|
What the gently caress
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 08:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 05:11 |
|
|
McAlister posted:I wouldn't call most of those characters ambitious per se. And strong/good female characters can be strong and good without being ambitious. Anyhow, I think that others have it. Hillary sits at the intersection of being an ambitious woman, an introverted nerdy wonk, and a realistic optimist. And all three run counter to the optimistic extroverted male trope that's called 'charismatic', and upset the traditional order of things for a lot of people. Add her long history in politics, which means that she's made some mistakes, and the hatred against her has had the time to brew, and you have the irrational levels it has come to.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 09:11
|
|
|
Daenarys from Game of Thrones probably counts; because despite being nominally royalty, she is very much driven by ambition to gain power and wield it for good. Noticeable how many fans think she is going to end up a villain... Another 'nominal royal, but ambitious to make that mean something' one might be Leia. I suspect Carrie Fisher was consciously channeling Clinton in the last one; Harrison Ford certainly seemed to be doing Bill. Maybe that's why there is such an idea she is unusually hawkish; a planet-destroying Death Star is a kind of WMD. Star Wars is Sci fi. So there is a billion dollar movie backing the idea Clinton has unrealistic and unlikely ideas about WMD.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 09:11
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Fair enough. I think it's a shame the Clintons got to resubmit the previous recipe rather than Bill having to enter something of his own.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 09:17
|
|
|
I hate her for the Iraq War vote that's it
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 09:54
|
|
|
Let's not forget that she was in cahoots with the DNC to ensure her nomination.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
Acid Haze posted:What the gently caress I'm assuming you're referring to film theory chat? I'm quoting you because that's less obnoxious than quoting everything McAlister wrote, especially since it's really tangential to the topic at hand. The issue I have with this analogy is applying the same rules to men (ambitious, positive portrayal, no revenge) comes up with an equally weak list of movies that could be nitpicked just as easily. Ambition in general is almost never treated as a good thing in movies, American culture, or anywhere else. Shoot, Harry Potter has an entire fourth of the cast be designated to a special club of people who are ambitious, and almost exclusively evil simply for possessing that character trait. Even Trump has to sidestep the whole ambition issue by pretending like the real reason he's running for President is because he's been summoned by God to use his awesome business management superpowers to save the country. Something Trump himself probably believes wholeheartedly at this point, since I doubt he was actually expecting to win the primaries and can come up with no explanation for this save for divine intervention. As for Hillary, well, at this point a lot of it is just that she's been around for a really long time. Sure the Republican smear campaign right now seems misogynist, but that's just because they frame the smear around to whoever happens to be leader of the Democratic Party at the time. Before Hillary was racist. Before Obama it was the effete New England elite. Before Kerry it was just the same old Clinton hate train and Hillary has inherited a lot of the baggage from that. But given the especially vitriolic turn American politics has taken to all politicians (not just Hillary), a lot of it may simply be bad timing on her part. She would have been a much stronger candidate, I think, in 2008 or especially 2004. All the same, it would not at all surprise me if she does, as predicted, become much more popular after becoming President simply because people care a lot less about the smear campaign when it's not an election year.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 10:17
|
|
|
parcs posted:Let's not forget that she was in cahoots with the DNC to ensure her nomination. Like literally every election the DNC had a favorite candidate. They were discussing if they would make it harder for Sanders. But the same emails heavily imply that they decided against that. She did not steal the nomination and it wasn't even close. But some people like to present this like she wrote: "My empire is crumbling around me. Help me my loyal servants. Sanders must be stopped at any cost. Kill him off if you have to!" Which brings us back to the hatred of her. Do you honestly think internal emails from other elections wouldn't show a preference? cant cook creole bream fucked around with this message at 10:49 on Oct 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 10:45
|
|
|
meristem posted:I'm looking forward to Queen of Katwe. (Some other sweet - and I do mean sweet, and heartwarming - movies are Bend It Like Beckham and English Vinglish. And I have no idea why all three are by Indian directors, I don't usually watch Bollywood.) I also have doubts about the film theory stuff, that's attributing too strong a cause on public entertainment. I mean, it's there, but it's not overwhelming, I'd spitball it at something like 10% of the cause. More relevant is the media portrayal of Hillary specifically, which is often as this kind of Political Crone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 11:21
|
|
|
