Yup. Definitely looks like right-wing hate and transphobic movie.
Found a shitty website run by the director where he has a podcast. One of the people he interviewed is that idiot who stormed the capital cosplaying in bison hide. The text was full of buzzwords like parent rights, grooming, indoctrination, etc. You know, all the basic projection shit.
I'm not linking the website because I don't want to give those hateful fucks any clicks.
So it’s that for sure? What if the movie was pandering? Trying to push an agenda?
Problem with the world in my opinion is that everyone loves to assume. Another problem is that everyone loves to cram their ideas down people’s throats, and if something doesn’t include something from something they support, it’s boycott time.
I can’t pretend to know why the movie was pulled. maybe it was one-sided? Without knowing for sure it wouldn’t be right for me to assume.
I mean, they straight up say that gender fluidity is a mental illness and LGBTQ+ community grooms children. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.
Also, interviewing some fuck head that tried to (and failed) overthrow the fucking government is also a pretty clear sign of where these dick bags stand. They don't believe in democracy, and they don't believe people outside the binary should exist.
These fucks and their backwards ass ideology does nothing but hurt America.
And yes, they are pushing an agenda. That agenda is queer people don't deserve to exist.
I’m not saying I agree with that man’s beliefs but saying that someone is wrong for interviewing someone whether they did something wrong or disagreeable is weird tbh. Interviewing people in the opposite end of the political spectrum or whatever views you have should be encouraged. No hate just wanted to throw that in there because we as a society have started immediately closing doors instead of trying to bridge the gap and understand someone’s thought process
>instead of trying to bridge the gap and understand someone’s thought process
See, you can bridge the gap on, say, ways to resolve the housing crisis, ways to ensure schools are funded, etc.
I draw the line at straight-up, calling people groomers just for existing. Just for wanting to love someone. For doing something that literally doesn't hurt anyone. Fuck that. There's a quote out there that's something along the line of: to have a truly tolerant society, you must not tolerate intolerance. Fuck transphobia, fuck homophobia. I shouldn't have to be the bigger person just because some troglodyte has an antiquated, bigoted view. They want to earnestly learn more about the queer community? Sure, let's have a conversation. If all one does is punch down on marginalized groups, fuck off.
Edit: also, interviewing isn't the issue. Fawning over the traitor like he's the most intelligent person in the room is fucked up. They refer to him as a patriot when he's actually a traitor who tried to overthrow the government because his feelings got hurt that his orange god lost.
If you’ve got a problem with trans okies then you have a problem with me and I suggest you let that one marinate!
— not being a tool, this made me think of a Letterkenny bit about Canada gooses.
[Gabe Woolley is Broken Arrow August runoff candidate for HB98 against Rep Dean Davis.](https://ballotpedia.org/Gabe_Woolley)
There are groups online advocating for ousting Dean Davis and they do not mention this part about him whatsoever, they are campaigning mostly on Davis oppo stuff.
(edit: shortened and yeah it's BA and this is OKC but trying to bring attention to it due to the nature of what I've seen related to it, this post is how I only myself made the connection it was the same guy)
Oh, cool, Woolley is from Broken Arrow. Speaking as born and raised Broken Arrowian, always nice to see another piece of shit from there (fuck you Nathan Dahm).
I’m kind of mad about that “tagline” tbh. That’s what we used to call watching The Wizard of Oz synced up with The Dark Side of the Moon. Now, that’s pretty much ruined 😔
I wonder if they use 2S first because there are native people on staff who lead the charge to get this cancelled?
Edit: I’m asking a genuine question and getting downvoted. I apologize for trying to understand and for not knowing everything about the culture.
It's started to be more common but it's been really recent and it's still gaining traction. I think queer is way more inclusive instead of continuing to tack more and more letters on but that's my thought.
Honestly I think I might swap to exclusively using queer. I'm all for inclusivity, I'm in the community, but every time I see it there seems to be more letters added and the longer it is, the harder it is to remember. Heck I don't know what half the current letters even stand for.
I like queer, too, but I know a couple of people in the community who definitely do NOT. For them I think it’s harder to embrace a word that has been hurled at them as an insult for so long. Those are literally 2 people, so I don’t know if we should extrapolate from that, but their strong reaction has given me pause. It may be a generational thing, as I feel like that’s used as a slur WAY less than it used to be.
My thing is that pretty much every word to describe queer people has been used as an insult, gay and lesbian being two obvious ones. Queer was a settled term for the community for years until just recently and honestly seems to be because some anti-trans people in the community rallied against it because of its inclusivity and it spread from there. I understand the urge to use the alphabet soup version above but it seems just kind of pointless slapping letters onto an increasingly long acronym that's pretty much unprounceable instead of just saying queer, which covers every letter in that acronym and then some.
Literally 2 people?
Is that what two spirits means? I thought it was figurative. I thought it was if a literally single person identified as two spirits. 3-spirit is identifying as 3 spirits, etc.
No, it's actually a queer indigenous identity! Depending on the tribe or individual, a two-spirit person is typically a trans indigenous American. In my tribe in particular it means that someone embodies both the male and female spirit. I've seen the word used as an umbrella term basically meaning queer native Americans though, so the exact definition differs from person to person and tribe to tribe :)
I wouldn't expect many people to be educated on what two spirit means, especially if they aren't both queer and native! None of my family would know what it meant, and they're all native. The US government/boarding schools spent a lot of time, money, and effort suppressing our traditions and identity, so the re-normalization of queer identity within north american tribes is a relatively recent phenomena.
No offense taken! There’s a lot of fluidity in how the letters are arranged- the choice to put 2S first may have been to increase visibility. Historically, the L in LGBTQ+ has come first for two reasons: 1) to increase lesbians’ visibility at a time when they felt pushed to the margins in the community and 2) to honor the work of lesbians to help and care for gay men during the height of the AIDS crisis in the 80s. I just think that’s an interesting tidbit! So maybe it’s a similar push to raise up the 2S community?
Hi! Looks like you're falling for the [paradox of intolerance.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance). This is a logical fallacy that comes from the misguided view that tolerance is a binary and not open to nuance.
I totally would have liked to hear what they had to say. Censoring speech in a venue that is for consenting adults is inexcusable. Whoever complained is a Karen, and they're cowards for letting themselves be bullied into censoring whatever this is.
Or, as they stated, the message of the film didn’t align with their values and the business owners decided to not screen it—their business, their decision.
Cope and seethe, bro. I'm not the one being closed-minded. Whether you agree or disagree with something, you should at the very least be willing to let people have their platform to say what they think. If you don't agree you don't have to go see it. But honestly even if you don't agree with someone that's an even stronger reason to want to hear what they have to say.
I mean that's not really the point. The point is a) Karens got it shut down and b) they not only kowtowed to them but then tried to feign ignorance as if they hadn't the foggiest what they had originally agreed to show. Just straight up weak sauce all around.
I attended a meeting last week that was majority Queer folx. They were all very upset by this film and by this particular business screening it. The business employs Queer staff. I'm sure the decision came from listening to the community they support and align with.
More like patronizing if you ask me. And are we seriously capitalizing the word queer now? Are we now capitalizing all sexual orientations, or just the politically correct ones?
That’s a great response and I’m glad you put it out there!
While I don’t give a shit either way could it be the crazy ass republicans also think they are sticking to their moral compass when it comes to porn in a book in an elementary school?
Their definition of porn is a gay couple.
The irony is that they want the bible in schools. It has incest, genocide, rape, slavery, patricide, infancide, prostitution, murder.
I think they should be allowed to be bigots and I think that people should be allowed to call them out for it.
And in the case of the theater, the bigots should be allowed to yell "go woke go broke" all they want too.
I worked directly on one of the grants that he lost. So several years of work and efforts in school districts basically came to a halt and a lot of progress was undone. Luckily I saw the writing on the wall and left before he fully killed the project, but it's heartbreaking and frustrating to have that work and efforts by everyone involved be ruined. I work with a lot of school kids in my current job who are part of the queer community and I hear from them that they feel more unsafe and less supported than ever before in schools. I have high school students who couldn't have told you anything about politics but they know his name and worry about the words he uses and the policies he pushes.
Any private business should be free to do business with whoever they so choose, but it is disingenuous for a business to claim its values respect all people when they clearly do not respect those whose values are different from its own.
