General Star Wars News

[Disney Irish]

Because at that point she has no leg to stand on. Once they chimed in with their statements, they drew a line in the sand. So now I'll throw it back to you. You keep telling me, she had no contract, season 3 wasn't written, she wasn't announced to even be in it. so how could it be worse? By your posts, she wasn't planned to be in it. So it's a simple statement for Disney. "This is what we had planned all along". The only way that doesn't fly, is if you're completely wrong and there was tangible plans as I've said. So you need to pick a lane and stay in it. So if what you keep arguing is true, Disney would have absolutely NOTHING to worry about.

Sure there's a group that would do their rage against Disney. But that's just the world we live in, so no big deal. Just remember, if everything I've said is wrong and I have no proof people would think the statements are equal. Then how can you say

"it would have been worse because she then would have been calling them "cowards" for not saying anything publicly."

The correct answer is, YOU CAN'T. Did you ask everyone in the world? How did you come up with that information? Can you post a link to it? Did I miss a news story?
You see, everything you are arguing against me, is exactly what you're doing. And it's funny, while pulling up all the, I'm not sticking up for Gina posts you and the others ignored. That came up multiple times. You saying I'm wrong while doing exactly what you say I do. Just some food for thought.

Does she have no leg to stand on? Nothing changes other than Disney not making a statement in this hypothetical situation. So if she has no leg to stand on in that situation of Disney not making a statement how does she have a case to begin with? Because Disney making a statement isn't illegal. So that seems like you just admitted her case was weak to begin with and that other than Disney's statement there wasn't really an issue here.

And you're right I have no proof that is indeed what Gina would do in that situation. I'm basing it on how I've seen her react (and others even here who've had similar sentiments when Disney doesn't do things they like, ie calling them cowards), so maybe she wouldn't do that in this hypothetical that you made up where Disney didn't initially respond. And sure if you want to call that "doing the same as you", ok, I'm not perfect and will be the first to admit that. I fall to the same faults that others do. Sorry.

As for the rest, its all moot. We don't see eye-to-eye, and I'm fine with that. Maybe we should live in a better world where more situations like this are equal like you want. And maybe we should strive for that. I just know that as humans its not likely to happen because of all the faults we have. So I'm willing to acknowledge that its unlikely we'll ever get to the "equal" that you think we should have.

 

[easyrowrdw]

Disagree, because we've seen Disney make plenty of statements even if involved in a lawsuit. So they may not "have to" but they usually do, and usually at the request of the lawyers/PR people, as do most corporations in a similar position. As again not making a statement can be seen as weakness or in some cases looking like you have something to hide. Which we've seen many times in history when someone makes a "no comment" comment. Or even such as in this case where you want to distance yourself from a potentially toxic situation.

Do you have sources to support these statements?

 

[Disney Irish]

Do you have sources to support these statements?

I'd have to go do searches on past statements.

As for the lawyer/PR people comment, that is an assumption based on the type of statements released by corporations. It all comes across as being filtered by lawyers and PR people.

But since this isn't a hill I'm willing to die on, I'll let it go and just say that Disney doesn't "have to" make a statement but they usually will.

 

[easyrowrdw]

I'd have to go do searches on past statements.

As for the lawyer/PR people comment, that is an assumption based on the type of statements released by corporations. It all comes across as being filtered by lawyers and PR people.

But since this isn't a hill I'm willing to let it go and just say that even if Disney doesn't "have to" make a statement but usually will.

Okay.

 

[erasure fan1]

So if she has no leg to stand on in that situation of Disney not making a statement how does she have a case to begin with?

Because they clearly drew a line in the sand. See everything I've been saying. By making such a harsh and damning statement you set a precedent in peoples minds. And then when you have two other people making what many consider equally terrible comments, and not a peep from the mouse. It becomes something to look into. It's just a bad look. And I get it, you don't care. Disney can do what they want. That doesn't mean I have to accept the bad in the world because, that's just how it is.

So that seems like you just admitted her case was weak to begin with and that other than Disney's statement there wasn't really an issue here.

Absolutely not. If you go back and look, I said I don't know what the case was. As I said, we know a lot of Ginas side. We know almost nothing of Pedros side. You think we do, but you have absolutely nothing. That's why I thought it was a valid case.The case was filed and a judge basically said, yea there's more to look at here. And the fact that it moved to discovery and they wouldn't dismiss the case like Disney tried, proves it wasn't cut and dry like you think. I'm on record saying if Gina lost the case, and the courts said everything was perfectly legal, great. Were they treated equal and fairly? I have no clue, that's what the case could have shown everyone.

I just know that as humans its not likely to happen because of all the faults we have. So I'm willing to acknowledge that its unlikely we'll ever get to the "equal" that you think we should have.

Yea, I think we all know that. I acknowledge it too, but shouldn't you strive for it? is that wrong even if it doesn't seem to make a difference? I don't get the snarky, well you're just better than everyone I guess comments. I just feel that for someone who has argued A LOT, on subjects of equality, that now it's all, ehh people being treated equal and fairly won't ever happen so it's no big deal. You say you are not coming at this from a "certain side". But it does seem like there's some dots we can connect.

 

[Disney Irish]

Because they clearly drew a line in the sand. See everything I've been saying. By making such a harsh and damning statement you set a precedent in peoples minds. And then when you have two other people making what many consider equally terrible comments, and not a peep from the mouse. It becomes something to look into. It's just a bad look. And I get it, you don't care. Disney can do what they want. That doesn't mean I have to accept the bad in the world because, that's just how it is.

I'm just not so sure that it would play out the way you think. Disney not making a statement ends up making it look like Disney agrees with her statements because even if not currently employed she was still seen as associated with Disney, at least that is how I think it plays out. Now maybe that isn't important to you. But to a company that wants to avoid drama like this its important to separate from a message that isn't what the company represents.

Now I'll even offer that maybe the wording could have been "softened" to not be as "harsh and damning in people's minds" as you say. But I do think some statement was inevitable, especially in this hyper polarized world we live now.

Absolutely not. If you go back and look, I said I don't know what the case was. As I said, we know a lot of Ginas side. We know almost nothing of Pedros side. You think we do, but you have absolutely nothing. That's why I thought it was a valid case.The case was filed and a judge basically said, yea there's more to look at here. And the fact that it moved to discovery and they wouldn't dismiss the case like Disney tried, proves it wasn't cut and dry like you think. I'm on record saying if Gina lost the case, and the courts said everything was perfectly legal, great. Were they treated equal and fairly? I have no clue, that's what the case could have shown everyone.

Ok, but the way you presented it as she has "no leg to stand on" if Disney doesn't release a statement sure makes it hard to indicate that she has a strong case. Because just saying "ah ha look at what Disney said in a statement about me" isn't really a strong legal claim in my opinion. I mean what Disney said couldn't even be consider liable really, even if you considered it "harsh and damning". So if you remove the statement what do you have left? I guess that is the part of the case that will never be seen. So again it makes it seem that irrespective of the statement the rest of the case kind of falls apart, at least in my opinion.

Yea, I think we all know that. I acknowledge it too, but shouldn't you strive for it? is that wrong even if it doesn't seem to make a difference?

Which is why I posted this in the part of the post you removed (something you very often do by the way) -

"Maybe we should live in a better world where more situations like this are equal like you want. And maybe we should strive for that."

I think that answers your question.

I don't get the snarky, well you're just better than everyone I guess comments. I just feel that for someone who has argued A LOT, on subjects of equality, that now it's all, ehh people being treated equal and fairly won't ever happen so it's no big deal. You say you are not coming at this from a "certain side". But it does seem like there's some dots we can connect.

I'll just respond to this by saying that I never have seen this as a matter of "equality". I'm sorry that you find that offensive or however else you may or may not feel about my stance on this.

Also you can connect any dots you want to, doesn't make it true. Just like you say that posters trying to say you seem to be coming at this from a "certain side" is not true as well.

 

[MisterPenguin]

What does this have to do with Star Wars?

Oops, too many tabs open.

 

[erasure fan1]

Disney not making a statement ends up making it look like Disney agrees with her statements because even if not currently employed she was still seen as associated with Disney

I don't understand. So it looks like Disney endorses zegler and pedro then? No statements at all there, and they weren't concerned about it. So I'm not sure how much water that holds. Remember, we were all told zegler wasn't under a contract so how could shee be fired. Well it seems like they just moved on, with no statement from Disney and she has no listed or announced projects with the mouse.

Which is why I posted this in the part of the post you removed (something you very often do by the way) -

"Maybe we should live in a better world where more situations like this are equal like you want. And maybe we should strive for that."

