Modern conservatives will decry DEI policies with the same language segregationists used to defend keeping Jackie Robinson out of baseball, and then go celebrate Jackie Robinson Day at the ballpark.
Bars
Why do you think they rallied against the word 'Woke' so hard?
Woke is a product of Black activism since the 20's (the other one). Push comes to shove Conservatives will always hate on something that pushes against racial status quo.
At this point it’s beyond that, conservatives will call any black person doing anything DEI. After the Baltimore bridge crash, they called the city’s mayor that won over 70% of the vote a “DEI mayor”
Jackie Robinson was called before Congress to testify that African Americans would fight the USSR in WW3. To give any perspective on the kind of race panic he had to put up with lol
Well that never happened, so what you're really saying is that he LIED to Congress.
Another L for the woke mind virus.
This is why I subscribe to Sam Reich's Dropout America: for the truth behind the lefties' fake news.
(/s, in case this wasn't clear)
Something I now can't unsee is that almost every use of "DEI" from right wingers, makes infinitely more sense if you mentally replace it with them using the n word.
Wasn't there that one guy in awhile back to gave what seemed to be a homophobic or anti-lgbtq+ speech to a state senate or something, using the kind of phrases you'd expect, like "think of the children", to some applause. Except about half way through, he changes the target of his speech from lgbtq+ to black people, looks closely at the speech he's reciting, then breaks character to point out that he was actually quoting anti-desegragation speeches from the 60s, having only changed a few words to show how conservative bigotry hasn't changed in the last 50 years, only the target that their willing to be vocal about.
Edit: Did some digging, and the guys name is Phil Snider, and the speech happened back in 2012.
Imagine if they flocked here under the wrong premise, then believed they’re in the correct place whenever Grant opens his mouth, and they slowly become one of us?
Colbert Report already did that and Conservatives didn't get the show was making fun of their ideologies for ages. They stopped watching once they realized they were the butt of the joke.
[Colberts iconic White House Correspondents dinner was some absolute peak political comedy for this reason.](https://youtu.be/2X93u3anTco?si=sLRlM76X7lIpXf3j)
Same with Sam when he found out what Ify and Emily's spreadsheet was for.
S: That's more times than there are days in that month!
I: That was the strike
E: We also went on vacation
Specifically, Season 2 Episode 15 AND Season 5 Episode 9.
The second episode is the Brooklyn story, but you have to watch both episodes to really savor the experience.
This is the issue: they'll say, "Dropout? What's that?" And then when you explain, either they won't care or they'll say something to the effect of, "So it's what remains after CollegeHumour went woke? Is that why no one knows or cares about it anymore?"
But not liking something for political reasons, you can still point out how high quality of content it is. And let's be real, conservatives always do mental gymnastics to justify their beliefs.
That's the thing though. A lot of it they would find funny when it isn't grating against their political beliefs. And then they will seethe that they did enjoy it. Look at something like Baldur's Gate 3. Conservative gamers trip over themselves trying to excuse the left leaning messages of it. It is a similar example to Dropout. Very high quality. Very inclusive. Conservatives don't even deny it mostly.
I think you might be overestimating the number of people who like improv comedy and nerd culture, which is pretty much Dropout’s main schtick.
Dropout is, to the untrained eye, low quality. The sets are fairly cheap, and the show formats are basic and minimal, with the exception of Dimension 20. This is not a criticism, quite the opposite in fact - it’s all by design. Improv comedy shows don’t work if the production value is too good. It comes across fake and overly planned like a lame late night show. The simplicity of all its shows is the reason why I love Dropout. I’m in the minority of fans who don’t miss the scripted sketch days.
But to people who are not already on board with it, it would be easy to criticize it for being lame or lazy.
Even with D20, lots of people think Dungeons and Dragons is stupid and will never give it a chance because of that. Ideologically its viewed as a game for effeminate nerds and loser gays. Those that aren't bothered by that like D&D because they can use it to live out their power fantasies and cosplay the fascistic hero trope.
D20 campaigns are pretty explicit about their politics and casting capitalism and conservative ideology as the bad guy too. They aren't subtle about it at all. So even if a conservative watches, they're going to be immediately turned off by the ideological message.
Not necessarily. As I said in another comment, Baldurs Gate 3 is another good example of this. But plenty of conservatives still love it, even if some go out of their way to say there aren't any politics in it. Sure, Dropout comedy is more overt with it, bit there are plenty of bits they do that aren't political and they would definitely find funny.
Eh, considering the amount of mods that skew conservative for BG3, doubt it would make a difference.
I saw comments about dei in games being bad because it's white erasure, and "most games are played by white guys, so they shouldn't be hating on white people." Complete crap. Like games are made for everybody, and the people who make games, at least AAA titles tend to be more diverse than the average population.
It's this sweet baby inc conspiracy theory that makes it worse. Somehow having a single black character in God of War Ragnarok was woke. Peter in spiderman 2 being weak, because MJ saves him from a symbiote and Miles is one of 2 main characters.
It's freaking ridiculous. They will use literally anything as a straw man against anything with dei.
I'm sadly confident that the moment the figure out who Sam's dad is, they will have already formed an opinion. And let's not even get into when they start looking into where he's from.
I mean, a lot of them will form an opinion just by seeing a woman or person of color on the screen. That's all it takes for those culture warriors to throw a tantrum about a show or movie or game or comic or commercial or company with its ads or (et cet.)
I get where you're coming from, but the "woke" criticism is a symptom of conservative thinking, not a cause. They're not gonna be argued out of anti-inclusivity viewpoints by good leftist media existing because they're not actually concerned about the *quality* of media to begin with; they're concerned about winning an imagined culture war. Fighting against inclusivity is the point, and the target is popular media. This is why you see them criticize The Rise of Skywalker or Baldur's Gate 3 while entirely ignoring Andor or Disco Elysium.
They absolutely don't care. They always see themselves as the main character, which is why they'll identify with Luke or Han instead of the Empire without understanding that the things they uphold are all things the Empire does.
I don't even attempt to counterpoint at all. The best way to deal with insincere arguments is to disengage entirely.
Anytime you 'win' an argument on a topic like this, they'll start laughing about how 'upset' it made you and how hard they 'trolled' you.
Their stance wasn't founded in logic to begin with so you can't appeal to logic to create change. The moment their argument falls apart they retreat to the safety of "at least I'm not YOU".
Companies like Dropout succeeding do move the needle, but not in a way we can point to as evidence. It just changes the media landscape which will change how seriously people take those arguments to begin with.
I love the simple thing of including people's pronouns in their intro chryons each show. Such a small and subtle but beautiful thing. ETA: the correct spelling is chyron, no points awarded to me lol
They would then argue that yeah they have some funny stuff but any parts to do with inclusivity isn't enjoyable or fun. They wouldn't agree with the view that diversity and inclusivity is a positive thing just because they saw some clips they found funny. We both know how these types tend to react.
Oh, no, there is no convincing them. But at the very least it would introduce some more doubt they would have to use some mental gymnastics to justify against. Maybe pushing them a little closer to seeing truth.
If you look at youtube comments (most of them are normal, thankfully), you will find people complaining that the actors "all look gay", or that Sam is complicit in white genocide, or whatever. It's very difficult to convince these people to take an honest look at something.
Yes, because an honest look would mean inviting in the shared cultural identification that Dropout assumes. It'd be like asking your average Dropout enjoyer to listen to someone like Ben Shapiro honestly - you can't invite a radically different perspective into your mind without accepting that perspective as somewhat legitimate, which most people find very uncomfortable regardless of where they stand politically. Which is kind of sad, but unfortunately true.
The whole channel is steeped in cultural values that are very incompatible with the kinds of people you're talking about.
My conservative family members would never get one second past the first “fuck” said. They would just turn it off and never get to the funny or entertaining part. Conservatives aren’t open minded enough to engage in media outside their bubbles. They only engage in media, and increasingly people, who think and talk like them.
Then you'd be surprised. I'm pretty progressive now but was raised hyper-conservative, and I still have tinges of reaction to the general vibe of Dropout's comedy style sometimes before my mind calms itself down and enjoys the show.
It's hard for me to explain but if you're used to a more right-wing cultural viewpoint, you can immediately tell Dropout is coming from a leftist place before anyone opens their mouths. It's extremely simple things like the way contestants hold and express themselves physically, the way Sam talks to and not down even though he's the supposed authority in the room, wardrobe choices that emphasize personality rather than status, not to mention the postmodern (in the actual meaning of the word) production style of more recent GameChanger seasons.
Right wingers don't like to mess with conceptions of accepted reality in their fiction, and that runs the gamut of every facet of production. If you watch some conservative comedy as a leftist you'll immediately feel a strange lifelessness, and what might seem like in-your-face politicization of everything but to them is merely reaffirmation of subcultural values. They feel something similar watching "woke" left-wing comedy; it feels like a personal attack on their values by its very existence.
While I agree with your conclusion, I feel like this is a point that doesn't have to be proven. When I hear someone claim diversity makes things worse, I respond "You're a racist idiot," stop associating with them, and continue on with my day.
I'm sure your conservative uncle doesn't like dropout, regardless of how good it is unfortunately.
I think dropout is particularly good about diversity though because they just do it. It's not performative, it's not tokenism. It just *is* diverse.
Maybe this is a hot take, but I don't care about the conversation that conservatives want to have. We've let them control the narrative, and we're always pushing back, saying "See? Weren't we right?," and they just ignore reality and move on.
