• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

King Richard is sexist?

T

thebeave

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Messages
4,435
Location
Silicon Valley, CA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
This is a weird one from the world of SJWs gone mad. There is a movie out called "King Richard" about the father of Venus and Serena Williams, and his role in creating these two tennis superstars. Will Smith stars as their dad, Richard. Apparently, that didn't go over too well with one "Dr. Jessica Taylor" on Twitter, a white feminist woman (I know, right?) who tweeted:

9074eeadd81a4d18b78d85b4f9354ccd_md.jpg


The twist in this is that Venus and Serena are executive producers of this film, and developed it as a way to honor the role of their father Richard in their lives and careers. Even after this fact was pointed out to her, she double downed with another tweet. Apparently, there are others who agree with Dr. Taylor. Read the whole story here:

SERENA & VENUS WILLIAMS MOVIE ABOUT DAD CRITICIZED AS SEXIST Despite Them Being EPs

Its generally the case that when a person (or persons as in this case) says, or creates, something that is perceived as sexist (or racist or homophobic) by others they are obligated to apologize publicly to the offended, and promise to do better in the future, blah, blah, blah. What about in this case, though? How does it work, though, when the people you are getting offended on behalf of are not personally offended. Or are in fact creators of the thing that was "offensive"? Should Venus and Serena apologize to Dr. Taylor for making a sexist film, or should Dr. Taylor apologize for being hypersensitive and a busybody?
 
thebeave said:
This is a weird one from the world of SJWs gone mad. There is a movie out called "King Richard" about the father of Venus and Serena Williams, and his role in creating these two tennis superstars. Will Smith stars as their dad, Richard. Apparently, that didn't go over too well with one "Dr. Jessica Taylor" on Twitter, a white feminist woman (I know, right?) who tweeted:

View attachment 36194


The twist in this is that Venus and Serena are executive producers of this film, and developed it as a way to honor the role of their father Richard in their lives and careers. Even after this fact was pointed out to her, she double downed with another tweet. Apparently, there are others who agree with Dr. Taylor. Read the whole story here:

SERENA & VENUS WILLIAMS MOVIE ABOUT DAD CRITICIZED AS SEXIST Despite Them Being EPs

Its generally the case that when a person (or persons as in this case) says, or creates, something that is perceived as sexist (or racist or homophobic) by others they are obligated to apologize publicly to the offended, and promise to do better in the future, blah, blah, blah. What about in this case, though? How does it work, though, when the people you are getting offended on behalf of are not personally offended. Or are in fact creators of the thing that was "offensive"? Should Venus and Serena apologize to Dr. Taylor for making a sexist film, or should Dr. Taylor apologize for being hypersensitive and a busybody?
Click to expand...
The correct response to Dr Taylor's Tweet - if one indeed has the patience to engage a feminist - is 'no, they made a film about Richard Williams'. But it is generally not fruitful to engage feminists in discourse.
 
"King Richard" is the nickname that I gave to my old favorite putt-plug. It was pretty hefty.
 
Serena Williams was born in my home town. I actually remember handling her blood work in the lab when she was in the hospital nursery.
 
I never even learned how to swing a tennis bat, personally.

iu
 
@Patooka Attempting to seduce me, now, are you?
 
I say the film does not have enough dragons in it, and I would rather watch a film that has better dragon representation.

It doesn't mean I'm trying to dictate how you think. I just like dragons.

The reason why I think a non-dragon pride parade is a dumb idea is that every day is a non-dragon pride parade. Declaring one is just kind of dissing dragons for no reason. Dragons have to speak out, or people forget we are there. The people that currently happen to have a cultural hegemony have their pride march on every day that nobody else has a pride march.

Likewise, powerful women are a minority. They feel like if they don't say, "Hey, I managed to become a doctor!" then you might forget that women can become doctors if they really want to. That's why they mention they are doctors and promote better representation for other powerful women.

So a woman that wants people to know she's a doctor made a snark comment about a dude being the title character in a film about two influential female athletes, but it turned out that the two influential female athletes in question just wanted there to be a special movie about their dad, which is totally understandable but also understandably disappointing to a woman that would have wanted the film to be about the athletes, themselves. I. Don't. Care. Nobody should really care. Everybody understands why she feels obligated to make those kinds of statements. Those statements are not always going to be on-point, but sometimes, I pass gas. A couple of people snicker, and everybody forgets it.

Let's talk about dildos.
 
Last edited:
SigmatheZeta said:
I say the film does not have enough dragons in it, and I would rather watch a film that has better dragon representation.