I think that answers your question.

you put it, but you keep fighting it. Like you, I said I'm not perfect. I also agreed that that what happened is basically par for the course in Hollywood. The difference is I'm not going to sit back and say, oh well that's just the way it is, Disneys gonna Disney I guess.

I'll just respond to this by saying that I never have seen this as a matter of "equality". I'm sorry that you find that offensive or however else you may or may not feel about my stance on this.

Hey, I get it, and I'm sorry you feel so strongly against me wanting fairness. Or questioning the fairness. We both obviously see the world much differently.

 

[Disney Irish]

I don't understand. So it looks like Disney endorses zegler and pedro then? No statements at all there, and they weren't concerned about it. So I'm not sure how much water that holds. Remember, we were all told zegler wasn't under a contract so how could shee be fired. Well it seems like they just moved on, with no statement from Disney and she has no listed or announced projects with the mouse.

While I see your point, by the way I've seen your points all along even if I don't agree with them so just thought you should know that, a couple things.

First, Pedro's posts were from BEFORE he was employed by the Mouse back in 2018 (funny how they had to dig up posts from before his time as Mando as "examples"), and were deleted by the time he was employed. Also of note as said before he is the star of the show. So no statement would have been needed since it all happened BEFORE his employment with the Mouse and he already deleted them. That is an important distinction. Hmm, wonder why Disney treated this situation differently, maybe because it all happened before and the issue was rectified.

Second, Rachel's posts were WHILE she was still doing press for Snow even if she was not under a new contract with the Mouse, and were immediately deleted and (likely at the insistence of the Mouse) she issued an apology and since she hasn't really posted anything. So no statement would have been needed. Also of note, she is the star of the movie. She also basically did what Gina should have done with at least deleting the posts and stopping all further posts. Hmm, wonder why Disney treated this situation differently, maybe because she did it right and rectified the situation?

Lastly, Gina wasn't under contract (and she hasn't disputed that fact) and wasn't doing any press for Mando or any events for the Mouse. But because she wasn't under contract and didn't delete the posts and continued to post more, ie she didn't rectify the situation. Disney felt they needed to issue a statement to separate themselves from any association from her just to make it clear she wasn't affiliated with Lucas/Disney. Plus as noted before, she wasn't the star of a show or a movie, at least yet, she was a series regular.

I'm sorry that you think that is not fair and equal. But do you not see the difference between these situations and why Disney's public response to each was different?

And in the back of my mind I question if you really would be "fighting" this hard if this wasn't involving Disney.

you put it, but you keep fighting it. Like you, I said I'm not perfect. I also agreed that that what happened is basically par for the course in Hollywood. The difference is I'm not going to sit back and say, oh well that's just the way it is, Disneys gonna Disney I guess.

I keep fighting it? I just disagree with you, I'm not fighting against anything. Just because you think something is not fair in life doesn't mean I have to agree with you.

I'm not fighting against actual injustice when I see it, I'm not fighting against real fairness in life.

Hey, I get it, and I'm sorry you feel so strongly against me wanting fairness. Or questioning the fairness. We both obviously see the world much differently.

I'm not against you wanting fairness or questioning it in life in general. I just don't think this situation is where that "fight" needs to be. I think there is greater "fights" that need to be had and better people to "fight for" where real injustice is happening.

 

[erasure fan1]

I'm sorry that you think that is not fair and equal. But do you not see the difference between these situations and why Disney's public response to each was different?

I do see what you're saying and I do see a difference to a point. But push comes to shove there's a perception issue when situations like these come up. And I believe the noise of how Disney went about this was much greater than it needed to be. You don't, we're at a solid agree to disagree.

And in the back of my mind I question if you really would be "fighting" this hard if this wasn't involving Disney.

I couldn't give a rats butt if it was Disney or anyone else. I'm no fan of Disney upper management and how they handle a lot of how Disney operates, no shock there I'm sure. I'm not against Disney as a brand, but I am against how they have been running the brand. If I was just in it to hate on Disney I surely wouldn't be on this site. There are sites with a lot larger reach than here to make one heard. And you would be able to actually argue without the restrictions that something like this situation brings.

I think there is greater "fights" that need to be had and better people to "fight for" where real injustice is happening.

