Sign In

The Random Star Wars Pics & GIFs Thread — Page 156

Author
Time

^ wonder what it was? 😉
 


 

and more here at kyb3r.com’s ‘Star Wars Art: Best Of 2018’ - https://kyb3r.com/2019/01/star-wars-art-best-2018/
 

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here?
And say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

Author
Time

Great, pando Lando is making it’s way into pop culture…

Author
Time

screams in the void said:

Valheru_84 said:

Great, pando Lando is making it’s way into pop culture…

^ so …by your definition , anyone who identifies that way is an "it " ?

Oh come on, don’t twist things into something they aren’t. He wasn’t calling Lando an “it”. He was calling the idea or concept of Pando Lando “it”. Which, btw, would be correct in the English language. Since ideas or concepts are non-gender specific, the appropriate pronoun is “it”.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Thanks Canofhumdingers for straightening my words back to their original meaning and Screams for acknowledging you overreacted to something you obviously took offence to (which wasn’t my intent).

So to answer your question anyway - no I do not call pansexuals or any other people of any sexual orientation or lackthereof “it”. Canofhumdingers has the right of it and that’s all there is to that particular post.

To expand on it a bit more though on why I’m not enthused by the idea of “Pando Lando” sticking around and becoming part of the collective pop culture and also answer your second question of why it bothers me:

Lando is an established character from nearly 40 years ago that I expect for the majority of people, would come across as a heterosexual “ladies man” as he was portrayed and stereotyped in the way he acted around Leia. Once Han essentially tells him to stop hitting on his love interest and Lando loses Cloud City to become a Rebel, he just becomes one of the gang and we don’t ever get any more information as to what sexually attracts him.

Some people may have taken a different view in feeling he could possibly be bisexual simply due to getting the impression of Lando being a rather promiscuous individual (or so I read, not sure how as I certainly don’t, he simply seems flirtatious with a beautiful woman) and this in turn can and I guess did play into Jonathan Kasdan’s rather random and sudden statement/confirmation in lieu of ‘Solo’ releasing that Lando is pansexual (probably just to generate the reactionary drama he would have known and expected it to create - any press is good press). Pansexuality is really just a broader term that effectively encompasses bisexuality anyway but without trying to place you in one “box” or another, essentially pansexuals have no sexual preference or default orientation when it comes to being attracted to another human. Many people though even in this day and age are still trying to come to terms and understanding with gay and bi, let alone now pan and it is simply not something one even comfortable with these wouldn’t be surprised about to be so openly and suddenly linked with Star Wars which has only ever had heterosexual relationships represented up till that point, hence why it created such a media sensation.

I don’t have a problem myself if there are homosexual, bisexual or pansexual characters in movies. If that is the character and it plays to the story at hand and isn’t shoved in my face just so no one can miss that the movie makers ensured the “representation” box was ticked, then that’s fine.

I object to “Pando Lando” because:

  • It needlessly alters the fundamentals of a classic character and in effect can retcon many if not all of your memories of said character (a reason I will also never watch Solo…I like Han just the way I know and remember him from the OT).

  • It puts a spotlight focus on sexual orientation in Star Wars when there never was and never needed to be. Previously you simply had characters who were the way they were without their orientation being highlighted outside of the movies. So if there were characters simply being shown to be attracted to the same sex or other species in the new movies as part of the natural flowing of the story and/or background environment, this would be perfectly fine. While Star Wars clearly is a movie for all ages, that does still include children and so there is no need for blatant advertising and signalling of sexual tendencies and orientations even if that was just for heterosexuality. Adults are smart enough to pick up on these themes and finer details while leaving it obscured enough for children to miss and maintain their innocence until such time as they are ready to notice themselves or be educated on such matters. Star Wars has always done fine without this kind of content just like it has without heavy swearing and obscene cursing which is actually a really nice change when many other movies use obscene language for every other word because they have no other way to create impact in the dialogue.

  • “Pando Lando” is in itself not accurate but attached to the understanding that in Solo, Lando is maybe pansexual in his orientation but is actually inferred (a number of times as I understand) to be attracted and engage in mechanophilia / robosexuality with his droid counterpart L33T. Now that is really something that is not needed in Star Wars nor to be reminded of when references are made to it in memes.