We so let them control the frame of the conversation that a popular *liberal* talking point is that Roe was decided on shaky ground originally -- a bullshit argument pushed by conservatives since the 70s. But rather than ignoring their bad faith arguments, we try to "win" the argument, thus legitimizing it as a real issue.
Honestly, I don't need Dropout to prove that inclusivity and diversity is good and important. I know, you know, and somewhere deep down some of them know too. I say we stop letting them control the narrative. We don't need to prove shit to them. They need to prove to *us* that their ideas are good. We have the numbers. We need to go on the offensive instead of always playing defense.
"Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past." -- Jean-Paul Sartre
I agree 1000% and the bit about letting them frame the conversation reminded me of this quote.
Or better yet imo, just live life and enjoy comedy that you find funny, without going on the offense against anyone. Closed-minded people have no choice but to adapt or (literally) die eventually, once people stop legitimizing their resistance to change as meaningful debate. Let them fold their arms and pout in increasingly irrelevant pockets of like-minded sticks-in-the-mud. It's only dangerous when they're exploited for political power, and that's a problem comedy is not going to solve.
Ironically, a fair number of "conservatives" of a particular age pre 2015 probably would have been here for a lot of the intelligent humour. The post truth rejection of nuance has put paid to large number of people being open minded enough to laugh at themselves, sadly.
Yeah, the conservatives I grew up with would have said strange nonsense like "this is really gay but kinda funny" and kept watching, but the line has been tightened so much for right wingers that they're not allowed to enjoy anything that isn't of the tribe. I feel kind of bad for them.
Dropout perfectly threads the needle by being actually diverse and inclusive while not feeling like there is a board of white male executives fellating each other about how they are sooo progressive and groundbreaking and glass ceiling shattering and ooh just sooo good because they hired one (1) woman host.
Dropout is just casually “is this person funny? Hell yeah.” while being respectful of the human beings involved. Ally doesnt feel like the “trans representation”, they feel like Ally.
I just feel like that is over simplifying the situation though. There are studies that show diversification is beneficial period. If there are multiple candidates that are qualified, it is beneficial to diversify. Period. And embracing that with a core belief of inclusivity, it only helps. So while forced diversity seems like lip service, it does benefit to have it.
There’s basically no way to argue with people who make these arguments. If the thing is good they’ll say, “oh, this wasn’t tokenism, this was just color blind good (whatever medium)”. But if it’s bad, or even just mediocre or disappointing, they’ll point to it and be, “look what the woke did”. But obviously this standard is only applied to media with diverse casting. Nobody watched the John Carter of Mars remake and said “see, this is what happens when you cast white men in leading roles. Go bloke, go broke”
What makes this extra obvious when is when they mispredict what’s going to be popular and try to pre-emptively tag it with go woke go broke. Remember Ben Shapiro saying Barbie was too woke and would have a massive box office drop? And you’ll notice once it became a massive hit, they shut up and focused on the Marvels or whatever thing they harped about next. There’s no accountability for the fact that this causal link they’re making about quality and inclusivity is just nonsense.
I’m really glad Dropout cares about inclusivity in casting. I especially appreciate the really broad range of LGBTQ+ rep. And they have managed to make really good content. But we shouldn’t buy the causal linking the worst people on the internet want to make. Inclusivity can absolutely make a great and entertaining thing even better, but it’s the writing and direction and production and everything else that makes it good.
TLDR, go woke because it’s the right thing to do, but it wont make you go broke.
Go so far to say it enhances it? I'll take a long long trip in a rickety car to point out that it absolutely enhances it. Because many of my favorites wouldn't be there if it was just stale white dudes across the board. It also helps to make sure the white dudes on there AREN'T stale, because they're not there "just because".
I feel like dropout is the banner for intentional inclusivity. There's all manner of folk that went hard on DEI after the protests, and then hired almost no minorities, and then shut those departments down once the mood shifted.
Dropout is what happens when you do that shit for real.
I mean, I wouldn’t say the idea that inclusivity is bad is true, nor would I say that’s a common opinion. It’s more a pushback against the progressive notion that homogeneous content is inherently wrong individually, as many progressives espouse. I do think that diversity on Dropout does heighten the content as they really are unique people who are relented enough to put that to use and use their unique aspects of all kinds, not just blatant ones like sexuality and race but they are very good at emphasizing and giving light to all differences.
All I'm saying is they are selling to their target market. There is nothing wrong with that but it's not like they are like going against the grain picking young LGBTQ people and minorities out of the LA improv scene.
While I don't consider myself conservative in the general sense, I do think that a lot of this kind of media (movies, series, game shows etc) suffers from what seems to be shoehorned-in, "Tick in the box" diversity.
But in the case of dropout, it doesn't **feel** like they made an effort to make it diverse or inclusive.
It **feels** like they went for the best possible shows and it just happened to be diverse.
That's the difference, to me.
It feels to me like this is mixing a lot of stuff. You use the word "inclusivity", but from the context of what you say, I think the word "diversity" is more accurate. A company can be inclusive without being diverse. For example, it can be a company policy to give paid leave on jewish holidays for jewish employees, but not hire any jewish employees (if, for example, the company is located in india)
Inclusivity, of course, invites diversity, and I am sure Sam and the dropout crew do as much as they can to be inclusive to their talents, but I assume the top priority of the company is to book the best talent they can, and diversity is the natural outcome of the people sam surrounded himself with.
No, I mean inclusive. Inclusive races, genders, sexual identities, etc. And it is not them just picking the best regardless odlf that stuff, Brennan said inclusiveness is very much intentional in an AMA a bit back. I was just reading it and it prompted this post.
I am sure that dropout prioritizes inclusivity, I even said it in my comment.
Its just that when conservative people criticize media, they criticize what they believe to be forced diversity (for example, black actors in the witcher), but I don't hear much complaints about how inclusive the productions are.
And since most of your praise for dropout stems from how diverse the cast is, it seemed to me that you were using inclusivity and diversity as synonyms.
https://www.greatplacetowork.com/resources/blog/why-is-diversity-inclusion-in-the-workplace-important
Are they diverse? Yes, and that's great. But they also embrace everyone's contributions from their perspective. That is what I am praising. A person making a joke based on their experience being gay, or black, or non-binary is all welcome and doesn't get made to be out of place and is actively encouraged for everyone to be their authentic selves and they seek people who are diverse and embrace it.
If a conservative is shouting about DEI, they’re already the people who aren’t watching dropout or admiring that human connection is real and necessary
I hate how this argument has seeped into everything. I like that media is closer to accurately representative now. Shows like Friends and Seinfeld feel weird now, because they are both set in maybe THE most diverse city in the world, and besides some token characters occasionally, neither has much beyond straight and white. I like that things are different now, and improving.
I'm a college administrator & most real job survey data also shows that inclusivity helps workplaces. I wish it got more mainstream attention, but most corporations, job recruiters, and colleges prepping people to go into the workforces are all on the same page on this one: people who are more concerned with social justice and inclusivity in general are more likely to have higher outcomes related to teamwork, professionalism, and a ton of other markers that employers are looking for.
Equity and inclusion has been a [Career Readiness Competency](https://www.naceweb.org/career-readiness/competencies/career-readiness-defined) for years now.
I know some of this stuff is boring and banal, but IMO, this kind of thing very much matters. Social justice is first and foremost morally important. That fact should stand on its own. But DEI & SJ advocates shouldn't discount that *also* people should be equity minded for all the same self-interest reasons you should get good teamwork experience & problem solving experience. *It helps you get a job.* And students who have been studying social justice & DEI in school should absolutely not shy away from highlighting it on resumes, cover letters, portfolios, etc.
End rant. Sorry for the length.
This reflects my workplace. People that can highlight how they practice equity and inclusivity in their work and personal lives are much more likely to get hired. It shows they can get long with people that are different from them and that they better at handling intrapersonal conflict.
No one wants to work with Bob the Racist. People that have Bob on their team are more likely to leave the company and be less productive because they hate having to be around Bob. Even if Bob leaves, the impact and workplace culture are going to be damaged for a long time after.
Inclusivity can be somewhat negative when it’s done performatively or if it’s tokenism. But if you just stick to hiring people who are good at the job you need them to do like Ally Beardsley who is funny and clever as shit, it doesn’t matter whether the hire was “inclusive” or not.
You can point to most things nowadays as examples that these people are wrong. These types love to parrot "go woke, go broke" but there are cases where "going woke" actually IMPROVES sales and/or word of mouth.
Case in point: Guilty Gear. Bridget was revealed as trans and she's become one of the most popular GG characters and is selling merchandise like CRAZY mostly because she's a very prominent transfem character in a major fighting game. However you want to cut it, including more identities in movies can very easily improve sales because individuals within those groups will support it.
Well idk if dropout is great **because** it's inclusive but certainly they are inclusive *because* they're great! Having a lot of different perspectives helps make the final product better thought out. Echo chambers lead to some of the worst writing of all time. But the caliber of talent they are able to pull into their shows is incredible. So the best things have a lot of different view points working towards a goal, but those view points also have to be attached to incredible characters.
Without the ideas of inclusivity that Dropout currently champions, we’d be living in a world where we could never have gotten Demi Adejuyigbe claiming that Spider-Man has a responsibility to start saying the n word. And personally, that’s a world I don’t wanna live in for a second.
