Diversity in TV and Movies

I know there are multi-ethnic folks on this board and I want to ask: is diversity in films important to you? Do you feel detached from movies that don't have a like-skinned protagonist?

Other urls found in this thread:

jaymans.wordpress.com/jaymans-race-inheritance-and-iq-f-a-q-f-r-b/
jaymans.wordpress.com/about/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Nah, I never gave a shit about the race or gender of the protaganist, probably since most movies star generic white guys anyway, so I didn't grow up being addicted to living vicariously through movies.

No, and anyone saying otherwise is lying to you. People are clearly in an sjw craze

is diversity in films important to you?

Absolutely not no, it never has been important to me. "This movie is bad because there is not a latino or asian" or whatever the fuck never ever crossed my mind. I can't even think of a single movie where that thought would even apply besides perhaps Ghost in the Shell. And god knows that movie was terrible regardless of the casting.

What is important is: it is a good movie? Is it a good script? good dialogues? good actors? good directing and so forth. That's the stuff that matters the most to me, not a fucking racial quota.

Just to affirm: I'm not asking if you think a movie is bad because the race of the protag isn't yours, I'm asking do you feel "detached" or any way of expressing that word.

It's always a bad thing because it's always forced diversity.

You can see the political hacks behind the curtain.

Making a great film should be the only focus not pushing your shitty political biases into it.

so much this
I wish we could go back to a time where nobody gave a shit if the movie starred an all white cast or an all black one, or a mixed one, and what it mattered was storytelling while not giving a fuck about political agendas.
>It's a movie
>It needs more black people
>Ok lets put these token filler characters so minorities don't feel left out
>brainlets.jpg

Depends entirely on how it's handled.

The vast majority of the time...

You mean like Diversity and Comics?

It wasn't an issue for example Lethal Weapon, Rush Hour, Rocky, Predator, Terminator, Trading Places, Coming to America.

I'm born in england but ethnically indian. Most movies cobsumed by the masses are American movies anyway meaning they will star english speaking americans who are most likely white. So it wasn't an issue. The whole diversity thing is a meme and you only please dumbasses who need a self insert. If you truly take diversity all the way you'll have stupid shit like the dwarf from GOT playing James Bond or random aborginees appearing in hungarian films for no reason at all there is no need for it and when they try to tackle diversity from an "underepresented minority" angle that is stupid aswell, the representation of ethnicities is not a 1:1 to match from population to industry population, and where do the percentages stop are we talking about locally, nationally, globally? Because white people are actually a minority it's just that they produce the most consumed movies. What if you need to split up a percentage of people ethnically into a fixed number of people in a cast of say 3 people when there are more ethnicites than 3 to represent.

It's all so fucking stupid unless it's absolutely key to a role for historical accuracy or geographical accuracy of a characters backstory then it doesn't matter. It was actually more progressive on merit over 10 years ago but people love to use the current year as a measure of the being the most progressive thing in history to feel good about themselves.

>is diversity in films important to you?
In movies made by whites? No. Non-whites need to start making their own films. And more importantly, support them. Blacks don't need whites to tell them to make music. They just do it.

>Do you feel detached from movies that don't have a like-skinned protagonist?
No. This is a strange question.

No because I am an independent thinker and my views align with what others have already said.

No. I hate this forced diversity in movies like an Amerindian man or a black woman in Medieval Scotland, it's ridiculous and kills my mood like corn and tomatoes in a story about the Roman Empire.
If they want diversity, they need to make movies about Mayans, Mongols, Eskimos, Tutsis, etc.

no, I don’t give a fuck. I don’t watch movies to feel racially represented. I watch a lot of foreign films and literally never cared about the race or gender of any protagonist.

Also this ‘diversity’ shit only happens in america and in shitty blockbusters, so even more reasons to not give a fuck

I grew up watching white men in lead roles for years and identfied with them despite being black and still do. The forced diversity is disingenuous.

>is diversity in films important to you?
I think it matters.
>Do you feel detached from movies that don't have a like-skinned protagonist?
Not always, it depends on the movie. A movie with pocs doesn't automatically mean it's going to be good or that it "speaks to me". A lot of movies don't try to frame a specific narrative that I personally can relate with either, which is perfectly fine. Movies tell stories. I'm not a black woman so a movie that revolves around the life and experiences of a black woman isn't meant to be about me, but to tell that story. The issue is more about how whiteness is understood as invisible, neutral, the norm, idealized etc.. If picking whiteness is an "artistic style" or a certain kind of framework, then I would rather prefer the movie to be highlighted as such. If a movie tries to "ignore race" because it "doesn't fit", that it's too sensitive, well sure it's fine. But call it white because that's what it is. Don't generalize or pretend that you can wrap these things around white people and expect the rest of us to relate or even applaud it. White westerns can stay in their white supremacist lane all day long if they want to, but they should at least be honest. Say you want to make racist movies and own it, like pic related should.

People always whine about "forced diversity", but you see the opposite more often where the protagonist is the least intelligent and least capable in a group of multi-culturals, yet he's blunt forced as the leader because he's the white male self insert.

Like most people in this thread, forced diversity for the sake of it is demeaning. I can't really support if, because in the end it mosts it as if blacks or any such non-white race has to be spoonfed.

I just watched Bright and I'm not an orc but he was favorite character

>I'm asking do you feel "detached"

Depends of the movie. I didn't feel detached by say Django or 12 years a slave because the protagonist happens to be from a different race than my own. But these are rather good movies.

However when it's so obvious as it has been with say Nuwars or the ghostbuster reboot, and on top of that these happen all to be average to shitty movies, then yes it starts to triggers me big time.
Because I can see the agenda and I can tell someone is trying to push it down my throat, while completely disregarding the movie quality. It insults the audience's intelligence and damages the movie itself.

Not at all. Do I need to get pissy at Da Vinci for not drawing a portrait of a gypsy? The art belongs to the auteur (and not producer, but that's not the case today). A film should not be about how YOU want the characters to be related to you.
And POC should focus more on finding representations in a more substantial domain. Pajit Pai is an influential figure while the retards are whining about how Apu ruined their life

I would like to add that to those of you claiming forced diversity it's rather funny in a way how all-white casts are not really radical or represents some sort of agenda, as if whiteness truly is invisible and neutral. Yet, just seeing someone on a screen that isn't white is called out for being forced as if it's unnatural for us to try to like or empathize with someone who isn't white. Sure, there is bad writing and just having pocs for the sake of having it to pat yourself on the back is in itself racist and already got a name, tokenism. With that aside, what does "non-forced diversity" look like? How are pocs supposed to be portrayed and act so to not trigger white culture and its audience? And even if we were portrayed "respectably" or "non-provocatively" for white people, how is that going to magically make people less racist?

1/10
made me reply

I personally think that tokenism is often, but not always, the most accurate way to portray diversity. Why do people have such a problem with it? That's the way that things go down a hell of a lot of the time.

I am white, but I didnt even consider diversity or representation in movies until it became a forced thing by SJWs. Like watching The Thing, I never once thought of the characters skin tones being an imoortant part of them. They all acted like anyone would in those situations.

We gotta woman over here!
LONDON

Flip here. I dont give a shit about representation. Sometimes it even irks me more if the representation is a walking stereotype. I can relate to a character that speaks to me regardless of skin color

Mixed (almost everything except native american). Therefore I can make fun of everyone, and no one can stop me.

Grew up on movies in English, most if not all of them with white protags. I never see anyone who looks even remotely like me, but I never thought to look for anyone who looked like me in the first place. It never occurred to me.

The relationship I have to characters comes from the circumstances they are in, and how they deal with those circumstances based on their personality traits. I cry at the end of The Return of the King, I pump my fist in triumph during Ong Bak, and I laugh my ass off watching Charlie Chaplin.

Diversity and representation is just another way of people who are not in power to gain power through social coercion. That's all. The proof of this is in Bollywood or the Chinese film traditions, in which no one complains about representation and yet they have very strong financial support from the masses.

When I look on screen, I want to see attractive women and heroic men. Or if I'm watching a character study, I want ugly people all around so I'm not distracted and I can focus on the philosophy.

Representation is a fake argument, like the 'gender gap' in pay. If you pay it credence, then it works, but if you ignore it or laugh at it, then it disappears.

>forced diversity
A made up nothing meme term. Like someone is tearing some blue eyed blonde infant away from its brothers and sisters and forcing it through tears to play with some tar babies instead.

Get out of your echo chamber.

Sorry, a few more thoughts.
I'm convinced that 'representation' only matters to people who are unable to see events from another person's perspective. Children usually have problems with this, but liberal soyboys and their lesbian friends seem to have the same problem. They continually show an inability to put themselves in someone else's shoes, and this tumbles over into their views on entertainment.

If you can see something from someone else's perspective, then their skin colour, sex, race, etc. don't actually matter so much at all. You're not looking at the screen for a 1-1 copy of yourself, you're looking at a character trait that is familiar. Greed, envy, love, ecstasy, hate, etc...these are things we all feel, and are in many ways separate from our direct biological make up.

SJWs don't understand this at all...they are too preoccupied with 'identity' and fitting into an identity that they try to convince others of as being individual and unique and yet they really just want to feel like they are a part of a group. Entertainment helps them to do this if they see a visual representation of themselves...they hate it though when the character traits conflict with their idealized version of themselves.

That's all..I'm sure there's more that one can say on this subject.