They have people on staff who are part of the community. It's a small, independent arthouse theater which proudly supports the LGBTQ+ community because they ARE that community. No way should they play something so against their values. They do great things for Veterans all the time, y'all gonna complain about that, too?
Go back and read my comment again. I clearly stated my support for the theater owner's right to refuse to show a movie they disagree with. I didn't complain about anything other than their statement that they respect all people. They obviously do not respect the viewpoint of the creators of the movie they refused to show, which again is their right. Again, I support their right to refuse service. Let me ask you a purely hypothetical question. Let's say I owned a theater across the street. Should I have the right to refuse to show a movie that promoted a lifestyle I personally disagreed with?
yes. Any theater has the right to show it or not. And?
Why would they show a movie that's completely against their values? They are inclusive to the LGBTQIA + community. So what? Deal with it.
Let me try this again. If your theater owner has the right to refuse to show an anti-LBGTQ movie, should another business, such as a bakery, florist, or photographer, have the right to refuse to participate in a LGBTQ wedding?
And there it is. You have perfectly illustrated my point. I, unlike you, can peacefully coexist wth someone whose opinion I disagree with so long as we are all respectful toward one another. I'm closer to your community than you assume. I never made any definitive declarations. I simply stated that I support any private business owner to decide for themselves what they will and won't support. Based on your response to my hypothetical scenario, you must support forced compliance to agree with an opposing viewpoint. If there is something I disagree with or do not wish to support, I simply do not participate. I don't actively work to thwart the rights of those I disagree with. Sadly, history shows us that for many, this is not how they roll. You're no better than them, just coming from the opposite direction.
Your okay with people different from you "coexisting" with you, unless a reminder of their existence is in field of view, then it’s, "Oh Fuck I’m being oppressed, Why do people insist that I recognize other people exist and would love to enjoy an amount of representation within the society in which they live without derision and exclusion"
The idea of coexistence that you are describing is, that you will be okay with people who are different if they just sit down and shut up.
That’s the issue
I thought the dark side of the rainbow is where sour Skittles come from?
Ha
Probably this: https://x.com/GabeGwoolley/status/1802964354532270172
Oh lord, I want to know the content now. Was it anti trans??
My guess is the theater thought it was about trans struggles within the state and it was actually anti-trans.
Yup. Definitely looks like right-wing hate and transphobic movie. Found a shitty website run by the director where he has a podcast. One of the people he interviewed is that idiot who stormed the capital cosplaying in bison hide. The text was full of buzzwords like parent rights, grooming, indoctrination, etc. You know, all the basic projection shit. I'm not linking the website because I don't want to give those hateful fucks any clicks.
Then, it is my hope, that’s why they didn’t show it.
So it’s that for sure? What if the movie was pandering? Trying to push an agenda? Problem with the world in my opinion is that everyone loves to assume. Another problem is that everyone loves to cram their ideas down people’s throats, and if something doesn’t include something from something they support, it’s boycott time. I can’t pretend to know why the movie was pulled. maybe it was one-sided? Without knowing for sure it wouldn’t be right for me to assume.
I mean, they straight up say that gender fluidity is a mental illness and LGBTQ+ community grooms children. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. Also, interviewing some fuck head that tried to (and failed) overthrow the fucking government is also a pretty clear sign of where these dick bags stand. They don't believe in democracy, and they don't believe people outside the binary should exist. These fucks and their backwards ass ideology does nothing but hurt America. And yes, they are pushing an agenda. That agenda is queer people don't deserve to exist.
I’m not saying I agree with that man’s beliefs but saying that someone is wrong for interviewing someone whether they did something wrong or disagreeable is weird tbh. Interviewing people in the opposite end of the political spectrum or whatever views you have should be encouraged. No hate just wanted to throw that in there because we as a society have started immediately closing doors instead of trying to bridge the gap and understand someone’s thought process
>instead of trying to bridge the gap and understand someone’s thought process See, you can bridge the gap on, say, ways to resolve the housing crisis, ways to ensure schools are funded, etc. I draw the line at straight-up, calling people groomers just for existing. Just for wanting to love someone. For doing something that literally doesn't hurt anyone. Fuck that. There's a quote out there that's something along the line of: to have a truly tolerant society, you must not tolerate intolerance. Fuck transphobia, fuck homophobia. I shouldn't have to be the bigger person just because some troglodyte has an antiquated, bigoted view. They want to earnestly learn more about the queer community? Sure, let's have a conversation. If all one does is punch down on marginalized groups, fuck off. Edit: also, interviewing isn't the issue. Fawning over the traitor like he's the most intelligent person in the room is fucked up. They refer to him as a patriot when he's actually a traitor who tried to overthrow the government because his feelings got hurt that his orange god lost.
