Is there a place at the table for white men?

[jimmyjimmy]

Is hate for white men = to hate for black men? Does racism only work in one direction?

 

[Ana the Ist]

The unemployment rate of North korea is about 4.3/4.5% .... Also Food rations are not dependant on eligibility, so they arn't comperable to welfare (you get them whether employed or not), also employment in North Korea is not a matter of Choice for most People.

You're quoting the numbers N Korea gives to the UN. Conservative estimates are anywhere between 25-50% unemployment. Census data shows anything from 80-99% amongst working age N Koreans.

North Korea experiencing income inequality, high unemployment, analyst says

The facts matter, and Your post here just basically made my point for me ...

In Norway and Sweden we have a labor market, and a very strong welfare systems, what is it that makes the prediction libertarians make when it comes to welfare not come true there (or really any western country)?

I'm sure I don't know...I'm not a libertarian.

Also we can compare statistics to when there were stronger welfare protections and when there were weaker welfare protections and see if labor force participation went up when there were weaker welfare proptections ... There is no such corrolation.

If NONE of the data show what you say they should show, that's a good sign that Your theory is wrong.

What theory?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Is hate for white men = to hate for black men? Does racism only work in one direction?

-_- it should be obvious that racism doesn't exclude any race, though some people try to assert otherwise by adding stuff to the definition of racism that doesn't belong there. Furthermore, it shouldn't matter what race a person is racist against, that still makes them a racist.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

-_- it should be obvious that racism doesn't exclude any race, though some people try to assert otherwise by adding stuff to the definition of racism that doesn't belong there. Furthermore, it shouldn't matter what race a person is racist against, that still makes them a racist.

It should be obvious, but it isn't. Hatred of black men would get you banned from most online forums, while hatred of white men would be ignored or even applauded.

 

[PsychoSarah]

It should be obvious, but it isn't. Hatred of black men would get you banned from most online forums, while hatred of white men would be ignored or even applauded.

-_- maybe if your websites of choice are tumblr or some other such thing. Plenty of online forums that couldn't give a crap even if a person posted legitimate hate speech or praised Hitler. I'm pretty sure 8chan is so... controversial that a tumblrite would pass out from massive triggering by reading just 1 post.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

-_- maybe if your websites of choice are tumblr or some other such thing. Plenty of online forums that couldn't give a crap even if a person posted legitimate hate speech or praised Hitler. I'm pretty sure 8chan is so... controversial that a tumblrite would pass out from massive triggering by reading just 1 post.

Take a stroll over to the political forums of any Christian discussion board. . .

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

It should be obvious, but it isn't. Hatred of black men would get you banned from most online forums, while hatred of white men would be ignored or even applauded.

AMEN TO THAT! Just having white skins makes you racist no matter what you try and say about such issues. If you point out you have black family and even a black wife people will stay say your racist and say racist people will say such things and it doesn't mean their racist. Which makes zero sense because would a KKK member have black family or marry black women? Of course not. BTW I don't have a black wife, though I did have a black ex-fiance.

Bringing up race is a losing battle if you're white. Anyways we have so much privilege that we don't understand anyways (sarcasm). They often fail to see the privilege they have since they have all the power to say what they want and get away with it.

 

[PsychoSarah]

You do realize there are plenty of asian actors that aren't from the U.S. that can speak English quite well?

-_- why hire a foreign actor few people in the U.S. have heard of over an easily recognizable name?

Furthermore, why care about the gender or race of an actor? Samuel Jackson makes a great Nick Fury because he is an awesome actor, so who would throw a fuss over the fact that the character was white in the comics? The only time I take issue with a gender or race change in a character is for the following two reasons:
1. being said race/gender was critical to the character's development originally, or the character is based on a real person (it'd be pretty wacky for a black person to play the role of Hitler).
2. the change was specifically made to appeal to PC crap and is a huge part of the movie advertising. Hiring actors to use their race or gender as a selling point sickens me.

 

[samir]

Does racism only work in one direction?

Yes. Only white people can be racists. It's called reverse racism if it's in the other direction.

I wouldn't worry about it as no one has been able to show that racism is a sin or that there is anything wrong with being a racist.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Yes. Only white people can be racists. It's called reverse racism if it's in the other direction.

I wouldn't worry about it as no one has been able to show that racism is a sin or that there is anything wrong with being a racist.

Actually I kind of agree. What some call racism is often simply legitimate preference, which often has an unintended but negative effect on minorities, but really doesn't even rise to the level of 'benign neglect'.

Often those who scream racism are like the guys who fail to hook up with a girl at closing time........so they go out and start a fight (and some of them were really only there for the fight ) .

 

[jimmyjimmy]

What some call racism is often simply legitimate preference

Absolutely, which is why we have "black" churches. (funny that no one complains about that, isn't it?)

Preference of people to be among similar folks is natural.

 

[joshua 1 9]

The Proverbs are generally considered universal truth. Many deal with the theme of wealth and rules that apply.

Solomon wrote 1,000 books. Only 3 of them found their way into the Bible.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Yes. Only white people can be racists.

White people tend to be the least racist. Asians tend to be the most racial or what they call traditional. My son is 33% Asia, 48% European, 17% Polynesia and 2% middle east. What race would he be?

 

[joshua 1 9]

But, but, they passed up on all those opportunities, not to be poor.

Jesus told the rich young man to sell what he had and give to the poor then he would have riches in heaven. So it all depends on what you do with what you have. It looks to me like giving people are happy and people who do not give to others are miserable. A poor person that has money will use that money to help people who have a greater need then themselves. Because of their compassion for others. So they will still be poor but rich in love.

"Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." Luke 6 38

 

[PsychoSarah]

Yes. Only white people can be racists. It's called reverse racism if it's in the other direction.

-_- then what is it when a black person hates Latinos? Also, reverse racism is a stupid term. The only difference between racism against white people and racism against any other race is just that; race.

Race itself also being a stupid concept, seeing as individuals within the same "race" generally have more genetic differences than the averages of two different "races".

I wouldn't worry about it as no one has been able to show that racism is a sin or that there is anything wrong with being a racist.

-_- racism is a form of hate, and hate is a sin. Though, the bible condones racism multiple times.

 

[bhsmte]

-_- then what is it when a black person hates Latinos? Also, reverse racism is a stupid term. The only difference between racism against white people and racism against any other race is just that; race.

Race itself also being a stupid concept, seeing as individuals within the same "race" generally have more genetic differences than the averages of two different "races".


-_- racism is a form of hate, and hate is a sin. Though, the bible condones racism multiple times.

Correct.

All people no matter their background, can be racist.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Absolutely, which is why we have "black" churches. (funny that no one complains about that, isn't it?)

Preference of people to be among similar folks is natural.

In terms of physical attractiveness, I find Asian women to be the most attractive, and mixed race black and white men to be the most attractive. Just in terms of purely shallow observation. Does that make me racist against groups I don't find to be the most attractive? Not any more than preferring buff guys means I hate fat people.

Just to add the icing to the cake, my fiance is a white string bean of a man XD

Having all one race churches seems weird to me. Why limit the potential size of the congregation?

 

[Ana the Ist]

-_- why hire a foreign actor few people in the U.S. have heard of over an easily recognizable name?

Arguably? Because they're a better actor/actress. It's odd to see someone argue against making a casting choice based upon race or gender one right after making an argument for casting based upon nationality and name recognition.

Furthermore, why care about the gender or race of an actor? Samuel Jackson makes a great Nick Fury because he is an awesome actor, so who would throw a fuss over the fact that the character was white in the comics? The only time I take issue with a gender or race change in a character is for the following two reasons:
1. being said race/gender was critical to the character's development originally, or the character is based on a real person (it'd be pretty wacky for a black person to play the role of Hitler).
2. the change was specifically made to appeal to PC crap and is a huge part of the movie advertising. Hiring actors to use their race or gender as a selling point sickens me.

Sure...if it ever went the other direction, an asian actor getting hired for what was written as a white character, I'd agree....but it doesn't.

If one is going to argue for a completely merit based casting choices...then that person can't start off their argument arguing for "familiarity" based upon name recognition and nationality.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Arguably? Because they're a better actor/actress. It's odd to see someone argue against making a casting choice based upon race or gender one right after making an argument for casting based upon nationality and name recognition.



Sure...if it ever went the other direction, an asian actor getting hired for what was written as a white character, I'd agree....but it doesn't.

Sure it does, don't act like other countries don't make movies. Plus, most of the time, the only people complaining aren't even of the race that is "supposed to be offended". When Japanese people were shown that Major Mira Killian was being played by Scarlet Johansson, they gave comments such as "she looks like the character".

I agree

Can you think of a female Asian actor with a big name that would have been a better choice in terms of acting ability and looking like the character?

There are about 1.3 million people of Japanese decent in the United States, including people of mixed race (and you can't have a Chinese person play a Japanese character, because that is also "racist"). There are about 248 million people that are Caucasian in the United States. From what group are there going to be the largest number of actors to choose from? Redundant question, obviously. In every country, the majority of roles are played by the majority "race", regardless of the race of the characters. Chinese bootleg Superman ain't white.

