Why is 'browning up' acceptable in Hollywood?

[Spanky Longhorn]

Yes. But, your post implied that white people pursue that line argument because it results in white actors being cast (regardless of whether they are the best for the role); that's a causal link, not an unintended consequence.

I think you're new to this debating lark.

Why do you think white people might take a particular position on this issue?

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

I agree mate. After Athos continually tagged and quoted me after i asked him not so politely to do one. I made this point to him on the cleaning thread derail. He conceded slightly. But then has continued to argue with citizen and others and minimise experience of POC. It's bang out of order.

Posing hypotheticals against real experiences is often the first resort of the scoundrel

 

[Athos]

I agree mate. After Athos continually tagged and quoted me after i asked him not so politely to do one. I made this point to him on the cleaning thread derail. He conceded slightly. But then has continued to argue with citizen and others and minimise experience of POC. It's bang out of order.

I'm sorry that you feel that. But nothing I've said was intended to, or, in my opinion, actually tends to minimise the experience of POC (accepting, of course, that I don't have that experience). I've been at pains to acknowledge it, and to condemn racism in Hollywood and beyond.

Had you asked me with courtesy not to quote/tag you, I would have responded in kind.

 

[Athos]

I think you're new to this debating lark.

Why do you think white people might take a particular position on this issue?

Different white people have a variety of reasons for taking a variety of positions.

 

[Thimble Queen]

My mistake... i was polite initially and then called you a cock. I should've just called you a cock from the off.

 

[Athos]

My mistake... i was polite initially and then called you a cock. I should've just called you a cock from the off.

From memory, in the first post in which you asked me not to quote or tag you, you called me a cockend (going on to call me a twat and a cunt in subsequent posts).

 

[Athos]

Posing hypotheticals against real experiences is often the first resort of the scoundrel

It was posed against moral absolutism.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Different white people have a variety of reasons for taking a variety of positions.

What do you think they are and why do you think they take them?

 

[Thimble Queen]

No go back and read the thread. I said I'm not talking to you about it and then you went on to quote and tag.

 

[Athos]

What do you think they are and why do you think they take them?

With regard to white actors playing black characters, some white people reject the notion that there are no circumstances in which it is acceptable, because it suits their interests/they're racist etc.; other white people (and people of colour) reject that notion because they don't believe that such a moral absolute bears the scrutiny of logic/they can conceive of circumstances where it is morally acceptable. Similarly, some people (white and black) take the opposing view for reasons which could include (amongst other things) a sincerely held conviction, a poorly thought-through argument, an unwillingness to speak out against the consensus, or to flatter their own egos.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

With regard to white actors playing black characters, some white people reject the notion that there are no circumstances in which it is acceptable, because it suits their interests/they're racist etc.; other white people (and people of colour) reject that notion because they don't believe that such a moral absolute bears the scrutiny of logic/they can conceive of circumstances where it is morally acceptable. Similarly, some people (white and black) take the opposing view for reasons which could include (amongst other things) a sincerely held conviction, a poorly thought-through argument, an unwillingness to speak out against the consensus, or to flatter their own egos.

First of all it's useful to know what some of the terms you're using mean to you

what do you mean by white?

what do you mean by black?

what do you mean by people of colour?

 

[Athos]

No go back and read the thread. I said I'm not talking to you about it and then you went on to quote and tag.

Should have put me on ignore then. like I suggested.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Should have put me on ignore then. like I suggested.

Why do you think it's acceptable for you to chase people around just because they have a different view to you?

 

[Athos]

First of all it's useful to know what some of the terms you're using mean to you

what do you mean by white?

what do you mean by black?

what do you mean by people of colour?

Really? Seriously?

Tell you what, since you used the term 'white' in the post with which I took issue (because it appeared to me that you were hinting my position was motivated by racism), why don't you define it?

But this is just nonsense, pissing about, isn't it?

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Really? Seriously?

Tell you what, since you used the term 'white' in the post with which I took issue (because it appeared to me that you were hinting my position was motivated by racism), why don't you define it?

But this is just nonsense, pissing about, isn't it?

So far you have failed to answer a single question put to you - I'm slightly disappointed but not surprised, I suppose that airy realm of pure logic you dwell in is very distracting.

 

[Athos]

Why do you think it's acceptable for you to chase people around just because they have a different view to you?

I don't think that's acceptable; and I don't accept that's what I did. But some of what (s)he said was pertinent to the debate, so I quoted it (and referred to the poster).

 

[Athos]

So far you have failed to answer a single question put to you - I'm slightly disappointed but not surprised, I suppose that airy realm of pure logic you dwell in is very distracting.

Because I don't think you've posed them to further the debate, but merely to piss about.

Until that became apparent, I was answering your questions.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Because I don't think you've posed them to further the debate, but merely to piss about.

Until that became apparent, I was answering your questions.

You've not answered a single question from anyone

 

[Athos]

You've not answered a single question from anyone

Demonstrably a lie:

Why would you think that?

Because the implication was that the argument I have presented would more likely be presented by a white person, which, in turn, hints at the idea that it's a cover to justify discrimination.

why would you think that?

I've explained why I thought that you might be. If I'm wrong, that's great.

Where did you explain it?

Post #436

Ah found it.

Why do you think it implies that and why do you think white people are more likely to justify discrimination?

Some white people are more likely to justify discrimination from which they benefit, because of that benefit.

But that's not why I took the stance I did (which, for the record, wasn't to defend discrimination).

I thought you were trying to hint that it was. If I got that wrong, then that's fine.

Do you think it's possible to do things which lead to unintended consequences?

Yes. But, your post implied that white people pursue that line argument because it results in white actors being cast (regardless of whether they are the best for the role); that's a causal link, not an unintended consequence.

I think you're new to this debating lark.

Why do you think white people might take a particular position on this issue?

Different white people have a variety of reasons for taking a variety of positions.

What do you think they are and why do you think they take them?

With regard to white actors playing black characters, some white people reject the notion that there are no circumstances in which it is acceptable, because it suits their interests/they're racist etc.; other white people (and people of colour) reject that notion because they don't believe that such a moral absolute bears the scrutiny of logic/they can conceive of circumstances where it is morally acceptable. Similarly, some people (white and black) take the opposing view for reasons which could include (amongst other things) a sincerely held conviction, a poorly thought-through argument, an unwillingness to speak out against the consensus, or to flatter their own egos.

Why do you think it's acceptable for you to chase people around just because they have a different view to you?

I don't think that's acceptable; and I don't accept that's what I did. But some of what (s)he said was pertinent to the debate, so I quoted it (and referred to the poster).

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

They're not answers they're evasions and derailings

 

[Athos]

They're not answers they're evasions and derailings

That's a bizarre claim.

They were straightforward answers to all your questions (except the definitions - by which time it became clear you weren't serious).

I think the truth is that they're not the answers you'd have liked.

 

[Crispy]

I'm sorry that you feel that.

You don't apologise for what someone else feels. You apologise for your actions.

But nothing I've said was intended

Intent is irrelevant when it comes to offence. If you do something with the best intentions, but it still causes offence, you might want to consider the thing itself, rather than the intent with which it was done.

 

[Athos]

You don't apologise for what someone else feels. You apologise for your actions.

Intent is irrelevant when it comes to offence. If you do something with the best intentions, but it still causes offence, you might want to consider the thing itself, rather than the intent with which it was done.

Yes, and, as I explained in the second half of the sentence (which you didn't quote), I don't think I did minimise the experiences of people of colour.

 

[Crispy]

Yes, and, as I explained in the second half of the sentence (which you didn't quote), I don't think I did minimise the experiences of people of colour.

What you think you did and what you did are not necessarily the same

 

[Citizen66]

You don't apologise for what someone else feels.

You do if the apology isn't genuine.

 

[Athos]

What you think you did and what you did are not necessarily the same

True enough. But the fact that debate can have the the unintended consequence of upsetting people doesn't necessarily mean that the discussion should be off limits.

 

[Crispy]

True enough. But the fact that debate can have the the unintended consequence of upsetting people doesn't necessarily mean that the discussion should be off limits.

Absolutely not. But remember that apologies are about humility, not forgiveness.

 

[Athos]

Absolutely not. But remember that apologies are about humility, not forgiveness.

I haven't asked to be forgiven. I said I was sorry because it's regrettable that people are upset, not because I have any cause for remorse. Obviously, I'd rather people weren't upset by what I said, but, nevertheless, I don't think I ought not to have pursued that line of argument, or been prevented from pursuing it (by self-censorship, bullying, or for any other reason).

 

[FNG]

 

[Thimble Queen]

I don't think I did minimise the experiences of people of colour.

Yeah but you have and continue to do so.