Okay, I'm gonna need some help here.

[conuly]

It's like banging my head against a wall, but more painful. And if I'm going to keep wasting my time on this futile effort, I could at least get a little company there.

I mean, I'm not wrong, am I? My facts aren't wrong, are they? My thoughts aren't missing a crucial point, are they? This person IS being willfully annoying, right?

HELP ME OUT HERE I FEEL SO ALONE.

Also, I didn't know this as I don't really follow celebrity anything (I'm lucky if I know who a certain star IS, much less what they've done and why people care) or watch many movies or TV shows (I do watch TV, of course, but I seem to limit myself to three or four shows. If I add a new one, an old one inevitably drops off my list), but I'm realizing it now by looking at these pictures...

WOW does that girl look like her dad. Will Smith? HIS DAUGHTER LOOKS JUST LIKE HIM.

It's sorta creepy to look at, but I'm sure as she gets older it'll be more her face and less her dad as a young girl. (Kinda like a kid down her block who looks spookily like her grandmother... or she did at four. Creepy seeing a four year old who looks like a 50 year old woman, but now that she's 12 even though her face hasn't changed, it looks like HER instead of her grandma.)

Comments

[http://www.google.com/profiles/102813354404079649216]

You're getting somewhere. I used to be a lot like that person you're arguing with. It took folks like you repeatedly pointing out racism to get me to see it.

[http://www.google.com/profiles/102813354404079649216]

This is feebeeglee. Dumb OpenID. I guess I need a DW account.

[conuly]

That's weird, I don't know why the OpenID isn't working. You don't need a full DW account, though, you can get a DW OpenID account. (Or do you have one? I don't know how one can tell.)

And I do know why people think "colorblind" is the way to go. I also know that it doesn't work, though. I don't see how it can't be obvious to others! (But then again, I kinda want to say "Well, look at how she types!", but that's not fair. Plenty of intelligent people type like that. I guess.)

[http://www.google.com/profiles/feebeeglee]

This is a little better. At least it has my name.

[dragonwolf]

First, I want to beat her over the head with her own cell phone. "lol" cannot be interchanged with a period, and she just in general comes off as a bimbo.

That said, I think they should cast a black actress for the part, because that's how the book describes her, and, therefore, the qualifying actress should follow suit. I've seen Eragon fans go foam-mouthed like rabid dogs because Arya's hair was the wrong color. And don't get me started with Harry Potter or LOTR fans.

And about The Last Airbender, has that OP even seen the TV show? If you want to get technical, Katara and Sukko would be better played by Inuit, not Japanese/Asian, given both the show's characters' features and their geographical location of origin, and both Aang and Toph are actually quite pale (and pale enough that a white person can feasibly play them). Then, there's also the fact that Asian people generally don't really look like anime people, since one characteristic of the anime style is that the characters are often deliberately drawn to not display a nationality/ethnicity. And just because it's an anime style (A:TLA is actually American made), doesn't mean the characters have to be, or even are, Japanese or Asian.

As for the supposed lack of non-white actors in TV and film, I can't help but wonder where that one comes from. Perhaps it's just the shows and movies I watch, and perhaps I'm willing to accept a smaller percentage in a given feature than they are, but I've seen no shortage of non-white (and specifically black) people in movies and TV, and not just in secondary or villain roles (and what's so wrong about being a villain, particularly when there seems to be no issue when the villain is white, or male in the case of people complaining about the lack of "strong female characters"). Hell, in Bruce Almighty and its sequel, a black man played God, you can't really get much more "important good guy" than that (no, he technically didn't have a huge part, but without God, the whole movie falls apart).

[dragonwolf]

And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying discrimination doesn't exist. I just don't think it exists to the extent that some groups of people think it does. It's the whole "seek and you shall find" thing - if you look for discrimination everywhere, then it will be everywhere.

[conuly]

As for the supposed lack of non-white actors in TV and film, I can't help but wonder where that one comes from.

