Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram Live Sex ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

Colin's Last Stand, Episode 18: Wonder Woman, Alamo Drafthouse, and Toxic Politics (Patreon)

Published:
2017-06-01 16:57:02
Edited:
2018-03-17 07:17:09
Imported:
2022-01

Content

What if the shoe was on the other foot?

Files

Wonder Woman, Alamo Drafthouse, and Toxic Politics -- Colin's Last Stand (Episode 18)

If this Wonder Woman/Alamo Drafthouse fracas proves anything, it's that identity politics is unequally distributed, philosophically inconsistent, and politically and personally toxic. Colin's Last Stand is free of baked-in ads, product placement, and other obnoxious forms of advertising because of your support. Please consider subscribing to CLS' Patreon to show your support for independent historical and political content: http://www.patreon.com/colinslaststand Twitter: @notaxation Instagram: @clsmoriarty Facebook: /colinslaststand Reddit: /r/ColinsLastStand Still images in this video were acquired from the following sources, for which Colin's Last Stand is thankful: Alamo Drafthouse, CNN, DC Comics, PBS, The Hollywood Reporter, YouTube, Wikia, Wikipedia, and World War II Today. Bibliography/Reading List: Alamo Drafthouse's Women-Only WW Screenings: https://drafthouse.com/austin/show/women-only-screening-wonder-woman Alamo Drafthouse's Women-Only WW Screenings (II): https://www.facebook.com/AlamoAustin/posts/1329447453777473 Feminism Leaves Men Behind: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/06/opinion/campaign-stops/the-men-feminists-left-behind.html Goldwater Was Against 1964 Civil Rights Act: http://www.npr.org/sections/politicaljunkie/2010/06/17/127915281/flashback-friday-this-day-in-1964-goldwater-says-no-to-civil-rights-bill Man Buys Ticket To All-Women WW Screening: http://www.indiewire.com/2017/05/alamo-drafthouse-all-female-wonder-woman-1201833537/ Man Files Complaint Against Alamo Drafthouse: http://mashable.com/2017/05/31/wonder-woman-alamo-drafthouse-complaint/#bVzsqPBOdiqS Men 'Lose Their Shit' Over WW Screenings: http://jezebel.com/men-lose-their-shit-over-alamo-drafthouses-women-only-w-1795606224 Men 'Man Babies' Over WW Outrage: http://www.salon.com/2017/05/25/wonder-woman-woman-only-screening-austin/ Millennials Are Open-Minded: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-millennials-idUSTRE61N18B20100224 Pizza Shop Tricked Into Catering Gay Wedding: http://hotair.com/archives/2015/09/29/memories-pizza-tricked-into-catering-gay-wedding/ Some Men Not Happy With Alamo Drafthouse: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/05/28/530490073/some-men-are-not-happy-about-a-women-only-screening-of-wonder-woman The Civil Rights Act of 1964: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-78/pdf/STATUTE-78-Pg241.pdf Third Wave Feminism Is Now: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-third-wave-of-feminism-is-now-and-it-is-intersectional_us_586ac501e4b04d7df167d6a8 Wonder Woman on Rotten Tomatoes: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/wonder_woman_2017/

Comments

Steven Camilo

Colin, I'm sorry you're such a sexist, racist bigot. We'll still keep you. /s

Anonymous

Loved the video Colin!! Please keep more of these coming along with the other videos!!!

Anonymous

Great video, I am going to use your counter-example when having discussions with some of my friends about their thoughts on this matter!

Joey Finelli

What if the movie theater was doing it just for fun? Why can't we do anything for fun anymore... :(

CTE

Honestly regardless of the conclusions presented or taken from this video. The worst thing about the current state of things is that this kind of content is only being spoken from producers like Colin. Maybe Fox News, but they have a lot of baggage that does not appeal to me. Try to imagine this on NPR, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, etc. They will happily side with any woman's group suing to have access to a mans group (like boy scouts), but would never call out the opposite. It's just sad really.

