| The move comes after conservative personalities resurfaced old tweets Thursday in which the filmmaker joked about controversial topics such as pedophelia and rape. Gunn has been an outspoken critic of President Donald Trump |
pretty shocking - but as we used to say in 1996
don't ever put anything online that you wouldn't want your mother to see or read.
bummer he doesn't get to finish the trilogy - hope they get Taika Waititi to replace him
James Gunn Fired from 'Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3 - (
New Window )
The guys a predator, and if you understand what he said, and still defend him in anyway, you should lose your job and be gassed.
Zero room in our society for those who harm our children in such ways.
Death is the only answer.
The guys a predator, and if you understand what he said, and still defend him in anyway, you should lose your job and be gassed.
Zero room in our society for those who harm our children in such ways.
Death is the only answer.
You're smart. I like you.
Ian Miles Cheong
Verified account @stillgray
Jul 20
I was defending James Gunn earlier because I thought the extent of his actions was posting edgy jokes on Twitter.
I was wrong. He shared a CP-ish video of pubescent girls alongside an equally disgusting caption by a man who was later convicted for possession of CP.
I feel sick.
Ian Miles Cheong
Verified account @stillgray
Jul 20
I was defending James Gunn earlier because I thought the extent of his actions was posting edgy jokes on Twitter.
I was wrong. He shared a CP-ish video of pubescent girls alongside an equally disgusting caption by a man who was later convicted for possession of CP.
I feel sick.
Wow, I was unsure of the decision to fire him until now. He is a sick individual and I hope authorities investigate his home for child pornography.
ironically, or not, he was an early victim of the twitter mob (and perhaps deservedly so, he seems like a POS too), his opinion means nothing, I pasted the tweet on here only to show that Gunn's "rhetoric" was very likely beyond being a provocateur or bad comedian. He's likely committed crimes related to pedophilia.
So while I do not support twitter justice or mob justice (for anyone) and I agree it can be a slippery slope, in this case I don't think Gunn is a victim, I think he's getting what he deserves, but should probably be investigated by an authority.
So basically Silverman is calling out the dude who called out James Gunn on his pedophile tweets, while she herself has posted similar jokes in the past.
Again, what's the selection process for outrage and who gets the mob riled up?
It's bizarre, and frankly terrifying that social media has that much power and is only growing.
Not many will admit it, but the difference is that Sarah Silverman is hilarious and James Gunn is far from it. His tweets were painfully unfunny. As someone said above: if you dip into edgy comedy, you better be funny or you'll be out on your ass. Pedophilia is also not 90% of Silverman's act.
By today's standards, that's the difference.
However I, too, am concerned about the issues you bring up: that everything you say online could cost you your livelihood at any time in your life. It seems like Gunn cleaned up his act. Perhaps he was forced to remove those tweets by Disney years ago, but people in the industry have come out to say he's a sincerely good guy now. I don't know if I'd personally get along with him, but people should have the opportunity to better themselves.
Ian Miles Cheong
Verified account @stillgray
Jul 20
I was defending James Gunn earlier because I thought the extent of his actions was posting edgy jokes on Twitter.
I was wrong. He shared a CP-ish video of pubescent girls alongside an equally disgusting caption by a man who was later convicted for possession of CP.
I feel sick.
Well, that changes things if true. I admittedly did not read all of his tweets (5 or 6 sick, unfunny jokes was enough for me).
Quote:
Sarah Silverman retweeted a post calling out the guy who called out James Gunn, and in that thread, somebody posted a screenshot of a Sarah Silverman tweet from 2009 which read "Hey, is it considered molestation if a child makes the first move? I'm going to need a quick answer on this."
So basically Silverman is calling out the dude who called out James Gunn on his pedophile tweets, while she herself has posted similar jokes in the past.
Again, what's the selection process for outrage and who gets the mob riled up?
It's bizarre, and frankly terrifying that social media has that much power and is only growing.
Not many will admit it, but the difference is that Sarah Silverman is hilarious and James Gunn is far from it. His tweets were painfully unfunny. As someone said above: if you dip into edgy comedy, you better be funny or you'll be out on your ass. Pedophilia is also not 90% of Silverman's act.
By today's standards, that's the difference.
However I, too, am concerned about the issues you bring up: that everything you say online could cost you your livelihood at any time in your life. It seems like Gunn cleaned up his act. Perhaps he was forced to remove those tweets by Disney years ago, but people in the industry have come out to say he's a sincerely good guy now. I don't know if I'd personally get along with him, but people should have the opportunity to better themselves.
But would she defend someone who tweeted the same as Gunn but who was not lockstep with her politically. No fucking way.