If one is going to argue for a completely merit based casting choices...then that person can't start off their argument arguing for "familiarity" based upon name recognition and nationality.

-_- I never argued for completely merit based acting choices; it would be nice, but it's unreasonable given that the absolute best actors often refuse movie roles frequently, and a movie's budget often can't handle too many big names... which usually got big for a reason. Yes, people found Adam Sandler entertaining at one point.

Ultimately, movie making is a business, so of course actor choice has to consider marketing potential. There are so many good movies that get little attention because no big names are in them. What We Do in the Shadows is an excellent movie, but the production and all the actors are from New Zealand, so exposure in other countries is almost entirely limited to word of mouth by hipsters that pay attention to the Sundance Film Festival.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Sure it does, don't act like other countries don't make movies. Plus, most of the time, the only people complaining aren't even of the race that is "supposed to be offended". When Japanese people were shown that Major Mira Killian was being played by Scarlet Johansson, they gave comments such as "she looks like the character".

Who is Major Mira Killian? Did you mean Major "Motoko Kusanagi"? Did they honestly whiten up her name just so a white character could play her? Did they set the movie in future Japan or did they change that as well?

I'm sure that you can find some Japanese who couldn't care less who plays a Japanese character from a futuristic Japanese setting as part of a rather insightful and well written story by some Japanese guy....just as I can find those who do care. That's not really the point though.

Can you think of a female Asian actor with a big name that would have been a better choice in terms of acting ability and looking like the character?

With a big name? Again...what criteria are you arguing for here? A merit based one or "name based"? If we're talking about merit...yeah, I can think of a few asian actresses who are better than ScarJo.

There are about 1.3 million people of Japanese decent in the United States, including people of mixed race (and you can't have a Chinese person play a Japanese character, because that is also "racist").

Lol is it? I haven't heard that one...I'd figure the important thing is that they're asian. After all, we group all white nationalities and black nationalities as blacks and whites...are we just separating the asians now?

There are about 248 million people that are Caucasian in the United States. From what group are there going to be the largest number of actors to choose from? Redundant question, obviously. In every country, the majority of roles are played by the majority "race", regardless of the race of the characters. Chinese bootleg Superman ain't white.

The majority of characters written for roles are white as well...which is why it's disappointing to me that when there is a role written for an asian and it gets filled by a white actor.

I find it a little insulting that Hollywood assumes that it's mainly white audience cannot appreciate an asian actor in an asian role. If these decisions were completely merit based, that would be at least understandable...but they aren't.

I owned the original Ghost in the Shell on VHS since the 90s. It has a very Japanese aesthetic, and explored some rather interesting themes relating to individuality in a very Japanese way.

I guess I can still hope that if Leonardo DiCaprio ever decides to do a live action Ninja Scroll, he'll choose some asian actors for it, but if he doesn't I hope he gets lambasted.

-_- I never argued for completely merit based acting choices; it would be nice, but it's unreasonable given that the absolute best actors often refuse movie roles frequently, and a movie's budget often can't handle too many big names... which usually got big for a reason. Yes, people found Adam Sandler entertaining at one point.

Ultimately, movie making is a business, so of course actor choice has to consider marketing potential. There are so many good movies that get little attention because no big names are in them. What We Do in the Shadows is an excellent movie, but the production and all the actors are from New Zealand, so exposure in other countries is almost entirely limited to word of mouth by hipsters that pay attention to the Sundance Film Festival.

Ever see Genghis starring Asano Todonobu? (Hoping that's the correct spelling, I didn't check before writing this post). Personally, it's one of my favorite movies...if for nothing but his performance as the titular character. If you've ever seen him starring in a Japanese film, it's obvious he's an incredible actor. Most people will only recognize him from his role in the Thor movies, or maybe Silence, and frankly...it's a little sad. He's a far more talented actor just about everyone else in those films...but he's asian so he's relegated to these lame "diversity for the sake of diversity" ensemble casts (see the most recent king arthur movie and the magnificent seven for other examples of this).

What's worse is that on the few occasions when Hollywood does explore an asian story in an asian setting...it's almost always through the ham-fisted movie trope of "white guy travels to foreign land and kicks butt!" and it's become cliche and boring. See The Last Samurai, 47 Ronin, Fast and Furious Tokyo Drift for examples. Perhaps if we demand better of Hollywood, they'll actually deliver it.