This article is basically about right-wingers getting angry about The Odyssey while the film has done very well at the box office.
Maybe some right-wing people just like getting angry when there’s really not much reason to get angry.
Because it’s all fucking bots. The dumbest thing we do is looks at trends on social media and pretending it’s actually relevant. Billionaires put their thumb on the scale of public discourse and signal boost absolute fucking morons in hopes that they can convince stupid people to believe their rhetoric.
The right-wing hate campaigns are the modern equivalent of a bunch of crackers in the 1950s burning Elvis records because they were “primitive jungle music” that would lead their daughters to sin.
One day we’ll be rid of the black and white sports team mentality so bored of it
It’ll take a lot. One party systems are one of the most heavily propagandized topics in the US. Many fail to see 1 party == no party, which is kind of the goal.
Wait, but when movies flopped in the past it was blamed on “right wing hate campaigns” but now I’m supposed to belive that those don’t work? People are watching this movie because it’s a Nolen film and the majority probably have no idea or don’t care about the online discorce.
It’s almost like people like good movies. People will watch shitty racist movies when theyre well constructed and enjoyable to their target audience, and people will watch progressive “woke” movies when theyre well constructed and enjoyable to their target audience.
And yet there’s also a bunch of complaining when a (not very good) movie does poorly in the big office that is because of misogyny, racism, etc.
Funny how you can have a GOOD movie with (talented) female actors of varying ethnicities and it still sells tickets very well.
Ok but the 2016 Ghostbusters was accused of being the fall of western civilization by the alt right. That thing lives rent free in their heads.
sounds like they getting talking points straight from russia themselves, i wouldnt be surprised if it came from thier troll farms. the farms always uses things like “western, west” in thier comments.
Turns out just because a slogan rhymes it doesn’t mean it’s true
And there’s just way more progressive and non conservative people out there than not.
They think they’re some huge majority because of the Fox News bubble and gerrymandered over representation in the government.
At this point, getting the standard high-profile screamer streamers whipped up into apoplexy is just part of the marketing strategy.
“Woke” is just the new Rage Bait that a marketing company can use to raise its profile. And conservative pundits are more than happy to play along, because “Listen to Tucker Carlson review Christopher Nolan” only ever benefits both Carlson and Nolan.
There are better movies than Odyssey in theaters right now that will be far more Woke/Based and get far less attention, simply because they don’t have the marketing budget to kick the Internet Ant Hill. Even if we’re stuck on remakes of Greek Tragedies, I had way more fun watching Hadestown.
Yes, but what if I REALLY BELIEVE something is true. That makes it true right?
/s
That just proves you are an orc.
Zug zug
But the right-wing hate campaign has affected the box office, giving the movie some massive publicity. I wouldn’t have even heard about the movie if it weren’t for this controversy (I’m a bit saturated lately so I don’t keep up with barely any new media).
Maybe some right-wing people just like getting angry when there’s really not much reason to get angry.
This phenomenon doesn’t only happen in that direction, lots of people cried out racism because of a white Cleopatra. So when is it acceptable to race-bend a character or historical figure and when is it not?
PS: the real Cleopatra (of the Ptolemaic dynasty) was actually white.
You wouldn’t have heard about the big practical set full IMAX movie made by the Oppenheimer/Interstellar/Dark Knight director?
To be fair I’ve not seen it advertised anywhere and only heard about it because a Youtuber mentioned it was coming out this year in a video a while back and I made a mental note I wanted to watch it. I went to see it the opening weekend without even realising it was the opening weekend! I just saw it listed when looking what was on at the cinema.
I only heard about it because it’s been getting news recently. I know the idiots are upset about something, but that’s about it. I go out of my way to not be advertised to. 🤷🏼♂️
We live in an age where people hear about breaking news via memes. You don’t have to see literal ads in order to hear about something.
But, I guess if all you’ve heard about it is that people are outraged then it just goes to show the power of conservative media being able to push its message past your filter.
