Journal of Other Forum Analysis

[Switters]

FeigeJobberC3PO hiding out in the care bunker.

[Pwnz]

I don't know why people keep posting in political threads on era still and are surprised. They have no interest in moderation. They're tankies that only want discussion they agree with at least to some degree.

If the Ukrainan war has a bit more nuance they'd ban anyone speaking against Russia.

[Besticus Maximus]

Your forum has been hijacked by sex criminals Bdubs, you know it and I know it too, and now they're taking the piss out of you. What's worse, the long tail effect of you losing control of the keys to the asylum is actually the very real possibility of these people not voting democrat at the next election, purely because you filled their heads with the poison of people you already know to be unwell dickheads.

The effect of your inaction is both being cuckolded by absolute turbolosers, and also pushing them towards creating the worst outcome, Trump.

[Pwnz]

Like Brady created a topic, he didn't inject strawmen or red herrings incessantly which is the concern trolling.  They just don't like his opinion. Which sure whatever it's their forum but stop lying to yourselves mods.

Now if Brady reported a bunch of people responding to him in his thread sure, but they didn't list that reason.

[Nintex]

lol Miyamoto ain't going to cast a trans Zelda. He's going to pick a well known blonde like Margot Robbie or someone who has already played royalty like Vanessa Kirby.

[Pwnz]

I think the only person that posts on era that I actually will read in political threads is albatross or a poster with an avatar sipping and I think Iggy something. Everyone else is on the discord

[Uncle]

lol Miyamoto ain't going to cast a trans Zelda. He's going to pick a well known blonde like Margot Robbie or someone who has already played royalty like Vanessa Kirby.

[Uncle]

[Nintex]

 
Could pass as a descendant of the Goddess Hylia. 

Clean in terms of PR and scandals, not top billed cast, likes costume drama and playing royalty, sort of rebellious in most of her roles, can hold her own in action scenes and often has great chemistry with her male counter parts. Good pick for a $100 million movie.

[Pwnz]

Maybe I'm full of shit, but it kind of seems like if you had a problem with Hunter playing link then you'd have a problem with Hunter playing a cis female. They seem to have this rule where you can shit on something if it is perceived as punching up.

[Besticus Maximus]

Cast Sophie Thatcher, who is a total baller and will take the florence pugh pipeline soon I believe

[Taco Bell Tower]

Red Alert 

Tom Brady has been banned!!!

So apparently we're gonna get a weekly NYT or WAPO article on just how Trump hopes to go full Fascist with a second term.

I don't know, if people still want to threaten to withhold their vote, or try and equate Both Sides, or accuse people of "guilt tripping" them to vote then there's no helping you

Terrifying fascist shit. This is what we're fighting.

Well, some of us.

So we got a genocider and a Hitler.

Great fucking job America. You learned nothing.

I was hoping that the passive aggressive swipes at diminishing Trump would wait until at least Page 2.

User banned (1 month): sniping at other posters and concern trolling around ethnic cleansing across multiple threads *originally a perm

You started the thread with passive aggressive comments, what did you expect?

No, I started this thread with actively aggressive comments.

If you want to come out and say that there's no difference between Biden and Trump in the face of articles like this one, the one about his plans for the DoJ, and the entirety of Project 2025 and you plan to refuse to vote due to that belief do so. Don't dance around it. Be firm in your convictions.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/nyt-sweeping-raids-giant-camps-and-mass-deportations-inside-trump’s-2025-immigration-plans-trump’s-plans-to-go-full-hitler.784130/#post-114773603

The PoliEra community is in shock that another one of their prominent members has been genocided. 

Brady got permabanned for alleged "concern trolling around ethnic cleansing over multiple threads" and "sniping at other posters." Absolute bullshit.

How can you get permed for concern trolling about ethnic cleansing about a NYT times article about the GOP frontrunner's plans to…ethnic cleanse the US? What the Fuck?