Basically if Dryden Vos (the main bad guy?) and Qi’ra are indicated to be sexual partners (which I think is inferred as the case?) but then Vos is also shown to leer at a group scantily clad male and alien sex slaves and is inferred to take them to bed sometimes before turning back and killing someone or doing something evil, there’s your pansexual character and if it’s worked logically into the story somehow or kept to the background where it doesn’t overtly distract from the main story then that would have been completely fine.

The difference is, it’s not a core original character we already know, there’s no one shouting “there are pansexuals in Star Wars!?” before the movie releases and kids have no real idea about what’s going on in that scene apart from the baddie being evil as expected (in relation to it being the bad character, you can of course have one of the good characters have a similar scene as they pass through a cantina or something).

Anyway this post is getting a bit lengthy so I might stop it there and wait to see where this discussion goes before continuing 😉

But I will say there would be nothing wrong at all with the meme oojason posted if it didn’t have L33T hanging off of his shoulder. It would then refer to the Lando of old that we already knew…

Also, I just wanted to point out your use of “it” here:

screams in the void said:
…why does it bother you ?

😛

Val

Author
Time

ray_afraid said:

Valheru_84 said:

it created such a media sensation.

I’ve never once heard/seen it mentioned outside of this site…

Then you simply haven’t been looking or stumbled across the articles online. These are the first mainstream ones I can across after searching “Jonathan Kasdan Pando Lando”:

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.polygon.com/platform/amp/2018/5/17/17365604/lando-calrissian-sexuality-solo-star-wars-jonathan-kasdan

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5af77d59e4b00d7e4c1b37a9/amp

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2018/5/17/17366002/lando-calrissian-solo-a-star-wars-story

Val

Author
Time

ray_afraid said:

Valheru_84 said:

it created such a media sensation.

I’ve never once heard/seen it mentioned outside of this site…

Skip to 47:35 if the time stamped link doesn’t work:

https://youtu.be/zdVtKHRTfe8?t=2855

Here you have a mainstream TV show mentioning it and referencing a different article again than linked above, followed by the actors themselves talking about it and followed by a video rant in a car that is not the media but shows the disgust likely felt by many when hearing about Pando Lando and finding out what this actually referred to in the movie which is mechnophilia / robosexuality and is actually not part of being a pansexual which at this point, “Lando is a pansexual” feels like an attempt to divert and misconstrue what is actually inferred in the movie which is a very weird and unsettling choice for the movie, especially being Star Wars.

Val

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Valheru_84 said:

ray_afraid said:

Valheru_84 said:

it created such a media sensation.

I’ve never once heard/seen it mentioned outside of this site…

Then you simply haven’t been looking or stumbled across the articles online. These are the first mainstream ones I can across after searching “Jonathan Kasdan Pando Lando”:

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.polygon.com/platform/amp/2018/5/17/17365604/lando-calrissian-sexuality-solo-star-wars-jonathan-kasdan

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5af77d59e4b00d7e4c1b37a9/amp

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2018/5/17/17366002/lando-calrissian-solo-a-star-wars-story

Val

It ‘created such a media sensation’ that we have to search for the actual term on an online search engine? 😉

I’ve never heard of ‘Pando Lando’ before you mentioned it. Seems much ado about nothing to me (or chance to clickbait for some who are into that type of thing). I imagine most 12 years olds (and over) will take it as the actors referred to the question/statement did - a bit of a joke.

Are you really bothered by it and worried for the children when a spoof/riff Lando pic appears on here (and there are many of that Colt 45 image) - or this particular one enters popular culture - as you put it? I imagine many wouldn’t give it a second thought. Seems many didn’t either for Captain Jack from Doctor Who, or others in sci-fi who are pansexual.

Anyway, back to the pics…
 

^ from https://imgur.com/gallery/lliM0al

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here?
And say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

Author
Time

Seeing two dudes smooch in a movie is gonna affect a kid just as much as seeing a girl and a guy smooch, unless of course they have homophobia drilled into their head very early.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Sorry but it’s clear both of you haven’t actually read my posts, maybe you glanced over them and made some assumptions at best as neither make sense in context to what I actually said. Please pay me the respect of at least reading them properly and with an open mind before replying with something that addresses what I actually said.

What you said Snooker is especially out of line as it’s completely counter to what I said and almost comes off as an attack on my character. You’re either unaware of what I said due to not actually reading it or you are flat out calling me a deceitful liar. Which is it?

