Re: Gay and Streaming
Posted: November 30th, 2023, 10:28 am
Is this a great country or what!
https://www.silverscreenoasis.com/oasis3/
https://www.silverscreenoasis.com/oasis3/viewtopic.php?t=7761
I do apologize for offending you Lomm.Lomm wrote: ↑November 30th, 2023, 7:28 am You aren't banned (obviously) jimimac. I didn't say YOU had to be a movie nut...I said that's why I was here. As to the "antiquated forum", it's actually very up to date and still maintained and updated regularly. You just don't like the way posting works here. There's nothing I can do about that, and I do honestly grow tired of the many demands (and they are very often demands, not requests). Your earlier post could be seen as equally offensive, to me, as my post was to you. I wasn't literally telling you to leave...I was telling you that if you were unhappy, you could just leave. I have enjoyed many of your posts here.
I suppose you read MUTTS today. (The newspaper comic)
Thank You Lomm.Lomm wrote: ↑November 30th, 2023, 1:19 pm Sorry for your loss jimimac.
They show the code in reply boxes so you can insert things, put replies intermingled with the other post (by adding quote tags) and customize your reply. For myself, on a tablet I avoid all that and just make sure to put my reply at the end after the last [/quote ] marker.
Opposition to a “like” button is not the same as being offended by a sub-forum being created to separate discussions of movies about people from an historically marginalized demographic group. With the “like” button someone can simply chose not to use it, but now that the sub-forum is visible, there’s no way for someone who’s offended by it to not see that it exists here.Hibi wrote: ↑November 29th, 2023, 10:55 am Frankly, I don't understand Holden's strident objections to this issue which seem way out of proportion to what's been done. If it bothers him so much, just ignore the sub-forum. It seems we're back to the LIKE button all over again. It's just a message board. There are far more disturbing things going on in the world to get upset about.
Swithin, you're missing my point. The gay Affinity groups for college alumni that you mention are not regressive.Swithin wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2023, 10:30 pm Hi Holden,
I continue to be sad that you are distressed about this and wish you would post in the new forum, if a subject appealed to you, though I realize that you won't. I don't see it in terms of it being a "safe place;" merely a convenient, easily accessible grouping of subjects (curation?), just like any of the other genres, even though we can argue about whether it constitutes a genre or not (which doesn't matter to me).
With regard to your "generational" comments, my alma mater has numerous "Affinity Chapters," including a few which are for LGBTQ+ students and alumni, though anyone is welcome to join. I'm on one of the gay Affinity committees and in regular contact with many young gay men and women. I think they would disagree with you and would not see these things as regressive. In fact, the existence of these groups would have been unthinkable when I was in college! They are commonplace, and expected, now.
We agree to disagree.HoldenIsHere wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2023, 3:18 pmSwithin, you're missing my point. The gay Affinity groups for college alumni that you mention are not regressive.Swithin wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2023, 10:30 pm Hi Holden,
I continue to be sad that you are distressed about this and wish you would post in the new forum, if a subject appealed to you, though I realize that you won't. I don't see it in terms of it being a "safe place;" merely a convenient, easily accessible grouping of subjects (curation?), just like any of the other genres, even though we can argue about whether it constitutes a genre or not (which doesn't matter to me).
With regard to your "generational" comments, my alma mater has numerous "Affinity Chapters," including a few which are for LGBTQ+ students and alumni, though anyone is welcome to join. I'm on one of the gay Affinity committees and in regular contact with many young gay men and women. I think they would disagree with you and would not see these things as regressive. In fact, the existence of these groups would have been unthinkable when I was in college! They are commonplace, and expected, now.
Those kinds of groups provide a feeling of community for gay people.
But, as I stated in my previous post, singling out a sub-forum on a mass media discussion board to discuss so-called "LGBT Films" perpetuates the notion that the wants and desires of gay people are categorically different than those of “regular” people.
That is unequivocally regressive to me and to every other gay person I know personally. You and I will have to agree to disagree about it.
You keep mentioning convenience. Yea, convenience for you. Please don't imply it was convenience for everyone, since you don't know how everyone felt about a separate sub-forum. As for convenience for everyone: when creating a thread can you please post the year of the movie?Swithin wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2023, 3:46 pmWe agree to disagree.HoldenIsHere wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2023, 3:18 pmSwithin, you're missing my point. The gay Affinity groups for college alumni that you mention are not regressive.Swithin wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2023, 10:30 pm Hi Holden,
I continue to be sad that you are distressed about this and wish you would post in the new forum, if a subject appealed to you, though I realize that you won't. I don't see it in terms of it being a "safe place;" merely a convenient, easily accessible grouping of subjects (curation?), just like any of the other genres, even though we can argue about whether it constitutes a genre or not (which doesn't matter to me).
