@doschicos - are you really arguing that [this post](Positive steps I can take to fight racism - #271 by 50N40W - Parent Cafe - College Confidential Forums), the one to which I was directly responding, doesn’t expressly minimize institutional racism and falsely equate it with “reverse racism”?
Well, I thought you were responding to the posts in general. I admit that one is a little out there. Although I don’t like the tone and word choice nor the general sentiment, there is a kernel of something (won’t call it truth…maybe merit?) it that is worth considering. Look where we are now in this country? There are people feeling alienated on many sides and because of it we are facing a nightmare. I’ll stop now because otherwise I’ll get all political. Racism clearly exists in many forms (I think that is apparent to many who maybe were oblivious to the extent in the past) and needs to continue to be addressed but we’ve taken a HUGE step in the wrong direction, that is for sure. Vigilance is needed.
I hear you. That’s the tip of the iceberg. People have no fear expressing hate these days.
Very true that anyone can be racist and practice racial discrimination. However, that does not preclude recognizing that most racism in the US is against non-white people, with significantly less against white people. This includes most of the racism that manages to get itself embedded into organizations that are not supposed to be race-related, thus affecting such organizations’ interactions with people of different races.
Even in cruder forms like racially-motivated crimes, we see for racially-motivated crimes in 2014:
https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2014/topic-pages/victims_final
Considering the population distribution of the US, we see that black people are extremely overrepresented as targets of racially motivated crimes, while white people are extremely underrepresented as targets of racially motivated crimes. Most other non-white people (other than Hawaiian and Pacific Islander) are overrepresented as targets of racially motivated crimes, though not as much as black people.
At least 1 of your links propagates one of the most persistent urban legends: there’s solid evidence that whites traffic drugs at the same rate as other groups. Most of this is based on voluntary surveys, and since most people lie about their criminal conduct, even on voluntary surveys, the data is biased in a way that makes it almost useless.
Okay, @roethlisburger , that’s not even worth arguing about–what about the rest, though?
Not sure why it is even useful to argue that “people of color cannot be racist”. It mostly seems like a way to excuse or justify bigotry among people of color, which is an odd and counterproductive thing to argue.
^Not really, no one wants to see themselves in a negative light.
I think it could help to point out hypocricy, too. Think of big caucasian Hollywood stars that claim to decry the absence of persons of color in Hollywood. Matt Damon is one of those. You know Matt Damon, right? The guy that recently starred in “The Martian”. Mr. Damon could have refused to accept the lead role, and instead insisted on a person of color replacing him. Or, Quentin Tarantino could turn down the next potential blockbuster offered for him to direct, and insist on a person of color being hired instead. Think that’s going to happen? Too often some people that call for others to get more really mean other can have more “after I get mine”. That isn’t equality, or trying for equality.
While true, trying to excuse or justify bigotry is counterproductive to trying to reduce it.
Unfortunately, it seems common. If a member of group X does something racist against a member of group Y, the typical reactions:
a. Members of group Y will usually be greatly outraged.
b. Members of group X will have reactions from outrage to excusing or justifying it, or trying to explain it as something other than racism. Unfortunately, the tendency is often more toward the latter, rather finding it undesirable.
c. Those not of group X or Y will also have a range of reactions, which can depend on what they think of groups X and Y and how they see themselves as being more like X or Y in the situation.
@younghoss I don’t see how Matt Damon or Quentin Tarantino turning down an opportunity offered to them with a demand that a person of color be selected to replace him is effective. Equality means standing side by side. It doesn’t mean turn down a role to hand it to someone else. If Damon and Tarantino want to effect change, let them put their name to it and work side by side with actors/ directors of color that they believe exhibit the talent/fit for the role. If they turn down the opportunity, they have no say in what happens in a movie and are in no position to demand anything.
Well put. Damon and Tarantino may be in positions to effect change, but not by demanding that X is hired in their place. Why would they have the power to make that decision?
