• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Star Trek Discovery

Right, wallowing in self-pity was what made Trump a billionaire and brought him to the GOP nomination.
No, just exploiting the people who do.

(And yes, dude, I get that you were attempting a slightly more sophisticated version of I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I. I guess maybe your recent misadventures in the "Scifi with aggressive sexuality" thread weren't humiliation enough or something? But I have the same question for you that I had for the other poster who tried it earlier. When. Does. That. Ever. Work? Like, do you actually imagine you're performing some awesome rhetorical jiu-jitsu that's going to convince people of colour that their lived experience is some kind of hologram and white privilege doesn't exist? I'm curious.)
 
Let me know when every single city and person in the US agrees with them, a segment of the population being accepting doesn't make up for everyone who doesn't. Especially when a major political party is determined to roll back rights as part of a misguided "moral" crusade.
*shrug*. I don't "agree" or "disagree" with them. Live and let live.
 
Experience with Internet communities going back to the days of UseNet in the mid-Nineties, yes. Of course these communities were not entirely without "minority" representation but take your average geek forum or Board? Something like, say, The Escapist in its halcyon days of sort-of-credibility before it was Actually About Ethics in Game Journalism? In the long term under rules that soft-pedalled bigotry, it would become so disproportionately white and male that even white males would notice it. They wouldn't necessarily do much about it, swimming against the current is hard and most people who try drown, but they'd notice it.

Well, that is messed up.... I'm just not sure if i'm convinced its as wide spread as some might think. Maybe because it happens in much heftier forums with much larger user bases, or shall we say when it crops up in more "high profile" or "more visible" places is when it get's really noticed? I've certainly encountered a fair share of degenerate asses on the internet, but most of them were not specifically about bigotry as much as they used that as a tool to cause problems.

An example would be there was this guy on a gaming related forum I go to, he started derailing a thread with what on the surface seemed to be anti-semitism. He was posting poorly photo-shopped images of stereotypical "jewish" characters rubbing their hands together, et-cetera. He pissed everyone off, took the topic off track for four or five pages, and then he was done. In a PM discussion he revealed that he was just drunk and having a laugh. He didn't really believe the anti-semantic trash he was posting, he just used it to get a rise out of people, and it worked. I think that can, to a certain extent explain the behavior of many people on the internet.

What's my point exactly? I think there is a large chunk of this "hatred" out there that is so over-the-top not because those folks honestly believe the horrible things they say but because they know they can get attention for saying those things. "The trolls will blot out the sun." I mean, either way it's poor behavior, but I've never seen, personally, the wide spread "administrative" reinforcement of bigotry that you imply. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I do wonder if maybe it's a matter of some of these places just being higher in the visibility of the internet and thus getting the attention of interested parties. Most of the places I've been a part of the primary rule was... If you're a big enough shithead, you're going to be dealt with, for whatever reason. In certain places it was looser, and in certain places it was more formal.

Let me know when every single city and person in the US agrees with them, a segment of the population being accepting doesn't make up for everyone who doesn't. Especially when a major political party is determined to roll back rights as part of a misguided "moral" crusade.

Unfortunately I think you'll be waiting indefinitely for everyone to agree on something like that. We can't get people to agree on basic things, like that the Earth is a planet orbiting the sun. I'm shocked we haven't seen new age groups arguing over the alphabet's length. If there's anything I've learned on the internet, people will always find a way to argue about everything.
 
*shrug*. I don't "agree" or "disagree" with them. Live and let live.
Then why say anything at all? You're just wasting my time saying "gee it's not so bad in major cities, you should be grateful".
Unfortunately I think you'll be waiting indefinitely for everyone to agree on something like that. We can't get people to agree on basic things, like that the Earth is a planet orbiting the sun. I'm shocked we haven't seen new age groups arguing over the alphabet's length. If there's anything I've learned on the internet, people will always find a way to argue about everything.
No, but at a certain point the people against it become a joke. People claiming the world is flat are openly ridiculed and they deserve to be. Just like every single bigot, racist, sexist, homophobic and transphobic person who thinks that their hatred of a group deserves attention. They belong in history books as example of how wrong we used to be, forgotten and ignored forever.

The sooner we get there, the better.
 
It's what made Donald Trump the man he is today. :techman: For extra points, call everyone less privileged than you "the real racists" and go on long tirades about their being traitors to their country.

There are perhaps other places on the Internet more welcoming of that schtick, though. Is what I'm getting at.
See the deepness? I don't.
Oh, that's deep.
Yup, i see the deepness.
Then why say anything at all? You're just wasting my time saying "gee it's not so bad in major cities, you should be grateful".
I was actually reposting an interesting factoid I came across earlier on this board. I happen to live in NYC, which has some interesting legislation regarding gender rights. And which recognizes, and legislates rights for, multiple genders beyond "male" and "female".
 
No, just exploiting the people who do.