I haven’t even seen an ad, trailer, review, or article about it that doesn’t has to do with the Musk and company drama, yet.
It’s entirely based on the culture at the time. Not just the tolerance of racial diversity in media, or the definition of “whiteness,” but also education about the source material.
Greeks aren’t white, Western Europeans. Not even like Slavs from just north of there. They’re as white as Turks and Egyptians and Southern Italians. Italians were lynched in the South in 1891. Show these racist fucks a picture of the Greek national football team, and then the Mexican, Egyptian, Isreali, or Algerian national team, and have them bet $20,000 they can guess them right. Same goes for TV news anchors in those places, I would imagine.
Anyone calling Greeks “white” is thinking of Renaissance paintings where Jesus was also blonde haired and blue-eyed.
Being white is a social concept. See: Italians or Irish past history in the usa.
Exactly. The definition and its application are entirely subjective.
They’re as white as Turks and Egyptians and Southern Italians.
And Spaniards and the Portugese, who are indisputably Western European. So the only part of your comment that’s true is that Greece isn’t in western Europe. It’s in southeastern Europe.
The white/black dichotomy is idiotic since, along the black/white continuum, humans are a clinal population, regardless of which phenotypic feature you might use: skin color, hair texture, nose breadth, whatever.
It kind of worked in the American south slave society because the middle of the spectrum was unrepresented there. But it was always bullshit.
Italians were lynched in the South in 1891.
Because they were Catholics, most likely, or just foreigners. The Klan hated both. But if you look at the immigration records on Ellis Island, for Italians, the “White” checkbox for race was always selected. Same for Jews. Same for the Irish. Most of the “X weren’t considered white” assertions are ahistorical. There was often virulent prejudice, but there were more causes for xenophobia than just “race” was supposed to mean back then.
Yeah, my point is that even once you get outside the “acceptable” side of Europe for racists, everyone on the Med looks the same if you don’t know the really subtle traits between smaller ethnic groups.
The reasons for numerous Italian lynchings are equally numerous. And equally sketchy and stupid. That’s my point there, is that being marked “white” on paper does not confer the same benefit as being perceived as “white” in a community. 20% of reported lynchings in the American South were not black people.
If we’re going to be pedantic about the historical definitions of whiteness, than it should be noted that the concept of race (and especially of “whiteness”) didn’t exist back then. You were either Greek (preferably from one of the more respectable city-states), or a barbarian.
Cleopatra was Greek, and would’ve looked roughly like a Greek person today, which people do generally consider white in America today. Hell, even plenty of Turks call themselves white these days, and it’s not like you could tell the difference at a glance anyways.
Exactly, that’s my point. Race is a stupid concept.
White people are typically shocked that there are ethnic groups in Africa, and it’s not all just “assorted blacks.” And that they don’t really all get along.
Meanwhile, I once explained the Balkan wars to people I worked with in West Africa. One of them genuinely asked “What? Why? They’re all white!”
it should be noted that the concept of race (and especially of “whiteness”) didn’t exist back then
Or rather, it did, sort of, but it had very different baggage than it has now. The ancient Greeks knew about Ethiopians, and described their physical appearance. They also distinguished Greeks from one another by hair color and skin tone: Achilles was blond (or maybe red-haired-- classical Greek color terms are unclear); Odysseus dark-skinned (for a Greek). “White-armed” (famously applied to Helen) was a desirable womanly attribute, more because it implied the woman wasn’t doing work outside in the sun. But we don’t know if “white” meant like milk, or just not tanned as much as a peasant.
Hell, even plenty of Turks call themselves white these days
Turkey’s unusual, since the urbanites are mainly Mediterranean-looking, but some of the peasants from the hinterland look lighter-skinned and sometimes blond and blue-eyed.
If you look at old paintings, the orginal generation of Turkish invaders looked very much like Mongols (there are quite a few portraits-- the Turks back then were Muslim but didn’t observe the modern prohibition on making pictures of people-- the Sultans liked to hire Venetian portrait painters). Since then, they’re intermarried with the locals to such an extent that their appearance is just like the pre-Ottoman-invasion population of Asia Minor.
