Kulturkampf

[HaughtyFrank]

[Nintex]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/Mangalawyer/status/1770689024228757757

[/tweet]

November 5th will be a wonderful day

[benji]

https://twitter.com/torturednbroken/status/1770582988469751937

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

[Nintex]

How the times have changed and it'll only get worse.

A poll released in the Netherlands today showed 55% of the population support breaking off diplomatic relations with Israel.

[Eric Cartman]

Mona: Australian art museum sued over women's-only exhibit

Inside Tasmania's famous Museum of Old and New Art lies a large, emerald-draped cube.

The walls are thick silk curtains. Within them, a cascading chandelier hangs over a phallus-shaped velvet couch and a chequered marble floor. Opulent gold accents everything - from the framed art on the walls to the furniture.

Women are ushered in and offered champagne by male butlers "who live to serve" them. But men are otherwise noticeably absent, turned away at the entrance.

This "Ladies Lounge" takes the concept of an old Australian pub and turns it on its head.

It was only in 1965 that women won the right to drink in the nation's bars. Previously, they were relegated to dingy side rooms, if admitted at all, and often charged exorbitant prices for their tipple.

And so, the exhibit - which contains some of the museum's most-acclaimed works, from Picasso to Sidney Nolan - was designed as a piece of interactive art, intended to provide a safe place for women to enjoy each other's company, while also highlighting the exclusion they faced for decades.

Artist Kirsha Kaechele calls it an "essential space for perspective and reset from this strange and disjointed world of male domination".

And it's one which could now be taken away by a man.

New South Wales resident Jason Lau has complained that the museum, known as Mona, is engaging in illegal discrimination.

This week, the accusation culminated in a high-stakes court hearing - rife with drama and theatrics.

Reparation or discrimination?

Tuesday started with a large group of women dressed in navy power suits, clad in pearls and wearing red lipstick marching into the hearing to support Ms Kaechele.

Mr Lau, by contrast, dialled in without a fuss via a video link. He had visited Mona - long known for its provocative art - while on a trip to Tasmania in April last year, he said, and bought the $35 (£18; $23) ticket expecting access to the whole museum.

"I was quite surprised when I was told that I would not be able to see one exhibition, the Ladies Lounge," he said.

Representing himself, Mr Lau argued it breaches the state's Anti-Discrimination Act.

"Anyone who buys a ticket would expect a fair provision of goods and services in line with the law."

The museum agrees the exhibit does indeed discriminate. But it argued that Mr Lau hasn't missed out on anything - he experienced the artwork exactly as intended.

"Part of the experience is being denied something that is desired," said Mona's counsel, Catherine Scott, according to local paper The Mercury.

Women have often been side-lined from places of power or prestige, and the exhibit was inspired to correct an imbalance which existed at Mona, says Ms Kaechele, whose husband owns the museum.

"It excludes men, and I would be lying if I were to say I didn't find it titillating," she told the hearing, according to The Mercury.

As the parties sparred, the museum's supporters were somewhat stealing the spotlight. They had periods of complete stillness and silence, before moving in some kind of subtle, synchronised dance - crossing their legs and resting their heads on their fists, clutching their hearts, or peering down their spectacles. One even sat there pointedly flipping through feminist texts and making notes.

Apparently unperturbed, the parties continued arguing.

Ultimately, Ms Scott said Mona has a legal defence. The law - as written - allows for discrimination if "designed to promote equal opportunity for a group of people who are disadvantaged or have a special need because of a prescribed attribute".

According to Nine, when asked by tribunal deputy president Richard Grueber to explain how the artwork does that, Ms Kaechele said: "I have taken something that was used to keep women down and I have repurposed it into a triumphant space for [them]."

But Mr Lau argued that section of the law was designed to permit "positive discrimination" and not "negative discrimination".

He wants the lounge to either be closed or for it to admit men. Alternatively, he says men should have to pay less for a ticket than women - something the museum says it will not consider.

After Mr Grueber reserved his decision for a later date, which is yet to be determined, the museum's posse left as conspicuously as it came in - dancing out of the building in a conga line as one woman played 'Simply Irresistible' by Robert Palmer off her iPhone.