Quote:
In comment 14017588 Britt in VA said:
Quote:
Sarah Silverman retweeted a post calling out the guy who called out James Gunn, and in that thread, somebody posted a screenshot of a Sarah Silverman tweet from 2009 which read "Hey, is it considered molestation if a child makes the first move? I'm going to need a quick answer on this."
So basically Silverman is calling out the dude who called out James Gunn on his pedophile tweets, while she herself has posted similar jokes in the past.
Again, what's the selection process for outrage and who gets the mob riled up?
It's bizarre, and frankly terrifying that social media has that much power and is only growing.
Not many will admit it, but the difference is that Sarah Silverman is hilarious and James Gunn is far from it. His tweets were painfully unfunny. As someone said above: if you dip into edgy comedy, you better be funny or you'll be out on your ass. Pedophilia is also not 90% of Silverman's act.
By today's standards, that's the difference.
However I, too, am concerned about the issues you bring up: that everything you say online could cost you your livelihood at any time in your life. It seems like Gunn cleaned up his act. Perhaps he was forced to remove those tweets by Disney years ago, but people in the industry have come out to say he's a sincerely good guy now. I don't know if I'd personally get along with him, but people should have the opportunity to better themselves.
But would she defend someone who tweeted the same as Gunn but who was not lockstep with her politically. No fucking way.
You couldnt possibly know this unless the situation presented itself which, it hasnt.
amen, brother
One side ran a pedophile for US Senate.
Quote:
The left has to play by the same rules as the right. I think both sides have grown entire too sensitive
One side ran a pedophile for US Senate.
Seriously, and if this is about Roseanne, you need to mention that her comments were a personal, racist attack on an individual WHILE she was employed at her job.
And, I havent read most of this thread, but has anyone mentioned the fact that the right wing troll who dig up these old tweets, Mike Cernovich, is an actual rapist and absolute piece of garbage? The right has their darlings, though, I guess.
Like Mike Cernovich
Like Milo
Like Shapiro.
Like Cheeto
Its such a common theme and completely devoid of any intellectual honestly, but I guess when you are actual human trash, you need to resort to these tactics.
How do they not properly vet someone in such a high profile position?
This is something that can be investigated without anyone even knowing, regardless of the person's resume.
I find it hard to believe that no one at Disney knew about this ahead of time.
I dont find it difficult to believe. And on the other hand why should we want to live in a world where every detail of your life should be under scrutiny and investigated by another human or team of humans to be hired for work and collect a paycheck?
People on this thread shift the focus away from the fact that Gunn brought this on himself. He is accountable for his actions. Instead the focus shifts to right wingers who exposed him and their character and whataboutism.
It does not make what Gunn very likely did and is any less reprehensible. People are unhappy that social media is being used this way, well I for one and thrilled if social media helps expose pedophiles. Sorry, I won't weep for people being "found out" because they liked young children or engaged in pedophilia in any way and claim they have changed (maybe).
A likely pedophile was removed (for now) from a position where he could be working with or around children.
that's a good thing. And he should be investigated.
I don't give a flying fuck if the potential pedophile is right wing, left wing, American, Russian, white, black, who gives a shit? And I don't care who exposed them for what they are.
Instead it's but.but but...the right wing had a candidate who was accused of being a pedophile.
but..but..but.. the guy who outed him is a POS shit too?
do you even hear yourselves?
fucking media manipulated coin operated lemmings.
think for your selves for 5 seconds and stop getting your information from the same sources. diversify yourselves a little bit.
What cernovich or Shapiro being POS has anything to do with Gunn likely being a pedophile is some serious rationalization some of you find necessary for some weird reasons. Maybe cognitive dissonance.
this is not a case where you want to pick a side.
On this board. Not surprised to see CiP as one of them.
Quote:
Doubt that you didn't read all his tweets..
The guys a predator, and if you understand what he said, and still defend him in anyway, you should lose your job and be gassed.
Zero room in our society for those who harm our children in such ways.
Death is the only answer.
You're smart. I like you.
Thanks, that's rare to see on BBI but it's true, I am. The left defending this child predator on this board will pay bigly for their disgusting degeneracy that will be dealt with in the most efficient and ruthless of ways. Their time is coming
People on this thread shift the focus away from the fact that Gunn brought this on himself. He is accountable for his actions. Instead the focus shifts to right wingers who exposed him and their character and whataboutism.
It does not make what Gunn very likely did and is any less reprehensible. People are unhappy that social media is being used this way, well I for one and thrilled if social media helps expose pedophiles. Sorry, I won't weep for people being "found out" because they liked young children or engaged in pedophilia in any way and claim they have changed (maybe).
A likely pedophile was removed (for now) from a position where he could be working with or around children.
that's a good thing. And he should be investigated.
I don't give a flying fuck if the potential pedophile is right wing, left wing, American, Russian, white, black, who gives a shit? And I don't care who exposed them for what they are.