Unfortunately, right wing hate campaigns do affect the voting public. The right excels at getting their voters to hate the opposition.
Anything that doesn’t please the white supremacist European American majority is “woke”, this culture is crazy.
Maybe some right-wing people just like getting angry when there’s really not much reason to get angry.
With like two minutes of training, anyone can identify political affiliation almost instantly from a brain scan, with over 70% accuracy…
This is because of three things.
-
Someone with a larger prefrontal cortex has more empathy and critical thinking, they’re the progressive ones.
-
Someone with a large amygdala has a larger fight/flight reaction, those are conservatives.
-
Roughly 30% of Americans don’t vote, they’re the ones whose political affiliation can’t be determined from a brain scan.
What’s important is those brain differences aren’t innate, and one of my personal favorite studies on London Taxi drivers showed that these types of changes can happen even well into someone 60s.
So practically no one is a lost cause.
The (should be clear) downside, is we stopped teaches kids the shit that grows a pre-frontal cortex decades ago, so we’re going to keep getting fresh waves of conservatives until like a decade after we fix public education.
Tldr:
The more people get angry, the larger their amygdala grows.
The larger the amygdala grows, the guicker they are to anger.
They’re literally addicted to getting pissed off. Oligarchs have to keep giving them imaginary things to be mad about, or they might get mad at the oligarchs. And if they do, the oligarchs are fucked.
those brain differences aren’t innate
Makes sense. Surely political views are most of the time just a product of someone’s life circumstances. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that billionaires are conservatives who want to lower taxes on rich people. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that people who face particular struggles in life (low income, discrimination, dangerous work, health problems) often support left-wing politics.
Leftists are angry literally all the time, and I spend like 90% of my life either in fight or flight, or avoiding and dissociating to avoid the fight or flight of anxiety.
I’m not a conservative.
Your interpretation kinda feels like it may be somewhat reductive. Possibly.
What you think of as a “leftist” is likely just a relatively small but very vocal subculture. Plenty of normal people with no mental illness or unresolved trauma vote for left-wing parties.
Your interpretation
It’s not opinion…
It’s verifiably true…
Theres a reason experts always contextualize their statements and explain the nuance and limitations of their research. If thats what the experts are doing, maybe treating every possible interpretation of that research as a “verifiably true” take is not a particularly scientific approach. Especially when the researchers themselves explicitly warn against this EXACT reductive interpretation.
You will notice that the article written on the research and the quotes from the researchers who did the research are infinitely tamer to a point of not being entirely the same claims anymore. Including explicitly telling people not to interpret their research in reductive ways.
The study successfully replicated a key finding from earlier research: on average, conservative participants had larger amygdalas compared to their more progressive counterparts. Although the size difference was small, it was statistically significant, suggesting that conservatives may be more sensitive to fear or threat-related stimuli—a role the amygdala is known to play in emotional processing.
…
“The main takeaway is that our political beliefs may be shaped not only by our environment and experiences but also by our biology,” Petropoulos explained. “We found that certain brain structures, like the amygdala and fusiform gyrus, are associated with political ideology. While this doesn’t mean our brains ‘determine’ our political views, it suggests that biology plays a role in how we perceive and react to the world, influencing our political preferences.”
…
“While our study used a large and representative sample, it is still only one piece of the puzzle,”
…
“I think it’s important for people to understand that our findings should not be used to reinforce stereotypes or suggest that political beliefs are fixed. The brain is incredibly adaptable, and political beliefs are shaped by many factors. Instead, understanding the biological influences on ideology may help us appreciate the diversity of perspectives and improve our ability to communicate across ideological divides.”
(Bold/italicized emphasis mine)
What the original commenter said is a reductive interpretation of the research that extrapolates the findings beyond what the researchers ever would, and is in fact explicitly at odds with the way the researchers told people the research should be interpreted.