Anonymous

While the 3rd feminist movement is stupid I just don't see what Alamo Drafthouse is doing as part of it. Maybe that is just my naivete but I just see the screenings as what they advertise them to be. Screenings of a female superhero movie by women for the purpose of celebrating women. I just don't see anything nefarious about it and don't see the point of it being exclusivity. How many female superhero movies are there? Its important to note that this is the 75th anniversary of Wonder Woman. A female superhero who from conception had some pretty sexist overtones(her weakness was bondage, and her purpose was to create peace through love). So when I see something like this I don't see discrimination I see a celebration of progress and a lot of males who just seem to want to crash a party because they weren't invited.

CTE

Regarding the video. The people would not support the opposite. If the organizers didn't get into some legal trouble, and maybe they wouldn't just like this group, they would for sure get protested. Likely they would even cancel it because the protesters would fill up in front of the screen.

Owen

I think if they had left out the planned parenthood part it would be a lot less politically motivated. I think Wonder Woman is a big deal, it was mentioned in the video, it's been a long time coming to get a female super as the main character on the silver screen. - I think it's really cool that Alamo is doing this type of screening... Throw planned parenthood proceeds into the mix though and I'm like uhhhhhh? What's really interesting to me though - I worked at a movie theater during high school and college, we had a women's only showing of Sex and the City... No one gave a fuck. It says something about society as it stands right now that people for some reason give a fuck about Wonder Woman. Is it because guys actually wanna see this movie? I dunno, but that's just where I'm like where was your bitching and moaning then, and why are you bitching and moaning now? (Your referring to men/people in general, not to Colin or any of my fellow patrons here)

Anonymous

I was hoping to get your take on this. I personally think that this is somewhat divisive, but like you said they are within their rights to do this. I personally think it has to simply be that Alamo Drafthouse is hoping to score some political and social capital with this move. I really think I could be much more on board with a simple change in verbiage from "Women Only" which wreaks of segregation language, to something that encourages women to attend and bring other women and take a more inclusive tone. Also Colin, for the record, I have enjoyed these unscripted videos quite a bit, and enjoy the contrast in learning history, as well as having commentary on current social and political happenings. Also, I think this is the best looking and sounding video that you have released so far. I know that's not your chief concern, but I think you've found that right set up. Thanks again!

Anonymous

While this can be seen as divisive to men vs women, one could also see it as divisive for women as well. By adding the political/Planned Parenthood element, that immediate alienates any pro-life women that would love to attend a women only screening of the movie but would not want any of their money going to PP. If you're going to make the screening for women only, why not make it inclusive to ALL women instead of dividing people even further? Just a thought.

LastStandMedia
>>5453381

It's a fair question. I'm simply asking, would an all-male Dunkirk screening with money going to the NRA also be "for fun"? Would you feel the same way with that?

LastStandMedia
>>5453423

I was speaking more towards intent, and even more than that, the predictable outrage and counter-outage. It all seems designed to foment division, and I just can't get behind it.

LastStandMedia
>>5453524

Of course they wouldn't support the opposite, which is why we need to earnestly ask if anything like this is okay. I don't know the answer. I'm simply posing it.

LastStandMedia
>>5453848

I agree with you. Planned Parenthood's inclusion really does show a political motivation.

LastStandMedia
>>5454478

That's a great point, and goes back to the alienation many pro-life women felt during the March for Women, which they were clearly not included in.

Tristan

I agree with your thoughts on the segregation and division of people of all types being far more prevalent now a days (something that deeply upsets me). But I couldn't wrap my head around the NRA comparison (due to the fact I have no idea what the NRA do), so I created some of my own comparisons. A broke back mountain screening for gay males with the proceeds going to amnesty internationals action on Chechnya, & a screening of any movie where a man takes his own life for males with proceeds going CALM. Do you think these 2 examples would have the same reaction to them?

Anonymous
>>5455269

I don't think either of the charities you mentioned would cause any negative feedback. I think Colin went with the NRA because both the NRA and Planned Parenthood are organizations that are very polarized when it comes to left vs right ideals.

GabrieleEU

I'm a progressive, feminist guy and I don't really see the point for this kind of things. I subscribe to everything you said, switch the tables and the reaction would be roaring and most of all, there's really no point in dividing people like this. Whenever you exceed in one sense you are gonna create an opposition movement on the other side which will be stronger and stronger. Policies like this one will cause a chauvinist reaction on the long run, if you preach equality act equally. It's kind of a shame 'cause it shows the positive feminist movement in a bad light.