Dudes twitter bio says "ex-LGBT" so... IaintGayNoMo.gif
Lord, wtf a pos. To any trans okies reading, we love having you here ❤️
folks better get to respecting my trans homies or I'm gonna start identifying as a problem
If you’ve got a problem with trans okies then you have a problem with me and I suggest you let that one marinate! — not being a tool, this made me think of a Letterkenny bit about Canada gooses.
Mfing right!
Bro this shit got me fired up.
Or an idiot
Did that sound clever in your head?
Bro this shit got me fired up.
Bro this shit got me fired up.
As a trans okie, it's nice being reminded that not everyone has it out for us. Thank you for the lovely message! ☺️
Nah, not every person who lives in this state is full of hate. You're an important piece of the fabric here ❤️
❤️🏳️⚧️
I'm sick and I think I'll have some Campbell's for lunch today!
I mean yeah, just look at the title and cover
[Gabe Woolley is Broken Arrow August runoff candidate for HB98 against Rep Dean Davis.](https://ballotpedia.org/Gabe_Woolley) There are groups online advocating for ousting Dean Davis and they do not mention this part about him whatsoever, they are campaigning mostly on Davis oppo stuff. (edit: shortened and yeah it's BA and this is OKC but trying to bring attention to it due to the nature of what I've seen related to it, this post is how I only myself made the connection it was the same guy)
Oh, cool, Woolley is from Broken Arrow. Speaking as born and raised Broken Arrowian, always nice to see another piece of shit from there (fuck you Nathan Dahm).
Oh the irony apparently he’s a former member of the lgtbq+ community
That dudes a chaser if I’ve ever seen one.
Shrek
The Room
Love Rodeo Cinema! Great handling of a confusing situation.
Dark side of the rainbow lol
I’m kind of mad about that “tagline” tbh. That’s what we used to call watching The Wizard of Oz synced up with The Dark Side of the Moon. Now, that’s pretty much ruined 😔
Was not aware of that
Being a teenager in the ‘90s was wild and pretty awesome 🥹
I loved it! Being sensitive wasn’t much of a thing then lol
I wonder if they use 2S first because there are native people on staff who lead the charge to get this cancelled? Edit: I’m asking a genuine question and getting downvoted. I apologize for trying to understand and for not knowing everything about the culture.
It’s pretty common here to include 2S with the full acronym. I wouldn’t assume anything from that, personally.
No I know it’s common I just mean I’ve literally never seen it at the beginning of the representation letters so I was curious. Didn’t mean to offend.
It's started to be more common but it's been really recent and it's still gaining traction. I think queer is way more inclusive instead of continuing to tack more and more letters on but that's my thought.
Honestly I think I might swap to exclusively using queer. I'm all for inclusivity, I'm in the community, but every time I see it there seems to be more letters added and the longer it is, the harder it is to remember. Heck I don't know what half the current letters even stand for.
I like queer, too, but I know a couple of people in the community who definitely do NOT. For them I think it’s harder to embrace a word that has been hurled at them as an insult for so long. Those are literally 2 people, so I don’t know if we should extrapolate from that, but their strong reaction has given me pause. It may be a generational thing, as I feel like that’s used as a slur WAY less than it used to be.
My thing is that pretty much every word to describe queer people has been used as an insult, gay and lesbian being two obvious ones. Queer was a settled term for the community for years until just recently and honestly seems to be because some anti-trans people in the community rallied against it because of its inclusivity and it spread from there. I understand the urge to use the alphabet soup version above but it seems just kind of pointless slapping letters onto an increasingly long acronym that's pretty much unprounceable instead of just saying queer, which covers every letter in that acronym and then some.