Val

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Valheru_84 said:

Sorry but it’s clear both of you haven’t actually read my posts, maybe you glanced over them and made some assumptions at best as neither make sense in context to what I actually said. Please pay me the respect of at least reading them properly and with an open mind before replying with something that addresses what I actually said.

What you said Snooker is especially out of line as it’s completely counter to what I said and almost comes off as an attack on my character. You’re either unaware of what I said due to not actually reading it or you are flat out calling me a deceitful liar. Which is it?

Val

I read what you said just fine. If you have an issue with what I said then take issue with it - though not by accusing me of not actually reading your posts (despite referencing your own words in them) - or not keeping an open mind - in a post which asks reasonable questions, IMHO.

Now, if you have an issue with what I posted then let’s hear it - if you think I’ve misread or misinterpreted your posts then please say why - but let’s not hear the above baseless accusations and supposition from yourself.

Try and debate the point (which you’ve ignored) - not the person. And keep it civil, man.
 

Btw was Snooker talking to me or you (or just making a general point)? Did you ask Snooks to clarify which before you jumped in and stated they were either calling you a deceitful liar or are unaware of what you said? (it can ONLY be one of those two options according to you…)
 


 

Edit…

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here?
And say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

Author
Time

I AM trying to debate the issue without effectively having to repeat myself as I can’t understand your response in the context that you have supposedly read my reply. You are dismissive and make statements that appear to ignore the additional clarification and detail that I already provided to give you insight into my perspective where my opinion stems from and the contributing factors. Your responses do not present to me as someone that has read and tried to understand what I actually said.

To try and put it simply:

  • Perhaps “sensation” was inaccurate in the picture it painted but it seemed an apt enough approximation at the time due to the amount of places and mediums I have seen it appear in, many of which are mainstream. I don’t believe it ever featured in my local town news channel but my point was if you search for it there are countless references, many of them big or well known names and brands. Regardless of the actors tone, they were talking about it and on camera which means it was public knowledge and a topic viewable to many Star Wars fans that would view such content. I can’t help it if you and Ray haven’t come across it, you asked for examples and I provided 6. The burden of proof works both ways, it’s your turn to get educated on the matter before you continue to summarily dismiss it.

  • Pando Lando is what the public and media termed it as when Jonathan Kasdan answered a direct question from a journalist on whether Lando was pansexual which he confirmed.

  • I’ve already stated what I object to which has nothing to do with homosexual, bisexual or pansexual characters but the retconning of a classic character and the fact that the term in itself is misleading and when I think about it now, it could be offensive to actual pansexuals because of what it is actually alluding to in the movie which has nothing to do with pansexuality and is disgusting, depraved and hardly the type of thing to include in a Star Wars movie which will be watched by little kids and that is the act of sexual activity with a robot called L33T.

  • My response to Snooker was because I already clearly stated my views on homosexuals and of which any sexual representation in a movie is normally only shown in M15+ rated movies where you are supposed to be 15 years or older to view and it is not expected to be watched by little kids (ie. 3-10 year olds).

  • My issue with the meme was simply a passing observation of my less than enthused thoughts on it that I did not expect anyone here to be completely ignorant of seeing how prolific it has featured in media. In fact, if you understand the context of the meme “It works every time” as in getting the “ladies” but with L33T hanging off of his shoulder instead of a woman, then you understand the reference and where I am coming from and I again have to wonder as to the genuine nature of your supposed ignorance on the matter. Just think about it - why would you insinuate a sexual relationship between a Star Wars character and a robot and not just any character but freaking Lando Calrissian?!

  • I never would have gone to such lengths to explain the situation or myself if I didn’t feel I had to after Screams accused me of referring to pansexuals as “it” and also asking why pansexuals bothered me, rather than seeing the multitude of issues tied to the name and idea, not the sexuality.

  • I’ve got no issue with pansexuals in sci-fi or in general. If you try to make me repeat this a 3rd time by saying you “read what I said just fine” I will not be happy. You can’t say now that I haven’t warned you.

Valheru_84 said:
I don’t have a problem myself if there are homosexual, bisexual or pansexual characters in movies. If that is the character and it plays to the story at hand and isn’t shoved in my face just so no one can miss that the movie makers ensured the “representation” box was ticked, then that’s fine.

