Television 'Dear White People' - Film and Netflix Series (Scores 100 on RT)

[afrocentricity]

The rape joke would likely affect the person who is a rape survivor more than someone who has not experienced it.
The offended-ness of the person who you spoke to does not, in my view, change whether saying something was morally justified or not.

I don't think anyone is justified in holding prejudiced views, irrespective of whether it matters to the victim or not. I think it is only logical to try and view others as individuals and not hold any 'class based' biases.

Ok, so you can see that all things are not equal/equivalent.

I dislike all forms of racism but I don't see how anyone could say that all racism is the same. I fail to see how being refused entry to a club/bar/etc as a majority (white being the obvious example) person could feel the same as being refused as a minority for the umpteenth time. Or how being smacked and called a racial slur is equivalent to being smacked and called a racial slur when this has happened to you or those you know many times throughout your life. Or being treated unfairly by authority due to your race just the one time versus one of many times knowing that there isn't much you can do about it as opposed to knowing you can go through the correct channels and have it dealt with accordingly. It is what it is...

Due to the history, due to the past experiences of the individual, they are not equal. How you feel about it probably depends on your ability to empathise with the past experiences of an individual and truly relate to the experience of being a minority subject to discrimination in an imbalanced system. It is what it is... nothing for you to feel guilty over but your perception of it doesn't change what it is.

 

[JustAFan]

Put it like this.
We can point to individual instances where black person holds power over another and uses that power to deny that other person rights to whatever it is.

Yes it happens, yes it's possible, but realistically how often does it happen? How many people does it impact? Is this a recurring theme? (Mugabe even invited the white farmers back )

Now on a much larger scale, historically the people in power globally have been white. Law makers, law enforcers, job creators, job givers, loan givers etc.

So with that being said, black people using their power to deny white people rights is possible, but if it happens so infrequently is it really worth diverting the conversation? Especially since people of colour continue to be victims of racism?

In large part depends on which part of history you are talking about, where and when you were alive, and who you consider white (for instance depending on the point someone was trying to prove I have seen both the Romans and Greeks included as white people and excluded). The European colonial period really got started around the 15th century, leaving plenty of human history prior to that. There is a long history of people all over the world having very fine civilizations and engaging in all these activities and more without the aid of any white people.

Let me add, I have no problem with the TV Show, no problem at all.

 

[villain]

In large part depends on which part of history you are talking about, where and when you were alive, and who you consider white (for instance depending on the point someone was trying to prove I have seen both the Romans and Greeks included as white people and excluded). The European colonial period really got started around the 15th century, leaving plenty of human history prior to that. There is a long history of people all over the world having very fine civilizations and engaging in all these activities and more without the aid of any white people.

Let me add, I have no problem with the TV Show, no problem at all.

I was only really talking about the colonial period and afterwards because quite a lot of previously colonised countries have been independent for less than a century, so it's hard to argue that the effects of colonialism still aren't felt and haven't impacted their economic growth.

 

[afrocentricity]

I never understand why when people talk about race X's racism towards race Y, examples of racism between Y and Z (or racism against race X) need to be brought up as if to minimize the afore mentioned racism between X and Y. It's usually missing the point (racism is bad). Or worse, an attempt to downplay.

 

[PedroMendez]

Like I said - is it worth diverting the conversation?

It just seems like a convenient way to deflect from the actual issue, an easy way to say that white people can be oppressed too even though it isn't comparable to the scale of racism that people of colour have, and continue to go through.

So if you want to nitpick, sure.

wtf are you talking about. Persons of colour have done racist things through out history and still doing them just like white people do them. The "majority race" in a country are usually the people who can discriminate most and these are white people in most western countries. Yet racism is not confined to any particular nation or region. Have you any clue at all how freaking racists mexicans are (on average)? Or almost any other latin american country? What about the Arab slave trade? Or Mongols enslaving anyone who came in their path (both in the west and east)? What about the internal slave trade in africa?

 

[ivaldo]

So a book definition overrides actual events and instances of racism?

