By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Why Jordan Peele is Unlikely to Cast White Lead: 'I've Seen That Movie'

Torillian on 28 March 2019
psychicscubadiver said:
Torillian said:

That's fun, because I'm not sure you know what disproportionately means. If whites make up 61% of the population but make up 86% of the leading roles in film than they are disproportionately represented. Now that doesn't sound like a big difference if but from the minority perspective that's the difference between having 39% of the roles if it were proportionate to 14%, a massive drop. 

Here's a report on the proportion of leads by race compared to the general population: 

https://socialsciences.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/UCLA-Hollywood-Diversity-Report-2018-2-27-18.pdf

I'm doubtful of any statistics that just use 'minority' or 'poc' and 'white' without defining anything. Primarily, because many Hispanics consider themselves white and will declare themselves that way on the census and other forms. However, there's no way that report is correct in declaring white as 61% of the population unless they do not include any Hispanic population. Even worse, that report doesn't include any hard data in its appendix or even source the demographics data for its claims. They just declare 'these are the true and factual numbers' with no citation. Even if they gathered the data themselves it needs a detailed methodology in the appendix. 

It's clearly an article piece instead of an actual sociology paper, regardless of its writers.

You're going to make me read through actual sociology papers to argue that there are less minorities in film then there are in the population and it isn't proportional? Killin' me here. 

Link to a review on the subject: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/soc4.12237

Relevant Quote:

"Of great concern to marginalized groups is the precise quantity that constitutes adequate representation in media. Numerical representation describes a social group’s presence or absence on-screen or behind-the-scenes, usually referring to the proportion of a particular occupation that the group occupies. Several studies described Hollywood as a predominantly White and male sphere, with women and racial/ethnic minorities being highly underrepresented with proportions well below their share of the US population (Bielby and Bielby 2002; Erigha 2014; Lauzen 2008; Lauzen 2009a; Lauzen 2009b; Lauzen 2012; Smith and Choueiti 2011a; Smith and Choueiti 2011b; Smith et al. 2014)."

And here's the references being used for that statement:

Bielby, Denise D. and William T. Bielby. 2002. ‘Hollywood Dreams, Harsh Realities: Writing for Film and Television.’
Contexts 1(4): 21–27.
Erigha, Maryann. 2014. Unequal Hollywood: African Americans, Women, and Representation in a Media Industry. PhD
dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
Lauzen,MarthaM. 2008. Women@the Box Office: A Study of the Top 100Worldwide Grossing Films. San Diego, CA: Center
for the Study of Women in Television and Film.
Lauzen, Martha M. 2009a. IndependentWomen: Behind-the-Scenes Representation on Festival Films. San Diego, CA: Center for
the Study of Women in Television and Film.
Lauzen, Martha M. 2009b. The Celluloid Ceiling II: Production Design, Production Management, Sound Design, Key Grips, and
Gaffers. San Diego, CA: Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film.
Lauzen, Martha M. 2012. The Celluloid Ceiling: Behind-the-Scenes Employment of Women on the Top 250 Films of 2011.
San Diego, CA: Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film.
Smith, Stacy L. and Marc Choueiti. 2011a. “Black Characters in Popular Film: Is the Key toDiversifyingCinematic Content Held in the Hand of the Black Director?” Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, Los Angeles, CA.
Smith, Stacy L. and Marc Choueiti. 2011b. Gender in Cinematic Content? A Look at Females On Screen and Behind-the-Camera in
Top Grossing 2008 Films. Los Angeles, CA: Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism.
Smith, Stacy, Marc Choueiti and Katherine Pieper. 2014. Race/Ethnicity in 600 Popular Films: Examining On Screen
Portrayals and Behind the Camera Diversity. Media, Diversity, & Social Change Initiative. Los Angeles, CA.



...

Around the Network
Machiavellian on 28 March 2019
DonFerrari said:
Machiavellian said:

This is exactly why you do not get the point.  In an industry where the default is a white male lead, where the default is white male directors, where the purse strings for big budget movies are controlled by old white men.  You are trying to pretend that everything is equal and thus the context of his statement should be considered equally if a White male made the same statement.  Context is king in understanding a person view point and the statements they say.  In your original OP, you only took out the part that supported your own interpretation of what Peel stated ignoring everything else because it did not fit your argument.

You want to paint a picture that everything is equal so every statement can be weighted with the same scale but its not.  This is the problem with your stance.  Things are not equal.  POC are not represented on the same scale as white people and definitely as lead roles.  Trying to make a black and white case on this point seems foolish when the playing field isn't level.

You'll beat the same point trying to say same thing is or isn't racism 'depending on the context' when it isn't.

So if you want to call one racism, you have to call the other. 

Because its not racism.  As I stated, you took one statement out of context to support your opinion ignoring everything else.  Anyone can take a statement out of context and make it appear to be something else.  People do this all the time and it appears here you are trying to do the same thing.  

Case in point, if I stated "I hate white people who hate black people".  You would be the person that take the part "He said He hates white people" and form a conversation on just that part trying to make a point.



Jpcc86 on 28 March 2019

His films revolve around the life experience of black families/individuals, so I see no problem with what he said. He can choose to do that. He is delivering great films, with fantastic cast and promoting representation. All is well as far as im concerned.



TopCat8 on 28 March 2019

These threads kill me. Some people on this site understand racism, but those people are, predictably, in the minority.