Neither Damon nor Tarantino could force a movie company to hire a minority, unless they owned the rights to a particular project. That they could force someone wasn’t my point. They do have a position; they can make demands, though they cannot enforce them. The power comes not from force but from publicity and public support or public outrage. But the publicity would be highly effective if one of them essentially said: “Stop! There has been too much white privilege. I have benefitted too much from being white at the expense of skilled performers that are minorities”. There might be huge credibility for the cause if a white guy complaining about too many whites starring stepped down for a minority. There might be outrage if another white was hired as a substitute. As it is, it is often white actors complaining about lack of opportunity for minorities, yet gobbling up every acting part offered to them. If they are serious about a lack of opportunity, let them step down to offer a minority the opportunity. Money where one’s mouth is, to use a phrase. It is the difference between saying something about perceived injustices compared to doing something about perceived injustices.
Or, how about the movie-going public? How about they stop going to movies that feature white artists? Eventually, in theory, studios would hire far far more minorities to please the public right? But actually we know not that many in the public will stop going, at least not enough to effect the theoretical change.
There again is my point. Some people talk about a change but do not wish to inconvenience themself to effect it. Want actor George Lopez as the next James Bond? And Gabourey Sidibe as the next “Bond girl”? Certainly 2 skilled acting monorities that go against typecast. I bring those 2 up just to show many actors and many in the public complain about the lack of opportunity, but would these 2 earn the money the studios need to produce the next Bond movie?
Katy Perry wants to fight income inequality? How about she takes the proceeds from her next concert and divides it among the underpaid clean-up crew? Or would she say she has earned the money based on her effort, talent,skill, hard work and beauty? She want others to give their money to fight income inequality.
The movie makers presumably cast based on what they perceive movie viewers want. They believe that some portion of movie viewers are (perhaps subconsciously) racist enough that the race of the lead characters is likely to affect their chance of seeing the movie. Unfortunately, this means that market forces (or the perception of such) can push participants in a pro-racist direction in this case, even if market forces can push participants in an anti-racist direction in other cases.
Also, note that women are underrepresented in movie characters as well:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/government-jobs-data-agrees-hollywood-is-even-more-sexist-than-the-real-workforce/
Let’s remember a far greater percentage of Americans are caucasian so caucasian casting is not necessarily racist.
Yes, ucbalumnus, I understand they are making movies based on what they think viewers want. The movie-going public could change that perception in theory. If some who decry the lack of minorities in movies would quit attending movies with predominantly white cast/crew, and persuade others to do the same, then the perception in Hollywood would soon change. And imagine the publicity of a white male actor that turned down a major starring role and insisted a minority take his place. And that is much my point, that not enough of the moviegoing public will quit going to movies to effect a change. And that, like the couple actors I mentioned, are willing to call out what they claim is an injustice, but are not willing to do anything about it. To me, that is isn’t supporting a minority; it is actually practically the very definition of hypocrisy.
Quite likely Tarantino thinks he is the best director, full-stop. So giving up his place to anyone else would be an act of charity, not a search for the best qualified individual.
I’m ok with that, sorghum, he may feel he is number 1. Voluntarily stepping down for any other person could be considered an act of charity. I never said anything about seeking the best qualified individual. My complaint is the hypocrisy in Hollywood. His claim is lack of opportunities for minorities while he hangs onto his job. He could open up an opportunity for a minority, but so far has not chosen to do so. I would recommend to him to keep quiet about the lack of opportunities for minorities in Hollywood, while he gobbles up blockbuster projects lest he continue to appear just a hypocrite. So far, he has demonstrated that someone else white should not get a job so a minority gets the opportunity. That, is his hypocrisy.
OP here chiming in. It seems to me that an argument about what famous actors/directors can do to fight racism is rather unproductive. The question is what can I do. I don’t happen to be a famous actor. The challenge I face is what actions I can take (in my case as a privileged white woman) that have an impact on the problem of racism.
So far this is what I’ve got:
- I can vote
- I can be politically active by campaigning, calling my reps, etc.
- I can expose myself to other cultures via the media I choose to consume and the friends I make.
- I can support POC in film, business, etc.
- I can advocate for change via social media.
- I can be kind to others of all ethnicities.
Adding on you can support organizations like My Brother’s Keeper that are working at closing up the school to prison pipeline.
More indirectly you could support organizations that encourage pleasure reading for younger kids by getting books into their hands. Reading is Fundamental http://www.rif.org/ and Reach out and Read http://www.reachoutandread.org/about-us/ are two of my favorite organizations promoting literacy.