<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="1" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
In a historic Sunday night episode of &#8220;Batwoman,&#8221; the lady caped crusader came out as a lesbian to Gotham City, thereby making her sexual orientation official.
According to <a href="https://deadline.com/2020/01/batwoman-comes-out-ruby-roses-cw-superhero-tells-gotham-shes-a-lesbian-1202835688/#comments">Deadline</a>, the midseason premiere episode, titled &#8220;How Queer Everything Is Today,&#8221; featured actress Ruby Rose&#8217;s Batwoman revealing her sexual identity after learning about a teenager whose parents refuse to accept her sexuality.
&#8220;The big reveal came in a magazine article published by CatCo, and the scoop belonged to none other than Kara Danvers, a.k.a. Supergirl (Melissa Benoist), the title hero from Batwoman’s Arrowverse sister show,&#8221; the outlet reported of the big moment.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
&quot;What&#39;s next for Lena? Lena Luthor spotted in Gotham&quot; What was Lena doing there?! jajaja and, also, Kara wrote the article of Batwoman being a lesbian!!!! Kara and Kate BROTP! <a href="https://t.co/TH2QbLMV3B">pic.twitter.com/TH2QbLMV3B</a>
&mdash; 𝗗𝗿. 𝗗𝗮𝗻𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀 (@lKDanvers_) <a href="https://twitter.com/lKDanvers_/status/1219082978292391937?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
</div>
Speaking with <a href="https://ew.com/tv/2020/01/19/batwoman-coming-out-caroline-dries-1x10/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-ylk="subsec:paragraph;cpos:5;elm:context_link;itc:0" data-rapid-parsed="slk">Entertainment Weekly</a>, series showrunner Caroline Dries, who wrote the episode, said she wanted the character to &#8220;stand in her truth.&#8221;
“For me, it was so important for this character to stand in her truth,” said Dries. “The girl underneath the costume is so comfortable with who she is and so comfortable with being truthful, and she never really has been in the closet.”
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="1" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
The character Batwoman first came onto the comic book scene in the 1950s as a potential <a href="https://comicvine.gamespot.com/kathy-kane/4005-81174/">love interest</a> for Batman, but she eventually took a backseat in the 1960s and did not become a lesbian until being reintroduced in DC’s “<a href="https://comicvine.gamespot.com/batwoman/4005-9052/">New 52</a>.” A previous Hollywood Reporter <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/batwoman-series-poll-elseworlds-recap-1168339">poll</a> showed that 85% (more than 2,000 people) of respondents wanted a separate “Batwoman” series.
Though Batwoman certainly has her own woke pedigree, SJWs were reportedly upset over the openly gay Ruby Rose’s casting, prompting her to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/34435/ruby-rose-quits-twitter-after-leftist-critics-emily-zanotti">leave social media</a> after enough people complained she was “not gay enough” to play the title character.
“A #RecastBatwoman hashtag started circulating, with people also wondering why the role couldn’t have gone to a lesser-known LGBTQ+ actress in need of an acting break,” <a href="https://www.glamour.com/story/ruby-rose-quit-twitter-after-getting-bullied-about-her-batwoman-casting">Glamour reported</a> at the time. “Critics also accused Rose of not being a lesbian since she also refers to herself as gender-fluid.”
In response, Rose said she could not believe people were actually insinuating she was not gay enough when her entire career has been people accusing her of being too gay. “Where on earth did ‘Ruby is not a lesbian, therefore she can’t be Batwoman’ come from — has to be the funniest most ridiculous thing I’ve ever read,” the actress tweeted at the time. “I came out at 12? And have for the past five years had to deal with ‘she’s too gay’ how do y’all flip it like that? I didn’t change.”
The CW network broke barriers on the SJW-themed “Supergirl” with the arrival of Nia Nal, the first transgender hero in television history, played by transgender actor Nicole Maines and based on the <a href="http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Nura_Nal_(Pre-Zero_Hour)" data-rapid-parsed="slk" data-ylk="subsec:paragraph;cpos:2;elm:context_link;itc:0">DC Comics character Nura Nal</a>. Sometimes called “Dream Girl,” the character Nia Nal is a humanoid alien that also sees into the future.
Marvel has separately announced that phase four in its cinematic universe will feature more LGBTQ representation, starting with “The Eternals,&#8221; which will introduce the universe’s<a href="https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2019/12/16/the-eternals-marvel-openly-gay-superhero-trailer-mcu-brian-tyree-henry-angelina-jolie-gemma-chan/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> first openly gay superhero, Phastos</a>. The character will be married to a man and will be portrayed by actor Brian Tyree Henry.
</div>

Celebrity Sightings in Los Angeles &#8211; September 11, 20199

HISTORIC: ‘Batwoman’ Tells Gotham City She&#8217;s A &#8216;Lesbian&#8217; In Latest Episode

Homosexuality

Lesbian

LGBT

Political Correctness

Sexuality

Social Justice

Transgender

One evening this week, I was rereading Lord Byron’s great poem “Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage,” and came upon a startlingly accurate description of Cancel Culture. Writing in the early 1800s, Byron describes a civilization that has ceased to search for truth but weighs everything in “custom’s falsest scale”:
<blockquote>“Opinion an omnipotence, whose veil
Mantles the earth with darkness, until right
And wrong are accidents, and men grow pale
Lest their own judgments should become too bright,
And their free thoughts be crimes, and earth have too much light.”</blockquote>
Now, yes, I know I can’t enlist Byron — who used to refer to the more conservative William Wordsworth as ‘Turdsworth’ — as a spokesman for conservatism. But in this moment when the left insists that all disagreement with their orthodoxies equals bigotry and evil, when speaking simple truths like “a man is not a woman” can cost you your reputation or your job, who can fail to recognize a world in which “men grow pale lest their own judgments should become too bright and their free thoughts be crimes”?
This week alone, the left renewed its attempts to vilify the Oscar-nominated film Joker as somehow racist, which it’s not. When a Bible that was used to swear in commanders of the new Space Force was blessed in a ceremony at Washington National Cathedral, an anti-religious group called the blessing a “shocking and repulsive display of only the most vile, exclusivist, fundamentalist Christian supremacy, dominance, triumphalism and exceptionalism.” Even Stephen King, one of our great storytellers and a reliable anti-Trump leftist, was attacked when he said he would “never consider diversity in matters of art” but would only judge it by its quality.
These attacks are relentless and can often be costly. Writer Chadwick Moore, a gay former liberal, says he has been repeatedly banned from Facebook for not towing the homo-leftist line. His latest thirty day expulsion was for posting an article he wrote entitled “Rednecks Are the Least Racist People in America,” based on his own experiences bolstered by research by Thomas Sowell and historian Colin Woodard.
And much worse. In Australia, a young gay conservative who protested Drag Queen Story Hour at a library in Brisbane, committed suicide after being viciously defamed by the so-called LGBTQ Community.
Conservatives tend to treat the fight against such leftist bullying as a side skirmish compared to such major battles as who wins the 12th district in Ohio. They may roll their eyes and tweet their tweets — but at the same time, they teach themselves to watch their words lest they lose their social media platforms or their sponsors or their jobs.
Which, of course, is the whole point. In order to funnel power away from the individual and into the central government, the left is selling a utopian fantasy based on utterly false ideas of human nature and human enterprise. The greatest danger to that fantasy is any expression of the simple truth. Silencing that expression is what political correctness and Cancel Culture are for.
And any conservative who thinks the political fight to save the country from leftism can be won without confronting those devices is an idiot. The fight against Cancel Culture is not a side skirmish. It’s not even a major battle. It’s the war.
In the first two weeks of this year, President Trump eradicated a major terrorist, faced down the evil regime in Iran, made a new trade deal with China and had the new NAFTA-style deal ratified in a bi-partisan vote — all while the economy soared to new heights and low- and middle- class workers of all races saw their wages finally begin to rise. Indeed, lower income households have seen their net worth increase by 47 percent since the president took office.
And yet, the RealClear Politics polling average has Trump’s approval rating at 44.3 percent. About half the people want to see him impeached and removed from office.
Well, why not? Trump is himself the victim-in-chief of Cancel Culture. He is repeatedly and relentlessly portrayed as racist, sexist and otherwise phobic by a news media that gives him 93% negative coverage, according to the Media Research Center. The stone lie that he said there were “very fine people” among white supremacists continues to be shamelessly repeated — this week by the New York Times’ Charles Blow. And Democrat candidate after candidate declares the American economy serves only the rich, unchallenged by their poodle press.
If we cave in to leftist bullying, if the relentless political correctness of social media and the press goes unchallenged and Cancel Culture thrives because “men grow pale lest their own judgments should become too bright, and their free thoughts be crimes,” then the American public will ultimately follow a leftist fantasy straight into leftist reality, which is another name for hell.

cancel.jpg

KLAVAN: The Culture War Is The War

Leftism

Progressivism

In 2008, Democrats nominated for president a first-term U.S. senator with no serious legislative experience, Barack Obama. They nominated him over the long-championed, long-celebrated presumptive heir apparent to the Democratic leadership, Hillary Clinton. Obama was, of course, the first black Democratic nominee, and he would be the first black president.
In 2020, 12 years later, we have been informed by the media that Democrats are ensconced in racism anew. Why?
First, because Democrats refused to activate in support of awkwardly robotic Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), who is black; second, because Democrats refused to activate in support of wild-eyed former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julian Castro, who is Latino; and now because Democrats refused to activate in support of scenery-chewing Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), who is black.
Democrats have been accused by the media of having ignored their initially diverse field in favor of old, white candidates (amusingly, the media only noticed that Sen. Elizabeth Warren was, indeed, an old white person when actual people of color were booted from the race). It appears that the memory of President Obama — not yet four years old — is not enough to insulate Democrats from charges of discrimination.
Then there&#8217;s Hollywood.
In 2014, African actress Lupita Nyong&#8217;o won an Oscar for her supporting role in &#8220;12 Years a Slave.&#8221; In 2018, director Greta Gerwig was nominated for a best director Oscar for &#8220;Lady Bird.&#8221;
This week, we found out that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences had neglected — horror of horrors! — to nominate both Nyong&#8217;o, for her role in the extraordinarily overrated horror flick &#8220;Us,&#8221; and Gerwig, for her direction of &#8220;Little Women.&#8221;
These oversights, we were solemnly informed, evidenced the Academy&#8217;s deep-seated bias in favor of white men. Never mind that Cynthia Erivo was nominated for best actress for her role as Harriet Tubman in &#8220;Harriet.&#8221; Discrimination was alive and well in Hollywood.
It must be difficult to live in an environment in which every day is a perpetual test of one&#8217;s submission to the &#8220;Woke Police.&#8221; It must be difficult to know that no past act stands in favor of the accused — that each day must be lived fresh — and that all past omissions stand against the accused. But the intersectional revolution requires continual struggle and continual sacrifice.
In Arthur Koestler&#8217;s &#8220;Darkness at Noon,&#8221; communist lackey Rubashov is jailed and charged — of what crime, it does not matter. The Soviet Union is purging members of the older generation and Rubashov is told that he must confess in order to uphold the sanctity of his own cause. Eventually, Rubashov does exactly that.
&#8220;There is nothing for which one could die, if one died without having repented and unreconciled with the Party and the Movement,&#8221; Rubashov says in his confession. &#8220;Therefore, on the threshold of my last hour, I bend my knees to the country, to the masses and to the whole people.&#8221; The choice between dying honestly, in repudiation of his own cause, was simply too much.
In the end, all revolutionaries will have to determine whether they, too, will bow before the cause — even if they go unjustly to the guillotine. Because there is one basic rule of radical revolutions: Those who are first to launch them are often just slightly delayed in feeling their wrath.

