By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Gina Carano - Disney fired her, what does that solve?

I didn't like her character so i really do not care. I do feel like it wasn't the most innappropriate thing she said but anyway



Around the Network
Nautilus said:
Hiku said:

What could have happened if those people who chanted "Hang Mike Pence" etc, actually got to the congressmen/congresswomen they were looking for is on a whole different level than anything that happened in any other riot.

A disaster would happen, that's for sure. I am not denying that.

But BLM and Antifa KILLED people, destroyed livelihoods. That actually did happen, in contrast with the invasion. Are you saying that the lives of normal people are worth less than the lives of congressmen? Because if that's what you are saying, then it is fucked up.

Completely irrelevant. You're ignoring the point that they attempted violent insurrection the US government. Antifa and BLM have absolutely nothing to do with that.

Your post is literally apologetics for anti-US terrorism.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Walt Disney would have like her.



Jaicee said:

I'll take the unpopular position:

This for me isn't about whether or not whether Carano's views are generally right. They're not. I disagree with most of the social media content I see from her. But it says something to me that her most controversial remark is a hyperbolic (and yes, insensitively-worded) claim that conservative Americans face viewpoint discrimination and the company the works for responds...by firing her for her political opinions, thus validating her essential point.

Seriously, it's not as if half the internet hasn't been hyperbolically called a "fascist" by someone before, most often by the very sort of progressives who are supporting Disney's decision in this case. One does wonder whether they'd like to be held to the same standard and lose their jobs as well for reductive online hyperbole.

Freedom of speech means freedom of speech for everyone, not just for those who are right or who's opinions are popular.

I'm.... actually surprised by your statement! Couldn't agree more.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

Hiku said:
Nautilus said:

Let's just agree to disagree then. I think I had enough hypocrisy for one day.

If you're going to suggest that someone is a hypocrit, you need to explain it:

  1. Explain and justify your opinions. If you have nothing reasonable and/or relevant to add to a topic, then don't post at all
  1. Do not say that item A sucks, or that item B is better than item C. Give reasons why, and provide evidence (articles, screenshots, technical information, even opinion etc.).

You can't ask 20 questions, and then when someone answers them all, just reply with a one-line insult.
In the future, treat people with the same courtesy they've shown you.

I have shown the hypocrisy, and made my point clear with all the previous posts that I have made in this thread. There is a difference between giving an answer, and refusing to accept such answer. Don't twist my words as you usually do.

I'm not to blame if you won't view that as satisfactory. Plus, I don't have time to spend all of my day on the PC, I have other things to do, and I would rather not reply to you a day after the discussion began.

Like I said, let's agree to disagree.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

Around the Network
Jaicee said:

I'll take the unpopular position:

This for me isn't about whether or not whether Carano's views are generally right. They're not. I disagree with most of the social media content I see from her. But it says something to me that her most controversial remark is a hyperbolic (and yes, insensitively-worded) claim that conservative Americans face viewpoint discrimination and the company the works for responds...by firing her for her political opinions, thus validating her essential point.

Seriously, it's not as if half the internet hasn't been hyperbolically called a "fascist" by someone before, most often by the very sort of progressives who are supporting Disney's decision in this case. One does wonder whether they'd like to be held to the same standard and lose their jobs as well for reductive online hyperbole.

Freedom of speech means freedom of speech for everyone, not just for those who are right or who's opinions are popular.

Freedom of speech isn't involved with this. Freedom of speech applies to government prohibition on speech. 

Gina wasn't fired for conservative positions. She was fired for among other things promoting conspiracy theories about stolen elections and dangerous medical advice. I would not consider these "conservative positions". They are conspiracy theorist positions, and I'd say it's quite justified that Disney would not want to be associated with a person spreading them.

And she decided to express those opinions like an asshole (insensitive as you termed it). She was hired to be on the show in large part due to her name value (sure as hell wasn't because of her acting). When they no longer get the benefit of her name value, for instance doing interviews on ESPN isn't going to draw more eyeballs to the show, then I'm not sure why Disney should keep paying her. It's quite contrary to their best interests. 

