Lady Butterfly Pedro Pascal Calls For Boycott of HBO's Upcoming $2 Billion ‘Harry Potter' Series — World of Reel
dandelionPascal has been a vocal ally of the transgender community, frequently using his platform to advocate for trans rights. At the UK premiere of “Thunderbolts,” he wore a shirt reading “Protect the Dolls,” a term of endearment for transgenderism.
I wonder if the author of the article realizes “transgenderism” is a right-wing, anti-trans term?
EDIT: ah, it looks like the author of that blog is probably anti-trans and holds other right-wing views: old.reddit.com/…/can_someone_give_me_context_for_…
Good spot! Trans+ would have been better
Considering dolls is a term applied only to trans women, he should have just said “a term of endearment for trans women”. The only reason he didn’t is because he’s anti-trans, and maybe he doesn’t even understand that “dolls” is a term specific to trans women, or that trans men even exist, a lot of anti-trans bigots are obsessed with trans women and think the only trans people are trans women; there are estimated to be equal numbers of trans men as trans women, they just don’t get the same attention.
The bathroom debate shows this mindset, anti-trans activist want trans women to use men’s restrooms, but they aren’t thinking about the fact that those same laws and policies force trans men into women’s restrooms, leading to this kind of situation:
So the anti-trans movement claims they are keeping men out of women’s restrooms, while doing exactly the opposite.
I think the anti-trans movement wants to claim that the entire idea of trans people is ideologically driven, but they have it in reverse - the gender binary and anti-trans movement is ideologically driven, while the position that trans people exists and should have gender-affirming care is based on actual empirical evidence. The science shows reality is much more complicated than the gender binary, and that being trans is biologically determined, genetically inherited, and part of natural human variation throughout our history as a species.
So it seems acknowledging the reality and gender of trans people is not so much ideologically driven as much as it is more aligned with reality than the status quo of assigning gender according to a model of binary sex based an a quick inspection of genitals at birth, which we know is ideologically driven. The only reason to reject the undisputed science is for religious and political reasons, there is no actual debate or ambiguity about the science. Every single major medical and scientific association endorses gender affirming care for minors and adults, there is a firm consensus on this. These organizations are typically conservative, not “woke”, and they only support those treatments because they are the only known effective treatments of gender dysphoria.
The anti-trans movement has more in common with young earth creationism, the anti-vaxx movement, and other anti-science movements, which are often politically motivated and intersect with conservative forms of Christianity. These are truly ideologically based movements, and they support views of reality based not on what is empirically demonstrated but rather based on a dogmatic interpretation of religious texts.
For example, Matt Walsh’s anti-trans film What is a Woman was compared to antivax films like VAXXED or the anti-evolution film Expelled!.
Jo MiranI’d like to take a moment to acknowledge #occupotty
Pronellthere are estimated to be equal numbers of trans men as trans women, they just don’t get the same attention.
And this is a stunning example of the power of male privilege.
and the fact that transphobia is mostly motivated by misogyny (see Julia Serano’s concept of “transmisogyny” outlined in Whipping Girl).
Even transphobia against trans men is misogynistic, e.g. when trans men are treated as just vulnerable / hapless women or girls that need to protecting from “trans grooming”, which is patronizing and conventionally sexist, or when
content warningcorrective rape is used on trans men to re-assert their assigned gender, e.g. Sam Nordquist and Brandon Teena.
The violence trans men face is ultimately connected to violence against women, even if it is being applied to men to deny them their gender.
LetstakealookWow. People really sicken me.
yeah, tough to stomach some aspects of humanity - but it’s worth keeping it mind it’s only a small minority of people, I try not to generalize the exceptional violence of the worst of us onto the rest of humanity.
I hear you, and I do try to practice that. I find so many to be disappointing, though. It definitely helps to remember that I can’t control others, just my own actions/reactions.
transhetwarrior (he/him)Erasure is not a privilege
anti-trans activist want trans women to use men’s restrooms, but they aren’t thinking about the fact that those same laws and policies force trans men women’s restrooms, leading to this kind of situation
Oh, that’s the point.
See, it’s about men protecting women from bad things. Not about women feeling uncomfortable.
It’s the same as the justification for Crhistian rejection of empathy: the undertone is “women are more vulnerable to ‘falling for’ the empathee’s sin.”
Womens’ perspective is where the thoughts stop, but that is no accident.
I think the anti-trans activists coming up with the policies are aware of trans men and have crafted this policy to stoke moral panic and to keep trans people out of public life. I guess in my mind, the naive anti-trans person who doesn’t know about trans men were more like the average person duped by anti-trans propaganda.
The actual people running the movement know a trans man realistically won’t be comfortable going to the women’s restroom, so their intention isn’t really to force them in there either - it’s to increase risks for trans people so they either face violence in the wrong bathroom or face criminality, maybe with a long term goal of using the prisons to forcefully detransition trans people.
That some trans people are going ahead and complying with the bathroom law is maybe an unintended side effect, but it still achieves the effect of increasing risks for trans people - trans women are at much greater risk of violence in a men’s restroom or in a men’s prison than in a women’s restroom or a women’s prison, and thus achieving the genocidal goal of eradicating trans people.
See, it’s about men protecting women from bad things. Not about women feeling uncomfortable.
Womens’ perspectives may be where the thoughts stop, but that is no accident.
I completely agree, women’s safety was never the actual priority - nor does it accord with reality, the empirical evidence shows that trans inclusive policies do not increase crime and the idea that trans people pose any real threat are not based in reality.
Women never mattered here, and even the anti-trans “gender-critical” movement that claims feminist roots have distanced themselves from feminism, with increasing focus on targeting trans women and prioritizing anti-trans policies even when it contradicts feminist goals or beliefs.
I think the anti-trans activists coming up with the policies are aware of trans men and have crafted this policy to stoke moral panic and to keep trans people out of public life.
I think it really depends. There are some leaders/influencers who know exactly what they’re doing, and are using this moral panic as a engagement tool. Maybe some do have the idea of forcefully detransitioning the incarcerated, with a kind of Mike Pence attitude to it (who is much more supportive of conversion therapy than most people are aware of).
But (speaking as someone with some very evangelical southern US family), I think some supporters really are thinking of this from the “protect vunerable women” perspective. This thread weaves through everything, their whole ideology and perception of people… Women are supposed to need and accept men’s protection and direction. So of course these scary “biological men” should be removed from their bathrooms, while being with “biological women” still fits that idealistic fantasy until you actually look at a picture like this.
Yes, I was trying to differentiate the kinds of anti-trans people, the clergy from the flock so to speak. The politicians like Mike Pence and activists like Matt Walsh are more likely to be strategic and knowledgeable about the issues.
The lay people who are influenced by those activist leaders are more likely to be ignorant and have different perspectives.
Whether leaders or lay people, I don’t take them seriously when they say they are trying to “protect vulnerable women” any more than I think conservatives actually care about small government or states rights, everything is just rationalization and rhetoric to justify a less pleasant and less defensible position (like taking food stamps away from the poor, or eradicating trans people).
I want to see it… But imagine if pirates made it so accessible it was easer to view then buying it.
Watching/playing/acquiring media without paying for it only sends the message that the demand is there; it’s just that the anti-piracy enforcement schemes haven’t been perfected yet.
If 100 million people watch this show on day one, but only 1 million paid to do so, the question is going to be “How can we force those other 99 million people to pay for this?” But if zero people watch this show, the immediate red flag will be “People used to love Harry Potter? Why aren’t they watching it now?”
You want to show that Joanne Rowling’s bigotry isn’t to be tolerated? You don’t show her that her content is still wanted; you shut her out completely.
Counter point. If there’s a drop in subscriptions and a spike on piracy after they release, they can conclude that the best approach is to drop the show and J. Terf Rowling.
That, and have all the discourse of the show be around her bigotry.
I have to interest on the show
Counter point. If there’s a drop in subscriptions and a spike on piracy after they release, they can conclude that the best approach is to drop the show and J. Terf Rowling.
Media execs don’t see piracy as an economics or social issue. They believe it’s a technological issue and they just need to find the right silver bullet to force you to watch the content that the know you want to watch (why would you be pirating it otherwise?) while paying them for it.
No corporation has seen an increase of piracy of their content and thought anything other than “We need stricter anti-piracy measures.”
burgersc12The company doesn’t care about popularity lmfao. They only care about money
Lots of media are popular that didn’t make money, but there’s no media that made lots of money that wasn’t also popular.
Money directly correlates with popularity when talking about films/books/television. Why do you think, for example, that there was only one Eragon movie despite there being four books? And yet Twilight also had four books, but had five movies made?
You seriously think the suits spending tens or hundreds of millions of dollars making movies or tv shows don’t care about what’s popular? Then why the hell are they remaking Harry Potter?
How would they know that 99 million people pirated it?
They track torrent file downloads so they can send threatening DMCA takedown letters to people that don’t use VPNs to obfuscate their IPs. Even if you do use a VPN, they may not know who you are, but they can count the download.
Does pirating a show via streaming site circumvent this or does that get tracked too?