Nice points, user

(You)

>I personally think that tokenism is often, but not always, the most accurate way to portray diversity
Maybe it says more about your idea of what diversity is and how it looks like rather than about its accuracy. With tokenism often comes the stereotypes as well or being portrayed a certain way over and over. It shows how limited makers of that movie is, that they cannot fathom a poc in a different way. It's lazy.
>Why do people have such a problem with it?
On the surface it doesn't seem like a big deal. When you add some history and how people of different races (other than white) in the West has been understood it becomes clear that we aren't supposed to belong or have a say, just to put it short. And I guess it's an annoying reminder when it's also expressed through entertainment, like movies, although it's so common and has always been so it's silly whenever someone gets "shocked" and yells the current year. It's almost like there is a collective cognitive way of looking at "the others", which despite all its bias and racism, is just accepted as if it says something real about us. Like you want to believe it's true, and this is where it becomes interesting how some white people will get loud and really defend these portrayals as if it has some kind of sacred meaning to them. That we symbolize something in white culture, that not being white is supposed to have a specific place and expression and it's completely taboo to question it. It shows how the medium of entertainment uses some kind of lens - any form of entertainment from any culture would, there is no neutrality - and reproduces its own truths or realities, but without saying anything about why. It just is and requires no real justification, and with stereotypes and tokens that justification is made a lot easier. "We" don't need pocs on a screen if they "don't belong here" or represent everything else than what's considered normal, so to say.

Diversity is fine.
Women are fine.
But stop forcing fucking ugly no names and shitty messages down our throats!

Nobody wants to watch fat Chinese romances with apes (Even Ceasar is more attractive than Boyega).

Yeah it's important for me because I always hate black people and I force myself to watch diversity stuff to help me hating them less.

I don't know what you're talking about, but all I was saying is that it's often more accurate, and objectively so, to portray a group of people as being homogeneous apart from one or two people. I've had multiple groups of friends in my life and been in several different work/school environments. Some were diverse, some were homogeneous, and some were mostly homogeneous. The idea of "forced diversity" to me means that no artwork should ever be homogeneous, even though it would be an accurate reflection of society at times. Go ahead and amp up the diversity to 11 in a movie if that's what you're about. Or make a movie with a stereotypical token character, because stereotypical people exist. Or make a movie with a lily-white primary cast. These groups all exist in real life.

WE

>Mixed (almost everything except native american). Therefore I can make fun of everyone, and no one can stop me.
Well, what do you look like? Are you light-skinned? Being a poc doesn't make you anti-racist by default or give you any type of free card.
>If you pay it credence, then it works, but if you ignore it or laugh at it, then it disappears.
You still grow up in this culture and you learn its language and norms. You don't have a super brain that is immune to it's surroundings. This idea that you through your unique individuality but also through your "way of thinking", like some tabula rasa, can rise above the social structures we are raised within sounds like white peoples' mythological nonsense to me, because it is usually white people who has the luxury of being understood as individuals. The easiest example of how you're tied to a group would be your name, which tells everyone which gender you have and in a lot of cases also your ethnicity.
>When I look on screen, I want to see attractive women and heroic men
It sounds like you're saying diversity is bad because we will see more of less attractive women and heroic men, because they're not white.
Identity politics isn't a SJW thing exclusively and not being able to see from a different person's perspective isn't a liberal/conservative thing either. Which is kinda funny, because it would sound like an argument in favor of diversity as it will force you to become aware of how you are in relation to someone else. Ideally, of course... Without any further look into why you see yourself the way you do and why you have the ideas of others around you and where it comes from, you will most likely just reproduce your own biases. I'd say that's a really basic way of putting it. It doesn't matter seeing a poc if he is still a stereotype, as it assumes the psyche of the receiver and denies any form of reflection.

It scared me sometimes how much I love white people so I think diversity is important.

Maybe there is indeed one more thing to say about all of this.

The people who scream for 'diversity' only want it to happen in things that are already successful. No one clamors for diversity in artistic failures, or artistic risks that have no guarantee of success. No, it has to be with already established franchises that make shittonnes of money.

What they don't realize is that these movies do not make money BECAUSE of their diversity or lack thereof, they make money because people enjoy watching them. Furthermore, injecting diversity into something is not a neutral factor, like changing the colour of the car the hero drives or the model gun they fire. Human diversity is linked with culture, and when you disassociate culture from diversity, you get what we see now in movies: bland characters that have no recognizable traits of humanity in them because they're written to be played by anyone, man or woman, trans or real. Women are no longer women in film, men are no longer men in film, and anyone can play anything. This is death on film.

Annie wasn't a successful musical movie because the protag was a red-headed cute girl, it was because the film was well made, the cast suitable, and the music memorable. So what do they do? Make it black, and then blame people for not going to see it.

Star Wars wasn't fun because it had a male white protag in Luke, it's because the story was efficient and exciting to watch. So what do they do? Make the protag now a woman, because women need a hero too. And then they blame people for not being able to relate to her when she has no personality that we can figure out and doesn't act in the least way like a woman, straight or lesbian.

That's all...now I'm going down the damn rabbit hole.