Democratic Debate

SHAPIRO: For Democrats, Every Day Is A Perpetual Test Of One’s Submission To The ‘Woke Police’

Democratic Party

Racism

This article has been updated since its original publication.
Fitness icon Jillian Michaels (&#8220;The Biggest Loser&#8221;) has defended her critique of pop singer Lizzo&#8217;s body positivity image in response to critics claiming she &#8220;body-shamed&#8221; her for daring to point out that obesity leads to serious health issues.
In an exclusive <a href="https://www.tmz.com/2020/01/09/jillian-michaels-defend-lizzo-fat-shaming-comment-health-diabetes/">interview with TMZ</a> on Thursday, Michaels said that her comments had nothing to do with Lizzo&#8217;s worth as a human being and everything to do with her position as a health expert.
&#8220;Look, I&#8217;m a health expert,&#8221; Michaels told TMZ. &#8220;For decades, I have said your weight and your size have no bearing or merit on your value, your beauty, your worth, your ability. Where it does have relevance is your health. And to pretend that it doesn&#8217;t is not only irresponsible, it&#8217;s dangerous. And it&#8217;s just not a lie I&#8217;m willing to tell because it&#8217;s politically correct.&#8221;
Michaels went on to say that her &#8220;overall point&#8221; is that loving oneself does not exclude taking care of one&#8217;s health.
&#8220;My overall point is to take care of your health because you love yourself,&#8221; she continued. &#8220;That&#8217;s kind of the whole point. And that we should value people based on their skills and their abilities. It should be irrelevant what size they are.&#8221;
Ultimately, Michaels&#8217; critique had less to do with Lizzo&#8217;s weight and more to do with how segments of the media have been celebrating her body for smashing traditional standards of beauty while seeming to have no regard for the health consequences. Even in her <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/jillian-michaels-on-lizzo-why-are-we-celebrating-her-body-wont-be-awesome-if-she-gets-diabetes">interview with Buzzfeed</a> on Wednesday, Michaels simply pointed out her health concerns and did not denounce Lizzo as an individual.
“I have to say, I have personally found and I love celebrities like Lizzo or Ashley Graham who are really preaching self-acceptance,” the Buzzfeed host said.
“I love her music, yeah, 100 percent,” Michaels responded. “I don’t know anything about her, I’m sure she’s a cool, awesome chick.”
“Yeah, and I love that they’re putting images out there that we normally don’t get to see of bodies that we don’t get to see being celebrated,” the host continued.
“But why are we celebrating her body? Why does it matter? That’s what I’m saying,&#8221; said Michaels. &#8220;Why aren’t we celebrating her music? Because it isn’t going to be awesome if she gets diabetes. I’m just being honest. I love her music, my kid loves her music, but there’s never a moment when I’m like, ‘I’m so glad she’s overweight.’ Why do I even care? Why is it my job to care about her weight?”
Shortly thereafter, Michaels experienced a public flogging on social media for being an alleged &#8220;fat shamer.&#8221; Here are just a few helpful samplings:
&#8220;Nick Jonas and Halle Berry both have diabetes. Fat does not equal diabetes,&#8221; said one Twitter user, who seemed unaware of the difference between Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes.
&#8220;TW Fatphobia — Once you understand that nothing she is saying is backed by fact or science, this interview becomes all the more pathetic. This isn&#8217;t about health, this is about humiliating and shaming bodies that are not white and thin,&#8221; said another Twitter user.
&#8220;All this time it turns out Jillian Michaels was the biggest loser,&#8221; said Trayvon Free.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Nick Jonas and Halle Berry both have diabetes. Fat does not equal diabetes.
&mdash; Gheigh Niggaologist (@NegroClarkKent_) <a href="https://twitter.com/NegroClarkKent_/status/1214982485668438022?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
TW Fatphobia &#8211; Once you understand that nothing she is saying is backed by fact or science, this interview becomes all the more pathetic. This isn&#39;t about health, this is about humiliating and shaming bodies that are not white and thin. <a href="https://t.co/yeYZrWBvLf">https://t.co/yeYZrWBvLf</a>
&mdash; belen (@cloudiabelen) <a href="https://twitter.com/cloudiabelen/status/1214994383038083072?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
All this time it turns out Jillian Michaels was the biggest loser. <a href="https://t.co/KKEN9SI7vi">https://t.co/KKEN9SI7vi</a>
&mdash; Travon Free (@Travon) <a href="https://twitter.com/Travon/status/1215004740783763456?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
UPDATE: The original article attributed statements made by the Buzzfeed host to Jillian Michaels during her Wednesday interview. This article has been slightly altered to reflect that.

LizzoMiche

Jillian Michaels Refuses Apology For Allegedly &#8216;Fat Shaming&#8217; Lizzo Amid Backlash

Jillian Michaels

obesity

Ricky Gervais gave some excellent and useful advice at the end of his brilliant monologue to open the Golden Globes last night.
&#8220;So if you do win an award tonight, don’t use it as a platform to make a political speech, right?” Gervais said, speaking directly to the assembly of narcissists in front of him. “You’re in no position to lecture the public about anything. You know nothing about the real world. Most of you spent less time in school than Greta Thunberg. So, if you win, come up, accept your little award, thank your agent and your god, and f*** off. No one cares about your views on politics or culture.”
Predictably, none of the assembled narcissists were willing — or perhaps even physically able — to heed this warning. Least of all Michelle Williams, who wasted no time in turning her acceptance speech into a satanic homily. After winning an award for her dazzling role in something or other, Williams pivoted directly to abortion: Her own abortion, to be precise.
&#8220;I’m grateful for the acknowledgment of the choices I’m made, and I’m also grateful to have lived at a moment in our society where choice exists, because, as women and as girls, things can happen to our bodies that are not our choice,” Williams sermonized. &#8220;I wouldn’t have been able to do this without employing a woman’s right to choose, to choose when to have my children and with whom.&#8221;
We should note that Williams was visibly pregnant while she bragged about killing a previous child. She then ended her speech with a rousing defense of selfishness.
&#8220;So, women, 18 to 118, when it is time to vote, please do so in your own self interest. It’s what men have been doing for years,&#8221; she proclaimed, as the camera cut to actresses in the audience literally weeping tears of joy at the very mention of self-interest. Ricky Gervais couldn&#8217;t have scripted it any better.
Now, first of all, I very much doubt that the people at the awards ceremony last night needed encouragement to act in their own self-interest. I doubt that anyone anywhere in the world needs that sort of encouragement. But if such a person does exist, you won&#8217;t find her at the Beverly Hills Hilton.
<iframe title="Hollywood Gets The Treatment It Deserves | The Matt Walsh Show Ep. 398" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JsTJr7ZzXRE?start=948&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Second, I feel once again compelled to make the obvious point that Michelle Williams and her progressive pals in Hollywood really can&#8217;t do this girl power schtick anymore. References to a woman&#8217;s body and a woman&#8217;s voting habits make absolutely no sense in light of the gender theory that people like Michelle Williams routinely espouse. What the hell is a woman&#8217;s body? I mean, I know what it is. But Michelle Williams doesn&#8217;t. No member of the American Left does. Yet, when it suits them, they still pretend they do. They obliterate all distinctions between the sexes one minute, and then hope nobody notices when they redraw those distinctions the next minute.
Third, Williams packs about a half-dozen non-sequiturs, falsehoods, and delusions into the two sentences she spends talking about her abortion. Let&#8217;s take a look at just a few of them. She says that pregnancy is something that can &#8220;happen to our bodies that [is] not our choice.&#8221; In cases of rape, this is true. But <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/24/rape-and-incest-account-few-abortions-so-why-all-attention/1211175001/">rape accounts for</a> only 1% of all abortions. The other 99% occur because a woman chose to participate in the reproductive act. She chose to do the thing that, by its nature, can, and in billions and billions of cases does, result in the conception of a human life. To say that conception, in these cases, happens against the will of the woman is like saying that my elevated heart rate happens against my will when I use the treadmill. It may be true that I am not specifically willing my heart to beat faster, and it may even be true that I don&#8217;t want my heart to beat faster, but I am the one who is making it happen because I am the one who chose to get on the treadmill.
Likewise with Williams&#8217; insistence that a woman should be able to choose the person with whom she has children. Every contemporary person on Earth who is not a fundamentalist Islamist agrees. But the word &#8220;have&#8221; has two pertinent definitions here. Have can mean &#8220;to possess, own, or hold,&#8221; or it can mean &#8220;to experience or undergo.&#8221; Another possibly relevant definition is &#8220;to be the recipient of.&#8221; Whichever definition you choose, it&#8217;s clear that you &#8220;have&#8221; children from the moment they exist as distinct physical entities. That moment occurs when they are conceived, and not when they are born. So you choose who you are going to have children with when you choose who you are going to participate in the reproductive act with. Abortion does not protect that right or, indeed, have anything at all to do with that right.
But the most striking and disturbing part of Williams&#8217; abortion apologetic was more subtle. Note that she says &#8220;my children.&#8221; She claims that abortion enabled her to &#8220;choose when to have my children.&#8221; Currently, she has two children: One from a previous relationship and the other in the womb (notice how she identifies herself as &#8220;having&#8221; two children, apparently agreeing that women have children at conception, not birth). When she says that abortion enabled her to &#8220;have my children&#8221; later on in life, she seems to be almost suggesting that the child she eventually birthed was the same one she aborted years before.
Obviously, on an intellectual level, she knows that isn&#8217;t the case. But the rhetoric from the abortion lobby and abortion clinics is meant to give this perverse impression. Women are told that they can &#8220;put off&#8221; being a mother. They can place motherhood on hold for awhile. No need to have a baby now, they&#8217;re assured. They can just have it later, when everything is easier and it&#8217;s the &#8220;right time.&#8221;
Of course, in reality, motherhood occurs at conception. She is only at the abortion clinic because her attempts to &#8220;put off&#8221; parenting and babies failed. It is now too late for putting off. It is too late for waiting for a better time. It is too late to &#8220;have children&#8221; in a more convenient season of life. She is a mother now. That child exists now. If she goes through with the abortion, the child will be killed and he will be dead forever thereafter. And she will not go back to being a woman waiting for the right time. She will now be the mother of a dead child, living in grief or denial.
That is the horrible truth. Michelle Williams has three children, not two. One dead and two alive. She has found ways to talk about it and think about it that make her feel a little better about what she&#8217;s done. But she knows the truth, deep down. Otherwise she wouldn&#8217;t be on that stage, begging for applause.

Michelle Williams at Golden Globes

WALSH: Michelle Williams Shouted Her Abortion At The Golden Globes. Here&#8217;s The Most Disturbing Part Of What She Said.

Abortion

Golden Globes

Hollywood

Comedian Ricky Gervais catered to no audience last night when he let his mouth run wild in a no-holds-barred opening monologue at the Golden Globes, during which he roasted the roomful of celebrities for their yearly routine of hypocritical virtue-signaling.
“If you do win an award tonight, don’t use it as a political platform to make a political speech,” Gervais told the crowd. “You’re in no position to lecture the public about anything, you know nothing about the real world. Most of you spent less time in school than Greta Thunberg. So, if you win, come up, accept your little award, thank your agent and your God — and f*** off. OK?”
Gervais simultaneously roasted corporations like Apple and Amazon for producing supposedly &#8220;woke&#8221; creative content while doing business in authoritarian countries like China.
“Apple roared into the TV game with ‘The Morning Show,’ a superb drama about the importance of dignity and doing the right thing — made by a company that runs sweatshops in China,&#8221; Gervais said. &#8220;Well, you say you’re woke but the companies you work for in China — unbelievable. Apple, Amazon, Disney. If ISIS started a streaming service you’d call your agent, wouldn’t you?”
Naturally, segments of the American media did not exactly embrace everything Gervais had to say that night. Indeed, Gervais was immediately blasted for cruelly repeating &#8220;right-wing talking points&#8221; to score cheap laughs.
&#8220;Here&#8217;s my Ricky Gervais problem: The idea that celebrities are not only pampered babies but hypocrites who cause the problems they make speeches deploring and should therefore shut up and act/sing/be grateful is a right-wing talking point, and an especially stupid one,&#8221; <a href="https://twitter.com/MarkHarrisNYC/status/1214209277772156928?s=20">tweeted</a> Mark Harris of Vanity Fair.
&#8220;It&#8217;s not an act of speaking truth to power or of bravery to attack celebs on that front — it&#8217;s a tired way of scolding people into silence because you don&#8217;t like what they&#8217;re saying, and saying that he&#8217;s &#8216;calling out&#8217; the hyper-privileged is just the same thing in a new guise,&#8221; he continued in the tweet thread. &#8220;You&#8217;ll never go broke ending a night scowling at celebrities and saying, &#8216;Get drunk, do your drugs, f*** off,&#8217; which I think were his last words on the show. There will always be people to say, &#8216;Yeah! You tell &#8217;em!&#8217; But tell &#8217;em what? &#8216;F*** off&#8217; isn&#8217;t a stance. It&#8217;s a tantrum.&#8221;
&#8220;Anyway: There were celebrities who used their stage time to say valuable things coherently last night, and others who said valuable things incoherently, and others who talked about themselves. I don&#8217;t think yelling at any of them is of great interest. Peace,&#8221; he concluded.
Over at the Los Angeles Times, Lorraine Ali lamented how Gervais&#8217; trollery disrupted the sober mood at the Golden Globes.
&#8220;The [Golden Globes] mood was already sober thanks to an impeachment, threat of war with Iran and Australian bush fires. The last thing anyone needed was Ricky Gervais there, telling them they sucked,&#8221; <a href="https://twitter.com/LorraineAli/status/1214069393174323201?s=20">tweeted</a> Ali.
Sam Adams of <a href="https://slate.com/culture/2020/01/ricky-gervais-golden-globes-opening-monologue-jokes-ranked-meanness.html">Slate</a> went into even more detail by ranking the jokes in Gervais&#8217; opening monologue according to their &#8220;dickishness.&#8221;
&#8220;Going into the Golden Globes, the biggest question was not who will win the night’s biggest awards but how much of a jerk Ricky Gervais would be,&#8221; wrote Adams.
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-117bsoe r-mvpalk r-156q2ks">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-18bvks7 r-t23y2h r-1phboty r-rs99b7 r-1udh08x r-o7ynqc r-1j63xyz">
<div class="css-1dbjc4n r-1ila09b r-rull8r r-qklmqi r-1adg3ll" aria-hidden="true"></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>

NBC&#8217;s &#8220;77th Annual Golden Globe Awards&#8221; &#8211; Red Carpet Arrivals

Media Trashes Ricky Gervais For Telling Hollywood To ‘F*** Off’

Media

Media Bias

Ricky Gervais

Comedian Ricky Gervais has responded to the reaction to his eye-opening performance in hosting the 2020 Golden Globe Awards over the weekend, saying that he was relieved it was over.
Gervais caused many in Hollywood to melt down on Sunday after he ruthlessly mocked and attacked out-of-touch celebrities and elites for trying to politicize everything and for constantly lecturing the world.
The reaction to Gervais&#8217; speech appeared to be overwhelmingly positive among people who do not work in the news, media, or entertainment industries.
Entertainment news website Gold Derby wrote in a tweet, &#8220;Golden Globes viewers want Ricky Gervais to host ‘every year’ — He was ‘amazing!’&#8221;
The tweet included a link to an <a href="https://www.goldderby.com/article/2020/golden-globes-host-poll-results-ricky-gervais-amazing/">article</a> which stated:
<blockquote>Golden Globes viewers have spoken, and they want Ricky Gervais to host “every year.” A whopping 71% of fans who voted in our recent poll said he did an “amazing” job overseeing the 77th ceremony on NBC. To compare, 9% thought he was “good, but forgettable” while the remaining 20% of haters voted that he was “awful.”</blockquote>
Gervais responded to the tweet by writing, &#8220;Never gonna happen&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Never gonna happen 😂 <a href="https://t.co/1tYopQjL1c">https://t.co/1tYopQjL1c</a>
&mdash; Ricky Gervais (@rickygervais) <a href="https://twitter.com/rickygervais/status/1214246992580243456?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In a separate tweet, Gervais wrote: &#8220;Thanks for all your amazing comments about my Golden Globes monologue. Best reaction ever and that means a lot to me. I had a blast but thank f[***] it&#8217;s over, so I can get back to my real job of editing #AfterLife2 and touring #SuperNature. Make Jokes, Not War&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Thanks for all your amazing comments about my Golden Globes monologue. Best reaction ever and that means a lot to me. I had a blast but thank fuck it&#39;s over, so I can get back to my real job of editing <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AfterLife2?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AfterLife2</a> and touring <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SuperNature?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SuperNature</a>. Make Jokes, Not War 🙏 <a href="https://t.co/u1bKrnDWMt">pic.twitter.com/u1bKrnDWMt</a>
&mdash; Ricky Gervais (@rickygervais) <a href="https://twitter.com/rickygervais/status/1214242222578622465?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Here is Gervais&#8217; speech at the Golden Globe Awards that ignited a firestorm in the media world:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Ricky Gervais kicks off The <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/GoldenGlobes?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#GoldenGlobes</a>. <a href="https://t.co/ZSdqiWMudx">pic.twitter.com/ZSdqiWMudx</a>
&mdash; NBC Entertainment (@nbc) <a href="https://twitter.com/nbc/status/1214008610667155456?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Transcript of Gervais&#8217; speech provided via <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7856311/Accept-award-f-OK-transcript-Ricky-Gervais-Golden-Globes-monologue.html">The Daily Mail</a>:
<blockquote>You’ll be pleased to know this is the last time I’m hosting these awards, so I don’t care anymore. I’m joking. I never did. I’m joking, I never did. NBC clearly don’t care either — fifth time. I mean, Kevin Hart was fired from the Oscars for some offensive tweets — hello?
Lucky for me, the Hollywood Foreign Press can barely speak English and they’ve no idea what Twitter is, so I got offered this gig by fax. Let’s go out with a bang, let’s have a laugh at your expense. Remember, they’re just jokes. We’re all gonna die soon and there’s no sequel, so remember that.
But you all look lovely all dolled up. You came here in your limos. I came here in a limo tonight and the license plate was made by Felicity Huffman. No, shush. It’s her daughter I feel sorry for. OK? That must be the most embarrassing thing that’s ever happened to her. And her dad was in Wild Hogs.
Lots of big celebrities here tonight. Legends. Icons. This table alone — Al Pacino, Robert DeNiro … Baby Yoda. Oh, that’s Joe Pesci, sorry. I love you man. Don’t have me whacked. But tonight isn’t just about the people in front of the camera. In this room are some of the most important TV and film executives in the world. People from every background. They all have one thing in common: They’re all terrified of Ronan Farrow. He’s coming for ya. Talking of all you perverts, it was a big year for pedophile movies. Surviving R. Kelly, Leaving Neverland, Two Popes. Shut up. Shut up. I don’t care. I don’t care.
Many talented people of color were snubbed in major categories. Unfortunately, there’s nothing we can do about that. Hollywood Foreign press are all very racist. Fifth time. So. We were going to do an In-Memoriam this year, but when I saw the list of people who died, it wasn’t diverse enough. No, it was mostly white people and I thought, nah, not on my watch. Maybe next year. Let’s see what happens.
No one cares about movies anymore. No one goes to cinema, no one really watches network TV. Everyone is watching Netflix. This show should just be me coming out, going, &#8220;Well done Netflix. You win everything. Good night.&#8221; But no, we got to drag it out for three hours. You could binge-watch the entire first season of Afterlife instead of watching this show. That’s a show about a man who wants to kill himself cause his wife dies of cancer and it’s still more fun than this. Spoiler alert, season two is on the way so in the end he obviously didn’t kill himself. Just like Jeffrey Epstein. Shut up. I know he’s your friend but I don’t care.
Seriously, most films are awful. Lazy. Remakes, sequels. I’ve heard a rumor there might be a sequel to Sophie’s Choice. I mean, that would just be Meryl just going, &#8220;Well, it’s gotta be this one then.&#8221; All the best actors have jumped to Netflix, HBO. And the actors who just do Hollywood movies now do fantasy-adventure nonsense. They wear masks and capes and really tight costumes. Their job isn’t acting anymore. It’s going to the gym twice a day and taking steroids, really. Have we got an award for most ripped junky? No point, we’d know who’d win that.
Martin Scorsese made the news for his controversial comments about the Marvel franchise. He said they’re not real cinema and they remind him about theme parks. I agree. Although I don’t know what he’s doing hanging around theme parks. He’s not big enough to go on the rides. He’s tiny. The Irishman was amazing. It was amazing. It was great. Long, but amazing. It wasn’t the only epic movie. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, nearly three hours long. Leonardo DiCaprio attended the premiere and by the end his date was too old for him. Even Prince Andrew was like, “Come on, Leo, mate. You’re nearly 50-something.”
The world got to see James Corden as a fat p****. He was also in the movie Cats. No one saw that movie. And the reviews, shocking. I saw one that said, &#8220;This is the worst thing to happen to cats since dogs.&#8221; But Dame Judi Dench defended the film saying it was the film she was born to play because she loves nothing better than plunking herself down on the carpet, lifting her leg and licking her [expletive]. (Coughs) Hairball. She’s old-school.
It’s the last time, who cares? Apple roared into the TV game with The Morning Show, a superb drama about the importance of dignity and doing the right thing, made by a company that runs sweatshops in China. Well, you say you’re woke but the companies you work for in China — unbelievable. Apple, Amazon, Disney. If ISIS started a streaming service you’d call your agent, wouldn’t you?
So if you do win an award tonight, don’t use it as a platform to make a political speech. You’re in no position to lecture the public about anything. You know nothing about the real world. Most of you spent less time in school than Greta Thunberg.
So if you win, come up, accept your little award, thank your agent, and your God and f*** off, OK? It’s already three hours long. Right, let’s do the first award.</blockquote>