He shouldn't have been banned, but he clearly posted that thread and went in with the intention to argue with people when we've seen that continually get regulars from this thread banned.

He basically went on a suicide mission. I hate the fact that the mods ban people for heated arguing on this forum. I don't think it's conducive and just causes people to censor themselves.

But I doubt Brady didn't know what he was getting himself into.

Good lord this site

Hell, I've been banned (granted, just a month long one that was appealed to time served) for reporting someone getting hateful in their arguments. If you can't even report someone without catching heat, why on Earth would I post more than I already do?

This fucking site man

Brady has been doing bullshit like that since he got here and has built up a pretty clear pattern of behavior. Also, he literally admits to trying to start fights with his OP in the post he got banned for. Honestly, after the last cycle, if you're just here to snipe at and score points against other posters, especially as a new account, we're going to go harder on you. If you want to talk about the issues then talk about the issues, but the petty sniping nonsense between communities we saw last cycle isn't on this cycle. We're not having socialism era come in here at 3am to start fights again, we're not having poliera troll them back, or the reverse or whatever.

Last time was exhausting, so if you actually want to talk about the issues then go ahead. You're in no danger. Nothing will happen to you. If you're just here to start fights, and especially if you admit it, then you're going to get hit and hard. If you'll notice, he's the only one who got smacked and on that specific post. Everyone else is fine

That Perma was completely unnecessary. It’s sad another good contributor is gone from this thread.

That's an absolute shit ban. Brady ruffles feathers but no more than people who were here before him that are still here. Just a terrible decision.

But you removed one of the best contributors and individuals who have eased a lot of concerns for others with that ban. It's absolutely uncalled for

Best contributors? He was running around the site acting like a total jackass! He posted conspiracy theories (which he got banned for), attacked other members at the drop of a hat (which he also got hit for a few times), and literally made his OP in the thread in such a way as to snipe at other members and then actively admitted to doing so on purpose! He's been here not even three months and this is his fifth infraction!

If he was a long-time poster this would likely have turned out different, but dude wasn't even out of his 3-month junior phase yet.

Should it be shocking if the real possibility of a disgusting authoritarian getting into power encourages some to be more aggressive in their attempts to ring the alarm?

Last time was exhausting and butchered this community and we're not even into 2024 and have lost two members of one of the more important and educational communities on this board. I pray you all reconsider this and TheHunter's ban.

What conspiracy theories? Genuinely asking.

I think a ban is fine for that thread but not permanent. You're coming up with excuses because you're uncomfortable with a person who doesn't want to continue perpetuating progressive self-owns and will come with energy. It's just a weak ass reasoning

In three months he's become one of the thread's biggest contributors, filling a hole left by other members' losses. So many informative posts, keeping people dialed in to things like polling methodology and events that most members would not know about otherwise.

I actually agree with his snark in the OP of that thread. It wasn't exactly helpful in the context of Trump's plans, but my sincere belief is that if you are willing to throw all marginalized people under the bus because you feel personally slighted by Biden, then you can go fuck yourself. Instead we're going to once again have people coming in here proudly proclaiming that they won't vote for Biden, and those people who are very obviously trying to pick a fight and get people to "debate me" will go unpunished because the truth is that there's plenty of people high up enough in the staff that agree with them.




Remember just earlier this year when mods came in here and in threads in Etc. and basically gave a mea culpa about how they went too far in perming people and listening to bad actors in the lead up to 2020?

Time is a circle.

Look, it's down to a month, but here the thing: we are NOT doing the inter-community sniping we did last time. Full stop. It's not happening. We are not going through that shit again and I'd hope all of you would agree how unreadable it made things last time around. We're not doing it this time. You guys begged us to come down on this shit and we are, but that means you gotta hold up your end too and not contribute to it. There's a difference between making your voice heard and attacking other people. There was no need for that thread to go in the direction it did and brady has a lot of blame in that. So if you want him to stick around, get your buddy to shape up.

Brady was one of the reasons this thread didn't die after you guys banned Hunter. At a certain point this thread will be completely barren. Is there also no functionality to lock accounts to being able to post in certain threads? I miss a lot of old posters.

And again, we are NOT doing the sniping and trolling we did last time. We're coming down on it, so if you start it expect to get smacked. If you perpetuate it, expect to get smacked.

If you wanna talk about the issues then talk about the issues, but for the love of god leave the knives at home.

I think for a supposedly liberal site we should try as much to abide by the principle of freedom of speech as possible. Thank you BDubs for reducing the ban - let's try to move on and remember that we're all on the same side here trying to prevent fascism in this country.

   

https://www.resetera.com/threads/us-poliera-2023-ot-2-tapping-the-sign.768689/page-121#post-114775874

Guess they changed it

User banned (1 month): sniping at other posters and concern trolling around ethnic cleansing across multiple threads

[Nintex]

Cast Sophie Thatcher, who is a total baller and will take the florence pugh pipeline soon I believe

Maybe for a younger Zelda but Nintendo knows their audience well.

For TOTK a lot of the marketing focused on 30 - 40 something salary men winding down after a days work. These days Nintendo sees Zelda typically as a franchise with appeal to older players in terms of challenge and complexity (teenagers and up). They also gave up on Toon Link and have pretty much made adult Link the 'default' version.

I don't think they will make Zelda a 'kids' movie like the Mario Movie but instead try something more LOTR-esque. If they went with Toon Link or Young Link they would've made an animated movie instead. This could be the big break for live action video game movies if they play their cards right, just like the Mario movie was for animated video game movies. If this works the sky is the limit with Nintendo's endless supply of video game IPs.

lol Miyamoto ain't going to cast a trans Zelda. He's going to pick a well known blonde like Margot Robbie or someone who has already played royalty like Vanessa Kirby.

Link being 'too girly' has been a running joke among Nintendo executives in interviews and Nintendo Directs for decades.
Aonuma and Tezuka have been especially fond of it. It originated from the Wind Waker days, when they changed to what was perceived as a hunk by female players in OOT to a girlish boy in TWW.

[ComeAgain]

Ah the "Kamala is a forced character nobody likes" rhetoric. Now this thread is REALLY going places.

I mean, yeah? Her show got dismal ratings. This movie is getting middling reviews and it’s a bomb at the box office, so…

[HaughtyFrank]

Ah the "Kamala is a forced character nobody likes" rhetoric. Now this thread is REALLY going places.

I mean, yeah? Her show got dismal ratings. This movie is getting middling reviews and it’s a bomb at the box office, so…

What is your explanation to both her show and movie being two of the least successful things marvel produced?

Irrelevant. I'm just calling out the red flag where I see it.

I mean if you want to say Kamala have quite cracked the "MCU Mainstream", fine. I was specifically calling out and shutting down the "She's never been popular, Marvel keeps 'forcing' her" rhetoric that's used by scumbag Comicsgaters.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/deadline-the-marvels-hovers-around-6m-thursday-night-box-office.783836/post-114782552

[Besticus Maximus]

They're always extra touchy when someone actually says out loud, you're trying to force us to like things

[kaleidoscopium]

They love to add gate to the end of things and think that absolves all need to argue further 😂

[DSC]

red mage was an alt, no surprise there. guesses as to who they were before?

willing to bet so is brady. nobody racks up 2k posts in 2 months in poliera threads with such "i've always been here" vibes

[kaleidoscopium]

Are we really doing this? Are really trying to blame women led films and high profile women for the MCU's failures? So what's your suggestion here, get rid of She-Hulk, Carol, Kamala, Valkyrie etc because men are scared of them? Only appeal to white men (after all, those "core" fans may not like Shang-Chi, Rhodey and Sam either!) because diversity scares the MCU's apparent fans?

And I genuinely can't believe we're actually doing the "women don't like superheroes" thing in this thread. I apparently don't exist.

[ComeAgain]

Ah yes, the men who are the ones showing up most for The Marvels, otherwise these numbers would be even worse, are scared of them. Spot on analysis

[benji]

The whole "It can't be X because of movie A" thinking is so simplistic and childish; all these upward and downward pressures exist to various degrees, and The Marvels just happened to get slammed by a multitude of different strong downward pressures.

You mean a coordinated harassment and disinformation campaign by chuds.

Are we really doing this? Are really trying to blame women led films and high profile women for the MCU's failures? So what's your suggestion here, get rid of She-Hulk, Carol, Kamala, Valkyrie etc because men are scared of them? Only appeal to white men (after all, those "core" fans may not like Shang-Chi, Rhodey and Sam either!) because diversity scares the MCU's apparent fans?

And I genuinely can't believe we're actually doing the "women don't like superheroes" thing in this thread. I apparently don't exist.

Yes, that's what all these people want, for Disney to change nothing else but replace all the characters with white men. The money will come rolling in because rather than spreading lies about the lack of fun the chuds will hype up how much fun there is in seeing white men in movies. There's really nothing else to do, Disney tried everything else, they put women, people of color, etc. in movies for the first time ever and now look at how many genocides are happening because of how angry the chuds got about it. We live in an absolute hellworld where the chuds always get what they want and the only way to save the MCU and society is to divest from capitalism, colonialism and white supremacy. Except Zaslav has tricked Bob Iger into pandering to the chuds rather than the vast majority of people who want fun movies. If the quality of the MCU wasn't so continuously good and regularly coming out with slam dunk factually excellent content I don't know how I'd spend my days with no hope at all.

[ComeAgain]

Prepare to have half a dozen people comment on your post about how you don't understand how any of this works.

I'm more amused than anything. Because Cinemascore only polls opening day movie-goers who are already super enthusiastic , the grades tend to skew higher than what the general audience would give it, but the amount of people who are using the B grade are saying its a bad movie, or that the MCU is in trouble are sounding a lot like certain youtubers.

It kinda just makes me want to see the movie more now lol.

Lawd the denial  and this person has a few posts like this in that thread

[benji]

Apparently there was a whole drama in constructive about closing the Zelda trans actress thread that I don’t think anyone posted here. Post dump:

Generally speaking, whether a thread is worth having or not is based on a number of factors and is also done on a categorical basis. Which is why sometimes threads are locked for being "non-news" while WeekendEra shitpost threads are treated differently. The Hunter Schaefer thread that is the catalyst, or perhaps lighting rod, for all this feedback? That's not substantial news by a number of objective metrics, which I agree with in a bubble. When there's big news, such as a freaking The Legend of Zelda movie in the works, that has everyone talking about it we inherently try to limit less substantial threads and get people talking in established threads. That was the case here and everyone is entitled to their valid feelings, such as possibly seeing it as a microaggression against the trans community. I and other staff do want to convey that we do not keep tabs on our thread locking behaviors/patterns. We try to be consistent but some smaller threads just get locked while others don't. There is already so much on our plates that it's just not something we can feasibly keep track of other than using what guiding principles we do have to lock threads. That's all there is to it, there's no malice on our part there. Such arbitrariness just comes with moderation and we ask for your understanding.

Upon review, we will reopen the Hunter Schaefer thread as we can now see that there is a different kind of merit to the thread that was not considered at the time.

It's not that there is no introspection, we have plenty of that. There are just an incredibly large amount of scenarios in which a thread might be made. We have some guidelines we generally adhere to, but they can't really account for every single topic.  For things that require more scrutiny - e.g., elections, world events, or even like, a gaming conference, etc. -  we choose to spend more effort there because it requires more.  For the rest, it's more like looking at it in the moment and making a decision on whether it seems worth having the discussion. This could be because maybe the topic isn't presented well (or purposefully skewed), or it's a random WeekendEra-type thread that is too over the top, or any number of factors.