Nevermind that the provided source can’t actually tell us much about scientific consensus, nor does it evaluate the quality of the experimental design. And if you ever talk to actual scientists, they generally don’t go around calling anything “verifyably true”, even when there actually is fairly strong scientific consensus.
The results of a paper tell you that THAT experimental design, produced THOSE statistical outputs, and may support the interpretations the researchers put forward. Thats the only thing thats “verifiably true”. Everything past that is essentially layperson narrative crafting, until you get to things like systematic reviews, or meta analysis which can start to communicate scientific consensus, and even then its only the interpretations actually in the paper that have strong evidence, not just any old way you might interpret their findings.
“I think it’s important for people to understand that our findings should not be used to reinforce stereotypes or suggest that political beliefs are fixed. The brain is incredibly adaptable, and political beliefs are shaped by many factors. Instead, understanding the biological influences on ideology may help us appreciate the diversity of perspectives and improve our ability to communicate across ideological divides.”
(Bold/italicized emphasis mine)
Ok, so either the problem was you didn’t read this:
What’s important is those brain differences aren’t innate, and one of my personal favorite studies on London Taxi drivers showed that these types of changes can happen even well into someone 60s.
Or you didn’t understand the verbiage I used?
Either way buddy, you’re not being anywhere near polite enough for me to keep sinking time into trying to help you understand this.
Like, do you understand the problem here?
You’re mad at me trying to explain this in layman’s terms, but you seem to not even understand what the word “innate” means, so obviously the issue is I’m not simplifying this enough for you.
And it’s always pretty much impossible to resolve something like this.
If I do what you ask,you’ll understand even less. If I don’t do what you ask, you’ll get mad because you can’t understand it…
There’s just no path here I can see to explaining this in a way that will make sense to you. I’m afraid I’m going to have to throw in the towel and accept you won’t get this regardless of how much of my time I sink in this.
Some of that is fair, going back and rereading your first comment I think I misunderstood certain aspects of your position from having waded through the pile of discussion from people not just including you
Believe it or not I’m actually a reasonable person, who isn’t angry at you at all. Nor was I really impolite at all at any point frankly. Like, even a little bit. Thinking you might be overstating or extrapolating the research into somewhat sweeping conclusions isnt rude, its just not sharing your exact position.
But I do understand that when you’re arguing with a pile of people on the internet it does change the way you experience what people say and will put you in a headspace where things read as attacks
Have a nice day
I have cptsd, autism and ADHD. Prefrontal cortex issues. I’ve also spent 2/3 of my life in fight or flight, larger amygdala. I have hyper empathy, compassion and decent critical thinking skills. If I can do it, everybody can. Somewhere along the way people choose to be selfish and continue to make that choice all their lives. Don’t give them a pass.
Yep, that’s why it’s a statistical tendency, not a straight-up determining factor. Also, your lifelong suffering gives you more compassion for those who also suffer, another well-studied phenomenon.
That makes sense
Same here, hyper-amygdala because of fibromyalgia (brain is broken), probably hyper-empathy from doing as ton of lsd years back. Not American… Where do people like us fit?
I’m not giving anyone a pass, nor would I be able to if I wanted…
It’s science, whether you agree with it or even understand it, it’s real.
If someone talks about something you don’t know about, they’re almost always going to be willing to answer questions if you ask.
Get upset at what they say and spout uninformed opinions and personal ancedotes at them…
They might block you before even replying so they don’t waste time trying to help you understand things later.
Don’t make other people write you off as a lost cause.
I have cptsd, autism and ADHD. Prefrontal cortex issues. I’ve also spent 2/3 of my life in fight or flight, larger amygdala
I literally have a degree and years of experience in explaining things to people with issues like you say you’re facing. There’s a very real chance no one else on the fediverse is more equipped to explain shit to you bro.
But just in general, with anyone, if they say something you w never heard that doesn’t make sense, give them the benefit of doubt for at least one reply, ask them what they’re talking about, even mention your own personal experience seems to conflict with it if you think that matters.
