[DISCUSS] Gaston is better than the Beast

[Kim]

I've recently come to the conclusion that Gaston is better than the beast in basically every way, and every way that he isn't the Beast is just as bad.

Gaston is confident, charismatic, strong, very skilled in his areas of interest, and has a great singing voice (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcvtPuxZxc0&feature=related). Based on the movie, we can really only say, of these, that the beast is strong. Hell, the movie tries to characterize Gaston as dumb, but he's quick to come up with plans and has a pretty decent vocabulary. He's only dumb if you think the only kind of intelligence that matters is book smarts, which is silly.

Both were evil guys who locked Bell and her father away, but the Beast did it right off the bat. It at least took Gaston time to resort to that. What's more, the Beast locked Bell's dad away for the stupidest fucking reason. At least when Gaston did it, it was part of a plan, even if it was an evil plan.

Ultimately, people compare Gaston at the end of the movie to the Beast at the end of the movie, which really isn't fair. Everything was geared in the Beast's favor from the beginning, in terms of becoming a less terrible person. That's why he was cursed, after all. He had more motivation to become a less terrible person as a result, he also had an entire house full of servants with personal interest in him becoming a less terrible person. He also had Bell's Stockholm Syndrome love to ~change him into a better person~, because we all know that love makes abusive people change their ways.

I mean, say what you will about Gaston, but at least he doesn't have that fucked up moral attached to his character.

[stefan]

Gaston is the one who shot Bambi's mother.

I rest my case.

[Solid Snake]

I just told you this on AIM but I'll say it here anyway;

Belle's high point as a character was at the very beginning of the movie, and from there on, she just perpetually regressed from "awesome independent booksmart likable human being" to "submissive stereotypical twit."

Seriously it's like if you could watch the movie in reverse, you'd have a great tale of feminism and self-respect.

[Kim]

Gaston is the one who shot Bambi's mother.

I rest my case.

Is there anything he cannot do?

No, there is not.

[Fifthfiend]

Yeah B&TB was a fucked up movie on a whole lot of levels.

[Gregness]

Wait, I thought general was for Fartz and Butz?

[Kim]

This is a Serious Discussion.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

I thought Gaston was supposed to be an arrogant douche who couldn't take a hint, with a dash of predjudice against beastmen thrown in?

I mean yeah the whole thing is still fucked up what with the kidkapping and stockholm syndrome on the beasts part, and Belle herself getting stupider with every passing minute, but at least by the end the beast ended up nice and bettering himself, whereas Gaston was always pretty douchy and just got worse as time went on, culminating in his insane rage boner to kill the beast and get his end away with Belle.

[Solid Snake]

The biggest suspension of disbelief for me was the notion that Gaston, given his personality and his appearance, would be deadset on pursuing Belle when he could (for shallow reasons, but hey) basically have nearly anyone he wanted in the entirety of France.

I mean if you're Gaston and Belle's like "Nah seriously I'm into furries and I like being physically abused beyond even your meager abusive abilities" is it really that much of a loss? She's just a stranger and you're a one-man army of a muscleman who's got an entire damn town swooning over you. It'd be more consistent with his characterization for him to just be like "Your loss, sweet-cheeks" and stumble into the nearest bar in search for a one-night stand.

Also, Belle should have totally pretended to wuv Beast to break the curse and help out all those innocent people trapped in it, then just said to the characters who were once furniture "You really don't want to work for and live with this asshole, do you?" and run off with them, leaving human-Beast to rot in his castle.

Like Belle could have started her own little adventuring troupe there, maybe marry one of the unnamed background servant characters who wasn't a total abusive asshole or something.

/why am I over-analyzing this Disney movie

[Fifthfiend]

I mean if you're Gaston and Belle's like "Nah seriously I'm into furries and I like being physically abused beyond even your meager abusive abilities" is it really that much of a loss? She's just a stranger and you're a one-man army of a muscleman who's got an entire damn town swooning over you. It'd be more consistent with his characterization for him to just be like "Your loss, sweet-cheeks" and stumble into the nearest bar in search for a one-night stand.


Gaston is a dude with a hugely outsized ego and sense of entitlement and priviledge responding to someone he sees as failing to acknowledge aforementioned priviledge and self-perceived importance.

This is not an area where obsessive, disproportionately aggressive overreactions are unheard of.

[Ecks]

Guys guys guys guys guys guys guys.
Guys.


Guys.

No wait, seriously.

Wait.

Guys wait.

What if - wait a sec, listen guys.

What if...

What if Beauty and the Beast is a story about how love conquers all?

HOLY SHIT YOU GUYS I just blew my own mind.

EDIT: Okay guys, I'll admit to being slightly inebriated when typing this post and not actually entertaining the idea that this was going to be a serious thread. I'm leaving the post in its entirety to ensure maximum embarrassment and harassment for my folly, just letting you guys know I actually came back to this and realized with horror what I'd posted.

[Fifthfiend]

Guys guys guys guys guys guys guys.
Guys.

Guys.

No wait, seriously.

Wait.

Guys wait.

What if - wait a sec, listen guys.

What if...

What if Beauty and the Beast is a story about how love conquers all?

HOLY SHIT YOU GUYS I just blew my own mind.

Sorry for making you uncomfortable by thinking about things and then talking about them.

[Solid Snake]

What if Beauty and the Beast is a story about how love conquers all?


Apparently "love conquers all" now translates into "if you're a woman you better damn well love your man regardless of how much of an abusive jackass he is, maybe eventually he'll come around and stop treating you like his personal possession."

Dammit Fifth don't pseudo-ninja me.

EDIT: At least I ninja'd Liz.

[Kim]

What if Beauty and the Beast is a story about how love conquers all?

That wouldn't change its horrifying moral lesson being that if you love your abusive boyfriend enough he will stop being an abusive monster.

[IHateMakingNames]

But only if he's rich. Gaston didn't have his own castle.

[Kim]

I think it's pretty clear that the point of this thread is that he should have.

[stefan]

That wouldn't change its horrifying moral lesson being that if you love your abusive boyfriend enough he will stop being an abusive monster.

you do realize that the Beast turning back into a human was supposed to be His reward for no longer being an asshole, rather than Belle's reward for putting up with him, right?

[Kim]

you do realize that the Beast turning back into a human was supposed to be His reward for no longer being an asshole, rather than Belle's reward for putting up with him, right?

So what your saying is that if you put up with your abusive boyfriend long enough, maybe his life will improve?

Beauty and the Beast: More fucked up than I originally thought.

[Solid Snake]

Stefan actually more or less seems to be implying what I perceive Beauty and the Beast's creators intended to imply, which is that the story was entirely about The Beast and Belle was an ancillary character, and The Beast's personal growth was all that really mattered and whatever Belle may have thought or felt during his growth was unimportant because she's a woman she can just tolerate it and stop getting in the way of Beast's happy story, Belle.

...Which is pretty much how I think the predominantly-male crew in Disney just perceived the world at the time. It wasn't so much intending to thrust Belle into an abusive relationship as it merely intended to tell a story about a man because stories in a male-dominated society are about men, and Belle's just a bit piece in that context because she's just supposed to help Beast advance from point A to point B, and we as viewers (even female viewers) are supposed to solely relate to and define our experience in the context of The Beast because he is The Main Character.

EDIT: To clarify, in the prologue of the story The Beast is introduced as The Main Character and, narratively speaking, despite any attention given to Belle, the story is basically about The Beast's transformation which is never in doubt because he is The Protagonist and therefore he is going to become a very good person by the end of the story and this is taken for granted. The problem for a woman viewing this is that, if a girl grows up actually believing that the real world works like Beauty and the Beast does, she's going to assume in the context of any abusive relationship that her boyfriend is still The Protagonist, and there's dire ramifications that stem from that. Because The Beast's transformation into a genuinely good person is never in doubt, Belle can act irrationally and against her own interests as the narrative demands of her insofar as her sole purpose is to enable The Beast's transformation and beyond that she is not an independent character because she functions solely to act as a love interest to Beast. Therefore when Beast is an abusive ass, she does not do what any sane person should because the narrative is not about what Belle should be thinking or feeling or doing in response to being abused.

[Locke cole]

Also, Belle should have totally pretended to wuv Beast to break the curse and help out all those innocent people trapped in it,

Pretty sure that pretending wouldn't have broken jack shit, because of magic.

[Kim]

Magic is bullshit.

[IHateMakingNames]

Magic is bullshit.
http://i858.photobucket.com/albums/ab149/IStillHateMakingNames/1691-twilight-sparkle-longneck-1.png

Gaston also has one of the best songs that Disney has produced. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhG9hKiplfQ) Beast can't sing for shit.

[Aldurin]

But only if he's rich. Gaston didn't have his own castle.

I think it's pretty clear that the point of this thread is that he should have.

Now I want to make a Gaston character on either Skyrim or Mount & Blade: Warband.

[mauve]

I definitely see where you guys are coming from here, but as far as Disney princesses go, Belle's actually one of the better ones. Granted the kidnapping thing is messed up, but let's not forget about Snow "OMG I JUST MET YOU LIKE TWO SECONDS AGO WHEN YOU KISSED MY NEAR-LIFELESS CORPSE AND NOW I'M MAGICALLY IN LOVE WITH YOU FOREVER" White, or Cinder-"OMG I DANCED WITH HIM IN A TECHNICOLOR WONDERLAND BALLROOM FOR THIRTY SECONDS NOW WE'RE IN LOVE--okay actually I'm just using him as an excuse to escape my abusive home life because I'm a single woman in some sort of mideval European setting. Seriously, I don't even know the guy's name"-ella.

But anyway, I've always seen Belle as one of the three or four GOOD princesses Disney has.

[Kim]

I would argue that at least none of the princes in those films locked up any of those princesses' fathers, never locked them up, etc etc etc

[Solid Snake]

But anyway, I've always seen Belle as one of the three or four GOOD princesses Disney has.

Oh, I love Belle. As a character independent of the plotline she was haplessly thrust into, she's right up there with Jasmine as my Favorite Disney Princesses.
(Yes, I am a guy, and yes, I do maintain an ordered list of "favorite Disney princesses," leave it be.)

...That's why it's even more frustrating and disappointing that she of all likable characters is stuck with Beast. I mean, Jasmine wasn't in a perfect situation either, I won't claim Aladdin (as a movie) was an ode to strong feminist values, insofar as Aladdin got away with sketchy things himself and clearly was The Main Character who continuously benefited from his protagonist status, but Jasmine and Aladdin's relationship does not upset me nearly as much, for whatever reason.

[Locke cole]

Beast was better in Kingdom Hearts, of all things.

And Belle elbowed the most annoying boss in the game in the stomach and ran off when he tried to take her hostage, so it earns some points there.

[mauve]

I would argue that at least none of the princes in those films locked up any of those princesses' fathers, never locked them up, etc etc etc

They were too busy being bland and/or mcguffiny. XD

[Solid Snake]

They were too busy being bland and/or mcguffiny. XD

Ssshhhhh Aladdin was awesome
I mean even I have a huge crush on Aladdin

[Ryong]

Man, yeah, Gaston is cool and all but I have to agree with Snake on nearly everything he said.

Aladdin is a pretty sweet franchise, after all...

But then there's Mulan and she SAVED CHINA and RESTORED HER FAMILY'S HONOR and shit and fuck it has the best song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGMN-gNfdaY).

[Amake]

I rather like Beast and Beauty as they're depicted in Fables. They've been through a bunch of centuries and great societal upheaval together, and Beast stays mostly human most of the time; manifest evidence that they genuinely love each other. Or, I guess, at least evidence that she loves him. Maybe the moral of the story is that even if Gaston is a better person than Beast, Beauty and Beast are good for each other? Maybe they're just in love?

[mauve]

Ssshhhhh Aladdin was awesome
I mean even I have a huge crush on Aladdin

Oh sure, I agree with you on Aladdin. I was referring to Snow White and Cinderella's princes. Aladdin was a CHARACTER. Cinderella's prince was a PLOT DEVICE.


ANyways. Back to Gaston: Gaston is indeed super rad.

[Gregness]

I can't really agree with Liz about Gaston being smart given his usual response to intellectual matters is to punch it (i.e. he flips the chess board during his own song).

Edit:

Man, yeah, Gaston is cool and all but I have to agree with Snake on nearly everything he said.

Aladdin is a pretty sweet franchise, after all...

But then there's Mulan and she SAVED CHINA and RESTORED HER FAMILY'S HONOR and shit and fuck it has the best song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGMN-gNfdaY).

To Be a Man is good, but I'm gonna have to disagree about it being the best. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZ6cw_MuTDE)

[IHateMakingNames]

To Be a Man is good, but I'm gonna have to disagree about it being the best. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZ6cw_MuTDE)
I was already preparing to correct you, but then I clicked the link and all was well.

[PCD]

Man I am so tired of hearing the Stockholm argument. Belle did not put up with any of Beast's shit until he got his act together, she was ready to abandon that selfish motherfucker until he went out and got himself nearly killed trying to save her from wolves, whoops.

I will agree with the point that, seriously, Gaston, you can have any other super hot chick in town, why go for the bookish nerd when you clearly don't even like bookish nerdishness?

[Locke cole]

That's right, isn't it? I wasn't going to say anything, since it's been, like a decade since I've actually seen the movie, but I thought that was part of it.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

That's because Gaston is a douche, as I already said. He wants what he can't have.

[phil_]

The Lion King is the best Hamlet because Hamlet stops bitching and does something instead of whining until the final curtain. Also Scar.

Have I watched Beauty and the Beast since it came out? No!

[Fifthfiend]

The Lion King is the best Hamlet because Hamlet stops bitching and does something instead of whining until the final curtain.

You should really give Sons of Anarchy a try.

[phil_]

One of my co-workers has described it to me. It seems like something I'd spend every moment of either laughing of exclaiming "DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUDE!"

So, yeah, I might.

Not that I dislike Hamlet, as a character. He had it pretty rough for a prince. Step-dad tried to have him killed by pirates for crying out loud; he had a lot to whine about. Dying didn't help anything either, vis a vis getting over stuff. I just appreciate doing things differently sometimes. Tradition is there to remix.

[Solid Snake]

Man I am so tired of hearing the Stockholm argument. Belle did not put up with any of Beast's shit until he got his act together, she was ready to abandon that selfish motherfucker until he went out and got himself nearly killed trying to save her from wolves, whoops.


I don't really understand the whole "He saved my life, therefore despite treating me like shit up until the moment he saved my life, I owe him my affections" thing.

Like, it seems to me the epitome of an argument a "nice guy" would make, except when he's not really a nice guy but just adheres to the label of being a "nice guy" because he was bullied in high school and he now believes that he's completely and utterly justified in any dickish thing he does after that because he's still a "nice guy" and not the resident jock. Like, it's akin to that whole "nice guy" vibe of "If I do enough nice things for her, no matter how little chemistry we have or how unattractive I am, she will be obligated to love me."

