Yes, that is true. A great case study in what to avoid. They should teach it in business school except they would probably see it as a positive situation.
. So having a female director on say an action film like Wonder Woman or a comedy like Ghostbusters is seen as an extra risk.
Do you have a citation for this, or are you kind of going on intuition here?
If you don't believe this is true then scroll up a bit and look at some of the comments on this story
I don't care what random people on the internet say, some of them are just saying it to annoy you. (And I do mean "you" specifically, there are people on Slashdot who like to troll AmiMoJo).
California does that: schools are mostly funded by the state instead of the city to even out inequality. There can still be some issues of inequality (like, the parents can come together to pay for a new football field or multi-purpose building, or parents can actually volunteer in schools; also, finding good teachers for bad schools can be hard). Overall it seems to work well.
And yet, feminists seem to be winning despite having platform that's approximately 95% insulting by volume.
I don't know what you mean by winning, but when feminists have caused change in the world, it's because they've identified specific problems and attacked them. Women suffrage, rape law changes, sexual harassment policy changes, and many more all happened because a specific problem was identified, awareness was raised, and so people were happy to support those changes. What isn't helpful is calling for "killing all men" and such.
Of course, self-named "MRAs" have a similar problem.....it's not clear that they want anything other than to fight with the people they call "SJWs." If the MRAs had actual problems they could point to, then maybe they could gain some support.
There isn't just one specific thing. Strawmen challenges are pointless. If there was just one specific thing, then the problem would have been solved long ago. Point to any specific thing, and watch the goalposts shift.
If there are multiple problems then point them out, and I will support solving them. But your vague allusions are empty. When you say, "watch the goalpost shift," do you mean, "watch the problem get solved?" Because that's what it sounds like you are saying.
I don't think the complaint is really accurate. Gravity won several academy awards and had a female lead. Passengers had a female star and was nominated for two academy awards. In the fantasy-science-fiction genre, Avatar had blue people and won multiple academy awards. TBH I don't really know what he is looking for......more science fiction romance? If you include science-fiction-fantasy as science fiction, then science fiction is fully mainstream now (Avengers for example).
I think you're missing the point. If there's something systemic that is preventing women from breaking into directing
Then point to that specific thing instead of making vague allusions. If there is a real problem, most of us are willing to help. The vast majority of us favor gender/race/human equality, but if you're just going to go around insulting people as "too white, too male, and too whatever" without even being able to identify a specific problem, I'm going to tune out.
Groups that are more interested in insulting than in fixing lose support.
. I was aware that CDMA was a superior technology but much like Betamax vs VHS, GSM won the war.
You completely didn't understand his post. CDMA won the war completely, so utterly surpassing GSM that GSM switched to CDMA. If you have a so-called GSM phone right now, it uses CDMA technology.
Some people want to argue that all of this is somehow brilliant political maneuvering on Trump's part, but that's being far, far too gracious. He may not be the type of complete idiot that much of the media would like to portray him as, but that doesn't make him some kind of chess master playing a highly skilled game that leaves his opponents caught in any number of clever snares.
Trump wrote (or ghost wrote) the art of making the deal. If nothing else he's had a lot of experience negotiating. It's not that he's a brilliant chess master, he's just experienced with standard negotiating tools and tricks. These are normal tricks but most people don't know them. You can learn them pretty easily in this book, although actually using them can take practice.
You like to deal with lies in statistics. Why did you choose "war years" instead of "number of warmongering Republicans" vs "number of warmongering Democrats?"
The truth is there are warmongering people in both parties, and you are treating politics like a sports game: you chose your side, and you will make up arguments to make your side look good. You only care about truth if it makes your team look good. Stop that.
Maybe his opinion is based on facts. Have you thought about that? Some people go into effort to read and understand a situation. You don't have to choose a favorite spin doctor, you can dig deep and seek understanding.
He seems to be predicting that humanity will not get together to solve the problem. He is just following the standard line on climate science, he isn't doing that himself.
Slashdot Mirror
and Avatar was visually enchanting at times.
Lame story in a really beautiful world.
Yes, that is true. A great case study in what to avoid. They should teach it in business school except they would probably see it as a positive situation.
. So having a female director on say an action film like Wonder Woman or a comedy like Ghostbusters is seen as an extra risk.
Do you have a citation for this, or are you kind of going on intuition here?
If you don't believe this is true then scroll up a bit and look at some of the comments on this story
I don't care what random people on the internet say, some of them are just saying it to annoy you. (And I do mean "you" specifically, there are people on Slashdot who like to troll AmiMoJo).
The US university textbook system should not be used as a model for anything.
