Discover the magic of the internet at Imgur, a community powered entertainment destination. Lift your spirits with funny jokes, trending memes, entertaining gifs, inspiring stories, viral videos, and so much more from users.
On the one hand, the genocide needs extensive and copious pushback.
On the other hand, he is inside of a play, as a performer, doing contracted work. Where in his contract does it give him this leeway?
If this happened outside of the performance, then fine. But inside of it? Yeah, I’ve got mixed feelings on that one. It just seems… immature? Not sure that’s the right word, but it’s the closest one I have so far.
My first thought is What if it was a flag representing some group I disagreed with? How would I feel then. If your support changes based on which flag then your support isn’t valid. Now if he had gone out on the street right after the performance and waved his flag as viewers were leaving the property, I’d say he every right and MGMT could fuck off. But on the stage at the end of the performance, it wasn’t his right to do so.
I am sure you didn’t mean to say pointing out a genocide is immature.
There is something going on here and it is probably along the lines of discipline or tactifullness. Having the discipline to not bring something political into the play. Having the tact to know when to show it and when not to. These are both judgement calls though.
Actors are human beings with complex emotions, so I don’t really see the problem with his expression. I would have asked him not to display the flag again and if he did then discipline him, but the stakes are apparently much higher probably due to organizational politics.
Tact occurs in the absence of maturity, so immaturity is certainly adjacent to your superior term.
And it’s not so much about the person breaking out a soapbox, but more along the lines of breaking out a soapbox in a venue that is neither theirs nor public, especially when they are a contracted rep of that venue. That person was there on contract to entertain the patrons according to a clearly-defined program. That alone means they don’t air anything beyond what is defined in that program. It’s exceptionally rude to the patrons, who came there to see the program, not the person (specifically) or their protest.
Things get blurrier when the artist is the focus of the program, like when a band is playing, and they - as a group - pull out the soapbox. There I see a point in their favour, as patrons came to see them, specifically and exclusively, perform.
Even supporting artists have more of a leg up than this guy, because people will pay money to see a specific band even if it’s only an opener.
I personally see tact as a separate skill from maturity. I know plenty of grown adults who lack tact. I wouldn’t call them immature myself.
This simple display was not really that disruptive, it really reminds me of when the NFL players were taking a knee. Your argument against this display is very similar to the argument conservatives used to shutdown them down during that controversy.
You seem to be saying that this actor took away from the production by doing this. I don’t think this is accurate. I don’t think this quick display of a flag without even saying a word took away from anything. In fact, the overreaction is more of a problem than what the actor did.
I think you are probably right about bands and other single acts having more leeway to make their politics known, but even then you have artists like the Dixie Chicks who got blackballed for saying an offhand comment many Americans agreed with at the time.
Okay, well how about if someone unfurled a Dallas Cowboys flag on stage while you were on it. I would be furious. Do you now understand the point I was making?
I’m of two minds on this one.
On the one hand, the genocide needs extensive and copious pushback.
On the other hand, he is inside of a play, as a performer, doing contracted work. Where in his contract does it give him this leeway?
If this happened outside of the performance, then fine. But inside of it? Yeah, I’ve got mixed feelings on that one. It just seems… immature? Not sure that’s the right word, but it’s the closest one I have so far.
There’s no gray area here.
He’s opportunistically hijacking the platform that is the opera company’s viewership.
He, alone, had no right to this platform and the company is well within their rights to remove him.
As a thought exercise, (and I can scarcely believe this needs to be said) imagine he came out waving an Israeli flag.
If that last sentence got any of this crowd irritated, we might admit what this instance did for the operators of the opera company.
My first thought is What if it was a flag representing some group I disagreed with? How would I feel then. If your support changes based on which flag then your support isn’t valid. Now if he had gone out on the street right after the performance and waved his flag as viewers were leaving the property, I’d say he every right and MGMT could fuck off. But on the stage at the end of the performance, it wasn’t his right to do so.
How do so many people not know what curtain call is
I am sure you didn’t mean to say pointing out a genocide is immature.
There is something going on here and it is probably along the lines of discipline or tactifullness. Having the discipline to not bring something political into the play. Having the tact to know when to show it and when not to. These are both judgement calls though.
Actors are human beings with complex emotions, so I don’t really see the problem with his expression. I would have asked him not to display the flag again and if he did then discipline him, but the stakes are apparently much higher probably due to organizational politics.
Tact occurs in the absence of maturity, so immaturity is certainly adjacent to your superior term.
And it’s not so much about the person breaking out a soapbox, but more along the lines of breaking out a soapbox in a venue that is neither theirs nor public, especially when they are a contracted rep of that venue. That person was there on contract to entertain the patrons according to a clearly-defined program. That alone means they don’t air anything beyond what is defined in that program. It’s exceptionally rude to the patrons, who came there to see the program, not the person (specifically) or their protest.
Things get blurrier when the artist is the focus of the program, like when a band is playing, and they - as a group - pull out the soapbox. There I see a point in their favour, as patrons came to see them, specifically and exclusively, perform.
Even supporting artists have more of a leg up than this guy, because people will pay money to see a specific band even if it’s only an opener.
I personally see tact as a separate skill from maturity. I know plenty of grown adults who lack tact. I wouldn’t call them immature myself.
This simple display was not really that disruptive, it really reminds me of when the NFL players were taking a knee. Your argument against this display is very similar to the argument conservatives used to shutdown them down during that controversy.
You seem to be saying that this actor took away from the production by doing this. I don’t think this is accurate. I don’t think this quick display of a flag without even saying a word took away from anything. In fact, the overreaction is more of a problem than what the actor did.
I think you are probably right about bands and other single acts having more leeway to make their politics known, but even then you have artists like the Dixie Chicks who got blackballed for saying an offhand comment many Americans agreed with at the time.
I wouldn’t want to be on stage while a coworker unfurled a MAGA flag.
False equivalence - MAGA is a party in the US that is the oppressor. Palestine is a country and people that are oppressed and genocided.
“Well akchewally”
Okay, well how about if someone unfurled a Dallas Cowboys flag on stage while you were on it. I would be furious. Do you now understand the point I was making?
I honestly recomend not engaging with people this far gone.
deleted by creator