all 22 comments

[–]TitsAndWhiskey 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

The real answer, IMO, is that the left has claimed the moral/cultural high ground for a long time now. Their platform, superficially, is all about that “peace, love, tolerance, acceptance” candy coating that makes you a “good person” if you are one of them, and a “bad person” if you are not.

But then the right claimed anti-child-sex-abuse-and-trafficking as a big plank in their platform, and that’s a huge problem to the left for 2 reasons:

  1. It is inherently morally repugnant to oppose the position, and

  2. Child sex abuse is danger close to the left’s Landsknechte: the queer and transgender community. Not to mention a number of wealthy and powerful string-pullers.

They know they can’t oppose it, and they know that it will eventually expose and undermine the people who form their foundation.

We are currently in the “that doesn’t happen” stage of leftist propaganda. Buckle up for stage 2.

[–]passionflounder 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

"Moral high ground" as a concept has been hijacked. Its meaning is subject to changes- even quantum shifts contingent on the ability of the propagandists- both in "news" media and Hollywood- to coax a suggestible population to accept the morality-du-jour.

Much of this is accomplished by manipulating language- like substituting the acronym "MAP" (Minor Attracted Person) for pedophile. This also includes designating plain, descriptive terms like pedophile as hate speech.

You can bet that if a member of the Trump family were implicated in any such trafficking, the powers that be would turn on a dime to wear their "compassion and concern for children" costume and we'd be getting barraged by related stories, discussions, expert studies on the permanent damage, etc. 24/7 and the Democratic Party would be seen by most as militantly against human trafficking and pedophilia.

[–]TitsAndWhiskey 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You are 100% correct.

[–]makesyoudownvote 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

This is the first time I have heard anyone take such a based take.

Everyone here wants to go to the extreme and say it's because Hollywood is a secret kabbalah of Pedophile Jewish Satanist Lizard people or something like that, but the truth is much more simplistic. It's a narrative they can't control or spin to make themselves look good.

I think there is also another element to it though. I think Disney specifically passed on it because it's bad for their brand. The association of a Family centric brand with pedophilia just gets too messy. Even if it's them condemning it the association has been made and the thought is planted in people's minds.

I think with all these factors together though they pretty much have to bad mouth the movie just to save their own jobs. Board members don't care about woke politics, they care about returns and stock value. So studios are doing their best to avoid their board realizing how bad of a call they made.

[–]TitsAndWhiskey 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

This site does seem to attract a large number of schizophrenics.

Not so sure about Disney being behind it, but I don’t know the whole story there. If they didn’t want it to get out, couldn’t they have just not sold the rights and sat on it?

[–]makesyoudownvote 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Disney is quite a bit like Apple in the movie industry. They are more than willing to take a loss if it will not benefit any of their competitors. They have more steady income avenues besides the success of movies themselves. They can make films that flop, and still make characters likeable enough with kids to earn their investment back over several decades of toys, merchandise amusement parks etc. This is what they were going for with Disney+, but they overplayed their hand, so this policy may be changing soon.

I'm not sure if that makes sense. Those are two industries I worked for. I worked at Apple for 2 years as a "Genius" including the 2 month training program in Cupertino.

I also used to be a filmmaker, and worked in Hollywood for over a decade. I have worked for most of the major studios, though Disney is not one of them. I did work for Marvel Studios though, just before they got bought by Disney.

Not that this is really relevant, but I technically work for Disney fairly often these days, but as an electrical engineer doing work at Disneyland.

I have seen them pull this strategy a lot. I can't say for 100% sure that is what is going on with this film, but given how they have acted with other properties, it definitely seems like their modus operandi.

[–]TitsAndWhiskey 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)


[–]makesyoudownvote 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)


[–]Musky 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)



[–]jet199 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Too close to the bone

[–]Maggotus 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Because most of them are on Epstein's unreleased client list. If they are fighting it, then they don't want to draw attention to themselves.

[–]IMissPorn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's certainly not because they don't like the trafficking conspiracy theory. MSM loves promoting that almost as much as Q-Anon. I haven't watched it but I suppose there might be some particular detail of the story they didn't like. I don't think they even need a reason to hate it though, just the fact it was made by the out-group is enough.

[–]IkeConn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They are all guilty.

[–]DrRaccoon 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm guessing because their friends/donors/allies are the ones diddling the kiddos

[–]William_World 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

this all relates to the pizzagate emails from podesta. who happened to be a democrat so they kneejerk support him. but deep down they know those emails were weird.

[–]twolanterns 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

too many of them involved/negligent

its still something that generally is career ending

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A conspiracy so immense that those who see it are dismissed as crazy.

When a digital ID is needed for universal basic income don't get the chip. That's a "game over" move.

[–]Entropick 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

but what does the socks sockpupet have to say about all that ?!?!?!?!?!?!

[–]Mcheetah 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

"You know why." - Robert Downey Jr.

[–]TheMaharishi 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I have no clue but maybe it outs some rich and powerful people. Maybe they simply don't want their primary tool of controlling the rich and powerful to have light shone on it.

[–]hfxB0oyA 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Echh, it's by Chanda Prescod-Weinstein - a pseudoscientist asshole whose mission in life is to make physics demonstrably worse by complaining that there's not enough recognition of herself as a black jewish queer woman intersectional unicorn. It's so bad that the stunning and brave ones made a faggy award just to give her, since she's useless at actual physics.

[–]topiary2 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

oy vey, why indeed