Instead it's but.but but...the right wing had a candidate who was accused of being a pedophile.
but..but..but.. the guy who outed him is a POS shit too?
do you even hear yourselves?
fucking media manipulated coin operated lemmings.
think for your selves for 5 seconds and stop getting your information from the same sources. diversify yourselves a little bit.
What cernovich or Shapiro being POS has anything to do with Gunn likely being a pedophile is some serious rationalization some of you find necessary for some weird reasons. Maybe cognitive dissonance.
this is not a case where you want to pick a side.
It's beyond even trying to reason with at this point..
This is the line... they lunged past it. That's it. They are all exposing themselves
This is the guy that started Pizzagate, he has accused many others besides Gunn of pedophilia, and he has somehow escaped scrutiny himself because the right wing troll army attacks anyone who tries to expose him. So yes, it does fucking matter. The truth fucking matters.
Quote:
In comment 14017604 DennyInDenville said:
Quote:
Doubt that you didn't read all his tweets..
The guys a predator, and if you understand what he said, and still defend him in anyway, you should lose your job and be gassed.
Zero room in our society for those who harm our children in such ways.
Death is the only answer.
You're smart. I like you.
Thanks, that's rare to see on BBI but it's true, I am. The left defending this child predator on this board will pay bigly for their disgusting degeneracy that will be dealt with in the most efficient and ruthless of ways. Their time is coming
Let's not insult each other's intelligence by thinking both of believe what we've written.
He was a cringey edgelord trying to get social media attention with risque jokes that were not funny.
If you think that makes him an actual pedophile you are reading something into this situation which is not there.
I don't care that he was fired by Disney, either. They have a reputation to protect and made a choice that is sensible, all things considered.
The desire to equate this to Roseanne (current behaviors targeting a specific individual versus ten year old behaviors in general poor taste) seems a little bit of a stretch.
You mean writing and directing two films which have grossed over $1 billion?
Yeah, can't imagine why Disney would want to protect their asset here...
Especially with tweets which are publicly available and published for all to read.
Yup, your totally right. That's exactly what happens
Poor Mr Gun, all he did was tell bad jokes , that's all he did!!! Goodness these right wing snowflakes getting bent out of shape about nothing at all. Just silly jokes, nothing to see. Also definitely not connected to other Hollywood sex networks at all and not any coincidence whatsoever in anyway and if you say otherwise you are a Drumpfturdstain and have no sense of humor.. who doesn't like some nice old fashioned pedo Jokes once or a dozen times here and there, am I right? Oh well, hopefully Mr Gun can get another shot in Hollywood , he sure as heck didn't do anything wrong outside of the silly jokes that are of no coincidence or meaning to the times we live in
Quote:
Disney fired a guy because they didn't like what his sense of humor was 7-10 years ago.
Yup, your totally right. That's exactly what happens
Poor Mr Gun, all he did was tell bad jokes , that's all he did!!! Goodness these right wing snowflakes getting bent out of shape about nothing at all. Just silly jokes, nothing to see. Also definitely not connected to other Hollywood sex networks at all and not any coincidence whatsoever in anyway and if you say otherwise you are a Drumpfturdstain and have no sense of humor.. who doesn't like some nice old fashioned pedo Jokes once or a dozen times here and there, am I right? Oh well, hopefully Mr Gun can get another shot in Hollywood , he sure as heck didn't do anything wrong outside of the silly jokes that are of no coincidence or meaning to the times we live in
Again with the loony Right wing Pedo wing conspiracy theories. Howd Pizzagate work out for you guys? Catch a lot of predators in that big sting?
Actually, if you want to look further into Mike Cernovich, you can read all about his posts on 8chan giving child grooming advice to ACTUAL pedophiles. Gunn made some disgusting and unfunny jokes, but theres never been any evidence that they were anything more than that. Its kind of creepy to me that you guys are so HOPING that hes actually a pedophile, though, whats up with that? Creepy.
However, based on the content and volume of his tweets, I believe it's a very likely possibility or at least one that should be investigated. People blanketly saying he's not a pedophile with zero knowledge either a) didn't read the tweet or b) feel Harvey Weinstein is going to prison because of Republicans.
I can't say enough, this should not be an our side vs your side issue. It's a common sense issue, which I get is clouded by confirmation bias, so look at the facts.
Did you read the tweets? Why once this was exposed did Gunn feel he needed to delete 10,000 tweets? If it's all bad comedy he would have just left them there.
Harvey Weinstein had a lot of people saying how great of a person he was too, is that all right-wing conspiracy theories? Sadly, people actually knew what he was, but ignored it and looked past it because they wanted jobs.
I think Gunn should be investigated, as I mentioned above, if he's not guilty he should be treated as such. Yes, damage has been done, but IMO he brought it on himself.