Despite the guidelines, there's always going to be some level of arbitrary decision making when it comes to these smaller threads.  Perhaps there is currently a megathread that the info would be more suited. Maybe it's been a long day of handling Israel/Palestine reports and we really don't want to have to deal with yet another thread on The Last Jedi (only half joking here).

My valid feelings: these people are idiots.

[Taco Bell Tower]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/deadline-the-marvels-hovers-around-6m-thursday-night-box-office.783836/page-12#post-114783293

There's an ongoing online hate campaign against this movie, and it's been orchestrated by the same haters who have been targeting Ant-Man all these years! It's sad to see what they're doing.

I still hope for the best. People will eventually realize this movie is really good.

If this is sarcasm I'm all for it lol

I'm probably the only person still defending Ant-Man, I think haters of the character have tried to sabotage his movies for a while and finally succeeded this year. The hate against Quantumania is overblown, but they managed to make it "look cool" to bash the movie endlessly on social media.

People thought BloodRayne was jking 

[Potato]

Apparently there was a whole drama in constructive about closing the Zelda trans actress thread that I don’t think anyone posted here. Post dump:

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

Seeing a thread where the responses are super positive about the hope or potential for a trans woman to be cast as the titular character for one of the most iconic franchises in gaming, where posters are having a good time and the mood is joyful, and swooping in to kill that mood dead and lock the thread because you deem it not thread-worthy is pretty damn sad tbh.

Asking what colour your belly button fluff is tho? Super important.

It also didn't seem to be a problem when Jamie Lee Curtis was doing it:

https://www.resetera.com/threads/jamie-lee-curtis-once-the-strike-is-over-i-will-lobby-along-with-all-the-fans-to-become-doctor-kureha-in-netflixs-one-piece.767288/

Odd isn't it.

The decision towards what is and isn't thread worthy are so inconsistent sometimes that its hard to figure out what goes into making them.  Like a majority of the threads made here are kinda dumb and useless and sort of "not thread worthy" so I don't get how, "Will Sony sell 25 million consoles here's a poll" or "Predict this games metacritic!"  is somehow more conducive to insightful or interesting discussion than the potential casting of a trans woman in a Zelda movie.

I think it's because we already have a cast prediction thread, but the thing about curtis had nothing close? Could 100% be wrong through.

The close message doesn't specify that the conversation should happen in the prediction thread, just that actors saying they would want a part is not thread worthy.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/hunter-schafer-euphoria-playing-princess-zelda-in-nintendo%E2%80%99s-live-action-the-legend-of-zelda-movie-would-be-so-cool.783617/post-114706985

Yeah, I really agree.  A big inconsistency in what really is valid.  Hunter openly saying she would want the role isn't a confirmation  but we have had like 10 threads about Nolan saying he wants to make James Bond.  Or even that Jaime Lee Curtis One Piece thread recently.

To say nothing of the Weekend Era threads, some of which have been literal nonsense humor at times yet have been allowed to remain open. Mind you, I like those kinds of threads because of how lighthearted they can be.

Is a thread about asking about cutting toe nails really important enough to be a topic?

I guess I don't understand why a thread like that (EDIT: not the toenails one, lmao) is subject to needing to be "thread-worthy" to begin with?

I more or less can understand considering that when it's a matter of like… "is it really worth holding up this specific random Twitter user or YouTuber the OP likes as having a valuable, authoritative take when people are arguing over it" (…though I suppose we also recently saw how that kind of judgement can backfire). But the only negative post in the thread I saw was just someone threadwhining. If it's just people nicely discussing something like that, I don't really get why we need to judge it?

Especially when you can just kinda slap together a shitpost and that's somehow more worthy of a thread.

This is literally the same thread premise but somehow fine. Like, there is no consistency here whatsoever. What makes these threads different? Why is one 'not thread worthy' but the other fine? Serious question.

This place has had hundreds, if not thousands of threads that really aren't 'thread worthy' but like, sometimes they make people smile/happy. One person out of everybody who posted in seemed the locked thread seemed to object to with what was nothing but a threadwhining post and that was that.

The Jamie Lee Curtis thread was also allowed to run it's natural course too - people cheering on the idea, some humor, and then it died off. This all happened within a day.

Given that this thread has some merit, if however minor, what was the reason for locking it instead of just letting it run it's natural course? We all know threads on trans related subjects die off super fast on Era anyhow.

yeah, i feel like over the past year or so the number of thread closures has increased by a dramatic amount, all with a very brazen "does this really need to be a thread?" type close message, which - yes, i would say a vast majority of them do. if they are not going to present issues for the mod staff wrt: overly heated discussion or otherwise cause burdens, then why not just hit the ignore button on the thread and let posters enjoy themselves? how do we allow a thread like "let's keep counting upwards until a mod locks the thread" while shutting down often fairly genuine or interesting discussion?

While I wouldn't want to see etcetera filled up with threads called "so and so to play jokers dad" or whatever, the Hunter Schafer thread seemed to be the first time a lot of posters had heard of her, and as Kyuuji mentioned, was filled with positivity. I think there's some much-needed nuance with thread closure decisions like this that isn't happening at the moment.

Generally speaking, whether a thread is worth having or not is based on a number of factors and is also done on a categorical basis. Which is why sometimes threads are locked for being "non-news" while WeekendEra shitpost threads are treated differently. The Hunter Schaefer thread that is the catalyst, or perhaps lighting rod, for all this feedback? That's not substantial news by a number of objective metrics, which I agree with in a bubble. When there's big news, such as a freaking The Legend of Zelda movie in the works, that has everyone talking about it we inherently try to limit less substantial threads and get people talking in established threads. That was the case here and everyone is entitled to their valid feelings, such as possibly seeing it as a microaggression against the trans community. I and other staff do want to convey that we do not keep tabs on our thread locking behaviors/patterns. We try to be consistent but some smaller threads just get locked while others don't. There is already so much on our plates that it's just not something we can feasibly keep track of other than using what guiding principles we do have to lock threads. That's all there is to it, there's no malice on our part there. Such arbitrariness just comes with moderation and we ask for your understanding.

Upon review, we will reopen the Hunter Schaefer thread as we can now see that there is a different kind of merit to the thread that was not considered at the time.

This is very appreciated. Thank you.

Appreciate the unlock and update. For what it's worth the issue was less that it was substantial news by any objective metric, and more that it was evidently of interest to the forum and received well. Read the first two pages of that thread and people are just happy. Maybe that should be considered in the worthiness of a thread in and of itself even if it isn't major major news.

Having threads that are majority positive in their responses is obviously a boon to the forum. Not least one where a trans woman is suggested to play an icon of a beloved gaming franchise lol. I know you don't disagree with that, so thanks for the unlock and allowing it to run its course.

Up front, I want to say I appreciate what was done in this case; thank y'all for listening and re-opening it.

But I also want to say that I'm a little surprised that there's not been introspection on the handling of thread locks. Purely because the way threads get locked (in general though, not necessarily with a consistent issue) feels like it comes up in this thread as a pain point pretty frequently?

It's not that there is no introspection, we have plenty of that. There are just an incredibly large amount of scenarios in which a thread might be made. We have some guidelines we generally adhere to, but they can't really account for every single topic.  For things that require more scrutiny - e.g., elections, world events, or even like, a gaming conference, etc. -  we choose to spend more effort there because it requires more.  For the rest, it's more like looking at it in the moment and making a decision on whether it seems worth having the discussion. This could be because maybe the topic isn't presented well (or purposefully skewed), or it's a random WeekendEra-type thread that is too over the top, or any number of factors.

Despite the guidelines, there's always going to be some level of arbitrary decision making when it comes to these smaller threads.  Perhaps there is currently a megathread that the info would be more suited. Maybe it's been a long day of handling Israel/Palestine reports and we really don't want to have to deal with yet another thread on The Last Jedi (only half joking here).