I mean I'm not really sure it works that way? I think saving someone's life, when you have the capacity and the power to do so and you're the only one in a position to do so, is something you should more or less be expected to do, like it's a sign that you're a Decent Human Being, but once you do something like that you're not owed anything, it's like congratulations, you are in fact a human being, thanks for being that. But I don't like the insinuation that it causes Belle to love him, because I don't think love works that way.

I mean, let's put it this way: if Belle's in the exact same situation, being attacked by wolves and whatnot, except Beast doesn't know about it but Gaston does, for whatever reason, wouldn't you expect Gaston to save her?

...And wouldn't the fact that Gaston saved her mean absolutely nothing in regards to whether Belle is compatible with him, or should consider dating him, or even should re-evaluate whether he's worth her time?

...If a man abuses his wife for years, then suddenly she's in danger and since he's the only one present in the house who can do a thing to rescue her from said danger and he does, is all the abuse like canceled out, and he gets a blank check and she's like totally indebted to him or something?

In a strange way I think my lack of appreciation for the Beast's turnaround could be compared to my lack of appreciation for Vriska's, like it's strange how unforgiving I apparently am, or how I seem to assume these characters who were once assholes can't simply snap their fingers and stop being assholes, maybe I'm just a judgmental jerk like that, but sometimes narratives in general seem to make changing one's personality so easy, when in real life, I mean, I'm just not convinced it happens like that.

[Viridis]

Tiana is the best Disney Princess. Maybe tied with Mulan. The only ones who actually get things done.

[Solid Snake]

Tiana is the best Disney Princess. Maybe tied with Mulan. The only ones who actually get things done.

I've never even heard of Tiana.

[Magus]

Is Gaston the candle dude? Because yeah I totally agree and I don't know why anyone wouldn't!

[Locke cole]

I've never even heard of Tiana.


Princess And The Frog.

[Viridis]

I've never even heard of Tiana.You are an objectively terrible person and now need to be cursed into a beast form until you correct this.

Basically, she's a girl who doesn't believe in any of that 'waiting around, wishing on stars' nonsense and works two jobs, trying to afford her own restaurant. Then Disney magic bullshit happens anyway.

[phil_]

I mean I'm not really sure it works that way? I think saving someone's life, when you have the capacity and the power to do so and you're the only one in a position to do so, is something you should more or less be expected to do, like it's a sign that you're a Decent Human Being, but once you do something like that you're not owed anything, it's like congratulations, you are in fact a human being, thanks for being that. But I don't like the insinuation that it causes Belle to love him, because I don't think love works that way.I think you're underselling the value of being a decent human being in a world were lots of humans aren't decent. I mean, saving someone's life doesn't obligate them to be your slave for life/wife, but a little more than a "Thanks, bud" is in order, you know? At least a handshake. You know, for being a decent human being, as opposed to just being human.

[Solid Snake]

I think you're underselling the value of being a decent human being in a world were lots of humans aren't decent.

*shrug*

...I honestly think you're buying into that whole myth about people being innately evil (sadly Judeo-Christian in its roots) when, really, I don't buy into the idea that most people are innately evil.

Like, most people I know aren't saints, but they'd totally save someone's life if they were in a position where they could.

[phil_]

Evil, cowardice, and powerlessness are all different things, Snake.

[Solid Snake]

Evil, cowardice, and powerlessness are all different things, Snake.

Are you suggesting that Belle should love Beast because he isn't a coward? I'm not sure the trait of 'courage,' in and of itself, is necessarily a sign that you have chemistry with a guy. I mean I don't think there's a more courageous guy than Gaston in that universe, at least in terms of the fact that he'd be itching for a fight, but again, not something that translates into undying affection in the real world.

[PCD]

Snake I think it's also worth noting that like the Beast had been a dick to Belle for like... what... a day... two....? And yes it was an unbelievably shitty first impression where he did in fact kidnap her and treat her awfully for like those first two days but then when he pushed her too far he just kind of let her leave when she got pissed off so it was a pretty poor version of kidnapping, and then after he saved her life and then went on a clear incline of trying to make up for his shitty attitude the whole rest of the time. So basically I don't think it's fair to compare it to relationships where someone is abusive for long periods of time because he was only for that little bit of time and then was like "oh god damn I really need to get my act together fuck wow sorry umm"

Also I think it's bullshit that all the poor saps who worked for him had to get cursed as well, what is the logic behind that.

[Ryong]

The teacup didn't even work for him!

But yeah, it seems like it was a short time, he still had time to get his act together.

[Locke cole]

You are an objectively terrible person and now need to be cursed into a beast form until you correct this.

Basically, she's a girl who doesn't believe in any of that 'waiting around, wishing on stars' nonsense and works two jobs, trying to afford her own restaurant. Then Disney magic bullshit happens anyway.

Disney magic bullshit does, in fact, happen, but she still buys that restaurant with the coffee cans full of money that she earned herself.

[Yrcrazypa]

To Be a Man is good, but I'm gonna have to disagree about it being the best. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZ6cw_MuTDE)

I like listening for the moment where Jim Cummings takes over for Jeremy Irons. If you're well acquainted with both of them, you can tell.

[Gregness]

I like listening for the moment where Jim Cummings takes over for Jeremy Irons. If you're well acquainted with both of them, you can tell.

http://gifsoup.com/view/31155/master-exploder-o.gif

[phil_]

Are you suggesting that Belle should love Beastsaving someone's life doesn't obligate them to be your slave for life/wife,Nope.

[Grandmaster_Skweeb]

I think one very basic but defining act of Belle is being conveniently overlooked. She values her freedom but is willing to sacrifice it to save her father from imprisonment. Was imprisonment necessary? Probly not. But it conveys that Beast forgot what it meant to be human and he was practically on his death bed anyway. So what should he care about some old man rotting in a cell?

Let us not overlook that Beast pretty much gave up on life. He knew he fucked up and the curse was entirely his own fault, didn't know what to do, and until a young women came around and sacrificed what she cherished most he was practically one foot in the grave as is.

In any case, like PCD said: beast let her go after she put up with enough of the tantrums. But she stuck around because what she saw in beast intrigued her, no small part thanks to the wolves. She gave him a breath of life, so to speak. It was either die forever alone or risk it all to save the last chance at genuinely living again and being of worth to someone besides his own reflection. Yeah she lost her freedom but she got it back almost right away. It was either stick around beast n Co. or go back to a town that thought she was a no good eccentric like her father and openly mocked her about it in song even! That and be nothing more than a trophy 'little wife to gaston, as he put it. Dude'd cheat on her the first night he'd get.

I'd pick sticking it out at beast's too, honestly.

[Nique]

There's lots of goofy bad-message stuff in Disney movies, but I always felt like this movie was a little more complicated than 'Belle being in an abusive relationship'. As a whole the movie is thoughtful enough in terms of how appropriate their relationship is, at least for my tastes. But I can see how certain nuances wouldn't get through to kids and the 'I can change' message can be a bad one since it's something that actually abusive people use to keep being abusive.

My problem with 'princess' themed movies is that the girl is either waiting for some rich dude with no discernible personality to save her, putting up with loads of abuse from some male figure or another, or receiving some perspective about how this or that guy who would under normal circumstances not be someone you should deal with is just totally misunderstood.

Like, it is totally great not to judge by outward appearances, or to go for 'commoners' becuase they are virtuous and stuff, but Aladdin is literally a criminal.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Like, it is totally great not to judge by outward appearances, or to go for 'commoners' becuase they are virtuous and stuff, but Aladdin is literally a criminal.

Han Solo was a criminal.
Then he became a terrorist.

[Nique]

Han was a smuggler for a space-worm mob boss, which isn't much of a distinction, admittedly.

But no one said this type of problem was isolated to Disney films.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

Han Solo was a criminal.
Then he became a terrorist.

