We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
“Allegedly fired from other jobs for her political views” “Fired for her anti-lgbt views and speech”
These are not political views, they are prejudices. she was fired for being a hateful asshole.
“by now, we know that the vaccine was not safe or effective.”
Also yet another a dangerous moron who thinks they're a fucking genius.
Always gets me back to the Dr House scene about the mom who doesn't want to vaccinate her kid.
Tens of billions of vaccines have been received by billions of people, with no negative affects. Where do these idiots get statements like hers? How are they so confidently wrong in the face of staggering amounts of data?
A concentrated effort by bad-faith actors who understand that the only thing Americans love more than being told they're right is being able to feel smugly superior. Tap into that with the power of social media and voila.
They like to say “go woke go broke” but I only ever hear about right wingers getting fired for saying terrible things about their co-workers and/or fans.
And they of course blame it on the woke mob or some other shit instead of just taking responsibility for the comments that people are having issues with or that a brand/company wants to have nothing to do with. They can't comprehend the idea of being wrong about something.
Shhh! That’s too much logic for them, you’re challenging them to reconsider their worldview.
I'm shocked this even qualifies as news. Like I'm looking at her IMDb page right now and she's been in basically nothing since the '70s. She wasn't even named character in her Brady Bunch Movie cameo. That's how unimpactful she is. Why would CBS even bother to find her. She's an actor who played a child in the '70s. No one's going to recognize her. They could have cast literally anybody and just lied to me and told me it was the same person and I would have believed them.
But where is Ja Rule to help us process this news?
Getting windmill dunked on by 50 Cent.
She's a real pile of garbage BUT I do kind of agree on the risk of a token black character-- I could absolutely see that happening in a fucking Brady reboot. Now, if they got a diverse writing staff and actually wrote something interesting with the premise, that'd be kind of amazing but we're talking a blatant boomer nostalgia bait show. You know that's going to be terrible.
lol and here I thought that comment was absolutely ludicrous.
“Let’s make this Black spouse somebody who has a really close relationship with another Brady, and that’s how this Brady met them. Give them a foundation so this isn’t a token position.”
You do realize why this is racist right? It's a natural progression to age and begin dating, I doubt they're doing similar back stories for every single Brady. To single out that a white/black relationship requires a precursor of events to be acceptable is just hidden/sly cultural bigotry. It might be easier to swallow for the older viewers of the show (who again, are being racist here), but I've seen these reboots trying to cater to younger audiences who will give them that social hype.
I don't know if you can't actually flesh out six families backstories if it's a multi-season show (especially if it's written well and not just six boring ass nuclear families.) Just not... you know, an idiotic "oh he's friends with X from work."
Modern Family did that mostly fine with multiple arcs, I think, although my fucked up head canon is that's the sequel to Married With Children (even if it really doesn't make sense, haha). In the Brady's case, I'd make one of the characters awkwardly racist-- let's say, Cindy, and have a laugh at her expense. Wait, actually that's starting to sound like It's Always Sunny so probably not!
I'm probably not a TV writer for a reason.
She said he would be a token because he didn't know the other Brady siblings. That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The implication is that your family has to know a black guy really well before you marry him in case he isn't one of the good ones.
Fuck it. Let's just get more "A Very Brady..." movies made. Gary Cole's still around. What about the rest of the cast? Let's fucking go.
Never meet your heroes.
I’m struggling to imagine the life of someone whose hero was Cindy Brady.
I mean, half of the USA think a fascist egomaniac, pedophile and pathologic liar with a brain the size of a tomato is the messiah, so...
I would assume their life is also a struggle.
Is there a difference between homophobic and queerphobic or can I use them interchangeably? Honest question
Homophobic relates to homosexuals and queer refers to anyone who isn't cis or straight, which is essentially any member of the LGBT+ community. So homophobia, biphobia, and transphobia are forms of queerfobia.
I use queerphobic because I think it's more accurate. If you have a problem with homosexual people, it's very unlikely that you're okay with all other queer people.
Yeah I remember learning this. Didn't she say Mr. Brady died because he was gay?
Bummer.
Let’s make this Black spouse somebody who has a really close relationship with another Brady
..... Ri-ight. I'm sure that this proposed show, with six grown-up Brady kids, six Brady spouses, and a decent number of Next Gen Bradys will have plenty of time for yet another character .... I'm sure that wouldn't be a token position at all ...
Actually, while I was writing this, I had a thought and I went back and re-read her comment:
"One of Jan’s children was going to be trans, and one of the Bradys was going to have a Black spouse. [...] Let’s make this Black spouse somebody who has a really close relationship with another Brady, and that’s how this Brady met them."
It's interesting, isn't it? She mentions Jan specifically, and "another Brady" who could have a black spouse, but she's pretty coy ("this Brady") about who was originally going to have the black spouse. Who wants to bet it was her?
Regardless of who it was going to be, the idea that a character marrying a black person their siblings weren't already friends with makes that black person a token is a bizarre claim.