‘NEVER GONNA HAPPEN’: Ricky Gervais Responds To Reaction Over Golden Globes Performance

On Sunday night, comedian Ricky Gervais exposed Hollywood in brutal fashion — their pretensions and their cruelties, their hypocrisy and their greed. It was a dazzling exhibition. And it was made even more dazzling by the obvious and insufferable inability of the Great Faces of Celebrity™ to even act as though they could laugh at themselves for a solitary moment.
No sacred cow was off limits. Gervais sideswiped Felicity Huffman, the perpetrator of a scam to defraud colleges: “I came here in a limo tonight and the license plate was made by Felicity Huffman.” He went after the top Hollywood executives, who were “all terrified of Ronan Farrow. He’s coming for you, he’s coming for you.”
He continued, “Many talented people of color were snubbed in major categories. Unfortunately, there’s nothing we can do about that; the Hollywood Foreign Press are very, very racist. We were going to do an In Memoriam this year, but when I saw the list of people who had died, it wasn’t diverse enough. No, it was mostly white people, and I thought, ‘No, not on my watch.’ Maybe next year. Let’s see what happens.”
He blasted the Hollywood crowd for humoring the likes of Jeffrey Epstein: Speaking of his own show, &#8220;Afterlife,&#8221; he noted, “Spoiler alert, there’s a season two, so in the end, he didn’t kill himself. Just like Jeffrey Epstein.” When the room grew awkward, Gervais dropped the other shoe: “Shut up, I know he’s your friend, but I don’t care. You had to make your own way here in your own plane, didn’t you?”
He scoffed at the ridiculous wokescolds: “Apple rode into the TV game … a superb drama about the importance of dignity and doing the right thing, made by a company that runs sweatshops in China. Well, you say you’re woke, but the companies you work for — Apple, Amazon, Disney — if ISIS started a streaming service, you would call your agent, wouldn’t you? So if you do win an award tonight, don’t use it as a platform to make a political speech, right? You’re in no position to lecture the public about anything. You know nothing about the real world. Most of you spent less time in school than Greta Thunberg. So, if you win, come up, accept your little award, thank your agent and your God and f*** off. OK?”
Gervais’ appearance is likely to draw the ire of those in Hollywood who don’t appreciate being called on the carpet for their heresies. But that’s just because Hollywood has lost its own sense of humor. They’ve grown fat and lazy making fun of those who live in the red states and don’t swill from the ocean of self-aggrandizing leftism available to the coastal elitists. In Hollywood, the only funny joke is the one that isn’t a joke at all (see Gadsby, Hannah) or the one about Trump that isn’t actually a joke (see Bee, Samantha) or the one about abortion that isn’t a joke either (see Wolf, Michelle). If the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences had any brains at all, they’d see that most Americans want to see comedians rip up celebrities rather than listening to actors lecture them on global warming. Instead of avoiding an Oscar host, they’d host someone like Gervais, who would remind them just why they’re such pretentious asses for canceling their Oscar host in the first place.
Good for Gervais. He has eyes, and he has ears, and what’s more, he has a wicked hook. He used it last night. Thank goodness for that.

Ricky Gervais at Golden Globes

SHAPIRO: The Importance Of Ricky Gervais At The Golden Globes

In the lead-up to his return as host of the Golden Globe Awards, comedian Ricky Gervais ripped woke culture&#8217;s ruination of comedy by refusing to back down from making jokes it has deemed taboo.
Speaking with <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/ricky-gervais-5-time-golden-globes-host-has-a-few-more-things-say-hollywood-1265405">The Hollywood Reporter</a> (THR), Gervais addressed the intense Twitter backlash he has faced in recent days for making jokes at the expense of transgender activists. Most recently, he jokingly responded to a satirical article from Jarvis Dupont, sarcastically blasting biological women upset over transgenders using their bathrooms and taking over their sports.
“Those awful biological women can never understand what it must be like for you becoming a lovely lady so late in life,” Gervais said on Twitter. “They take their girly privileges for granted. Winning at female sports and having their own toilets. Well, enough is enough.”
Gervais later told THR that he was simply playing along with Jarvis Dupont&#8217;s persona of taking woke to an illogical extreme, arguing that his critics were angered by the fact he dared to make a joke about a touchy subject.
&#8220;I&#8217;m taking the p*ss out of Jarvis Dupont, who is actually a woman in real life. And this is the problem. You can say, &#8216;Listen, I was joking. It&#8217;s a joke.&#8217; But that&#8217;s not always enough for people. They go, &#8216;Well, why were you joking?&#8217; Also, add to that the nature of Twitter — it&#8217;s so curt, there&#8217;s no nuance, it&#8217;s there forever out of context,&#8221; Gervais said.
When THR pressed Gervais as to why he would engage in that kind of joke in the first place, the comedian said that some people would say it&#8217;s better not to engage in such jokes strictly due to fear. &#8220;For an easy life, it&#8217;s better not to,&#8221; he said.
On the issue of woke culture destroying comedy, a subject that &#8220;Joker&#8221; director Todd Phillips publicly lamented in recent months, Gervais said the onslaught of such purity results from a dislike for freedom of speech.
<blockquote>People like the idea of freedom of speech until they hear something they don&#8217;t like. So there&#8217;s still a pressure, but that doesn&#8217;t mean I&#8217;m going to water it down or back down and not say what I want. It&#8217;s just another form of what we&#8217;ve been through many, many times — it used to be called P.C. I think those things start off with very good intention and then they&#8217;re mugged. It&#8217;s a good thing to not be racist and sexist and homophobic. But it&#8217;s not a good thing to not be allowed to make jokes about those things, because you can tell a joke about race without being racist. I&#8217;m happy to play by the rules. It&#8217;s just that the 200 million people watching have different rules. That&#8217;s the plight. When people say, &#8220;He crossed the line,&#8221; I say, &#8220;I didn&#8217;t draw a line, you did.&#8221; It&#8217;s relative. It&#8217;s subjective.</blockquote>
When THR pressed Gervais on the issue of transphobia, he outright denied having no animosity against transgender individuals, and simply wanted to make a point about people holding up taboo subjects as a sacred cow.
&#8220;Some people, when you deal with contentious issues or taboo subjects, the very mention of them is the sacrilege,&#8221; said Gervais. &#8220;That&#8217;s why they stay taboo. People straight away, particularly with a comedian, if you&#8217;re joking about a subject, they think you&#8217;re anti it as opposed to pro it.&#8221;
Ricky Gervais faced heat for criticizing radical transgender activist Jessica Yaniv, who filed suit against a beauty parlor in Canada for refusing to wax his genitals. When news broke that he would return to host the Golden Globes, <a href="https://www.indiewire.com/2019/11/ricky-gervais-transphobic-golden-globes-1202189531/">IndieWire argued</a> that Gervais&#8217; past transgender jokes warrant cancelation.

Ricky Gervais Slams Woke Culture&#8217;s Stranglehold On Comedy: I’m Not ‘Going To Water It Down Or Back Down’

In response to the growing backlash on social media over the character Rose Tico&#8217;s diminished role in &#8220;The Rise of Skywalker,&#8221; screenwriter Chris Terrio has argued that her screen time was cut strictly for economic purposes — and not out of fan service.
Speaking with <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/star-wars-writer-sets-record-straight-perceived-last-jedi-jabs-1265168">The Hollywood Reporter</a> (THR), the Academy Award-winning screenwriter said that multiple scenes were shot featuring Rose Tico but were ultimately cut.
&#8220;Given the abuse that the actor/character has endured the last two years, people are, understandably, quite sensitive over the film’s treatment of Rose Tico,&#8221; THR began in its lengthy questioning of Terrio. &#8220;Additionally, in a couple of other interviews, I was told of some things that were cut out involving Rose. So, what ultimately happened, and were you and J.J. [Abrams] conscious of how her reduced role would be perceived by those who defended Rose and those who demeaned her?&#8221;
&#8220;As I&#8217;ve said elsewhere before, there were a couple of scenes that we shot with Rose that I wish had made it to the final cut,&#8221; Terrio began. &#8220;You&#8217;d be hard-pressed to find a screenwriter who doesn&#8217;t wish that all his scenes were treated as inspired gospel and ended up in the film exactly as written. But it&#8217;s the nature of the process that certain scenes fall out of the film, and I very much respect the difficulty of the decisions J.J. had to make, wearing both his screenwriter hat and his director hat — especially given that I know for a fact that J.J. adores and respects Kelly and would have loved to keep every second he shot with her in the film.&#8221;
With that said, Terrio argued that &#8220;The Rise of Skywalker&#8221; indeed featured Rose as an important character whose arc reaches its apex in conjunction with her role in &#8220;The Last Jedi.&#8221;
&#8220;I do think that [&#8216;The Rise of Skywalker&#8217;] shows Rose changing, growing, evolving,&#8221; said Terrio. &#8220;Rose begins her journey in [&#8216;The Last Jedi&#8217;] as just about the lowest person on the Resistance totem pole. In [&#8216;The Rise of Skywalker&#8217;], Rose is at the right hand of the general, working on military plans and helping to call the shots. I think Kelly does a masterful job of showing us a young woman&#8217;s evolution from a starry-eyed admirer of Finn to Resistance leader and strategist who is very much his equal.&#8221;
The controversy over actress Kelly Marie Tran&#8217;s diminished role in the film reached a fever-pitch last week, when the hashtag #RoseTicoDeservedBetter began trending on Twitter. Many embittered fans lamented the abuse Tran received on social media at the hands of alt-right trolls, arguing that her screen time reduction essentially rewarded the trolls&#8217; behavior. Violet Kim of <a href="https://slate.com/culture/2019/12/the-rise-of-skywalker-kelly-marie-tran-rose-tico-time-onscreen.html">Slate</a>, who clocked Tran&#8217;s screentime in at just one minute and 16 seconds, amplified those concerns extensively.
&#8220;Tran’s absence in  [&#8216;The Rise of Skywalker&#8217;] is especially troubling because she became the target of widespread racist harassment after &#8216;The Last Jedi&#8217; was released, to the extent that she had to delete her Instagram account,&#8221; argued Kim. &#8220;That the new movie not only shunts her aside but does so without bringing any closure to her character makes it seem as if Abrams caved into to some of Star Wars’ worst fans, or at the least that there was no involved who understood how deeply Rose’s casual exclusion would hit those to whom she meant so much.&#8221;

