|
Post by robeiae on Aug 19, 2018 10:46:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 19, 2018 11:18:58 GMT -5
... $126? I reread that several times to make sure I hadn't missed a few zeroes.
That means maybe a dozen people bought tickets, in 10 cities. I didn't think any movie ever opens that badly. I mean, Free Willy IX: Honeymoon in Vancouver would probably sell more tickets than that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2018 11:31:11 GMT -5
I just spent more than that at Whole Foods.
|
|
|
Post by markesq on Aug 19, 2018 15:35:11 GMT -5
I just spent more than that at Whole Foods. Well, yeah, meaning you bought a carton of milk, two apples, and some honey-citrus lip balm.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Aug 19, 2018 15:38:14 GMT -5
Don't forget the avocado toast! We all know that Cass is a part of the avocado toast crowd...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2018 15:41:19 GMT -5
I had avocado toast for breakfast today, as a matter of fact! (True!) I made it myself, though -- it's one of those things I never order out because it's so cheap and easy to make at home that I just can't see paying a small fortune for it in a restaurant.
And I made a cafe con leche to go with it.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Aug 19, 2018 15:43:08 GMT -5
You're like the hippest person I know.
Aside from Haggis.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2018 15:51:22 GMT -5
You're like the hippest person I know. Aside from Haggis. Oh, I could never compete with haggis on the hipness front.
|
|
|
Post by gaild on Aug 20, 2018 2:53:12 GMT -5
Avocado toast is a hip thing? Is that where you mash up an avo, season it with salt and pepper and spread it on toast? We do that often. I thought it was pretty ordinary. Wow! We're hip!!! Who knew?
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 20, 2018 7:27:19 GMT -5
It's only hip if you pay someone $18 to make it for you.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Aug 20, 2018 8:52:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by haggis on Aug 20, 2018 12:19:20 GMT -5
You're like the hippest person I know. Aside from Haggis. Oh, I could never compete with haggis on the hipness front. Right. Like who else of you would even think of trying avocado kibble?
|
|
|
Post by Don on Aug 20, 2018 12:52:48 GMT -5
"Stereotypical" usually implies oversimplified and false, but what makes behavior stereotypical may in some cases be the fact that it's actually common - i.e., not inaccurate. Pffft. If that's true, why do so many people not act in the 'stereotypical' way? Because we are evolving or adapting as individuals, but the existing members of the power structure have immense incentives to maintain the status quo. Every few decades, it surfaces as a political issue, the usual promises are made, but little changes in the power structure to reflect the broader society.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Aug 25, 2018 19:34:44 GMT -5
Pffft. If that's true, why do so many people not act in the 'stereotypical' way? Because we are evolving or adapting as individuals, but the existing members of the power structure have immense incentives to maintain the status quo. Every few decades, it surfaces as a political issue, the usual promises are made, but little changes in the power structure to reflect the broader society. I was thinking more along the lines of societal influences, as opposed to power structures (assuming you mean government), but I take your point. E.g., the "dumb blonde" stereotype. I think this one has gone away for the most part, but as recently as a couple of decades ago, it seemed like any pretty young blonde on television acted like an airhead. And in my experience, quite a few pretty young blondes acted the part. The question is (and I think we all know the answer) does being pretty and blonde -- and female, of course -- mean you're probably dumb? Or does the stereotype inform the pretty blonde of what her role is to play? Power structures exacerbate garbage stereotypes, for sure (Trump as POTUS issuing "illegal immigrant" vomitous rhetoric in response to the Iowan murdered college student, for example) but even without the politics, those who benefit from current social norms are loathe to change. Including the free market, which by following whatever trend makes the most money, continues to promote stereotypes.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Aug 26, 2018 7:02:40 GMT -5
Long story, short, Christine , you're blaming gender stereotypes on a "free market" that didn't exist when those stereotypes surfaced and were historically enforced by TPTB. Only recently has a "free market" in those roles started to surface, and we can indeed thank that "free market" for the growing diversity in gender and relationship roles. When you say "free market", Christine , you make it seem as if the relatively free market we have today in gender and relationship roles has been in place forever. Up until a couple of decades ago, there was no free market whatsoever in gender or relationship roles. Those roles were, indeed, dictated by the power structure, based on roles previously defined by the earlier dominant power structure, the church. The "dumb blonde" stereotype arose in the days when there were very few sources of role models, and those seen in the media were the fevered imaginings of a few dirty old men who controlled the few movie studios and television networks where those stereotypes were ground into the psyche of those parked in front of pretty picture boxes for several hours each day. Hedy Lamarr was made famous by those same fevered old men for her body, and the brain that led to today's WiFi was not only ignored but hidden to perpetuate those old sterotypes. If you were a participant in other gender or relationship roles, you had to stay underground. Diversity was illegal. Blacks were legally discriminated against. Gays were legally locked up or forced to take drugs to correct their "illness". Alan Turing's genius was denied the world because he fit the wrong gender role for the time. Terms like "BDSM" and "Furry" were sure signs of mental illness and could get you committed. Bachelors and "old maids" were not to be trusted or held up as role models, and an accent automatically marked people as "other"... and all these roles were legally enforced by the power structure. FFS, oral and anal sex are still illegal in any number of states in this supposedly "free" country. Polyamory is still illegal in all 50 "free" states. While some movements, like women's suffrage and civil rights, became too large and/or too violent to ignore, others never gained sufficient momentum to force action away from the status quo. Until the Internet of Ideas gave voice to the incredible diversity that is truly the human condition, and TPTB could no longer ignore those tiny voiced amplified by the communities that were able to form on the Internet. The Stonewall Inn would be another urban legend, if networks and presses were still the only means of mass communication today. Today, there's a home, and voice, for every community of any size, and that has forced society and it's rulers to recognize and begin to deal with reality. Of course, their weapon of choice is coercion, and we still see far too much of it used in defense of the old sterotypes. But the incredible diversity of today's society is in spite of the authoritarian power structure that has tried to stop that diversification with law after law, not because of it. It has been the actions of individuals and groups IN OPPOSITION to existing laws that have forced some changes to grant those outside the white, protestant mainstream to live the life they choose without running afoul of outdated laws. We have a long way to go, and it's the individuals in society, not the so-called "leaders" who are leading the way. The "leaders" have their heels dug in and are resisting with everything they have. So if you want to thank the "free market" for anything, thank it for today's diversity in gender and relationship roles, not the "dumb blond" stereotype created in the fevered dreams of a few old men who used to control the dialog of society. They did their dirty deeds in the absence of anything resembling a "free market." ETA: And by "power structure" or "TPTB" I refer not only to government, but to those people and legal fictions who distort that power structure to their own ends. ETA2: And it's worth noting that in the entertainment industry, those new roles are being embraced and supported by those media producers and advertisers who recognize the shifting reality, now that it's proving profitable to do so. Indeed, profits should follow embracing society's changes, not resisting them. I'd much rather have stock in NetFlix than the Christian Broadcasting Network these days, because the profits will follow the growing freedom, not the religious repression, in the long run.
|
|