Just don’t do what you just did if you actually want to learn shit.
Oh, a degree, well that definitely makes me think you know everything, fine, let’s all bow down to the ultimate authority here.
Fuck you, dude.
Removed by mod
The researchers used structural MRI scans from a large public dataset known as the Amsterdam Open MRI Collection, which includes brain imaging data from 928 healthy volunteers. This is about ten times the sample size of earlier studies, making the findings more statistically reliable. Participants were, on average, 22.86 years old, with a relatively balanced gender distribution (52% female).
928 Dutch college students hardly comprises a definitive sample. It’s perhaps an interesting question to explore further, but the unwarranted authoritative, arrogant explanation given by OP is wild lmao.
anyone can identify political affiliation almost instantly from a brain scan, with over 70% accuracy…
60% of the time, it works every time! Ahhh I just can’t deal with this nonsense, why must the dumbest people always be the loudest?
Yes, but what about the shape of their skull?
Some well-placed taps with a dead blow mallet will take those dents right out.
Ah, a fellow retrophrenologist.
Horseshite, he has the problems, you do not. You are not qualified to make an opinion and also, from your language you sound like, in full circle, you are talking horseshite…
he has the problems, you do not
Oh…
I forgot the only people with issues are the ones that randomly claim to have them on social media.
And since I didn’t say I have any in my last comment, clearly I’m just normal as fuck over here.
This whole comment just ignored what he said…
Looks like phrenology is back.
Neat!
I get to link a third academic study about this.
For other studies:
https://lemmy.world/post/49973823/24987459
https://lemmy.world/post/49973823/24989298
Hopefully that explains it in a way you can understand. I won’t be available to answer any more of your questions, and despite the first study on this being 15 years ago, I’ve never seen anyone else being it up…
So really, best of luck finding someone else willing to help you understand this.
Love to watch someone bust out the calipers when they talk politics.
I hear the low sloped forehead and close-set eyeballs are a clear indication of Paleo-Libertarianism. Meanwhile, if your second toe is longer than your big toe, there’s a good chance you voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2008 primary.
They’re literally addicted to getting pissed off.
The only thing more addictive is medicalizing your ideological beliefs.
Poking someone with a stick, shouting “Why are you mad, tho? Why are you mad?!”, and then calling them Trump voters when they take a swing at you. Maybe calling in a body-language expert to do a riff on the Chris Rock bit - “Does anyone notice how Democrats walk like THAT but Republicans walk like THIS?”
Absolute bottom-of-the-barrel eugenics-tier propaganda.
Of course you’d say that, you have the brainpan of a stagecoach tilter!
Or, just look it up.
Flipping through my copy of The Bell Curve smugly
Lemmy is literally one giant amydala…
A lot of days I feel like Cornell Sanders from The Waterboy over here…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cu7A8LIzL1o
Too many people just don’t want to actually think, if it doesn’t match their opinions they not only refuse to believe it, they insist on telling everyone they don’t even understand it.
Wake up, babe! New phrenology just dropped.
The great part about so many studies being done on this, is I can just go grab a different peer reviewed academic study every time someone doesn’t believe it…
I already linked someone else what I was talking about.
So I’ll give you a different study where they studied people with lesions in either area, and discovered once again that the size/health/ability of those regions correlates to political leaning.
Specifically, we compared the political orientations of patients with frontal lobe lesions, patients with amygdala lesions and healthy control subjects. Lesion type classification analyses revealed that people with frontal lesions held more conservative (or less liberal) beliefs than those with anterior temporal lobe lesions or no lesions. Additional analyses predicting ideology by extent of damage provided convergent evidence that greater damage in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex—but not the amygdala—was associated with greater conservatism.
What ill never understand, is why people think literal physical changes to the brain wouldn’t correlate to political reasoning…
What do you think pushes people to one side of the aisle or the other besides differences in our brains?