That's all you, or Wendy or anyone else had to say. That is the angle I figured some were coming at this from. But again, I'm not fighting for Gina. And if hell freezes over and we are in the end of days and you said, you know, you might be right. Maybe it was handled poorly and I would like to know if everything was handled properly. You know what I wouldn't say? That you were sticking up for Gina.

 

[Disney Irish]

I do see what you're saying and I do see a difference to a point. But push comes to shove there's a perception issue when situations like these come up. And I believe the noise of how Disney went about this was much greater than it needed to be. You don't, we're at a solid agree to disagree.

I've already said that maybe Disney could have softened the message so its not as "harsh and damning" as you put it. And maybe that would have made a difference and be less "noise", dunno.

But do appreciate that we can see each others points.

I couldn't give a rats butt if it was Disney or anyone else. I'm no fan of Disney upper management and how they handle a lot of how Disney operates, no shock there I'm sure. I'm not against Disney as a brand, but I am against how they have been running the brand. If I was just in it to hate on Disney I surely wouldn't be on this site. There are sites with a lot larger reach than here to make one heard. And you would be able to actually argue without the restrictions that something like this situation brings.

Ok, well I'll have to take your word for it. But it sure seems like if Disney wasn't involved you wouldn't be fighting as hard or at all.

That's all you, or Wendy or anyone else had to say. That is the angle I figured some were coming at this from. But again, I'm not fighting for Gina. And if hell freezes over and we are in the end of days and you said, you know, you might be right. Maybe it was handled poorly and I would like to know if everything was handled properly. You know what I wouldn't say? That you were sticking up for Gina.

You know what is fair....

I stick up for her right to post whatever she wants. I will not however stick up for her belief that she deserves to be employed by anyone in-spite of those posts. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. You have the right to shout fire, you do not have the right to shout fire as a joke in a crowded theater in which people can be harmed as a result, that will get you jailed.

So as I've said numerous times, her posts are irrelevant to me. I don't care about their contents, never have. She can post whatever the hell she wants. Just don't expect to be hired (or stay employed) if those posts are counter to the image of that company.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Star Wars Multiverse Disney+ Special Trailer Teases Franchise Deep Cuts

Sig Greebling is putting the Star Wars galaxy back together — brick by brick. After Force-sensitive nerf herder Sig (voiced by Stranger Things star Gaten Matarazzo) discovered the Cornerstone of the Galaxy in a Jedi temple on Fennesa, he unwittingly caused space and time to fall apart. “The...

comicbook.com

 

[Phroobar]

Star Wars Multiverse Disney+ Special Trailer Teases Franchise Deep Cuts

Sig Greebling is putting the Star Wars galaxy back together — brick by brick. After Force-sensitive nerf herder Sig (voiced by Stranger Things star Gaten Matarazzo) discovered the Cornerstone of the Galaxy in a Jedi temple on Fennesa, he unwittingly caused space and time to fall apart. “The...

comicbook.com

That's season 2. I like we will get a Lego minifig of Jax. We need more from Darth Jar Jar.

 

[Baloo124]

So yesterday, Hayden Christensen (wearing a #66 jersey as a nod to Order 66 in ROTS) sang during the 7th-inning stretch at Wrigley Field with his daughter. Shortly after they began singing, a jet flew over, and the engine roar startled everyone. It was rather comical, yet also felt like some sort of plot point in a SW series.
"Anakin Skywalker addresses large crowd as starfighters zoom by overhead... and Pirates win in the end."

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Bad acting is sort of a Star Wars thing.

I kinda take some issue with that…but I’ve spoke on that before

 

[Phroobar]

99 cents seems like a fair offer, just don't ask what I'll do with it once I receive it.

Just to give you a hint....

Just like my dreams and aspirations...

 

[Tha Realest]

So yesterday, Hayden Christensen (wearing a #66 jersey as a nod to Order 66 in ROTS) sang during the 7th-inning stretch at Wrigley Field with his daughter. Shortly after they began singing, a jet flew over, and the engine roar startled everyone. It was rather comical, yet also felt like some sort of plot point in a SW series.
"Anakin Skywalker addresses large crowd as starfighters zoom by overhead... and Pirates win in the end."

And since he was on the pitcher’s mound he had the high ground this time.

 

[Phroobar]

 

[Baloo124]

This is officially canon now.
Including that inflatable beach ball.
Palps remembers seeing one a long time ago and it inspired the creation of the Death Star.

 

[Phroobar]