Just Google, "black parents, white child".
Thoughts on Burnham's relationship to Sarek
- Thread starter JRoss
- Start date
Just Google, "black parents, white child".
I find it odd that you had no input when I asked if Grace Park could be replaced by a black actress, but only offered a response when I asked if it is okay that she be replaced by a white actress.
As to something making sense - it makes little enough sense in n ongoing TV series to recast a role, let alone to completely change that character ethnicity.
The notion that you claim is diversity is itself highly prejudiced. Real diversity is about making everyone equal, not about favouring one group over another, regardless that white males have dominated the screen.
First of all, I'm not whining. And I have never made mention of of the casting in the Star Trek reboots so your claim to know how I feel on the issue is a complete fabrication.
I would have had no issue with any of the characters being played by white, black, hispanic, asian, etc actors. None at all. I didn't care that an American played a Russian or that Cho was the same ethnicity as Takei.
What I would have a problem with is the ethnicity of any character suddenly changed from one film to the next in that series.
Absolutely nothing that you put in that post remotely resembles anything that I have posted on this issue. Another case of a moderator not bothering to read a post, just more interested in flinging false accusations. If we can't rely on you guys to accurate, what hope is there.
I don't think you get it. You do favor some groups over others until equality is actually achieved. When everyone is getting the same fair chance.
Yes, being of asian decent is very central to her character.
No, being white is not important to either Superman or Kirk. As I said no reason they have to be white, but a sudden ethnicity in the midst of a running series is laughable.
Being male is a different matter. The name is SuperMAN - if he isn't a man, then he isn't Superman. There is already a female version. Kirk could be a woman though, just as long as the personality is the same.
Characters have been recast since the dawn of TV. Scotty looking completely differently in JJTrek doesn't bother you but a skin color change makes a huge difference to you for reasons of consistency?
You seem to have serious problems grasping the concept of structural disadvantages. Diversity is not about favoring one group over another. It's about ending the century-old dominance of one group by providing fair representation.
You have already made that abundantly clear.
And plenty of people have told you that they don't have a problem with it. I'm not sure what kind of result you expect here. Are you just going to repeat it again and again? Do you need some moisturizer for your fingers in case the typing gets too much?
Stop the drama already. I said "people would whine", I didn't address you personally so cut the crap.
And the fact that I'm a moderator matters fuck all for this conversation.
No, you give everyone the same opportunities without deciding in advance that one ethnicity gets the gig and another doesn't. You don't create equality by making things unequal.
Abrams and Kennedy wanted a diverse cast for Star Wars but they and the casting team auditioned colour blind. The only actor who had to be a white male was the guy who would be would be playing be Kylo Ren, simply because Ford and Fisher are white.
Would it have been okay if Lucas has cast a black or asian actor as young Kenobi?
It is "fiction".
Which works great! People are more comfortable with people like themselves, which is why you have to push the envelope and make laws to guarantee minority candidates and women get a chance.
"Everything will just work itself out" has been proven wrong time and again.
Sure, I wish that was the way it worked.
In reality the people in charge are overwhelmingly white and tend to cast roles with white actors by default. Just like the writers think of "male whitey" as the default for most characters.
Characters have been recast since the dawn of TV. Scotty looking completely differently in JJTrek doesn't bother you but a skin color change makes a huge difference to you for reasons of consistency?
You seem to have serious problems grasping the concept of structural disadvantages. Diversity is not about favoring one group over another. It's about ending the century-old dominance of one group by providing fair representation.
You have already made that abundantly clear.
And plenty of people have told you that they don't have a problem with it. I'm not sure what kind of result you expect here. Are you just going to repeat it again and again? Do you need some moisturizer for your fingers in case the typing gets too much?
Stop the drama already. I said "people would whine", I didn't address you personally so cut the crap.
And the fact that I'm a moderator matters fuck all for this conversation.
You should be ashamed of yourself using that type of language.
And you were addressing the "whine" at me. Several times in that post you typed "you", which is me. No one else.
And the fact that you are a moderator does matter - a moderator who can't be bothered to properly read a persons posts or to accurately represent those remarks has no right to enforce the rules on others.
I grasp diversity very well. it is you who doesn't;t seemed to, nor can you keep your opinion consistent.
You have previously stated that diversity is about favouring one group over another, now you say it isn't make up your mind.
It is completely nonsenical and illogical to claim that showing favouratism to one person or group does not create inequality. Favouritism to white males is what caused the imbalance in the first place. Inequality cannot be fixed by creating inequality.
Diversity is about giving everyone the same chance and allowing them to succeed by using their actual talent the thing that really matters. Giving an actor a role just because of their skin colour, sexual orientation, etc. is an insult to that person. A person who truly wants to succeed wants to do so because of who they are, not what they look like.
Do not use profanity to me again or make false claims about what I think or have said.
That isn't an answer.
It worked on the casting of Star Wars Sequels. Rogue One also had colour blind casting.
For saying "fuck"?
You're out of luck on this site then.
No, I was addressing a general "you" in at least some of the sentences.
Again: Cut the drama. My reading comprehension is just fine. I just don't happen to agree with you.
No, I did not. I have repeatedly stated the opposite. Is it now my turn to question your reading comprehension? This is getting really tedious.
I just don't think we need to worry about male whiteys representation in media because it's by no means threatened. Male whitey is overrepresented so it's not like we have to fight for his representation. Male whitey is the default in most contexts.
Of course, and sadly this is not how it works. As I've pointed out before:
In reality the people in charge are overwhelmingly white and tend to cast roles with white actors by default. Just like the writers think of "male whitey" as the default for most characters. This is not a meritocracy. This is the perpetuation of an old structural inequality.
Call me when that changes.
Whether or not I use profanity is none of anybody else's fucking business.
I have never said the inequality wasn't there. I said you can't fight it with more inequality.
It isn't that hard a concept to grasp, but yet it goes on and on and lost is the fact that Green is not playing a previously white character, lost is the fact that she is a new character and lost is the fact that she is not related to Spock - because that is the silliest, dullest, most unimaginative possible idea.
Nobody is suggesting that.
Repeating it again and again doesn't make it true. Fighting for fair representation isn't about favoring one group. It's about stopping an existing favoritism for one group.
Irrelevant. You don't do it with me.
The post was directed to me, therefore you were talking about me.
It is irrelevant whether you agree with me on the topic - the point here was that nothing in that post remotely represented any comment I had made. I was a complete fabrication.
I never said white males had anything to worry about. I said you can't make something right, by doing something wrong.
Whitey? Seems very like calling a guy "blackie" - I find that offence and I'd imagine many white people would find "whitey" offence. Or can white people not be the victims of prejudice?
I don't believe you want equality. Your vision of diversity is another unequal world.
It is for the person you are directing it at. And it is a special kind of pathetic to use profanity in a text message in a forum like this. It just shows that you can't actually have a discussion and losing your temper to the point of needing to swear in a block of text - just sad. Clearly you no real faith in your point of view.
Or what?
No, and I'm not going to repeat it again. It's starting to feel like you're just baiting people and we've had way too much of this on this site in the past weeks. And for some reason it always sounds very similar. Curious, huh?
Because I'm asking you not to.
Or is asking you behave like an adult with manners too much?
Ah, the classic "I'm losing credibility so I'll accuse him of being a troll with a new ID".
Tough luck. Stop trying to police the language on this forum. You are not a moderator and swearing is not against the rules.
Comments to PM.
Similar threads