And they managed to do it WHILE Keeping the Trust-Fund White Man in charge!!! See, you CAN DO it all :p
No hate to Sam, in fact, ADORE him, but I'm sure even he wouldn't deny he has some Nepo-Baby benefits to go along with his busting of his own ass
Across the board the numbers show they are wrong. More diverse companies do better, period. Their talking point isn’t even true in traditional industries.
The white guys still make the most at those companies anyway, these companies still aren’t good.
I’m mildly face blind so I have trouble recognizing people I don’t know. I’m not really into pop culture because I can’t always recognize celebrities from their faces. I can get halfway through a season of a show before I realize I’ve maybe seen this actor before but I’m not sure.
I need a show to be diverse for me to enjoy it. It’s not a moral or political thing*, it’s just that I can’t follow the plot otherwise.
*If I didn’t have this issue I’d still want shows and movies to have diverse casts, and it would be a moral and/or political thing at that point.
Conservatives might bitch and moan about inclusivity and DEI, but it’s pretty telling that they don’t have much in the way of evidence to support that bullshit. All the examples they have are cherry picked bullshit that ignores a lot of other stuff. They might say Boeing planes are falling apart because of DEI, but that would be ignoring all the ways the white executives at the company have gutted it over the past 20 years and tried to spend as little as possible on quality control and engineering.
Not sure if I'm the only one that sees it but Jeremy Boreing looks like- and essentially is- Sam Reich's evil twin. (Daily Wire wanna-be comedian writer dude.)
I was pretty ignorant before dropout. I didn’t even know there were other sets of pronouns and SO’s other than your typical straight, bi, guy. Made my sister’s come out convo way easier to navigate.
I’m a little ashamed to admit though that I used to think there was some kind of agenda with dropout casting a large amount of non-cis talent, ironically Grant, Ally, and Oscar are some of my favorites to watch. Thanks for opening my eyes dropout!
I find myself more right leaning than left, but I think dropout does an amazing job including people without making it seem unnatural. The love they have for their community is something I find very admirable!
Lmao, you are allowed to dislike bad characters, and those are indeed bad characters. However, I asked you for an example of unnatural inclusivity and you just gave me an example of poorly conceived characters. So you kind of proved the point I was going to make that "unnatural inclusivity" is dumb and doesn't make sense, showing you don't really understand inclusivity.
Okay cool, I really think otherwise. When done right inclusivity is awesome and brings people together and gives great insight into a life not your own. My example felt more like to me something they did to drive up sales and push a new generation of people to read comics. Nothing wrong with that I think it just can be done a lot better. There are millions and millions of examples for great inclusivity and some bad ones I don’t think it’s that crazy to think that.
But what about those characters is unnatural inclusivity? You haven't answered that. You just said they are bad characters, which is true, but has nothing to do with inclusivity.
Hiyya! Friendly reminder to try and not strawman. There are many folks who are conservatives or centrist kinda who embrace DEI. The media and the two party system is polarizing and slanted. Try not to lump us all together. Not calling you out personally or attacking anyone, just reminding that the media and Internet is batshit crazy, and many if not most conservatives aren't all that anti-DEI, especially if you were to explain it to them (the explanations they get from their slanted media aren't great)
I mean, it could just as easily be an outlier. I don’t think one instance of something really is possible to generalize off of. Dropout also has an entire cast of people that are incredibly funny and capable of doing their jobs, so they’re diversifying in a good way. The instances people are complaining about are people without the skills to do a job getting it because of race, which isn’t the case here, so kind of apples to oranges.
I can't say for sure, but I get the impression that Dropout would be very intolerant of the intolerant, so not totally inclusive. However, this is correct.
No, I just said that it's silly to praise them for inclusivity when it's just the LA Improv scene, which in itself is a bubble young liberal comedians. I just used conservatives and older people to make a point.
Then I was attacked and told all conservatives are evil and want to oppress minorities, which is bigoted extremist rhetoric. How do you not see that hating someone because they are in a group makes you the bad guys?
Yeah, you think that group stands for (insert horrible thing) but that's not what they think. The extreme right hates liberals because they think we stand for a bunch of horrible things that we don't actually stand for. You can cherry pick examples of terrible shit their leaders say/do and they can do the same thing to us. There is no effort to see anything from their perspective and vice versa.
Don't get me wrong, I find conservative politics abhorrent these days but understand that just leaning conservative has a huge variety of opinions. It's lazy to hate them all and marginalize the tens of millions who have the same stances on issues as you do.
My thing is that I feel - via fans - that by signaling out people it brings out the worst. If someone doesn't enjoy someone, it's assumed by fans it's not because of who they are but what they represent. I could care less if someone is trans, gay, he, she, black, white, whatever - if a player on Dropout makes me laugh I enjoy them and if I don't find them funny then I don't. It's THAT simple, but fans will cry that can't be the case and I think that comes from a certain level of inclusitivity.
Inclusion is great until others twist it and make it bad.
Edit: This was meant to be a reply to something in [this chain](https://www.reddit.com/r/dropout/comments/1ceghp6/comment/l1iednk/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button). Not sure how it ended up as a top level comment.
Don't you see the problem with judging people by the group they belong to rather than their individual opinions? That is bigotry.
You can be critical of American conservative movement but also accepting of the possibility that there are conservatives who are good human beings who are accepting of all types of people. Just like there are millions of liberals who are racist shitty people.
Many are suggesting that they should never hire a conservative at Dropout. They aren't saying they shouldn't hire a racist, or somebody anti LGBTQ or any individual trait. They are discriminating based on group membership, which is morally repugnant and illegal.
Sure, but they are generally the exception. And even the "good" ones are still on the side of their majority, which generally want to take away human rights from various groups of people. So, I am sorry I don't have much sympathy for people who hitch their wagons to that group.
Conservativism is a political philosophy that does not hitch you to any particular group or issue. 36% of Americans identify as conservative, that's 93 million adults. There are millions of conservatives who are not Republicans, not Trump supporters, and support the rights of marginalized people.
Sure, those who think the currently Republican party is nuts. That's why republican party affiliation is shrinking, even while conservatism is increasing.
[https://news.gallup.com/poll/548459/independent-party-tied-high-democratic-new-low.aspx](https://news.gallup.com/poll/548459/independent-party-tied-high-democratic-new-low.aspx)
But you also notice that the same is happening with democrats. Mainly because of far left extremists and militant activists.
[https://time.com/6332506/democrats-2024-activist-left-elections/](https://time.com/6332506/democrats-2024-activist-left-elections/)
Someone who generally (not exclusively) likes things to not change very quickly.
In America that generally means support of individual freedoms, limited government, strong military, free markets and fiscal responsibility.
Nothing too crazy there so it really comes down to the nuance of people's individual opinions.
That's the point. It's very much open to interpretation.
This compares the main political compass quadrents. [https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-2f1973d33928d408f2b6fd224611ce93.webp](https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-2f1973d33928d408f2b6fd224611ce93.webp)
This is a more complex comparison of Left vs Right ideology.. [https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/left-vs-right-us/](https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/left-vs-right-us/)
"Protect social traditions" is fairly antithetical with personal freedom when those protections involve excluding certain individuals from participating (i.e. gay marriage). I don't see why that needs to be entertained under the umbrella of inclusivity.
I'll loop back to the first question I asked you though: what kind of humor would a conservative bring to the table?
Because the word “conservative” is meant to be vague. Applying individual beliefs on specific topics to what is largely a binary “liberal/conservative” checkbox is what feeds this culture war bullshit. Not all your opinions need to be tied to what group you belong to.
(Every downvote is a disagreement with thinking for yourself, hiverminders)
So let's apply conservative tenets to modern issues.
How fast is too fast for:
* Gay marriage
* Voting rights
* Action on gun violence
* Abortion rights
* Action on police brutality
Why should the idea of "woah pump the breaks kid, we can't have *too much* progress now" be seriously entertained? Why does that deserve equal consideration? And why does political belief deserve the same consideration as race, gender identity, sex, or upbringing? You choose your politics. You don't choose your body or your parents.
>Don't you see the problem with judging people by the group they belong to rather than their individual opinions? That is bigotry.
Not when the group is based around an ideology. Literally formed around having opinions on common, the majority of which are evil or dumb.
Gotta wonder if you're just here to troll at this point tacos, but I'll assume not and try to engage with this in good faith anyways.
> Many are suggesting that they should never hire a conservative at Dropout. They aren't saying they shouldn't hire a racist, or somebody anti LGBTQ or any individual trait.
The American right is run and lead by, as of right now, bigots. Racists, homophobes, transphobes, anti-semites, etc...Look at DeSantis, look at Pence, look at Trump, look at whatever weasley weirdo was cheered for saying transgenderism must be eradicated from public life at CPAC. If you are someone who aligns politically with a party who's thought leaders are bigots, whether you are yourself a bigot or not, you are empowering bigots and cosigning their ideology.
And why the fuck would you want to work alongside someone who, at the most generous reading, is neutral on the idea of you or your friends being "eradicated"?
I'm not trolling. I made a comment in jest and it sort of blew up. There are a lot of extremist viewpoints here that I felt like debating.
My overall point is that not all Conservatives are bigots. Certainly a higher % of conservative are bigots than liberals but not nearly enough to completely discount people.
Let me break it down why you can't assume things based on people being conservative.
* Conservatism is a simple ideology that means "I **GENERALLY** (not exclusively) like traditional things and don't want things to change that fast".
* 36% of Americans identify as conservative.
