Oh, neither am I. But it begs the quetion why you carry yourself with the supreme arrogance of a political commissar?

 

I'd call it my strongly developed sense of what is right and wrong and my will to battle injustice. There is a reason why I went to study law, so it's not arrogance, it's my sense of justice and my will to battle for what I believe is right. In this case, I passionately and heavily oppose sexism.

I'd call it my strongly developed sense of what is right and wrong and my will to battle injustice. There is a reason why I went to study law, so it's not arrogance, it's my sense of justice and my will to battle for what I believe is right. In this case, I passionately and heavily oppose sexism.

 

And your strong sense of right is dogmatic, because all alternatives to your subjective viewpoint are essentially blasphemous and must be met with force and no quarters whatsoever. If people disagree with you, it is not because they offer another point of view, it because they are essentially evil.

Your political opinions have transcended ideology to become religion.

Good for you.

And your strong sense of right is dogmatic, because all alternatives to your subjective viewpoint are essentially blasphemous and must be met with force and no quarters whatsoever. If people disagree with you, it is not because they offer another point of view, it because they are essentially evil.

Your political opinions have transcended ideology to become religion.

Good for you.

So calling out a sexist post as being sexist, and reporting a sexist post when sexism is against the message board's ToS = being "dogmatic" and treating all other points of view as "essentially evil"?

I don’t know snytning about that. I reacted to the tone and and arrogance of your posts in this thread.

It bears witness to a plague in modern society: the sacralization of opinion and ideology.

I don’t know snytning about that. I reacted to the tone and and arrogance of your posts in this thread.

It bears witness to a plague in modern society: the sacralization of opinion and ideology.

 

You don't have the right of the first amendment on a private forum that you agreed to the ToS when posting. So that point is moot.

So calling out a sexist post as being sexist, and reporting a sexist post when sexism is against the message board's ToS = being "dogmatic" and treating all other points of view as "essentially evil"?

 

Sadly, this is what we're devolving into. Don't try to argue with the trolls. Pointing out something that is clearly sexist, or bigoted, only gets met with hypocritical accusations and victimism.

 

Stand for what you believe and don't be dragged down by those just looking to start trouble.

Sadly, this is what we're devolving into. Don't try to argue with the trolls. Pointing out something that is clearly sexist, or bigoted, only gets met with hypocritical accusations and victimism.

 

Stand for what you believe and don't be dragged down by those just looking to start trouble.

 

Problem is, the OP isn't being sexist in this instance. I can't comment on whether he is or not, since I don't actually know the guy, but, in this post, he's not being sexist. Dragging any sort of "ism" into the conversation is a smoke screen to silence someone who you disagree with. Let him say what he wants. If mere words hurt you, you fail at life. That is how we've gotten riots on college campuses because a speaker that a portion of the population disagrees with is coming. You disagree? So what? Don't listen. Or better, do listen. Debate. Talk. Screaming "sexist" or "racist" at someone and getting them banned simply to silence them shows a failing on your part, not theirs.

Sadly, this is what we're devolving into. Don't try to argue with the trolls. Pointing out something that is clearly sexist, or bigoted, only gets met with hypocritical accusations and victimism.

 

Stand for what you believe and don't be dragged down by those just looking to start trouble.

 

I completely agree with you. But that's the tactic when you don't have anything sensible to bring to the discussion. Instead of asking me "why do you believe he is sexist" or "can you elaborate on your view?", the person in question immediately resorted to personal attacks by calling me "arrogant" amongst others. But that only shows me one thing: they were unable to think of a reasonable way to continue the discussion and make well thought out points and arguments.

 

Sadly it's the new way of arguing, when you are unable to think of something reasonable to say or run out of arguments, you resort to personal attacks. It's a pity, a great pity.

The strong woman message was lost in the slap and this is why I say that. If a man slaps a woman is he being strong or is he being an abuser, if it is fair for one sex it is fair for the other. Forcing the issue based on strength of will, knowledge and ability to convince others, and being the better person shows strength, the other way is a shortcut that would not be tolerated if it was done by a male character to a female character the outrage would be huge.

 

Two of the best bosses I ever had were women and they were great, one of the worst bosses I ever had was also a women, when I quit due that company due to the worst boss, I was told by a female HR person that I obviously had problems with having a female Director. That was inspite of having worked for a female boss and a female director and having turned down a promotion to stay in that group because of the excellent working environment prior to them leaving the company and the bad boss coming in. Oh and I held both sets up to the same standard that I held male bosses up to both good and bad.