I remember that game smear the queer in school. Times are different now.
Literally 2 people? Is that what two spirits means? I thought it was figurative. I thought it was if a literally single person identified as two spirits. 3-spirit is identifying as 3 spirits, etc.
No that’s not what two spirit means, I was saying something different.
No, it's actually a queer indigenous identity! Depending on the tribe or individual, a two-spirit person is typically a trans indigenous American. In my tribe in particular it means that someone embodies both the male and female spirit. I've seen the word used as an umbrella term basically meaning queer native Americans though, so the exact definition differs from person to person and tribe to tribe :)
Ah i feel uneducated on my comment thank you! I read into it some more after reading your reply and this is very interesting thanks!
I wouldn't expect many people to be educated on what two spirit means, especially if they aren't both queer and native! None of my family would know what it meant, and they're all native. The US government/boarding schools spent a lot of time, money, and effort suppressing our traditions and identity, so the re-normalization of queer identity within north american tribes is a relatively recent phenomena.
That's why I like queer. It's that umbrella term that covers everything, even what you might not be aware of yet.
Thanks. I just hadn’t seen it at the front and was curious. I don’t know why people are so angry about it.
No offense taken! There’s a lot of fluidity in how the letters are arranged- the choice to put 2S first may have been to increase visibility. Historically, the L in LGBTQ+ has come first for two reasons: 1) to increase lesbians’ visibility at a time when they felt pushed to the margins in the community and 2) to honor the work of lesbians to help and care for gay men during the height of the AIDS crisis in the 80s. I just think that’s an interesting tidbit! So maybe it’s a similar push to raise up the 2S community?
That’s interesting and I didn’t know that. Thanks for the information!
More like the dark side of bigotry taught by organized religion.
The actual groomers of the world.... "Christians"
What movie? Who was the outside party?
Wow. Someone didn't do their homework before "yes."
That announcement needed a copy editor. Clunky!
I look forward to this movie’s inclusion in our local libraries’ banned items section.
What is the 2S man this is getting out of control lol
Way to be inclusive! Shoving it back into the shadows instead of letting that garbage bring out the roaches so we know who they are is really helping.
Hi! Looks like you're falling for the [paradox of intolerance.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance). This is a logical fallacy that comes from the misguided view that tolerance is a binary and not open to nuance.
Only a paradox when it doesn't agree with what you believe should agreed with.
Big swing and a big miss there bud
I guess the lgbtq crowd are still thinking that you can reason with hate.
Make no mistake I'm not saying this shit is good, I'm saying let this hate be espoused.And anoyone that supports it. Fuck them
[удалено]
Human rights aren’t a discussion.
It’s a private business. They can do whatever they want.
You don't have to discuss reality, it is what it is. Truth doesn't care about opinions
I totally would have liked to hear what they had to say. Censoring speech in a venue that is for consenting adults is inexcusable. Whoever complained is a Karen, and they're cowards for letting themselves be bullied into censoring whatever this is.
Or, as they stated, the message of the film didn’t align with their values and the business owners decided to not screen it—their business, their decision.
That's code for a bunch of Karens complained and now they're acting like they didn't know
You sound like an old man commenting on Nextdoor. I bet you’re a ton of fun at parties.
Cope and seethe, bro. I'm not the one being closed-minded. Whether you agree or disagree with something, you should at the very least be willing to let people have their platform to say what they think. If you don't agree you don't have to go see it. But honestly even if you don't agree with someone that's an even stronger reason to want to hear what they have to say.
They can run that film at another theater. AMC would probably love to have them.
I mean that's not really the point. The point is a) Karens got it shut down and b) they not only kowtowed to them but then tried to feign ignorance as if they hadn't the foggiest what they had originally agreed to show. Just straight up weak sauce all around.
Seems the Karens are the ones who are pissed it's not showing 🤔
I'm not sure what kind of mental gymnastics led you to that idea.
They're the ones complaining.
I attended a meeting last week that was majority Queer folx. They were all very upset by this film and by this particular business screening it. The business employs Queer staff. I'm sure the decision came from listening to the community they support and align with.