Is it really terrorism if you fight against an oppressive regime that builds space stations that can murder entire planets in an instant, and will use said weapons as an interrogation technique on the off chance a prisoner is lieing?

Terrorists job is usually to, you know, spread terror. That is the sole purpose of terrorism, hence the name. Fighting a rebellion against an oppresssive military dictatorship is not terrorism.

[Nique]

They would still be considered terrorists.

[Locke cole]

By Grand Moff Tarkin, and I don't think we really care what Tarkin thinks.

As for Aladdin, yeah he's a criminal, but he has to eat to live, and in his position, he has to steal to eat. I mean, otherwise they'd get along.

[Fifthfiend]

Like, it is totally great not to judge by outward appearances, or to go for 'commoners' becuase they are virtuous and stuff, but Aladdin is literally a criminal.

"Fuck the police" is a great message for kids movies.

[Nique]

As for Aladdin, yeah he's a criminal, but he has to eat to live, and in his position, he has to steal to eat. I mean, otherwise they'd get along.

I love you.

"Fuck the police" is a great message for kids movies.

If Aladdin was committing acts of protest against the tyrannical rule of the Sultan that would be one thing. But he was basically a thief-turned-con-man.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

They would still be considered terrorists.

No, he wouldn't, he'd be considered a common thief, which is exctacly what he is. He makes no excuses for that, and we all know what he is. He didn't even give a shit about the rebellion until he met the princess, how the fuck could he be a terrorist then? Your argument is completely invalid.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

No, he wouldn't, he'd be considered a common thief, which is exctacly what he is. He makes no excuses for that, and we all know what he is. He didn't even give a shit about the rebellion until he met the princess, how the fuck could he be a terrorist then? Your argument is completely invalid.

From our perspective we're fully aware that by the third movie Han Solo is a good guy fighting for the future of the galaxy. The Rebellion is a wholly good organization fighting selflessly to save everyone from a despotic Empire that exerts its will over every damn thing through intimidation, fear and destruction.

You really think that's how the Empire paints the picture to their citizens though?

"BREAKING NEWS: ALDARAAN DESTROYED BY EMPIRE TO PROVE A POINT".
"GOOD WILLED REBEL ALLIANCE WIN GREAT VICTORY FOR FREEDOM BY DESTROYING SPACE STATION, PLANS FOR YOUR EVIL DESPOTIC EMPEROR TO ENACT A COUNTER ATTACK ARE AT WORK."

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

Doesn't change the fact that the Empire are still genocidal fucks who are trying to manipulate everyone to their will. Anyone fighting against that is ok by my book, whatever you class them as. It doesn't matter what you refer to your enemies as if you're still evil as fuck.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Doesn't change the fact that the Empire are still genocidal fucks who are trying to manipulate everyone to their will.

Doesn't change the fact that from the perspective of the Empire and whomever might be under their influence, Han Solo and the entire Rebellion are a terrorist organization.

Anyone fighting against that is ok by my book, whatever you class them as. It doesn't matter what you refer to your enemies as if you're still evil as fuck.


That's wholly irrelevant.

[Arhra]

Don't be silly.

All good sons of Empire know that Alderaan shot first.

Alternatively:

ALDERAAN DESTROYED IN TERRORIST PLOT

OVER A MILLION DEAD IN REBEL ATTACK ON 'PEACE MOON' SPACE STATION

[Loyal]

"Terrorist" is roughly synonymous to "Freedom Fighter," often with the only distinction being who's addressing the subject in question.

Doesn't change the fact that from the perspective of the Empire and whomever might be under their influence, Han Solo and the entire Rebellion are a terrorist organization.Hell, according to Imperial propaganda, Palpatine was like unto a caring, benevolent god, the Rebellion was a bunch of meanie-doodoo-heads, and quite a few people believed that even after his death.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Hell, according to Imperial propaganda, Palpatine was like unto a caring, benevolent god, the Rebellion was a bunch of meanie-doodoo-heads, and quite a few people believed that even after his death.

It's not hard to believe when you consider that for certain portions of the galaxy life wasn't just not bad but could actually be pretty fucking awesome as far as standard of living goes.

As long as you never questioned anything, were 100% human and had no qualms about surrendering freedoms.

[Ryong]

Like, it is totally great not to judge by outward appearances, or to go for 'commoners' becuase they are virtuous and stuff, but Aladdin is literally a criminal.

He stole food to eat and went dungeon raiding which like every video game hero does!

[Nique]

He stole food to eat and went dungeon raiding which like every video game hero does!

You mean stealing directly from local businesses and allowing his monkey to illegally raid treasure from a tomb/ cave/ whatever? Not to mention conning his way into the palace?

I'm glad these Disney heroes turn out to be great guys who are just misunderstood or railing against unfair social rules or whatever, but I don't know if seeing every charming thug (EDIT: or spoiled and potentially abusive rich white guy) who comes your way as potential marriage material is really a great message...?

Actually, in all seriousness I think it's possible to worry too much about this kind of thing and not judging a book by it's cover is still a pretty good message. But it is important to think about the kind of ideas that our media reinforces.

Doesn't change the fact that the Empire are still genocidal fucks who are trying to manipulate everyone to their will. Anyone fighting against that is ok by my book, whatever you class them as. It doesn't matter what you refer to your enemies as if you're still evil as fuck.

Sounds right. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness)

[01d55]

Are we seriously arguing that we should all just roll over for propagandistic redefinition of the word "terrorism" and/or abandon the idea that it has any real meaning at all?

Because no, fuck you. Terrorism is the practice of avoiding direct armed conflict in favor of attacks against civilians in order to intimidate (or enrage) the target population. Avoiding open field combat in favor of ambush or sabotage against military targets is guerrilla warfare.

Now in real life people resort to guerrilla tactics for most of the same reasons as people who resort to terrorism and this leads to a lot of people resorting to both at the same time, but in Star Wars they told a nice fairy tale story about virtuous guerrillas who never resort to terror tactics.

TL;DR: Han Solo was a criminal. Then he became a guerrilla.

Also I was going to point out that the thread has been derailed but actually trying to give credence to (inferred) Imperial propaganda is totally the same as trying to pass off Gaston as anything other than a bully & a stalker.

Pay attention to what Gaston does during his song: He casually inflicts violence on his supposed admirers with absolute impunity. It's obvious to anyone who thinks about it that trying to call Gaston on anything he does, or even withholding praise for Gaston, will be punished. Through violence and intimidation Gaston has created a culture of enforced admiration. Gaston doesn't even like Belle, but simply never takes no for an answer and resolves to marry Belle in order to bring her in line with the cult of Gaston.

Beast, on the other hand, gives up on ever breaking the curse and takes no for an answer. If it had been Gaston who saved Belle from the wolves he would have pretty much straight out said "You owe me your life so now you HAVE to marry me so HA!" And Belle would have justly told him to go pound sand. Beast, on the other hand, says something along the lines of "Ugh FINE this was a terrible idea to begin with just go." It's pretty surly but it's pretty much the opposite of post-abuse abuser excuses (the abuser always asks for another chance) so I'm not going to fault Belle for making the call to hear him out after holding out for the principle that she has the right to make that call herself.

P.S. Nique if Aladdin was protesting the tyrannical rule of the Sultan he wouldn't have food.

P.P.S. The Fairy who cursed Beast et. al was goddamn evil. The curse is set to become permanent on Beast's 21st year, and at the time of the movie they've been cursed for 10 years. She cursed an 11 year old boy and his entire staff (implication: kid was a rich orphan) because a child didn't have good manners, and for good measure enchanted a portrait to track what Beast would look like if not for the curse.