So I don't think her viewpoint was validated. If she was expressing conservative views in a respectful manner, then that'd be one thing. But, if she's spreading conspiracy theories in an insensitive manner, it seems quite reasonable for Disney to not want to keep their association with her going for reasons that had nothing to do with her being conservative.

okr said:

Walt Disney would have like her.

The evidence for Walt being anti-semitic is shaky at best. Walt was rabidly anti-communist (which may be an issue in itself) and as part of this attended several meetings of the German American Bund, which was a group that was purportedly against Communism, but largely anti-semitic (tends to be a pattern). This seems to be the source of the rumors.

But there's evidence opposing this. Walt hired many Jewish workers, and reportedly chewed someone out for referring to the Sherman brothers (two of his most famous composers) as his "jew boys". He was awarded as man of the year by the LA chapter of B'nai B'rith for his work with Jewish charities. They investigated allegations of anti-semitism and were satisfied that they were unfounded. None of Walt's Jewish employees ever reported any negativity directed towards them for being anti-semitic.

As for racism, there's really not much more evidence, aside from some obviously racist images in his work, most notably Fantasia, Dumbo, and Peter Pan. Whether this amounts to actual racism or simple insensitivity of the times is up for people to determine.

But the evidence shows that Walt likely held the predominant views of his time... which were pretty much racist and sexist. The idea that he was especially bigoted doesn't have any foundation. 



snyps said:

Personally, I don’t care which corrupt Federalist Party is in the White House. Why can’t people believe what the want to believe and say what they want to say? 

They can Gina believes what she wants and she was able to say it. What you want is for people to be able to believe what they want and say what they want and force companies to keep these people hired regardless of what they say or how it affects that company. I believe a private business she could be able to fire and hire people however they want. Also no offense to Gina but she's a horrible actor. I can't believe how far she's made it in this industry. I'm not some acting snob but she is genuinely one of the few actors I can think of that stands out is exceptionally bad at their job. I would expect to see this level of acting in sci-fi original movies and even then she would still be at the bottom even at that level.



This thread taught me that VGC is almost entirely far left. Interesting.



method114 said:
snyps said:

Personally, I don’t care which corrupt Federalist Party is in the White House. Why can’t people believe what the want to believe and say what they want to say? 

They can Gina believes what she wants and she was able to say it. What you want is for people to be able to believe what they want and say what they want and force companies to keep these people hired regardless of what they say or how it affects that company. I believe a private business she could be able to fire and hire people however they want. Also no offense to Gina but she's a horrible actor. I can't believe how far she's made it in this industry. I'm not some acting snob but she is genuinely one of the few actors I can think of that stands out is exceptionally bad at their job. I would expect to see this level of acting in sci-fi original movies and even then she would still be at the bottom even at that level.

She's not really an actress. She was an MMA fighter, and is an attractive woman, so that combination got her attention. She has a reputation as a bad ass which is likely deserved (although there weren't as many female competitors at the time), and she parlayed that into media success which, good for her.

But... as an actor, she's limited, because she wasn't trained at that, and doesn't seem to have taken to it that naturally. You can put people like her or Chuck Norris or Dave Bautista in limited roles and sometimes it works out, but they rarely become great actors. They're there primarily for name value. 

Which is why this is a bit of a different case than if someone who was actually good at acting was fired... It's not like they hired her because she was the only one who could bring life to this character. She wasn't hired for her talent, she was hired for her marketability. And when that goes away, why keep paying her for something she is not providing?

Disney can hire someone far cheaper who would at least be neutral in terms of publicity and would likely be a better actress. Or cut the role and put in another character who would contribute just as much to the show's success without generating negative press.

So, for Disney, why not fire her? Aside from potentially taking a moral stand, what is their rationale for keeping her on their show? As far as I can tell, there is none.

Last edited by JWeinCom - on 13 February 2021

Why even have twitter anyway.