Film theory (which at this point is better described as pop culture theory) is very limited as an analytical tool because pop culture is ultimately a reflection of society rather than its genesis. At best this can turn into a positive feedback loop, but considering the extent to which the modern entertainment industry explicitly caters to feminist critique even that effect is pretty questionable. Remember that we didn't see this kind of antipathy to Hillary in 2008 when that was indisputably a much less gender-diverse pop culture landscape. Conceivably it might have affected the tone. I remember Obamabros putting out way more heinous misogynist poo poo than anything Berniebros this year would have considered acceptable. A lot of this has to do with other evolving trends, though. I mean shoot, ask any Bernie supporter on the question and they would have told you- want a woman President? Nominate Warren, because progressives actually like her. For an even more extreme example, Thatcher in the eighties with England was indisputably a more potent collection of all of Hillary's negative character traits. But not even conservatives especially cared because she was their rear end in a top hat, and more importantly, an elected one. First lady not being an elected position does stick with people, and it's not coincidental that Hillary has been playing down Bill's possible influence in the White House this year when back in 2008 (and 1992) their position as a power couple was treated like a two for the price of one deal. Really, you want to discuss pop culture, I'd say House of Cards has done more damage to the Hillary campaign than any more general trend, because it's a drama that explicitly states political power couples are cynically ambitious and unlikable people. If that's not a metaphor for Hillary and Bill, what is?
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 11:49
|
|
|
computer parts posted:#4 is the root of the other two. Like there's no serious way you can justify #2 without saying at some point "well sure she says progressive things but I don't believe her". Some people make the association between policy and political ideology, #4 from the left comes from the suspicion that she's ideologically a closet conservative. Dead Cosmonaut fucked around with this message at 12:57 on Oct 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 12:54
|
|
|
Honestly, the weird thing about this election is just how much Trump is the antithesis of Clinton. Whereas Clinton has been at the center of several negative campaigns, Trump has had an already existing popular image that would have been seen as, at worst, sleazy, but not really unpopular or hated. They're both figures of the 90s, and try in different ways to call back to that time, before the great recession. She's an insider, he's an outsider. Trump is a charismatic and confident person, but relies solely on those qualities because he's not actually very clever, She's the opposite, ahd to contantly fight against negative first impressions, either earned or imposed (if we're talking about her time in Arkansas). She's careful not to promise too much, and is a bit of a jaded cynic, Trump doesn't seem to care about promising the moon. She's very popular with minorities, he's very unpopular with minorities. Trump is used to being in control, in a position of dominance, and when he's not, when he can't just intimidate people into doing what he wants, he falls apart like a house of cards (see "you've been fighting ISIS your entire adult life"). Clinton's done that rodeo and has the free t-shirt. And if I were to guess what happens after the election, it'll be this: Clinton will win, it'll essentially be a 3rd term of Obama. People will get over the negative press they have of her, but I don't think they'll ever like her. But Trump? Trump's going to be ruined by this election. His biggest asset was his name, which is why he rented it out to Hotels he didn't own. After this election, that name isn't going to be worth poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 13:12
|
|
|
radmonger posted:Daenarys from Game of Thrones probably counts; because despite being nominally royalty, she is very much driven by ambition to gain power and wield it for good. Book daeny eventually - and it always pisses me off that the book where she stopped marching on westeros and used the time to apply herself to learning statecraft is universally unpopular - the arc everyone hates. There is an excellent blog post somewhere explaining to people that what they are looking at is important character development and not a waste of  that is slightly effective - but without that she is mostly a rape-and-revenge trope mixed with magical girl. So it isn't trying to retake the birthright that was stolen from her and return to the safety and love of the room with the red door that made her ambitious - it's the resolution to be a good queen and rule her subjects well. And that happens mostly in her head as well as involving putting her revenge down for awhile as she studies up and practices statecraft. Does the show make her thought processes there clear? If people are seeing her as villain potential I'm guessing no.Imagine a Dany storyline where she woke the dragons after finding the eggs herself from clues left in a family journal, studying with the red priests, and sacrificing some of her own Queen's blood to do so. The new Leia would count if there was a movie about her studying up to become a general - proving to others that she is the best general etc. Instead she is presented fait accompli. The product of ambition yes but the display of it no. More damning is the fact that her midichlorian count is supposed to be very high per cannon but she never applies herself to learning how to use the Force. Who doesn't do that???? If you were told you had the makings of a great space wizard would you just go, "meh. Don't care."?
