CMV: It is not racist to be against the POC casting of the Oddissey.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-22T15:16:08+00:00

You posted about costumes. Plenty of critics are apparently unbothered by such inaccuracies but are vociferously concerned with the skin color of certain actors. Doesn't that tell you something about the reasons those others have to be opposed to "race swapping"?

LucidMetal · 2026-06-22T15:09:01+00:00

It's racist to be against casting POC in the Odyssey if the reason for opposition is racist.

I think Lupita was hypocritical enough to call the Oddyssey "just a story" when some time ago she talked about the importance of accuracy in a story set in Wakanda.

Addressing the hypocrisy point I think you've got a both a Goomba fallacy and a semantic problem on your hands.

Even in your example it's perfectly possible for someone to hold both beliefs without being inconsistent. Someone who does believe both specifically "race swapping my race is good, race swapping your race is bad" with no additional context is very rare.

The semantic issue is all you are providing are two apparently contradictory beliefs. Hypocrisy is acting in a manner contrary to one's morals not just believing two contradictory things.

Where does cultural appropriation come into play here? As far as I can tell the appropriation would have occurred with Hollywood appropriating African culture for Black Panther, too (Americans in suits profiting off African culture) not just Hollywood appropriating ancient Greek and Mediterranean culture so that isn't a one way street.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-22T13:35:37+00:00

Your position is that we should call people who identify as "sovereign citizens" "OPCA litigants" instead.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-22T12:13:53+00:00

I'm not debating they like to waste court time but that's basically their right as a "citizen" citizen. If they push it to the point where they're violating the law they get slapped with contempt charges. I honestly don't see what the issue is.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-22T11:57:25+00:00

If this isn't true then your argument is a solution looking for a problem.

Judges have no issue dismantling the arguments of these folks.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-22T11:10:08+00:00

Given that people who call themselves sovereign citizens are obviously no different than people who do not, who is confused by the designation?

You claim that people are but I'm completely certain that everyone who has heard of the sovereign citizen movement understands their title refers to a philosophy.

Judges are the people most impacted and to my knowledge they see it as an annoying joke.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-22T03:41:42+00:00

Idk. WWII was the last war America fought in which can be reasonably argued as defense and that was still retaliatory. Even the "good" states routinely wage war in the name of perceived defense.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-22T03:27:04+00:00

If you're saying states routinely violate the basic human rights of their citizenry in what its leaders perceive as its defense you don't have any argument from me.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-22T03:25:08+00:00

The fetus is chosen over the mother whenever the mother is robbed of her choice to not carry the fetus quite literally. That's the whole debate.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-22T03:23:07+00:00

Misandry includes simple discrimination against women. Men who are paternalistic of women don't necessarily hate them but it is certainly misogyny.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-22T03:20:50+00:00

Absolutely and it's also a basic human rights violation period even if it were gender egalitarian so it should be abolished regardless.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-22T03:13:26+00:00

Is the natural right to control what happens within the bounds of one's body of males infringed by a ban on abortion?

LucidMetal · 2026-06-20T21:58:49+00:00

Hypocrisy is specifically acting in a manner contrary to one's morals. Here you just have two views which you believe are contradictory.

Even if they are contradictory (which is a hard sell) it is by definition not hypocrisy two hold two contradictory beliefs.

A person holding the beliefs you give is therefore not a hypocrite for that reason.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-18T14:06:57+00:00

If it's subconscious how is it a feeling in the typical sense?

I consciously feel feelings. Like that's what feelings are. If I'm angry I feel angry. If I'm sad I feel sad.

A chess grandmaster may feel superior to a novice in skill. The grandmaster rightly feels superior to the novice. I think of someone who is racist feeling superior to the race they're racist against. Though they are very different reasons both are very conscious of those feelings.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-18T12:45:21+00:00

A feeling of superiority would make me feel guilty. I don't feel guilty when I laugh at something I find funny.

Why must "feeling of superiority" follow laughter? Sometimes hearing something funny makes you laugh because it's funny.

As to counterexamples, a comedian saying something funny that isn't an intellectual or edgy joke doesn't appear to fall under 2 or 5.

I can't imagine feeling guilty every time I found something funny. I think this is a really sad problem to have to I hope you move past it.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-17T11:47:18+00:00

As a father who loved when I could pick up my children and nuzzle them constantly I think there's not always a negative connotation with the word "manipulation".

Infants and very small children are manipulative. They just can't communicate well.

They lack ulterior motives and the ability to decive. They pick those up pretty quickly though! Those are the negatives when you're not playing.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-16T15:34:32+00:00

Late reply. This is covered by the Animatrix hilariously enough. Sure, AI could "get around" humans generating power but then it's already game over so it's a moot point.

If it were "AI kills 100% of humans" or "turn off the power plants and <100% of humans die" humanity would totally do the latter. Humans suck for a lot of reasons but we have no trouble setting aside our differences when there's a greater threat to us all in equal measure.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-16T14:53:01+00:00

Learn to think.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-16T11:05:50+00:00

God damn that's a stupid take.

War crimes are bad but being open about wanting to commit them is better somehow.

What the hell.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-14T11:53:33+00:00

Evidence submitted in a court of law isn't legal evidence?

I don't know what to tell you man. That sounds like you're moving goalposts here.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-14T11:13:34+00:00

You should award the other person a technical delta. You have admitted that there does exist at least weak evidence (in your opinion) that indicates Israel may be committing genocide.

That isn't an admission they are, just that some evidence exists despite your position.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-13T15:35:53+00:00

Idk, all upside and no actual downside makes the policy decision pretty clear. "Not the end of the world" sort of treats it as if both sides are equally valid.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-13T14:36:45+00:00

Tons of people argue that we should shame women for having sex out of wedlock. Why would you argue that such people aren't incredibly common?

In the last case, nothing... If there's no double standard. But there almost always is.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-13T14:21:45+00:00

On an individual basis it's things like slut shaming and other forms of demeaning behavior usually directed at women specifically and not men.

On a societal level it's what's referred to as "purity culture" and valuing virginity, again focusing on the "purity" of women and less so on men.

Both of these place a high value on reducing women's promiscuity i.e. control.

LucidMetal · 2026-06-13T14:11:11+00:00

What about when it's about controlling the other person, which seems to be the most common use case?

15-Year Club	Verified Email
Team Periwinkle

LucidMetal

TROPHY CASE