Well don't just spread it out, put it on their plates.
Yeah that should be fixed.
The thing about systemic biases is that it's entirely possible that no one knows what, specifically, is the problem.
ok, well find out then. I'm not going to help you fight spectres. If you want a research grant I can probably support that.
Oh, ok.
California does that: schools are mostly funded by the state instead of the city to even out inequality. There can still be some issues of inequality (like, the parents can come together to pay for a new football field or multi-purpose building, or parents can actually volunteer in schools; also, finding good teachers for bad schools can be hard). Overall it seems to work well.
We take care of our books and save them for the next generation of students. That's the idea, anyway, and it mostly works.
He is looking for a best picture academy award for his next few avatar movies.
He should pay off some people.
And yet, feminists seem to be winning despite having platform that's approximately 95% insulting by volume.
I don't know what you mean by winning, but when feminists have caused change in the world, it's because they've identified specific problems and attacked them. Women suffrage, rape law changes, sexual harassment policy changes, and many more all happened because a specific problem was identified, awareness was raised, and so people were happy to support those changes. What isn't helpful is calling for "killing all men" and such.
Of course, self-named "MRAs" have a similar problem.....it's not clear that they want anything other than to fight with the people they call "SJWs." If the MRAs had actual problems they could point to, then maybe they could gain some support.
The onus is on you to tell us
The onus is on the one who cares and wants change.
when did equality hit with such force that this is no longer an issue you should be fucking figuring out yourself
I have my own problems. I don't need to busy myself figuring out other people's problems for them, especially from people who want to insult me.
There isn't just one specific thing. Strawmen challenges are pointless. If there was just one specific thing, then the problem would have been solved long ago. Point to any specific thing, and watch the goalposts shift.
If there are multiple problems then point them out, and I will support solving them. But your vague allusions are empty. When you say, "watch the goalpost shift," do you mean, "watch the problem get solved?" Because that's what it sounds like you are saying.
I don't think the complaint is really accurate. Gravity won several academy awards and had a female lead. Passengers had a female star and was nominated for two academy awards. In the fantasy-science-fiction genre, Avatar had blue people and won multiple academy awards. TBH I don't really know what he is looking for......more science fiction romance? If you include science-fiction-fantasy as science fiction, then science fiction is fully mainstream now (Avengers for example).
I think you're missing the point. If there's something systemic that is preventing women from breaking into directing
Then point to that specific thing instead of making vague allusions. If there is a real problem, most of us are willing to help. The vast majority of us favor gender/race/human equality, but if you're just going to go around insulting people as "too white, too male, and too whatever" without even being able to identify a specific problem, I'm going to tune out.
Groups that are more interested in insulting than in fixing lose support.
. I was aware that CDMA was a superior technology but much like Betamax vs VHS, GSM won the war.
You completely didn't understand his post. CDMA won the war completely, so utterly surpassing GSM that GSM switched to CDMA. If you have a so-called GSM phone right now, it uses CDMA technology.
They look dumb as bricks from inside the country as well, which is why the largest party in America by far is "independent" (no affiliation).
Most of them disagreed with it and voted against it. Of course, if Obama had been a republican, a lot of them would have switched.
Some people want to argue that all of this is somehow brilliant political maneuvering on Trump's part, but that's being far, far too gracious. He may not be the type of complete idiot that much of the media would like to portray him as, but that doesn't make him some kind of chess master playing a highly skilled game that leaves his opponents caught in any number of clever snares.
Trump wrote (or ghost wrote) the art of making the deal. If nothing else he's had a lot of experience negotiating. It's not that he's a brilliant chess master, he's just experienced with standard negotiating tools and tricks. These are normal tricks but most people don't know them. You can learn them pretty easily in this book, although actually using them can take practice.
I like to deal in facts, not wishes....
You like to deal with lies in statistics. Why did you choose "war years" instead of "number of warmongering Republicans" vs "number of warmongering Democrats?"
The truth is there are warmongering people in both parties, and you are treating politics like a sports game: you chose your side, and you will make up arguments to make your side look good. You only care about truth if it makes your team look good. Stop that.
Maybe his opinion is based on facts. Have you thought about that? Some people go into effort to read and understand a situation. You don't have to choose a favorite spin doctor, you can dig deep and seek understanding.
We simply can't have it both ways: we have to find some middle ground with manufacturing if we want the jobs.
A lot of environmentalists are fine if the jobs disappear. People, too.
Is that a reason to migrate, or a reason to not migrate?
He seems to be predicting that humanity will not get together to solve the problem. He is just following the standard line on climate science, he isn't doing that himself.