that’s what forebrains do. The show plot is contrived, Janeway’s inconsistent and shallow, none of the characters are likeable. We turn off the TV.

It’s not to say that this is a bad evaluation of a TV show! I could do the same thing from the perspective of someone who really likes Voyager. I could slice it apart and talk about how the same systems cover over the poorly-made parts of the show, and how it’s all an exercise in the forebrain masking over blatant self-congratulation.

I don’t want to change anyones’ opinions on the show or the characters with this. I’d just like to show that those opinions one holds aren’t really statements about the show – they’re statements about one’s brain and what they value. Also, I’m very likely completely wrong, and you shouldn’t trust a thing I say!

Your rationalism homework for today is to find a piece of media that you dislike, and discover the root of why you dislike it. Bonus marks if you can subvert that dislike and bring yourself to the point of liking it after that discovery.

Diego Duarte
Diego Duarte
3 years ago

Yep, “Man learning to fight quickly in a few minute training montage” is “heroic archetype”. Woman doing the same, but without as much montage? “couldn’t have happened that way”

Pretty much. Not only does luke force pull a lightsaber before Dagobah and without training, he also lightsaber blocks blasts from the training orb whilst wearing a sorts of blinfold.

Also, pretty sure people figured out the ways of the Force before the Jedi. Otherwise there wouldn’t be any.

Also it’s not like Rey did something entirely unbelievable: Kylo Ren might’ve been one of Luke’s stronger apprentices but he was injured by the blast from Chewbacca’s bowcaster. Also, he was emotionally unstable at the time (well, more than throughout the movie) and wasn’t going in for the kill. So it makes sense that rookie Rey was able to best him without training (and then again not exactly because the way she handled that staff you could infer she had been trained in combat).

Kylo Ren isn’t exactly Darth Vader, he’s not that competent.

JS
JS
3 years ago

There’s all sorts of ways to use space magic and say, “Yeah, Rey could have done it”

Simplest is probably the way that Ben/Luke’s lightsaber has been through so much, it got some sort of Force imprinted on it. Rey had this very strong vision when she just touched it. Magic sword is … wait for it … magic! Obi-wan wasn’t just sticking around Luke, he was in the saber. It’s possible that Yoda and Anakin’s spirit also did something like that, either in their own sabers, or Luke’s.

It’s not just Finn’s “natural skill” allowing him to use it. It’s the saber itself helping out.

First Order’s troopers were also not clones, without the extra training during the growth process. Some even managed to work around the compulsion to follow orders. We have one example, and since they have a method of dealing with it, we know there are others.

Of course, the real answer to “why are the alt-right so against Star Wars” is “in the end, the fascists will lose”. The rest of their complaints are just rationalizing stuff.

History Nerd
History Nerd
3 years ago

A number of people (who are not really part of the autism rights or disability rights community) pointed out that Autism Speaks doesn’t base any of its work on actual scientific research. It funds attempts to develop a pre-natal test for autism spectrum disorders, and it was one of the last organizations to back out of research into the bogus MMR vaccine link. AS has more or less grouped together people who happen to have PhD’s who are willing to make incendiary comments about people on the autism spectrum.

Robert Walker-Smith
Robert Walker-Smith
3 years ago

The only ST series that I just couldn’t get into was Enterprise.

One of my favorite parts of TNG was Dr. Pulaski. For some reason, the character just appealed to me, and I was genuinely disappointed when Crusher returned. There was a scene in which Worf was going to have some Klingon delicacy (a beverage, IIRC) that was unhealthy for Klingons and toxic to humans. Pulaski dosed herself with the antidote so he wouldn’t be drinking alone. When she mispronounced Data’s name, and he corrected her, she was visibly intrigued that he could have an algorithm for bruised feelings.
“Data, data, what’s the difference?”
“One is my name, the other is not.”

I also liked the Doctor’s arc on Voyager, as he gradually grew a personality instead of remaining a holocartoon. His prickliness against Janeway’s brusqueness was always entertaining. I wept no tears when Neelix went away.

latsot
latsot
3 years ago

@Scildfreja Unnyðnes

That is one amazing over-analysis.

