Black actors at the Oscars PART 2! WSJ Agrees with ME!

[Nemesis77]

OK, I will clarify my statement regarding me being "careful" around certain minority (the gypsy/romani) in Finland.

First of all, there are quite alot of "foreigners" in Helsinki area. There are africans, arabs, south-europeans, asians.... I have no bias regarding those people since they have never caused me any problems. Quite the contrary, many times they seem really nice people.

As for my reasons for having a bias when it comes to the romani-people.... It's simply because most of the cases I have seen them, have been negative. By "negative" I mean that they were harassing other people, stealing (including from my mother), acting stupid in traffic (like, stopping ones car in the middle of the road so he could have a chat with his relative who's in the other side of the road), making alot of noise, breaking stuff, fraud, being rude, fighting.... After witnessing that over and over again, I can't help it but to feel biased when I meet them. My past experiences have teached me to be careful.

Now, I am objective when I deal with them. I HAVE met romanis who were nice, so I know that there are nice people there too. But I am always careful when dealing with them, because of my past experiences.

I do not consider myself to be racist because of that. It's no different that when people are biased against Hell's Angels or skinheads. In this case, that group who is the subject of the bias, just happens to be a racial/cultural group.

I think that the reason why the romani seem to cause more problems that people on average (the statistics of the police verify that) is cultural. I guess their culture and cultural-values just are a bit incompatible with the dominant finnish-culture.

 

[AaronP]

but say 50% of blacks in America live below the poverty line whereas 10% of whites do. You can see the inequality.

"I believe that anyone who works hard in America and lives an honest life will succeed." Bill O"Reilly said that tonight. I agree with him.

 

[BooneRebel]

<< I just have to laugh. All these years when a white man and woman won best actor and actress, the deabte was always if their performance was that good. Now that a black man and woman win in the same year its charity or some kind of racial whatever. It is so stupid. I could see if Nell Carter and Tommy Davidson won. But for god sakes, two very good and accomplished actors won. They just happened to be black. Big deal. Next year when a two white people win I going to say it was racism. LOL By the way anybody got any buttered popcorn? >>

It's a racial whatever this year because it was made out to be a racial whatever. If it was presented as a normal Oscars and not as a giant leap forward for blacks then you wouldn't see all of this flak. If Halle had gotten up and said "Thank you to everyone that has helped me to be the person I am", etc., etc., just like every other actor/actress does every year, then you wouldn't have heard anything more about it. But for her to get up and act like her receiving an award was the greatest accomplishment since the slaves were freed went a little over the top.

 

[Red Dawn]

<< But for her to get up and act like her receiving an award was the greatest accomplishment since the slaves were freed went a little over the top. >>

And Somebody going over the top about anything is new to the Oscars? You'd think she said something against the White Race the way some of you Boys are acting. Heavan forbid she state that blacks have finally achieved parity with whites.

 

[BooneRebel]

<< Poitier's award was overdue and clearly two leading actors plus Whoopi was too much for some of the white (and apparently Indian-descent) audience. I didn't intend to watch b/c I did not care I stopped to hear his speech and see the award for animated short. If the proselytizing was too much just say so and move on but it's hard for me to believe the whiners complaint is proportional to the actual slight. But if a white actor didn't win a justly deserved award that's unfortunate but that's life . . . maybe their studio should have provided better PR. But the Oscars by definition are part merit, part Hollywood. The more serious issue is . . . how to resolve our serious problem where we preach color-blindness but it's damn near all we ever talk about. >>

I don't disagree that Sidney, Halle, and Denzel all deserved their awards. I think that they earned them. However, I disagree with the manner in which it was presented with the emphasis on color. Yes, we as a whole preach color-blindness. But it seems to be very one-sided. Whites should not acknowledge a difference for those of darker skin. But if you're black it seems to be perfectly acceptable (at least to several of you here) to not only acknowledge a difference but to place as much emphasis as possible on it.