[Nique]

Are we seriously arguing that we should all just roll over for propagandistic redefinition of the word "terrorism" and/or abandon the idea that it has any real meaning at all?


Yes. Because the word actually doesn't have an agreed upon definition, so it is only ever used in propaganda anyway.

Are we seriously becoming legitimately upset at people calling the Rebels from Star Wars what they would actually have been called in real life?

EDIT: It seems like you guys are afraid of the word. Like, seriously if I was fighting some dudes as obviously wicked-evil as the Empire, I would be pretty happy to call myself a terrorist.

Nique if Aladdin was protesting the tyrannical rule of the Sultan he wouldn't have food.

Because that's the way the story was written and the way the story was written sends weird messages about lying, stealing, and romance.

[Nique]

Here's hoping I don't wind up on an FBI watch list for that post.

[Krylo]

Yes. Because the word actually doesn't have an agreed upon definition

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v294/krylo/Reactions/THEROCKBROW.jpg (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism)

[Nique]

Wikipedia seemed to indicate that what identifies a group as a terrorist organization has no legal definition, and yeah that was totally not clear from;

Yes. Because the word actually doesn't have an agreed upon definition, so it is only ever used in propaganda anyway.

Although, just working off of dictionary dot com, this

1.the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

Pretty much sounds like the Rebel Alliance, Sonic The Hedgehog, Brown Coats, the Maquis, or equivalent in whatever other particular flavor of science fiction themed social commentary you chose.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

When exactly did the Rebel Alliance use threats of violence to intimidate or coerce anybody? When did frikken' Sonic for that matter either? As far as I recall they hid and they ran, and when they couldn't do that they stood up and fought back on even terms, which is what, you know, armies in a war do.

Just because you oppose a larger nation/military force and use guerrilla tactics to oppose them does not make you a fucking terrorist. Terrorists use terror as their primary and often only weapon. They scare populations, murder civilians and broadcast propoganda and messages of hatred to incite more violence. Their modus operandi is completely different.

By your definitation any force that opposes any other force is now guilty of terrorism? What?

[Nique]

No that is pretty obviously not what I'm saying.

Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coercion. In the international community, however, terrorism has no universally agreed, legally binding, criminal law definition.

...
The word "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged, and this greatly compounds the difficulty of providing a precise definition. Studies have found over 100 definitions of “terrorism”. The concept of terrorism may itself be controversial as it is often used by state authorities (and individuals with access to state support) to delegitimize political or other opponents, and potentially legitimize the state's own use of armed force against opponents (such use of force may itself be described as "terror" by opponents of the state).

Terrorism has been practiced by a broad array of political organizations for furthering their objectives. It has been practiced by both right-wing and left-wing political parties, nationalistic groups, religious groups, revolutionaries, and ruling governments.

...

.... As I recall they hid and they ran, and when they couldn't do that they stood up and fought back on even terms, which is what, you know, armies in a war do.

I am not enough of a Star Wars buff to remember their explicit tactics, but in a realistic scenario, in order to effectively fight the Empire the Rebels would by necessity have to use terrorist-like tactics by making tons of violent, opportunistic attacks, and make use of propaganda (which is not the same as lying).

Maybe I'm wrong but you seem to be confusing me saying that the Rebels qualify as terrorists with me saying that the Rebels were bad people.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

The rebels were bad people. They wanted to replace a rational progressive stable empire with one based on outdated religious fundamentalism.

May the force be with you=allahu akbar

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

in order to effectively fight the Empire the Rebels would by necessity have to use terrorist-like tactics by making tons of violent, opportunistic attacks, and make use of propaganda

No, violent opportunistic attacks are the staple of guerrilla warfare, which is entirely different from terrorist tactics. Also we have absolutely no evidence that they use such terror tactics as used by any of our present day notions of terrorism. All of the conflicts we saw them engaged in with the Empire where stand up battles where they pitted 1 army against another, which is exactly the opposite of what terrorists do. If anybody was using propoganda it was the Empire, to cover up their genocidal destruction of entire planets and to maintain their tyrannical stranglehold on an entire galaxy.


Maybe I'm wrong but you seem to be confusing me saying that the Rebels qualify as terrorists with me saying that the Rebels were bad people.

No, I'm arguing that your definition of terrorism is wrong, and that the Rebellion were not terrorists. Your arguement seems to be that there is not exact definition of terrorism, and therefore terrorism can cover a whole host of different possibilities, but underneath it all I'm sure we can agree, there is ONE fundamental truth of terrorism; it has to cause terror. It is used to make people scared, intentionally, if for no other reason that to simply make them scared. The only people who were scared of the Rebellion were the military personel of the Empire, because they were the only ones who ever came into direct combat with the Rebellion. The Rebellion did not attack peaceful worlds, did not bomb civilians, did not transmit messages of hate or spread fear and hatred among the masses. They used stealth and surprise to attack enemy installations, probably the odd raid for military hardware, smuggled hardware and peoples around the galaxy, but they did not do anything that under any definition counts as actual terrorism.

If anybody was using terrorist tactics it would be the Empire as a means over its population, by using propoganda to make the Rebellion seem "evil". And lets face it, the planetary garrisons of Stormtroopers were oppressive, corrupt and probably more terrifying to see wandering around than anything the Rebellion might do to a world. Not to mention officers in the military would be routinly executed for the smallest mistakes or setbacks, which is entirely counter-productive to morale and probably more likely and terrifying than being killed by the apparantly "terrorist" enemy you're fighting.


The rebels were bad people. They wanted to replace a rational progressive stable empire with one based on outdated religious fundamentalism.

May the force be with you=allahu akbar

Yes, one where entire planets with no weapons could be blown up at a moments notice due to vauge asscociations with a single individual accused and sentenced of crimes without any kind of trial. Real progresive that!

That's like burning down an entire town in any modern day first world country because you suspect 1 person who moved to that town 10 years ago is a spy.

[Ecks]

Not to ruin everyone's fun but...

Oh what am I saying, of course it's to ruin everyone's fun.

Is it that magical time when we're done actually talking about the topic and now we're just riding the coattails of this trainwreck until it gets locked after the argument flies off the rails out of control?

[Krylo]

Pretty much sounds like the Rebel Alliance, Sonic The Hedgehog, Brown Coats, the Maquis, or equivalent in whatever other particular flavor of science fiction themed social commentary you chose.

Nah, they weren't using violence to intimidate or coerce in any of the movies. They were using violence with very clear military-esque mission statements. Infiltrate and blow up a military compound. Extricate prisoners. Etc.

Terrorism requires that intimidation and coercion be the goal not a secondary effect. The Rebel Alliance wasn't trying to scare the Empire into doing a thing, they were trying to overthrow the Empire. Their attempts to coerce were done toward the people, not the government, and were not done with violence.

There's no legal definition of terrorism, but there is A definition of terrorism and the Rebel Alliance doesn't fall under its umbrella. At least not unless you cock your head just so, and squint just right, while holding a picture of a burning building next to it.

I mean, to be totally fair, the Empire totally would have called them terrorists, and probably would have lied about a lot of the shit that actually went on, most likely blaming the rebellion for about half the Empire's own atrocities while pointing at that half to justify the other half. It's just that it would have been, you know, lies. Not a factual representation of what the Rebel Alliance actually was or did.

[Nique]

I mean, to be totally fair, the Empire totally would have called them terrorists, and probably would have lied about a lot of the shit that actually went on, most likely blaming the rebellion for about half the Empire's own atrocities while pointing at that half to justify the other half. It's just that it would have been, you know, lies. Not a factual representation of what the Rebel Alliance actually was or did.