Stephen J Seidler

The argument that free market forces would contain or even minimize the practice of discrimination, at least on it's own, is somewhat flawed. It's true that, if a restaurant in 2017 refused to serve black people, reviews and a general public outcry would totally destroy their business...BUT the same restaurant in 1957 would be likely lauded for maintaining a "high standard of clientele" and would, in fact, be rewarded by the same free market and encourage to maintain discriminatory practices. What changed between then and now? The Civil Rights Movement and the laws it fought and bled for. Those laws were, and I often believe, still are, the only reason that situation ever changed. A another recent example was the corporate pushback against the "bathroom" laws enacted in some states recently. The threat of losing significant business did encourage the backers of those laws to reconsider, and that's good. But the free market is...at best...impartial & amoral when it comes to social values and mores. If open condemnation and discrimination against LGBT people was still as commonplace now as it was decades ago, the same free market would be more than willing to support that position as well. The only reason the free market can help prevent egregious civil rights violations now is because people put their lives and freedoms on the line then to force the changes to society that allow it. So I would hesitate to say that the free market would ever have eliminated such problems on it's own without a Civil Rights Act as the catalyst, no matter how much time people would have spent "waiting it out".

James Schubert

It's the link to Planned Parenting that I have a problem with here. If the screening was "women only because its fun for a ladies night out" I'd be fine with it. Nothing wrong with spending a little time in a group like this. Like likes like, a very popular term used in psychology with specific connections to Neuro-linguistic programming. We like the things that are like us. Leave the political statement out of this and then give men a chance at a male only screening of the next Spiderman. Other than that, I have very little to say on the matter, it has surely been scoffed at by a high percentage of people. At least I hope so.

Zack E

I think I'm most offended by the fact that we continue to have superhero movies rammed down our throats.

Ryan Berry

I discussed this with my wife last night and she had a very similar example. Just in general, I think the fight is against a perceived injustice towards women/minorities/muslims/etc. trying to "balance" the "advantage" (privilege?) that white men have. I said it once and I'll say it again: I'd love to see an episode on affirmative action.

Anonymous

Amen Colin amen. Totally agree.

Jeremy Meyer

Jordan Peterson explained this deeply on Joe Rogan's podcast. The division is the goal. Identity politics is the tool. It is superficial unthinking collectivism, and profoundly evil.

Anonymous

It's not about equality anymore. It's about getting even. It's fucked.

Anonymous

They could have easily said "ladies and those that love them" night and still celebrated what is for those of us who are excited about FINALLY getting a Wonderwoman movie an opportunity to celebrate while also being inclusive. There is also another layer to this...are people really and truly outraged about this or is it being blown out of proportion by the media to make it look like a much bigger deal? Of course ADH is fanning the flames as much as well because they are getting great PR out of it.

Anonymous

I enjoyed this style of show very much, i would love to see you with guests in the future on topics like this. Maybe a counter point would make this seem a little more well rounded (although i am in complete agreement with your point of view).

BettyAnn Moriarty

I really loved this- brought me right back to one of my graduate courses and the 'outrage' discussions over these types of topics we'd all have. Ahhhh. Learning. Nothing like it. 😉

Anonymous

"Alamo Drafthouse hasn't don't anything egregious". While this is true, it should be noted that civil rights are always fought at the edges. Segregated water fountains isn't a big deal, either, but it was opposed and rightfully so. The real battles are always at the edges.

GrisWold Diablo

Imagine this family: Mother with 2 children, 7 years old daughter and 8 years old son. How does the mom explain to her son,that he can't come because he's a little boy. He loves super heroes, but just because hes a little boy, he cannot go with his mom and his sister to see the movie, he will have to go an other time. As adult we can process this whole thing. But as a child this send a bad precedent, he's experiencing a situation where he his rejected just on the basis of his gender. This is not something you want to happen ever. We strive for equality, let's do that all across the board everytime. Yes it doesn't matter as a single event, it's just one time, it's for a good cause. But once is once to many time in my book. If you open the door for a second every now and then, eventually the door will remain open. Slippery slope.