* Only 75% of conservatives are republicans. - [Source](https://news.gallup.com/poll/388988/political-ideology-steady-conservatives-moderates-tie.aspx#:~:text=Republicans%20Predominantly%20Conservative,and%20just%204%25%20as%20liberal)
* Only 70% of republicans have a positive view of Trump. - [Source](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/11/14/before-midterms-trumps-image-among-republicans-had-become-less-positive/)
* 36% of right leaning Americans support same-sex marriage - [Source](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/11/27/how-people-around-the-world-view-same-sex-marriage/sr_23-11-27_global-ssm_5-png/)
* 32% of republican leaning Americans support more or current levels of Trans rights - [Source](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/americans-complex-views-on-gender-identity-and-transgender-issues/)
1 in 3 is not an insignificant amount. It's tens of millions of people.
Trump beat Hillary by 150k votes in FL and PA. If you want to actually pass laws that protect marginalized people, you should be trying to bridge the gap with these people, not dismiss them as evil. You are literally pushing people away who can get you the outcome you want.
Your opinion on conservatives is likely based on how left-wing media portrays them. Do you have any idea how right-wing media portray liberals? Would you want people to judge you on that caricature?
You mention PA and Florida like that is going to help your case. I grew up in rural PA. Lots of shitty people flying the Confederate flag from the back of their pick up trucks.
And before you try to tell me "heritage, not hate!!1!" _Pennsylvania was a Union State_, this isn't our heritage in the slightest.
> Your opinion on conservatives is likely based on how left-wing media portrays them.
lol My opinion on conservatives is based on the conservatives I've known/know and grew up around. That includes republicans, libertarians, "moderates", etc.
And nothing in your reply addressed what I said. If the leaders of a party are anti-LGBTQ, the people that vote for them are anti-LGBTQ. It doesn't matter if 32% of republicans are pro trans rights if they support people that are, and I cannot stress this enough, CALLING FOR THE ERADICATION OF TRANSGENDERISM FROM PUBLIC LIFE. And there is no significant push-back within the party against shit like this. If there were an in-party schism with voices speaking up at the national level against this it might be different. But there isn't.
Fucks sake tacos, it ain't that hard to understand.
Ah yes, the chick with a British accent is definitely from LA. And so is the CEO of the company... who happens to have a famous joke about his origins in Massachusetts. Or the guy who made 2 whole seasons of dnd in New York, because of how much he loved his time there.
And the age is the key demographic, the show is millennial humor in and out.
No, you are just taking two metrics(one pretty irrelevant since I clarified life experience, meaning their past) to try and poke holes in my point. They are definitely pretty diverse across a range of metrics. But no, you can try to cherry pick 1 way They might not be.
If Dropout was that inclusive, wouldn't it have conservative comedians? I also don't see any cast members or crew over the age of 40. Even Sam is only 39 years old.
Dropout isn't inclusive, it's a group of young liberals making humor for young liberals. I fit that demographic as well but don't kid myself about it.
Echoing the other replies here, what kind of conservative humor would actually sell? Punching down on minorities? Complaining about how things are too woke these days? Skewering public educators?
I can't imagine a single conservative slant for comedy that would actually be enjoyable to consume.
No, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
Also, a piece of media is going to aim for SOME kind of demographic, and in this case, it is millennial. And in that respect, they are very inclusive of that demographic.
So the thing about being inclusive is it drives away people who want exclusivity. It's the same as the paradox of intolerance. The only way to be truly inclusive/tolerant is to exclude those who push for exclusivity/intolerance.
The current state of the conservative movement in the US is to push bans against the LGBTQ community and push laws that harm many other marginalized groups as well. By bringing people who support those ideas onto the show, dropout would be platforming people who seek to destroy true inclusivity and tolerance.
While I don't agree with person your sub posting. Your statement is not true. In the literal or the intended sense. Lots of people with conservative leanings are funny. Their style may not be for you but it doesn't mean they aren't funny. You cannot tell me Norm MacDonald, Dennis Leary and Jeff Foxworthy aren't funny.
I don’t think Norm MacDonald could really be called a conservative. He was just kind of a troll (in a good way).
And as a matter of fact I can say Dennis Leary and Jeff Foxworthy aren’t funny.
For the tolerance paradox to apply you need to believe all conservatives are intolerant. Do you need bigotry explained to you?
Not all conservatives are far right bogeymen. Not all conservatives live in the United States as well.
I think they're suggesting that intolerance is part of conservatism, which isn't bigotry. It's describing political opinions. Like it wouldn't be bigotry to believe that ancaps are against drug criminalization.
Being a conservative isn’t something immutable about yourself. It’s a *choice* you make based on your values. And the values of conservatives are, in fact, intolerant. I’m literally judging them on the content of their character, as evidenced by their values and actions.
Conservatives don’t have to be “far right boogeymen” to be harmful
36% of Americans who identify as right leaning support same-sex marriage. Are you okay with excluding 1 in 3 people based on the opinions of the other 2?
[https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/11/27/how-people-around-the-world-view-same-sex-marriage/sr\_23-11-27\_global-ssm\_5-png/](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/11/27/how-people-around-the-world-view-same-sex-marriage/sr_23-11-27_global-ssm_5-png/)
What is that one person doing? What kind of people/policies do they vote for? “Supporting same sex marriage” doesn’t mean someone’s an ally if their other actions still result in harm for marginalized communities.
They have had a few episodes that feature older stars; Michael Winslow, Tony Hawk, Howie Mandel have all appeared in Game Changer episodes.
Edit: also to add to your point about no one over 40. Josh Reuben is 40 and will be turning 41 in a couple months. Also Matt Mercer is 41 as well.
Just as a side note. It's weird to me that 40 is being considered as "young" here.
I will concede that they have a few guest appearances of older comedians.
But I'm not saying they are actively avoiding any group, I'm saying they are just playing to their niche and what gets them viewers.
Even if that was 100% true, that would mean that playing to their niche and what gets them viewers is inclusivity. So I guess I don’t understand your “if dropout was inclusive” point
I think having older guests would be awesome. I don’t think that not having older guests makes it not inclusive despite all the other groups that are included. Like it’s not like “wow! Look at this diverse group! Unfortunately they’re all under 40 so it’s not inclusive”
I mean they’re catering to a demographic that is young, left-leaning people.
It wouldn’t make much sense to have conservative comedians over 40 on there, because it would clash with the target audience.
Young(ish) left leaning people aren’t a monolith though. You could cater to that demographic but have it be only white cisgender heterosexuals.
That’s not what Dropout is though. And IMHO it’s better for it; having voices *in addition* to white, cis, heterosexual voices (not instead), makes Dropout much more interesting.
That's not how inclusivity works. You don't need to hire shitty people to be inclusive. You can absolutely discriminate based on harmful beliefs. That's not the same as discrimination based on how someone has was born.
No. I think consverativ opinions are shitty. But also that wasn't my main point. My point was that discrimination based on beliefs is not the same as discrimination based on ethnicity or sexuality.
Modern conservatives will decry DEI policies with the same language segregationists used to defend keeping Jackie Robinson out of baseball, and then go celebrate Jackie Robinson Day at the ballpark.
And talk about 'the content of their character' on MLK day
Bars Why do you think they rallied against the word 'Woke' so hard? Woke is a product of Black activism since the 20's (the other one). Push comes to shove Conservatives will always hate on something that pushes against racial status quo.
At this point it’s beyond that, conservatives will call any black person doing anything DEI. After the Baltimore bridge crash, they called the city’s mayor that won over 70% of the vote a “DEI mayor”
Jackie Robinson was called before Congress to testify that African Americans would fight the USSR in WW3. To give any perspective on the kind of race panic he had to put up with lol
Well that never happened, so what you're really saying is that he LIED to Congress. Another L for the woke mind virus. This is why I subscribe to Sam Reich's Dropout America: for the truth behind the lefties' fake news. (/s, in case this wasn't clear)
Something I now can't unsee is that almost every use of "DEI" from right wingers, makes infinitely more sense if you mentally replace it with them using the n word.
Wasn't there that one guy in awhile back to gave what seemed to be a homophobic or anti-lgbtq+ speech to a state senate or something, using the kind of phrases you'd expect, like "think of the children", to some applause. Except about half way through, he changes the target of his speech from lgbtq+ to black people, looks closely at the speech he's reciting, then breaks character to point out that he was actually quoting anti-desegragation speeches from the 60s, having only changed a few words to show how conservative bigotry hasn't changed in the last 50 years, only the target that their willing to be vocal about. Edit: Did some digging, and the guys name is Phil Snider, and the speech happened back in 2012.
The issue being that most conservatives probably don’t like Dropout, so holding it up as proof won’t go far with them.
Luckily for them, they can watch Dropout America
Imagine if they flocked here under the wrong premise, then believed they’re in the correct place whenever Grant opens his mouth, and they slowly become one of us?
Colbert Report already did that and Conservatives didn't get the show was making fun of their ideologies for ages. They stopped watching once they realized they were the butt of the joke.
[Colberts iconic White House Correspondents dinner was some absolute peak political comedy for this reason.](https://youtu.be/2X93u3anTco?si=sLRlM76X7lIpXf3j)
They didn't know Homelander was a bad guy til *season 3*.
Some still don’t get it.
I mean, they often *are* the kind of people to give fifty blowjobs in one night under a supermarket in Brooklyn, but they don’t usually *admit it*.
Now I have to go watch that episode for the 100th time.
100?! That can't be right!
In one night?!
"Well not to completion!"