I find Mulgrew’s voice annoying. I find other people’s voices annoying sometimes, too. I find the character and the series to be poorly written. I find other characters and series to be poorly written, sometimes too.

Her voice was by no means a deal breaker for me and my mention of it was *clearly* a joke.

The reason I don’t like Voyager or the Janeway character is for the reasons I have stated, I won’t go over it again.

There’s just the slightest tiny little chance that’s all there is to it.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
3 years ago

@Scildfreya:

Your rationalism homework for today is to find a piece of media that you dislike, and discover the root of why you dislike it.

“Reality” TV. It’s not hard to see what’s not to like. So much of it seems to be designed to humiliate the non-winners. The contestants themselves are abasing themselves for a shot at some money, attention, or fame. The whole genre strikes me as exploitative.

Adding to that are annoying production values: overly loud and brassy music that makes a TV airing one of these things dominate the attention of anyone within a four mile radius; excessive phony drama — a contestant has a hangnail or misses a bus and the music is more appropriate to an action movie where the hero has been shot, or the ground crumbled and he’s now dangling by one hand over a precipice. Toward the exciting finale, they’re likely to play a track more suited to Bruce Willis disarming a ticking nuke rather than two people about to find out which one of them wins a few hundred bucks.

Oh, and then there’s the way the genre is taking over the entire TV schedule like kudzu, elbowing aside quality shows with actually interesting content, because it’s much cheaper to produce and for some silly reason doesn’t get near-zero ratings. It’s not even just that the percentage of non-reality TV is going down; it’s that individual reality shows behave like 800-lb gorillas, moving around and randomly changing size and elbowing aside everything else whenever they do. Everything I actually ever like to watch gets pre-empted 3 to 4 times as much as 20 years ago, and nearly all of the excess is attributable to one reality show or another. Multiple shows I’ve liked (Fringe, Grimm, others) appear to have been killed by reality shows, because their final seasons showed a pattern where year after year the show would be pulled off the air in mid-season for several whole weeks at a time while some reality show suddenly wanted to air 2-hour instead of 1-hour episodes, and of course these shows returned to lower ratings as people forgot about them or assumed they’d been cancelled. And because they had story-arcs the ratings didn’t tend to recover. And eventually they got axed due to the declining ratings. In Fringe’s case I specifically remember that the guilty reality show was one of the cooking-themed ones. It would usurp Fringe’s time slot for several weeks every single year.

Some of these things might not be the reality shows’ faults, in a certain sense. For example, if they know two different shows are going to need to use the same time slot at two different points in a season, why don’t the scheduling people put all of show A before all of show B? Sure neither show can take advantage of all three sweeps periods then, but if that’s a problem, then they should redesign that as well. Most shows would work better IMO if they were divided into two or three “seasonlets” that aired contiguously — no reruns or preemptions — for say 8-10 weeks and had self-contained story arcs. Some recent shows have even been trending in that direction — Gotham and OUaT spring to mine — but they won’t go all the way to consolidating the new-episode-weeks into just a couple of contiguous blocks. Gotham was outrageously scheduled last season, having a long break over the holidays, then coming back for 3 episodes and disappearing again, this time for no good reason, for nearly THREE MONTHS before the rest of the back half aired in a big rush right before summer rerun season. The no-good reason? Some reality show wanted its time slot temporarily, of course.

But it’s not the broadcast network reality shows that are the worst, oh no. I reserve my greatest ire for the way the “ice road truckers” style shows have all but completely erased educational television from existence. No more history, geography, or science documentaries. No, now the cable channels nominally devoted to these topics are wall to wall pink-slime schedule filler, and most of that is, on top of that …

Blatant right-wing propaganda.

The cop/border security shows are the worst, of course. Hour after hour (in long marathons) of poor, brown, female, and foreign traveller people portrayed as barbarian hordes at the gate (or, in the cop case, already inside the gate) always trying to get away with something (usually something victimless, of course). The whole subgenre is a paean to authoritarianism: The rules are the rules, whosoever tries to circumvent them deserves whatever they’ve got coming, nevermind whether there is actually a legitimate public purpose served by the rules, and, of course, those insert-oppressed-group-here, always trying to get away with something. The impression these shows create is that only a thin blue line of valiant uniformed thugs (mostly white and nearly all male, natch) stands between civilization and anarchy, and but for them it would be some sort of Mad Max dystopia in literally seconds.

And of course, the Fox-watching uncle that inevitably exists in my family is also a giant fan of these propaganda shows.

Bonus marks if you can subvert that dislike and bring yourself to the point of liking it after that discovery.

I don’t think that’s going to be happening, in my case. The reasons for my dislike being what they are:

1. Many of these shows are exploitative.
2. Many of these shows are blatant propaganda for politics I don’t, and never will, agree with.
3. The producers of these shows are given special-snowflake privileges to bully those of other, nicer shows, resulting in pre-emptions that harm shows I find more desirable to watch and, worse, inducing the complete destruction of all educational television.

In case 1, to be entertained by the shows at issue I’d have to enjoy a vicarious thrill of superiority at seeing other people humiliated and abasing themselves in various ways, in a situation where this would constitute punching down rather than punching up.

In case 2, I’d have to combine the above with being willing to soak my brain in what’s basically Nazi propaganda. I’d sooner drink poison. At least the latter wouldn’t make me a danger to others on the way to killing me.

And in case 3 I’d have to no longer prefer genuine educational shows and decent storytelling to overgrown game shows that, all too often, are rigged or otherwise manipulated in dishonest ways, in addition to having the problems outlined above.

Thanks, but no thanks. 🙂

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
3 years ago

@History Nerd:

AS has more or less grouped together people who happen to have PhD’s who are willing to make incendiary comments about people on the autism spectrum.

Sounds like there’s a truth-in-advertising case to be made for forcing it to rename itself from “Autism Speaks” to “Neurotypicals Neurotypicalsplain”.

@Robert Walker-Smith:

The only ST series that I just couldn’t get into was Enterprise.

I’m glad to hear I’m not the only one. Somehow the characters never gelled for me as especially distinctive from one another, the way they did on the others — the Vulcan woman and alien doctor excepted, for obvious reasons. But the various human male characters seemed too alike to one another.

Chalk me up, by the way, as another Janeway fan. Her no-nonsense way of dealing with threatening bullies and other problems was refreshing. But I also liked Sisko. And Picard. And yes, even Kirk, who did get at least a few decent speeches in. “We can admit that we’re killers, but we’re not going to kill today” springs to mind, and of course his speech about the words “We, the People” in the alternate-world-where-the-US-and-SU-blew-it-up episode. I think he also had a nice antiracist speech in the episode “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield”, didn’t he?

The difference in command style had a lot to do with circumstances. Kirk (and Janeway) operated much more remotely from the Federation border, much of the time, than Picard did, hence the “gunboat diplomacy” and “cowboy” tendencies. These are strategies adaptive when beyond the frontier in mostly ungoverned space. Picard, operating mostly well inside the Federation, had the luxury and the obligation of being much more diplomatic. Sisko, perched right on the border between these two realms, and also the only one of the four to become embroiled in a major large-scale shooting war, ended up having to do both at times, resulting in the greater ambiguity in his character. I find they all make sense in light of their different surroundings and the different resources available to them.

JS
JS
3 years ago

Grand Jury impaneled by Mueller. Clearly he thinks something real is going on.

Also, f*** WSJ’s damn pay wall.

Jesalin
Jesalin
3 years ago

@Robert Walker-Smith

Yes, yes, and yes.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
3 years ago

@Surplus
Then first 2 seasons of Hell’s Kitchen were fun (it got so much worse after the producers seemed to realize Ramsay yelling at genuinely incompetent cooks was more crowd pleasing than watching people with potential and skill succeed despite the yelling). Sorry it fucked over your show tho. The seasonlet model is definitely a better one for all shows, but, yeah, sweeps… 🙁

Diego Duarte
Diego Duarte
3 years ago

@Surplus

I didn’t know what was going on behind TV cameras and the decisions to pull out otherwise successful TV shows, but now that you mention it that makes so much sense.

At this point Idiocracy seems more and more like a documentary instead of a satire.

JS
JS
3 years ago

Sarah Sanders and Trump find 10 year old who wants to mow WH lawn.

Next Week: An 11-year-old wants to hug Trump in the Oval Office.

Also… Grand Jury impaneled… I know I keep repeating myself, but this should lead to some sort of indictment for somebody. I’m quite sure Mueller can work out probable vote counts better than Corbyn (my “Senator” *pfbbbt*), plus he only needs a majority to indict.

Banananana dakry: Fat, Short-Haired, and Deranged
Banananana dakry: Fat, Short-Haired, and Deranged
3 years ago

I hate reality shows for all the reasons enlisted above. Not to mention having a role in killing MTV as anything related to videos and instead filling it to the brim with this shit.

I miss ‘Unplugged’ and ‘Headbanger’s Ball’, dammit.

Laserqueen
Laserqueen
3 years ago

People who fit that mold quickly will be accepted as “kin” and help activate the complex social interaction structures to help us gauge our position to them. People who don’t fit that mold take extra time to match (on the order of hundreds of milliseconds I believe). This delay creates stress and can stimulate the fight-or-flight systems. It’s believed to be a biological source of racism.”

@Scildfreja-
Thank you for that explanation! I see this hesitation frequently when people are faced with my children that don’t match. I have to confess, I do nothing to prepare them, preferring to see them work through that moment of discomfort as they process the “other” into “kin”. I think it’s good to challenge people that way. 🙂

Pie
Pie
3 years ago

Read this not so long ago, relevant to discussions of Kirk.

http://strangehorizons.com/non-fiction/columns/freshly-rememberd-kirk-drift/

(tl;dr: author suggests that the popular notion of what kirk was like doesn’t necessarily match up with what actually appeared in the tv series)

Scildfreja Unnyðnes
Scildfreja Unnyðnes
3 years ago

@lastot,

That is one amazing over-analysis.

You’re right! It is. It goes much, much deeper than one might normally. I wasn’t trying to tell you that your beliefs were wrong or bad, I was just trying to describe how they came about.

Don’t mind me, my duck! I’ll stick to my studies and leave you in peace.

http://i.imgur.com/4OS3ucF.jpg

History Nerd
History Nerd
3 years ago

Autism Speaks cherry-picks academic research that lines up with their preconceived positions, and they’ve been very aggressive about making sure their views get disproportionate attention in college and graduate school curricula for education and mid-level counseling* professionals (including recommending the Autism Speaks site and “neurotypical advocacy” sites to students writing research papers).

Legitimate scientific research-based advocacy groups have experts evaluating the research and usually don’t interfere with what graduate programs teach.

*I.e., people training to be counselors who don’t go to medical school or get PhD’s in clinical psychology.

Scildfreja Unnyðnes
Scildfreja Unnyðnes
3 years ago

@Surplus, a lovely little exploration! I don’t like reality TV at all either, for a lot of the reasons you list – the exploitative authoritarian shows, the blatant product placement on home building shows, the loud music and contrived story. Nor would I suggest that’s something you should want to change your mind on!

I will say, though, that you should practice changing your mind about things. It’s an important thing, in my opinion.

Take a smaller bite. You don’t like the unrealistic storylines. Why? Some people think they’re fun. Try to pull apart why you dislike these stories. See if there’s anything meaningful in there. If there isn’t? Try to change yourself – just a little. Try to see the other perspective, see how someone could enjoy it. See the fun in it. It’s good exercise in empathy.

Thank you for replying!

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
3 years ago

the blatant product placement on home building shows

So, part of the reason they’re so loud and brassy they often sound like an hour-long advertisement rather than a show is because they are an hour-long advertisement rather than a show? (Plus an extra bonus hour some days!)

Figures.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
3 years ago

Hold on — reality shows have “stories”?

Well, it’s not like I’ve actually sat through a whole episode of one. I’ve merely had the misfortune to have had roommates etc. at times who have done so in my presence, while I tried to tune it out to the best of my ability and do something else. Preferably something involving earphones and music/dialogue/lighting zombies on fire.

Scildfreja Unnyðnes
Scildfreja Unnyðnes
3 years ago

Oh gosh yes. I’m pretty sure the reason that the reality shows are so powerful on TV is because they’re just viral marketing campaigns. Cheap to produce and bring in huge piles of money from the companies sponsoring them. People living in Alaska? Paid for by Alaskan tourism companies and gun manufacturers. Cooking show? Quisinart and whatever other stuff they’re using. Home reno show? Paid for by construction/reno lobbies, tool manufacturers, and the like.

That’s why they eat time slots and seem to do well regardless of how much people watch them. The ratings almost don’t matter at all, and they certainly don’t matter more than inputs for a number-of-eyeballs-per-show marketing calculation. They’re modern day infomercials.

The whole thing is designed to hook into your autonomic system and force you to watch it. Intense sounds, fast movements, human voices with signs of strain – these things engage our fight or flight responses. That suppresses critical thinking, creates anxiety, and can also create an emotional attachment if we have good feelings about the subject as well. That’s why they have gentle periods and will put in cute or sweet moments with the characters, so that you identify them as “friend”. This way when the drama club hits you, you get emotionally invested. You’re in their tribe, on their team.

A natural extension of that is to signal membership in that tribe, by undertaking activities and behaviours typical to them. Doing your own home renos, going on a hunting trip, whatever. That’s the behaviour the whole process is designed to encourage. They want the viewer to feel as if they are friends with/kin with the characters in the show, and induce stress to make you want to demonstrate that kinship. And it works.

Reality TV’s creepy, you guyse. I don’t like it :C

Nanny Oggs Bosom
Nanny Oggs Bosom
3 years ago

@ History Nerd

I haven’t had much to so with the online autistic community because I only got my initial diagnosis in late January, I’ve still got assessments to do to get it all official, but I’ve heard about Autism Speaks in all their horribleness.

kupo
kupo
3 years ago

Re: pay walls
Some of them rely on cookies, so opening the page in incognito mode (Chrome) or in Private (IE) will bypass them.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
3 years ago

@Scildfreja:

They want the viewer to feel as if they are friends with/kin with the characters in the show, and induce stress to make you want to demonstrate that kinship.

Sounds like quite the right-wing psyops, both from the fiscal right (buy more! Make corporate America great again!) and, increasingly, the social right (border security et. al.).

And using some of the techniques of dysphoric rituals to induce group identification. (You can read more about those over at cliodynamica, of course.)

Disturbing.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
3 years ago

Raises the question of why, though? I can think of three alternative explanations, off the top of my head:

1. Organic outgrowth of existing trends, assorted corporate ideas, some encouragement here and there from the security sector and the usual suspect right wing think tanks, etc., but no overarching conspiracy.

2. Right-wing conspiracy aimed at world domination.

3. First comes the brainwashing via TV, then the mesh caps, and then the Tripods. They’re heeeeeere

dslucia
dslucia
3 years ago

@Scildfreja:

http://i.imgur.com/4OS3ucF.jpg

Oh hey, it me.

Scildfreja Unnýðnes
Scildfreja Unnýðnes
3 years ago

Oh, no no, @Surplus, it isn’t some sort of psy-op nonsense. It’s marketing. The whole point of it is to make you engage in behaviours that require you to spend money.

There’s no conspiracy here, this is just what late-game Capitalism looks like. People as Consumers, being configured to consume. Communities as Markets to be exploited and managed in the same way that logging companies exploit and manage forests. Horrifying on its own, no conspiracies required.

The right wing influence shows, on the other hand – hard to tell where the funds on those comes from. They are more than likely not primarily funded by right wing think tanks. They’re just fulfilling a demand for authoritarian shows. I don’t know, though, that’s a guess.