GrisWold Diablo
>>5456446

I agree the free market argument doesn't not work. All it would do is naturally create segregation. You would have pockets of separations. A restaurant would be destroyed on yelp for a while, but eventually discriminatory folks will start supporting the restaurant and it will survive and create a division in society. Inclusion of difference is not a inherent trait of human being. We are born to love who we grow up with and enjoy the type of activities we are being introduce to by folks we respect. No one is either inherently racist. But if we start to enjoy going to that restaurant unconsciously we will seek experiences that ressemble it, and as time pass we have removed ourself from all diverse places/activities. We are creature of habits, same routine everyday. Anyway, I wrote lots more than I expected I'll stop here.

Bryan Silva

Nothing's Shocking and that's what has driven the "cause" to a satire. Many women are cool and powerful and don't need to exaggerate their physical or emotional differences to belittle anyone. They make great moms, teachers and friends.

Anonymous (edited)

Comment edits

2023-06-05 11:22:23 헉!! 빨리 한섭에 나와주길!!
2017-06-02 08:18:33 Is this political marketing or marketing to the political? In other words, perhaps the marketing is specifically targeting (and amplifying) a prevalent political emotion.

Is this political marketing or marketing to the political? In other words, perhaps the marketing is specifically targeting (and amplifying) a prevalent political emotion.

Anonymous

So what if I identified as a woman but haven't transitioned yet? Could I have gone?

Jeremy Meyer

Gender pay gap is real. Hollywood only gave Wonder Woman 60% of the production budget compared to Man of Steel and Batman vs Superman. Must boycott!

Mod

Exclusionary, retroactive equality. Defeats its own purpose.

George Newton

A valid point I've often made glad you had the minerals to make this video to highlight the hypocrisy of our modern life

Anonymous
>>5462246

I think the solution here would be to go to a different showing than the one single one that is women only, not ditch the son behind and have him feeling rejected based on his gender. That would be a parenting issue, not an issue with the theater setting up a women only showing. At some point, we have to have just a little bit of responsibility in what we expose our children to and how we conduct ourselves.

Anonymous

This is a common trend anymore. Somewhere along the way, people got it in their heads that counter-oppression is the best remedy for oppression. I would hope that we could strive for no oppression at all.

LastStandMedia
>>5456696

In my mind, they are allowed to make a political statement. They just need to be able to deal with the market consequences. It was better they were open about the fact that the proceeds would go to charity, and specifically to which organization they were going to be paid, then to do it after the fact.

LastStandMedia
>>5459212

In the age of social media and the ever-present 24 hours news cycle, it's impossible to tell what's real and what isn't anymore. Remember: Donald Trump because president after a year of the media (and social media) telling us it was impossible. Reality is sometimes in the eye of the beholder, I suppose.

LastStandMedia
>>5459687

Thank you! I have no plans to have guests on much, but I do have one guest in mind (my dad) to do a special episode or two (about 9/11).

LastStandMedia
>>5462246

It's a slippery slope. You nailed it. And it creates problems where there literally are none. Like, none at all.

LastStandMedia
>>5467325

What's most interesting about your point is that many women (like my girlfriend, mom, and sisters) will be the first to reiterate what you just said. My girlfriend is an ER nurse. My mom was a college adviser and educator. My sisters are both public school teachers. They don't need your help. They're doing just fine.

LastStandMedia
>>5467518

It's possible. Who knows what the motivation was? Seems like, in the end, it was good, free advertising for Alamo Drafthouse.

LastStandMedia
>>5479363

It's wholly retaliatory, and will therefore be counter-productive to whatever vague goals they're fighting for to begin with.

Adam Wells

So finally getting around to watching this, and I understand your point on divisiveness, but the women only screenings are celebrating female empowerment, which in a time when we have a President who has said he wants to grab women's crotches and calling his female opponent a nasty woman, it is nice to see them be able to use the first female led comic book movie in over a decade as a way of celebrating women. Your example of a hypothetical white men only screenings of Dunkirk, is kind of irrelevant. Majority of movies star and focus on white men, most people in politics in America are white men. Celebrating women is different because they are are minority group, a better hypothetical would be an all black screening of the upcoming movie Girl's Trip, a movie that focuses on black women going on a bachelorette party weekend. And I doubt anyone would care about that because systemically, majority of people seeing Girl's Trip will be black because it is a movie that plays better to black audiences. The only reason, the Alamo Drafthouse women only screenings are making headlines is because of the people who are complaining that they can't go, most of whom are white men. And after 400 years of dominating global culture and power structures, is it really that bad that women can have a time to see a movie where men aren't apart of it?