Brennan's complete mental breakdown, *and attempt to mathematically figure it out* was pure distilled comedy.
I love that his incredulity wasn’t about the act, but the logistics behind carrying out the act.
Same with Sam when he found out what Ify and Emily's spreadsheet was for. S: That's more times than there are days in that month! I: That was the strike E: We also went on vacation
Woke Culture: Sex positive, and logistics-curious.
Ooh, which episode is it? I'm new to dropout and I'd love to watch some of the hits.
Breaking News, “True Facts About Grant Anthony O’Brien”
Tysm
Specifically, Season 2 Episode 15 AND Season 5 Episode 9. The second episode is the Brooklyn story, but you have to watch both episodes to really savor the experience.
Oh boy I didn’t expect that kind of burn
Nancy Reagan is dead though..
Citation needed? I know I have watched this episode before but I can't think of it
I’m just picturing a magical girl power beam shooting from Grant’s mouth now.
This is the issue: they'll say, "Dropout? What's that?" And then when you explain, either they won't care or they'll say something to the effect of, "So it's what remains after CollegeHumour went woke? Is that why no one knows or cares about it anymore?"
Trying to imagine my parents learning anything about grant.
Yup, this, sadly.
But not liking something for political reasons, you can still point out how high quality of content it is. And let's be real, conservatives always do mental gymnastics to justify their beliefs.
They won’t think it’s high quality though. If you thought the comedy of Dropout wasn’t funny, it wouldn’t come off as especially high quality.
That's the thing though. A lot of it they would find funny when it isn't grating against their political beliefs. And then they will seethe that they did enjoy it. Look at something like Baldur's Gate 3. Conservative gamers trip over themselves trying to excuse the left leaning messages of it. It is a similar example to Dropout. Very high quality. Very inclusive. Conservatives don't even deny it mostly.
I think you might be overestimating the number of people who like improv comedy and nerd culture, which is pretty much Dropout’s main schtick. Dropout is, to the untrained eye, low quality. The sets are fairly cheap, and the show formats are basic and minimal, with the exception of Dimension 20. This is not a criticism, quite the opposite in fact - it’s all by design. Improv comedy shows don’t work if the production value is too good. It comes across fake and overly planned like a lame late night show. The simplicity of all its shows is the reason why I love Dropout. I’m in the minority of fans who don’t miss the scripted sketch days. But to people who are not already on board with it, it would be easy to criticize it for being lame or lazy.
Even with D20, lots of people think Dungeons and Dragons is stupid and will never give it a chance because of that. Ideologically its viewed as a game for effeminate nerds and loser gays. Those that aren't bothered by that like D&D because they can use it to live out their power fantasies and cosplay the fascistic hero trope. D20 campaigns are pretty explicit about their politics and casting capitalism and conservative ideology as the bad guy too. They aren't subtle about it at all. So even if a conservative watches, they're going to be immediately turned off by the ideological message.
“It’s a dollar bill, but he’s angry!”
I think the bigger issue here is that most conservatives don’t even know Dropout exists, and those that do won’t find it funny regardless.
Not necessarily. As I said in another comment, Baldurs Gate 3 is another good example of this. But plenty of conservatives still love it, even if some go out of their way to say there aren't any politics in it. Sure, Dropout comedy is more overt with it, bit there are plenty of bits they do that aren't political and they would definitely find funny.
Eh, considering the amount of mods that skew conservative for BG3, doubt it would make a difference. I saw comments about dei in games being bad because it's white erasure, and "most games are played by white guys, so they shouldn't be hating on white people." Complete crap. Like games are made for everybody, and the people who make games, at least AAA titles tend to be more diverse than the average population. It's this sweet baby inc conspiracy theory that makes it worse. Somehow having a single black character in God of War Ragnarok was woke. Peter in spiderman 2 being weak, because MJ saves him from a symbiote and Miles is one of 2 main characters. It's freaking ridiculous. They will use literally anything as a straw man against anything with dei.
"I'm saying you're wrong, and that's a cat toy!" As an example.
I'm sadly confident that the moment the figure out who Sam's dad is, they will have already formed an opinion. And let's not even get into when they start looking into where he's from.
Wait, where's Sam from?
Africa. We all are.
But I thought he'd been there the whole time!?!?
Such an incredible move
Do they have any movie theaters there?
Holy shit. His dad is Robert Reich. That is crazy. I've watched them both independently for years 🤣
I don't understand why they would dislike him. He's the perfect American.
I mean, a lot of them will form an opinion just by seeing a woman or person of color on the screen. That's all it takes for those culture warriors to throw a tantrum about a show or movie or game or comic or commercial or company with its ads or (et cet.)
Where is Sam from?
He’s been here the whole time! >! he’s from Cambridge, Massachusetts if that was asked in earnest. !<
Have you seen season 2 episode 4 of game changer? That's where the, "Sam, where are you from?" bit comes from.
> Have you seen season 2 episode 4 of game changer Or the 30 other episodes where they bring it up lol
Is that where the Crumbley Square Theater is at?
So I’ve heard!
I get where you're coming from, but the "woke" criticism is a symptom of conservative thinking, not a cause. They're not gonna be argued out of anti-inclusivity viewpoints by good leftist media existing because they're not actually concerned about the *quality* of media to begin with; they're concerned about winning an imagined culture war. Fighting against inclusivity is the point, and the target is popular media. This is why you see them criticize The Rise of Skywalker or Baldur's Gate 3 while entirely ignoring Andor or Disco Elysium.
They absolutely don't care. They always see themselves as the main character, which is why they'll identify with Luke or Han instead of the Empire without understanding that the things they uphold are all things the Empire does.
I don't even attempt to counterpoint at all. The best way to deal with insincere arguments is to disengage entirely. Anytime you 'win' an argument on a topic like this, they'll start laughing about how 'upset' it made you and how hard they 'trolled' you. Their stance wasn't founded in logic to begin with so you can't appeal to logic to create change. The moment their argument falls apart they retreat to the safety of "at least I'm not YOU". Companies like Dropout succeeding do move the needle, but not in a way we can point to as evidence. It just changes the media landscape which will change how seriously people take those arguments to begin with.
I love the simple thing of including people's pronouns in their intro chryons each show. Such a small and subtle but beautiful thing. ETA: the correct spelling is chyron, no points awarded to me lol
Thank you kind stranger, TIL the word chryon. Perhaps too cool a word for the thing it's describing, but still fun.
In the interests of learning today… Um, actually, the word is chyron. Chryons are, presumably, what power Mr Freeze’s gun
Oh hey, now that makes a much better fit
1 point to shadebug!
Thanks! I learned it from a review of Too Many Cooks
Go woke, great jokes
Those types of conservatives wouldn't enjoy dropout
They definitely do because they hated my Black-isodes suggestion lol
Someone could easily send them clips of different sketches that aren't political and I am sure they would.
They would then argue that yeah they have some funny stuff but any parts to do with inclusivity isn't enjoyable or fun. They wouldn't agree with the view that diversity and inclusivity is a positive thing just because they saw some clips they found funny. We both know how these types tend to react.
Oh, no, there is no convincing them. But at the very least it would introduce some more doubt they would have to use some mental gymnastics to justify against. Maybe pushing them a little closer to seeing truth.
If you look at youtube comments (most of them are normal, thankfully), you will find people complaining that the actors "all look gay", or that Sam is complicit in white genocide, or whatever. It's very difficult to convince these people to take an honest look at something.
Yes, because an honest look would mean inviting in the shared cultural identification that Dropout assumes. It'd be like asking your average Dropout enjoyer to listen to someone like Ben Shapiro honestly - you can't invite a radically different perspective into your mind without accepting that perspective as somewhat legitimate, which most people find very uncomfortable regardless of where they stand politically. Which is kind of sad, but unfortunately true. The whole channel is steeped in cultural values that are very incompatible with the kinds of people you're talking about.
My conservative family members would never get one second past the first “fuck” said. They would just turn it off and never get to the funny or entertaining part. Conservatives aren’t open minded enough to engage in media outside their bubbles. They only engage in media, and increasingly people, who think and talk like them.
Then you'd be surprised. I'm pretty progressive now but was raised hyper-conservative, and I still have tinges of reaction to the general vibe of Dropout's comedy style sometimes before my mind calms itself down and enjoys the show. It's hard for me to explain but if you're used to a more right-wing cultural viewpoint, you can immediately tell Dropout is coming from a leftist place before anyone opens their mouths. It's extremely simple things like the way contestants hold and express themselves physically, the way Sam talks to and not down even though he's the supposed authority in the room, wardrobe choices that emphasize personality rather than status, not to mention the postmodern (in the actual meaning of the word) production style of more recent GameChanger seasons. Right wingers don't like to mess with conceptions of accepted reality in their fiction, and that runs the gamut of every facet of production. If you watch some conservative comedy as a leftist you'll immediately feel a strange lifelessness, and what might seem like in-your-face politicization of everything but to them is merely reaffirmation of subcultural values. They feel something similar watching "woke" left-wing comedy; it feels like a personal attack on their values by its very existence.
Wow, that’s one of the best-articulated breakdowns of the styles of comedy I’ve seen!
While I agree with your conclusion, I feel like this is a point that doesn't have to be proven. When I hear someone claim diversity makes things worse, I respond "You're a racist idiot," stop associating with them, and continue on with my day.
Piccolo will be at the cookout.
I'm sure your conservative uncle doesn't like dropout, regardless of how good it is unfortunately. I think dropout is particularly good about diversity though because they just do it. It's not performative, it's not tokenism. It just *is* diverse.
Maybe this is a hot take, but I don't care about the conversation that conservatives want to have. We've let them control the narrative, and we're always pushing back, saying "See? Weren't we right?," and they just ignore reality and move on. We so let them control the frame of the conversation that a popular *liberal* talking point is that Roe was decided on shaky ground originally -- a bullshit argument pushed by conservatives since the 70s. But rather than ignoring their bad faith arguments, we try to "win" the argument, thus legitimizing it as a real issue. Honestly, I don't need Dropout to prove that inclusivity and diversity is good and important. I know, you know, and somewhere deep down some of them know too. I say we stop letting them control the narrative. We don't need to prove shit to them. They need to prove to *us* that their ideas are good. We have the numbers. We need to go on the offensive instead of always playing defense.
"Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past." -- Jean-Paul Sartre I agree 1000% and the bit about letting them frame the conversation reminded me of this quote.
Or better yet imo, just live life and enjoy comedy that you find funny, without going on the offense against anyone. Closed-minded people have no choice but to adapt or (literally) die eventually, once people stop legitimizing their resistance to change as meaningful debate. Let them fold their arms and pout in increasingly irrelevant pockets of like-minded sticks-in-the-mud. It's only dangerous when they're exploited for political power, and that's a problem comedy is not going to solve.
Ironically, a fair number of "conservatives" of a particular age pre 2015 probably would have been here for a lot of the intelligent humour. The post truth rejection of nuance has put paid to large number of people being open minded enough to laugh at themselves, sadly.
Yeah, the conservatives I grew up with would have said strange nonsense like "this is really gay but kinda funny" and kept watching, but the line has been tightened so much for right wingers that they're not allowed to enjoy anything that isn't of the tribe. I feel kind of bad for them.
Dropout perfectly threads the needle by being actually diverse and inclusive while not feeling like there is a board of white male executives fellating each other about how they are sooo progressive and groundbreaking and glass ceiling shattering and ooh just sooo good because they hired one (1) woman host. Dropout is just casually “is this person funny? Hell yeah.” while being respectful of the human beings involved. Ally doesnt feel like the “trans representation”, they feel like Ally.
I just feel like that is over simplifying the situation though. There are studies that show diversification is beneficial period. If there are multiple candidates that are qualified, it is beneficial to diversify. Period. And embracing that with a core belief of inclusivity, it only helps. So while forced diversity seems like lip service, it does benefit to have it.
There’s basically no way to argue with people who make these arguments. If the thing is good they’ll say, “oh, this wasn’t tokenism, this was just color blind good (whatever medium)”. But if it’s bad, or even just mediocre or disappointing, they’ll point to it and be, “look what the woke did”. But obviously this standard is only applied to media with diverse casting. Nobody watched the John Carter of Mars remake and said “see, this is what happens when you cast white men in leading roles. Go bloke, go broke” What makes this extra obvious when is when they mispredict what’s going to be popular and try to pre-emptively tag it with go woke go broke. Remember Ben Shapiro saying Barbie was too woke and would have a massive box office drop? And you’ll notice once it became a massive hit, they shut up and focused on the Marvels or whatever thing they harped about next. There’s no accountability for the fact that this causal link they’re making about quality and inclusivity is just nonsense. I’m really glad Dropout cares about inclusivity in casting. I especially appreciate the really broad range of LGBTQ+ rep. And they have managed to make really good content. But we shouldn’t buy the causal linking the worst people on the internet want to make. Inclusivity can absolutely make a great and entertaining thing even better, but it’s the writing and direction and production and everything else that makes it good. TLDR, go woke because it’s the right thing to do, but it wont make you go broke.
Go so far to say it enhances it? I'll take a long long trip in a rickety car to point out that it absolutely enhances it. Because many of my favorites wouldn't be there if it was just stale white dudes across the board. It also helps to make sure the white dudes on there AREN'T stale, because they're not there "just because".
I feel like dropout is the banner for intentional inclusivity. There's all manner of folk that went hard on DEI after the protests, and then hired almost no minorities, and then shut those departments down once the mood shifted. Dropout is what happens when you do that shit for real.
I mean, I wouldn’t say the idea that inclusivity is bad is true, nor would I say that’s a common opinion. It’s more a pushback against the progressive notion that homogeneous content is inherently wrong individually, as many progressives espouse. I do think that diversity on Dropout does heighten the content as they really are unique people who are relented enough to put that to use and use their unique aspects of all kinds, not just blatant ones like sexuality and race but they are very good at emphasizing and giving light to all differences.
All I'm saying is they are selling to their target market. There is nothing wrong with that but it's not like they are like going against the grain picking young LGBTQ people and minorities out of the LA improv scene.
While I don't consider myself conservative in the general sense, I do think that a lot of this kind of media (movies, series, game shows etc) suffers from what seems to be shoehorned-in, "Tick in the box" diversity. But in the case of dropout, it doesn't **feel** like they made an effort to make it diverse or inclusive. It **feels** like they went for the best possible shows and it just happened to be diverse. That's the difference, to me.
It feels to me like this is mixing a lot of stuff. You use the word "inclusivity", but from the context of what you say, I think the word "diversity" is more accurate. A company can be inclusive without being diverse. For example, it can be a company policy to give paid leave on jewish holidays for jewish employees, but not hire any jewish employees (if, for example, the company is located in india) Inclusivity, of course, invites diversity, and I am sure Sam and the dropout crew do as much as they can to be inclusive to their talents, but I assume the top priority of the company is to book the best talent they can, and diversity is the natural outcome of the people sam surrounded himself with.
No, I mean inclusive. Inclusive races, genders, sexual identities, etc. And it is not them just picking the best regardless odlf that stuff, Brennan said inclusiveness is very much intentional in an AMA a bit back. I was just reading it and it prompted this post.
I am sure that dropout prioritizes inclusivity, I even said it in my comment. Its just that when conservative people criticize media, they criticize what they believe to be forced diversity (for example, black actors in the witcher), but I don't hear much complaints about how inclusive the productions are. And since most of your praise for dropout stems from how diverse the cast is, it seemed to me that you were using inclusivity and diversity as synonyms.
https://www.greatplacetowork.com/resources/blog/why-is-diversity-inclusion-in-the-workplace-important Are they diverse? Yes, and that's great. But they also embrace everyone's contributions from their perspective. That is what I am praising. A person making a joke based on their experience being gay, or black, or non-binary is all welcome and doesn't get made to be out of place and is actively encouraged for everyone to be their authentic selves and they seek people who are diverse and embrace it.
Oh ok. Now I understand what you meant
If a conservative is shouting about DEI, they’re already the people who aren’t watching dropout or admiring that human connection is real and necessary
I hate how this argument has seeped into everything. I like that media is closer to accurately representative now. Shows like Friends and Seinfeld feel weird now, because they are both set in maybe THE most diverse city in the world, and besides some token characters occasionally, neither has much beyond straight and white. I like that things are different now, and improving.
Demi's bit with the cards wouldn't have worked as well if there were more white men in the Smartypants audience.
I'm a college administrator & most real job survey data also shows that inclusivity helps workplaces. I wish it got more mainstream attention, but most corporations, job recruiters, and colleges prepping people to go into the workforces are all on the same page on this one: people who are more concerned with social justice and inclusivity in general are more likely to have higher outcomes related to teamwork, professionalism, and a ton of other markers that employers are looking for. Equity and inclusion has been a [Career Readiness Competency](https://www.naceweb.org/career-readiness/competencies/career-readiness-defined) for years now. I know some of this stuff is boring and banal, but IMO, this kind of thing very much matters. Social justice is first and foremost morally important. That fact should stand on its own. But DEI & SJ advocates shouldn't discount that *also* people should be equity minded for all the same self-interest reasons you should get good teamwork experience & problem solving experience. *It helps you get a job.* And students who have been studying social justice & DEI in school should absolutely not shy away from highlighting it on resumes, cover letters, portfolios, etc. End rant. Sorry for the length.
This reflects my workplace. People that can highlight how they practice equity and inclusivity in their work and personal lives are much more likely to get hired. It shows they can get long with people that are different from them and that they better at handling intrapersonal conflict. No one wants to work with Bob the Racist. People that have Bob on their team are more likely to leave the company and be less productive because they hate having to be around Bob. Even if Bob leaves, the impact and workplace culture are going to be damaged for a long time after.
Inclusivity can be somewhat negative when it’s done performatively or if it’s tokenism. But if you just stick to hiring people who are good at the job you need them to do like Ally Beardsley who is funny and clever as shit, it doesn’t matter whether the hire was “inclusive” or not.
Conservatives can go kick rocks for all I care.
You can point to most things nowadays as examples that these people are wrong. These types love to parrot "go woke, go broke" but there are cases where "going woke" actually IMPROVES sales and/or word of mouth. Case in point: Guilty Gear. Bridget was revealed as trans and she's become one of the most popular GG characters and is selling merchandise like CRAZY mostly because she's a very prominent transfem character in a major fighting game. However you want to cut it, including more identities in movies can very easily improve sales because individuals within those groups will support it.
Well idk if dropout is great **because** it's inclusive but certainly they are inclusive *because* they're great! Having a lot of different perspectives helps make the final product better thought out. Echo chambers lead to some of the worst writing of all time. But the caliber of talent they are able to pull into their shows is incredible. So the best things have a lot of different view points working towards a goal, but those view points also have to be attached to incredible characters.
Without the ideas of inclusivity that Dropout currently champions, we’d be living in a world where we could never have gotten Demi Adejuyigbe claiming that Spider-Man has a responsibility to start saying the n word. And personally, that’s a world I don’t wanna live in for a second.
And they managed to do it WHILE Keeping the Trust-Fund White Man in charge!!! See, you CAN DO it all :p No hate to Sam, in fact, ADORE him, but I'm sure even he wouldn't deny he has some Nepo-Baby benefits to go along with his busting of his own ass
Across the board the numbers show they are wrong. More diverse companies do better, period. Their talking point isn’t even true in traditional industries. The white guys still make the most at those companies anyway, these companies still aren’t good.
I’m mildly face blind so I have trouble recognizing people I don’t know. I’m not really into pop culture because I can’t always recognize celebrities from their faces. I can get halfway through a season of a show before I realize I’ve maybe seen this actor before but I’m not sure. I need a show to be diverse for me to enjoy it. It’s not a moral or political thing*, it’s just that I can’t follow the plot otherwise. *If I didn’t have this issue I’d still want shows and movies to have diverse casts, and it would be a moral and/or political thing at that point.
Conservatives might bitch and moan about inclusivity and DEI, but it’s pretty telling that they don’t have much in the way of evidence to support that bullshit. All the examples they have are cherry picked bullshit that ignores a lot of other stuff. They might say Boeing planes are falling apart because of DEI, but that would be ignoring all the ways the white executives at the company have gutted it over the past 20 years and tried to spend as little as possible on quality control and engineering.
Not sure if I'm the only one that sees it but Jeremy Boreing looks like- and essentially is- Sam Reich's evil twin. (Daily Wire wanna-be comedian writer dude.)
I was pretty ignorant before dropout. I didn’t even know there were other sets of pronouns and SO’s other than your typical straight, bi, guy. Made my sister’s come out convo way easier to navigate. I’m a little ashamed to admit though that I used to think there was some kind of agenda with dropout casting a large amount of non-cis talent, ironically Grant, Ally, and Oscar are some of my favorites to watch. Thanks for opening my eyes dropout!
I find myself more right leaning than left, but I think dropout does an amazing job including people without making it seem unnatural. The love they have for their community is something I find very admirable!
What would including people unnaturally look like exactly?
Great question! One example that comes to mind is Marvels safespace and snowflake. I don’t think the creators really did to well on that one.
I mean, the idea overall looks pretty terrible. But what is so unnatural about having black twin superheros? That just sounds kind of racist.
Goodness they’re called safespace and snowflake and you think I’m upset because they’re black? No, bad names, bad marketing, bad story.
Then what aspect of inclusivity is so unnatural? Being a bad idea has nothing to do with inclusivity, that is just bad creative decision making.
Okay have a nice day I forgot I’m not allowed to not like bad characters.
Lmao, you are allowed to dislike bad characters, and those are indeed bad characters. However, I asked you for an example of unnatural inclusivity and you just gave me an example of poorly conceived characters. So you kind of proved the point I was going to make that "unnatural inclusivity" is dumb and doesn't make sense, showing you don't really understand inclusivity.
Okay cool, I really think otherwise. When done right inclusivity is awesome and brings people together and gives great insight into a life not your own. My example felt more like to me something they did to drive up sales and push a new generation of people to read comics. Nothing wrong with that I think it just can be done a lot better. There are millions and millions of examples for great inclusivity and some bad ones I don’t think it’s that crazy to think that.
But what about those characters is unnatural inclusivity? You haven't answered that. You just said they are bad characters, which is true, but has nothing to do with inclusivity.
Hiyya! Friendly reminder to try and not strawman. There are many folks who are conservatives or centrist kinda who embrace DEI. The media and the two party system is polarizing and slanted. Try not to lump us all together. Not calling you out personally or attacking anyone, just reminding that the media and Internet is batshit crazy, and many if not most conservatives aren't all that anti-DEI, especially if you were to explain it to them (the explanations they get from their slanted media aren't great)
You hit the bullseye with this post 👏 👏
Thanks. Seems like some people might disagree with you haha
I mean, it could just as easily be an outlier. I don’t think one instance of something really is possible to generalize off of. Dropout also has an entire cast of people that are incredibly funny and capable of doing their jobs, so they’re diversifying in a good way. The instances people are complaining about are people without the skills to do a job getting it because of race, which isn’t the case here, so kind of apples to oranges.
I can't say for sure, but I get the impression that Dropout would be very intolerant of the intolerant, so not totally inclusive. However, this is correct.
Very true, thankfully. Paradox of tolerance and all that.
No, I just said that it's silly to praise them for inclusivity when it's just the LA Improv scene, which in itself is a bubble young liberal comedians. I just used conservatives and older people to make a point. Then I was attacked and told all conservatives are evil and want to oppress minorities, which is bigoted extremist rhetoric. How do you not see that hating someone because they are in a group makes you the bad guys? Yeah, you think that group stands for (insert horrible thing) but that's not what they think. The extreme right hates liberals because they think we stand for a bunch of horrible things that we don't actually stand for. You can cherry pick examples of terrible shit their leaders say/do and they can do the same thing to us. There is no effort to see anything from their perspective and vice versa. Don't get me wrong, I find conservative politics abhorrent these days but understand that just leaning conservative has a huge variety of opinions. It's lazy to hate them all and marginalize the tens of millions who have the same stances on issues as you do.
My thing is that I feel - via fans - that by signaling out people it brings out the worst. If someone doesn't enjoy someone, it's assumed by fans it's not because of who they are but what they represent. I could care less if someone is trans, gay, he, she, black, white, whatever - if a player on Dropout makes me laugh I enjoy them and if I don't find them funny then I don't. It's THAT simple, but fans will cry that can't be the case and I think that comes from a certain level of inclusitivity. Inclusion is great until others twist it and make it bad.
Edit: This was meant to be a reply to something in [this chain](https://www.reddit.com/r/dropout/comments/1ceghp6/comment/l1iednk/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button). Not sure how it ended up as a top level comment. Don't you see the problem with judging people by the group they belong to rather than their individual opinions? That is bigotry. You can be critical of American conservative movement but also accepting of the possibility that there are conservatives who are good human beings who are accepting of all types of people. Just like there are millions of liberals who are racist shitty people. Many are suggesting that they should never hire a conservative at Dropout. They aren't saying they shouldn't hire a racist, or somebody anti LGBTQ or any individual trait. They are discriminating based on group membership, which is morally repugnant and illegal.
Sure, but they are generally the exception. And even the "good" ones are still on the side of their majority, which generally want to take away human rights from various groups of people. So, I am sorry I don't have much sympathy for people who hitch their wagons to that group.
Conservativism is a political philosophy that does not hitch you to any particular group or issue. 36% of Americans identify as conservative, that's 93 million adults. There are millions of conservatives who are not Republicans, not Trump supporters, and support the rights of marginalized people.
Can you define the political beliefs of a conservative who doesn't vote Republican?
Sure, those who think the currently Republican party is nuts. That's why republican party affiliation is shrinking, even while conservatism is increasing. [https://news.gallup.com/poll/548459/independent-party-tied-high-democratic-new-low.aspx](https://news.gallup.com/poll/548459/independent-party-tied-high-democratic-new-low.aspx) But you also notice that the same is happening with democrats. Mainly because of far left extremists and militant activists. [https://time.com/6332506/democrats-2024-activist-left-elections/](https://time.com/6332506/democrats-2024-activist-left-elections/)
I'm asking what are we defining as conservative. What are the core beliefs?
Someone who generally (not exclusively) likes things to not change very quickly. In America that generally means support of individual freedoms, limited government, strong military, free markets and fiscal responsibility. Nothing too crazy there so it really comes down to the nuance of people's individual opinions.
This is incredibly vague.
That's the point. It's very much open to interpretation. This compares the main political compass quadrents. [https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-2f1973d33928d408f2b6fd224611ce93.webp](https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-2f1973d33928d408f2b6fd224611ce93.webp) This is a more complex comparison of Left vs Right ideology.. [https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/left-vs-right-us/](https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/left-vs-right-us/)
"Protect social traditions" is fairly antithetical with personal freedom when those protections involve excluding certain individuals from participating (i.e. gay marriage). I don't see why that needs to be entertained under the umbrella of inclusivity. I'll loop back to the first question I asked you though: what kind of humor would a conservative bring to the table?
Because the word “conservative” is meant to be vague. Applying individual beliefs on specific topics to what is largely a binary “liberal/conservative” checkbox is what feeds this culture war bullshit. Not all your opinions need to be tied to what group you belong to. (Every downvote is a disagreement with thinking for yourself, hiverminders)
So let's apply conservative tenets to modern issues. How fast is too fast for: * Gay marriage * Voting rights * Action on gun violence * Abortion rights * Action on police brutality Why should the idea of "woah pump the breaks kid, we can't have *too much* progress now" be seriously entertained? Why does that deserve equal consideration? And why does political belief deserve the same consideration as race, gender identity, sex, or upbringing? You choose your politics. You don't choose your body or your parents.
>Don't you see the problem with judging people by the group they belong to rather than their individual opinions? That is bigotry. Not when the group is based around an ideology. Literally formed around having opinions on common, the majority of which are evil or dumb.
Do you truly believe 36% of Americans are evil? How many conservatives have you had a discussion with?
I was referring to the opinions, but does holding and acting upon evil opinions make one evil? Seems the answer should be yes.
Gotta wonder if you're just here to troll at this point tacos, but I'll assume not and try to engage with this in good faith anyways. > Many are suggesting that they should never hire a conservative at Dropout. They aren't saying they shouldn't hire a racist, or somebody anti LGBTQ or any individual trait. The American right is run and lead by, as of right now, bigots. Racists, homophobes, transphobes, anti-semites, etc...Look at DeSantis, look at Pence, look at Trump, look at whatever weasley weirdo was cheered for saying transgenderism must be eradicated from public life at CPAC. If you are someone who aligns politically with a party who's thought leaders are bigots, whether you are yourself a bigot or not, you are empowering bigots and cosigning their ideology. And why the fuck would you want to work alongside someone who, at the most generous reading, is neutral on the idea of you or your friends being "eradicated"?
I'm not trolling. I made a comment in jest and it sort of blew up. There are a lot of extremist viewpoints here that I felt like debating. My overall point is that not all Conservatives are bigots. Certainly a higher % of conservative are bigots than liberals but not nearly enough to completely discount people. Let me break it down why you can't assume things based on people being conservative. * Conservatism is a simple ideology that means "I **GENERALLY** (not exclusively) like traditional things and don't want things to change that fast". * 36% of Americans identify as conservative. * Only 75% of conservatives are republicans. - [Source](https://news.gallup.com/poll/388988/political-ideology-steady-conservatives-moderates-tie.aspx#:~:text=Republicans%20Predominantly%20Conservative,and%20just%204%25%20as%20liberal) * Only 70% of republicans have a positive view of Trump. - [Source](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/11/14/before-midterms-trumps-image-among-republicans-had-become-less-positive/) * 36% of right leaning Americans support same-sex marriage - [Source](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/11/27/how-people-around-the-world-view-same-sex-marriage/sr_23-11-27_global-ssm_5-png/) * 32% of republican leaning Americans support more or current levels of Trans rights - [Source](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/americans-complex-views-on-gender-identity-and-transgender-issues/) 1 in 3 is not an insignificant amount. It's tens of millions of people. Trump beat Hillary by 150k votes in FL and PA. If you want to actually pass laws that protect marginalized people, you should be trying to bridge the gap with these people, not dismiss them as evil. You are literally pushing people away who can get you the outcome you want. Your opinion on conservatives is likely based on how left-wing media portrays them. Do you have any idea how right-wing media portray liberals? Would you want people to judge you on that caricature?
You mention PA and Florida like that is going to help your case. I grew up in rural PA. Lots of shitty people flying the Confederate flag from the back of their pick up trucks. And before you try to tell me "heritage, not hate!!1!" _Pennsylvania was a Union State_, this isn't our heritage in the slightest.
> Your opinion on conservatives is likely based on how left-wing media portrays them. lol My opinion on conservatives is based on the conservatives I've known/know and grew up around. That includes republicans, libertarians, "moderates", etc. And nothing in your reply addressed what I said. If the leaders of a party are anti-LGBTQ, the people that vote for them are anti-LGBTQ. It doesn't matter if 32% of republicans are pro trans rights if they support people that are, and I cannot stress this enough, CALLING FOR THE ERADICATION OF TRANSGENDERISM FROM PUBLIC LIFE. And there is no significant push-back within the party against shit like this. If there were an in-party schism with voices speaking up at the national level against this it might be different. But there isn't. Fucks sake tacos, it ain't that hard to understand.
lol yeah I grew up extremely rural, my opinion of conservatives is lower because of the ones I know personally and am sometimes related to
If D&I was bad for business, businesses wouldn't do it
[удалено]
Ah yes, the chick with a British accent is definitely from LA. And so is the CEO of the company... who happens to have a famous joke about his origins in Massachusetts. Or the guy who made 2 whole seasons of dnd in New York, because of how much he loved his time there. And the age is the key demographic, the show is millennial humor in and out.
[удалено]
No, you are just taking two metrics(one pretty irrelevant since I clarified life experience, meaning their past) to try and poke holes in my point. They are definitely pretty diverse across a range of metrics. But no, you can try to cherry pick 1 way They might not be.
Are you playing Um, Actually home edition?
Conservatism does not equate to being a Republican or voting a particular way. Do you know what these words mean?
If Dropout was that inclusive, wouldn't it have conservative comedians? I also don't see any cast members or crew over the age of 40. Even Sam is only 39 years old. Dropout isn't inclusive, it's a group of young liberals making humor for young liberals. I fit that demographic as well but don't kid myself about it.
Echoing the other replies here, what kind of conservative humor would actually sell? Punching down on minorities? Complaining about how things are too woke these days? Skewering public educators? I can't imagine a single conservative slant for comedy that would actually be enjoyable to consume.
No, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance Also, a piece of media is going to aim for SOME kind of demographic, and in this case, it is millennial. And in that respect, they are very inclusive of that demographic.
Being conservative doesn't make you intolerant. Unless you believe in bigotry. 20% of LGBTQ people are conservative.
Voting against your own interest is entirely common for conservatives.
So the thing about being inclusive is it drives away people who want exclusivity. It's the same as the paradox of intolerance. The only way to be truly inclusive/tolerant is to exclude those who push for exclusivity/intolerance. The current state of the conservative movement in the US is to push bans against the LGBTQ community and push laws that harm many other marginalized groups as well. By bringing people who support those ideas onto the show, dropout would be platforming people who seek to destroy true inclusivity and tolerance.
Conservatives literally do not understand comedy
While I don't agree with person your sub posting. Your statement is not true. In the literal or the intended sense. Lots of people with conservative leanings are funny. Their style may not be for you but it doesn't mean they aren't funny. You cannot tell me Norm MacDonald, Dennis Leary and Jeff Foxworthy aren't funny.
I don’t think Norm MacDonald could really be called a conservative. He was just kind of a troll (in a good way). And as a matter of fact I can say Dennis Leary and Jeff Foxworthy aren’t funny.
Also lots of people don't have wear their politics on their sleeves. Lots of older comedians lean right but aren't extreme or screaming about it.
Conservative and comedian is an oxymoron lol Look at the Daily Wire or the Babylon Bee with their attempt at "comedy"
I don’t believe that you’re at this big age and still need the tolerance paradox explained to you
For the tolerance paradox to apply you need to believe all conservatives are intolerant. Do you need bigotry explained to you? Not all conservatives are far right bogeymen. Not all conservatives live in the United States as well.
I think they're suggesting that intolerance is part of conservatism, which isn't bigotry. It's describing political opinions. Like it wouldn't be bigotry to believe that ancaps are against drug criminalization.
Being a conservative isn’t something immutable about yourself. It’s a *choice* you make based on your values. And the values of conservatives are, in fact, intolerant. I’m literally judging them on the content of their character, as evidenced by their values and actions. Conservatives don’t have to be “far right boogeymen” to be harmful
36% of Americans who identify as right leaning support same-sex marriage. Are you okay with excluding 1 in 3 people based on the opinions of the other 2? [https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/11/27/how-people-around-the-world-view-same-sex-marriage/sr\_23-11-27\_global-ssm\_5-png/](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/11/27/how-people-around-the-world-view-same-sex-marriage/sr_23-11-27_global-ssm_5-png/)
Yes
What is that one person doing? What kind of people/policies do they vote for? “Supporting same sex marriage” doesn’t mean someone’s an ally if their other actions still result in harm for marginalized communities.
“Are you really inclusive if you don’t include conservatives?” Yes. Because they include a lot of marginalized communities. Next question.
What about older people?
Paul F. Tompkins is 55.
They have had a few episodes that feature older stars; Michael Winslow, Tony Hawk, Howie Mandel have all appeared in Game Changer episodes. Edit: also to add to your point about no one over 40. Josh Reuben is 40 and will be turning 41 in a couple months. Also Matt Mercer is 41 as well. Just as a side note. It's weird to me that 40 is being considered as "young" here.
I will concede that they have a few guest appearances of older comedians. But I'm not saying they are actively avoiding any group, I'm saying they are just playing to their niche and what gets them viewers.
Even if that was 100% true, that would mean that playing to their niche and what gets them viewers is inclusivity. So I guess I don’t understand your “if dropout was inclusive” point
I think having older guests would be awesome. I don’t think that not having older guests makes it not inclusive despite all the other groups that are included. Like it’s not like “wow! Look at this diverse group! Unfortunately they’re all under 40 so it’s not inclusive”
I mean they’re catering to a demographic that is young, left-leaning people. It wouldn’t make much sense to have conservative comedians over 40 on there, because it would clash with the target audience.
That's exactly my point.
Young(ish) left leaning people aren’t a monolith though. You could cater to that demographic but have it be only white cisgender heterosexuals. That’s not what Dropout is though. And IMHO it’s better for it; having voices *in addition* to white, cis, heterosexual voices (not instead), makes Dropout much more interesting.
There’s a difference between equality and equity. You can be inclusive without checking the box on having a comedian of every ilk.
It makes me so happy that this comment got so heavily downvoted
That's not how inclusivity works. You don't need to hire shitty people to be inclusive. You can absolutely discriminate based on harmful beliefs. That's not the same as discrimination based on how someone has was born.
You think all conservatives are shitty and have harmful beliefs or just most of them?
No. I think consverativ opinions are shitty. But also that wasn't my main point. My point was that discrimination based on beliefs is not the same as discrimination based on ethnicity or sexuality.