I don’t think a third party can track your steaming without the allowance of the site you are using. With torrents, it’s the nature of Peer to Peer transfers that your client or connecting to other clients to share the files, which is how they get your IP. With a streaming service, there is no open Peer to Peer download, so they could only track your streaming via cookies on the website or something like that.
The Last of Us spoilersWhat are they gonna do? Kill him off?
!I he shows up throught the second game in flashbacks, I think he will be done after this season, unless they keep bringing him back…but after this? He is 100% gone lol!<
entropicdriftFYI your spoiler tag didn’t work on this comment. Also I heard they’re adapting Last of Us Part II into 2 seasons of the show, since it’s so much longer plot-wise.
Odd, I see it blacked out on my side. Apologies to all.
I don’t see Pedro even working for HBO going forward. He is attacking another HBO show, and you know it’s all about bottom line. Could be wrong.
Regardless, Pedro is the man.
adr1anI just read that… You should edit to either remove or correct the tags. Anyway, I will remember that so no worries… But for others.
Meh, I don’t think character shows up in flashbacks after their death is something that’s spoiler tag worthy imo.
huppakee:::spoiler Last of us season 2 spoiler
I’d be more bummed about “after his death” then “flashbacks”
:::
Defeating the Terf queen, rowlings
This pedro pascal guy seems like kind of a good dude man
Makes you wonder what he’s hiding…
A trans sister for one, so it would make sense he’s not a fan of the TERF queen?
I support this man, and his ideas.
Well, if I watch it I guarantee I won’t pay for it.
TheLowestStoneBe better. Don’t watch at all.
The_Helmet_Stays_OnNothing worse then when people don’t even want to pirate your shit.
EXACTLY! Pirating let’s them know you’re interested.
They’re not even gonna fuckin know lawl
screenrant.com/games-thrones-most-pirated-tv-show…
Yes, they will. The GoT showrunners used to brag about it during interviews.
TwinTitansYeah, I’m going to watch it twice now.
max_dryzenDone. I havent watched any of the other one either. lmao
Bilb!Yeah, I wish there was a way I could meaningfully boycott something which I had no interest in to begin with. But oh well.
Yeah yeah this is great and all but can we not fawn over the guy working for a rabid zionist bc he’s doing the barest trans advocacy? Not to get all dark woke or anything but if he’s calling to boycott Harry potter bc JK is a bigot what should we do with his show written by a genocide supporter? It just seems silly. I won’t be watching either show but cmon. If we’re gonna hold people accountable for their hate based views let’s not stop at trans people.
If all you want is perfect allies, then you should expect none.
Instead take the imperfect ally and work to achieve a positive result.
queermunist she/herWe must identify the primary contradiction and struggle against it, not endlessly shift our focus as opportunities arise.
I don’t need perfect allies, but I need my allies to not be fascists or fascist collaborators.
AbsentBirdI have no idea. Pedro Pascal worked the The Mandalorian, which was created by Jon Favreau, but I don’t think he’s a Zionist.
I think he means Drukmann, the creator of the last of us.
vice.com/…/the-not-so-hidden-israeli-politics-of-…
Seems a bit overblown though.
[Wikipedia’s summary of an article interviewing him and other studio members](en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Druckmann#Studio_leade…) pretty much says he actually doesn’t support Israel and in fact felt disgusted about having had feelings of anger for the Palestinian protestors who killed 2 Israeli soldiers in 2000. And he pretty much says that in the game he wanted the player to go on a similar emotional rollercoaster.
He supposedly also donated to emergency response teams on both sides of the conflict
I honestly had no idea who the dude was until now as I’m not really a PlayStation guy, but I’m not sure he’s much of a zionist. He was born in an Israeli settlement and it’s certainly shaped him in some ways, but has he ever voiced support for the genocide?
Ya that’s mostly my view on it from what little I’ve read. The donations was days after the attack as well. It says a lot that he still donated to both sides even when he comes from Israel and when at the time, Israel was very much the victim in the eyes of the media.
Where do you work? I need to find out if your employer is a zionist before I listen to what you have to say.
I mean… all her bullshit aside anyway; It’s too soon for a Harry Potter remake.
Is it?
I can’t say I have ever liked the films, so maybe they will produce something better.
EtherWhackI would say yes.
The amount of media coverage and fandom the series got pretty much immortalized the actors within their roles. Animated stuff, fine. But live-action, not for the next quarter-century, at least.
Aside from that. We need more new stories, ideas, and tales; not just rebooted/regurgitated slop, made just to bleed a successful franchise dry.
I agree with your last point, but is seems to me that people are enchanted with this setting and would really like to revisit Hogwarts. So I would say I disagree with you on that it is not soon enough.