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
Ego-bot posted:Princess and the Frog, maybe? That one is about a girl who works too hard and her resolution is to chill out and let her man do some work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
skeet decorator posted:Kiki's Delivery Service and a lot of Miyazaki's other films Japanese culture has a whole big set of problems with women. But it's a different set of problems. With a different set of media representation issues.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 15:10
|
|
|
This meeting starts in a second but I wanted to tie this to studies about the effect on children for praising them for being something vs praising them for trying hard. When you praise a child for being smart then offer to let them take a harder or easier test they opt for the easier because they don't want to mess up and reveal that they aren't actually smart. When you praise them for trying hard they opt for the more difficult challenge. And trying the more difficult thing is how you grow. Challenging yourself is how you become better. Boys get ample lessons on the importance of getting up again after being knocked down and letting failure galvanize you to try harder. Girls have the one-two punch of lack of examples of striving to attain a goal and stereotype threat causing them to fear letting down all women everywhere if they do badly at something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:Some people make the association between policy and political ideology, #4 from the left comes from the suspicion that she's ideologically a closet conservative. Nah, #4 existed originally and justifies the other feelings. #4 exists because of the decades of propaganda against her.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
McAlister posted:More damning is the fact that her midichlorian count is supposed to be very high per cannon but she never applies herself to learning how to use the Force. Who doesn't do that???? If you were told you had the makings of a great space wizard would you just go, "meh. Don't care."? Totally want to do the same thing that got my mom killed, turned my dad into a space magic Terminator and plunged the entire galaxy into decades of war and chaos.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
parcs posted:Let's not forget that she was in cahoots with the DNC to ensure her nomination. this is goofy. of course an organization has a preferred outcome. the RNC left everything up to the voters and look what happened - every joker in the world took a shot at the republican nom and donald trump squeaked by with a plurality sanders wasn't a democrat until 2015, so it's pretty obvious why he didn't have a lot of support within the democratic machine. you can't be both an outsider independent and a member of the establishment at the same time. pick one
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
Wondering why do people hate Hilary Clinton? We asked three top anime experts for their opinions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
McAlister posted:Ambition is not tolerated in women in our society. Wow This is a bunch of crazy nonsense! Reminds me alot of evopsych just-so biotruths, feels'right' but is ultimately unsupported gut feels. tsa fucked around with this message at 17:54 on Oct 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
Ixnay on the Omelet posted:Personally, aside from Maggie Thatcher, I could never vote for a woman leader. Yeah, why can't we go back to the good ol' days, with the Kennedys and the Roosevelts and the Adamses. McAlister posted:[movie chat] How about Pitch Perfect or Ghostbusters '16? Or any given one of the 2000's glut of dance movies that had a female protagonist. cant cook creole bream posted:Do you honestly think internal emails from other elections wouldn't show a preference? Hell, the GOP was openly doing everything they could to get rid of Drumpf, the difference is just that they failed. raditts fucked around with this message at 18:16 on Oct 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
tsa posted:Reminds me alot of evopsych just-so biotruths, feels'right' but is ultimately unsupported gut feels. Since women actually aren't in positions of power in society you either have to believe they are being held back or you gotta believe that they aren't because they are an inferior kind. Thinking the cultural narrative keeps women away from positions of power seems way less biotruths than the claim of inherent male superiority being the reason.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
Ixnay on the Omelet posted:Personally, aside from Maggie Thatcher, I could never vote for a woman leader. If ol G-Wash hadn't been sterile, one of his descendants would have been President.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 18:15
|
|
|
On the subject of female ambition being distasteful that's definitely a pervasive prejudice, but I think it also bares looking at why male ambition is conversely so worshiped. It's an extremely American trait on display. There are cultures that see ambition as a character flaw, like read any Voltaire to see the French attitude towards men who try too hard or believe too fervently, or Cervantes to see the same in Spanish culture. Ambitious people are, in a way, prideful and greedy. But in the United States we're taught from the start that ambition is only good (along with pride and greed, really) when it's attached to a Y Chromosome. Your worth as a man is tied directly to how much you get done during your time on Earth, and whether you interpret that as making the most money you can in the stock market or building the max number of structures you can or even donating the most man-hours to charity; whatever you do, do as much of it as you possibly can and always strive for greatness or you're coming up short. I think that's a big part of the stigma, that American men are deeply terrified by the prospect of failing at their over-inflated goals, and women are a classic, time-tested choice for someone to step on as the men feel themselves slipping. Meanwhile American Feminism fails to solve anything by telling women they're "allowed" to be just like American Men; irrational, self-absorbed and doomed to exhaustion. Being one's self instead of a social archetype is not acceptable for anybody, but it's especially unacceptable for women. On the subject of why people hate Hillary, her party did not do her any favors by trying to rig the convention. But really it's what other posters have already pointed out, the media machine runs on mud and hatred and "hate woman" is a prehistoric schtick that still sells ad space.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