I do apologise for now taking this thread off topic but I am immensely frustrated by these attempts to make me out as some kind of unreasonable homo/panphobe.

Val

Author
Time

Valheru_84 said:

I AM trying to debate the issue without effectively having to repeat myself as I can’t understand your response in the context that you have supposedly read my reply. You are dismissive and make statements that appear to ignore the additional clarification and detail that I already provided to give you insight into my perspective where my opinion stems from and the contributing factors. Your responses do not present to me as someone that has read and tried to understand what I actually said.

To try and put it simply:

  • Perhaps “sensation” was inaccurate in the picture it painted but it seemed an apt enough approximation at the time due to the amount of places and mediums I have seen it appear in, many of which are mainstream. I don’t believe it ever featured in my local town news channel but my point was if you search for it there are countless references, many of them big or well known names and brands. Regardless of the actors tone, they were talking about it and on camera which means it was public knowledge and a topic viewable to many Star Wars fans that would view such content. I can’t help it if you and Ray haven’t come across it, you asked for examples and I provided 6. The burden of proof works both ways, it’s your turn to get educated on the matter before you continue to summarily dismiss it.

  • Pando Lando is what the public and media termed it as when Jonathan Kasdan answered a direct question from a journalist on whether Lando was pansexual which he confirmed.

  • I’ve already stated what I object to which has nothing to do with homosexual, bisexual or pansexual characters but the retconning of a classic character and the fact that the term in itself is misleading and when I think about it now, it could be offensive to actual pansexuals because of what it is actually alluding to in the movie which has nothing to do with pansexuality and is disgusting, depraved and hardly the type of thing to include in a Star Wars movie which will be watched by little kids and that is the act of sexual activity with a robot called L33T.

  • My response to Snooker was because I already clearly stated my views on homosexuals and of which any sexual representation in a movie is normally only shown in M15+ rated movies where you are supposed to be 15 years or older to view and it is not expected to be watched by little kids (ie. 3-10 year olds).

  • My issue with the meme was simply a passing observation of my less than enthused thoughts on it that I did not expect anyone here to be completely ignorant of seeing how prolific it has featured in media. In fact, if you understand the context of the meme “It works every time” as in getting the “ladies” but with L33T hanging off of his shoulder instead of a woman, then you understand the reference and where I am coming from and I again have to wonder as to the genuine nature of your supposed ignorance on the matter. Just think about it - why would you insinuate a sexual relationship between a Star Wars character and a robot and not just any character but freaking Lando Calrissian?!

  • I never would have gone to such lengths to explain the situation or myself if I didn’t feel I had to after Screams accused me of referring to pansexuals as “it” and also asking why pansexuals bothered me, rather than seeing the multitude of issues tied to the name and idea, not the sexuality.

  • I’ve got no issue with pansexuals in sci-fi or in general. If you try to make me repeat this a 3rd time by saying you “read what I said just fine” I will not be happy. You can’t say now that I haven’t warned you.

Valheru_84 said:
I don’t have a problem myself if there are homosexual, bisexual or pansexual characters in movies. If that is the character and it plays to the story at hand and isn’t shoved in my face just so no one can miss that the movie makers ensured the “representation” box was ticked, then that’s fine.

I do apologise for now taking this thread off topic but I am immensely frustrated by these attempts to make me out as some kind of unreasonable homo/panphobe.

Val

If my post above has resulted in you being ‘immensely frustrated by these attempts to make me out as some kind of unreasonable homo/panphobe’ you likely need to re-read my post and point out which parts of it make you feel that way - because it seems from your reaction to it you may have some issues with something out side of my post.

Warning me? My ignorance? Get educated? Do yourself a favour and grow up - or get past whatever issues you have previous with me, or others who may have a differing opinion or view to which you hold. And maybe stop looking for a fight (or issues) where there isn’t one.
 

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here?
And say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Jason, this has nothing to do with our past history. While I still don’t think of you fondly (anymore) it was water under the bridge from 8 or more months ago that I was also asked to leave be when being allowed to return from my permanent ban, to which I have no problem doing so if you were to do the same. It seems you can’t though in brining it up now. I’ll repeat it again since you do seem hard of hearing - the way I currently feel has nothing to do with our past fullstop. Nor is there anything external influencing it, I feel the way about this exchange because of the way you’ve handled it and to shift blame onto imaginary external factors on my behalf instead of taking responsibility for your own tone and demeanour towards me is beyond the pale.

I replied directly to your previous post you refer to above and explained my response to Snooker’s and essentially repeated much of what I had already explained in a more straightforward manner so that you could easily address it. I covered each paragraph in order to directly respond to your “reasonable questions” you asked to be addressed. If you don’t want to engage in that discussion then don’t. You’re telling me to grow up yet you are the one sitting there with your fingers in your ears yelling “nah nah nah” until I’ve finished speaking and then proclaim I need to point out where the issues are with your post. I did - you’re not listening or actively trying not to reply to the many points I do make. I replied again directly to your post yet there seems to be something wrong with that as well since you just make claims as to what I’m doing wrong instead of debating the point as you yourself so aptly brought up (that I don’t need reminding of).

Warning you? You didn’t seem to understand I’d already covered everything that I explained a 2nd time directly to you, citing you read what I said just fine - yet didn’t respond in a manner that indicated this since what you say is refuted or explained already by what you supposedly read just fine. I simply made it clear what would happen if you did this again.

Your ignorance of the Pando Lando matter? You said you’d never heard of it before, therefore you are ignorant of it. What is wrong with this assertion? You claim to know nothing about it yet want to down play and dismiss everything I say about it.

Get educated? Learn what you are talking about before presuming to tell someone else how they should think and feel about it.

I never went looking for a fight, it came to me when I was simply explaining my position on pansexuals and why I have a distaste for newly canonised “Pando Lando”. To add fuel to the fire you throw a L33T gif back in my teeth as your final words that literally references part of what I take issue with on the Pando Lando matter. That’s really mature, nice work on trying to deflate the situation, these are a great display of your moderation skills at work here.

Say what you will in response but it’s clear now that you need to go in the same basket as Dom. It was nice trying to converse with you again for a time but it’s clear that isn’t possible with the chip on your shoulder (whether that be our past, anti-TLJ/ST criticism or both).

This will be my last post on the matter (waits for the post now by Jason that finally addresses all my points to spite me in saying I would not post again).

Val

Author
Time

I see you ignored the explaining of what in my post made you ‘immensely frustrated by these attempts to make me out as some kind of unreasonable homo/panphobe’ - probably because there was nothing there bar a few reasonable questions in it.

BTW, I’m not a moderator here.

Nor have I a chip on the shoulder - I just asked a couple of questions and got a load of shite back (though you claim I need to be warned, educated and to stop with my ignorance - along with my tone and demeanour to you) - and apparently brought a fight to you in asking said questions. Claims that I hadn’t actually read your posts, I had made some assumptions at best as don’t make sense, should pay you respect, and I hadn’t an open mind)… just as a reminder those questions which generated such shite from you, were…

oojason said:

Valheru_84 said:

ray_afraid said:

Valheru_84 said:

it created such a media sensation.

I’ve never once heard/seen it mentioned outside of this site…

Then you simply haven’t been looking or stumbled across the articles online. These are the first mainstream ones I can across after searching “Jonathan Kasdan Pando Lando”:

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.polygon.com/platform/amp/2018/5/17/17365604/lando-calrissian-sexuality-solo-star-wars-jonathan-kasdan

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5af77d59e4b00d7e4c1b37a9/amp

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2018/5/17/17366002/lando-calrissian-solo-a-star-wars-story

Val

It ‘created such a media sensation’ that we have to search for the actual term on an online search engine? 😉

I’ve never heard of ‘Pando Lando’ before you mentioned it. Seems much ado about nothing to me (or chance to clickbait for some who are into that type of thing). I imagine most 12 years olds (and over) will take it as the actors referred to the question/statement did - a bit of a joke.

Are you really bothered by it and worried for the children when a spoof/riff Lando pic appears on here (and there are many of that Colt 45 image) - or this particular one enters popular culture - as you put it? I imagine many wouldn’t give it a second thought. Seems many didn’t either for Captain Jack from Doctor Who, or others in sci-fi who are pansexual.

Anyway, back to the pics…

Wow.
 

