Fun
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

On red pilled conservatives and the Matrix.

I laugh because plot twist, they are the Matrix. They are usually the ones who think they're red pilled because they are traditionalists and right winged so they "think" they're being edge lords. However, the director said the Matrix movie was relating to trans gendered rights. That trans people "wake up" to realize they're in the matrix and take the red pill while everyone is still in the Matrix. The Matrix essentially doesn't understand new information and only wants old information that is unchanged. The Matrix doesn't accept things outside of its own existence because it literally "cannot" understand and doesn't have that type of intelligence, which is essentially red pilled conservative dogma.

Isn't it ironic when the Matrix thinks it's not the Matrix? Lmfao. Almost as if they've tricked themselves into thinking they are actually independent beings capable of independent thought, cute.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Heavenlywarrior · 36-40, M
The directors stole the movie from a black women named Sophia Stewart … she’s since won in court and her rights to the movie and it “DOES NOT” mean anything about trannys rights.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Heavenlywarrior That goes back to an urban legend and isn't true:

In Stewart’s case, the Internet rumors that she was triumphant in her case have flourished. To be clear, the stories that the producers of “The Matrix” trilogy have forked over billions of dollars to Stewart are patently false. No judgment of damages for funds in any amount were decided in her favor. The case has been closed since 2005, but urban legend found its way to the Internet and for nearly a decade many who read unresearched stories believe that Stewart actually won her case.

https://newsfeed.time.com/2013/11/22/inside-the-billion-dollar-matrix-lawsuit-one-of-the-internets-most-pervasive-hoaxes/

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/sophia-stewart-matrix-lawsuit/

https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2022/10/fact-check-sophia-stewart-did-not-win-a-2-point-5-billion-lawsuit-over-ideas-for-terminator-matrix.html
Heavenlywarrior · 36-40, M
@SatanBurger thanks… only God knows if she inherited royalties. Liars and thieves have been doing this for years.

Here’s one passage from the court documents.. https://www.scribd.com/document/23342663/Matrix-and-Terminator-copyright-rulings

The Terminator and Matrix Defendants do not dispute Stewart's allegation that she owns a valid copyright. Rather, they contend that no triable issue of fact exists as to whether they copied her protected works.

Stewart can prevail at trial only if she produces evidence showing (1) that defendants had "access" to her works and that the Terminator and Matrix films are "substantially similar" to those works; or (2) evidence that the accused films are "strikingly similar" to her works.
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Heavenlywarrior Here's also another paragraph from same court case:

She also failed to adduce evidence rebutting the expert witness reports of Mark Rose proffered by defendants. Rose opined that neither the Terminator films nor the Matrix films were substantially similar to Stewart's Third Eye literary materials. The fact that plaintiff's admissions conclusively established that there was no substantial or striking similarity between the works, and the fact that Rose's opinion was uncontroverted also necessitated the entry of summary judgment in defendants' favor. 8. Rule 60(b) also authorizes relief from a judgment or final order where a party proffers newly discovered evidence; where the judgment is a product of fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct; where the judgment is void; or where it has been satisfied or discharged or for any other reason justifying relief. FED.R.CIV.PROC. 60(b). None of these bases is relevant here. Stewart has proffered no new evidence, and does not allege fraud or misconduct.


https://docshare.tips/matrix-and-terminator-copyright-rulings_5750afd2b6d87f7fb08b49fb.html
Heavenlywarrior · 36-40, M
@SatanBurger typical
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
@Heavenlywarrior Just in case you missed the judgement in that court case:

She also failed to adduce evidence rebutting the expert witness reports of Mark Rose proffered by defendants. Rose opined that neither the Terminator films nor the Matrix films were substantially similar to Stewart's Third Eye literary materials. The fact that plaintiff's admissions conclusively established that there was no substantial or striking similarity between the works, and the fact that Rose's opinion was uncontroverted also necessitated the entry of summary judgment in defendants' favor. 8. Rule 60(b) also authorizes relief from a judgment or final order where a party proffers newly discovered evidence; where the judgment is a product of fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct; where the judgment is void; or where it has been satisfied or discharged or for any other reason justifying relief. FED.R.CIV.PROC. 60(b). None of these bases is relevant here. Stewart has proffered no new evidence, and does not allege fraud or misconduct.


https://docshare.tips/matrix-and-terminator-copyright-rulings_5750afd2b6d87f7fb08b49fb.html