Tbh I'm getting the impression American education isn't very good amd that's why people are turning out so poorly able to think
It's so disturbing how things that used to be considered common sense across the political spectrum (vaccines) are now considered controversial by half the country.
For the first time in 10 years, a child has died from measles in the United States.
Vaccines prevent measles.
Americans need to hear our top health officials say clearly: every child in America should get vaccinated against this terrible disease.
Our state legislature’s in session so I’ve spent the time between my other morning tasks writing and submitting testimony for healthcare, housing, traffic safety and public transit bills in both chambers.
I need a bill tracker 😬
And she blocked. What an angry person lol
Uhh...I never said there's no propaganda in the UK. There's a lot.
But because the news can't outright lie, as I said in my original thread, which you clearly didn't read properly, UK news bias is more through suggestion and insinuation.
Not outright stating an incorrect fact.
You seem angry! 😂
Not sure why Elizabeth is so angry when people ask straightforward questions about the law and news lying.
Intelligent people ask questions and learn. Stupid people refuse to ask questions or learn and yell at people who want to.
Gripes?
It's literally me asking questions, ya know, to get people's insight 🤣
Sorry you hate conversation? 😂
Also assuming US news can legally lie, how come making that illegal hasn't been more of a priority?
I imagine folks will say 1st amendment but 1st amendment covers opinion, no? Rather than presenting things as fact?
Or in America do news organisations have the same rights as individual citizens?
Bearing this in mind, how can Fox News just state things like "Democrats bring immigrants here to make them voters."
Like how is it legal to lie in the news? In the UK, you can't do that. That's why news bias is more sneaky, more to do with suggestion or implied meaning.
Can US news legally lie?
Genuine question for Americans
In the UK we have laws around libel & also so that the news can't just blatantly say something incorrect.For example the BBC recently had to amend a headline where they accused trans women of being rapists because it was factually wrong
Is this not a law in USA? 1/2⬇️
it's 2025, if you're *still* into Harry Potter as a grown adult you're just a cunt. Not even because the author is a fascist piece of shit, which she is, but because they're fucking shit
So when queer film fans defend someone who has 0 interest in our actual ability to survive and indeed is helping the forces that want us dead.......
That is disturbing to me.
It's disturbing that you're duped so easily
That you don't understand most bigotry is just APATHY (Fiennes) not hate (JKR)
If Ralph Fiennes was genuinely affected by the content of Conclave, he would be defending the rights of intersex, trans folk, POC etc
But he isn't
He is only concerned with these groups as a CURIOSITY
That is what west end theatre culture IS & what folks like me have been trying to change 4 YEARS
And this is something gen z find impossible to grasp.
They see an interview where Fiennes makes some generic statement about tolerance and they think he's defending intersex people. NO.
That's just the type of generic crap actors of his age always say to audiences about their acting craft.
This is something you would understand if you'd spent extended time talking to British actors of a certain generation.
They have a big talk about empathy but it is performative (literally). It does not translate to action in the real world.
Fiennes' generation of actors are deeply apolitical.
This is something millennial & gen z fans seem to find impossible to understand
To us, our EMPATHY and our understanding of ART, translates directly to action, to activism, politics, community building etc
For Fiennes, it is not so direct. It's INTERESTING for him but he DOESN'T CARE.
1 of the big claims folks are making is that because Conclave is trying to be a progressive film for minorities, they say Fiennes himself is progressive on minorities
Fiennes is of a generation of actors who consider minorities THEORETICALLY interesting but don't practice activism to help them
BAFFLED by how so many queer film fans stan Ralph Fiennes, who openly supported JK Rowling's definition of a woman (that trans women are men) & when I call them out either lie (example pictured below, didn't happen) or make the baffling claim that a character in a film shares the actor's morals
But also a lot of people are too stupid to educate and you shouldn't have to do it individually for every person.
Then if the conversation does actually come up you have more weight to shut them down, if they say something bad, you have more ability to be mad or stern and because they've not seen you like that before it's taken more seriously.
I actually hate talking to cis people about trans issues. They're so grotesquely poorly educated that if your 1st conversation with them's about trans issues they'll immediately dismiss you as a snowflake
I prefer talking to them about other things-which builds their respect before bringing that up
Films don't have to be leftist necessarily in my opinion to be good or interesting but I don't think this film had a real point of view, nor did it ask interesting enough questions about gender, misogyny or patriarchy
The questions it did ask started strong, but were abandoned as the film continued
How would that affect his faith?or if Cardinal Racist had in fact won, would Lawrence have stayed in the Church?
All questions much more interesting than what we actually got.
A vague feel good message on a technicality that doesn't seem to be for any specific demographic.
The portrayal of fighting liberal vs conservative factions in the Church was interesting but not explored enough.
It would have been better honestly to see Lawrence tested by being a good man in an evil institution. Perhaps the liberal candidate IS homophobic amd DOES win & will he accept that?
Well given the Church's many crimes, the film places a strange level of importance on this ancient institution, when a more interesting question would be why we have allowed it to exist for so long and how people justify being part of it.
Or a deeper exploration of Church misogyny.
Most of the interesting themes were earlier in the film.
Towards the end the intent of the filmmakers became very on the nose and very hollow for me.
And a film about the Catholic Church, an institution of unspeakable evil which actively covered up child rape & rips off its own worshippers...⬇️
My partner has long had 0 desire to see this film as it appeared to be another film with almost entirely men. After 100 years of men. And men being serious. And men thinking about morals. And men arguing.
And yeah...it kinda was.
It wasn't a bad film.
But it wasn't progressive or all that deep.
It is a film where men, mostly white men nod along to concepts they find exotic or interesting (like intersex people or racism)
But once they leave the theatre or cinema, there is no permanent effect to these concepts. There is no meaning behind this art beyond amusement for the privelliged
The gender elements of the film are vague, they feel tokenistic, they lack authenticity as to my knowledge nobody intersex is involved in this film (I have tried to find out if the actor is intersex, there is nothing on that, which is concerning).
This film is for libs & posh people.
