Removing a homophobic user review

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 9 months ago
  • Solved
Hi,

I'm trying to report the following review https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5136603/?ref_=tt_urv which I believe violates IMDB's terms & conditions in that the reviewer appears to be making a homophobic statement.

The reviewer states "Unfortunately the liberal left made sure they are shoving sinful homosexual crud at every turn" and "Was a good movie until the LGBTQ agenda surfaced mid movie"
Rather than reviewing the film the reviewer appears to be pushing their anti LGBT views instead.

I have reported the review twice as being inappropriate. However, each time I am told that my contribution has been declined with the response "Reason Unable to verify".

I'm not sure what the moderator is unable to verify?

Thanks,
Gayle

Photo of Gayle Hibbert

Gayle Hibbert

  • 4 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
  • Annoyed

Posted 9 months ago

  • 1
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23311 Posts
  • 27775 Reply Likes
An opinion about a movie is valid no matter how Much we may disagree with it. You have the same right to go review a movie that in "your opinion" had a certain amount of suggested LGBT, but was hiding the actual reality due to producers restraint.

You would be within your right to point that out without some one attaching a derogatory name to your behavior. You have proalterlifestylaphobia. There you have a name for your behavior. You are proalterlifestylaphobic!!!!

Live and let live.

Your complaint was denied with good reason. It's called freedom of speech.


(Edited)
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23311 Posts
  • 27775 Reply Likes
Adrian, if I may point out here, you are defending censorship by a public media outlet.
IMDb IS losing users. They don't say anything. They have already left the building so to speak. When the people on one side of an issue force their collective will on the other side of that issue they feel unwanted. Every review that you censor or remove is a lost user.
You are basically advocating for 1/2 of the IMDb users to just go away because they don't agree with those that don't think as they do. That is sad.
Photo of Rob Sieger

Rob Sieger

  • 382 Posts
  • 232 Reply Likes
Adrian -- The only person I ever heard refer to a hill he chose not to die on was James Comey. Therefore it is a tainted metaphor. 


As far as "hate speech", not only is that protected by the First Amendment, hence the extralegal and paramilitary assaults on anyone whom a group of lunatic resisters, gender anarchist, Antifas, etc disagree with -- but the term itself is largely subjective. Lunatics on college campuses and almost elsewhere else believe that people who claim that there are differences between men and women, or who otherwise oppose gender neutrality are guilty of hate speech and/or "transphobia" or some other recently invented thought-crime to satisfy the goalpost-shifting of militant and violent extremists.  
 
"You guys seem to be suffering from an extreme case of privilege. You will never be discriminate against so you engage in thought exercise of which you will never face the consequences of. Google the paradox of tolerance." -- That is so stupid I do not believe you can seriously mean it. If you don't think that intersectionality does not permanently legally disable and diminish those who don't have enough "minority" status claims, especially in academic, the workplace, Hollywood, etc, then you are an ignoramus and a fool. (How come people of color are still minorities in cities in which whites are clearly in the minority? I guess it's 2+2=5.) 
(Edited)
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23311 Posts
  • 27775 Reply Likes
Rob, thanks. Yes I'd rather state scholarly facts. Learned, highly educated people who have thought long and hard on an issue and will not be brainwashed by a minority attempting to shape and mold society in an unrealistic conformity. We have had enough. We tolerated that speech and said nothing for decades. That was a mistake. That silence and tolerance has allowed a bombarding indoctrination of bad ideas to be perceived as good ideas. These supposed "Good Ideas" are so bad, that it is a commentary on what our good tolerance has brought forth. We the meek shall inherit..........yada yada. Well the meek is the majority. We would like our Earth back!
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23311 Posts
  • 27775 Reply Likes
Adrian??????????
You guys seem to be suffering from an extreme case of privilege.
This is a head in the sand statement. You are the privileged! Don't you see that. Your side has anointed themselves that status. I am the Idiot who can't see the forest for the trees according to you. Well.......I can see clearly now, the rain is gone. I can see all obstacles in my way. All of your dark clouds are broken open. We are seeding those clouds with good old Poor Richards Almanicisms.
Common Sense should rule. Not Utopianism/Socialism/Communism.

Photo of Rob Sieger

Rob Sieger

  • 382 Posts
  • 232 Reply Likes
Gayle Hibbert -- Yeah, yeah. Homophobia -- the unforgivable career-destroying sin, usually found more in the minds of those seeking to be offended and provoked than anything else. (You have to bake me that cake!!!!) 

I am an American so I don't give a crap about the UK or the European Union, but the USA is almost as bad and intolerant. Men and women are different -- that's transphobia. Affirmative action = intersectionality. Etc, etc, etc.
Photo of Nikolay Yeriomin (Mykola Yeromin)

Nikolay Yeriomin (Mykola Yeromin), Champion

  • 3727 Posts
  • 5163 Reply Likes
In my humble opinion "sinful homosexual crud" is indeed homophobic and should not be protected with freedom of speech. Just because your religion says something about what should you do, it's not a reason to abide to it like national law and condemn everyone like it's Middle Ages...
(Edited)
Photo of Gayle Hibbert

Gayle Hibbert

  • 4 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
But it isn't an opinion about the movie. There is no "sinful homosexual crud" in the movie so the review is factually incorrect. The reviewer suggests that homosexuality is sinful which under UK and EU law and ethics it is not and under UK and EU law such a statement would be regarded as derogatory.

If I were to say that disabled people should be banned from films because they are sinful crud (which isn't true of course), would you also say I have the right to put that in a review because it is "Freedom of Speech".

I'm not sure which part of the world you come from but I suspect it maybe somewhere where homophobia is accepted?

(Edited)
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23311 Posts
  • 27775 Reply Likes
Adrian is unlikely to reply further Rob. King IMDb of America has spoken. Review removed. That means that the matter is settled and he is vindicated. Another lost user more than likely shall result.
The left never wants to hear what the other side has to say. We have not made a dent in anything here.
Sad
Very sad
I will hope that Adrian and all that think as they do now will regret what they have done when history repeats itself right here in the good ole USA Comrade Rob!
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23311 Posts
  • 27775 Reply Likes
You know Rob it just occurred to me that the big court case that IMDb fought so hard against just recently and won over the right to "Retain Data" (Date of Birth) over the objections of an actress may come back to haunt them here. That date of birth was deemed objectionable. But the courts disagreed. IMDb won the right to post what another deemed objectionable. Yet this supposed objectionable information (review) is OK to remove only because of ??????What???????? Makes no sense. If IMDb can willfully remove info that people find objectionable, then whats the difference between a date of birth or review that many find objectionable too!?
Hmmmmmm!
(Edited)
Photo of Rob Sieger

Rob Sieger

  • 382 Posts
  • 232 Reply Likes
You could talk to Col Needham (seems like a nice guy) regarding the "ToS", I guess, which is probably what the decision to remove the review was based on. 
Photo of Rob Sieger

Rob Sieger

  • 382 Posts
  • 232 Reply Likes
Ed Jones (XLIX) -- I think the problem is that you and I are old enough (I may be wrong about you as I don't know how old you are but I think I am right; I am 54), unlike the lunatic millennials, to remember when (even if life was not so great) the world was comprehensible and education was not indoctrination and there were only two recognized genders and women who accomplished everything through their husbands were not considered feminists and the LGBTQ lobby was not the most powerful and influential and affluent on the face of the earth yet still considered the underdog and the perpetual victims and where college students didn't need remedial education, safe spaces, trigger warnings, and hot coffee.  

Now we live in a country where Orwellian dystopia (colored blue) is unfolding. And not just here. I don't think Canada is much better. And EU countries, including the UK (as we see from the comments of Gayle Hibbert, which appear less fanatical than many others in the Loony Left) are no better. 
(Edited)
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23311 Posts
  • 27775 Reply Likes
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23311 Posts
  • 27775 Reply Likes
the reviewer has clearly let their prejudice influence their review
That is only a matter of opinion. That reviewer could be gay for all you know. Labeling "Anyone" something based solely on words is prejudicial behavior at it's worst. 
Photo of Elizabeth

Elizabeth, Employee

  • 1168 Posts
  • 1905 Reply Likes
Hi Gayle, thank you for flagging this to us, the review has been removed. 

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.