This is probably more or less the case, yeah. I guess the problem in making real-world analogy to Star Wars is that there is no indication in the (good) films that the Empire did anything to present a friendlier image or use propaganda against the rebels even, let alone that there is no way the Empire could have survived anyway with such insane military and human rights policies.

But look, I just wanted the real terrorists to have some positive role models, is that so wrong?

[Krylo]

let alone that there is no way the Empire could have survived anyway with such insane military and human rights policies.

I think the official explanation for this is that Emperor Palpatine was actually using a galaxy wide low level 'jedi mind trick' to make the Empire seem cool.

[Kim]

Star Wars is duuuuuuuumb.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

I think the official explanation for this is that Emperor Palpatine was actually using a galaxy wide low level 'jedi mind trick' to make the Empire seem cool.

This came up in the EU Thrawn Trilogy once as well, and was apparantly why the Empire lost the battle of Endor after the Emperor died, because he was actually controlling and directing much of the battle. Not sure how accurate that is though, been a while since I've seen the film and I can't recall if the turning point came before or after his death.

That and the EU stuff is canonically debatable anyway.

[Locke cole]

Doesn't Lucas go over the EU books with a fine-toothed iron fist?

I may be misinformed, but I think I remember hearing something along the lines of that mixed metaphor.

[Amake]

Man does anyone think Lucas spent even one second considering the public image the Rebels or the Empire projects to the citizens, or even that the citizens in that scenario could have an opinion about the political system of their galaxy. The Rebels are terrorists the same way the pirates in Pirates of the Caribbean are terrorists. And I'm referring to the amusement park ride.

[Locke cole]

I've been on both versions of that ride.

Boy, their animatronic Jack Sparrow looks jarring next to the older animatronic pirates. He looks too much like an actual person. Just doesn't fit.

[BitVyper]

Star Wars is duuuuuuuumb.

What if Gaston were a Sith?

[Aldurin]

Gaston would be Han Solo.

[Vauron]

This came up in the EU Thrawn Trilogy once as well, and was apparantly why the Empire lost the battle of Endor after the Emperor died, because he was actually controlling and directing much of the battle. Not sure how accurate that is though, been a while since I've seen the film and I can't recall if the turning point came before or after his death.

That and the EU stuff is canonically debatable anyway.

My understanding is that, while Palpatine was issuing orders like 'kill the weak crap first' during the battle at Endor, most of the actual directing of military assets was done by a Grand Admiral who was on the Death Star. What really brought low the Empire was that Palpatine did not set it up in such a way that it could survive past him. Among other issues, the line of succession essentially ran as Palpatine-> I R IMMORTAL. As such, the way that new supreme leadership was decided afterwards was essentially decided by military force, with most imperial assets destroyed in blue-on-blue fights.

[Aldurin]

And the Beast would be Chewbacca for ironic purposes.

[Aerozord]

That wouldn't change its horrifying moral lesson being that if you love your abusive boyfriend enough he will stop being an abusive monster.

but that IS the moral of the story. Beauty and the Beast is a fairy tale from before the creation of divorce when a woman really was stuck with a guy and "stick it out and it might get better" really was the most they could hope for

[CABAL49]

I think it is worth mentioning that in the old timey version of Beauty and the Beast, Gaston never existed and it was a bit less Stockholm syndromey.

[Krylo]

That and the EU stuff is canonically debatable anyway.Eh, not really. Rule is Movies are Primary Canon, TV series (other than the christmas special), video games, and other media of that sort are secondary, and then books and comics are tertiary. If anything in a book does not DIRECTLY conflict with primary or secondary canon then it's canon. If it does, then it's not.

Doesn't Lucas go over the EU books with a fine-toothed iron fist?
Nope, he just has the above blanket ruling. That way he doesn't need to go over them, or worry about contradicting them when he puts out a new, well, anything. It just makes some books non-canon if they conflict.
This came up in the EU Thrawn Trilogy once as well, and was apparantly why the Empire lost the battle of Endor after the Emperor died, because he was actually controlling and directing much of the battle. Not sure how accurate that is though, been a while since I've seen the film and I can't recall if the turning point came before or after his death.

My understanding is that, while Palpatine was issuing orders like 'kill the weak crap first' during the battle at Endor, most of the actual directing of military assets was done by a Grand Admiral who was on the Death Star. What really brought low the Empire was that Palpatine did not set it up in such a way that it could survive past him. Among other issues, the line of succession essentially ran as Palpatine-> I R IMMORTAL. As such, the way that new supreme leadership was decided afterwards was essentially decided by military force, with most imperial assets destroyed in blue-on-blue fights.

It's probably a combination of what Vauron said here, and Battle Meditation (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Battle_meditation).

[Amake]

It's also worth mentioning many of the old fables weren't built around "morals" so much as "let's scare the crap out of our children, ohoho". Not that I mind such classics as "Don't be kidnapped by a monster, even if it is an enchanted prince", "Don't throw out your magic beans and then climb on the giant beanstalks to the clouds and screw with the giants who live there", "Don't have a baby-eatingly evil stepmother", "Don't follow the enchanting naked violin player into the river" and of course the ever-popular "Don't be an orphan".

[Aerozord]

It's also worth mentioning many of the old fables weren't built around "morals" so much as "let's scare the crap out of our children, ohoho". Not that I mind such classics as "Don't be kidnapped by a monster, even if it is an enchanted prince", "Don't throw out your magic beans and then climb on the giant beanstalks to the clouds and screw with the giants who live there", "Don't have a baby-eatingly evil stepmother", "Don't follow the enchanting naked violin player into the river" and of course the ever-popular "Don't be an orphan".

they do still often work as advisory tales. The ones that seem sillier are often "beware the fae", which to the people of the time were very real creatures to worry about. Heck most can be summarized as, if it seems too good to be true, it probably is

[Archbio]

they do still often work as advisory tales.

The Pied Piper of Hamelin, as a fairytale, is totes about the moral of not going back on a deal when it becomes advantageous because someone who can help you can also jack you up.

Looking it up on Wikipedia to refresh my memory of it, I see that it seems to have been based on a real (if forgotten) story of Hamelin. Creepy.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Yes, one where entire planets with no weapons could be blown up at a moments notice due to vauge asscociations with a single individual accused and sentenced of crimes without any kind of trial. Real progresive that!

That's like burning down an entire town in any modern day first world country because you suspect 1 person who moved to that town 10 years ago is a spy.

the only person who says it is unarmed is a critical member of the rebel alliance. like she is goig to tell you where all the rebel weapons are stashed. Probably on the places she says have no weapons. She told them a rebel base out in the middle of nowhere like if you capture Osama Bin Laden and he's like "all our weapons are stashed in Antarcatica, clearly not in Iraq or Pakistan or Afghanistan" probably not a good plan to believe him.

Also their senator/princess is a high rakig member of the rebel alliance. Let's say that David Cameron declares war on the US tommorow and he isn't deposed by Britain/ Would you consider Britain to be at war with you? You can't play both sides Alderaan.

And ike the rebels blew up two planet sized objects packed full of like medics and costruction staff and admin officers and like dudes growing some food and maybe some blind orphans. that's how dudes roll in star wars. Neither side comes off as good in thewhomurders innocent people stakes.
And like apparentely the empire collapses when you murder the emperor. You didn't need to blow up the deathstars. the emperor is pretty easy to murder.

the jedi were racist little fucks, if your blood wasn't good enough you have no chance of advancement. The republic operated on slave labour and folowig millenia old outdated religious bigotry. Fuck the rebels, fuckthe republic.

