Is the academy award committee unfair to black actors?

General philosophy message board for Discussion and debate on other philosophical issues not directly related to veganism. Metaphysics, religion, theist vs. atheist debates, politics, general science discussion, etc.
User avatar
EquALLity
I am God
Posts: 2998
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 11:31 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan
Location: United States of Canada

Re: Is the academy award committee unfair to black actors?

Post by EquALLity » Wed Feb 03, 2016 11:24 pm

knot wrote: Yes, somewhere in that video he says "Israel and the US are the real terrorists", or something like that
Do you know what time he says it, and the actual quote?
knot wrote: No, I just said their reporting was "anti-Jewish" (don't know of a better word for it), because equating Israelis with the rock-throwing, suicide-bombing, wife-beating losers that populate Palestine is not fair.
...Israeli is not synonymous with Jew; an Israeli is merely a citizen of Israel. Not all Israelis are Jews, and not all Jews are Israelis. Many Jews are very critical of the Israeli government. Are they anti-Jewish (anti-Semetic) also?

There is also a difference between The Israeli government and Israelis.
What you're saying here uses logic that reminds me of the mindset that led to Japanese-American internment camps.

First, there's the assumption that Japanese automatically agree and identify with what their government does, and then there's the absurd equivocation with the Japanese and Japanese-Americans. It makes no sense.

And you're also generalizing about Palestinians. Not Palestinian terrorist groups, but all Palestinians.
If anything is bigoted here, that is.
knot wrote:That's just what his name sounds like to me: ))
...
knot wrote:Blacks are reported as being perpetrators of crime more often, so it only makes sense that the cops investigate them more
Institutional racism is clearly apart of it. See that video. If police weren't investigating black people inappropriately, why would they have to lie about it?
knot wrote:Yes, but blacks kill blacks slightly more often than whites kill whites, and they commit many more murders in general per capita.
It's probably largely reported that way because black people are investigated by the police more. It also could be because they might tend to live nearer to each other.
knot wrote:If they don't want to be stereotyped by the police, they should stop giving the police good reasons to stereotype them. Simple!
O_O
I don't want to live in a country where it's encouraged that police stereotype any group.

It's pretty obvious that black people still face a lot of racism in America. Excluding this, for one thing, there's the stuff we just saw with the Confederate flag (AKA the slavery flag that apparently isn't racially related, even though people in the south have literally been using it to terrorize black people, because racism is pretty much gone in America).
Your dismissive attitude towards the issue, combined with blaming black people for being stereotyped, and as a result being shot and murdered while unarmed and running away in the streets leads me to believe that you simply don't want to acknowledge the issue because you have white guilt.
knot wrote:nd if black people want to reduce their risk of getting shot by the police with 99,9% they should comply with the police officers requests, not punch the officer in the face and not try and grab the officer's gun. In other words, do the exact opposite of what Trayvon Martin did
Yeah, like that twelve-year-old Tamir Rice who got shot with the toy gun and totally had it coming! Damn blacks.
knot wrote:I don't know where that statistics is from, but it needs to take some things into account to be legit. Like, repeat offenses, amount of drugs, etc.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... ne-charts/
They are disproportionately arrested. I'm not sure what repeat offenses and amount of drugs have to do with that.
knot wrote: You can't just assume they're racially motivated. American politics seems to be full of mud-slinging. They're just attacking him because he's a democrat, their political opponent. All politicans get flak, especially the ones who are on either end of the PC spectrum. Just look at how many personal attacks Trump gets. If anything, Obama's blackness most likely benefitted him hugely
The republicans never accused Bill Clinton of being born in another country, and never asked for his college records, or called him a secret Muslim.
knot wrote:Stereotypes often do exist for a good reason, eventhough they are not always fair in practice. The police have good reasons to be more concerned about black people or Muslims openly carrying guns around. Similarily it makes sense to be more worried about white males in the context of school shootings
I don't think they often exist for a good reason. They're overwhelmingly based on ignorance.

And no, they don't. Black people/Muslims protesting with guns are not inherently more dangerous than white people with guns protesting. Why would they be?
knot wrote:They're fueling a racial divide and enabling a faith-based victim narrative of black people. Where are the Jim Crow laws? Where are the people in favor of the KKK? Nowhere. They're just arguing for an invisible, intangible, racist system of oppression. It's very similar to feminists talking about patriarchy in the West. All of these issues have logical social explanations that are completely unrelated to skin color, but TYT doesn't want to hold minorities responsible for anything. It's easier (and more popular) to just blame white people's inherent racism for all the world's problems
You're making absurd assumptions. White peoples' inherent racism? What? When have they ever talked about that concept?
Ana, John, Ben, Jimmy, and Hannah are all white... I'm pretty sure they don't consider themselves racists.