Art imitates life

Speaking to the BBC the day after the hearing, Ms Kaechele says the case has felt like the art coming to life.

The exhibit was supposed to spark debate, yes, but has the spirit of a harmless practical joke, she argues.

"It brings up very serious and interesting conversations, but there's also something light hearted about it. Women delight in it and most men, I think, enjoy it. They find it funny."

Ms Kaechele says she is amused - but not surprised - by the men who are genuinely upset, though she hastens to add that Mr Lau has been pleasant and impressive.

"I think people might want to villainise him, but he's actually really lovely."

What does his case say about the themes the Ladies Lounge invokes, like male entitlement and the patriarchy, though?

"Well, I think it speaks for itself," she says.

Ms Kaechele has indicated she'll fight the case all the way to the Supreme Court if needed, but she says - ironically - that perhaps nothing could drive the point of the artwork home more than having to shut it down.

"If you were just looking at it from an aesthetic standpoint, being forced to close would be pretty powerful."

Women have often been side-lined from places of power or prestige, and the exhibit was inspired to correct an imbalance which existed at Mona, says Ms Kaechele, whose husband owns the museum.

whose husband owns the museum.

[benji]

[D3RANG3D]

[HaughtyFrank]

I thought the tweet video might be out of context or something but that's really what it is 

As I chatted with a number of the developers attending the scream, it seemed many of them had shown up for those exact reasons.

"I'm screaming because I was just in a really good, valuable, much-appreciated [GDC] session that I absolutely hated," one game developer who asked to be anonymous told me. "Because we talked about diversity in games and we were all marginalized people, and we're all looking at each other going 'Yeah it sucks, for some reason we have to do this, and we cannot not do this and I don't know how to deal with the obligation of having to do this just because I'm the person that I am.'"

[Nintex]

This is why you shouldn't DEI hire the oof / yikes / pronouns crowd because within 5 - 10 years your industry looks like this. 
Compare this to John Romero, John Carmack, Gabe Newell and the other kings.

How can you make an exciting videogame if you are so easily triggered and the only means to expres yourself is to cry like a baby.


We fucking told you these companies only hired Fiver Pakistani to photoshop their logos with rainbow flags to secure cheap loans and pat themselves on the back.
But you didn't listen 

[HaughtyFrank]

Even other game devs openly thinking this is embarrassing 

[benji]

[Nintex]

[Potato]

Everything this guy says it's invalidated by him including the prequels as something that wasn't the beginning of the end for Star Wars.

The prequels are fucking awful and any attempt by retarded nerds to say otherwise in aid of their current retarded culture war is just fucking retarded.

[Polident]

For their faults, the prequels movies did appeal to kids and led to a boom of other media, all the games and Clone Wars show. The whole reevaluation of them is from those kids who (physically) grew up.

The newer stuff, I don’t know who the target audience is. They’re all gen x and old millennials making this stuff for other people like them.

[Nintex]

[Nintex]

[benji]

Have they tried writing more articles about how they hate their audience and hate video games?

[benji]

Ray Wong
@raywongy
Deputy Editor of Tech Reviews & Guides
@inversedotcom
» 📧 ray.wong@inverse.com | Prevs: ∞ Founding Editor
@inputmag
(RIP) • Senior Tech Correspondent
@mashable

[benji]

Spoiler: is this linkedin? (click to show)(click to hide)

Beep boop:

[Nintex]

[Uncle]

For their faults, the prequels movies did appeal to kids and led to a boom of other media, all the games and Clone Wars show. The whole reevaluation of them is from those kids who (physically) grew up.

The newer stuff, I don’t know who the target audience is. They’re all gen x and old millennials making this stuff for other people like them.

the premise was shit: don't explore your intimidating awesome villain when he was a baby and whiny angsty teen

the plots and writing were shit

however in spite of all this the worldbuilding was great and really led to expanded possibilities for other storytelling in that universe

there was no prior understanding of what the galaxy used to look like in peace and prosperity, with jedi intact

it laid the groundwork for things like kotor

[Potato]

The prequels made everything stupid, but nothing as stupid as the jedi and the force. 