It's very simple what is meant by racism. You and others can try and redefine what racism is all you like it doesn't change what it actually is. Just because it happens less frequently to certain races or that the results are more severe to certain groups it doesn't make it any less racist.

 

[afrocentricity]

Case in point... arguments over the definition of racism, and examples of other kinds of racism taking us away from the thread topic... Hope the show is good, does well, and achieves what it sets out to do.

 

[villain]

wtf are you talking about. Persons of colour have done racist things through out history and still doing them just like white people do them. The "majority race" in a country are usually the people who can discriminate most and these are white people in most western countries. Yet racism is not confined to any particular nation or region. Have you any clue at all how freaking racists mexicans are (on average)? Or almost any other latin american country? What about the Arab slave trade? Or Mongols enslaving anyone who came in their path (both in the west and east)? What about the internal slave trade in africa?

I didn't deny that other races can be racist.
I don't know much about the Arab or Mongol slave trades, but the African slave trade is a very complex subject area, and I fail to see it's relevance in this context.

It's very simple what is meant by racism. You and others can try and redefine what racism is all you like it doesn't change what it actually is. Just because it happens less frequently to certain races or that the results are more severe to certain groups it doesn't make it any less racist.

Once again, I didn't deny that other races can be racist.

 

[ivaldo]

Once again, I didn't deny that other races can be racist.

So how is a book overriding instances of racism?

 

[Welsh Wonder]

Can we make using the word snowflake a bannable offense.

I'm partial to a bit of flake

EDIT: Though this has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand, or even anything to do with what you posted.

Just thought I'd say. I'm going to bed, my brain ded.

 

[PedroMendez]

I didn't deny that other races can be racist.
I don't know much about the Arab or Mongol slave trades, but the African slave trade is a very complex subject area, and I fail to see it's relevance in this context.

my bad. I should have just answered your question.

Put it like this.
We can point to individual instances where black person holds power over another and uses that power to deny that other person rights to whatever it is.

Yes it happens, yes it's possible, but realistically how often does it happen? How many people does it impact? Is this a recurring theme?

It happens all the time, impacts hundreds of millions of people and is a recurring theme.

 

[hobbers]

No idea if it's racist or not and certainly won't bother watching it, but if you want to make a race baity piece of television, fine. Just don't complain when it tanks. As MTV found out.

On the other hand the racially charged political element of college campuses is fairly hysterical in both senses and so is ripe for satirisation. Question of whether the writers can write something funny and not just follow the MTV example of being thick and racist.

 

[Snowjoe]

I'm partial to a bit of flake

 

[villain]

So how is a book overriding instances of racism?

In the context of what I was referring to - discrimination as a white person versus discrimination as a black person can be, and history proves it to be very different. They're both still discrimination by definition though, however real life paints a very different picture.

my bad. I should have just answered your question.



It happens all the time, impacts hundreds of millions of people and is a recurring theme.

Referring specifically to African slavery - it's not done because of skin colour, there isn't even one central reason or justification between the slave trade in Africa (chattel, pawn, service, sacrifice, status etc) and has been practised for thousands of years. The difference between African slavery and say slavery in the US is that African slaves were treated much better, often could work their way to freedom, and weren't seen as less human.
So again, I fail to see the relevance wrt racism.

 

[PedroMendez]

In the context of what I was referring to - discrimination as a white person versus discrimination as a black person can be, and history proves it to be very different. They're both still discrimination by definition though, however real life paints a very different picture.



Referring specifically to African slavery - it's not done because of skin colour, there isn't even one central reason or justification between the slave trade in Africa (chattel, pawn, service, sacrifice, status etc) and has been practised for thousands of years. The difference between African slavery and say slavery in the US is that African slaves were treated much better, often could work their way to freedom, and weren't seen as less human.
So again, I fail to see the relevance wrt racism.

I shouldn't have included it, but that doesn't change my point at all: It happens all the time, impacts hundreds of millions of people and is a recurring theme.

 

[SteveJ]

Case in point... arguments over the definition of racism, and examples of other kinds of racism taking us away from the thread topic...