Celebrities Visit SiriusXM &#8211; December 9, 2019

‘Rise Of Skywalker’ Screenwriter Addresses Rose Tico Sidelining Controversy

Star Wars

The word “brave” gets tossed around too easily in Hollywood.
It might apply to stars tackling issues the entire industry supports, like removing President Donald Trump from office. It also refers to actors who obscure their beauty for Oscar-bait roles.
Want true Hollywood bravery? Try making a movie about a teen who not only survives a high school shooting but fights back a la “Die Hard.”
That’s the story behind both “Run Hide Fight” and its indie studio, Rebeller. Director Kyle Rankin’s film, tentatively scheduled for a late 2020 release, follows a student who takes on the ghouls behind a school shooting, yippee-kay-yay style.
Major studios <a href="https://www.theringer.com/movies/2019/12/17/21024790/cinestate-rebeller-run-hide-fight-dallas-sonnier-craig-zahler">wouldn’t touch the “Run Hide Fight” screenplay</a> after the February 2018 Parkland High School massacre. Rebeller saw a compelling story and jumped in with both feet.
This indie studio, a branch of the equally rogue Cinestate, doesn’t have time for pearl clutching. It embraces “outlaw” cinema, stories that bounce from genre to genre without playing by the rules.
That’s refreshing at a time when key Hollywood players genuflect to the Woke Crowd. Just ask Scarlett Johansson, the industry’s most bankable actress. She took a gig playing a trans character in “Rub and Tug” but quit after social justice activists said the part should have gone to a trans performer.
Johansson’s apology read like a <a href="https://variety.com/2018/film/news/scarlett-johansson-exit-rub-and-tug-trans-backlash-1202872981/">ransom note.</a> (It’s worth noting that film project remains in limbo without its bankable star).
Kevin Hart recently unveiled a new docu-series on Netflix where <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/kevin-hart-reflects-aftermath-stepping-down-as-oscars-host-1265024">he apologies for not apologizing better</a> after his Oscar hosting scandal.
Imagine how many challenging films don’t get made these days because the subject matter is deemed “problematic.” We’ll never know.
RebellerMedia.com’s editor in chief, Sonny Bunch, says the film industry has grown “stifling and conformist.” The new studio offers something different. It won’t be for everyone – consider the hard R nature of previous Cinestate releases like “<a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/dragged-across-concrete-review/">Dragged Across Concrete</a>.”
Team Rebeller also won’t do any Apology Tours for its films.
Cinestate founder Dallas Sonnier “has my back,” says Bunch, who previously served as the Washington Free Beacon’s film critic.
“There are always going to be people who [will] be upset about the movies we make. They push buttons, they push buttons intentionally, in some ways. But that’s because art is designed to provoke a response … to push people’s buttons if you’re doing it well.”
That won’t necessarily stave off the outrage mob, a fact Bunch acknowledges.
“When they come for us, and they will, we just have to say, ‘what are you gonna do? Are you gonna fire Dallas Sonnier, get rid of the boss who runs all this stuff?’ That’s who you have to get rid of if you wanna shut us down. He fears no one.”
That protection extends to social media.
“I’ve never felt worried about being fired for an errant tweet,” Bunch says.
So how can Rebeller compete with Disney fare, from Pixar to the latest “Star Wars” adventure?
“You keep the budget low, you pre-sell rights based on the stars,” Bunch says. “Then you try to get it in theaters, and if you can’t get it into theaters … you move DVDs and Blu-rays on the shelves of WalMart and Target and you move [Video on Demand] sales. VOD is a very big part of our business model and has been a pretty big success on movies like ‘Bone Tomahawk.’”
Cinestate staple S. Craig Zahler, who directed “Concrete,” epitomizes the company’s ethos. His films, including “Brawl on Cell Block 99,” display fine craftsmanship, recognizable stars and material that pushes beyond standard storytelling tropes.
Zahler refuses labels, even if some far-left scribes dub him an auteur for the <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/s-craig-zahlers-dragged-across-concrete-starring-mel-gibson-the-hollywood-filmmaker-making-movies-for-the-maga-crowd">”MAGA crowd.”</a> The evidence suggests otherwise.
“Dragged Across Concrete” is a prime example. Mel Gibson and Vince Vaughn play rogue cops who share racist sentiments on, and off, the job. They risk their lives while bemoaning aspects of police culture they wish they could change.
Neither character is a true hero, nor are they villains in the mustache-twirling sense.
Rebeller isn’t Team Democrat or Republican. The studio doesn’t care about our increasingly tribal times. They’re telling stories, period. And, in our increasingly political age, being apolitical can be the bravest stance of all.

Hollywood sign.

TOTO: Indie Film Studio Rebeller Ready To Stand Tall Against PC Scolds

Woke

In response to actress Kelly Marie Tran&#8217;s relegation to little more than background noise in the recently released finale to Disney&#8217;s &#8220;Star Wars&#8221; trilogy, the hashtag <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23RoseTicoDeservedBetter&amp;src=trend_click">#RoseTicoDeservedBetter</a> has been trending on social media — with many noting the <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-44379473">racist abuse she received</a> at the hands of alt-right trolls on social media following &#8220;The Last Jedi,&#8221; the prior installment in the &#8220;Star Wars&#8221; saga.
&#8220;The treatment of [R]ose in [&#8220;The Rise of Skywalker&#8221;] sends the message that if you, as a woman, do your job as an actress &#8230; and men don&#8217;t like it and proceed to attack you online, the writers of the next movie will listen to that and totally erase you from it. [W]hat the f**[*]?!&#8221; lamented one Twitter user.
&#8220;Quite frankly, Rose Tico IS &#8216;Star Wars.&#8217; She is the common person of the galaxy, rising up in resistance and rebellion. Her message of fighting out of love, not hate, is THE central theme. It&#8217;s the main lesson George Lucas was trying to teach us,&#8221; said another Twitter user.
&#8220;Seriously, was it that hard to give Rose a role similar to Lando in [&#8220;Return of the Jedi&#8221;]? Doing something amazing in the climax to save the day? Even Jar Jar [Binks] had a crucial purpose in [&#8220;Attack of the Clones&#8221;], and Rose is a way better character than Jar Jar. Come the f*** on,&#8221; said another.
Others were more defensive, arguing that J.J. Abrams had to make a difficult choice by elevating the main characters, who were already so flatly drawn as a result of the previous two movies.
&#8220;I’m about to say something controversial, but I think [Abrams] was better off giving characters that were already established more vital roles, like Connix and Rose, than introducing more characters that aided this whole whack a** McGuffin plot,&#8221; said one Twitter user.
&#8220;#RoseTicoDeservedBetter is the [&#8220;The Rise of Skywalker&#8221;] take I can&#8217;t stand. [Kelly Marie Tran] didn&#8217;t deserve harassment. But that is not a justification to give more screen time to a character that failed to land with the majority. Simply put, [Abrams] didn&#8217;t find value in her character. Stop making it more than that,&#8221; said another user.
According to Violet Kim of <a href="https://slate.com/culture/2019/12/the-rise-of-skywalker-kelly-marie-tran-rose-tico-time-onscreen.html">Slate</a>, the sidelining of Rose Tico was so dramatic that she received less than two minutes of total screen time in &#8220;The Rise of Skywalker&#8221; — compared to her voluminous presence in &#8220;The Last Jedi.&#8221;
<blockquote>
Just how bad is it? I conducted an investigation, watching both &#8220;The Last Jedi&#8221; and &#8220;The Rise of Skywalker&#8221; with my finger poised over a stopwatch app. And while I noticed Rose’s glaring lack of a presence, the results surprised even me: In &#8220;The Rise of Skywalker&#8221; &#8230; she appears for just one minute and 16 seconds, give or take a few seconds.
Even 1:16 is a fairly liberal appraisal — while I tried to be strict about only letting the timer run when Rose was actually on-screen, my definition of “on-screen” was generous. For example, I included the scene at the end where she hugs Chewbacca at the Rebel base, although it’s possible to argue that she wasn’t quite in the foreground of the action. I was so alert for any sign of Rose that I even included the part where she is only seen in (partial) profile staring intently at Poe while he speaks.
</blockquote>
Regardless of how audiences received Rose Tico in &#8220;The Last Jedi,&#8221; the fact of the matter is her character played a pivotal role in the movie&#8217;s outcome — so much so that she nearly sacrificed her own life to save the character Finn. For &#8220;The Rise of Skywalker&#8221; to just sideline her character rather than creatively elevating it appears more like a cheap game of audience damage control rather than an act of genuine storytelling.

&#8220;Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker&#8221; European Premiere &#8211; Red Carpet Arrivals

Outrage Erupts On Social Media Over ‘Rise Of Skywalker’ Sidelining Rose Tico

J.J. Abrams

Comedian Whitney Cummings (&#8220;2 Broke Girls&#8221;) recalled once being reported to Human Resources by an &#8220;agnostic&#8221; intern because she wished the staff of a TV show a &#8220;Merry Christmas.&#8221;
During an appearance on Conan O&#8217;Brien, Cummings said that politically correct terminology is one of the most stressful parts of the season.
&#8220;Last year, I was working on a TV show, got in trouble with human resources for saying &#8216;Merry Christmas&#8217; to an intern,&#8221; Cummings said, as reported by Fox News.
&#8220;Is that true?&#8221; O&#8217;Brien responded.
&#8220;That&#8217;s true. I was leaving&#8230; I was like, &#8216;Bye, guys. Merry Christmas.&#8217; Like just a formality, what you would say,&#8221; Cummings explained. &#8220;I come back, like, June 6th. H.R. calls me and they&#8217;re like, &#8216;Hey, we need to talk to you. One of the interns is pissed off that you said &#8216;Merry Christmas.'&#8221;
Cummings said she meant nothing deeper by the rather generic holiday phrase.
&#8220;I don&#8217;t even care how your Christmas was,&#8221; Cummings said. &#8220;I just meant it as a formality. That&#8217;s what you say when you leave, right?&#8221;
O&#8217;Brien interjected that &#8220;Merry Christmas&#8221; is triggering to some people. &#8220;In these times that we&#8217;re in, that could trigger someone or offend them if it&#8217;s not their holiday,&#8221; he said.
&#8220;Well, that&#8217;s what I said,&#8221; Cummings shot back. &#8220;I asked, &#8216;Well, what should I have said? Do they celebrate something else?&#8217; And they&#8217;re like, &#8216;No, they&#8217;re agnostic.'&#8221;
&#8220;I was like, no, no, no, no, no. You do not get to do that,&#8221; Cummings continued. &#8220;Because had I known that this person was agnostic, that would mean we were in a relationship, like, that would mean we were intimately connected.&#8221;
&#8220;I should not know who believes in God and who doesn&#8217;t,&#8221; Cummings added. &#8220;I also can&#8217;t guess either, you know? I can&#8217;t guess your holiday based on what you like. That&#8217;s offensive. I can&#8217;t be like, &#8216;Hey Merry&#8230; Happy Hannukkah.'&#8221;
<iframe title="Whitney Cummings Got Busted For Regifting - CONAN on TBS" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QBBI7GlV9UM?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Cummings&#8217; confession about getting put on timeout by Human Resources for uttering the phrase &#8220;Merry Christmas&#8221; comes a few days after <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/saying-merry-christmas-is-a-gop-talking-point-leftists-melt-over-gorsuch-fox-friends-appearance">leftists expressed outrage</a> over Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch saying the same greeting during an appearance on Fox News this week. The phrase, said some critics, is a Republican &#8220;talking point.&#8221;
“Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch just appeared on Fox and Friends this morning, making a point to parrot the ‘Merry Christmas’ talking point of the GOP,” said Playboy journalist Amee Vanderpool. “If he’s willing to go on Fox and throw a shout out to Republican narratives, what [else] is he willing to do?”
“On Fox News, Neil Gorsuch made a point to say ‘Merry Christmas’ like he just gained the freedom to say it under Trump. This guy is such a worst case scenario of a stolen Supreme Court seat,” said comedian Sean Kent.
During the campaign of 2016 and following his election, President Trump promised to buck the culture of political correctness he saw during the Christmas season. Accordingly, Trump denounced the phrase, “Happy Holidays.”
“We’re getting near that beautiful Christmas season that people don’t talk about anymore. They don’t use the word Christmas because it’s not politically correct,” he said to a crowd in 2017. “You go to department stores and they’ll say ‘Happy New Year,’ or they’ll say other things and it’ll be red, they’ll have it painted. But they don’t say — well guess what? We’re saying Merry Christmas again.”