What would you say to an actor who gave an acceptance speech stating how proud he is to be a "white actor" and how much he owed to his "white forefathers" for giving him the opportunity to be a tribute to his race? I know it sounds laughable, but think about it for a minute. He would be absolutely crucified. The actors union would probably denounce him and the Oscars would withdraw the award. The NAACP and other groups would call for a boycott of any and all movies associated with him, etc., etc. But for everyone calling for color-blindness it's somehow OK for someone that's black to do the same thing? And you don't see why it would be questioned?

 

[SaltBoy]

I just got into this thread, and I'm just getting out, but not before I say two things:

1. ThisIsMatt, YOU ROCK!!

2. I have the most wonderful girlfriend in the world. I had a desire to watch the oscars, yet she wanted nothing to do with them. So, I turned off the TV and did something else with her which was a MUCH better use of my time. Looks like I missed nothing. Oh well.

 

[Corn]

<< And Somebody going over the top about anything is new to the Oscars? >>



Exactly.

It amazes me to see the reaction of some people regarding this year's Academy Awards. This is what Hollywood is good at: Pandering. They pander to our base emotions trying to take our money. Of course there is nothing wrong with that since entertainment is so crucial to our lives.....

The Oscars are not decided on the night they are awarded. It is no coincidence that Poitier received his lifetime achievment award. It was a night contrived by a lot of rich white folks seeking absolution of their guilt.

That's the real shame because Poitier, Washington, and Berry all deserved the awards they were given. In some people's minds there will always be an asterisk besides the names of this years Oscar winners because of the way it was played out. The whole night came off tawdry (especially the moment of silence), but then again what would you expect?

 

[Red Dawn]

<< What would you say to an actor who gave an acceptance speech stating how proud he is to be a "white actor" and how much he owed to his "white forefathers" for giving him the opportunity to be a tribute to his race? >>

You know why it would be taboo? Because it would sound straight out of a script for a Klan Meeting , an American Nazi Rally or a White Ayrian Church sermon. Blame them for whites not being able proclaim his pride in his race. Of course why on earth would I or anybody else have a reason to proclaim how proud we are of being white. It's not like we as a race had to overcome any obstacles.



<< But if you're black it seems to be perfectly acceptable (at least to several of you here) to not only acknowledge a difference but to place as much emphasis as possible on it. >>

Why shouldn't they, we put enough emphasis on their race. Blacks have always indentified themselves as a group. They were brougt over as slaves as a group and treated as property as a group, they were freed as a group and face dicrimination as a group. Is it that hard to imagine why they would indentify and have a sense of brotherhood as a group that isn't seen in White America (outside of Religion)?

 

[BooneRebel]

<<

<< What would you say to an actor who gave an acceptance speech stating how proud he is to be a "white actor" and how much he owed to his "white forefathers" for giving him the opportunity to be a tribute to his race? >>

You know why it would be taboo? Because it would sound straight out of a script for a Klan Meeting , an American Nazi Rally or a White Ayrian Church sermon. Blame them for whites not being able proclaim his pride in his race. Of course why on earth would I or anybody else have a reason to proclaim how proud we are of being white. It's not like we as a race had to overcome any obstacles.



<< But if you're black it seems to be perfectly acceptable (at least to several of you here) to not only acknowledge a difference but to place as much emphasis as possible on it. >>

Why shouldn't they, we put enough emphasis on their race. Blacks have always indentified themselves as a group. They were brougt over as slaves as a group and treated as property as a group, they were freed as a group and face dicrimination as a group. Is it that hard to imagine why they would indentify and have a sense of brotherhood as a group that isn't seen in White America (outside of Religion)? >>

You are contradicting yourself all over the place here. If it's racist to associate a group with the actions of a few, then you're racist against whites. Why would you immediately associate this 'actor' with the Klan, Nazis, and Aryans? And the whole issue here (apparently) is about how blacks want to be viewed equally with whites: Color-blindness. But as I said, it's only supposed to be a one-way color-blindness. Whites should not acknowledge a difference to blacks but it's accepted for blacks to acknowledge a difference against whites. If it's acceptable for blacks to identify themselves as a group (as you say it is), then why isn't it acceptable for whites to identify themselves as a group? It's a double standard.

 

[BooneRebel]

Red Dawn, just so I'm clear on this: Basically you feel that it's wrong to be racist against blacks, but it's OK to be racist against whites? That's it, right?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

<<

<< Mr. Varadarajan is deputy editorial features editor of The Wall Street Journal. His column appears Tuesdays. >>

You can say it was this guys opinion, but don't act as if he is some guy off the street giving his opinion, the guy is an editor at one of, if not the biggest newspaper in America, and yes, he saw what we all saw on Sunday, racism at it's finest, except this racism was black against white so it cannot be brought up without the person bringing it to light being called a racist now can it? Long sentence eh, just like the Oscars was, too long for me to sit through that's for sure. I like shows where the people actually win and are'nt preselected according to race. >>



So what? Are you implying that the fact that the guy works for a successful newspaper somehow makes his opinion more relevant or accurate than anyone else's? I don't care who he works for, and I can't see that a person's job has anything whatsoever to do with the validity of his opinion - I would not assume that the opinion of the President of the United States, the Pope, or anyone else was more credible than my own - why should I care that someone is the "deputy editorial features editor" of The Wall Street Journal?

If you really think these winners were "preselected according to race," I regard you as a crackpot conspiracy theorist. But that's just MY opinion, and since I am not a deputy editorial features editor, I'm sure you don't care.

 

[Spoooon]

<< "I believe that anyone who works hard in America and lives an honest life will succeed." Bill O"Reilly said that tonight. I agree with him. >>


I'm glad you believe that. It would be nice if it were true.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

<< Red Dawn, just so I'm clear on this: Basically you feel that it's wrong to be racist against blacks, but it's OK to be racist against whites? That's it, right? >>



That is nothing like what he said - are you being deliberately opaque or do you really not get it?

I don't think most black people would tell you that they are seeking color-blindness; they are mostly just looking to have opportunities comparable to what white people have. Fortunately we are getting closer to that ideal, even if we are not there yet.

Since whites and blacks have obviously had completely different experiences in this country (whites started here by settling the country and killing off most of the Indians, whereas blacks were brought here in chains, owned by the white landowners), black people have had to take a significantly more active role in their own self-preservation than have whites. I believe what Red Dawn meant (and, in fact, said rather clearly) is that black pride is not quintessentially racist (or, for that matter, necessarily racist at all), whereas "white pride" is a sociologically unnecessary "movement" that is pretty much exclusively the bailiwick of bigots. Nothing he said implied a tolerance of racism by blacks in any way that I can see.

 

[Red Dawn]

<< Red Dawn, just so I'm clear on this: Basically you feel that it's wrong to be racist against blacks, but it's OK to be racist against whites? That's it, right? >>

No just like it wouldn't be right of me to make fun of your inability to comprehend the written word (my typos and all)



<< You are contradicting yourself all over the place here. If it's racist to associate a group with the actions of a few, then you're racist against whites. >>

Yeah right..not!



<< Why would you immediately associate this 'actor' with the Klan, Nazis, and Aryans? >>

I didn't say that Boone? I said it would sound like they were reading a script from a Klan meeting, an American Nazi rally or a White Ayrian Church Sermon. That is not associating the actor with any of those groups.



<< it's accepted for blacks to acknowledge a difference against whites >>


You really need to work on your reading comprehension Boone. I said they weren't stating their difference or their superiority, they were claiming equality and parity. That's isn't racism Boone




<< then why isn't it acceptable for whites to identify themselves as a group? >>

Not that it unacceptable, it isn't the way whites see themselves. We are more prone to look at ourselves as individuals or members of a Community based on Religion or heritage than race. We have parades for Columbus Day and Saint Patrick?s Day but we don't have parades for White Man Day. To Blacks being Black is their heritage where as for Whites being White isn't

 

[BooneRebel]

To quote you, Red Dawn, in this thread you said

<< I also don't have a problem with the double standard that has been mentioned regarding Blacks being able to say what they've done as a Black Accomplishment but Whites not being able too. They can but they would sound like major Racists. Of course you can Blame the White Aryian Church, The KKK and the American Nazi Party for that situation. >>

But when I ask you to confirm it, << Red Dawn, just so I'm clear on this: Basically you feel that it's wrong to be racist against blacks, but it's OK to be racist against whites? That's it, right? >> you say no. And now twice in this thread when someone has mentioned 'white pride' you have immediately associated it with Aryans, KKK, Nazis, etc. But you don't think that is racist? To associate an entire race with the actions of a limited group? Isn't that the definition???