I'd argue that this is a problem on both the far left and far right, with both viewing idealized representations of other races/genders as somehow threatening to their own group. The far left vilifies heterosexual, male, and white protagonists as "others", while the far right tends to vilify gay, female, and/or minority protagonists as "others". As you said, I think such responses stem from an inability to see beyond one's own perspective/politics. That being said, I think the left is a lot more vocal about this and fosters a more stratified culture that probably contributes to this. People I know on the far left would see us divided along increasingly irrelevant racial/ethnic lines into miniscule social categories while those I know on the far right would have us divided into two larger categories of traditional v. nontraditional, with traditional favoring white, heterosexual, male, etc. as a general rule; I view both of these worldviews as unproductive given their near-requirement of conflict along lines drawn by inborn characteristics rather than ideas.

For my part, I'm biracial and have never felt "detached" because of the races of characters onscreen. I can watch Brief Encounter or In the Mood For Love and be just as invested in the British or Chinese characters as I would be in characters who match my own ethnicity/nationality. I think the answer to the diversity issue is an increase in diverse writers and producers, which requires investment in promising projects from those in minority communities. Example: Tyler Perry or Eddie Murphy should be investing in promising, low budget movies from other black talents rather than making offensively bad stuff like Madea or Norbit. I don't think asking white writers to represent minority viewpoints and then criticizing them when they fail to live up to expectations is a productive way to go about this.

>Women are fine

When they're not in male roles.

That's another thing they're trying to force.

this
>too many men are software developers and CEO's, I want to be a software developer and a CEO for a fortune 500!
>Also, I have a woman studies degree!
for some reason women don't want to be janitor or miners, they just want the high paying jobs that take dedication and skill to perform

really activates my almonds

>Do you feel detached from movies that don't have a like-skinned protagonist?
Yes, because race is deeper than skin color. It also depends on the narrative.

Ah, discussion!

I am mid-skinned; I can tan pretty dark, though I'd never be considered white because of my hair colour and eye colour, as well as facial structure. I never made the claim that I am anti-racist by default. I am happily racist like everyone else, only I'm not apologetic about it and I acknowledge that racism (if we believe that separate races exist) is merely an extension of our biological instincts to group things in order to determine if they are threats to us or not. I have the same 'free card' as anyone else, but I happen to live in a society where people still make fun of everyone and everything. That's rare, and it's certainly not a normal thing in the West.

The cultures are different depending on social strata as well as how multikulti it is. Even if I wasn't living where I am and interacting with the people I see, it would still have nothing to do with what you call 'ris(ing) above the social structures we are raised within'. The bottom line is that you have the power to recognize when a victim is a victim and when a victim is using something that doesn't exist to further their power and victimhood simultaneously. Names and ethnicity is important, sure, but irrelevant because I don't actually care what complete strangers think of me; the only opinions I take seriously are those of people who know me.

cont.

I'm very white and by no means a weeb, but I have felt really attached to samurai and other asiam kung fu movies before.
Can't think of another example.

They used to be dedicated to their husband and children that was the deal.
Which is perfectly in line with female nature they're interested in people not things.
They give birth to new people and have to care for their children.

Biology kills the left.

do you feel detached from zootopia because they aren't humans. or any animated movie for that matter?

cont.

As for seeing attractive women and heroic men on screen, it has nothing to do with whiteness or not. Why was Rose a fat Asian instead of her sister? Diversity. Why is Finn not a younger Denzel Washington? Diversity. Why does Admiral Holdo exist? Diversity. I don't care if they're white or not, I have no interest in seeing people that I find unattractive on screen unless it's a character study. Star Wars isn't that, therefore it's out of place.

Once again, I did not state that Identity Politics is ONLY an SJW thing; it is something that they have weaponized in the past few years and gained lots from playing the victim. In terms of seeing things from a different person's perspective, I see the proof of this in the tolerance that is shown to SJWs for every demand they make, from the demands in Universities to the demands in entertainment to the demands in government. Right wingers in power, if they were playing the same game, simply wouldn't allow it. But they do. Something to think about.
I think I understand your point about reflection and the problems of pocs being stereotypes, but be careful here; I absolutely know why I feel the way I do, why I developed this way, and why I view the world as it is and not how I'd like it to be. I grew up, quite simply, in a meritocracy, and was raised from a foundation that your biology doesn't matter, only the quality of your work does. And when I saw the fruits of my labour being rewarded fairly (as well as my failures being punished fairly), the proof was, as you would say, in the pudding.
But modern society doesn't like this idea because it excludes people based on their achievements or lack of ability to achieve. That's what this is all about really.