(And yes, dude, I get that you were attempting a slightly more sophisticated version of I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I. I guess maybe your recent misadventures in the "Scifi with aggressive sexuality" thread weren't humiliation enough or something? But I have the same question for you that I had for the other poster who tried it earlier. When. Does. That. Ever. Work? Like, do you actually imagine you're performing some awesome rhetorical jiu-jitsu that's going to convince people of colour that their lived experience is some kind of hologram and white privilege doesn't exist? I'm curious.)
actually i was simply stating that your post made absolutely no sense.
No idea why you had to bring donald trump into an offhand sarcastic remark, but whatever. more power to you dude.
 
I would like to see a fully independent crew with little to no interaction with Earth, the Federation, or Starfleet. It would be AMAZING if they were explorers,with the occasional missing brain episode tossed in the mix.
 
Well, that is messed up.... I'm just not sure if i'm convinced its as wide spread as some might think.

It will naturally be more visible to some than others, which is how privilege works. To take a somewhat parallel (more serious) example, most white Americans are not sure they're convinced that police brutality and misconduct is as widespread in their country as black Americans think it is. Which is in no small part because they're a lot less likely to see it, or to note it for what it is if they do see it. (I'm not trying to be inflammatory with this or saying that inconvenience on the Internet is the equivalent of immoral police shootings, I'm just saying privilege in both examples works in similar ways as perceiving a problem goes.)

I think there is a large chunk of this "hatred" out there that is so over-the-top not because those folks honestly believe the horrible things they say but because they know they can get attention for saying those things.

"Trolling for the lulz" is a popular explanation on the Internet and in some few cases might be true, but I think it's gotten less and less credible as time goes on. A pretty big example would be Gamergate. They started out telling themselves they were trolling for the lulz, but after a certain point you had to wonder where the "lulz" were supposed to be: they wound up pouring oceans of time and personal angst into their hate campaign, they were in some cases suffering real-world consequences as a result, they were getting doxxed and trolled in turn by the people on 4chan who they'd managed to piss off beyond the Lulz Envelope, they were quite evidently not having fun. But they persisted. Some of them are still out there even now, persisting. I expect it's because the hate isn't the transient pose they tried to pretend it is; it's who they are. It's why their movement attracted neo-Nazis and people like Milo Yiannopoulos (who, even he had sense enough to kick loose at a certain point) and other forms of scum.

I've never seen, personally, the wide spread "administrative" reinforcement of bigotry that you imply.

There's no reason you should, but trust me, it's quite widespread in communities of all sizes. It goes back a long way on the Internet, which after all started out with utopian libertarian notions of what "free speech" would be whose ultimate point of genesis was a parochial mostly-white technologist community in Silicone Valley. If you encounter someone who's experienced it, no, they're not making it up.
 
See the deepness? I don't.
You're telling me you don't see that the Trump campaign has exploited race hate and white self-pity for its own benefit? Because I'm not stating something outre there. That's a pretty commonplace observation about his campaign, the tie-in with someone professing that he supposedly "hates himself as a white male" for simply seeing people oppose bigotry is actually extremely obvious. So are you playing dumb, or what?

actually i was simply stating that your post made absolutely no sense.
About what I expected. Shine on you crazy diamond!
 
I'm thinking; if this ship is indeed developed from the Federation and Klingon technology. It is plausible if the setting is after the ENT and before the TOS. Because at that era, the Earth Federation was not the super power in the quadrant. They lack everything; including the technology. So if they adopt the Klingon's concept of Starship and experimenting them, then the probability is not zero for a Federation ship look like a Klingon's
 
You're telling me you don't see that the Trump campaign has exploited race hate and white self-pity for its own benefit? Because I'm not stating something outre there. That's a pretty commonplace observation about his campaign, the tie-in with someone professing that he supposedly "hates himself as a white male" for simply seeing people oppose bigotry is actually extremely obvious.
I must have misread what you wrote earlier; and im still not sure how that relates to the 'wallowing in self pity.'
But yes, you are correct here. Much as I hate to admit it, the GOP has gone off the deep end with him. If you want to continue this discussion in the Election Armageddon thread i"ll be happy to.
 
An interesting read: 7 Things We Learned About Bryan Fuller's STAR TREK: DISCOVERY at Comic-Con

Of particular interest from it:

Its Look Will Be Very Different from J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek

Forget the abundance of swooping curves on NuTrek’s Enterprise, Fuller’s Discovery has a healthy helping of straight lines, inspired by Star Wars concept artist Ralph McQuarrie’s designs for Gene Roddenberry’s never-produced 1970s Star Trek series.

“We were looking for a new aesthetic,” explains Fuller. “We can’t just go back to the same aesthetic. You look at what J.J. Abrams did with that 2009 movie, which reinvented Star Trek in such a wonderful way and claimed that territory. So we had to strike new ground that had Star Trek in its DNA at a fundamental level. To make a commitment to the fanbase, who are aware of Star Trek and its iterations—both the shows that made it to the airwaves and the ones that didn’t. So it felt like a really nice way to let the hardcore Star Trek audience know that I have their backs.”
 
This thread makes me hate myself for being a white male.
If seeing people of color and other genders achieve some small measure of proportional representation in media makes you hate yourself, that sounds like a "you" problem rather than a "we" problem. I don't feel threatened by people who look different then me or are a different gender than me getting more opportunities and the ability to redress centuries of national mistreatment and under-representation however they can.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top