I think that there's definitely proof of racism here, but it's yours, not mine. And you say I'm illiterate and ignorant because I have pointed it out to you? Do you have an argument that has any more logic than that or do you have to result to namecalling?

 

[BooneRebel]

<<

<< Red Dawn, just so I'm clear on this: Basically you feel that it's wrong to be racist against blacks, but it's OK to be racist against whites? That's it, right? >>



That is nothing like what he said - are you being deliberately opaque or do you really not get it? >>

Don_Vito, that is exactly what he said. Don't accuse me of being opaque (think you meant obtuse, but anyway) unless you read all of Red's posts in this thread. By the definition of the word I'd say that he's a racist:

<< I also don't have a problem with the double standard that has been mentioned regarding Blacks being able to say what they've done as a Black Accomplishment but Whites not being able too. >>

 

[Red Dawn]

<< Red Dawn, just so I'm clear on this: Basically you feel that it's wrong to be racist against blacks, but it's OK to be racist against whites?
>>

No I don't



<< That's it, right? >> you say no. And now twice in this thread when someone has mentioned 'white pride' you have immediately associated it with Aryans, KKK, Nazis, etc. But you don't think that is racist? To associate an entire race with the actions of a limited group? Isn't that the definition??? >>

I said it sounds like what you would hear from those groups, not that the person who was saying it was necessarily a member(though more times than not they are). I also said you can thank those groups for making any reference to "White Pride" taboo. Besides, what kind of pride should one feel being white?



<< I also don't have a problem with the double standard that has been mentioned regarding Blacks being able to say what they've done as a Black Accomplishment but Whites not being able too >>

I don't. It doesn't bother me in the least.The reason is, when a Black Person speaks about being black or the Black Community they are speaking of those who share their heritage. Now if a person of Irish Heritage wants to give props to those in the Irish Community, or a Jew wants to talk about his community or an Italian, more power to them and it's not like they don't. You see the difference between Whites and Blacks in this situation is that Blacks look at being black or African American as being their Heritage where as whites don't look at being white as their heritage. On top of that White Pride is associated with Knuckle Dragging Racist who spend all their time hating others because they happen to be of a diiferent race, religion or background.

 

[docmanhattan]

Boone

<< Don't accuse me of being opaque (think you meant obtuse, but anyway) >>

But you are opaque! Unless you're transparent.

 

[BooneRebel]

<<

<< Red Dawn, just so I'm clear on this: Basically you feel that it's wrong to be racist against blacks, but it's OK to be racist against whites?
>>

No I don't



<< That's it, right? >> you say no. And now twice in this thread when someone has mentioned 'white pride' you have immediately associated it with Aryans, KKK, Nazis, etc. But you don't think that is racist? To associate an entire race with the actions of a limited group? Isn't that the definition??? >>

I said it sounds like what you would hear from those groups, not that the person who was saying it was necessarily a member(though more times than not they are). I also said you can thank those groups for making any reference to "White Pride" taboo. Besides, what kind of pride should one feel being white?



