No, those aren’t Transformers

Joss Whedon departs Twitter in, well, not exactly a huff, but he does set up Robert Stacy McCain for a Future Film Projection:

The era of white cis male heteropatriarchal movie-making is over! Henceforth, every script will be created by a committee of Women’s Studies majors under the supervision of Judith Butler, Sally Kohn and Anita Sarkeesian, and all characters must be either lesbian, genderqueer or oppressed minorities from the Third World, preferably disabled or, at least, neuroatypical.

Your next super-hero blockbuster will be about an undocumented Guatemalan paraplegic bisexual with a harelip and chronic depression.

And the 12-year-olds are going to like it, or else.

What? He left out the Bechdel Test?

Actually, I could imagine a film about an undocumented Guatemalan paraplegic bisexual with a harelip and chronic depression; the poor shlub would have far more than usual difficulty breaching the porous-by-design border, and I’m pretty sure that had I all those obstacles in my path, I’d be pretty depressed too. What I can’t imagine is Michael Bay directing it.



  1. Dan Tobias »

    5 May 2015 · 10:32 pm

    Or the Bechamel Test:

  2. fillyjonk »

    6 May 2015 · 6:58 am

    It must suck to be a famous person. Kind of like being a regular person but more unhinged idiots know who you are. I’m not sure the much higher paychecks would make up for it.

  3. backwoods conservative »

    6 May 2015 · 7:25 am

    The words “rich and famous” are so often seen together that they seem to be part and parcel of each other. I prefer to separate them. I would love to be rich. I’d rather avoid being famous.

  4. Bill Peschel »

    6 May 2015 · 8:09 am

    I’m afraid that I was sensitive enough to look at the new Avengers poster and think, “Really? You added how many more superhero characters and you couldn’t make one of them black? That’s whiter than Obama’s Chicago campaign staff.”

  5. Bill Peschel »

    6 May 2015 · 8:16 am

    Oh, the website McCain drew the story from updated the story saying Whedon denies feminists chased him off; he just needed to focus on his writing. A link at the bottom of the story adds a quote from Whedon about the suspicion: “That’s horseshit!”

  6. CGHill »

    6 May 2015 · 8:37 am

    Yeah, I caught that on Twitter a few minutes ago. And, well, I can certainly understand Twitter-as-distraction.

  7. fillyjonk »

    6 May 2015 · 9:14 am


    Ever since I saw some tabloid in the store, like 20 years ago, that essentially had the headline “OMG OPRAH ATE PANCAKES, HOW DARE A FAT WOMAN EAT PANCAKES” I decided that being famous was decidedly not for me.

    I’m not even sure being super-rich would be for me, I don’t fit in at country clubs and the like. Maybe if I could be a super-rich HERMIT it would be cool….

  8. backwoods conservative »

    6 May 2015 · 9:33 am

    I don’t belong in country clubs and fancy restaurants leave me hungry for some real food. I like a simple life. The things being rich would mean to me are:

    1. I wouldn’t have to work.
    2. I could own hundreds of acres in the country instead of the three I currently have.
    3. I could afford to go places whenever I wanted to.
    4. I could buy a lot of nice toys.

  9. McGehee »

    6 May 2015 · 1:13 pm

    You’d think when you get rich enough you could afford to be not-famous.

  10. FMJRA 2.0: We’ve Got It Goin’ On : The Other McCain »

    9 May 2015 · 3:20 pm

    […] Director Off Twitter, Because … Gender Theory? Batshit Crazy News The Lonely Conservative Dustbury Regular Right Guy A View from the […]

RSS feed for comments on this post