While not the most woke series out there, this gets a 7/10, mostly for the contrived lesbian relationship that Amazon writers wanted to insert into the story to normalize leftist values. Apart from that, the series does not appear to be overly woke.
shareYou're mercifully free of the awareness that bandying around the term 'woke' so much is like wearing a badge on your shirt that says "small and scared" for all to see. And now we see one reason why: you're afraid of lesbians. I mean, they're still not portrayed on television nearly as much as they exist in society (and they've been around for a long, long time), but a single kiss on a cable show and you're out here screaming WOKE!
That character (non-maie, non-white, non-straight, in a position of power in Wyoming) is there in the story to point out that people who are afraid of diversity, such as yourself, are a dying breed. And what do you do? Come to a social media group for the show on and cry THIS IS SO WOKE! We're not laughing with you.
You have my pity.
You know what's great? It's that you get to share your opinion, and I get to share mine. Nothing you said makes me change my opinion that the producers of this show intentionally put wokeness into the series because it wanted to push a leftist sociopolitical agenda, of which attempting to "normalize" such behavior and influence viewers is an objective.
Actually, what they did was put in a diverse set of characters reflective of actual society and did not squelch that character set to align with the paper-thin sensitivities of people that think we should still live in the Leave it to Beaver era.
Having a group of people in your story that represents the real-life diversity of your viewership is not a leftist sociopolitical agenda. It just makes you angry because even though society is not all white and straight in the real world, you don't want to see it on your television set. It has you imagining conspiracies as a means of explaining things that make you feel squeamish inside.
If you think the wide spectrum of sexual orientation and identity is not real or even "normal", then it's clear that you steered away from all of that liberal indoctrination, which would have shown you history that this has been going on for a very long time.
They're attempting to influence viewers as an objective? If you ever get medication for your delusions, you might come to the realization that nobody is trying to turn anybody gay. If they're trying to influence viewers in any way, it's to show that you can have a gay family that's loving and healthy, even in the face of Wyoming-based neo-country scrutiny (such as the scene where they went to church and were admonished by some people there).
You could also use a dictionary. Sexual orientation is not behavior.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/behavior
I see that you are living with blinders on by pretending that Amazon isn't pushing its narrative. I'll put it to you plainly: yes, Amazon (and other networks) intentionally push leftist socio-political themes in their shows, and they have been doing it for a long time. If you choose to pretend otherwise, then you are living in a fantasy land.
And a lesbian marriage and lesbian activities are "behavior", not "orientation".
So every single time a show has a gay person it's pushing a "narrative"?
shareUh, if every show has a gay person, it's pushing a narrative.
shareNot remotely. TV shows have large casts. It's less likely that not that demographically a TV show will not have a gay person.
shareYou seem to be missing the point. It's quite clear that Netflix, Amazon, etc. feature gay relationships - especially ones portrayed in a sympathetic light - in their series. This is done on purpose as a way of pushing the homosexual ideology. In other words, they hope that the more they feature them, the less likely people will be to think negatively of them.
It sounds like you may have bought into this propaganda without even knowing it.
You seem to be missing the point. It's quite clear that Netflix, Amazon, etc. feature gay relationships - especially ones portrayed in a sympathetic light - in their series.
This is done on purpose as a way of pushing the homosexual ideology. In other words, they hope that the more they feature them, the less likely people will be to think negatively of them.
It sounds like you may have bought into this propaganda without even knowing it.
All TV shows that depict relationships, straight or gay depict them sympathetically.
How do you know that every single example of that is done for that reason?
I've "bought into" accepting that gay people exist, and have relationships?
That's not true by any stretch.
I don't think it's "every single example", but the obvious growth in them is clearly done with that in mind. Just look at any data showing how far to the left the entertainment industry is. Add to that the blatant politicization of different facets of society by the left, and you can understand that this is intentional.
I'm not talking about mere facts. I'm talking about how one *thinks* about those facts
Perhaps the alt-right should get better at making an entertainment.
But to add, LGBT is simply much more accepted now. Therefore TV will be more likely to represent them.
No idea about the so-called "alt-right", but I can say that other organizations are developing entertainment options without the leftist propaganda. Obviously, this takes time.
That's because the propaganda works on people, and this supports my point. The more propaganda that Hollywood pushes, the more people believe in the propaganda.
Conservatives, reactionaries, alt-right are all utterly useless at all forms of entertainment.
So it's bad now that people now see gay people as perfectly ordinary and are content to see them depicted on the screen?
Lol, to each his own. Perhaps you're not aware of the growing distaste in leftist entertainment.
You seem to be ignoring the subtext.
Hey Phids, I would give it up mate, because you can never win an argument with a Wokie, they're ALWAYS right in their assumptions, always.
I'm Deckard B26354, I retire Wokies, I'm filed and monitored.
It's not hard to always be right when talking to a retrograde moron such as your Right-wing anti-wokies.
While I agree the series didn't appear to be overdoing it on political correctness, and the homosexuality in it didn't seem like a big deal, I don't think it's true that homosexuality is underrepresented on TV. In fact, it looks generally overrepresented, statistically, with every series — from Vikings to Stranger Things — shoehorning it in anymore. Each show on its own (usually) isn't too bad for the most part, I don't think, and I suppose it can often be arguably believable. But the accumulation of all shows combined kinda can give the impression that shows, on the whole, are only doing this for tokenism at this point. Which can be a bit distracting, at times. Sorta like bad product placement (with the product in this instance being the obligatory minority).
According to Gallup, "most expert estimates place America's homosexual population at 10% or less". This is a lower percentage than the number of atheists in America. And it would certainly seem odd to me (an atheist myself) to see this much atheist representation (assuming that was a more visible thing) in any show that didn't take place in a science lab. The Walking Dead, in particular, is an especially good example of one that overdid it (assuming, at least, it's not revealed later that being gay somehow gives humans an upper hand in zombie encounters). Heck, even California is only estimated to have approximately 5% of a homosexual population. And that's one of the USA's gayest states (statistically).
I mean, I get wanting to showcase historically underrepresented groups. But it does get to feeling a bit hamfisted when you see it so often. As if it was done not for the story but simply for the sake of diversity.
IMO, I think this overdoing it is what results in so many threads like these. People have grown such hyperawareness of this forced-feeling diversity that now even the smallest, most innocuous instance is enough to trigger a rolling of the eyes and ranting about how "they're at it again!"
Good points, but: this is a show largely created / conceived of by one person, who also wrote a lot of it (though he shared the responsibility). So at most, one can say "HE's at it again". And yeah okay, the producers (including Amazon) are okay with it, or at the very least they don't object to that ones person's vision and story (and character selections) as long as the sci-fi neo-country show has good ratings.
But is it a Hollywood agenda with an objective to influence viewers? Nah.
California is not one of the gayest states just because we recognize that gay people are human beings that should be left alone to live their lives and not discriminated against. Is that a big thing with you, you want to ability to bash gays? Is that a big part of your concept of freedom?
share> so much is like wearing a badge on your shirt that says "small and scared" for all to see.
That's why they scurry to the Internet to hide.
[deleted]
It's true though.
share[deleted]
Sorry, but your insults are meaningless here. Your post is reported.
share[deleted]
Reporting you again. Your use of insults mean you utterly lack an argument on the merits.
shareThere's no argument. You are just pissed at a show for having a lesbian couple (who btw barely has a few minutes of screen time per episode.) If you're that butthurt about it stop watching it and buy some Preparation H.
shareI'm just calling out woke shows for the propaganda they are. The sooner you realize this, the better.
shareSo you ignore Right-wing homosexuals, or just think they don't exist.
Or, they exist, but they hate themselves and don't want to be normalized
as you call it?
So there's some lesbians in it ... so what?
Are you so far down the attraction scale that you're afraid there won't
be any females left to have sex with?
What is so vexing to you neanderthals about fairness, justice or equality
that you have to give it pejorative names and make fun of it?
You ask many questions. The only answer you need to know is that the woke rating is what it is. Not everyone likes to watch woke TV series. If you don't like the woke rating, you can simply move on to a different thread.
shareIt's quite funny, we just watched this and round about the end of the first episode I said to the missus, "Hang on, something's wrong with this show" and then it hit me - there's been no gayness in it whatsoever!
Anyway they quickly rectified that in the second episode with the Sheriff, who is a master class of writing being gay, a strong female character and a minority all rolled into one character!
Personally though, I think this is a cop out - in fact we should be outraged in this day and age by a show attempting to get away with one "token" character. Therefore I believe this show could be classified as almost anti-woke and therefore your rating is way too high.
Lol, that's an interesting point.
shareThanks for the warning.
I was originally interested in this due to Josh Brolin, I really like his work.
But more Rainbow Reich propaganda is an instant turnoff for me, so I'm glad someone bit the bullet to spread the word and issue a warning.
Troll Rating: 11/7
You might be a Gay Fish.