With regard to your "generational" comments, my alma mater has numerous "Affinity Chapters," including a few which are for LGBTQ+ students and alumni, though anyone is welcome to join. I'm on one of the gay Affinity committees and in regular contact with many young gay men and women. I think they would disagree with you and would not see these things as regressive. In fact, the existence of these groups would have been unthinkable when I was in college! They are commonplace, and expected, now.
Those kinds of groups provide a feeling of community for gay people.
But, as I stated in my previous post, singling out a sub-forum on a mass media discussion board to discuss so-called "LGBT Films" perpetuates the notion that the wants and desires of gay people are categorically different than those of “regular” people.
That is unequivocally regressive to me and to every other gay person I know personally. You and I will have to agree to disagree about it.
I think you are also missing my point. I just find the gay sub-forum as a convenient catch-all for an increasing number of movies (plays, television shows, etc.) for ALL people to find easily. It's not just about the "wants and desires of gay people" but about convenience for everyone who wants quick access to various threads in a burgeoning thematic field.
Just like I go to the sub-forum here in the "Foreign Film" sub-forum. (My local library, btw, has stopped using the word "foreign" for its former "Foreign Languages Library" and now calls it "World Languages Library," deeming the world "foreign" to be pejorative.)
For your convenience, I have added the years to the two works (one television series, one play) that I've posted about.jamesjazzguitar wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2023, 7:36 pmYou keep mentioning convenience. Yea, convenience for you. Please don't imply it was convenience for everyone, since you don't know how everyone felt about a separate sub-forum. As for convenience for everyone: when creating a thread can you please post the year of the movie?Swithin wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2023, 3:46 pmWe agree to disagree.HoldenIsHere wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2023, 3:18 pm
Swithin, you're missing my point. The gay Affinity groups for college alumni that you mention are not regressive.
Those kinds of groups provide a feeling of community for gay people.
But, as I stated in my previous post, singling out a sub-forum on a mass media discussion board to discuss so-called "LGBT Films" perpetuates the notion that the wants and desires of gay people are categorically different than those of “regular” people.
That is unequivocally regressive to me and to every other gay person I know personally. You and I will have to agree to disagree about it.
I think you are also missing my point. I just find the gay sub-forum as a convenient catch-all for an increasing number of movies (plays, television shows, etc.) for ALL people to find easily. It's not just about the "wants and desires of gay people" but about convenience for everyone who wants quick access to various threads in a burgeoning thematic field.
Just like I go to the sub-forum here in the "Foreign Film" sub-forum. (My local library, btw, has stopped using the word "foreign" for its former "Foreign Languages Library" and now calls it "World Languages Library," deeming the world "foreign" to be pejorative.)
That would make it more convenient for those whose focus is on studio-era film. Thanks
I understood your point about having that "LGBT Films" sub-forum for "convenience."Swithin wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2023, 3:46 pmWe agree to disagree.HoldenIsHere wrote: ↑December 3rd, 2023, 3:18 pmSwithin, you're missing my point. The gay Affinity groups for college alumni that you mention are not regressive.Swithin wrote: ↑December 2nd, 2023, 10:30 pm Hi Holden,
I continue to be sad that you are distressed about this and wish you would post in the new forum, if a subject appealed to you, though I realize that you won't. I don't see it in terms of it being a "safe place;" merely a convenient, easily accessible grouping of subjects (curation?), just like any of the other genres, even though we can argue about whether it constitutes a genre or not (which doesn't matter to me).
With regard to your "generational" comments, my alma mater has numerous "Affinity Chapters," including a few which are for LGBTQ+ students and alumni, though anyone is welcome to join. I'm on one of the gay Affinity committees and in regular contact with many young gay men and women. I think they would disagree with you and would not see these things as regressive. In fact, the existence of these groups would have been unthinkable when I was in college! They are commonplace, and expected, now.
Those kinds of groups provide a feeling of community for gay people.
But, as I stated in my previous post, singling out a sub-forum on a mass media discussion board to discuss so-called "LGBT Films" perpetuates the notion that the wants and desires of gay people are categorically different than those of “regular” people.
That is unequivocally regressive to me and to every other gay person I know personally. You and I will have to agree to disagree about it.
I think you are also missing my point. I just find the gay sub-forum as a convenient catch-all for an increasing number of movies (plays, television shows, etc.) for ALL people to find easily. It's not just about the "wants and desires of gay people" but about convenience for everyone who wants quick access to various threads in a burgeoning thematic field.
Just like I go to the sub-forum here in the "Foreign Film" sub-forum. (My local library, btw, has stopped using the word "foreign" for its former "Foreign Languages Library" and now calls it "World Languages Library," deeming the world "foreign" to be pejorative.)