It doesn't mean I'm trying to dictate how you think. I just like dragons.

The reason why I think a non-dragon pride parade is a dumb idea is that every day is a non-dragon pride parade. Declaring one is just kind of dissing dragons for no reason. Dragons have to speak out, or people forget we are there. The people that currently happen to have a cultural hegemony have their pride march on every day that nobody else has a pride march.
Click to expand...



Likewise, powerful women are a minority. They feel like if they don't say, "Hey, I managed to become a doctor!" then you might forget that women can become doctors if they really want to. That's why they mention they are doctors and promote better representation for other powerful women.
Click to expand...
Then they are pushy/bitchy...

So a woman that wants people to know she's a doctor made a snark comment about a dude being the title character in a film about two influential female athletes, but it turned out that the two influential female athletes in question just wanted there to be a special movie about their dad, which is totally understandable but also understandably disappointing to a woman that would have wanted the film to be about the athletes, themselves. I. Don't. Care. Nobody should really care. Everybody understands why she feels obligated to make those kinds of statements. Those statements are not always going to be on-point, but sometimes, I pass gas. A couple of people snicker, and everybody forgets it.
Click to expand...
And holy Zeus...the Dr. has ~6500 Twitter followers...Faux must have had slow day...
 
I promise I would not eat villagers if dragons were given better representation. I am a pescetarian.
 
I'm... a bit confused as to why you think this movie could not, in fact, be sexist. Just because two women were involved in its production? If taking down the patriarchy is that easy, we're in good shape lol.
 
Politesse said:
I'm... a bit confused as to why you think this movie could not, in fact, be sexist. Just because two women were involved in its production? If taking down the patriarchy is that easy, we're in good shape lol.
Click to expand...
The original Tweet, and its followups, indicates that Taylor's problem is not that there is sexist content in the movie, but the existence of the movie itself is the problem. She says 'I genuinely didn't expect a film about two of the most powerful, successful and amazing black female athletes to be named after a man, or centre a man.'

She does not seem to be aware of the incoherence of her own statement. The film is not about black female athletes. It's about Richard Williams. She says it herself: it centres a man. What Taylor feels so threatened by is that a number of people, including Venus and Serena Williams, thought a movie about their father was worth telling and they told it.
 
Politesse said:
I'm... a bit confused as to why you think this movie could not, in fact, be sexist. Just because two women were involved in its production? If taking down the patriarchy is that easy, we're in good shape lol.
Click to expand...
Kyriarchy in general!

Toxic prisoners' dilemmas, and the only true master of that prison is our own distrust toward each other.

Without trust, we are effectively a circular firing squad.
 
Politesse said:
I'm... a bit confused as to why you think this movie could not, in fact, be sexist. Just because two women were involved in its production? If taking down the patriarchy is that easy, we're in good shape lol.
Click to expand...
Why does anybody think that the movie is sexist?

Honestly, it looks like a really cynical advertising campaign. "Nobody will care about this movie unless we get somebody to trash talk it."

"But what's to trash? Hot girls. Athletic stars. A totally supportive dad. A true story.
How're you supposed to trash that?"

"Hell, I don't know. Make up something. The movie is sexist or something. Make up anything. Just get the internet talking about it."



"OK"

Tom
 
SigmatheZeta said:
Politesse said:
I'm... a bit confused as to why you think this movie could not, in fact, be sexist. Just because two women were involved in its production? If taking down the patriarchy is that easy, we're in good shape lol.
Click to expand...
Kyriarchy in general!

Toxic prisoners' dilemmas, and the only true master of that prison is our own distrust toward each other.

Without trust, we are effectively a circular firing squad.
Click to expand...
Both excessive and absent bonds of trust are known weapons of the kyriarchy, if it comes to that.
 
Politesse said:
SigmatheZeta said:
Politesse said:
I'm... a bit confused as to why you think this movie could not, in fact, be sexist. Just because two women were involved in its production? If taking down the patriarchy is that easy, we're in good shape lol.
Click to expand...
Kyriarchy in general!

Toxic prisoners' dilemmas, and the only true master of that prison is our own distrust toward each other.

Without trust, we are effectively a circular firing squad.
Click to expand...
Both excessive and absent bonds of trust are known weapons of the kyriarchy, if it comes to that.
Click to expand...
I think that "excessive" really translates to "one-sided." If it doesn't go both ways, there is no real way to break the prisoners' dilemma.
 
I haven't clicked any links or read into this because it seems not worth it, but is your argument seriously that if a woman authors an artistic work, the work cannot rest on the sexist underpinnings of the culture it comes from?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom