MovieChat Forums > X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014) Discussion > Is It Realistic That A Midget / Dwarf Wo...

Is It Realistic That A Midget / Dwarf Would Have Held A Position Of Such Power In The 1970s?


Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed many performances of Peter Drinklarge (although I haven't watched Game Of Thrones) and have no issue with midgets in general.

But back in the 1970s people weren't as enlightened as they are in today's more social justice empowered times and "little people", as I don't think they'd have been labelled then (?), were quite commonly ridiculed and openly mocked.

Therefore is it entirely realistic to show a midget in such a position of power and commanding such respect, even from Asian military Generals?

I appreciate the term is thrown about somewhat cheaply these days but could we even go so far as to suggest this may be a plot hole?

reply

Apologies - I've just read that Drinklarge is technically a dwarf rather than a midget. However, the 70s viewpoint on either would have been the same, so I think the question re the legitimacy remains the same...

reply

Absolutely not, and it is not a factor of societal 'enlightenment' as you surmise. A midget/dwarf is unlikely to be a super-genius, or a high ranking official in any capacity within a government structure.

A midget is too busy being a midget, and no insult intended. They spend the majority of their life simply adapting to living within a normal human's world. Their time is not utilized like everyone else' time. This is a fantasy of Hollywood depicted in this movie.

Now, I'm sure someone is going to come along and proof me with some google gotcha post, pointing to one dwarf scientist in history to prove me wrong. I don't care about outliers.

It is why the Greeks developed western civilization, because of the Mediterranean climate. It is the question of time and how people are allowed to utilize it. A midget's time is necessarily used for living as a midget, not for learning how to command troops, or certainly not to take up arms themselves, the time to become 'renowned scientist Oliver Trask'.

reply

"It is why the Greeks developed western civilization, because of the Mediterranean climate. It is the question of time"

You made QUITE the leap of logic here..

No one 'developed' or invented 'western civilization' (groan), and climate has NOTHING to do with it.

The reason why the ancient Greeks had so much philosophy, art and leisure, was because they had SLAVES.

So before you call them civilized, research your history and think what you are saying. The reason is not climate, the reason is literal slavery. That is why they had time to philosophize and to 'cultivate', but they didn't exactly invent computers or interstellar space travel. Basically they were people with a lot of time on their hands (climate does not give you time, just by the way, think where the time comes from - not having to do the stuff someone else does for you!), that did what they could with what they had.

Not all Greek people were all that civilized, and this did frustrate many that tried to be. There was one philosopher that carried a lantern with him, searching for 'humans', and never found any (or something like that), underlining the barbaric state of the masses even in the culture you call 'developers of western civilization'.

Also, as Gandhi pointed out when asked about what he thinks of 'western civilization' - 'It would be a good idea!'

This is not a mere joke. There is no true civilization in the west.. only in ancient India, ancient China and Japan, and of course all the Atlantis's priesthood-influenced cultures, like ancient Egyptians, that were spiritually on such a high level, modern people could NOT imagine it whatsoever. (Which is why egyptologists misunderstand everything, because they are looking at cultivated, sophisticated, truly and actually civilized culture via the lens of modern, nihilistic, materialistic barbarism that you call 'western civilization')..

reply

So of course every pyramid becomes an ego-based 'tomb', every stone becomes 'slaves put it there' (even though it has been proven to be logistically and factually impossible, and this is why the pyramids remain mostly still a mystery to those that don't understand the stones were levitated there and cut with energy tools, not metal tools - the truth is more fantastic than fiction)..

In reality, pyramids were initiation chambers.. should I even bother explain something like this to people that have NO concept of what 'initiation' even means, and probably associate it with some kind of cults and stupid, materialistic, useless 'rituals'..?

The pyramid shape focuses energies, so when you put the initiation chamber at the correct point, about 2/3 from the ground up, the pyramid shape focuses and sharpens cosmic energies and Earth energies to a very specific point as strongly as possible, which means that you can leave a physical body in that room for a very long time without it needing nourishment or starting to 'rot' in any way (the energy is the only reason why your body doesn't rot - it does not live without you keeping it animated.. so as soon as you depart, it starts rotting).

So an initiatee could leave their body for long periods of time to be initiated on higher levels, and this is conceptualized in the bible when Jesus the Christ did this so he could be purified and reach enlightenment so he could preach the truth as a pure, cosmic being, untainted by the animalistic side of the physical body (hence the temptations and getting rid of lusts and such).

Obviously he was a high-level spirit to begin with, and the body's seed came from a higher entity, so it could hold such powerful entity, but an Earthly incarnation still taints you to a level, so to be able to give the message as purely as possible, this kind of initiation was necessary.

But people are morons, so they distort these simple, obvious historical truths, so we have the bible and egyptologists..

reply

YOU NEED TO STOP USING THAT WORD.

reply