John Cleese on wokism

[Hawkmoon]

https://reason.com/2022/12/18/john-cleese-on-how-wokeness-smothers-creativity/

John Cleese is not (surprise, surprise) a fan of wokism.

[WLJ]

Standing his ground

"Monty Python" star and British comedy legend John Cleese has lashed out at the press in recent days for allegedly reporting that he will be removing a politically incorrect scene from future adaptations of his movie "Life of Brian" to avoiding offending the trans community.

In recent statements on Twitter, Cleese claimed that a reporter had "misreported me" when claiming the entertainer was planning to cut the famous "Loretta" scene for an upcoming stage adaptation of the classic religious satire film.

He corrected the reports, claiming that he was merely illustrating what others had advised him to do with the potentially controversial scene. He declared he has "no intention" of removing it.

The scene in question features a male character from the 1979 British comedy telling his associates that he wants to be woman named "Loretta" and demands the right to bear a child. Flabbergasted, Cleese’s character in the film tells the man that the notion is ridiculous, while another male colleague offers that they all merely advocate for his right to childbearing as a symbolic way of standing up to "oppression."

That scene has Literally  become reality

https://www.foxnews.com/media/monty-python-star-no-wont-cut-life-brian-scene-critics-have-hit-transphobic-stage-version

[Hawkmoon]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dgp9MPLEAqA

"It's symbolic of his struggle against reality."

^^^ That seems to sum it up fairly concisely.

[RocketMan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dgp9MPLEAqA

"It's symbolic of his struggle against reality."

^^^ That seems to sum it up fairly concisely.

I think we should take all the trannies and their woke supporters and lock them in a room where that routine is playing on an endless loop.  It may not change their behavior, but at least it would get them out of our hair.  It smacks of petty revenge, too.  I wouldn't be above that sort of thing in this case.

[MillCreek]

^^^I would add the 'what did the Romans ever do for us' loop as well.

[Hawkmoon]

While we're on the subject:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/combative-consumers-change-the-marketing-strategy-for-target-and-bud-light-97ca0ac2

“Previously you could send a homogeneous message to the country, but there’s so much divisiveness and polarization on so many issues that that’s become almost impossible,” said Allen Adamson, co-founder of brand and marketing consulting firm Metaforce.

Mr. Adamson seems to have missed the point. There was never a problem with advertising through a "homogenous" message -- until corporations started pandering to vocal minorities. NOW those minorities expect to be praised and to have marketing focused on/at them, and they get upset if companies "back off" and just focus on selling their product.

[Perd Hapley]

While we're on the subject:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/combative-consumers-change-the-marketing-strategy-for-target-and-bud-light-97ca0ac2

Mr. Adamson seems to have missed the point. There was never a problem with advertising through a "homegenous" message -- until corporations started pandering to vocal minorities. NOW thosse minorities expect to be praised and to have marketing focused on/at them, and they get upset if companies "back off" and just focus on selling their product.

I just read that article, and boy does it have some problems. Which is to say, it's normal journalism for 2023. Funny how if Target or Bud Light was caught selling confederate flag merch (much less to children), the story would be "they offended their reasonable and very sympathetic customers." But if it's the rainbow flag, the customers are the problem. "They're just so mean! Eeek!" Not even a defense of what Target was doing, pushing perv merch at children. That was just glossed over.

Then, this line here:

But critics this time were focused on transgender issues, which have climbed into the top ranks of conservative social agendas. And they combined their social-media messaging with tense in-person encounters.

[facepalm]

1 - um, who's got the agenda here?

2 - "they" So all the "transphobes" on the Twitters had secret meetings with their followers? "See here, Jim Follower; I'll message this stuff on the socials - you go to the store and rough 'em up."

And, of course, the usual Big Lie misgendering - using Mulvaney's preferred pronouns.

[Hawkmoon]

And, of course, the usual Big Lie misgendering - using Mulvaney's preferred pronouns.

I have said before but I'll say again: I don't understand why there's such an effort by the gender dysphoric population to create unpronounceable pronouns. There are three basic options in English: male, female, and neuter. If a person is male, he's a "he." If a person is a female, she's a "she." If a person claims to be something other than male or female (non-binary), we have a perfectly good pronoun for them, too: "it."

[RoadKingLarry]

I have said before but I'll say again: I don't understand why there's such an effort by the gender dysphoric population to create unpronounceable pronouns. There are three basic options in English: male, female, and neuter. If a person is male, here's a "he." If a person is a female, she's a "she." If a person claims to be something other than male or female (non-binary), we have a perfectly good pronoun for them, too: "it."

In polite company the "SH" can be silent.
 

[zahc]

I have said before but I'll say again: I don't understand why there's such an effort by the gender dysphoric population to create unpronounceable pronouns. There are three basic options in English: male, female, and neuter. If a person is male, he's a "he." If a person is a female, she's a "she." If a person claims to be something other than male or female (non-binary), we have a perfectly good pronoun for them, too: "it."

"It" is not equivalent to he or she, because "he" and "she" are for animate nouns, and "it" is strictly for inanimate nouns.

There is no other animate pronoun except for he/she/him/her. And pronouns are a closed word class in English so you cannot coin one.

As an alternative to coining a new pronoun, trans people could become inanimate. Note how animals and babies are sometimes inanimate in English; you can say "the baby fell down and hit its head", but you can't say "the woman fell down and hit its head".