Earthsea. And Friends, come to think of it. Oh, and how about Castle - two black characters, one of whom barely gets any screentime at all, though you're always gonna find a black murder suspect running around picking pockets. Psych - one black character. 5 - 7 white main characters, one black character. No Hispanics (excepting in that one novela ep) and they make up 30% of the population in Santa Barbara!

Now, this study says there are a lot of African-Americans on TV (not in the movies, that's a separate issue) but that they're not well-represented.

http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/4426

http://www.c3.ucla.edu/newsstand/art/prime-time-televisions-black-and-white-world/ (This seems to be the same study written differently?)

I can't find the same sorts of percentages on movies via google, but there is this: http://www.8asians.com/2010/06/25/racebending-releases-report-on-the-true-diversity-in-paramount-pictures-films/

Thing is, when I see movies, I rarely see movies with non-white protagonists. And while we all say there's no small parts, only small actors, it's a bit much to expect people to ONLY accept second billing.

and what's so wrong about being a villain, particularly when there seems to be no issue when the villain is white, or male in the case of people complaining about the lack of "strong female characters

Nothing. IF you have an opportunity to be MORE than the villain.

When available roles for your race are limited and stereotyped, then we have a problem. When the only role with an Asian actor in a movie is as a villain, and the only role for several movies is as the villain or maybe as a ultra-studious kid or a martial arts mogul, then there's a problem. It's not like being the villain this one time is bad, it's that it's again and again and again.

And yes, it's fair to say "It's not THIS movie, it's the trend it shows" because otherwise people say "God, what's wrong with that? You wouldn't complain if it was a white man as a villain, what do you even WANT?"

Hell, in Bruce Almighty and its sequel, a black man played God, you can't really get much more "important good guy" than that (no, he technically didn't have a huge part, but without God, the whole movie falls apart).

Let's see what TVTropes says about this:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BruceAlmighty

"# Magical Negro: Morgan Freeman as God. 'Nuff said.

* Anything with Morgan Freeman will have him as the Magical Negro. "

Magical what-now? Let's click the link, see the description for that trope.

"In order to show the world that minority characters are not bad people, one will step forward to help a "normal" person, with their pure heart and Closer To Earth wisdom. They are from a minority that is discriminated against, physically or mentally disabled, or social outcasts (drifters, the homeless, ex-cons). They step (often clad in a clean, white suit) into the life of the central character (often white, American and racist) and, in some way, enrich the central character's life.

While this can work as a plea for tolerance, or simply An Aesop about not dismissing people just because they're different, it's all too easy to go too far and make them into an all-knowing Mary Sue or pseudo-narrator whose magical minority-powers save the day. It also tends to raise the question that if the Magical Negro (more commonly called the Magic Negro, and sometimes the Mystical Negro) is so powerful and intelligent, why is he never saving the day, himself, instead of helping the mainstream hero to get all the glory. Also, quite often he's just ditched or even killed after he's fulfilled his purpose for the plot. This is Hand Waved as the Magical Negro is selfless and wants to help those who need guidance.

If the Magical Negro is from a society of Noble Savages, expect an Anvilicious Aesop about the failings of the society which protagonist comes from - which usually leads to the protagonist 'going native' and ending up better at everything than his Magical Negro mentor.

The reason the Magical Negro is problematic is because it is a moral and artistic shortcut, replacing a genuine moral message with a well-intentioned but patronizing homage to the special gifts of the meek. A Magical Negro is never a main character; he never uses his magical powers to accomplish his own goals, only to glorify the white protagonist. "

Example? Bruce/Evan Almighty films, where the main character is a selfish white guy who needs Magical Negro assistance to find wisdom.

Making Morgan Freeman God would be more interesting if Morgan Freeman didn't go around doing nothing but helping white guys (even in Earthsea, for crying out loud) in every movie he's in.

[conuly]

Alternatively, if you assume there is nothing, you won't see what's right there in front of you.