[Krylo]

the jedi were racist little fucks, if your blood wasn't good enough you have no chance of advancement. The republic operated on slave labour and folowig millenia old outdated religious bigotry. Fuck the rebels, fuckthe republic.

Man I know you're just trolling, but like, the rest of that was all technically accurate while this is not. The Jedi never gave a shit about blood or whatever, and the Republic didn't use Slave Labour. Both of those things are imperial/sith doings and were illegal in Republic space until the Emperor overthrew the government.

[Fifthfiend]

It's somewhat accurate in that he was talking about the jedi, who were totally all about people's magic blood, and "slave labor" fits if you count droids, which basically nobody had a problem treating as property in spite of their clear capacity for sentience and emotion.

Of course in the stories the jedi's blood-caste system is portrayed as being necessary and intrinsic to learning the ways and abilities of their order, but then, every essentialist hierarchy portrays themselves that way.

But really the racism is kind of a secondary issue compared with their overall religious extremism.

[Aerozord]

It's somewhat accurate in that he was talking about the jedi, who were totally all about people's magic blood, and "slave labor" fits if you count droids, which basically nobody had a problem treating as property in spite of their clear capacity for sentience and emotion.

capacity isn't the same as actually having it. Droids are supposed to be routinely wiped so that they do not accumulate enough experience to develop things like emotions or personality.

Like you know that one episode of futurama where they remove all of benders memories and he became a simple bending drone? Like that.

[Kim]

Haha that honestly makes it even worse.

[Krylo]

It's somewhat accurate in that he was talking about the jedi, who were totally all about people's magic bloodBut they didn't actually stop anyone from advancing based on it. Being super strong in the force and having all the midichlorians wasn't a necessity to being on the jedi council, nor was it particularly helpful in doing so (much to Anakin's chagrin). It was great if you just wanted to be the best MDK machine at Jedi High, but not really useful for much else advancement wise.

Edit: The Sith Empire was pretty much the exact opposite in that, yeah they only really cared about raw force potential and how they could use that to make you the best weapon and the best weapons got to be the most politically powerful guys as well. The Jedi were more about state of mind and wisdom through overcoming trials.and "slave labor" fits if you count droids, which basically nobody had a problem treating as property in spite of their clear capacity for sentience and emotion.To be fair jedi are the only people we ever really see allowing droids to develop emotions and/or treating them like equal or semi-equal sentient beings.

[Fifthfiend]

Jedi: the Thomas Jeffersons of Droid oppression.

[Locke cole]

capacity isn't the same as actually having it. Droids are supposed to be routinely wiped so that they do not accumulate enough experience to develop things like emotions or personality.

Like you know that one episode of futurama where they remove all of benders memories and he became a simple bending drone? Like that.

Oh yes, I remember that in this one book set before Episode 1. This dude had a droid companion that had developed a personality, and they were friends. And right before the dude got himself slaughtered by Darth Maul, he sent the droid to deliver some vital intel (Death Star plans or something) to the Senate or the Jedi or something.

Then another dude mind-wipes the droid because it's easier to resell it that way.

And the other dude manages to live just long enough after being attacked by Maul to give a high-ranking Senator the information that there's a Sith lord out and about. Specifically, he manages to tell Senator Palpatine.

The book didn't exactly have a happy ending, you see.

As for blood purity: just another reason why Midichlorians are a kinda sucky plot point. Though in this case, it's less something dumb like blood purity in Harry Potter, and more something like muscle mass.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

capacity isn't the same as actually having it. Droids are supposed to be routinely wiped so that they do not accumulate enough experience to develop things like emotions or personality.

Like you know that one episode of futurama where they remove all of benders memories and he became a simple bending drone? Like that.

I think the worst thing is it's not even like the entire Galaxy is just accidentally operating under the presumption that the robots are glitched and need to be memory wiped or they'll go nuts or something. As far as I remember every conversation you hear about it is pretty explicit that they're fully aware a droid can gain personality and they just don't want it.

[Aerozord]

I think the worst thing is it's not even like the entire Galaxy is just accidentally operating under the presumption that the robots are glitched and need to be memory wiped or they'll go nuts or something. As far as I remember every conversation you hear about it is pretty explicit that they're fully aware a droid can gain personality and they just don't want it.

yea, but to be fair before they get said personality they have no opinion or free will, kind of hard to call them sentient. As for morality when they do, well most people that you'd call "good" do seem to care about said droids. I dont think Chewie was lugging around C-3PO for the exercise.

[Nique]

Jedi: the Thomas Jeffersons of Droid oppression.

...? (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=thomas+jefferson+making+love+to+a+robot)

EDIT: I'm shocked that I didn't find a single good image to reply with from this search.

[Kim]

The internet has truly let us down this day.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

The internet has truly let us down this day.

We do have a board for those artisty types. Maybe one of them will take up the cause and fill this gaping wound the internet clearly suffers from?

[Nique]

But thomas jefferson has to be a jedi, and the robot has to be a black robot.

[Fifthfiend]

the robot has to be a black robot.

guys

Nique is a robots racist http://i606.photobucket.com/albums/tt148/fifthfiend/emoticons/redface1.gif

[Krylo]

That's okay. Robots don't have feelings, anyway.

So long as we wipe their memories often enough.

[Kyanbu The Legend]

We do have a board for those artisty types. Maybe one of them will take up the cause and fill this gaping wound the internet clearly suffers from?

Can't do it, my hands are already full.


Just~ throwing that out there...

[Kim]

Can't do it, my hands are already full.

Jesus Christ, don't you ever stop masturbating?

[Kyanbu The Legend]

Oh I see what you did there.

[Kim]

I didn't do shit.

I ain't touching your dick.

[Aldurin]

Yet . . .

[Kyanbu The Legend]

Man I don't even remember what this thread was about anymore. Something about an animal-thing, domestic abuse, and talking tea-pots and droids.

[Kim]

If it was really about an animal-thing, you woulda remembered.

[Nique]

! (http://www.hiyoooo.com/)

[Kyanbu The Legend]

If it was really about an animal-thing, you woulda remembered.

I... okay yeah I can't really argue with that.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Man I know you're just trolling, but like, the rest of that was all technically accurate while this is not. The Jedi never gave a shit about blood or whatever, and the Republic didn't use Slave Labour. Both of those things are imperial/sith doings and were illegal in Republic space until the Emperor overthrew the government.

Anakin was a slave in republic space. Likemaybe they outlawed it but they didn't do shit to stop it. It'sike how nowadays we technically don't have slavescause we just keep them all out of the way in Asia and Africa.
Like let's look at Tattoine. They running slave trade in the republic area. I don't recall seeing any slaves during the Imperial era.
Empire=gets shit done.

And like Jedi are all about balance and harmony and shit unless you don't have no midichlorians. Like I don't see no regular joe bloggs training at jedi schools or sitting on their council. You got to be a super space Aryan to get a foot in the door.
Like sure the most uber of the space aryans don't automatically rule but to have any chance you got to have sweet magic space blood.

[Krylo]

Anakin was a slave in republic space. Likemaybe they outlawed it but they didn't do shit to stop it. It'sike how nowadays we technically don't have slavescause we just keep them all out of the way in Asia and Africa.
Like let's look at Tattoine. They running slave trade in the republic area. I don't recall seeing any slaves during the Imperial era.
Empire=gets shit done.Tatooine wasn't ruled by the Republic. It was technically part of the republic, but the hutt cartels owned it.

And yes, you do see slaves during the imperial era. Jabba has a bunch of them. One of them is a main character. You don't see the trade because you don't see any major settlements during the original trilogy. Just Jabba's palace/pleasure barge fleet, which is manned mostly by slaves and droids. And the Empire was working relatively directly with Jabba and his bounty hunter.