The fact Ceernovich (a legit POS) brought this to light, in no way diminishes the potential severity of Gunn's actions.
life is not binary, Cernovich can be a POS and at the same time Gunn should not be working around kids or for a company like Disney (or should at least be investigated).
However, based on the content and volume of his tweets, I believe it's a very likely possibility or at least one that should be investigated. People blanketly saying he's not a pedophile with zero knowledge either a) didn't read the tweet or b) feel Harvey Weinstein is going to prison because of Republicans.
Hypocrisy Alert.
To be hypocritical for me based on my post would be me pretending to know what people think. When they come right out and say it I don't have to pretend to know what they think.
Hypocrisy is an often used word, not always correctly (like in this case). Kind of like the word patronizing.
Some times you leave a restaurant and they'll have a sign "thank you for patronizing us" when in actuality they meant "they you for your patronage". Patronizing someone is talking down to them like a child, much like I'm doing to you right now.
"People blanketly [sic] saying he's not a pedophile with zero knowledge either a) didn't read the tweet or b) feel Harvey Weinstein is going to prison because of Republicans."
So you can categorically state, with backup, that every person who is not personally involved with him and his situation thinks he is not a pedophile feels that way for only one of those two reasons?
That's quite a super power to know what everyone thinks. So cool that you don't have to pretend!
I love that you think you are not partisan. Totally adorable...
so you telling me that I want him to be a pedophile and me telling you to back off you don't know what I think
makes me saying
based on the content and volume of his pedophilia themed tweets warrants an investigation?
again, neither of you understand the meaning of hypocritical.
per Webster:
His hypocrisy was finally revealed with the publication of his private letters.
; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion
Nothing hypocritical in my post whatsoever. this lesson is on the house. the next one I will invoice you. Is that hypocritical? Or just patronizing?
I love that you think you are not partisan. Totally adorable...
You use the word adorable a lot.
What does this even mean? if Cernovich was running a Disney movie franchise would my standards be the same? Of course. Cernovich is a POS. It in no way changes what Gunn may or may not have done. I support investigating anyone who has the volume of tweets and links to stories and content about pedophilia as Gunn had. It's very straightforward IMO.
Also, I never claimed not to be partisan, we all are even those who don't admit it. I do try and view issues from all sides, I read and follow sources from all sides, I get as many opinions as I can consume, I try and weed through the bullshit and identify what can be corroborated as fact and then form my opinion.
I am not immune from confirmation bias anymore than anyone else. It would be inhuman if I was.
But there is a middle ground I try and get to where others see no middle ground, they ignore what they don't agree with and dismiss it as rhetoric or "right wing nuts" or "left wing nuts"
Even if unsuccessful, I try. and not asking for a medal, but from every thing I see in society today, not a lot of people even make the effort, opinions are formed from first source, with little in the way of fact, and once those opinions get formed people believe things that reinforce those opinions.
The fact you view 10,000 tweets as no evidence is probably the crux of the problem. You see, I do view that as evidence and I read enough of the tweets to form what I believe is an informed opinion.
Did you even read the part about making blanket statements?
You better give lessons on the house because you don't seem to be grasping what people are very pointingly saying.
Quote:
Nothing hypocritical in my post whatsoever. this lesson is on the house.
Did you even read the part about making blanket statements?
You better give lessons on the house because you don't seem to be grasping what people are very pointingly saying.
That was in response to Jerry's post below. How the F does Jerry know what Gunn did or didn't do, what he viewed or didn't view? His mountain of tweets about pedophilia present probable cause for an investigation.
JerryNYG has zero way to know any of what he says is fact.
My post about him blanketly claiming Gunn isn't a pedophile is 100% spot-on true and in no way contradicts anything else I've said.
JerryNYG : 7/22/2018 8:19 pm : link : reply
but can we give the "likely pedophile" bullshit a rest?
He was a cringey edgelord trying to get social media attention with risque jokes that were not funny.
If you think that makes him an actual pedophile you are reading something into this situation which is not there.
I don't care that he was fired by Disney, either. They have a reputation to protect and made a choice that is sensible, all things considered.
The desire to equate this to Roseanne (current behaviors targeting a specific individual versus ten year old behaviors in general poor taste) seems a little bit of a stretch.
So if I said Jerry (who was the only one I saw making blanket non-fact based claims) instead of "people" which I used to allow for the potential others may have as well, then this whole tirade by you would go away?
if so that's adorable.
Quote:
you said "people". So you're full of shit. I look forward to the next lesson...
So if I said Jerry (who was the only one I saw making blanket non-fact based claims) instead of "people" which I used to allow for the potential others may have as well, then this whole tirade by you would go away?
if so that's adorable.
No, of course not. Because you are a hypocrite, silly!