Ok, so we all have a copy of the movie now. Does anyone still want to argue that Leia didn't approve of Poe's plan?

 

Remember:

1) This was the plan in the first place or else bombers wouldn't have been scrambled with a very specific plan of where to drop the bombs

2) the bombers had hyperdrives (source, http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/MG-10...Fortress_SF-17 )

3) this wasn't a situation where communications were cut off, Leia could have ordered a retreat even after Poe cut his radio.

4) the ship was a "fleet killer" and at that time they were still a small fleet. Kind of necessary to take out, especially if the cost is only 8 or so bombers. I believe the monitor Leia looks at in that scene is literally the entire "bomber squadron" based on what's shown on screen and what's discussed as the size of the squadrons in "bomber command" novel.

 

My conclusions:

There are multiple scenes in the movie where Leia shows she's simply tired of losing her people. She helped build this plan in the first place, but still hates to see the actual losses. She knows it was 100% necessary or she would have given the bombers the order to jump to hyperspace.

 

Even clearer, Poe doesn't lose any status with her at all. In fact, she uses it to start grooming him for even higher leadership levels. In the final evacuation scenes it looks like she is perfectly willing to let him be THE leader. It was a clear "passing of the torch" type scene IMO. Out of universe, but clearly relevant, with Carrie's passing, I believe Poe will hold the highest military rank in Ep9.

Edited April 2, 2018 by annabethchase

Well, this thread had the white Knights descend quickly. Guys, the problem was Leia scolding Poe for a major tactical decision. Destroying a ship that would destroy their fleet. I don't care how Leia scolded him, slap or verbal, it shows me she's a leader in position alone not willing to accept risks. Leia is not General material it seems. Though can we throw the feminist argument out? It seems to bring out the idiocy on both sides, though i think the movement is far gone from what it was.

Well, this thread had the white Knights descend quickly. Guys, the problem was Leia scolding Poe for a major tactical decision. Destroying a ship that would destroy their fleet. I don't care how Leia scolded him, slap or verbal, it shows me she's a leader in position alone not willing to accept risks. Leia is not General material it seems. Though can we throw the feminist argument out? It seems to bring out the idiocy on both sides, though i think the movement is far gone from what it was.

 

Watch the movie again. Poe's mission was to be a diversion. He could keep the FO occupied until the Resistance was ready to jump. As soon as the last transport is away, Leia calls him back. Poe is the idiot who disobeys and switches off the comm. Poe crippled the Resistance with his thoughtless, selfish actions.

 

Maybe he learned from it. We'll see next year.

Well, this thread had the white Knights descend quickly. Guys, the problem was Leia scolding Poe for a major tactical decision. Destroying a ship that would destroy their fleet. I don't care how Leia scolded him, slap or verbal, it shows me she's a leader in position alone not willing to accept risks. Leia is not General material it seems. Though can we throw the feminist argument out? It seems to bring out the idiocy on both sides, though i think the movement is far gone from what it was.

 

Well Leia was both right and wrong for scolding Poe. She scolded him for the wrong thing. People die in war. That's the blunt truth of it, but Poe was excessive.

 

Now where did Poe screw up.

 

1. He ignored the chain of command. It does exist for a reason or it's chaos on the battlefield. Especially when he's that highly placed, sure he as more latitude to interpret orders as he sees fit to get the job done, but that does not give him Carte Blanche to ignore direct orders.

 

2. He used a sledge hammer when he could of used a scalpel. All he really needed to do was take out the main guns of the dreadnought to protect the fleet and he could of gotten away with that with himself and 4 x-wings. Would of gotten the job done and protected the fleet with far less resources.

 

Now Leia slapping him, that's just horrible screen writing. Further more doing it in front of the crew on the bridge instead of behind closed doors is doubly so and just shows that Johnson has no f***ing clue about how a military operates.

 

That scene was poorly written.

All of the complaints about Rey and other women in Star Wars are getting tiring... Suddenly, a dude isn't the main protagonist, OMG, best feel threatened by this... I am sure if some guy punched another guy in the face, most people would be like "dude, he is so bad***."

 

That being said, I don't see anything cool about slapping someone, especially a sub-ordinate. It's childish and inappropriate.

The characters in question are already strong women and the misguided writers probably thought that slapping somehow affirms that. It's just bad writing, like everything else in that snooze-fest of a movie. And it's sad that someone would even remember or pay that much attention to it...

 

I am a strong woman and I've never slapped anyone in the face and can't really imagine a situation where I would resort to something so juvenile. But then again I am not a fictional character written by people who think strength of character is displayed through physical violence...

This thread is hilarious.