And like Jedi are all about balance and harmony and shit unless you don't have no midichlorians. Like I don't see no regular joe bloggs training at jedi schools or sitting on their council. You got to be a super space Aryan to get a foot in the door.
Like sure the most uber of the space aryans don't automatically rule but to have any chance you got to have sweet magic space blood.Normal Joe Blows wouldn't want to, anyway. You can't learn the space magic, and Jedi aren't allowed to have any real power, have any relationships (family, lovers, etc.), and basically live pretty shit lives as public servants. They don't have any political power, other than a few senators respecting their insights enough to take suggestions. And it's not like there aren't non-jedi academies just as good at teaching everything other than space magic.

[Kim]

You know what bugs me about the Jedi in the new trilogy? They're all, "He's too old for us to start teaching him force shit," and that's total bullshit. If someone has force potential, I'm pretty sure they're not only able to use it if they've been taught how. We only see the ones who are taught how, but I think, given time, there would be those who realize, "Holy shit! I'm magic!" and start doing something with that power.

The Jedi wouldn't want to be all, "Nope, too old." They'd want to be teaching responsible force usage and being good and all that, just in case the Sith decide to take the force user under their wing or to prevent them from just being some unaffiliated jackass using force pull on everyone's trousers.

[Krylo]

The jedi are dumb in a lot of ways. I mean if they would have just let Anakin fuck Padme when he wanted there'd have been no Jedi Purge, no Darth Vader, and no resurgence of the sith empire.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

That's pretty conveinent. Oh we would stop the slave trade that is occuring in our area but there are some scary criminals there.
You can outlaw it all you want but unless you do anything about it it doesn't mean shit. Either the republic secretely endorsed the slave trade or they were too weak to stop it. I would be tempted to believe the former cause how hard would it be to take down the hutts. They can barely move- easiest crackdown ever.
The republic didn't do it because they wanted to live off some sweet sweet kickbacks from the hutts who in turn got their profits from slaving.

As for the council- until they started pumping out clones the jedi were like the army of the republic. They are like the "guardians of peace of the galatic republic". When you gotta go murder some droids they get the jedi to do it. That seems pretty important to me. They are basically the blackshirts of the republic- until the clones came along powerful enough to fuck anybody up if they felt like it ad the defacto police force/army.

If the republic were progressive they would have murdered the jedi long ago. The empire murdered all the jedi and for that they are ahead of anything the republic ever did.

E: And let's look atthe rest of the republic.
Senator of Naboo- also a queen- bloodline position
Senator of Alderaan- aso a queen-bloodline position.
Man the "republic" is basically just lots of minifiefdoms.

[Krylo]

That's pretty conveinent. Oh we would stop the slave trade that is occuring in our area but there are some scary criminals there.
You can outlaw it all you want but unless you do anything about it it doesn't mean shit. Either the republic secretely endorsed the slave trade or they were too weak to stop it. I would be tempted to believe the former cause how hard would it be to take down the hutts. They can barely move- easiest crackdown ever.
The republic didn't do it because they wanted to live off some sweet sweet kickbacks from the hutts who in turn got their profits from slaving.Hutt Cartels had enough power that neither the Sith Empire, Old Republic, OTHER Sith Empire, New Republic, or Empire ever felt it was worth the resources to remove them. They owned a rather significantly large area of space, and were their own empire by rights.

And Tatooine was a terrible planet that they literally could not get people to go to and settle. Only people running from something ever go there.

As for the council- until they started pumping out clones the jedi were like the army of the republic. They are like the "guardians of peace of the galatic republic". When you gotta go murder some droids they get the jedi to do it. That seems pretty important to me. They are basically the blackshirts of the republic- until the clones came along powerful enough to fuck anybody up if they felt like it ad the defacto police force/army.
If the republic were progressive they would have murdered the jedi long ago. The empire murdered all the jedi and for that they are ahead of anything the republic ever did.This is just patently untrue in every way and I do not know where you even come up with this.

E: And let's look atthe rest of the republic.
Senator of Naboo- also a queen- bloodline position
Senator of Alderaan- aso a queen-bloodline position.
Man the "republic" is basically just lots of minifiefdoms.

Republic was more like a more effective UN than a true ruling body. All protectorate worlds maintained their own government. Senators were the rulers of those worlds who voted on galaxy wide issues.

[Geminex]

Mind you, I'm pretty sure that, like the UN, it was pretty terrible at actually getting anything done. No sovereign power to enforce its demands, and insufficient concessions from other governments.

I mean, I guess it did fairly well at coordinating the war against the seperatists? But that was only once they got a sith lord in power.

[EVILNess]

Gaston is terrible, Beast is terrible, Belle is terrible, the Jedi are terrible, the Republic is terrible, and everyone can suck a dick.

Did I summarize the thread accurately?

[Kim]

More like Gaston is AWESOME

[Kyanbu The Legend]

Gaston is terrible, Beast is terrible, Belle is terrible, the Jedi are terrible, the Republic is terrible, and everyone can suck a dick.

Did I summarize the thread accurately?

Pretty much yeah. I'd defend Beast and Belle but I honestly just don't remember enough of the movie to make it worth an attempt.

[BitVyper]

Either the republic secretely endorsed the slave trade or they were too weak to stop it. I would be tempted to believe the former cause how hard would it be to take down the hutts. They can barely move- easiest crackdown ever.

The Republic had already deteriorated to the point where their currency wasn't being accepted anymore. I'm not even sure they had a significant enough military to do more than the very basics of protecting their sovereignty. Up until the clones, that is.

Senator of Naboo- also a queen- bloodline position

Apparently not, because the first movie was all "Naboo ELECTS its queens." Which is bizarre and stupid, I'll grant.

[Locke cole]

You know, that means that a majority of Naboo citizens were okay with electing a teenager to a position of supreme power. (or at least, she was one when she was elected)

Yeah, that's gonna go swimmingly.

Naboo in general has racism problems. Of course, if your only Gungan contact was Jar-Jar...

[Fifthfiend]

You know what bugs me about the Jedi in the new trilogy? They're all, "He's too old for us to start teaching him force shit," and that's total bullshit. If someone has force potential, I'm pretty sure they're not only able to use it if they've been taught how. We only see the ones who are taught how, but I think, given time, there would be those who realize, "Holy shit! I'm magic!" and start doing something with that power.

The Jedi wouldn't want to be all, "Nope, too old." They'd want to be teaching responsible force usage and being good and all that, just in case the Sith decide to take the force user under their wing or to prevent them from just being some unaffiliated jackass using force pull on everyone's trousers.

The jedi are dumb in a lot of ways. I mean if they would have just let Anakin fuck Padme when he wanted there'd have been no Jedi Purge, no Darth Vader, and no resurgence of the sith empire.

Like I said earlier they basically show all the hallmarks of an extremist religious order wedded to an utterly toxic ideology.

IRL Yoda would pretty much just be Pope Ratzinger or somebody.

[Fifthfiend]

Fun mental exercise: Imagine how the Jedi Order deals with pedophilia among its membership.

[Nique]

By murdering the children?

Oh wait that's a Sith thing, apparently.

EDIT: Good idea for Robot Chicken sketch - Palpatine is horrified at Anakin murdering toddlers.

[Archbio]

Good idea for a Robot Chicken sketch - dead air for 15 minutes.

Apparently not, because the first movie was all "Naboo ELECTS its queens." Which is bizarre and stupid, I'll grant.

Bizarre? Not so much. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elected_monarchy) Stupid? All signs point to yes.

Wasn't that one droid being mind wiped used as a comedic punchline at the end of the prequel trilogy? These movies were pretty sadistic.