The article is not loading for me. But I thought the controversy was about her constantly throwing shade at the classic movie.
Comment on Snow White, Disney, Rachel Zegler and a toxic debate that's not going away
LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
I mean casting her is obvious bait by the producers. But the BBC calling her comments “controversial”? That’s problematic at least. She opposed genocide and illegal occupation and opposed an authoritarian strongman gaining power. That is not a controversial comment in a liberal democracy and the founding values of the western democracy.
Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
This is what I was referring to:
Zegler also stoked controversy with her views after the 2024 US presidential election. Writing on Instagram, she said she hoped “Trump voters and Trump himself never know peace”.
BBC simply shouldn’t take the critique coming from fascists seriously, it legitimizes it as two valid viewpoints.
The article mentions the “shade” but it seems she only commented on the elements of stalking and I guess you can also throw in the somewhat necrophiliac element of the prince kissing her presumably dead corpse lol.
But Snow White is based on a Grimm’s fairy tale anyway, which are quite bloody and cruel and far from the sweet Disney movies, and they also contain centuries of storytelling condensing a cultural subconsciousness and dreams. Disney was always more shallow entertainment going with the times. Enchanted is completely bonkers too but really amazing movie. So it’s all bullshit asking a remake to “stay true”.
Ledericas@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
IVE SEEN propaganda against her on youtube daily, wtf i dont need to see that all the time. apparently its all driven by right wing sources.
Ilandar@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
They are objectively controversial positions, though. It doesn’t matter how much you agree with them, others clearly do not and it has led to heated public debate. That is literally the definition of controversial:
The so-called “liberal democracy” in which she lives is currently being run by the “authoritarian strongman” whose mission is seemingly to disrupt and dismantle many of those “founding values”. So again, reality is quite different to how you are presenting it. Calling the article garbage because it stated basic facts instead of ascribing to your fantasy land interpretation of current events is very silly.
LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
I’d bet you could find actual historic precedence for this. Imagine a german actress making her voice heard in the weimarer republic about the rising power of the NAZI party. Back then, people didn’t know where hate speech would lead. But now we know.
Hate speech must be opposed (see Paradox of Tolerance). If you accept it you help the fascists. There is no valid opinion except opposing it, so it is not controversial. There was no discussion that can be called a discussion. It’s just an attack by fascists.
At least on those two points. It is absolutely VITAL that we call out news media that are supposedly neutral like the BBC. If they accept fascist talking point as a valid opinion in discussion, we have already lost.
Ilandar@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
Again - this is netural reporting. The “fascists” won the election with a majority in Zegler’s country. The first step towards dealing with this societal problem is accepting that is not just some tiny fringe movement that will disappear if you close your eyes hard enough.
LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 3 weeks ago
So if some actor complains about something deplorable, and then there is a huge manufactured fake backlash, is it always ok to write “The actor created controversy by…”?
Lets make your argument more absurd and say there is a hypothetical problem with boots stomping on faces. All day and night these people would randomly pick certain people and start to stomp on their faces. Hypothetically it’s recently been legalized by Trump via executive order.
Is complaining about that creating controversy? Is there any line of deplorable, morally unacceptable behavior that would shift the framing from “creating controversy by complaining” to “spoke out and became a victim of a manufactured outrage by fascists”?
My problem is with the framing and how we’re accepting fascism as legitimate, while hiding the backlash is fake, immoral and baseless. This is the opposite of accepting reality and fighting back. It’s accepting fascism as something that we must respect and tolerate.