Re the L3 gif - just a bit of humour to diffuse the situation, though I see you wanted to go another way. That’s fine - and not unexpected given your posts to me in this and the Mary Sue thread (where you quoted a post of mine yet removed the humour parts, hence also the context). But like I said, not unexpected.

As for the “I’ll repeat it again as you do seem hard of hearing” jibe as some sort of lazy innuendo / stigma that deaf people are mentally / intellectually inferior or somehow ‘can’t / don’t get it’… go fuck yourself. I’ll happily take a ban for that.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here?
And say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

Author
Time

Girls girls, you’re both pretty now let’s get back to the matter at hand please. 😉

I can answer almost all questions anyone might have about the Sith from Star Wars Legends, and please do PM me for the bd25 DEED(Despecalised Editions), as I have this version, though I can’t answer technical questions about them. Do not go gentle into that good night, Though wise men at their end know dark is right, They
Do not go gentle into that good night.
“Star Wars is a buffet, enjoy the stuff you want, and leave the rest.” - SilverWook
Feel the love.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Ok, I have to reply:

  • I ignored nothing, I explained multiple times why I was frustrated and directly replied to your posts.

  • I know you are no longer a moderator, I simply thought you might exercise some of the skills that comes with the past role in keeping yourself in check. Additionally you have no doubt had to directly deal with such circumstances and so it is surprising you let yourself sink to these levels.

  • If you refer to my lengthy posts where I try to spell out my point of view and reasons as “a load of shite” then I understand why you haven’t actually addressed them. You should have just flung insults at me from the beginning for which I could report you and move on rather than bothering with your pretense.

  • Citing the gif as humour is disingenuous BS, although seeing as you never tried to understand my points maybe you actually believe that and can’t see the hypocrisy staring me in the face.

  • My reply to you in the Mary Sue thread was simply pointing out that humour or not, you have not watched the quite half of the video you criticise and dismiss and then act as if your opinion expressed so far in the thread (factual recounting of the throne room scene aside) is all anyone needs to know about it and the thread shouldn’t exist despite the multitude of other people having an interesting and reasoned conversation that they clearly want to engage in because they are regularly posting in the thread.

  • You are now actively twisting my words:
    – I never claimed you needed to be warned - you WERE warned. If you did the same thing that initially made me frustrated that I would not be happy. Pretty logical, why would you do it again? Doesn’t seem like a good way to discuss the topic.
    – You were clearly ignorant on the matter, you directly admitted it yourself in what you said. Why is it so hard to deal with the term when it is applied to you on just this matter? It is not a bad thing in off itself. Do some reading and come back to talk on the same level of understanding.
    – I did not make or infer any connection to you being mentally / intellectually inferior as to you not getting it. The issue stems from the fact that your responses seem to constantly miss, forget and ignore things I have already said. I was getting a bit frustrated with that.
    – Do we not all coexist on a basic mutual respect? That is all I meant. If you are going to refute my posts then do me the respect of actually addressing the points I make.

All I have done in this thread is represent myself and offer my opinion in discussion. For that I have been:
– Initially labeled and furthermore insinuated multiple times to be anti-pansexual.
– Posts I put some considerable effort and time into ignored and compared to “shite”.
– Sneered at and painted as someone having an unreasonable issue with Pando Lando despite the reasons listed and repeated yet not actually replied to.
– Past conflicts brought back up that have no bearing on the situation and trying to side shift the responsibility of your own part in this argument onto them.
– Been directly insulted and demeaned. I try to tell you why I am frustrated at the situation and your part in it and you end up telling me to go fuck myself.

The actual common issue between this and the Mary Sue thread with yourself and Dom - antagonistic behaviour towards those that criticise TLJ. I’ve had no issue talking with other people in both threads about the issues IMHO TLJ, the ST and various characters have, it wasn’t until Dom and yourself started having a go at me that things started heading down the drain pipe. I try to ignore Dom and now you, but I will stand up for myself.

Val

Author
Time

Jesus… This all got started over a fictional character’s sexuality? Interpret the character however you like and leave it at that. Please guys, let’s stop this.

Author
Time

snooker said:

Seeing two dudes smooch in a movie is gonna affect a kid just as much as seeing a girl and a guy smooch, unless of course they have homophobia drilled into their head very early.

If Frink was still around this would be perfect for The Ridiculous Jedi, or whatever he called it.

Could be good for a proper YTP too!