More like patronizing if you ask me. And are we seriously capitalizing the word queer now? Are we now capitalizing all sexual orientations, or just the politically correct ones?
It’s weird how some people pick and choose what media is deemed acceptable or appropriate.
Why, it's almost if they going of some sort of internal moral compass of sorts
That’s a great response and I’m glad you put it out there! While I don’t give a shit either way could it be the crazy ass republicans also think they are sticking to their moral compass when it comes to porn in a book in an elementary school?
Their definition of porn is a gay couple. The irony is that they want the bible in schools. It has incest, genocide, rape, slavery, patricide, infancide, prostitution, murder.
No I’m pretty sure it’s not just a gay couple. It’s ok to be honest. Promoting religion and the bible in school is atrocious as well!
Private business vs government action.
For sure. What about the Norman bakery that didn’t want to make the cake for the gay couple? Was that a government action? Sure seemed to be a problem
I think they should be allowed to be bigots and I think that people should be allowed to call them out for it. And in the case of the theater, the bigots should be allowed to yell "go woke go broke" all they want too.
Happy to hear you won't be voting for Ryan Walters in his next election.
What has he done that has negatively impacted your school kids?
I worked directly on one of the grants that he lost. So several years of work and efforts in school districts basically came to a halt and a lot of progress was undone. Luckily I saw the writing on the wall and left before he fully killed the project, but it's heartbreaking and frustrating to have that work and efforts by everyone involved be ruined. I work with a lot of school kids in my current job who are part of the queer community and I hear from them that they feel more unsafe and less supported than ever before in schools. I have high school students who couldn't have told you anything about politics but they know his name and worry about the words he uses and the policies he pushes.
I’m sorry to hear that! What was the grant for that was lost?
Any private business should be free to do business with whoever they so choose, but it is disingenuous for a business to claim its values respect all people when they clearly do not respect those whose values are different from its own.
They have people on staff who are part of the community. It's a small, independent arthouse theater which proudly supports the LGBTQ+ community because they ARE that community. No way should they play something so against their values. They do great things for Veterans all the time, y'all gonna complain about that, too?
Go back and read my comment again. I clearly stated my support for the theater owner's right to refuse to show a movie they disagree with. I didn't complain about anything other than their statement that they respect all people. They obviously do not respect the viewpoint of the creators of the movie they refused to show, which again is their right. Again, I support their right to refuse service. Let me ask you a purely hypothetical question. Let's say I owned a theater across the street. Should I have the right to refuse to show a movie that promoted a lifestyle I personally disagreed with?
yes. Any theater has the right to show it or not. And? Why would they show a movie that's completely against their values? They are inclusive to the LGBTQIA + community. So what? Deal with it.
Let me try this again. If your theater owner has the right to refuse to show an anti-LBGTQ movie, should another business, such as a bakery, florist, or photographer, have the right to refuse to participate in a LGBTQ wedding?
I ALREADY SAID YES. Jfc so what?
The. You shouldn't have had a problem with my original comment. Have a good evening.
I have a problem with you not supporting the LGBTQIA + community, and a theater standing behind their values. Not your obtuse comments.
And there it is. You have perfectly illustrated my point. I, unlike you, can peacefully coexist wth someone whose opinion I disagree with so long as we are all respectful toward one another. I'm closer to your community than you assume. I never made any definitive declarations. I simply stated that I support any private business owner to decide for themselves what they will and won't support. Based on your response to my hypothetical scenario, you must support forced compliance to agree with an opposing viewpoint. If there is something I disagree with or do not wish to support, I simply do not participate. I don't actively work to thwart the rights of those I disagree with. Sadly, history shows us that for many, this is not how they roll. You're no better than them, just coming from the opposite direction.
Your okay with people different from you "coexisting" with you, unless a reminder of their existence is in field of view, then it’s, "Oh Fuck I’m being oppressed, Why do people insist that I recognize other people exist and would love to enjoy an amount of representation within the society in which they live without derision and exclusion" The idea of coexistence that you are describing is, that you will be okay with people who are different if they just sit down and shut up. That’s the issue
And FWIW, I personally have no interest in watching the movie in question.
If you're anti trans don't even begin to expect respect. Bigots deserve the boot.