You don't need to support the KKK to be racist. That's a very high standard.
knot wrote:TYT outright accused the academy award board of being racists. But what do the numbers show? They're wrong
I don't understand that image... There were no black actors nominated, so why do they have a bar at all in the Oscar nomination section?
No non-whites were nominated at all, from what I'm reading, which seems very bizarre.
"I am not a Marxist." -Karl Marx

User avatar
ThatNerdyScienceGirl
Full Member
Posts: 210
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 8:46 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegetarian

Post by ThatNerdyScienceGirl » Sun Feb 07, 2016 1:15 pm

We separate Male and Female in terms of actors because... why not? Identity politics is totally not regressive! Just wait, they will soon add "Black Female Actor" and "Black Male Actor" into the mix, because why not!?

I do think that we should not just pick lighter skinned people for oscars or whatever, but I am not convinced that things like this happening is due to racism. Take last years Oscars for example, and the huge issue with #OscarsSoWhite, which is a hashtag designed to criticize the oscars for not including more non-white people because... non-white. Selma got good reviews and from what I heard was an excellent movie, but it got no Oscar Nominee, is this racism? Could be, could just be that Selma did not ring with the Oscar judges due to experiences, etc. Granted, a more diverse judging table would be nice, but then we get into the issue of True Representation Vs Tokenism.

Is the black judge there because he is the best for the job, or because the ratings would be higher and the judging look less biased if they APPEARED more inclusive? It's like American Idol and their White Guy + Woman + Black Guy thing they have going on with the judges.

We just have to remember that The Academy Award Committee and The Oscars were created and populated by the wealthy, which in 1929 happened to be all white. That isn't by itself a BAD thing, but we have to understand that modern movies that may resonate strongly with the black population might not resonate as strongly with the majority white judges. The same way the NAACP Image Awards are about as colorful in the opposite way, including almost exclusively black actors and shows, because Hispanic, Native American, Middle Eastern, and Asian actors, shows, and actresses just don't resonate with a majority/exclusively black panel. And that's perfectly fine!

Although I have to admit that I cringe at the word "blacktress" and "blacktor" the same way I cringe at "GAYmers" and "GAYtheists". Stop, just please stop. The cringe is real, like omg! The struggle
Nerdy Girl talks about health and nutrition: http://thatnerdysciencegirl.com/

User avatar
Jebus
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1944
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:08 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by Jebus » Mon Feb 08, 2016 4:35 am

Interesting chart. It seems the Latino are the ones who have reason to complain.
EquALLity wrote:Why do people always reference that statistic about black people, but never mention that most white murders are committed by other white people also?
Are we talking about the US here? With such an overwhelming white majority it would be perfectly normal if most white murders are committed by other white people. However, there is definitely something remarkable if indeed 93% of black murders are committed by a racial group representing only 13 percent of the population.
How to become vegan in 4.5 hours:
1.Watch Forks over Knives (Health)
2.Watch Cowspiracy (Environment)
3. Watch Earthlings (Ethics)
Congratulations, unless you are a complete idiot you are now a vegan.

User avatar
knot
Master in Training
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 9:34 pm

Post by knot » Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:45 pm

Do you know what time he says it, and the actual quote?
No
...Israeli is not synonymous with Jew; an Israeli is merely a citizen of Israel. Not all Israelis are Jews, and not all Jews are Israelis. Many Jews are very critical of the Israeli government. Are they anti-Jewish (anti-Semetic) also?

And you're also generalizing about Palestinians. Not Palestinian terrorist groups, but all Palestinians.
If anything is bigoted here, that is.
I'm generalizing and speaking in relative terms, like all people do in conversation. Some generalizations are fair, and some are not.

If I said "Paris is beautiful", you know I'm generalizing and not saying every single place in Paris is beautiful, and you also know there is a relative element in the sentence because in order for Paris to be a beautiful city there have to be uglier cities.
Institutional racism is clearly apart of it. See that video. If police weren't investigating black people inappropriately, why would they have to lie about it?
"Inappropriately"? I'm just going to assume that the police have been lying about it. Even then, how does that prove they're racist? They probably hate having to investigate more blacks than whites, because they know the liberal media will bash them and portray them as racist assholes for it

But the racial "bias" in the war on drugs has completely logical explanations. See this: https://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/usa/Rcedrg00-05.htm
O_O
I don't want to live in a country where it's encouraged that police stereotype any group.
So the police should be equally worried about little girls and 300 lb men with swastikas tatooed on their forehead? You have to be good at making educated guesses as a police officer, i.e. stereotyping people

It's pretty obvious that black people still face a lot of racism in America.
Maybe from individuals, but I don't see any good evidence that there is institutionalized racism
Excluding this, for one thing, there's the stuff we just saw with the Confederate flag (AKA the slavery flag that apparently isn't racially related, even though people in the south have literally been using it to terrorize black people, because racism is pretty much gone in America).
I don't know that much about the symbolism of the flag, but it doesn't seem to mean the same thing for all people. Far from it, actually http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-the-c ... lag-racist
Your dismissive attitude towards the issue, combined with blaming black people for being stereotyped, and as a result being shot and murdered while unarmed and running away in the streets
I'm not saying the police don't ever misuse their power, but there are a lot of ways to decrease your risk of getting shot when dealing with the police, especially if you live in a neighbourhood with a lot of violent criminals
leads me to believe that you simply don't want to acknowledge the issue because you have white guilt.
[/quote]

Wtf? :_D
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... ne-charts/
They are disproportionately arrested. I'm not sure what repeat offenses and amount of drugs have to do with that.
Read the report I posted earlier in this post
I don't think they often exist for a good reason. They're overwhelmingly based on ignorance.

And no, they don't. Black people/Muslims protesting with guns are not inherently more dangerous than white people with guns protesting. Why would they be?
Statistically, they're more likely to be either gang members or terrorists, so the police have good reason to be more suspicious of them. Different people have different privileges. White redneck NRA members get to openly protest with their guns out, and black people get to exploit a bottomless well of white guilt whenever something doesn't go their way (case in point: the Oscars)

User avatar
Red
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 2859
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Toluca Lake

Post by Red » Mon Feb 15, 2016 7:53 pm

Don't mind me but I have an anecdote I would like to share which isn't really relevant to the conversation or debate at hand because I didn't really pay attention to it.

Anyhoo, there is an extremely talented composer by the name Yoko Shimomura who makes music for video games such as Kingdom Hearts, Mario & Luigi, etc.. I decided to Google her, and on her Wikipedia page, a source described her as "the most famous female video game music composer in the world". That never really sat well with me from the 2 and a half years ago when I first read it. I thought to myself " I'm pretty sure if it was a dude, it would just say 'most famous video game music composer in the world'.". I mean, why just female video game composer? That never really sat well with me.

Anyway, she's got some excellent music. Here's a link to every Kingdom Hearts song she's made, if you're interested: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLF3A56DE71EB27364
Learning never exhausts the mind.
-Leonardo da Vinci

User avatar
seitan_forker
Newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 3:32 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan
Location: Denver

Post by seitan_forker » Mon Feb 15, 2016 8:13 pm

knot wrote: Statistically, they're more likely to be either gang members or terrorists, so the police have good reason to be more suspicious of them. Different people have different privileges. White redneck NRA members get to openly protest with their guns out, and black people get to exploit a bottomless well of white guilt whenever something doesn't go their way (case in point: the Oscars)
You seem nice.

Muslims are more likely to be labeled terrorists, but mass shootings, Planned Parenthood attacks, church bombings, etc. are perpetuated almost exclusively by white males. The FBI's list of monitored gangs is also loaded with white gangs, too.

User avatar
knot
Master in Training
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 9:34 pm

Post by knot » Tue Feb 16, 2016 4:55 am

seitan_forker wrote:
knot wrote: Statistically, they're more likely to be either gang members or terrorists, so the police have good reason to be more suspicious of them. Different people have different privileges. White redneck NRA members get to openly protest with their guns out, and black people get to exploit a bottomless well of white guilt whenever something doesn't go their way (case in point: the Oscars)
You seem nice.

=D
Muslims are more likely to be labeled terrorists, but mass shootings, Planned Parenthood attacks, church bombings, etc. are perpetuated almost exclusively by white males. The FBI's list of monitored gangs is also loaded with white gangs, too.
ya, I've already stated that context matters. So with regards to school shootings, for example, it makes sense to be much more wary of white adolescent males than any other group

But we were specifically talking about a group of people flaunting their guns in public, in which case it would be completely insane not to be much more worried if it was Muslims or blacks doing it. Just looking at the stats, it seems that any given gang member is 4 times as likely to be black than white. So (unless I'm being a retard about the math) this means any random black person is 21 times more likely to be a member of a gang than a random white person. Of course this is a simplified view, because there are a many other contextual cues that good police officers will use to evaluate the situation.

User avatar
Volenta
Master in Training
Posts: 696
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 5:13 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by Volenta » Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:11 am

Argh... wouldn't have expected the extreme right-wing Israel being defended on this forum, from people claiming to come up for oppressed groups.
knot wrote:
^What about the Antisemitism?
[...]

Then there are the infinite false equivalances, whereby USA and Israel's military are equated with Hamaz -- yes, the human shield-wielding, suicide-bombing terrorist organization. There's a huge ideological divide between the Palestinians and the Israelis that left-wingers love to pretend doesn't exist.
First, show me any evidence for the claim that Hamas is using human shields. There is none, it is a myth. (it is funny though that there is evidence of Israel using human shields) This is purely an argument put forward by the Israeli government (now a mainstream mantra for defenders) to detract attention from Israel's crimes in Gaza.

You can call Hamas a terrorist organization, then at least be consistent and admit Israel is a terrorist state when they target civilians, including children. Or else, define the word 'terrorism'. I doubt you can make a general definition that excludes Israeli actions.

Hamas is indeed a fundamentalist Islamic organization, but it's also a resistance movement fighting for the Israeli occupation to end. Not saying they are good guys, and I don't agree with their tactics, but these facts shouldn't be ignored if your talking about ideological divides. On the other hand, Israel is currently governed by Netanyahu, which is extremely brutal regarding Palestinians. This is no ideological moderate either (there are many Israeli people that are by the way, but the government just isn't). I'll absolutely grand that Israel is far more secular than Palestine, but this says absolutely nothing about whether their foreign policy is good or bad (just like Great Britain was great domestically, but a disaster in India and elsewhere).

Also, you seem to use Hamas and 'the Palestinians' interchangeably. Most Palestinians are not part of Hamas.

Lastly, conflating antisemitism with criticism of Israel is ludicrous. EquALLity was asking about antisemitism, and you start talking about left-wingers on Israel-Palestine. This is making damaging associations for no good reason. I agree completely with what EquALLity said here:
EquALLity wrote:...Israeli is not synonymous with Jew; an Israeli is merely a citizen of Israel. Not all Israelis are Jews, and not all Jews are Israelis. Many Jews are very critical of the Israeli government. Are they anti-Jewish (anti-Semetic) also?

There is also a difference between The Israeli government and Israelis.
What you're saying here uses logic that reminds me of the mindset that led to Japanese-American internment camps.

First, there's the assumption that Japanese automatically agree and identify with what their government does, and then there's the absurd equivocation with the Japanese and Japanese-Americans. It makes no sense.

And you're also generalizing about Palestinians. Not Palestinian terrorist groups, but all Palestinians.
If anything is bigoted here, that is.
knot wrote:No, I just said their reporting was "anti-Jewish" (don't know of a better word for it), because equating Israelis with the rock-throwing, suicide-bombing, wife-beating losers that populate Palestine is not fair.
Now that statement is actually discriminatory.

User avatar
EquALLity
I am God
Posts: 2998
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 11:31 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan
Location: United States of Canada

Post by EquALLity » Mon Feb 22, 2016 8:01 pm

Volenta wrote:Argh... wouldn't have expected the extreme right-wing Israel being defended on this forum, from people claiming to come up for oppressed groups.
Have you seen this topic I made awhile ago?: https://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewt ... f=17&t=971
"I am not a Marxist." -Karl Marx

User avatar
Volenta
Master in Training
Posts: 696
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 5:13 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by Volenta » Mon Feb 22, 2016 9:28 pm

EquALLity wrote:
Volenta wrote:Argh... wouldn't have expected the extreme right-wing Israel being defended on this forum, from people claiming to come up for oppressed groups.
Have you seen this topic I made awhile ago?: https://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewt ... f=17&t=971
Yes, maybe I'll post something there if I have time.

In short:
- I really don't take Pat Condell seriously on this issue (or maybe actually never really, see also the topic about him)
- BrimstoneSalad's analysis seems reasonable for the most part. Don't agree that the situation is complicated though, it actually pretty straight-forward compared to many other conflicts (like Syria; now that is an absolute mess). Also, I think he falls into this trap:
Volenta wrote:I'll absolutely grand that Israel is far more secular than Palestine, but this says absolutely nothing about whether their foreign policy is good or bad (just like Great Britain was great domestically, but a disaster in India and elsewhere).
Even if Israel was completely secular (which it isn't), that wouldn't make much of a difference whether there methods and occupation are justified. The conflict is ultimately much more about territory than it is about religion.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests