I don't know what point you are trying to prove. If there was a demand for women to look as muscular in movies as Zac Efron does, they would be made to look that way.

They look thin and feminine because the overwhelmingly straight male audience prefers that to female body builders.

 

Being thin is way easier. So, male celebs/influencers have to suffer more (I'm talking about today, not 40 years ago).

 

I know the rule that the woke world imposes is that all women are victims and all men are oppressors who have it way easier in life, but this is wrong. A pure factual lie.

Just now, Enrico_sw said:

Being thin is way easier. So, male celebs/influencers have to suffer more (I'm talking about today, not 40 years ago).

 

I know the rule that the woke world imposes is that all women are victims and all men are oppressors who have it way easier in life, but this is wrong. A pure factual lie.

 

So you think female actresses should try to beef up like the Rock or Zac Efron?

Just now, SympathysSilhouette said:

I don't know what point you are trying to prove. If there was a demand for women to look as muscular in movies as Zac Efron does, they would be made to look that way.

They look thin and feminine because the overwhelmingly straight male audience prefers that to female body builders.

 

 

Yes, that doesn't change what I said.  The demands on male actors make them suffer more. That's all I said and it's a fact.

 

I know it's hard to admit that female actresses have it easier (I'm talking about present day), because of decades of feminist brainwashing that say women's lives is always harder (which is not true).

Just now, SympathysSilhouette said:

 

So you think female actresses should try to beef up like the Rock or Zac Efron?

 

No.

It's hard to discuss with you, sometimes.

2 minutes ago, SympathysSilhouette said:

 

So you think female actresses should try to beef up like the Rock or Zac Efron?

 

No, I'm just taking note of a fact. Is that so hard to understand without trying to put words in my mouth?

4 minutes ago, Enrico_sw said:

It's hard to discuss with you, sometimes.

 

Well I don't get your POV either TBF. You mention that some male actors have to work hard to get in super-shape, which is true. But then you also would not want the women to do the same. So what is the problem? The women aren't working out as much as the men because it would make them look too muscular for the audience liking. Not because of any "wokeness" on the part of Hollywood.

4 minutes ago, Enrico_sw said:

 

No, I'm just taking note of a fact. Is that so hard to understand without trying to put words in my mouth?

 

It's just that I don't see the huge problem then? The women aren't muscular because it wouldn't sell to have them look that way. Not because Hollywood wants to spare them the extra exercise.

Just now, SympathysSilhouette said:

 

It's just that I don't see the huge problem then? The women aren't muscular because it wouldn't sell to have them look that way. Not because Hollywood wants to spare them the extra exercise.

 

Not everything has to have a secret meaning or goal. I'm just stating a fact. It's harder for men to get in shape for their roles.

 

Read my posts, I've already said many things. If I write everything again (for it not to be read), I'm not sure to see the point

21 minutes ago, SympathysSilhouette said:

 

Well I don't get your POV either TBF. You mention that some male actors have to work hard to get in super-shape, which is true. But then you also would not want the women to do the same. So what is the problem? The women aren't working out as much as the men because it would make them look too muscular for the audience liking. Not because of any "wokeness" on the part of Hollywood.

 

Who said there's a problem? I'm stating facts.

 

The demands put on men are harder nowadays, it's a fact. Wokeness is the zeitgeist and Hollywood is its conveyor, it's a fact.  My opinion or views on it don't matter.

 

I know Marxism always wants to find secret meanings or villains... but it's not the subject. The subject is that society has changed. The deal is not the same as 30 years ago. The "Survival of the fittest" game is way harsher on men (not just in Hollywood).

 

The demands on actresses were harder than men's 40 years ago. Now, it's the opposite.

 

I understand why it's very difficult to be a real sociologist today.

 

Sociology has been perverted. Sociologists used to a) observe facts b) look for tendencies, c) try to summarize them and d) then maybe try to find a cause.

 

Now, sociologists a) already know the cause to everything before even working (it's called ideology), b) then deploy their ideology by inventing unobserved sociological tendencies and c) maybe sometimes look at facts, only if they confirm their ideologies.

 

If they don't do that, hordes of people will attack them on the internet.

 

You can call this phenomenon however you want (wokeness, cultural marxism, etc.), but it's there.

That's why this type of things can happen

 

Quote

What an Audacious Hoax Reveals About Academia

Three scholars wrote 20 fake papers using fashionable jargon to argue for ridiculous conclusions.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/new-sokal-hoax/572212/

https://quillette.com/2018/10/01/the-grievance-studies-scandal-five-academics-respond/

 

 

Folks can deny it. They can believe in the (long gone) value of modern social sciences and their supposed quests for justice.

 

Everybody has the right to be fooled. We're just mere humans.

Or people can listen to real valuable social scientists. But of course it requires effort.

 

 

 

It's like discussions on the internet.

 

People don't discuss no more. They try to figure out in which "box" you belong (ideologically speaking) and then confirm or deny what you're trying to say based on your perceived ideological camp.

 

Civil discourse is shrinking. It's sad, but maybe, one day, tiny flames of hope could bring back the fire.

@Cult Icon What are your philosophical views on this ending?

 

^ "Tiny flames will dance across the darkness".

8 hours ago, Enrico_sw said:

 

The demands on actresses were harder than men's 40 years ago. Now, it's the opposite.

 

 

No one wants the actresses to work out as much as the men! Not because they feel sorry for the actresses but because there is no desire to see that body type in movies/TV from women. It's not some ideological shift.

Anyway, more details have emerged from the DC Studios decisions.

For Wonder Woman 3, apparently James Gunn and several other people in charge at that studio hated Patty Jenkins' treatment for WW3.

She was given the opportunity to rework it. She opted against that and walked away instead.

Gunn & DC still really like Gal Gadot in the role but it's not clear if Gadot wants to continue without Jenkins (the two of them have become very close over the course of working on the first two films).