Ok, so first, I’ve read it but not any of the citations or any other follow up work… but that study is about people with lesions in their brain, what about people with healthy brains? Can you identify conservatives with just a scan if they don’t have a brain injury? I still doubt it, much less ‘anyone with two minutes of training’. Or maybe you mean that half (if not more) of the world population suffers some kind of brain lesion or disorder? And that sample size seems also quite small and, without really being able to actually tell, not very random (the groups with lesions are overwhelmingly white, while the control group isn’t…).
Don’t get me wrong, I do think that conservatism is a disease/disorder. But a social, memetic one. That can’t be diagnosed or cured like physical or mental problems.
Anyway, it doesn’t convinced me, but it doesn’t matter cause I don’t really have any use for that information since I can’t scan people’s brains, modify them, or cure injuries. But I’m sure the fascists taking ahold of the world will be (are?) very interested on this bullshit, and I won’t be surprised if they end up putting anyone with a functional prefrontal cortex down.
what about people with healthy brains?
Well, I literally said it was in another comment already…
https://lemmy.world/post/49973823/24987459
Now, personally if someone said that, and I didn’t see it…
I would assume it was because for some reason I couldn’t see the comments from the other person.
So I would sign out, and then be able to see the comments.
If you still have questions after reading that comment and that study, no worries
Take a deep breath, remember I’m not arguing with anyone, I’m explaining scientifically repeatable experiments, and ask your questions.
I was just taking a look at that. Well, not the article but the actual study it links…
Don’t get so sassy, I think asking someone not only to read a scientific article to answer to your comment but also to go to the other comments to read another is a bit too much to ask. But I’ve done it anyway… and now I’m doubting that you did read them. From this second article:
No differences in Anterior Cingulate Cortex volume replicated between levels of conservatism - in contrast to the original study
self-reported ideology (single item) was not a significant predictor of amygdalar volume.
So you take a deep breath and read more carefully what you post before making bullshit assertions like ‘With like two minutes of training, anyone can identify political affiliation almost instantly from a brain scan, with over 70% accuracy…’.
Correct, this very much sounds like pseudo-science. I don’t even need to read the studies, all I know is that any self-respecting academic/scientist would call this out for the horseshite it is. If I didn’t know better, it’s a facist in a trenchcoat.
I don’t even need to read the studies
Well, that was obvious already…
I think asking someone not only to read a scientific article to answer to your comment but also to go to the other comments to read another is a bit too much to ask
Weird…
Personally I think it’s an entitled opinion to ask the same question some one else already has and expect a bespoke answer…
Agree to disagree I guess
Best of luck finding someone else to answer your questions. Frankly, it doesn’t matter to me that much if you understand, I was just trying to help you, and clearly you don’t want any help.
And don’t forget, you started with:
Wake up, babe! New phrenology just dropped.
I gave you plenty of chances to learn
Why are you acting like this? No one is asking you for your long-winded explanations. It feels like the only reason you’re giving them is so you can tell everyone else how stupid they are for not having the specific degree and experience you do.
“I gave you plenty of chances to learn”?? You sound like a supervillain.
deleted by creator
-
The Odyssey is a literal classic. Film has been making those since technicolor. The famous fighting skeletons in Jason & the Argonauts and such. The stories themselves pushing makers into trying new things.
And who doesn’t want some good stories and distraction now, in what has to be the second Great Depression.
They cant complain about their idiotic politicians, because theyre too dumb to see theyre getting fucked over
So they complain about hollywood where most famous people who comment on politics are left wing
Its not suoer surprising most of Hollywood is left leaning, creative types tend to be left leaning.
Heard lots of people complaining about Elliot Page casting. But Nolan isn’t a moron. I’m sure it looks fine on screen. I would actually call this film woke at all though. It frustrates me when people cast judgement before even seeing the film.
i think it specifically about elliot page, conservatives have been mad about him being trans for years, when he was in other roles like X-men as kitty pride. helen of troy being casted as AA person is a cherry on top.
I am rather surprised…