Now I really want to look into movie roles. That shouldn't be too hard, just time-consuming.

[dragonwolf]

And yet, had they cast a white man for God, people would have bitched something along the line of "why does God have to be white?" Just like The Last Airbender would have been added to the list of "martial arts movies" that people complain Asians are only in, had Asians been cast.

As for movies and TV shows with non-white protagonists that are more than just "the magical negro"? Off the top of my head, from what I've personally watched or at least know about:

24 (not one, but two black Presidents, before Obama's election, and both with balls (unlike the one white male President); a female President as well)
Stand and Deliver (majority Hispanic cast)
Lean on Me (majority black cast)
Stargate SG-1 (entire black race, black SG-1 team member, guest actors of various, including Asian, races)
Family Matters (black cast)
Criminal Minds (black BAU agent, almost never a non-white antagonist)
Law & Order: SVU (black detective, Asian psychologist, almost never a non-white antagonist)
Sister Sister (black cast)
Smart Guy (black cast)
Slumdog Millionaire (Indian cast)
Reading Rainbow (black host)
Blade (black title character)
Shaft (black title character)
The Matrix (several non-white keystone characters, the Oracle's standing as "magic negro" notwithstanding, she's not the only non-white character)
Catwoman (black, female title character)
I Am Legend (new one, black main characters)
Dr. Dolittle (new ones, black main characters)
Radio (black main character)
Remember the Titans (black main characters)
Drumline (mostly black cast)
The Color of Friendship (black main characters)
House (black and, for a time, Indian, main characters)
Numb3rs (several different ethnicities, including Hungarian Jewish and Indian)

Like I said, perhaps it's just the stuff I happen to watch, and/or that I value supporting roles as much as lead roles, unlike most other people.

Psych - one black character. 5 - 7 white main characters, one black character.

Technically speaking, that's pretty proportionally accurate for blacks (remember, the original argument I was protesting to was that blacks are under-represented, per the post you linked to). One in seven is 14%, which falls about into the overall American population distribution. Could there be more characters that are neither black nor white? Certainly, particularly with the setting of the show (I don't watch it, so I don't know much about it).

Could there be improvement? Certainly, I'd love to see more Hispanic, Asian, and Indian/Middle Eastern characters that aren't gangmembers, Karate masters, terrorists, or other stereotype.

The issue I see with the whole "there isn't enough diversity" thing, regardless of whether it's non-white characters or "strong female" characters, is that there are a fairly large number of cases where the characters appear to fit the bill of what people want, but then the group picks apart what's wrong with the character ("stereotyped," "ghettofied," "too white," "magic negro," etc). My question, then, is what would the desired non-white-male character be like? And I'm looking for specifics, not just "not X character" or "not stereotyped," and yes, it's an honest question, not one to just be antagonistic. If G.I. Jane, or Derek Morgan, or Jaime Escalante aren't good enough to be recognized, then what is?

While I concede that God was a "magical negro" character (as it was never expanded in either movie), the issue I have with some of the supposed "magical negro" roles the article mentions (such as Freeman's role in Batman Begins), is that the character is only a "magical negro" because the person happens to be black. If the character didn't exist, the main character would have to fill the role, and thus become a Mary Sue. If the character still existed, but was white (as any other race would also fall under the "magical [insert race here]" label), there would be an uproar about the lack of cast diversity. To expand on the Batman Begins example, if Lucius Fox didn't exist, it would mean Batman would have to build his own car, his own suit, and his own weapons and gadgets, thus making him not only a privileged, rich, white guy by day and superhero by night, but also one who could somehow have the time to come up with and build all his toys, engineer a cure for Scarecrow's poison (while under its effects, no less), and cover his tracks (both personally and financially). Oh, and somewhere in there, actually find time to sleep. Also, Fox is expanded upon in the second movie, as his role of Batman's behind-the-scenes "partner in crime" becomes more refined (since Batman Begins is pretty much an introductory movie for Batman, himself). We're also talking about trying to build a two-hour movie from a comic book franchise/mythos over half a century in the making.

