Why is 'browning up' acceptable in Hollywood?

[FNG]

Do you self identify as POC,or person of colour or do you just use it as forum shorthand, I ve used POC on here when discussing Johnny spieght with niño as a reference point for our perspectives, but on a day to day basis I'm more comfortable with dual heritage Anglo/Asian.

 

[Spymaster]

That term was introduced into the topic by POCs.

It's still clumsy and needlessly navel-gazey.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Tbf, yer man's MO is 'this has been discussed, at length, many times...' Which doesn't really describe that previous thread.

(((Previous thread, even pogo doesn't care about you)))

 

[FNG]

So I continued with it. Big ole racist that I am.

Think it takes on a whole different connotation when it's written long hand though my racist brother.

 

[Treacle Toes]

I identify as Rutita, RM, mixed x and y.., we all know what people are saying when using POC...another detour to discuss that IMO.

 

[Citizen66]

It's still clumsy and needlessly navel-gazey.

Perhaps so. But easier than getting all down nitty gritty into all the various races and cultures that it so easily could have slipped into. Oh hang on, it did anyway...

 

[Athos]

You fucked up, kid.

Yes, I momentarily confused the names of two posters who had been making similar arguments, immediately after re-reading a post by one which referred to the other (because I was going to quote it). I noticed the mistake myself, corrected it, and apologised. None of that's evidence of what you're trying to suggest, though.

We're talking at cross purposes.

I didn't mention your logical argument to suggest that, in logic, it leads to a world in which black actors aren't marginalised. I'm aware that you realise that.

I do understand your argument. I also agree with it. There is no a priori reason why persons of any 'race' can't portray persons of any other race - and here's the important bit -in a world that's free of racism.

The reason I think your argument is useless is because using it only serves to back up the reality, which you acknowledge, in which white actors get the parts.

As Rutita1 has said, it's annoying hypothetical bollocks that doesn't reflect the world. The unintentional (in your case, I guess) consequence is to maintain the status quo. You're not helping.

If you are truly anti-racist, then help.

 

[Citizen66]

Think it takes on a whole different connotation when it's written long hand though my racist brother.

Such is the minefield of referring to people via their appearance rather than name. There was a context to it on this occasion though but yeah, crass under most circumstances.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

It's still clumsy and needlessly navel-gazey.

I agree and wouldn't use it, but kind of don't think its my place to say

 

[JimW]

Such is the minefield of referring to people via their appearance rather than name. There was a context to it on this occasion though but yeah, crass under most circumstances.

Your main offence was writing POCs as an abbreviation of persons of colour

 

[Citizen66]

PsOC would look well weird though.

 

[FNG]

He's bang to rights on that one

 

[Athos]

I'm sure you are. Genuinely.

It is kind of relevant though, given the dissimilarity between mine and Rutita1's names.

It wasn't that your names are similar; I've explained why I confused you and Rutita1 in post #577.

 

[Treacle Toes]

It wasn't that your names are similar; I've explained why I confused you both in post #577.

Yet my opinons and Mations are not distinct at all on this thread...Loads of posters are making the same points. I add to that and repeat that I have not been active on this thread all day..yet...you are keeping score in some way...weird.

 

[Athos]

Yet my opinons and Mations are not distinct at all on this thread...Loads of posters are making the same points.

But, as I explained, I had just read a post of Mation's which referred to you. That's why I confused you both. Nothing else.

I don't really know what else to say; if you're determined to believe that it's some other reason, then you will.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

But, as I explained, I had just read a post of Mation's which referred to you. That's why I confused you both. Nothing else.

I don't really know what else to say; if you're determined to believe that it's some other reason, then you will.

Very aggressive and angry aren't they?

 

[Athos]

Very aggressive and angry aren't they?

I understand that people are pissed off by some of what I've said. I wouldn't say anyone's been particularly aggressive, though.

 

[Mation]

All plausible. All typical too, though.

 

[Treacle Toes]

I understand that people are pissed off by some of what I've said. I wouldn't say anyone's been particularly aggressive, though.

You do?

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

I understand that people are pissed off by some of what I've said. I wouldn't say anyone's been particularly aggressive, though.

Ok am surprised as your posts in the last few pages seemed to imply that certain people were being confrontational and aggressive. Apologies if I've got that wrong

 

[Athos]

You do? Explain that to me please.

People think that the position I took ignores and/or undermines the real-world struggle against racism in Hollywood, and beyond.

If I believed I'd done that, I'd be cross with myself! But, as it goes, I think that taking a position of moral absolutism on the question of whether it could ever be acceptable for white people to play black roles isn't an effective way to challenge racism (as well as being illogical). But I accept that others feel differently, and that their opinions are informed by different experiences.

 

[Athos]

Ok am surprised as your posts in the last few pages seemed to imply that certain people were being confrontational and aggressive. Apologies if I've got that wrong

No worries.

I don't think I'd go so far as to say aggressive. Confrontational, maybe. But I really don't mind being confronted, or having my ideas challenged.

The only thing that does irritate me is when people try to paint me as something I'm not. But, even then, it's water off a duck's back, really. I know who and what I am (and the extent of my anti-racism credentials); I'm big and ugly enough not to be too bothered by jibes from anonymous strangers in cyber-space.

Which I guess is as good a point as any to bow out of this thread. It's clear that I'm in a very small minority (of one!), and that I've made my point (at length!). And that, even if I wanted to (which I don't, particularly), I'm not going to change any minds. So there's little point me banging on - wasting my time and upsetting people.

I do regret that people were upset by what I said; but I don't disavow the principle, and I don't regret sticking to mine. Furthermore, whilst I appreciate the range of different people's experiences, I strongly reject the notion that the respective identities of the people expressing opinions trumps the content of those opinions. Something of which I see more and more, which was (at least) hinted at here, and which I consider to be a real threat to the solidarity and efficacy of the left.

No doubt some will see this as an opportunity to take some more cheap swipes, and to have the last word; so be it, I will try not to be goaded into continuing what has become a bit of a car crash!

Night all.

[/mini-flounce]

 

[Thimble Queen]

Do you self identify as POC,or person of colour or do you just use it as forum shorthand, I ve used POC on here when discussing Johnny spieght with niño as a reference point for our perspectives, but on a day to day basis I'm more comfortable with dual heritage Anglo/Asian.

I use it in writing quite often, partly because it's easier than listing out all the backgrounds of the people who have expressed a similar opinion. Also, for me, because it can help express certain shared experiences and stuff partic wrt racism... My mum describes herself as politically black, as did many poc of her generation, but she is "ethnically brown"... I think it's a difficult one.

 

[Vintage Paw]

It's still clumsy and needlessly navel-gazey.

How's about we let people decide how they want to refer to themselves, instead of telling them what is and isn't the best type of language to use?

 

[Spymaster]

How's about we let people decide how they want to refer to themselves, instead of telling them what is and isn't the best type of language to use?

Who's telling anyone what language to use? I couldn't give a fuck how people refer to themselves.

 

[Vintage Paw]

Who's telling anyone what language to use? I couldn't give a fuck how people refer to themselves.

"It's still clumsy and needlessly navel-gazey." -- That suggests you don't particularly like the term. That suggests you do give somewhat of a fuck, or it wouldn't have been worth mentioning. That suggests you think there is probably a better term, or one should be found - a term that isn't clumsy and needlessly navel-gazey. That suggests that while you are not saying "you are not allowed to use that term" the implication is that you'd be happier if people would use a different one to refer to themselves.

It's clear how your statement suggests all these things, yes?

 

[Spymaster]

"It's still clumsy and needlessly navel-gazey." -- That suggests you don't particularly like the term. That suggests you do give somewhat of a fuck, or it wouldn't have been worth mentioning. That suggests you think there is probably a better term, or one should be found - a term that isn't clumsy and needlessly navel-gazey. That suggests that while you are not saying "you are not allowed to use that term" the implication is that you'd be happier if people would use a different one to refer to themselves.

I told you, I couldn't give a fuck how people refer to themselves.

I wouldn't use the term POC because I think it's clumsy and needlessly navel gazey.

Got it?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Film4 still needs to make money though. They're not a charity, but I think even they were surprised by its success. I doubt even Hollywood would have got away with having the main characters played by White US or British actors

Macaulay Culkin in the lead role?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Star Trek (Khan is played by the whitest man ever)

If a person is named 'Khan', their skin color must be.....what?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

In the tv series Tyrant, there's a pair of supposedly half-Arab, half-English brothers. The good brother is played by a white English actor, the bad brother by an Israeli Arab actor.

Someone should be sent to jail.