bla is so brave about that whole jesus thing

.... and why you tagged me aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa :screaming emoji:

....

i dont make promises ok

also your no 1 is totally my pet peeve too

and i can relate to the other ones. yep. that dress code thing is so silly also i wish they'd let me sit cross legged on my office chair cuz i'm so comfortable that way. but no, has to be both legs down appropriately etc. as if sitting cross legged affect my respectability or sommit

gee golly

Yes haha I love going for the jugular. You can include the dresscode part when you write your pet peeves as well, with your own examples.

Dare Accepted. I am going to have to use that talking in the theater pet peeve in my post too.

it's cultural appropriation if only white people do it apparently. Where do i begin. First of all i completely agree with the first one but let's go to the thing that you mentioned and tagged me.

>I get it. You don't want to see Achilles played by a black person. Okay, but my argument to that is that what you're doing here is no different from the cries of cultural appropriation. Oversensitive people didn't want that girl to wear that Chinese dress, because it's "cultural appropriation" to them. Similarly, when a black man decides to play a mythological greek person, and you cry about it, you're essentially saying that a black man should never ever act like a greek because he's culturally appropriating greek culture

To begin with not only it isn't similar, it's completely different to equate a dress with a human being. A dress that depending on the case and era could be easily being a part of a trade that was happened ages ago till now, so it could be very easily obtainable for many nationalities to have a Chinese dress or kimono or a Greek one.

Secondly, i am a Greek, i grew up learning the Greek mythology and it was mandatory in school. Not only did we learned the Greek mythology and history, based on our books but also based on foreign authors that are respectable to the worldwide community. You mentioned that this is mythology and it isn't stated what his color is and how he looked like

WRONG

in the Iliad made by the same person who created the Odyssey (Homer) it is specifically stated that : («ξανθῆς δὲ κόμης ἕλε Πηλεΐωνα» = "she (Athena) grabbed Achilles by his blonde hair"; Iliad, 1.197).

If you don't believe me that is ancient Greek and ξανθῆς δὲ κόμης literally translated to blond hair. Now i don't know many black people that were Greeks, fought against Troy forces, were well known and died their hair yellow.

My issue as i mentioned in my post too, is pushing an agenda that is wrong. The author HOMER specifically gave the characteristics so even if it's mythology you have to respect the Author and how he created his character, it's exactly the same with movies like fantastic four with a black Torch. Not only it's disrespectful towards the Author but for the millions of people who grew up learning and loving and even had as a role model each specific character.

Just imagine if Black Panther was played by a white blond actor, it would have been completely wrong. Or imagine if we make a movie about ancient China and Kung Gu and it's full of Black,Russians and Greek Kung Fu Masters. This would have been even worse as it's not only disrespectful to everyone, it's also historically inaccurate, like in the Netflix's Troy that was full of inaccuracies.*

My point is that you just can't change nationalities and gender of characters already established. Instead be unique create your own story with whatever you want in and if the crowd love it so be it. Another example is Men In Black. Will Smith is iconic to the movie franchise. The ask the Greeks is completely stupid cause actually i have done and share the same view because contrary to you they are obligated to know a bit of your history. You can even see comments of Greeks and other regarding that thing in Steemit, if you want let me know and i will give you the links. I believe you are the one that can't or never asked a Greek about it nor you have ever read the Iliad. Check also the reviews for that movie (Troy: Fall Of A City 3.8/10) via google and see yourself what they are saying both for black Achilles and historic facts

as per the rock that you mentioned in the role of Hercules. It was historically inaccurate but at least they tried to portray a bit Hercules as a very muscular brunette man with long hair. I never saw a bold Dwayne! Also fun fact, this is Hercules not Herakles. Hercules is the Roman name and representation for the Greek hero Heracles

I'm aware of the Heracles/Hercules difference. It was inaccurate, and it was also fun. Perhaps you're not really seeing my point. I dissociate culture from ethnicity rather strongly. Why? Because to actually contribute to a culture, you need to make an effort. Being born in an ethnicity is 0 effort. It's simply something you had from the beginning.