<< I also don't have a problem with the double standard that has been mentioned regarding Blacks being able to say what they've done as a Black Accomplishment but Whites not being able too >>

I don't. It doesn't bother me in the least.The reason is, when a Black Person speaks about being black or the Black Community they are speaking of those who share their heritage. Now if a person of Irish Heritage wants to give props to those in the Irish Community, or a Jew wants to talk about his community or an Italian, more power to them and it's not like they don't. You see the difference between Whites and Blacks in this situation is that Blacks look at being black or African American as being their Heritage where as whites don't look at being white as their heritage. On top of that White Pride is associated with Knuckle Dragging Racist who spend all their time hating others because they happen to be of a diiferent race, religion or background. >>

That's a little calmer response than I expected. Thank you. But I still think it's naive for you to say that 'blacks' can single themselves out because they are respecting their heritage, but 'whites' are incapable of doing the same thing unless they add in an additional exclusion based on regional or religious background. All of these threads have pointed out how sensitive we as a group are towards racial & ethnic separation. I think everyone agrees that racial prejudice is not doing anyone any favors. We all need to 'just get along'. So it's disheartening to see the apparent progress of this 'getting along' disrupted by things like the recent Oscar awards. It's politically & morally correct in this day & age to ignore race, but we're held back by the promotion of statistics like "the first black to win an academy award in 74 years". As long as this scoreboard continues to be held up, I don't think we're going to be able to get away from racial prejudice.

 

[BooneRebel]

<< Boone

<< Don't accuse me of being opaque (think you meant obtuse, but anyway) >>

But you are opaque! Unless you're transparent. >>

Well......if you hold me up to a really bright light...

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Don_Vito, that is exactly what he said. Don't accuse me of being opaque (think you meant obtuse, but anyway) unless you read all of Red's posts in this thread. By the definition of the word I'd say that he's a racist:

<< I also don't have a problem with the double standard that has been mentioned regarding Blacks being able to say what they've done as a Black Accomplishment but Whites not being able too. >>

[/i] >>



No, I meant opaque (as in, "obtuse of mind; dense"), and I did read what he said. Unlike you, I am not contorting it to suit my own argument.

 

[clarkmo]

Let's top thinking about ourselves for a minute. It's beginning to sound like sour grapes. Why was the show geared the way it was? Who was the message going out to? No one on this forum obviously. So, who else? Who "Got It"? I'll leave it rhetorical and unanswered because we are all bright enough to answer it on our own. In that vein and spirit, considering the target audience (no, it was not you, stop whining and get over it), don't you think the message was a good one and don't you think that the fact that the message didn't connect with most of you, tells you that the target audience doesn't connect to most of the messages you see on tv? It's my guess that it was intentionally designed to appeal to a certain group, leaving the rest of us uninspired and feeling neglected. Perhaps that is how the target audience feels about movies, etc. most of the time. This really may have been a profound move on the part of the Oscar organizers. Think about it. Now you know what it's like.
Bravo
Edit: Perhaps there were 2 target audiences and each got the message that was intended for them.

 

[BooneRebel]

<< Unlike you, I am not contorting it to suit my own argument. >>

<sigh> Ok, here we go again. Apparently I've contorted this. Would you please explain it to me?

Back to my original argument, it sounds like you support Red Dawn and my original interpretation, i.e., black pride is a socially acceptable practice used to further the cause of the black race and support of their heritage.

White pride, on the other hand, is a non-socially accepted practice used to further the cause of the white race and support of their heritage. I think it's ironic (and sad) for anyone to call for acceptance of their race while belittling other races. If 'white pride' isn't acceptable then 'black pride' shouldn't be either. Or if 'black pride' is acceptable, then 'white pride' should be acceptable, too. To me, almost every other culture recognizes people by their country or region of origin: French, Italian, German, American, Asian (Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc.), Australian, et al. However, we have this new PC term "African-American" used to describe black US citizens of African descent. Oddly enough, not all black US citizens are of direct African descent, and not all African descendants in the US are black. Irregardless, this culture insists on placing emphasis on skin tone when the rest of the world couldn't care less. I don't refer to myself as a white-brown-American-Indian-German-European, nor do I call the British the "pasty-white Europeans" or the Chinese the 'yellow-white Asians". It's silly. It seems as though when everyone else is ready to quit calling attention to color, someone raises a flag to say "Look at me. I'm XXX color and this is my accomplishment". Now, if I have contorted your view, please explain what you really mean.