Instead of mystical samurai, they became super space cops and the force became super overpowered. 

There was no nuance in light side/dark side usage. Only the sith use the dark side. 

The force was always a neutral force in the OT and had both light and dark. The dark side wasn't evil and the light side wasn't good. Anyone could use either and both had their strengths and weaknesses. Too much use of the dark side can corrupt because it is where the might and power is. Having so much power can corrupt even the best intentioned, but that was never explored in the prequels.

This binary nature of the force in the prequels meant that Anakin turning to the dark side had to hinge on the most idiotic reason and everything fell apart. Would have made much more sense for him to lose his humanity slowly during the clone war and become drunk with power. He should have lost respect for the common people because they were not up to his standards and then he would have been easy for the Emperor to seduce to the dark side to use his power to "make things better/make the republic great again" like a good space fascist.

Lightsabres also became super overpowered and dumb.

If you like the prequels you have no brain.

[Polident]

the premise was shit: don't explore your intimidating awesome villain when he was a baby and whiny angsty teen

the plots and writing were shit

however in spite of all this the worldbuilding was great and really led to expanded possibilities for other storytelling in that universe

there was no prior understanding of what the galaxy used to look like in peace and prosperity, with jedi intact

it laid the groundwork for things like kotor

I’m sure some nerd can come in with some examples. But there anything new in the new Star Wars? Some 30 years later it’s x wings vs tie fighters. They’re flying the millennium falcon. They’re fighting stormtroopers. Same aesthetic and everything.

Think I’m thinking of Battlefront 2 where you could choose different eras to play. The prequel or original trilogy were distinct from one another. Try that with the new movies, it’s the same everything.

I mean, you had a fun racing game based on pod racing. There’s nothing to build on in the new stuff.

[Nintex]

The prequels made everything stupid, but nothing as stupid as the jedi and the force. 

Instead of mystical samurai, they became super space cops and the force became super overpowered. 

There was no nuance in light side/dark side usage. Only the sith use the dark side. 

The force was always a neutral force in the OT and had both light and dark. The dark side wasn't evil and the light side wasn't good. Anyone could use either and both had their strengths and weaknesses. Too much use of the dark side can corrupt because it is where the might and power is. Having so much power can corrupt even the best intentioned, but that was never explored in the prequels.

This binary nature of the force in the prequels meant that Anakin turning to the dark side had to hinge on the most idiotic reason and everything fell apart. Would have made much more sense for him to lose his humanity slowly during the clone war and become drunk with power. He should have lost respect for the common people because they were not up to his standards and then he would have been easy for the Emperor to seduce to the dark side to use his power to "make things better/make the republic great again" like a good space fascist.

Lightsabres also became super overpowered and dumb.

If you like the prequels you have no brain.

The light saber being some kind of super weapon was weird. In the original it seemed like it was more a of a traditional thing "the weapon of a jedi" much like how dueling or fencing existed among the European aristocracy long after guns were invented.

[HaughtyFrank]

Sounds like she's more concerned about how the story drove clicks above anything else

[benji]

"Second-most read story!"

[Potato]

"Second-most read story!"

A guide was probably the most read story

[Tucker's Law]

Everything this guy says it's invalidated by him including the prequels as something that wasn't the beginning of the end for Star Wars.

The prequels are fucking awful and any attempt by retarded nerds to say otherwise in aid of their current retarded culture war is just fucking retarded.

Star Wars has always been for kids and nobs, and the prequels didn’t change that.  Great original scores, though.

[Gamegirl Nostalgia]

We gotta sell children's toys, George! Make more marketable characters!  

[HaughtyFrank]

Apparently one journalist covering the whole sweet baby thing was pretty open about how they don't care that this whole affair went into overdrive when sweet baby tried to ban the guy in steam

[tweet]https://twitter.com/lobsterlooker/status/1769859963420082196?t=sN3WqVFoGjsYvySKKtXolw&s=19[/tweet]

If the point of your argument gets lost by simply providing a timeline I'd say it's fair to say that there's probably something flawed with your argument