[dragonwolf]

Then don't assume anything, find out the real facts about why something is done the way it's done.

In the article you linked the other day about "colorblind" vs "value-diversity" teaching, the ambiguous example is a prime example of this (and, obviously, is precisely why it was the ambiguous test). The "value-diversity" people assume the person didn't invite the other because of racism, while the "colorblind" side didn't make that assumption. In a real life situation like that, as a third party, I would have confronted the person and asked them why they didn't invite the other. For all we know, it would have nothing to do with race and the kid that wasn't invited was just a jerk that the other didn't want around, but because the two have different colored skin, many people automatically jump to the conclusion that the one throwing the party was just being a racist bastard, which in a large number of cases, leads to them dismissing any explanation given to them by the party thrower, no matter how valid. In many conversations, once you're labeled a racist or xenophobe, no amount of anything will make the labelers see you as otherwise.

[conuly]

Stargate SG-1 (entire black race, black SG-1 team member, guest actors of various, including Asian, races)

A race of slaves that needs human help. Yeah....

As far as Sister, Sister; Family Matters; etc. - this was addressed in at least one of the links. African-Americans are disproportionately represented on sitcoms... but fairly isolated TO sitcoms and ON sitcoms. You don't see many diverse casts in sitcomland.

My question, then, is what would the desired non-white-male character be like?

They should be interesting. I can't say "They should be this or that" because that depends on the part, the story, the whole shebang. But unless there's nothing BUT trite stock characters, we should see somebody we can believe in as a real person. It's a pity this isn't easy, but it's... well, it's not easy.

[dragonwolf]

A race of slaves that needs human help. Yeah....

1. They also fought for themselves, doing most of the fighting. Even the Americans had help from other countries in the American Revolution.
2. The humans weren't all-powerful themselves and regularly depended on other races, including the Jaffa, to maintain their own freedom.

As far as Sister, Sister; Family Matters; etc. - this was addressed in at least one of the links. African-Americans are disproportionately represented on sitcoms... but fairly isolated TO sitcoms and ON sitcoms. You don't see many diverse casts in sitcomland.

On the same token, sitcoms make up a good chunk of TV. You yourself mentioned Friends, which last I checked was considered a sitcom. That said, I'm of the opinion that sitcoms have their own unique values. They are like court jesters in that they can teach valuable lessons or approach taboo subjects and get away with it, because they make their audience laugh. Of course, the ones I mentioned have been in syndication for about 15 years now, and I don't really watch the new ones, so that very likely might have changed with new ones (which wouldn't surprise me, as I'm also of the opinion that TV quality has severely degraded over the past couple of decades). But then, I also think rather differently than most of the people I know. *shrug*

And just for a random thought, why didn't the writers of shows like Family Matters ever do other (mainstream) black-casted shows? Family Matters used to be on ABC's coveted "TGIF" lineup.

[silver-chipmunk.livejournal.com]

Well I don't feel qualified to comment in the committee since I'm totally unfamiliar with the books (except for their existence and popularity... I am a librarian after all. But I haven't read them myself, is what I mean) but the issue in general, I certainly agree with you.

It's like in the really, really bad adaptation of Ursala LeGuin's Earthsea books. The people of the archipelago are dark-skinned, ranging in description from a sort of coppery red to a very, very dark almost black. The only light-skinned people in the world are the Kargs. Yet in that movie adaptation everyone was white. Argh.

[tsukikage85.livejournal.com]

I know this is totally biased and unhelpful, but I can't help but be unsurprised that someone with icons like hers would say stuff like that...
But no, I think you're right. I mean, there's something to be said for preferring color-blindness over affirmative action, but I don't think anyone honestly thinks TLA was about color-blindness (or that wanting Asians playing the characters would be "affirmative action").

[conuly]

She was furious, as I recall. And I don't blame her!

(And no, not everybody was white. They managed to fit Morgan Freeman for the mystic advice-giver role.)