Bringing GBS politicl quagmires into D&d
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
Ixnay on the Omelet posted:Personally, aside from Maggie Thatcher, I could never vote for a woman leader. I'll ignore your first misogynistic point, and focus on the second: There's a difference between royal families and family businesses. A lot of people take up what their parents do (see: Kennedy family and Bush family), or marry because of similarities and ambitions (Clintons). I wouldn't be surprised if in several years we see at least one of Obama's daughters become a politician. In the end, however - Americans decide who they want. If there were "royal families" in the US as you'd described, Hillary would have been elected president in 2008, and Jeb! would have been the Republican nominee this year.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Wondering why do people hate Hilary Clinton? We asked three top anime experts for their opinions. The real question here is why do so few of our 10-14 year old girls pursue a career in giant robot fighting
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Barry Sanders awoke me to the fact that the system is broken and Big Business is out to get me that's why I'm voting for predatory businessman Donald Trump/Gary Johnson, rather than business shill hilary clinto
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
Suggesting the use of drones on foreign non combatants is a good reason to hate her (as well as every other politician that supports that)
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
Probably her bloodthirsty imperialism abroad and her open racism at home. It was p.funny seeing her "apologise" for the superpredators thing though, on stage to an audience of millions going "okay yeah so I did say that black children are predatory supermutants who can walk on the ceiling and drink blood, and that therefore they should be all locked up forever, but that was on accident! I just tripped over my own tongue and accidentally did racism throughout the multi day process of speech-writing and practising, totally unintentional". Honestly I expect her face to melt under stage lighting one day. She's not any kind of human I'd recognise; the important poo poo like empathy or shame isn't there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
Sulphuric rear end in a top hat posted:Suggesting the use of drones on foreign non combatants is a good reason to hate her (as well as every other politician that supports that) Hillary is moderately hawkish (by American standards, meaning a foaming-at-the-mouth warmonger by certain other standards), supported criminal-justice/anti-drug reforms that devastated minority and low-income communities over the past two decades, discredited and gaslit younger, more vulnerable women who were victims of her husband's sexual predation, encouraged American allies to allow dangerous and unethical industrial processes, and participated prominently in the third-way movement that stood by while organized labor and social safety nets were gutted throughout the western world. These are all reasonable reasons to dislike a person, if you're an internet communist or, hell, just a reasonably well-informed progressive voter. However, much of the electorate - including the center-or-leftward half of it - is either on board with those things or doesn't know/care about them, so there's gotta be some other factor that explains the sheer extent of her unpopularity (it's misogyny)
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:Hillary is moderately hawkish (by American standards, meaning a foaming-at-the-mouth warmonger by certain other standards), supported criminal-justice/anti-drug reforms that devastated minority and low-income communities over the past two decades, discredited and gaslit younger, more vulnerable women who were victims of her husband's sexual predation, encouraged American allies to allow dangerous and unethical industrial processes, and participated prominently in the third-way movement that stood by while organized labor and social safety nets were gutted throughout the western world. I think what the clintons did to welfare in the 90s is a bit more than standing by.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
HorseLord posted:Probably her bloodthirsty imperialism abroad and her open racism at home. How old were you in the 90s? There was a ridiculous amount of paranoia about youths/gangs/etc. then before we had the time to observe and realize that generation grew up better than the one before it. Nobody likes what she said, but it was an understandable mistake at that place in time for someone who tries to be so populist. You give someone a bit of a benefit of the doubt once they show that they recognize their mistakes/issues instead of constantly focusing on stuff from 20 years ago. In other words, that's not a reason to "hate," it's one to "be wary, in case her opinions did not actually change and she's still just being populist."