When I woke up this morning and saw that thread lock I was about to make a similar post myself but I had to go in a hurry and I was hoping that it would be you who put it more eloquently than I ever could. So thank you. It's fucked that we can have some kind of scatological joke thread every other week (which I honestly don't mind, for the record) and a thread where people are showing enthusiasm about trans representation gets shut down, just like that, for a bullshit reason. Extremely fucking disappointed, fucking read the room.
Anyway, I just wanted to thank you Kyuuji ❤️

its understandable it could be seen as fragmentation. Zelda movie is big news and there will be potntially threads sprouting over the tiniest indirect connection. Considering its only one notice and we have no real details and its ages away, it makes sense to keep discussion in one thread like with many other early news threads.

Similarly understandable given the volume of threads that specific details can’t always be meaningfully absorbed before making such decisions.

Appreciate it being reconsidered though

The thread locking policy in general seems to skew towards "shoot first ask questions later never". It kind of contradicts the reality that a thread that mayyybe should've/could've been locked usually doesn't hurt anybody, while the opposite will often bother people. Even from a mod perspective it just seems to invite complaints for no real benefit.

Do these thread locks tend to happen because people are reporting the threads, or because mods see the thread and decide that it needs closed? Just wondering what the catalyst is for closing them if people are being civil and not causing trouble.

Either of those can happen.

BDumbs is absolutely bitch made by the trans lunatics. Balls in a jar.

[Echelon]

Imagine if instead of deciding to be the arbiters of discussion, they just allowed threads to live and die organically based on the community's desire to discuss those topics. But that would render them as little less than janitors instead of the cops they crave to be.

Dumb cunts, the lot of them.

[HaughtyFrank]

Are we really doing this? Are really trying to blame women led films and high profile women for the MCU's failures? So what's your suggestion here, get rid of She-Hulk, Carol, Kamala, Valkyrie etc because men are scared of them? Only appeal to white men (after all, those "core" fans may not like Shang-Chi, Rhodey and Sam either!) because diversity scares the MCU's apparent fans?

And I genuinely can't believe we're actually doing the "women don't like superheroes" thing in this thread. I apparently don't exist.

Isn't Echos of cyborg a self admitted autistic trans lesbian? Why do they think they get to speak for all women or something? Why does RE have such a problem with speaking for entire groups anyway?

[benji]

Look, we can't be having people going about with unproductive discussion on topics not worth discussing.

[kaleidoscopium]

1699736127[/url]']

Prepare to have half a dozen people comment on your post about how you don't understand how any of this works.

I'm more amused than anything. Because Cinemascore only polls opening day movie-goers who are already super enthusiastic , the grades tend to skew higher than what the general audience would give it, but the amount of people who are using the B grade are saying its a bad movie, or that the MCU is in trouble are sounding a lot like certain youtubers.

It kinda just makes me want to see the movie more now lol.

Lawd the denial  and this person has a few posts like this in that thread

Was trying to think how to quote them here, it’s impossible because they just keep going and their posts get stupider and stupider 😂

[kaleidoscopium]

1699736732[/url]']

1699735363[/url]']

Are we really doing this? Are really trying to blame women led films and high profile women for the MCU's failures? So what's your suggestion here, get rid of She-Hulk, Carol, Kamala, Valkyrie etc because men are scared of them? Only appeal to white men (after all, those "core" fans may not like Shang-Chi, Rhodey and Sam either!) because diversity scares the MCU's apparent fans?

And I genuinely can't believe we're actually doing the "women don't like superheroes" thing in this thread. I apparently don't exist.

Isn't Echos of cyborg a self admitted autistic trans lesbian? Why do they think they get to speak for all women or something? Why does RE have such a problem with speaking for entire groups anyway?

Probably, they talk like one at least.

I've had nonsense thrown at me by male "fans" of comics for wanting more diversity back when the New52 was a new thing. I'm sorry but getting rid of women to appeal to male fans who are scared of strong women is not the answer.