[silver-chipmunk.livejournal.com]

Ah. Didn't know about Morgan Freeman. I stopped watching after about 15 minutes of the drivel. Man that sucked.

[conuly]

I did actually watch the whole thing, but it was a really boring movie. I had nothing better to do.

As it happens, the Earthsea books are some of the LeGuins that I haven't been able to get into. Ever. I don't know why, but she's like that - some of her books I *adore* beyond all reason, and some are just... meh.

However, they deserved better than to be turned into standard-ass European fantasy world.

[silver-chipmunk.livejournal.com]

Well I have the opposite thing towards the Earthsea books. They have always been one of the fantasy series that I've loved the most. And partly that's precisely _because_ they were something other than the standard European fantasy world. Don't get me wrong, I love books set in that milleu, too. I'm a major Tolkien fan, for instance. But there is something just so... different about Earthsea that makes them so much more... fantastical. Which is, after all, what one wants from a fantasy, right? And part of that is that the characters aren't white, and that it's apparently set in the southern hemisphere of the world (it gets colder in the south), and in so many ways it's obviously not our world, and it's certainly not European, or even particularly close to it. It's something completely separate.

[erisiansaint]

The problem is that you're arguing a) with an idiot who b) thinks "lol" makes everything ok, who c) genuinely doesn't care who's cast and whether it's appropriate for the character. That person claims to say it's all about the talent, but what that person really means is "I'm not auditioning, so I don't care." It's a spectacular display of privilege and jerkiness.

Did I mention that that particular person came across as having about as much intelligence as your average vacuum cleaner? (I'd say turnip, but I've discovered that I like turnips, they're very good food and good for you.)

But it's not just you. You couldn't get your point across because that person genuinely doesn't care. Or is trolling.

[conuly]

I know, it's a lost cause. I should never have started, but now that I have I want to finish. Triumphantly. NOW, DAMNIT!

[conuly]

I think you misread. I didn't say I object to them not being standard European (and I don't think that's why I couldn't get into them either, some books are just like that), I said they deserved better than to be made INTO standard European.

[silver-chipmunk.livejournal.com]

Oh, no, sorry, I was agreeing with you, actually, and then expanding on _why_ they deserved better than to be turned into the standard etc. Because part of what, to me, makes them so awesome is that they _aren't_ the standard etc.

My bad for rambling and not making it clear that I _was_ rambling.

[conuly]

So long as we understand each other now, let's hug!

[silver-chipmunk.livejournal.com]

HUG!

[erisiansaint]

It took me a few minutes not to respond entirely rudely to that person. I have no patience for people who intentionally abuse the language and refuse to see that there are huge problems with race and gender and how people are cast because they can't be bothered. It's sheer laziness.

[blackhanddpants.livejournal.com]

On the one hand, people who only complain because the movie is different from the book really annoy me.

On the other hand, when moviemakers change things they didn't have to change, that really annoys me, too. Usually those changes are made for the purpose of trying to attract/sell the movie to a specific demographic. Frex, they changed the age of the kids in the Percy Jackson stories for the movies, to draw an older demographic -- but it messed with the story in unacceptable (to me) ways (despite which the film will always hold a special place in my heart because of the buttkicking guardian character who used forearm crutches like my disabled daughter...).

So, while I realize that in any movie adaptation there will be things that are necessarily different from the book, I really hate it when filmmakers make changes they don't *have* to. Changing Rue's race would fall into that category for me. And like you point out, annoying as well because it would feel, to you, like an intentional slight.

And yeah, that kid looks like her dad. Wow!

My older daughter, at 5-6 years old, looked so much like my little sister at that age that I would often catch myself on the verge of calling my own child by the wrong name.

[siderea]

c) genuinely doesn't care who's cast and whether it's appropriate for the character.

Let's be clear here: when somebody cares enough to volunteer that they don't care, especially when they insist upon it over and over, what they're saying is that they think you shouldn't care.

Connie, you're not arguing with this idiot over whether you're right, but whether you have a right -- to your opinion, to take the issue seriously.

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

yeah, they had to have their Magic Nxlkcmgfhfgfhgfgfgfgf.

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

http://ksol1460.livejournal.com/88026.html
http://ksol1460.livejournal.com/185862.html

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

You were doing all right until you started mind-reading. Telling other people what they think or why they think it is an 'automatic lose' in any argument; telling them that you know what they think on account of their race is racism, plain and simple.

I didn't think she was being willfully annoying. Inadvertently annoying, yeah, because of the chat-speak, but a lot of people use chat-speak online. She's obviously young and/or naive - else she would have known better than to even comment in such a discussion - and probably had no idea she was setting herself up to be a target.

Ordinarily I'm on your side in this sort of thing, but you can't justly call it a triumph unless it's an honorable triumph, and this one isn't looking that way so far. If you insist on the validity of 'race', and, worse, on the notion that one can tell a person's thoughts from their skin color, then you're perpetuating the very same bullshit you claim to stand against. Further, mocking someone for disagreeing with you, even if her disagreement is based on poor logic and limited experience, is not doing anything to further the cause of education and harmony.

Yeah, she set herself up as a target, and now I see a bunch of other people have jumped on the mind-reading bandwagon, having a good old relational-aggression time for themselves. Oh, what a lot they know about this chickie, based on just the few words she wrote, and her icon, of course.

By the same token, what a lot I know from what I've read of their writing, eh? Enough to know that just the little I've said here (and my icon of course, by Sulamith Wulfing) is setting me up to be the next target. That's okay; those who wish may indulge themselves, but I have to say, Connie, this whole thing is unworthy of you, and from your comments, I think you know that.

I could, of course, be mistaken.

[ironychan.livejournal.com]

... now I keep hearing Bruce Campbell shouting "Klaatu Barata..." well, you know the rest.

[erisiansaint]

Wait, that was me who doesn't like the chatspeak, I'm the one who said that about the 'lol'ing.

But I don't like chatspeak. It's lazy, as I said further up, and saying 'lol' and breezing on without any further words to indicate that they know that their position is somewhat offensive or uncaring is just rude.

Anyway, I think you're conflating a lot of what I said with a lot of what Connie said.

Also, you're not going to be /my/ target. You actually take the trouble to offer your opinion with capital letters, punctuation, clarity, and some thought. Nor is it an unworthy opinion, just that I think you're taking someone else to task for what I said about the chatspeak and the mocking.

[conuly]

You're right.

[conuly]

Oh, wait, I thought you were talking to me.

But you're still right, I'm drifting into the wrong territory here myself. Need to take a deep breath and calm down. It's just one person.

[marveen.livejournal.com]

Kudos to you for clarity of thought and expression, as well.

(I had to go back and look at her icon to see what the problem was. If it's a reference/celebrity or something, I don't get it--all I see is an individual screaming aloud. Annoyingly, no doubt.)

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

I was talking to you - you were the one who asked if she was being wilfully annoying. I agree with bayushi about the excessive chatspeak, because I do find that annoying, but I don't think it's deliberate. I seem to recall having embraced more than one cool jargon with excessive enthusiasm in my youth, and looking back, I'm sure a number of my elders must have longed to smack me for it, but I didn't realize that at the time. LOL, want to hear really annoying; for a brief period in my teens I took to speaking in blank verse; chatspeak can hardly hold a candle to that.

*hugs* True that; only one person - a young, possibly not very intellectual person, who may know little of the world besides what she's seen on TV, and doesn't realize that saying "I don't care about race" is similar to saying "I don't care about poverty", or pollution, or cancer: that race is a huge problem that affects our entire species, whether or not one is being directly affected by it at the moment. Probably no one's ever explained it to her in those terms before.

