[ SECRET POST #3396 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3396 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.
[Robert DeNiro]


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 015 secrets from Secret Submission Post #485.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

08. http://i.imgur.com/LLy81c2.jpg
[Robert DeNiro]

[(Anonymous)]

How old is this? Negative press lasted all of two minutes like two weeks ago.

[(Anonymous)]

OMG two whole weeks ago?? Practically ancient history, you're right to question this secret, surely the statue of limitations has run out.

[(Anonymous)]

They are acting like this was done big thing. It wasn't. Ever.

[(Anonymous)]

nayrt

It's pretty significant when a celebrity of DeNiro's stature is an anti-vaxxer.

[(Anonymous)]

NA. Thank you for putting us straight. Just imagine what could have happened if you hadn't: like things getting wrong on the Internet and what have you.

[kallanda_lee]

Oh gawd really? I thought he'd be a bit stuck up, but anti-vaxx is just bad.

[(Anonymous)]

Except he's not anti-vaxx. His quote:
De Niro and his wife, Grace Hightower, issued a statement on Friday, defending the screening. “Grace and I have a child with autism and we believe it is critical that all of the issues surrounding the causes of autism be openly discussed and examined. In the 15 years since the Tribeca film festival was founded, I have never asked for a film to be screened or gotten involved in the programming.

“However this is very personal to me and my family and I want there to be a discussion, which is why we will be screening Vaxxed. I am not personally endorsing the film, nor am I anti-vaccination; I am only providing the opportunity for a conversation around the issue.”

[(Anonymous)]

But there's no conversation. Wakefield is a quack whose papers have literally gotten children killed. The only possible conversation is about why parents would rather have a dead kid than an autistic one.

[philstar22]

This.

[diet_poison]

+2

[sparrow_lately]

+3000

[(Anonymous)]

Anon you're replying to:

Oh, I understand fully.

[(Anonymous)]

Autism parent here. THIS.

[(Anonymous)]

*cough*bullshit*cough*

[kallanda_lee]

Okay, this is sort of more nuanced.

[diet_poison]

I think that's being generous.

[(Anonymous)]

It only looks nuanced. Saying "we need to have a conversation about this" is a little disingenuous because there's no real debate amongst scientists about whether or not vaccines cause autism. They don't. That's a pretty short conversation!

But anti-vaxxers who refuse to accept this know that they've got a bad reputation now, so they're dialing it back a bit and revising their phrasing. It's like FOX News saying oh, we're not saying that black people are violent, we're just saying that the nation needs to pay attention to black on black violence, and all lives matter, etc. etc. That's not nuance. It's just indirect enough to fool people into thinking they're being reasonable.

[diet_poison]

Ok but he is literally implying here that vaccines are a contributing cause of autism. They are not. That assertion has been thoroughly debunked so taking the position he's taking here is very irresponsible and definitely lends steam to the anti-vax movement.

[(Anonymous)]

Is De Niro an anti-vaxxer? Probably not.
Is he extremely anti-censorship? Yes. It's the only thing that explains what he said, IMHO.

[(Anonymous)]

Why should we be opening the conversation up to actors and other non-doctors and non-scientists? I don't really want to explore the possible causes of autism with uninformed parents trusting their gut and the dude who starred in Taxi Driver.

[dragonscrawl]

...Last I heard, they decided not to screen Vaxxed and DeNiro issued a statement about that the very day after the statement you posted. In fact:

“My intent in screening this film was to provide an opportunity for conversation around an issue that is deeply personal to me and my family,” De Niro said in a statement released late Saturday afternoon. “But after reviewing it over the past few days with the Tribeca Film Festival team and others from the scientific community, we do not believe it contributes to or furthers the discussion I had hoped for.”

(from this article on Entertainment Weekly).

[(Anonymous)]

Yep, that's how cautious anti-vaxxers sound. Oh, they're not ABSOLUTELY saying vaccines cause autism! They're just saying we don't know all the science behind it (except that we do, vaccines don't cause autism) and we should keep an open mind (we have, but science says vaccines don't cause autism) and we should let this doctor (Wakefield, who is a total quack and is in fact the original quack whose junk science is behind the anti-vaxx movement) have his say, etc. etc.

Again, vaccines don't cause autism. That's the conversation that science and repeated scientific studies done by doctors whose work hasn't been discredited multiple times have had. DeNiro is not offering to have THAT conversation, he wants to give a platform to a charlatan. There is no benefit in that, except to the charlatan.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm a fan and enjoy his work, whether it's heavy stuff or the lighter fare he's been in lately (I unironically enjoyed "The Intern") but his vaccination stance, even if it's not firmly anti, is deeply disappointing to me. I'll still go see his movies (it ain't that big a deal) but he should not be endorsing such sentiments, even quietly.

[(Anonymous)]

He's just not a very clever man, is he? Wakefield is a dangerous, discredited quack and a criminal. Five minutes on the internet would tell you that. Yet, for the first time in the history of the Tribeca film festival, despite never previously being involved in programming, he decides to impose this film into the programme and only withdraws it under pressure. Free speech, my ass. He fell for conspirasphere pseudo-science hook, line and sinker