It would be therefore quite arrogant for me to claim that no one should wear a dress from the culture I was born in.

I'm not going to be as thorough with my response, but I'd first like to emphasize on my main pet peeve, is people being oversensitive to PC, I'm the last person to give a damn about PC culture. I say the things I want, and if people don't like it, so be it. That said, I equally don't like the opposite of PC culture, patriotic correctness culture, which is being offended on behalf of a nationality.

it's completely different to equate a dress with a human being.
One's attire shapes culture. Ethnicity also shapes culture to an extent, but you shouldn't dismiss it just because it's an object. From the viewpoint of culture, it has as much value. If it didn't, the outrage over a white person wearing a Chinese dress or a white dude wearing dreadlocks wouldn't exist. The fact that they do does make my point.

Secondly, i am a Greek
I take my point then that Greeks wouldn't be offended. I guess you guys are indeed a little touchy over your myths.

You mentioned that this is mythology and it isn't stated what his color is and how he looked like
That's not what I said. To clarify, I said he isn't white, because he's fictional. When I said white, I meant real white. Real ethnicity can only exist in the real world. Achilles is a fictitious character, therefore he has no real ethnicity.

My issue as i mentioned in my post too, is pushing an agenda that is wrong.
There's literally nothing wrong with the concept of pushing agendas through media. That's one of the main reasons why authors even bother at all. The good stories they write, all push an agenda of sorts. You may not like the agenda that's being pushed, sure, but there's nothing wrong with pushing agendas.

Not only it's disrespectful towards the Author but for the millions of people who grew up learning and loving and even had as a role model each specific character.
I don't know if you realise it, but what you're doing here is political correctness. You're putting fictional characters on a pedestal, and getting outraged over the fact that a character you worship isn't being portrayed in the way you like. The author is long dead. New authors re-invent existing characters all the time.

Just imagine if Black Panther was played by a white blond actor, it would have been completely wrong. Or imagine if we make a movie about ancient China and Kung Gu and it's full of Black,Russians and Greek Kung Fu Masters. This would have been even worse as it's not only disrespectful to everyone, it's also historically inaccurate, like in the Netflix's Troy that was full of inaccuracies.*
All of these ideas actually sound great to me. I'm Chinese by the way, and if they make a movie about Ancient China, and it's full other people from other ethnicities practicing Kung Fu, why would I be mad? Just before you accuse me of not caring for history, oh, I do love history. However, what we're talking about here is a movie, not a history book. If people want to know the real mythology or history, books exist for a reason.

Cultures don't belong to any group. When you're born a Greek or Chinese, you contribute to Greek or Chinese Culture, but you don't own it. This is a simple fact that people don't get. You as an individual, do not get to speak for the entirety of a culture. You only get to speak for part of the culture you experienced, which may have massive variations. And even if you get to speak about it, you don't own it.

Second, what you're doing here again is political correctness. Who cares if some bloke think it's disrespectful? I thought the main idea of political correctness was to be able to say and do things we want, and if people find it disrespectful or offensive, they should just grow a thicker skin and not be such a beta about it.

My point is that you just can't change nationalities and gender of characters already established
Did you know that the story of Aladdin was set in Ancient China, and that Aladdin himself was supposed to be Chinese? But nowadays, people think Aladdin is middle-eastern. And you know what, that's ok. I understand that stories evolve, and people adapt them to their own culture. So my answer to your point is that yes, you can, as proven several times by actual history.

>One's attire shapes culture. Ethnicity also shapes culture to an extent, but you shouldn't dismiss it just because it's an object

indeed one's attire shapes culture and i never dismiss it because it was an object. What i stated and i am gonna state again it was a fact. It war very likely due to trading throughout most of our history for objects to of one's culture to be everywhere and in other words used by anyone. When merchants sold things and still do they said and say "a Chinese cloth" and thus most people knew where it came from or some things it represented. Also, about the dreadlocks the ones makings the fuzz are some uneducated blacks and whites who for some reason think they own it while if we check the history of dreadlocks we gonna see that some of the earliest forms came from India and yep Greece. (Google it). Still it's completely different and i see this once again to talk about an object or a style that i stated that mostly nobody knows where the style came from or the object with that of a nationality. It's like i say the first Chinese were Greeks something completely inaccurate

>I take my point then that Greeks wouldn't be offended. I guess you guys are indeed a little touchy over your myths.

So apparently that has an attitude toward us because we don't agree with you so we are "touchy towards our myths" myths that you were unaware about a little while ago. You just knew something generic about the Troy war probably from movies you have seen or thing that you heard so you formed a biased opinion.

>I don't know if you realise it, but what you're doing here is political correctness. You're putting fictional characters on a pedestal, and getting outraged over the fact that a character you worship isn't being portrayed in the way you like. The author is long dead. New authors re-invent existing characters all the time.

I said that multiple times but you try to twist my words and meaning a bit. It's not that a character "i worship isn't the way i like" It isn't the way the author portrayed him and thus it's disrespectful towards him and all the fans Also, when we are talking about a movie or something that is historic you can't just twist everything. You have a vast audience and you have and obligation to present some historic facts accurate, like tradition, customs, ethnicity, fighting style. Check out Vikings and how all this made the show having such great reviews and earnings. People like history especially when it's represented in the right way.

Also, regarding the agenda and this people are not that silly to not understand why we have movies and series like that. To please a certain audience because somehow we need to please it. I again say that easily you can an existing author (there are countless) with his brand new story and world that has every minority and every gender inside and easily make a series or movie about it.

A lot of new authors that wanna reinvent a character do it with respect both towards the previous author as well as the current audience or the whole culture-country around it, especially when it's historical. If you make something full of inaccuracies you will take what you deserve. 3.8/10 reviews. Easily they could create Troy in a parallel universe and change everything but apparently they didn't. Also, check the Troy of 2004 with Brand Pit. A masterpiece in every aspect and a huge success primarily cause they respected the history,the author and the culture.

>That's not what I said. To clarify, I said he isn't white, because he's fictional. When I said white, I meant real white. Real ethnicity can only exist in the real world. Achilles is a fictitious character, therefore he has no real ethnicity.

First of all Greek's are Caucasians not exactly the white concept you have in mind so a reason more about The rock portrayed Hercules! Once again the author wrote about his ethnicity and that's Greek and then he added the hair. So we are talking about A blond Caucasian which easily representing how Greeks were the given time. If he didn't mention an ethnicity or a hair nobody would have cared but once again they are completely changing all the author facts and twisting culture,history and disrespecting everyone. Therefore he has ethnicity because once again the author gave one to him.

Most of the authors when create something they give you a pretty accurate description of how the character look like and if it's historic or something regarding our world he give you a nationality. If we are talking about other planets and stuff you can easily change the color, ethnicity and everything (if the color isn't mentioned). When though you have everything and you go and change it just because it's lack or respect towards everyone. The dead part is just an excuse. So if an author dies we can take his ideas,book, "inheritance" and do whatever we want with it, just because his dead.

Fun fact that you probably didn't know as well. The Iliad and odyssey by Homer has proven to be more than a book. The places, wars and stuff he wrote, a lot of them prove to exist in the exact places he wrote and there were indication about actual wars and stuff. He helped archaeologist discover way too many things and that's one of the reasons he is consider one of the top ones, not only because of literature. That means that a lot of thing he wrote aren't "mythology" he just combined mythology with truth, apparently to make it more appealing i don't know. In other words we are not talking about only mythology here, we are talking about actual historic facts.

>I thought the main idea of political correctness was to be able to say and do things we want, and if people find it disrespectful or offensive, they should just grow a thicker skin and not be such a beta about it.

It doesn't matter what you think because the answer is the exact opposite of this.

> "The term political correctness (adjectivally: politically correct; commonly abbreviated PC) is used to describe language, policies, or measures that are intended to avoid offense or disadvantage to members of particular groups in society."

So apparently you had no idea about Homer and Iliad, just some stuff you heard somewhere or saw in a movie but you said abut searching something you never did it yourself. You had no clue what is mythology and what is reality,history,facts and how those tied together in his work. You don't care what others can do to an author's work if he is long dead. You also don't care the way someone will present historic facts in his movie/series when he deems it historic and finally you showed with your last statement that don't even know what political correctness means, just a though once again.

Ahh and before i forget it. The patriotic thing you keep saying. It's another word that has Greek originality and apparently you don't know the exact meaning. I would be patriotic and i would agree with the term "patriotic correctness" only if i was talking specifically about my country and movies/film regarding my country, in other words only about the Troy. I spoke about most of the movies changing the historic facts if they deem themselves "historic" or show lack of respect towards the author (dead or alive) and the fans who grew up with a certain character. Therefore, to say to me about "patriotic correctness" is once again inaccurate

indeed one's attire shapes culture and i never dismiss it because it was an object.
You said the comparison isn't valid. It totally is. You didn't emphasize my point. That is if people are getting offended over some non-Chinese wearing a Chinese dress, then their outrage is equal to that of you thinking that a black Achilles warrants outrage. The point of comparison wasn't about the object. It was the outrage. What you're doing is selective outrage. You're saying black people shouldn't be offended over other people wearing dreadlocks, because dreadlocks aren't theirs to begin with, or that Chinese dress isn't a big deal because Chinese items were traded abroad. You are missing an important factor in outrage, and that is how these people FEEL. And then you're turning around and being all hurtful over a black Achilles.

i worship isn't the way i like" It isn't the way the author portrayed him and thus it's disrespectful towards him and all the fans
What is it then?

Also, when we are talking about a movie or something that is historic you can't just twist everything. You have a vast audience and you have an obligation to present some historical facts accurately, like tradition, customs, ethnicity, fighting style.
Yes you can, because by your own admission, mythology was mixed with history. Ever heard of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms? It's a fictionalised version of the Three Kingdoms records. Similarly, this movie is a fictionalised version of the Trojan War. Have you ever watched a Chinese movie over Japanese? It's full of inacurracies, and obnoxious Chinese heroism, but guess what, people in China still approve, because it paints them in an even better light.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dg00J5Fjfzw

But I would argue that even if the trojan war was all historic, then creators can still change it to their liking any way they want, because people understand the differences between history and fiction rather well.

The author is under no obligation to appease anyone at all. This is what the creative process is all about. So if the audience reception for it is bad, so be it.

>Check out Vikings and how all this made the show having such great reviews and earnings. People like history especially when it's represented in the right way.
You're making an assumption here. Some do, some simply don't care. Vikings is popular because it's entertaining.

>but once again they are completely changing all the author facts and twisting culture, history and disrespecting everyone.
You're allowed to do so. Once again, this is creative freedom. Every time you mention the word disrespect or respect, you're engaging in political correctness.

"We have to portray this culture accurately otherwise people will be outraged!" That is political correctness.

it just because it's lack of respect towards everyone
Again mentioning respect. How can you not see is that you're acting like a SJW? This is precisely what political correctness is about.

In other words we are not talking about only mythology here, we are talking about actual historic facts.
I fully understand what romanticised history is.

It doesn't matter what you think because the answer is the exact opposite of this.
1. It matters what I think, because political correctness is still be defined as a concept. Dictionaries aren't authorities on words. They describe how words are used by the common people.

1. The definition you gave is precisely what you're engaging in.

So apparently you had no idea about Homer and Iliad, just some stuff you heard somewhere or saw in a movie but you said abut searching something you never did it yourself. You had no clue what is mythology and what is reality,history,facts and how those tied together in his work.
It's true that I didn't know if Achilles had blonde hair in the original mythology too, but that doesn't mean I had no idea about Homer and Iliad. I grew up reading on Greek mythology like every kid. To assume I don't know mythology, reality, history or facts and how they're tied together is a an unjustified accusation. I also watched the 2004 movie with Brad Pitt when it came out in the cinema. It was a huge flop from what I remember, and while I thought it was just a mediocre action flick, many people thought it was terrible.

i would agree with the term "patriotic correctness" only if i was talking specifically about my country and movies/film regarding my country, in other words only about the Troy. I spoke about most of the movies changing the historic facts if they deem themselves "historic" or show lack of respect towards the author (dead or alive) and the fans who grew up with a certain character. Therefore, to say to me about "patriotic correctness" is once again inaccurate
No, it involves other countries as well. It can be patriotic correctness on behalf of some other country. It doesn't have to be your own country. Take for example how American Christians constantly praise Israel and get offended whenever someone says something bad about Jewish people.

While I love to call that kind of behaviour patriotic correctness, it's actually just political correctness.

You are confusing patriotic correctness with political incorrectness. It's not incorrectness to point out that your culture isn't being respected, and being outraged over it, it's correctness.

I have no doubt in my mind now, that you haven't really grasped political correctness and are actively engaging in it. It goes across both political aisles.

By the way if you want to continue this conversation, I feel that it's better to do it on discord, if you wish. My name on it is Bla#1402.

>You said the comparison isn't valid. It totally is. You didn't emphasize my point. That is if people are getting offended over some non-Chinese wearing a Chinese dress, then their outrage is equal to that of you thinking that a black Achilles warrants outrage. The point of comparison wasn't about the object. It was the outrage. What you're doing is selective outrage. You're saying black people shouldn't be offended over other people wearing dreadlocks, because dreadlocks aren't theirs to begin with, or that Chinese dress isn't a big deal because Chinese items were traded abroad. You are missing an important factor in outrage, and that is how these people FEEL. And then you're turning around and being all hurtful over a black Achilles.

that's the point, facts don't care about your feelings. Dreadlocks and their originality is an undeniable fact so it doesn't matter if a black person outrages. Same with the Chinese dress and is completely tied with the fact that it's an object because as an object and due to trading from your people it gone vast throughout the world. Even now we have completely Chinese shops opened by Chinese selling Chinese clothes to anyone, so if Chinese people are offended they to fist deal with their own and ban your clothes to anyone else. When we are talking about mythology and history all together from a respected author you can't just change everything if you deem your movie historic. Those are facts. What you are doing is the exact opposite of comparing things, you deem them or equal, an object, facts,culture, people which are not for the reasons above. It's plain simple, black people of history and mythology when they are proofs should be played by black people, the same goes for Chinese, whites or whatever. If the creator specifically says that it's an alternative world/universe, a fantasy then he can do whatever he wants to. Once again we are talking about a historic movie regarding the Greek Mythology & History where we got way too many times mention THE GREEKS, it's not just some fictional story of a random tribe that non exists.

>What is it then?
> I grew up reading on Greek mythology like every kid.

I"ll tie those to together, but because i don't wanna make you think that i just choose specific things i will explain why and ofc reply to every single one. Here is one of the points that i keep insisting on and you don't seem to understand. To begin with not in every country they learn about Homer and Iliad. Secondly the key word is "as a kid". Most kids don't pay that much attention in school generally speaking and more specifically to lessons as history and literature, especially of other countries which is limited. Heck if you ask most of the people nowadays about some national celebrations and why we are celebrating them, they have no idea. You can check videos in youtube regarding that matter and that applies to my country as well.

The difference is that we learn about Homer formally since we started the elementary school and till we finish school (18). Not only we learn how to read ancient Greek, but we take each verse of Homer, translate, talk about it, what the meaning is, tie it to historic facts if there are any etc etc. Then in most universities regarding social/historic/teaching studies, they keep on learning about him, so it's just something we do a bit generically and for 2-3-4 years. (This is for Homer's work, Iliad and Odyssey)

Now moving on to what is it. Except the fact that i send you the verse which states his hair, Homer also mentions his origin, which is Greek. He also mentions his father, a king who was also Greek and king of Thessaly, Till now a part of Greece. That's not my thoughts that's what it is according to Homer. Given all these info he can't be black. **Also, take into account that there were heroes in that battle (mythology) like Memnon who was said to be Ethiopian. For me it would be the exact same if Memnon was portrayed as white.

>Yes you can, because by your own admission, mythology was mixed with history.

I said it's not my admission it's a fact. Just say the word and i will provide you with links which show a lot of things that Homer mentioned and actually showed to be true, or generally speaking things of every nation that are mythological but hide some historic truth.

>Ever heard of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms?

No i haven't which is the specific film and date? Generally i know a thing or two about the Chinese history and 3 kingdoms. Also, i have watched countless chinese and japanese movies and i agree with you that when a nationality seems cool and badass in the movies the citizens won't care at all about inaccuracies because it's part of a simple psychological behavior. They get to seem cool to everyone else and to themselves something that boosts their ego and it's way easier to know that you are a cool guy or make yourself believe it that face your problems and history.
That doesn't mean it's correct though If we break some boundaries here that's one of the things Hitler took advantage of when he manipulated the crowds. Imagine if you had a movie about the Romance of the three kingdoms with all the major characters or the majority of them portrayed by black, greeks, russians etc etc

>because people understand the differences between history and fiction rather well.

That's completely wrong because we tend to prefer the easy way. Whoever is watching a film or series regarding something historic, will more likely believe what they see. The second thing will be to have doubts but as long as he doesn't check it the doubts will become his new truth. It's way easier to watch movies about the three kingdoms because it's relaxing than go and search about the actual historic facts, open tabs read or watch informational videos, it feels like a chore and mostly anyone want just to relax even knows this affect him. I won't talk about reading scientific paper because we both know the answer. Take the vikings as an example A lot of people now and way too many 5-25 years ago still believed that a vikings= horned helmet something that is completely wrong How did they receive this knowledge? Mostly movies,comics and stuff that deem them as vikings without mentioning something about fiction and even if they did which i doubt (cause they never search it either) the individuals never did the search.
In the series vikings made by history channel , they used actual historians to show a bit of reality regarding traditions,outfits,beliefs**

>The author is under no obligation to appease anyone at all. This is what the creative process is all about. So if the audience reception for it is bad, so be it.

The author sometimes easy due to copyrights, but then no he isn't. The only obligation he has is a moral one, but a bunch of them only care about money so they don't care at if they alter history and never mentioned it. Also, i don't thing it's creative process or creativity to simply copy/paste badly an existing writing, following the same story set but only changing colors and nationalities to the characters. This is simply laziness and anyone can understand the reasons behind such movie/series makings. I think they slow down the creative process instead. Also, the audience reception was pretty bad not only in this but in every show like this

>People like history especially when it's represented in the right way.
You're making an assumption here. Some do, some simply don't care. Vikings is popular because it's entertaining.

when you have the history channel paid money to historians and people who can create outfits, buildings and stuff of that particular era as loyal as it can to reality, even in fight scenes and formations, i don't think there is room more many assumptions here. I think this is one of the main reasons it succeeded especially when at the same time we had game of thrones.

once again

>"The term political correctness (adjectivally: politically correct; commonly abbreviated PC) is used to describe language, policies, or measures that are intended to avoid offense or disadvantage to members of particular groups in society."

if you want to avoid offense you don't change a main's hero nationality while you have all the proofs that you need about his nationality out of a particular group in society especially if you deem your film historic and follow the exact story as the main author wrote it or reality if we are talking about a real actual human being, that's what it stands for.

The definition i gave is what you had no idea about but it doesn't matter to you because

>It matters what I think, because political correctness is still be defined as a concept. Dictionaries aren't authorities on words. They describe how words are used by the common people.

No it's not defined as a concept the definition for years now has already been down to that. When a few people want to change the definition for their own sake, it suits them or matters to them doesn't really matter. As you said grow a thicker skin and not be such a beta about it the world doesn't revolve around your thoughts but in facts and evidence. By the same logic i gather a group of people and we wanna change the definition of apple, the same applies to different groups. Then we go years back to when we started inventing the language and nobody could communicate with each other because exactly of that.

The definitions of words are exactly for that reason. To have a common ground when we say something, it doesn't matter what you think in the society you grew there are definitions for each word that mostly anybody can tell otherwise it would be chaos.

you say to a girl i wanna marry you. If we were using your own logic we could say that the definition is still undergoes some changes and the girl understand it as i want to kill you, her father i want to eat, her mother i wanna bath (check Jordan Peterson for that)

>American Christians constantly praise Israel and get offended whenever someone says something bad about Jewish people. You are confusing patriotic correctness with political incorrectness

I don't cause i don't believe that this thing even exists the way you say it. The definition of patriotism is the love and devotion to your country even if you are far away. If some people interpret the meaning as usual for their own sake like once again Hitler, or as you say now American Christians has nothing to do with that. They are just people who change the meaning of the words to manipulate others.

>By the way if you want to continue this conversation, I feel that it's better to do it on discord, if you wish. My name on it is Bla#1402.

ahhhhh now i saw that.................................

Yeah I'm not going to reply to all that. Hit me up on discord if you want to, although that's for later. I would like to address only a few points since I'm currently busy. The rest will have come later.

that's the point, facts don't care about your feelings. Dreadlocks and their originality is an undeniable fact so it doesn't matter if a black person outrages. Same with the Chinese dress and is completely tied with the fact that it's an object because as an object and due to trading from your people it gone vast throughout the world.
No, facts don't care about feelings. I never claimed they did. But since you're playing the outrage game over a Black Achilles, it totally matters. In the outrage game, feelings matter more than facts. You can't tell a black person that since dreadlocks weren't originally theirs that it's not theirs to feel pride in. You are being selective over the outrage.

The fact is, it doesn't matter if a Black person is playing Achilles, because this is still an alternate take on the myth. The author doesn't have to say it's an alternate take, BECAUSE BY DEFINITION, all adaptations are alternate takes on existing stories. Whether you bring a movie to a novel, or a novel to a movie, every adaptation is its own version with its own takes. Some can be closer to actual history or myth than others, but that doesn't mean THEY'RE EVER THE REAL THING.

The definition of patriotism is the love and devotion to your country even if you are far away.
It's more than one definition. It can also be BLIND love and devotion to a country.

No it's not defined as a concept the definition for years now has already been down to that.
Lol no. Words are constantly being defined ESPECIALLY a term like political correctness. In the last years the right found a new term which they used to bash those on the left, but the pendulum now swings both ways. With PC, you realise that a lot of people are hypocrites in their thinking and the actions they take. And what you're doing is political correctness for your country. You cite Jordan Peterson, but Jordan Peterson is the same kind of SJW who will defend Christianity at any cost.

They get to seem cool to everyone else and to themselves something that boosts their ego and it's way easier to know that you are a cool guy or make yourself believe it that face your problems and history. That doesn't mean it's correct though
It's not a matter of what your opinion is on the subject of historical accuracy. It's how Chinese history is defined. ROTK is a huge example of that because it was essentially a propaganda novel for one of the factions because the author was a fan of the underdog faction and not the one that actually won it, so he portrayed the underdogs as noble while the actual winner as evil barbarians. Character personalities changed, people who were mediocre in the actual records are now glorified. These same people now decorate Chinese temples as if they're legitimate.