Watch What Happens Live With Andy Cohen &#8211; Season 16

Comedian Whitney Cummings: HR Reprimanded Me For Saying ‘Merry Christmas’

Christmas

Conan O'Brien

On Thursday’s episode of “The Ben Shapiro Show,” the Daily Wire editor-in-chief talks about a New York Times column that the Christmas classic “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” is full of “queer code.” Video and partial transcript below: 
Apparently, The New York Times editorial page, when it&#8217;s not defending anti-Semitism coming from particular sources, is also a place for people to spill their feelings about their childhood struggles with sexuality. 
It’s amazing, half of editorial pages on the left-wing are now dedicated to people telling their personal stories about coming to grips with their own orientation, and it&#8217;s like, why? Okay, so what? Here&#8217;s the example. 
Jennifer Finney Boylan, who is a transgender woman, meaning a man who believes that he’s a woman, has a piece in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/11/opinion/rudolph-christmas-queer.html">The New York Times</a> called “Rudolph, The Queerest Holiday Special.”
<blockquote>It gets better for misfit reindeer, too.</blockquote>
So now we are to believe that a holiday special constructed in 1964 is actually a secret decoded message about being gay in America. So we have a long piece about why Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer is an inspiration to gay kids the world over. 
<blockquote>I&#8217;m sure that conservatives who love this old holiday chestnut will be infuriated by this suggestion.</blockquote>
Not infuriated, just puzzled why you would think that a holiday special constructed in 1964 is about gay rights — and also, why I would care how you interpret Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer. This is like a trite entry from your journal, diary, in your &#8220;intersectional theory&#8221; class. But Jennifer Finney Boylan says:
<blockquote>But if you watch the show without understanding that it&#8217;s central conflict is the way people who are different are constantly shunned and humiliated — well, I don&#8217;t know what show you&#8217;re watching. </blockquote>
Well, what if that&#8217;s just a general message that applies to anyone who&#8217;s ever been bullied? I was viciously bullied in high school — that had nothing to do sexual orientation. A lot of kids are, but apparently everything is now about sexual orientation. 
<blockquote>Conservatives seem to miss the point of a lot of things having to do with Christmas, actually. Is it really possible that anyone can watch (or read) Charles Dickens’s “A Christmas Carol” without understanding its fundamental critique of capitalism?</blockquote>
“A Christmas Carol” is not really about capitalism so much as it is about the idea that capitalism doesn&#8217;t solve the problem of the need for charity. Again, this goes back to the fundamental point of the show, which is that free markets and liberty are wondrous, wondrous things. But, you also have to have an underlying social fabric in order to promote those things. 
<blockquote>As for “Rudolph,” the whole movie feels as LGBTQ-friendly to me as any episode of “Queer Eye” or “Steven Universe” or “The L Word.” </blockquote>
Except for the fact that Rudolph doesn&#8217;t, you know, like have sex with any of the other male reindeer. So aside from that, and the fact that it&#8217;s a children&#8217;s special — I am particularly tired of the hijacking of children&#8217;s literature &#8230; in order promote political viewpoints on sexual matters. It&#8217;s a piece of children&#8217;s literature, cut it out. 
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gx6CvFf8Ym4?start=3137" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
The Left likes to play this game a lot when it comes to TV. So what they will do is, for example, some members of the LGBTQ community will start saying that &#8220;SpongeBob Square Pants&#8221; is like a gay metaphor, and then people on the Right will be like, “What are you talking, that&#8217;s ridiculous. Like, stop it.” [Then the Left will say] “Aha, you&#8217;re upset by a children&#8217;s cartoons.&#8221; Like, well, no, you&#8217;re the ones who are hijacking a children&#8217;s cartoon to make a point about your own sexual orientation. 
I remember this was a big controversy in the early &#8217;90s when some members of the LGBTQ community were suggesting that some of the Teletubbies were gay. And so Jerry Falwell made a comment [paraphrasing], “Well, the Teletubbies aren&#8217;t gay and it&#8217;s silly to try and hijack children&#8217;s characters” and the Left was like, “Aha, trolled you.” 
How about this — how about you just leave the children&#8217;s literature alone, especially because you have a whole wing of children&#8217;s literature, we&#8217;ve talked about it on the show, that is specifically designed to promote these sexualized viewpoints for children. Can’t you just leave Rudolph alone? He&#8217;s got enough problems than you putting your your own issues with sexual orientation on his fragile flying back.
<a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ben-shapiro-show/id1047335260">Listen to full episodes of “The Ben Shapiro Show” on iTunes. 
</a><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-ben-shapiro-show">Watch “The Ben Shapiro Show” on-demand!</a>

Reindeer

SHAPIRO: NYT Columnist: Rudolph Is The ‘Queerest Holiday Special’

Children

New York Times

Continuing his quest to Make America Merry Again, President Trump delivered a powerful message about the birth of Jesus Christ as he addressed the crowd during the lighting of the National Christmas Tree.
“In 1923, President Calvin Coolidge lit the first National Christmas tree,” President Trump began, as reported by <a href="https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/trump-the-cross-is-a-powerful-reminder-of-the-meaning-of-christmas">LifeSiteNews</a>. “Later that night, African-American community centers held an outdoor worship service on these grounds, and during that service, the Washington Monument was illuminated with a beautiful cross, a powerful reminder of the meaning of Christmas.”
The president then spoke of the three wise men and how the birth of Christ inspires us all to love one another with open hearts.
“More than two thousand years ago, a brilliant star shown in the east. Wise men traveled far and they came and they stood under the star where they found the Holy Family, in Bethlehem,” the president said. “As the Bible tells us, when the wise men had come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary His mother, and fell down and worshipped Him. Christians give thanks that the Son of God came into the world to save humanity. Jesus Christ inspires us to love one another with hearts full of generosity and grace.”
President Trump then tipped his hat to David and Sharron Hudson of the Salvation Army, an organization that has increasingly been inundated with false accusations of homophobia from the radical Left in recent days. Those accusations boiled over into absurdity when <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/pete-buttigieg-criticized-volunteering-salvation-army-n1096111">LGBT activists began criticizing South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg</a> for once having volunteered for the organization.
&#8220;Joining us today are David and Sharron Hudson of the Salvation Army,&#8221; the president said. &#8220;Each year, through their Angel Tree program, the Salvation Army brings new gifts to more than 600,000 children. David and Sharron are an inspiration to us all. And, David and Sharron, thank you very much for being with us. Thank you.&#8221;
As the president concluded, he reminded the audience that every human being is a child of God and wished the whole country a Merry Christmas.
&#8220;At Christmas we remember this eternal truth: Every person is a beloved child of God,&#8221; he concluded. &#8220;As one grateful nation we praise the joy of family, the blessings of freedom, and the miracle of Christmas. On behalf of Melania and our entire family, Merry Christmas, and God bless you all.&#8221;
During the campaign of 2016 and following his election, President Trump promised to buck the culture of political correctness he saw during the Christmas season. Accordingly, Trump denounced the phrase, &#8220;Happy Holidays.&#8221;
“We’re getting near that beautiful Christmas season that people don’t talk about anymore. They don’t use the word Christmas because it’s not politically correct,&#8221; he said to a crowd in 2017. &#8220;You go to department stores and they’ll say &#8216;Happy New Year,&#8217; or they’ll say other things and it’ll be red, they’ll have it painted. But they don’t say — well guess what? We’re saying Merry Christmas again.&#8221;
Though President Obama did say &#8220;Happy Holidays&#8221; for the White House Christmas card, <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/12/03/remarks-president-lighting-national-christmas-tree">he did use the phrase</a> &#8220;Merry Christmas&#8221; during the National Tree lighting.
<iframe title="President Trump Delivers Remarks at the National Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Hiza2vrGA6o?start=3&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

President Trump Participates In 97th Annual National Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony

WATCH: Trump Says The Cross Is ‘A Powerful Reminder Of The Meaning Of Christmas’

Christianity

Donald Trump

Pete Buttigieg

Salvation Army

This one certainly deserves an immediate induction into the Dumb Outrage Hall of Fame.
Peloton&#8217;s stock has taken a <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-03/peloton-backlash-over-gift-that-gives-ad-pummels-stock">nosedive this week</a> after an intense backlash against a holiday-themed ad for its exercise bike. The reaction was so widespread that Peloton was one of the top trending topics on Twitter over the weekend. You can watch the allegedly offensive commercial <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pShKu2icEYw">here</a> if you dare.
Be careful. Proceed with caution. The 30-second spot is, after all, &#8220;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/03/business/peloton-bike-ad-stock.html">sexist</a>&#8221; and &#8220;<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/dec/04/peloton-backlash-sexist-dystopian-exercise-bike-christmas-advert">dystopian</a>&#8221; and &#8220;<a href="https://boingboing.net/2019/12/03/the-most-disturbing-horror-fil.html">disturbing</a>&#8221; and &#8220;<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/peloton-addresses-backlash-over-holiday-ad-saying-spot-was-misinterpreted-n1095756">creepy</a>&#8221; and &#8220;<a href="https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2019/12/8954608/peloton-bike-ad-controversy-twitter">bizarre.</a>&#8221; It&#8217;s also &#8220;<a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2019/12/04/peloton-ad-internet-responds-unsettling-holiday-commercial/2606236001/">unsettling,</a>&#8221; &#8220;<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/peloton-holiday-commercial-is-sparking-hate-confusion-from-watchers-2019-12">confusing</a>,&#8221; and so &#8220;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/03/us/peloton-ad-controversy-trnd/index.html">perplexing</a>&#8221; that it &#8220;<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/03/us/peloton-ad-controversy-trnd/index.html">incensed the internet</a> (though some say it only &#8220;<a href="https://boston.cbslocal.com/2019/12/03/peloton-ad-tv-commercial-grace-boston-husband/">angered the internet</a>&#8221; because, look, let&#8217;s not be dramatic about this).
If at this point you are too terrified to look for yourself, I will describe the &#8220;<a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/12/03/784553273/pelotons-holiday-ad-prompts-cries-of-sexism-and-body-shaming">body-shaming</a>&#8221; advertisement for you. The scene opens as a husband surprises his wife with a Peloton exercise bike on what appears to be Christmas morning. I won&#8217;t assume that it&#8217;s Christmas, though. This could be a Buddhist or Jewish family with a pine tree randomly sitting in their living room. In any case, the wife is very excited about the present. She then documents herself using the bike over a period of many months. The ad closes with the husband and wife sitting in their living room while watching the video of the wife&#8217;s fitness journey. And that&#8217;s it. That&#8217;s the end. That&#8217;s the whole commercial.
The only confusing and perplexing thing about the ad is how anyone could be confused or perplexed by it, much less offended or incensed. It is an extremely normal holiday advertisement for a piece of exercise equipment. So, why are people so &#8220;unsettled?&#8221; The first answer is that the country is filled with idiots. I could probably end the analysis there. The second answer, from what I can tell, is that people find it weird that she&#8217;s so excited about the bike, and sexist that she was given the bike to begin with. Let&#8217;s go through both of these.
<iframe title="Fake Outrages Galore | The Matt Walsh Show Ep. 382" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ECLAIdnsIBs?start=1016&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Why is the wife excited about her Peloton bike? Well, because she&#8217;s a character in a Peloton advertisement. It would be quite a bit stranger if she reacted with a polite smile and a look of disappointment in her eyes. This, again, is an advertisement for a product. The people featured in advertisements are typically way more psyched about the advertised product than any normal human would be. Have you ever seen how people act in Pepsi commercials? Contrast that with how you actually respond when you order a Diet Coke and the waiter says, &#8220;We don&#8217;t have Coke products. Pepsi okay?&#8221; No, Pepsi is not okay. Unless you&#8217;re being paid by a marketing company to pretend it is.
Is it sexist for a husband to give his wife exercise equipment as a gift? Well, again, even if it were real life, it wouldn&#8217;t be in an advertisement around the holidays. Case in point: In reality, it would destroy your marriage and ultimately your life if you bought your spouse a $55,000 luxury sedan for Christmas. But people in Lexus and Mercedes ads do this all the time. And the spouse receiving the gift never says something realistic like, &#8220;You did this without telling me? Now we have a $1,200 car payment every month. How are we going to pay the mortgage? We&#8217;re going to be homeless now, you psycho.&#8221; That&#8217;s because, as has already been stated, it&#8217;s an advertisement, not a documentary.
Also, it&#8217;s actually not at all sexist to get your wife an exercise bike. I got my wife an elliptical for her birthday. Why? Because she specifically told me that she wanted one. And even if she didn&#8217;t, people who enjoy exercise and fitness would probably love to have a high-end piece of exercise equipment in the house. It&#8217;s not an insult to buy it for them. I have no way of measuring this, but I&#8217;m betting that the average BMI of the people outraged by this commercial is well above doctor recommendations. I can only assume this because otherwise, why would they be so &#8220;perplexed&#8221; and &#8220;confused&#8221; about someone wanting to exercise?
I&#8217;ve also heard that the ad is problematic because the wife was already skinny and didn&#8217;t &#8220;need&#8221; the bike. But would it have offended everyone&#8217;s delicate sensibilities any less if she were fat? Wouldn&#8217;t that have only made it worse? So, it&#8217;s body-shaming to advertise an exercise bike to skinny people, and body-shaming to advertise it to fat people. Who, exactly, is Peloton supposed to target? What kind of ad would pass the perpetually outraged litmus test? Maybe a disembodied, genderless voice saying: &#8220;Here is a Peloton. It is an exercise bike. You can use it. But you don&#8217;t need to use it. But you don&#8217;t not need to use it. We&#8217;re not saying anything about you, either way. Never mind, just forget we brought this up.&#8221;
I&#8217;m sure someone would find a way to be offended by that. It&#8217;s the one thing we&#8217;re good at in this culture. The only thing, it seems.

exercise bike

WALSH: Everyone Got Offended By A Commercial For An Exercise Bike. The Outrage Is Insanely Stupid.

Yesterday, during Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro&#8217;s must-watch <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/sunday-special-ep-79-yoram-hazony">&#8220;Sunday Special&#8221; podcast conversation</a> with prominent Israeli political philosopher Yoram Hazony, the author of &#8220;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Virtue-Nationalism-Yoram-Hazony/dp/1541645375">The Virtue of Nationalism</a>&#8221; made a biblically grounded argument that &#8220;good borders make good neighbors.&#8221;
It is perhaps difficult to think of a less politically correct thing to say to a bipartisan American ruling class still hooked on the post-Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 nostrums of porous borders and a classical liberalism-inspired freer flow of cross-border labor, but Hazony — a personal friend, in the interest of full disclosure — is nonetheless absolutely correct. And it ought not to be too difficult to understand why.
The fundamental premise of Hazony&#8217;s <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?459062-1/isi-conservative-book-year-award">award-winning</a> 2018 tome is to lay out two competing visions for the governance of global affairs, and to argue in favor of one vision over the other. Those two visions are imperialism, which favors a globally oriented governance of monolithic rule via transnational institutions, and nationalism, which favors a nation-state-centric governance of disparate rule via sovereign nation-states.
There are a myriad of reasons for preferring the latter to the former, and the deepest and most existentially  meaningful reasons are those that grasp at human nature itself. It is fundamentally inimical to human nature for people to outsource their sovereignty and self-determination to the whims and caprices of those external actors with whom those people do not share undergirding mutually interdependent bonds of loyalty. Those bonds of loyalty can only be nourished and sustained when the relevant polity shares some semblances of a common culture: Language, customs, traits, religious tradition, legal tradition, and so forth. Put even more simply, those bonds of loyalty can only be nourished and sustained when the relevant polity is a true nation, properly understood.
Yet nationalism is superior to imperialism/transnationalism for another reason that is less philosophically lofty but no less indispensable. In terms of most effectively ensuring relative global tranquility and diminishing the frequency of bloody conflicts, encouraging and emphasizing epistemologically modest national sovereignty is far preferable to encouraging and emphasizing epistemologically hubristic imperialism. Most of the great conflicts over the past millennium have involved one civilization frowning upon a foreign civilization and seeking to impose upon that foreign civilization its own political version of the good life.
A modern example is the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-never-forget-911-we-need-rethink-how-we-josh-hammer">bipartisan hubris</a> of the neoconservative moralistic &#8220;Right&#8221; and Samantha Power-esque &#8220;responsibility to protect&#8221; moralistic Left that leads to nonsensical overseas attempts to impose our American values and way of life upon those nations whose values and way of life are entirely anathematic to our own. As a purely tactical and procedural means of discouraging bloody conflict, it makes sense to establish a baseline default rule of respecting the internal dealings of foreign nations. Pursuing a domestic legislative agenda oriented around the <a href="https://americanmind.org/post/our-constitutional-order-prioritizes-justice-not-procedure/">common good</a> and Declaration of Independence-rooted <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-path-forward-conservative-movement-josh-hammer">natural rights theory</a> is just and proper; what is improper is pursuing the exportation and ultimately forcible imposition of a foreign agenda of our American vision of the common good and Declaration of Independence-rooted natural rights theory.
As a basic matter of observing developments around the world over at least the past half-century or so — and going back even further to at least the ancient construction of the Great Wall of China — it is intuitive and obvious that strongly enforced borders are generally largely successful in deterring and thwarting would-be foreign aggression and revanchism. In 2017, Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute <a href="https://www.aei.org/foreign-and-defense-policy/defense/the-places-where-walls-work/">laid out</a> just a handful of successful border walls/fences/security barriers in recent historical memory:
<ul>
<li>Israel&#8217;s post-Second Intifada construction of a security barrier around much of Judea and Samaria had the effect of quickly reducing terrorism in Israel by upwards of 90%.</li>
<li>The Polisario Front, a Cold War-era communist group committed to independence for Western Sahara, was largely contained after Morocco&#8217;s intensive fortification of its external barrier with Algeria.</li>
<li>The longstanding hot spot that is the Kashmir territorial dispute between India and Pakistan was relatively quelled by India&#8217;s nearby construction of a defensive border fence.</li>
</ul>
Indeed, there are countless other examples.
To resist the urge to forcibly export and impose one&#8217;s idiosyncratic domestic agenda unto others is to help decrease conflict and make the world a safer place. Good borders do indeed make good neighbors.

Israeli-Palestinian security barrier

HAMMER: Yes, Good Borders Make Good Neighbors

Bible

Border Wall

Conservatism

Illegal Immigration

Judaism

Nationalism

The Ben Shapiro Show

Yoram Hazony

In an appearance on &#8220;The View&#8221; on Monday, comedian and actor Tim Allen addressed how the politically correct &#8220;thought police&#8221; have influenced how he approaches his stand-up comedy in recent years.
Allen, whose popular right-leaning show &#8220;Last Man Standing&#8221; was famously canceled by ABC in 2017 despite excellent ratings, sparking allegations of political bias on the part of the network, brought up the &#8220;thought police&#8221; after co-host and fellow comedian Joy Behar asked him about how he handles the &#8220;PC culture&#8221; that is so strongly influencing comedy these days.
&#8220;So what do you think now?&#8221; asked Behar. &#8220;I mean it&#8217;s a little bit different now — there&#8217;s a PC culture out there [that] makes it really hard. I think my act, if I brought that old act back, I&#8217;d be driven out of town.&#8221;
Allen responded by saying he grew up watching comedians Lenny Bruce and Richard Pryor. &#8220;You can&#8217;t even go back and talk about the book he wrote,&#8221; Allen lamented in reference to Pryor.
&#8220;What I got to do sometimes is explain — which I hate — in big arenas, that this is a &#8216;thought police&#8217; thing, and I do not like it,&#8221; said Allen. &#8220;But [I say] &#8216;when I use these words, this is my intent behind those words. So as long as you understand my intent&#8230;'&#8221;
&#8220;I still get people [saying], &#8216;Well, just don&#8217;t say it,'&#8221; he added, imitating his critics. &#8220;And I say I&#8217;m not going to do that.&#8221;
Behar then interjected that even when you qualify statements like he just described, people still &#8220;take it out of context and put it on Twitter or put in on Facebook.&#8221;
&#8220;I&#8217;m surprised that they haven&#8217;t because I do use some provocative words,&#8221; Allen remarked, adding, &#8220;It&#8217;s words I really got from my parents.&#8221;
The increasing pressure to self-censor their acts, Allen said, &#8220;is an alarming thing for comedians.&#8221;
The View tweeted out the exchange:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Tim Allen looks back on how standup comedy has changed through the years, discusses the level of political correctness comedians face today: “It is an alarming thing for comedians.” <a href="https://t.co/cVclFZQmjA">https://t.co/cVclFZQmjA</a> <a href="https://t.co/vmmUxg4sD6">pic.twitter.com/vmmUxg4sD6</a>
&mdash; The View (@TheView) <a href="https://twitter.com/TheView/status/1199153299070619648?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 26, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<div id="ad-inread-1x1" class="ad gpt ad-h-1" data-ad-pos="inread" data-ad-size="1x1" data-google-query-id="CNC60Oj5iuYCFcUDPwodVm0AtQ" data-ad-slot-rendered="1" data-rendered-size="1x1">
<div class="tlod">
<div class="embed-media twitter">
<div class="tweet-embed">
Former &#8220;The Tonight Show&#8221; host Jay Leno, who Allen mentioned at the beginning of his exchange with Behar, has likewise recently <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-jay-leno-smacks-late-night-shows-one-sided-james-barrett">addressed</a> the negative impact of PC culture on comedy. In March, Leno spoke with NBC’s &#8220;TODAY&#8221; about how things are &#8220;different&#8221; for comedians now.
&#8220;So it’s been five years since you left ‘The Tonight Show,’ and you see the place we are right now in this country. Do you miss being on the show? Or is it such a different time that it would be hard to do?&#8221; Leno was asked.
&#8220;No, it’s different — I don’t miss it,&#8221; he said. &#8220;You know, everything now is if people don’t like your politics — everyone has to know your politics.&#8221;
&#8220;I kind of used Johnny [Carson]’s model,&#8221; Leno explained. &#8220;People couldn’t figure out: ‘Well, you and your Republican friends…’ or ‘Well, Mr. Leno, you and your Democratic buddies…’ And I would get hate mail from both sides equally. And I went, ‘Well that’s fabulous! That’s exactly what I want.'&#8221;
“But when people see you as one-sided, it just makes it tough,” he continued. &#8220;And plus, I did it when, you know, Clinton was horny and Bush was dumb, and it was just a little easier.&#8221;
“You know, now it’s all very serious, everything so&#8230; I’d just like to see a bit of civility come back to it, you know?&#8221; he remarked.
Leno also offered some hope about the future of comedy, saying he does believe that the pendulum &#8220;will swing back the other way.&#8221;
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-colbert-invites-on-hillary-starts-lock-him-up-chant-suggests-chelsea-slap-trumps-mouth">WATCH: Colbert Invites On Hillary, Starts ‘Lock Him Up’ Chant, Suggests Chelsea ‘Slap’ Trump’s Mouth</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>

Tim Allen

WATCH: Tim Allen Discusses PC ‘Thought Police’

Jay Leno

Joy Behar

The View

&#8220;Saturday Night Live&#8221; alumnus Rob Schneider issued another blistering takedown of anti-free speech &#8220;totalitarians&#8221; on his Twitter over the weekend, blasting Big Tech for censoring content.
“Sorry to have to repeat this again: Free Speech is ALL speech. Even the speech that you find repugnant,” <a href="https://twitter.com/RobSchneider/status/1197959053055537153">Schneider tweeted</a>. “You are either for ALL of it or … you are for none of it. We don’t need people deciding FOR us what to think, see or hear. That’s a load of totalitarian crap.”
Schneider took particular issue with banning books that &#8220;question medical orthodoxy,&#8221; which stands in line with his <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/how-vaccines-autism-battle-continues-despite-scientific-consensus-924080">viewpoints critical of vaccinations</a>.
“Amazon is already banning books that dare question medical orthodoxy. Facebook, Google, YouTube bury information as well,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;The push within democratic societies to further restrict their own freedoms is a road we mustn’t take.”
Indeed, the anti-vaxxer movement took a major hit when Amazon Prime <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/amazon-prime-removes-anti-vaxxer-documentaries-paul-bois">removed several</a> documentaries from its platform.
Rob Schneider noted how free speech might seem chaotic, but stressed that a society without it would be monstrous.
“I know free speech and democracy create a mess out of society, people being able to express and spew whatever they want,” said Schneider. “But I can’t think of a better one. And I surely don’t want to live in a society where people decide for me what to think or watch or how I should interpret it.”
&#8220;I worry more that the suppression of free speech will lead to more horrors than the continued free flow of ideas; good AND bad. People can decide for themselves what ideas belong in the dustbin of history,&#8221; he continued.
“Silencing those we disagree with denies us the chance to question our preconceived notions. Either to reaffirm them or reassess them,” <a href="https://twitter.com/RobSchneider/status/1198269659268694018" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">he concluded.</a> “Our ideas need and should always be consistently challenged and reconsidered so we don’t merely end up as consensus group think.&#8221;
Schneider experienced his intellectual departure from the Democratic Party several years ago and has been seemingly waging a war on destructive political correctness ever since. In April of 2018, he took his former stomping grounds of “Saturday Night Live” to task for <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/29957/rob-schneider-leftist-politics-are-ruining-snl-paul-bois">ruining the show with leftist politics</a>.
“The fun of ‘Saturday Night Live’ was always you never knew which way they leaned politically,” Schneider told the New York Daily News at the time. “You kind of assumed they would lean more left and liberal, but now the cat’s out of the bag they are completely against Trump, which I think makes it less interesting because you know the direction the piece is going.”
In May of this year, Schneider <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/rob-schneider-blasts-democrats-pushing-orwellian-paul-bois">similarly blasted Big Tech giants</a> for colluding with Democrats to promote an “Orwellian nightmare of censorship.&#8221;
“We are in a real world Orwellian nightmare of censorship. Be careful who you label and smear today. You will be the smeared tomorrow,” <a href="https://twitter.com/RobSchneider/status/1124562222628237312" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Schneider wrote.</a>
“Free Speech is ALL SPEECH! The UK and Australia don’t have protected speech. And we are not protecting our 1st Amendment. #EternalVigilance,” he continued. &#8220;As America’s greatest linguist Noam Chomsky says, &#8216;Free Speech is ALL SPEECH. You’re either for ALL of it or NONE of it.’ ([Emphasis for] dummies).&#8221;

Ed Asner&#8217;s 90th Birthday Roast

Rob Schneider Blasts Free Speech ‘Totalitarians’

Free Speech

Saturday Night Live

Saturday Night Live (SNL)

Legendary British-American actor and director Terry Gilliam of &#8220;Monty Python&#8221; fame is not afraid to push back on politically correct notions promoted by his counterparts in Hollywood. In his latest comments taking aim at progressive premises, the 79-year-old &#8220;Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas&#8221; director slammed the idea that only people with the right sexuality, gender identity or race can play certain roles.
&#8220;In Hollywood, there&#8217;s a lot of pressure if you&#8217;re going to have a transgender character, then you have to have a transgender actor — it&#8217;s ridiculous,&#8221; Gilliam told <a href="https://news.yahoo.com/monty-pythons-terry-gilliam-outraged-climate-change-hollywood-135459422.html">AFP</a> Friday. &#8220;If you&#8217;re going to have a serial killer then you&#8217;ve got to have a serial killer actor who has killed many people? It&#8217;s illogical.&#8221;
Referencing actress <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0757855/">Zoe Saldana</a> (&#8220;Guardians of the Galaxy,&#8221; &#8220;Avatar&#8221;), who was recently &#8220;pilloried&#8221; for darkening her skin to portray soul singer Nina Simone, Gilliam said, &#8220;If I&#8217;m going to play an Italian on film I&#8217;ll darken my skin, I&#8217;ll try to look Mediterranean.&#8221;
&#8220;This is such superficial nonsense,&#8221; said the director.
This certainly isn&#8217;t Gilliam&#8217;s first time going against the PC grain. In July 2018, Gilliam stirred up some controversy by offering a trolling response to the controller of BBC Comedy Commissioning stating that “Monty Python’s Flying Circus” would never fly today. “If you’re going to assemble a team now, it’s not going to be six Oxbridge white blokes,” said BBC&#8217;s Shane Allen. “It’s going to be a diverse range of people who reflect the modern world.”
“It made me cry: the idea that … no longer six white Oxbridge men can make a comedy show,” Gilliam said at a film festival press conference in early July, as reported by <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/jul/04/terry-gilliam-on-diversity-bbc-monty-python-black-lesbian">The Guardian</a>.
“Now we need one of this, one of that, everybody represented,” said the &#8220;Time Bandits&#8221; director. &#8220;This is bullsh**. I no longer want to be a white male, I don’t want to be blamed for everything wrong in the world. I tell the world now I’m a black lesbian… My name is Loretta, and I’m a BLT, a black lesbian in transition.&#8221;
&#8220;[Allen’s] statement made me so angry, all of us so angry,&#8221; he added. &#8220;Comedy is not assembled, it’s not like putting together a boy band where you put together one of this, one of that everyone is represented.&#8221;
In April, Gilliam returned to his PC perpetual &#8220;offense&#8221; theme in an interview with <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/monty-pythons-terry-gilliam-wishes-comedy-hadnt-changed-11555333940">The Wall Street Journal</a>. Asked if he believes there’s a difference between British and American humor, Gilliam told the Journal, &#8220;I always felt the British are very good at laughing at themselves; the Americans are better at laughing at other people.&#8221;
&#8220;I still think it’s pretty true, but it’s changing because now we can’t laugh at anybody because it causes offense,&#8221; he added. &#8220;There’s a kind of egotism out there: ‘Oh, they were making fun of me,&#8217; Never heard of you. I’m making fun of an idea.&#8221;
Asked about his response to Allen&#8217;s comments about &#8220;six Oxbridge white blokes,&#8221; Gilliam explained, &#8220;The idea is that we’re already excluded because the world has changed. I said, I’m tired of being, as a white male, blamed for everything that’s wrong in the world. So now I want you to call me Loretta. I’m a black lesbian in transition.&#8221;
The &#8220;Loretta&#8221; reference, he said, was to the famous Monty Python film &#8220;Life of Brian&#8221; (1979). &#8220;People now might take offense at that,&#8221; Gilliam remarked. &#8220;And when offense becomes so easy, it takes the fun out of offending!&#8221;
In March 2018, the director also pushed back against another idea that Hollywood has embraced, the &#8220;believe all women&#8221; excesses of the #MeToo movement. While he would go on to condemn Harvey Weinstein as a &#8220;complete monster,&#8221; Gilliam also suggested that some of the women who allegedly had sex with Weinstein had done so in order to promote their careers.
In his conversation with AFP Friday, Gilliam demonstrated that he doesn&#8217;t disagree with all of the Left&#8217;s premises by taking shots at Donald Trump and calling for more action to combat climate change.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/feminist-tries-to-cancel-disneys-the-mandalorian-over-lack-of-female-characters-gets-wrecked">Feminist Tries To Cancel Disney’s ‘The Mandalorian’ Over Lack Of Female Characters, Gets Wrecked</a>

Terry Gilliam

‘Superficial Nonsense’: Iconic Director Slams Idea That Only Trans Actors Can Play Trans Roles

Menu