Like I said, I thought you were doing all right up to the point where your frustration got the better of you. She wasn't terribly receptive to what you were saying (and why should she be, when you're just another stranger on the 'Net?) but she was sticking with the dialogue, and she was not getting personal or insulting, so there seemed a decent chance you were getting through to her a little.

But then you lost your temper, and thus not only lost your chance of getting through to her, but practically guaranteed that the next person who tries will have a much harder time. In essence you told her "I'm right because I'm black", and thus lost any claim to be speaking against racism.

I thought you were right, but not because you're black, and particularly not because being black gives you the psychic ability to know why someone who isn't thinks what she thinks. You were right just because you were right; because we all know the movie producers have to focus on 'box office', and many of them seem to be mentally stuck in the last century, so they figure white folk won't go to a movie with black protagonists.

Maybe that's true, maybe not; in any case, if that's what they want, there are plenty of stories written with all-white characters. Hopefully the scorn heaped upon Sci-Fi Channel's lousy Earthsea will have taught them the folly of taking a beloved story and characters and altering them out of recognition for the sake of 'box office'.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

"Anyway, I think you're conflating a lot of what I said with a lot of what Connie said."

??? Why do you think this? Read my text over again, I believe you will see that it is not so.

I know it was you who didn't like the chatspeak, but you aren't the only one who doesn't like it. Connie asked if the chick was being deliberately annoying; the use of chatspeak was the only thing I could see that might be construed as such. Granted, it's very annoying when one is trying to explain something and the explained-to doesn't get it, but that isn't the explained-to being annoying; it's the explainer being annoyed.

The mocking I was referring to was not yours. It was her "I wonder why I even bother. Some people..." comment, which is sideways as well as derisive. You were the person I was referring to as jumping on the mind-reading bandwagon, calling names and making attributions on the basis of extremely scanty evidence.

For example: "saying 'lol' and breezing on without any further words to indicate that they know that their position is somewhat offensive or uncaring is just rude." - how exactly are you deriving "I know my position is somewhat offensive and uncaring" from "lol"? Isn't that a pretty short and ambiguous sample upon which to base such an interpretation? How do you know what she thinks, what she cares or does not care about, from three letters of uninflected text?

"A spectacular display of privilege and jerkiness" - another harsh character-judgement made on the basis of almost no data. It's practically a textbook illustration of the word prejudice, pre-judging: deciding that one knows all about a person on the basis of a very few traits deemed to be stereotypical. I don't follow celebrities, so don't know who the person in her icon may be, but I can see how it might well be interpreted as the Face of Jerky White Privilege by someone who wished to see it that way. However, that's probably not why she chose it.

*shrugs* Yes, I write fluently in Academian, and have to deliberately stop myself from talking that way, which results in my verbal speech coming out fairly idiosyncratic. I'm also fluent in old-school 733t, and in earlier decades had people on Usenet threatening to packet-bomb me back to the Stone Age for using it too much. One can't gauge the intelligence of people by their online chat. One definitely can't gauge the intelligence of anybody by their ability to handle the mechanics of writing: that's what is called ableist.

I was born with near-perfect Spellcheck. It's not something I achieved, or worked for; it's not even a conscious process; just a 'wild talent'. My brilliant engineer brother, who was ten times the student I was, can't spell his way out of a paper bag, and has to rely on his computer's Spellcheck. I always figured any child of mine would inherit my spelling, but she didn't; she inherited her uncle's instead. Therefore, I have no patience with Spelling Nazis who think the ability to spell signifies either innate intelligence or commitment to scholarship. It doesn't; making fun of people for their poor spelling is on a level with making fun of them for poor hearing.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

Thanks!

I don't know who the celebrity in the icon is either, and if someone told me, it wouldn't help because I've probably never heard of her. But it's more than just 'an individual screaming aloud' - annoyingly, no doubt, because almost all screaming aloud is annoying - it's a white, bottle-blonde, trendily-overdressed female individual screaming aloud.