Brian Fuller

While I do not share the passion behind questioning a women's only screening of Wonder Woman I do agree that there is a broader issue with society using a lens of "equality" to focus attention on divisive groups. I feel like if the PP donation was not part of the promotion I would have zero issue with a group of women wanting to celebrate one of the few major female comic book characters for the same reason I would not be mad if you had to be part of the fan club to attend a Dr. Strange viewing (a big time movie that a small group is really looking forward to). A good example of the broader issue that I mentioned previously and that Colin hits on is re-evaluating female employees pay. Now let me say that my wife and I work for the same employer, she is a working mother of three, and I am all about her making more money. I do have to say my first thought after a female pay evaluation process was announced was that they should be focusing on competitive rates for all employees to keep/attract talent. I was hired on at a much lower pay rate than I was able to get in the open market (took a pay cut) just because my son was born with a heart condition that forced me to take a job near a particular children's hospital. Since then I have been promoted rapidly, but my pay remains at the very bottom of my current level and not inline with my male or female equivalents (even with my performance reviews being good enough to be in the top ten percent at my level at a company with 35k employees every year for 4 years). Will my pay be examined as part of the equality initiative? No, it will not. My wife, who again, I WANT to make more than me (I'd love to retire early) will likely make more than me after this process even though she is two levels below me. Seems the opposite of an equality initiative to me. I could be a rare case, and should be, but I would think a non-politically motivated equality movement would be taking into account all reasons for inequality and not just physical features, gender, etc... I hate to even post this because it's hard to complain about a meteoric rise, but when you are singled out and the aid is for everyone but you it does brew hard feelings about the "equality" so many preach.

Chris Holtzer
>>5529969

Interesting perspective. One thing that is always ignored in the compensation discussion is that there is no such thing as equality of candidate or employee. Every individual is different, as well is every role in an organization. No two people do the exact same thing, it just doesn't exist. This is before we get into their entire life, which significantly influences their value to an organization. Your paid less because you are not equal to your wife. If nothing else, you were willing to make less, that is a difference. That has a million different tentacles that drive that. Equality has nothing to do with outcome, only opportunity. You both had the opportunity to make your life decisions that have led you to your current situation. I don't have all the facts, but everyone making these arguments needs to realize, they don't either. Compensation is the outcome, not the opportunity. You have the opportunity to change your value and take your services somewhere else. It sounds like you don't want to, and for very good reasons, but that isn't inequality, that is a personal decision.

Brian Fuller
>>5529969

I can see your points and many are valid. The only thing I still would challenge is that by your own statements (unless I am misunderstanding) you are to an extent agreeing with me that "equality" initiatives to level pay is a farce. It is artificially adding value/compensation where it is not proven to be based on any additional value to the company...no additional RIO without extrapolating that the company may lose talent to a competitor that is willing to run an initiative. I agree that I have had to make changes in my personal journey that have led to artificial suppression of my current compensation (which seems to be right-sizing itself). Where the heart of my challenge to these initiatives lies is a company following economic principles should be compensating all employees based on their value to the company. That should not be taking into account race, sex, or sexual orientation. We also need to account for poor management and hiring processes that affect initial and ongoing compensation decisions. If a company deems they need an compensation initiative to stay competitive that should, in my opinion, be based on market dynamics and again not by personal demographics.

Brian Fuller
>>5529969

I do also want to add that I am not sure I totally agree that in the real world every position's compensation is driven by value of the role + value the employee brings to the role. Ideally, that would be the case, but I doubt many companies have the sophistication to be that precise. I would venture to guess that most roles a compensated more heavily on tenure as high performers are promoted out of positions and good and low performers carry on. This leads to new high performers in a role that add a lot of value receiving lower compensation while someone adding less value may be paid more due to longevity since most employers do not fire employees that don't have egregious failings. I am fine with not everyone receiving the same pay (to your point...way too many dynamics), even for being nearly equally talented, but as I have argued I think the goal of increasing compensation by demographics is not "equality" it is divisive as Colin similarly alluded to in the video.