Well, don't get me wrong here. Labeling is natural. We understand the world through labels and categories. Becoming aware of differences and differentiating things around you is normal and completely human. The issue that is drafted here is not so much about why we label, but how. A label isn't bad in itself, it's how we learn to think about that label and what (and who) we put into it. Portraying a group of people as homogeneous sounds nice when it's put in your example because it's just a way to make sense of things around us. When labeling is used as a way to limit people is when it's bad, pretty standard stuff. And if a bad label is repeated, like tokens do - it's in the definition so to say, it's undertones are that it is bad - then I'd say the product suffers from some "cultural dyslexia" in lack of a better term.
>The idea of "forced diversity" to me means that no artwork should ever be homogeneous, even though it would be an accurate reflection of society at times.
I guess it kinda makes sense to have a gag reflex against diversity if that is how you understand it. I wonder where you got this idea from, though, as "diversity in movies" doesn't objectively deny all-white movies or historical accuracies. White narratives are also themes that can be explored. As a side-note on that, what ideas people have about history and the past may not be at all accurate and pocs didn't weren't invented in the 80's.

I'm not sure how any of this follows from what I've said. Dumb it down for me.

No. I'm also REALLY glad that almost every couple in TV commercials has a mixed race relationship now.

>is diversity in films important to you?
Only if it's not forced and the only thing important about the character is the color of their skin. I love seeing black leads in movies, especially if they can pull it off normally, but it won't kill me if there are no people of color in movies.

>Do you feel detached from movies that don't have a like-skinned protagonist?
No. If that was the case, I wouldn't be able to enjoy a lot of movies. Not everyone is focused on race all the time. The only black people I know that complain about this shit are the weird "woke" niggas on Twitter.

That every commercial has a black father and a white mother....
That every bad guy is white...
That anyone Chinese only exists to appeal to the Chinese market....
That Indians are a source of humour...still...
That Native Americans are never portrayed as drunkards....
That women in movies who are supposed to be 'desirable' are now old and fat, and yet for some strange reason 'desirable' men are still ripped....

Intention is everything I guess. If it's a wish-fulfilling "white male hero story" then I am turned off. It doesn't matter how many heads-of-color are in the film if they are just there to meet a quota. It is easy to spot and disgusting when that is the case.

If you, the filmmaker, are asking, "How can I make this film more inclusive?" then I would be suspicious. If the story of your film is not inherently connected to the lives and stories of "diverse folks", then the casting of nonwhite actors won't make me feel more engaged.

If I could only watch films with like-skinned protagonists then I would have few films to watch. When I get sick of Big Hollywood I watch something Black American or European or Asian. Hollywood-with-a-dose-of-"spice" doesn't do shit.

The best anyone can do is make the best film possible. Fuck "marketing concerns", unless you just want money. In which case, fuck you.

I'm mixed-race and for me it's pretty simple.
If it's an original story then they should be able to cast whoever the fuck they want.

If it's an adaptation, then be true to the adaptation.

Please run for office.

If you're white or not depends completely on the culture you grew up in and how it sees whiteness. Within all the racial labels you also find colorisms, so you might call yourself black yet be lighter, and also benefit from being lighter, than some other black individuals.
>I am happily racist like everyone else
This view of racism will only make sense if you understand racism as simply nothing but "attitudes" alone. Race as a biological term is quite frankly refuted as it doesn't belong to science. Races as social constructs, part of our social and political reality is on the other hand very real so it wouldn't be racist to claim races "exist", as long as it isn't argued from a "biological" point of view. So your idea that sorting people into races as a biological instinct with the function or determining what's good/bad to us, as to increase our own fitness, is rather weak. You have to be aware of where the ideas of race even started from, for what purpose and how it was justified, and on top of that also how different groups were sorted into these racial categories with not only phenotypical traits as markers, but also with descriptions of their pathology.
>Names and ethnicity is important, sure, but irrelevant because I don't actually care what complete strangers think of me
That will only make sense if there is no social stigma attached to your name, and again shows this mentality of how you believe you can think yourself out of oppression so to say. It wasn't uncommon for Jews in Europe before to change their names to hide their Jewish heritage, just to mention something. I wouldn't trust your saying of how we have "the power to recognize a victim" when part of the reasoning you are using is to deny that there are issues that creates them in the first place. Like, "racism isn't real because I can just ignore it so therefore anyone claiming to be a victim of it is a brainlet" is kinda what I'm getting out of what you're saying.

I think is really important because all my life I have watched movies with white protagonists. Today we have characters that I can relate too and I dont want the younger generation to just have white protagonist like I ded

I don't find it difficult to feel for John Marston or Joel even though they're straight white men but I do empathize with female characters in ways I don't with male characters. I don't think a feeling of detachment is generally a problem for people either, otherwise movies with fish looking for their sons or a police robot living in the ghetto wouldn't be popular.

>People on this board complain every single time they see a non-white lead
>lolol, do brown people even care about this? Guess they aren't very empathetic lol

Excellent, let us continue.

I agree with you on the issue of how whiteness can be a function of the surrounding society, as well as your descriptions of colorisms.

I disagree with you entirely about race as a biological issue; medically you absolutely see differences in disease rates, affinity for certain genetic problems, etc, and these can be traced to someone's genetic heritage and usually (note that I say 'usually') this is consistent with their 'race', if we're going to use race in the most general of terms. Black people, as an example, tend to have higher natural blood pressure readings....middle-eastern muslims tend to have higher rates of diseases and genetic problems associated with imbreeding, white people tend to get skin cancer more often, etc.

Sorting people into races is absolutely a biological imperative, and comes from evolutionary tactics that helped tribes sort themselves out and quickly recognize danger i.e. I see someone who doesn't look like anyone I know, therefore I should be careful. It's really quite simple, and you see it in animal species as well.

Because we are social animals, we tend to extrapolate our world view from our social interactions, whether or not those extrapolations are in fact true descriptions of the world around us as opposed to simply a filter that we see the world through. So in some respects I agree with you about the impact and power of socially constructed racism.

As for social stigma attached to me, once again, I'll state the truth; I don't care what strangers think of me. Given that I don't live in a country where I can be hung for having the wrong religion, or chopped into bits and put into an oil drum for having the wrong political affiliation, I don't have to care what people think of me as long as the quality of my work is desired by them. It's very easy, actually, as long as you recognize the potential dangers and avoid them.
cont.

cont.
Lastly, I never claimed that racism isn't real because I can just ignore it. Of course racism happens, and didn't I mention earlier that I am happily racist like everyone else? You are seeing more in what I'm writing than is what is actually there. Don't look for hidden meanings or subterfuge in my words; read them literally, and they'll tell you everything you need to know about me.

Racism exists; I simply refuse to let it have power over me. But this is only possible because I live in a society where this can happen. As I said before, if I lived elsewhere, I'd have to make changes to my life and my behavior in order to maintain a safe living environment...but that's just common sense.

Basically that labels in itself isn't bad. But they can be. And if the label is bad and is used to describe a group of people, which didn't invent their label or the ideas about themselves that way, is forced onto that group and reproduced in popular entertainment which is kinda a show case of what is accepted in that culture, that is then contributing to normalize and reproduce that way of regarding said group. Will having more pocs in movies help breaking down stereotypes or believes other people have about us? Maybe? I don't even know, actually. But if it is tolerated to see a caricature of individuals of a group repeatedly, I'd argue that it says something about the nuts and bolts of those who consume this without thinking too much about it. As if it fits into their own view of what's real. I guess it's not too easy to boil it down. Maybe if I make a really dumb example... During the slavery there existed an idea that blacks couldn't feel pain. Why is this something that those who weren't black, and slaves, had to believe? What type of behavior, set of mentality, can you justify against blacks if this view is consistent with how you understand them? It's just an idea, that negative stereotypes also has a function, to rationalize your own biases and remove the dissonances. Obviously blacks can feel pain. But at the same time you observe how slavery causes pain and you need to justify the way things work.

>what does "non-forced diversity" look like?
Watch a couple movies from the 80's like Predator and Lethal Weapon and you'll see what people mean. They have characters played by different races, but they're characters first and their race is secondary. They're obviously not in the movie to push some kind of quota.

>I disagree with you entirely about race as a biological issue
Then I expect you to lay out a frame for how to classify races and how to measure this. Where does the race black begin and where does it end? As in, where do we draw the genetic line? There is no such thing as a line within our biology that claims that these are black and these are not. They are invented and can also be traced historically, which gives it a political context on top of this which would be hard to simply ignore. Sure, we can see the difference between someone with lighter skin and a different phenotype than someone who is dark. That alone does still not scientifically prove the existence of races. Furthermore, are there more than one type of black? Or white? Italians and Irish people weren't considered white before. Are they white now? Higher rates of medical issues also does not amount to justifying race. And even if we could scientifically determine races, what kind of races are those of mixed heritage? Are they a new race? This doesn't even start on how people perceive races. A white person in the US isn't necessarily seen as white in Europe. How can we even approach race as something scientific, if that is possible which I seriously doubt..., if we don't at the same time acknowledge its highly unscientific background? At the end here I'm really asking how a "socio-cultural-historical-political" (kill me) topic can be jumped on without looking into why we have these categories in the first place.
>I don't care what strangers think of me
Memes.
>Racism exists; I simply refuse to let it have power over me
Yeah, I think you're pretty light.
>Given that I don't live in a country where I can be hung for having the wrong religion, or chopped into bits and put into an oil drum for having the wrong political affiliation
The ones getting hung, chopped to bits and put into oil drums simply need to refuse the racism and stop it from having power over them through thinking.

And now you've proven your lack of reading comprehension. As your sisters would profess, race is a 'spectrum'; there is no genetic line or limit for each. Furthermore, biological attributes are entirely different to socially perceived attributes, which sadly you were unable to notice when I mentioned them in my previous posts. Races have no hard limits because everyone has some genetic mixture; there is no original race that we can compare people to, nor is that what I have either implied or suggested.

I agree with you that the 'socio-cultural-historical-political' elements must be taken into account when having a discussion about race, that is not in denial. But you're not recognizing the difference I am making here between the evolutionary reason that we perceive the difference of race (primarily due to physical factors and indicators) and the attempt by others to define hard races in order to further their own political agenda. These are two very different things, and at the moment you seem incapable of recognizing this.

You can think whatever you wish; as I said, it has no power over me. You believe I'm 'light'. Okay. Good for you. Does it matter to me if you're right or wrong? Nope. All it does is inform me of your preconceptions and prejudices, and thus I now know more about you than you do about me.
Your last sentence betrays your utter lack of understanding. I will not explain it to you, because I have a feeling you still won't understand it, but I'll give you a clue: read my post again. Or continue trolling, your choice.

Here's a decent primer on race if you're interested in learning about it through a form other than critique. And it was written by a "black" man, too!

jaymans.wordpress.com/jaymans-race-inheritance-and-iq-f-a-q-f-r-b/

jaymans.wordpress.com/about/

I'm Arab-Latino and i don't like diversity, specially since It always feels forced, i know a chink that feels the same way I do. More often than not diversity means strong women in leading roles and niggers. I kinda liked movies better when they were not diverse.

I do feel detached myself. Different races than my own i cant be immersed in the experience. But i guess i would stop watching movies if more blacks etc. Start playing all the characters. I would avoid those because i cant relate as well.

shyeet dis one wisa nigga

>And now you've proven your lack of reading comprehension.
From what I read you claim there is a scientific base, a biological foundation, to claim that there are races, which I'm kinda saying is completely impossible. On top of it I would add that is also inherently racist, but I mean we're on this page so why stretch it out too much. You already self-proclaimed as a racist, so I wouldn't really have to comment it further.
>Races have no hard limits because everyone has some genetic mixture
Well, the ideas of race presumes these hard limits. Unless you invented some new kind of definition of race I should just randomly know of.
>But you're not recognizing the difference I am making here between the evolutionary reason that we perceive the difference of race (primarily due to physical factors and indicators) and the attempt by others to define hard races in order to further their own political agenda.
I saw your "evolutionary" reasons to why we perceive races, but this argument is weak, as said, and it is weak because evolution didn't create races. It was an invention meant to justify the idea of superiority of one race above the others, which comes clear from the historical attempts of making race into a science. It is, as said, traceable within the literature of race and scientific racism. Therefore there isn't any evolutionary base to argue race from. Particularly not a perspective that justifies this by saying it has to do with separating safety from danger. Can we see physical differences between people? Yes, of course. But that in itself isn't either a proof of race, and feeling fear related to other groups aren't necessarily a natural reaction which dismantles this rationale you're trying to make. So, in other words, there has always been an agenda behind race. Arguing for that race is biological is itself an agenda and if you were to ever try to make it scientific and be serious, you would need to justify it - scientifically.

>From what I read you claim there is a scientific base, a biological foundation, to claim that there are races, which I'm kinda saying is completely impossible.
parroting what you heard in sociology 101, eh kid? I forgive ya, but watch yo self, bitch

no and i think it's gross that white people and hollywood just use us non-white folks to virtue signal to the masses. no one cares about a dumb fucking movie, if you want to help people, actually go an do it. i hate first-world sjw

>height and weight does not exist, skin color does not exist, autism does not exist, colours don't exist
That's deep.

I'm Finnish and my ethnicity is massively under-represented in Hollywood, Bollywood, Chinese, Japanese, Korean and African cinema.

I am hurt and very offended. There should be one Finnish actor in every movie. That is not too much to ask.

>You can think whatever you wish; as I said, it has no power over me. You believe I'm 'light'. Okay. Good for you. Does it matter to me if you're right or wrong? Nope. All it does is inform me of your preconceptions and prejudices, and thus I now know more about you than you do about me.
I just assume that you are light because of how you approach the topic. Besides, if you are light, then how is that even something you seem upset about for being pointed out? And my prejudices, well my prejudices doesn't amount up to racism.
>Your last sentence betrays your utter lack of understanding. I will not explain it to you, because I have a feeling you still won't understand it, but I'll give you a clue: read my post again. Or continue trolling, your choice.
I mean, I just found it funny how you in one sentence claims racism cannot hold any power over you simply because you "refuse it". Yet, at the same time you also claim yourself lucky that you live in a society that wouldn't perpetrate you for belonging in the "wrong" group, which kinda already implies that you have some understanding that power dynamics plays into this. Somehow, you are a special snowflake that cannot be affected by this even if you were to be a victim of racism. I mean, all you need to do is to learn the rules and avoid the potential dangers, #yolo

>evolution didn't create races

Definitely trolling...go back to redt

>it's a freshman social "scientist" post
I'm so sorry.

>More often than not diversity means strong women in leading roles and niggers
This. Case in point Blacks love to protest #OscarsSoWhite but fuck the asians, the latinos and the natives as long as blacks get to lambast whities and get the roles

Or how about how their work can rarely be criticized these days for fear of getting called racist? Beyonce gets her ass licked by media (she's talented yea but the way they praise even her fart is ridiculous) for almost everything she does so her being black actually shields her from legit criticism.

Or how come whites dont protest about #NBASoBlack or some shit

But it didn't. Show me the evolutionary evidence of how Italians and Irish people went from non-white to white. Or how Kim Kardashian is white in the US while considered a poc in Europe. Btw pic related is a black woman in Britain.

>I just assume that you are light because of how you approach the topic. Besides, if you are light, then how is that even something you seem upset about for being pointed out? And my prejudices, well my prejudices doesn't amount up to racism.

So, you're saying that people who have 'light' skin are more racist in your experience than people with dark skin, right? But of course, if that were the case, then that would make you discriminatory based on skin colour. But at least you're not racist...

Don't worry SoyBoy...we won't mistake you for something that you are not.

>SoyBoy
nigga that's a woman

...

...

ya boi zack

...

No you take the best actors possible. If they're white who cares? It's only the SJWs that give a shit.

I'm serious, those arguments the user is providing is 100% parroting sociology cultural Marxism. It's mostly women who buy into that, and they approach it from an emotional side erry time.

Great response, thank you.

My thoughts: any decision regarding casting should be about bringing the art to life. In other words, I don't care what race or creed the actor or character is if it's an artistic choice. When the decision becomes about forcing diversity to get a political message across, or to please some focus group, or anything other than an artistic choice, that shit can fuck right off.

In what way am I discriminating you for pointing out that you are light skinned if it turns out to be true? lol
I suppose this is meant to be the smoking gun that proves race as something biological. I kinda stopped at the 2nd claim as it got the definitions wrong that soon. Social constructs are tools to describe, used as frameworks to approach a topic in short and therefore doesn't claim something isn't real. For example, gender can be understood as a social construct, but you got this really mixed up if you also at the same time believe there isn't any biology within gender. So, there isn't a contradiction between believing in races and also understanding races as a social construct. The issue is more that biological ideas about race are rather badly developed and their "scientific basis" and cannot even answer basic questions like "where does one race begin and where does another one end?". As a contrast you can do that with species, which makes it scientific, but you can't do it with races. It's really a big mystery... I think this is a link that would impress those who haven't taken a lot of classes in biology outside of high school to be quite honest.

This young lady serves as a very interesting example and lesson of how the Left argues.
>If you're white or not depends completely on the culture you grew up in and how it sees whiteness.
Rachel Dolezal. She's black because she identifies as such and hopefully the society she lives in will call her black too. The society did, incidentally, until pics surfaced of her being white as my bedroom wall. No darling, whiteness and blackness are not limited to how society perceives you or how you want them to perceive you. Reality does exist...just ask any black person and they'll show you how it exists.
>This will only make sense if there is no social stigma attached to your name.
Have you ever experienced a stigma attached to your name? My god...where in hell do you live, and what are you called? Is your name Muhammed and you live in the state of Georgia or Alabama?
>Italians and Irish people weren't considered white before. Are they white now?
What in the world does this have to do with skin colour? Italians are people who are born in Italy...nothing more. You have many different colours of Italians...unless you're a racist bigot who thinks of Italians as only having dark hair and fair skin. You should be careful there...
>A white person in the US isn't necessarily seen as white in Europe
Do you think Americans give a fuck about what Europeans think of them?
>From what I read you claim there is a scientific base, a biological foundation, to claim that there are races, which I'm kinda saying is completely impossible.
And thus I conclude that you are claiming that races don't exist. Which makes nearly every claim you've made about me and about racism in general to be without basis or merit.

You can't have it both ways, young lady. Either race exists, and people recognize, group, protect, fight, and discriminate against other races. Or it doesn't exist, and everyone is the same.

>I kinda stopped at the 2nd claim
Stopped reading here.

Diversity is mostly a white person concern. I don't care what race plays who, what sort of shallow husk of a human being would need their skin color to match to be able to relate to a character? I just want to watch well written movies, that's it.

I don't view "diverse" media to be legitmate. It's plainly stated to be provocative and subversive. A finger to real westerners. It's just not really western.

Ok so you wouldn't have a problem with an all white cast.

No, the only people who have problems with all white casts are racists.

>pretends to know something about biology
>goes straight to social science
Welp.

>implying cultural marxism is a real thing and not an autistic conspiracy theory from people with no idea what marxism actually is

Honestly I don't know what the fuck people are on about when they talk about attaching to a character.

I can't relate to Will Smith in Bright because I'm not a cop working with an orc despite him being a black guy.