As such, I suppose she does make a pretty good poster-child for a Two-Minute Hate, but whatever reason one might hate her for, the fact remains that she is just an icon, not the real face of the writer. I have a bunch of deliberately annoying icons myself, but they tend to feature giant squids and such, so no one mistakes them for the face of Me.

LOL, at least I hope not.

[conuly]

I'm, uh, not black. I'm at least 50% guaranteed white (that's the first/second generation immigrant half) and the other 50% is I strongly doubt I have any African-American ancestry at all, and would be surprised to hear otherwise (that's the DAR half).

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

"Connie, you're not arguing with this idiot over whether you're right, but whether you have a right -- to your opinion, to take the issue seriously."

Word. Precisely. And how silly is that, to be arguing with some random stranger online as to whether or not one has a right to your opinion? Is one's right to have an opinion going to be revoked by the Opinion Police if a certain percentage of Internet users disagree with it, or say one has no right to hold it? Obviously not.

Note that my opinion doesn't revoke anybody else's right to consider this a Very Serious Matter Indeed, a mortal insult and total discounting of one's basic personhood to be told that the issues one considers important are not necessarily considered important by everyone else on the planet. But, by the same token, the fact that other people consider an issue to be important does not revoke my right to hold the opinion that it isn't.

In any case, holding opinions counts for very little if one isn't going to do anything about them. Suppose it were possible to convince all these chatters and bloggers to agree with one's opinions; what would that accomplish? Arguing about issues online is a hobby, nothing more; people who are seriously trying to engender change address their communications to those with the power to make decisions, because those are the ones whose opinions actually matter.

In this particular example, only the opinions of those willing to write directly to the movie producers matter, because those are the only opinions that will have any bearing on what happens. Everybody else's opinion does not matter - whether they agree or disagree about white actors playing brown or black characters, if they aren't going to write, what they think will not count one way or the other.

Therefore, it's futile arguing with the unconvincable when convincing them would be of no use, and it's equally futile 'preaching to the choir' of already-convinced but unmotivated-to-act. People who really take an issue seriously don't argue about it; they act.

[silver-chipmunk.livejournal.com]

THIS!

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

My apologies; I am not up on the current usage and don't mean to mislabel or disrespect you; also I'm not recalling if I've seen an actual picture of you, or if I've only seen pics of your nieces and jumped to the wrong conclusion. Aren't they considered 'black'? They're certainly what was considered 'black' in Brooklyn the last time I was there, but that was pretty long ago. It occurs to me now that their Dad is black but not their Mom?

Anyway, sorry; so-clueless me.

[marveen.livejournal.com]

...her icon is white?

*checks again* Funny, I thought it was a bewigged or bottle-blonde light-skinned person of color.

But yeah, icon attacks are the ultimate ad hominem angle, and I tend not to notice them at all, just skipping straight to the text.

[conuly]

They're biracial, yes, their dad is black and their mom is not.

I'd assume most people would view them as black, but I don't go around conducting polls on the subject. And of course I don't know how they'll view themselves when they're grown.

And it's not being rude or disrespectful or anything, but I don't want to misrepresent myself. I'd be actually astonished to find out I had any non-white ancestry, you know? It's possible, I guess (although I know that the work of tracking down my father's family tree has already been done, if I care to look it up), but it seems extremely unlikely, and even if I did find out "Wow, I do have one non-white great great great great great great great...." I certainly wouldn't change how I identify myself. That'd be a little weird.

[queenlyzard.livejournal.com]

*sigh* OY. You did your best, and a darn good job at that, but there comes a point where you just have to step back and acknowledge that a person isn't ready to learn. Sadly, I recognize myself of many years ago in the ignorance of that commenter. It just took time, maturity, and lots of people explaining, before I was able to see beyond my own privilege. My intentions were never malicious-- I just didn't have enough knowledge of other people's experiences yet to understand why certain things were a problem. Fortunately, I have learned and continue to do so.

[queenlyzard.livejournal.com]

I really like this comment. It ties into a lot of stuff I've been thinking about.