@dslucia, oh dear. I was being sort of sassy with that picture actually, very sorry :s

Freemage
Freemage
3 years ago

Reality TV arguably has four types of story going on within it at any given time, though the production and advertising teams desperately want you to believe it’s only one type:

1: Naturally occurring events. This is the one that they like to claim is happening all the time, of course, but the truth is way more complicated. Example: One of the contestants, in the first season of Survivor, falling asleep from exhaustion and actually tipping into the bonfire he was tending, burning badly enough they had to ship him off the show.

2: Staged events. These involve the personas of the show deciding to deliberately ‘up the drama’ in order to make things more entertaining (or at least, what they believe the audience wants to see). Example: Ninety percent of any show with the words “Real Housewives” in it. Also, Jersey Shore.

3: Manipulated events. Here, rather than the personas creating the drama, it’s the producers deliberately instigating fights or creating ‘shock’ scenarios. My most memorable version of this was “Average Joe”, where the entire premise was built around getting women to be surprised that they were on a dating show featuring guys who were, frankly, not even ‘average’ in the conventional looks department–and then surprising the guys by introducing a bunch of typical The Bachelor contestants partway through to compete against them.

4: Edited storylines. Here, the producers take interviews taken at different times in the series, and splice them together with the regular footage in order to create what looks like a narrative, but was anything but prior to the editing room.

***********

Voyager, for me, had 7 major flaws:

1: Neelix
2: The Maquis rebellion angle from the set-up was really interesting. Okay, halfway through the first season, we’re done with it, until we bring it up at random and always in a very hamfisted manner that made it clear that anyone still holding onto the old grudges was dead wrong, and the Federation was always wonderful.*
3: Neelix
4: The plots. Sometimes they worked, but some were just horrible, and then there’s Threshold which I consider the nadir not only of the series, but the franchise as a whole. I’d sooner re-watch Spock’s Brain.
5: Neelix
6: Q was unnecessarily creepy in the series, and I always wanted Janeway to respond the way Sisco did.
7: Did I mention Neelix?

* Side-note: I find that a lot of shows seem to shy away from their original, intriguing and novel premise, and immediately veer into something more akin to shows that already exist. It’s… unfortunate. My go-to example was Person of Interest, which started as a really cool (albeit creepy as hell) notion of an AI directing the good guys to intervene at the right moment to stop a small-scale crime from happening, which was ditched very quickly for a ‘battle the evil mob boss’ plot that dragged on far too long for my tastes.

kupo
kupo
3 years ago

Today sucks. Really don’t want to get into why. I just need wine. And kittens.

comment image

dslucia
dslucia
3 years ago

@Scildfreja:

Oh, nothing to be sorry about, at least in reference to me. That’s the sort of sassy way I’d leave a thread, and it’d be true too, ’cause that’s the kind of music I love. XD

Scildfreja Unnýðnes
Scildfreja Unnýðnes
3 years ago

<3 Kupo! All the kitties and wine for you. And thanks, @dslucia!

Austin Loomis
3 years ago

Sounds like there’s a truth-in-advertising case to be made for forcing it to rename itself from “Autism Speaks” to “Neurotypicals Neurotypicalsplain”.

I refer to them as “Allistics Speak”.

At this point Idiocracy seems more and more like a documentary instead of a satire.

A documentary about events that haven’t happened yet but look more and more likely as time grinds on.

kupo
kupo
3 years ago

@Jesalin
OMG those kitties are gorgeous!

Valentine
Valentine
3 years ago

@kypo

I don’t know what PBS is ))) first time i watched is on ‘dave’ – TV channel that my dad likes in England.

Bryce
Bryce
3 years ago

Neeelix was annoying for the simple reason of drawing out sometimes mildly funnly responses, mainly from Tuvok.

The Doctor and Seven of Nine received some meaningful character development in Voyager, the rest were bland caricatures. Doesn’t come close to Deep Space 9.

mrex
mrex
3 years ago

Holy fucking shit I just love that David’s first reference is simply a google search for what a jerk William Shatner is. I cackled for 5 minutes straight. Seriously.

If anyone thinks that this is a result of a shobby job done by a social media crew, check out the Mary Sue article* about William Shatner making a joke about how a women’s place is in the fridge 3 fucking times at a con. Because I guess if no-one laughs at a misogynistic joke about a misogynistic trope the first 2 times, the 3rd time must be the charm?

William Shatner has been the proverbial Not-All Man in twitter fandom for years, flitting from fandom to fandom defending all the poor white male actors from meanie pants female fans**, often for the terrible crime of being queer, female, femslash shippers with opinions. In the OUAT fandom he took on the SwanQueen fandom (along with Yvette Nicole Brown***), in Outlander he took on the much creepier female fans who ship the actors themselves. And he’s done this in other fandoms as well, again often against women, often queer women.

So yeah, fuck him.

*Let me just point out that the phrase “set-phasers-to-sexist” is quite frankly the best sentence I’ve ever read in reference to William Shatner ever.

**Though, to be fair, fandoms do tend to be dumpster fires fueled by toxic wastes.

*** At one point she supposedly said something like “Jesus fix it” in reference to Swen. Which… is a “fun” intersection of black colloquialisms meeting queer fandom.

mrex
mrex
3 years ago

Welp, fuck I typoed my email address. Again. Woops, sorry.

One thing I wanted to add, is when Shatner goes on these twitter wars with “bullies”, a lot of the time what happens is that his followers dogpile on whoever he’s arguing with and dox them, threaten them, whatever. He’s not stupid, he should know this happens.

So yeah, fuck him.

Gussie Jives
Gussie Jives
3 years ago

Your rationalism homework for today is to find a piece of media that you dislike, and discover the root of why you dislike it. Bonus marks if you can subvert that dislike and bring yourself to the point of liking it after that discovery.

The Twilight books. Because in addition to wrapping a thinly-disguised self-insert fantasy about an abusive relationship and Mormon propaganda in the trappings of a popular mythos… they’re just terribly written!

Seriously, the whole series is like this! http://reasoningwithvampires.tumblr.com/post/28889817150

I’ve read my fair share of paranormal romance and the vast majority are better written than those books. Sexier too.

On the other hand, they do serve as a great reminder to me as an aspiring fiction writer that if Meyer can get her stuff published, there’s hope for me yet. Hell, after re-reading my first work, I’m a better writer than Meyer. My sentences aren’t minivans. So Twilight… you inspire me.

By contrast, the movies are hysterical. I re-watched ’em with the Rifftrax on and it’s clear that Pattinson, Michael Sheen and Mustache Dad are the only ones in on the joke. Sheen’s hamminess is pure gold through and through.

latsot
latsot
3 years ago

@Scildfreja Unnýðnes

I wasn’t trying to tell you that your beliefs were wrong or bad, I was just trying to describe how they came about.

Oh, thanks for telling me about how my opinions came about. It’s not possible that they came about by means other than you claim or are subject by me to constant review. You’re definitely the expert on how I came to believe things and maintain them as I carry on throughout my turgid existence.

I’ll be sure to consult you in future about why I believe things and please feel fucking free to tell people why I believe whatever it is you think I believe. That is not fucked up at all.

Scildfreja Unnyðnes
Scildfreja Unnyðnes
3 years ago

You’re right, I apologize.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
3 years ago

Re: Reality TV

Charlie Brooker did a nice little piece about the techniques used to promote a particular impression or narrative.

Mattie
Mattie
3 years ago

If Luke’s lightsaber has developed its own Force-stuff, so that it helps Finn and it’s not just due to his “natural skill” (idk why the quotations), why is the same not true for Rey? What about when Finn feels the deaths of the villagers in one of the first scenes?

Finn is Force-sensitive just like Rey is. He’s as much the awakening as Rey is. Fandom counts him out because he’s black.

cavoyo
cavoyo
3 years ago

a contestant has a hangnail or misses a bus and the music is more appropriate to an action movie where the hero has been shot, or the ground crumbled and he’s now dangling by one hand over a precipice.

vweeeeeee