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
I think if you want to see the double-standard, all you have to do is juxtapose Hillary's approval ratings (low) with Bill's (perpetually high). 1990s Bill advanced sinister neoliberal policies and definitely did shady, hosed-up things in his personal life. 1990s Hillary advanced identical sinister neoliberal policies, but only maybe did shady, hosed-up things in her personal life. What's the difference? Bill is a man, and his behavior - good and bad - falls comfortably within expectations for his gender. His sleaze is considered charming. Hillary is a woman, and her behavior does not fall within those expectations. Her severity is considered offputting and her possible sleaze is drastically magnified relative to her husband's definite sleaze.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
donald trump took out a full page ad in the new york daily news specifically calling for the reinstatement of the death penalty to punish five black teens falsely accused of rape but let's get really twisted up and mad that hillary clinton said superpredators once sanders also invoked the superpredator myth btw, pretty much every politician from that era did because it was a commonly held belief, even among black people, so i guess everyone's racist as hell when you think about it boner confessor fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Oct 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
I think the main reason people hate her is because the media has been portraying her as a super terrible person for literal decades at this point, causing it to sort of seep into people's minds through cultural osmosis. As for why people might dislike (or at least "not like") her, there are a variety of reasons, some reasonable and most not so much. Personally I will be voting for Hillary and think that she will be a pretty good president (significantly better than Obama judging from her platform). But I don't really think she is a particular good person who personally cares deeply about these issues and it seems like her campaign has shifted significantly to the left at least partially due to the success of Sanders' campaign (which isn't a bad thing; it's good for a politician to be responsive to changes in the views of the electorate, particularly if those changes are good). The two main reasons for this that come to mind are: 1. Her paid speaking events with major investment banks (and the Clintons' close relationship with Goldman Sachs in general). I don't think she's a shill or anything, but I do think that she probably likes these people and is unlikely to do anything that they would strongly disagree with. While the speaking events certainly aren't bribery, they do mean that there's at least some financial relationship between her and the banks, which makes her less likely to do stuff they don't like. 2. Her kind of questionable/bad foreign policy decisions (for example Iraq). Regardless, I don't think any of this stuff makes her any worse than most Democratic politicians (if anything, she's better than most). The main reasons she receives so much disproportionate hate are the aforementioned media attacks on her and the fact that she is a woman who does not behave in a way that misogynists believe women should behave.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Can we just cut out all the bullshit and say what we want to say, which is that "if you're against military adventurism or economics that favor the investor class, you're a sexist and probably a racist"
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:donald trump took out a full page ad in the new york daily news specifically calling for the reinstatement of the death penalty to punish five black teens falsely accused of rape but let's get really twisted up and mad that hillary clinton said superpredators once Sanders actually voted for the superpredator bill too, if I recall correctly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 05:11 |
|
|
Ytlaya posted:But I don't really think she is a particular good person who personally cares deeply about these issues The former will be debatable simply because she's a politician, but she's been actively working on left-of-center causes since like 1968 or some poo poo. Her actual behavior for the most part shows that she cares more about these issues than just about any motherfucker alive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 20:02
|
|