Add me on Xbox Live: TopCat8

PSintend0 on 28 March 2019
RolStoppable said:
DonFerrari said:

You'll beat the same point trying to say same thing is or isn't racism 'depending on the context' when it isn't.

So if you want to call one racism, you have to call the other. 

Let's go over a couple of examples.

It makes me happy to read about car accidents where white people died, because the less white people on this planet, the better.
It makes me happy to read about car accidents where black people died, because the less black people on this planet, the better.

In the above example we can see that both versions of the statement are equally bad and equally racist.

I am not going to cast a white male lead for my movies, because there is already an abundance of movies with white male leads.
I am not going to cast a black male lead for my movies, because there is already an abundance of movies with black male leads.

In the above example we can notice a significant difference. The first statement's reasoning is objectively true while the second statement's reasoning is objectively false. The probable reason why someone made the second statement with its headscratching reasoning is that the true reason needed to be covered up; said true reason would be racism, because if there was an actual good reason to not cast black male leads, then that reason would have been mentioned instead of the nonsensical reason that was provided.

It is not only possible to call only one of two very similar statements racist, it's actually the only logical thing to do.

Nicely written Rol.

I was going to post something similar to that.

If things change and white male in the lead role becomes a rarity, then there should be no problem in saying something like that, but as of now it would just be crazy.

This is not really about skin color, its about doing something to differiate from the grey mass and not doing the same old thing that everyone else is doing. And to those that really like to be offended by everything, may I remind you that if I understood correctly there was also the word male in Jordan Peele´s statement (although for some reason that was left out from the name of the topic).

So he is a "racist" and a "man-hater feminist" :P



Around the Network
KLXVER on 28 March 2019
TopCat8 said:
These threads kill me. Some people on this site understand racism, but those people are, predictably, in the minority.

Well to be fair, in these hyper sensitive times, its quite difficult for many to really understand what racism is.



DonFerrari on 28 March 2019
Machiavellian said:
DonFerrari said:

You'll beat the same point trying to say same thing is or isn't racism 'depending on the context' when it isn't.

So if you want to call one racism, you have to call the other. 

Because its not racism.  As I stated, you took one statement out of context to support your opinion ignoring everything else.  Anyone can take a statement out of context and make it appear to be something else.  People do this all the time and it appears here you are trying to do the same thing.  

Case in point, if I stated "I hate white people who hate black people".  You would be the person that take the part "He said He hates white people" and form a conversation on just that part trying to make a point.

I love how much you assume.

And also love that you are ignoring the very fact that the point is on media coverage with great excuses of "it isn't that he doesn't like white people, he even worked with them before". All which would be considered irrelevant if he was a white person talking against black.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Machiavellian on 28 March 2019
DonFerrari said:
Machiavellian said:

Because its not racism.  As I stated, you took one statement out of context to support your opinion ignoring everything else.  Anyone can take a statement out of context and make it appear to be something else.  People do this all the time and it appears here you are trying to do the same thing.  

Case in point, if I stated "I hate white people who hate black people".  You would be the person that take the part "He said He hates white people" and form a conversation on just that part trying to make a point.

I love how much you assume.

And also love that you are ignoring the very fact that the point is on media coverage with great excuses of "it isn't that he doesn't like white people, he even worked with them before". All which would be considered irrelevant if he was a white person talking against black.

No body cares about if he likes white people, has a wife that is white or a mother.  Your point was that if someone white made the same statements they would be considered racist.  Rol pretty much took your example and showed how putting both into context does not prove your point.  Throwing other junk into the argument doesn't make your opinion any stronger, it just muddies the conversation.

You are not trying to show that the writer example or description of the comment has a fallacy.  You specifically stated if a white male said the same thing it would be considered racist.

The thing is, the point and agenda you created this tread for doesn't fit.  You took one statement out of context and used it to prove a point which if all you are going to do is take one excerpt from an entire conversation and build a case of reverse racism then this probably wasn't the best example you could find.



RJ_Sizzle on 28 March 2019
Soundwave said:

90% of actors cast in Hollywood films are white. It's about time other directors and other ethnicities of actors get a freaking chance. 90% of the audience for movies is not white by any means not even in the US.

All he's saying is one group has been way over-represented and we've seen their story told 5000+ different times. And both Us and obviously Get Out still had prominent roles for white people.

How many movie roles do white people need? 95%? 97%? 98%? 

For some people, ANY representation is over representation. Note how heated things get politically when a genre movie starring a woman or a minority becomes a blockbuster. Example: All the people that claimed they were attacked at Black Panther showings.



DonFerrari on 28 March 2019
Machiavellian said:
DonFerrari said:

I love how much you assume.

And also love that you are ignoring the very fact that the point is on media coverage with great excuses of "it isn't that he doesn't like white people, he even worked with them before". All which would be considered irrelevant if he was a white person talking against black.

No body cares about if he likes white people, has a wife that is white or a mother.  Your point was that if someone white made the same statements they would be considered racist.  Rol pretty much took your example and showed how putting both into context does not prove your point.  Throwing other junk into the argument doesn't make your opinion any stronger, it just muddies the conversation.

You are not trying to show that the writer example or description of the comment has a fallacy.  You specifically stated if a white male said the same thing it would be considered racist.

The thing is, the point and agenda you created this tread for doesn't fit.  You took one statement out of context and used it to prove a point which if all you are going to do is take one excerpt from an entire conversation and build a case of reverse racism then this probably wasn't the best example you could find.

Nobody cares? Funny, that was the reasoning the article writer gave to say Jordan isn't racist.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."