Similar to how discussions about assaults on women by men are often taken over by...discussion about asssualts on men by women.

 

[afrocentricity]

Similar to how discussions about assaults on women by men are often taken over by...discussion about asssualts on men by women.

Yup... what's that new buzz term? alt facts? No I mean false equivalence?

 

[SteveJ]

It's a point often missed in these debates that the word 'asssaults' has 3 s's.

 

[afrocentricity]

I noticed it... I just thought it was a pun on arse, then opted for an optical illusion and moved on. Glad you cleared it up as I was worried that my high had messed up my eyesight...

 

[SteveJ]

 

[saivet]

Really does make me frustrated when people use isolated incidents such as 'black boys beat white kid' to back up points that racism happens to white people too. To me incidents like that or a white woman telling a black person to go back to their own country are not all that relevant in discussions about racism.

I'm of the view that institutional biases and engrained sterotypes is where the issue lies.

 

[villain]

Yeah i'm not a fan of the whataboutism & false equivalence either.

 

[JPRouve]

Really does make me frustrated when people use isolated incidents such as 'black boys beat white kid' to back up points that racism happens to white people too. To me incidents like that or a white woman telling a black person to go back to their own country are not all that relevant in discussions about racism.

I'm of the view that institutional biases and engrained sterotypes is where the issue lies.

Yup, it's as if they don't realize that the real problems concern the job market, how people look at them, how people behave when they are around. Those are the real problems, that's what hurts people.

 

[ivaldo]

In the context of what I was referring to - discrimination as a white person versus discrimination as a black person can be, and history proves it to be very different. They're both still discrimination by definition though, however real life paints a very different picture.

Yes the context you created. The discussion put forward, and the definition provided to you was regarding racism. He hadnt qualified it, you had.

There is zero difference between racism from a white person to a black, black to white, white to asian. It is the act of discriminating against someone based solely on their race. It of course happens more frequently to certain races, and more frequently in certain ways, but quantity doesn't redefine the act. No instance should be treated differently based on the race of the victim and persecutor.

Do you not see the irony in highlighting racism against minorities yet trivialise minority instances of racism?


Anyway, digression aside the film is not racist, yet the title is designed to trigger 'snowflakes'.

 

[SteveJ]

Do you not see the irony in highlighting racism against minorities yet trivialise minority instances of racism?

Do you not see the irony in an attempt to shaping the discussion of racism in a way you see fit? The irony follows the usual Western pattern: "We gave you your damn rights, now stop complaining and don't mention the past that the rest of us are embarrassed about. If you have to complain, we'll tell you how to make that complaint in a manner that's acceptable to us...otherwise, we'll ignore you, shout you down or derail."

 

[Drainy]

Ok, so you can see that all things are not equal/equivalent.

I dislike all forms of racism but I don't see how anyone could say that all racism is the same. I fail to see how being refused entry to a club/bar/etc as a majority (white being the obvious example) person could feel the same as being refused as a minority for the umpteenth time. Or how being smacked and called a racial slur is equivalent to being smacked and called a racial slur when this has happened to you or those you know many times throughout your life. Or being treated unfairly by authority due to your race just the one time versus one of many times knowing that there isn't much you can do about it as opposed to knowing you can go through the correct channels and have it dealt with accordingly. It is what it is...

Due to the history, due to the past experiences of the individual, they are not equal. How you feel about it probably depends on your ability to empathise with the past experiences of an individual and truly relate to the experience of being a minority subject to discrimination in an imbalanced system. It is what it is... nothing for you to feel guilty over but your perception of it doesn't change what it is.

Fair enough. I can see where we were looking at it from different perspectives.
I am talking about the ethics of holding and expressing prejudiced views, while you are talking about the impact and scope of racism dealt with by minorities.

I think when talking about ethics the actions of the individual in question are the only consistent and logical way to make a judgement.

I do empathise with victims of any kind of discrimination and we do agree that discrimination against minorities is a far bigger issue speaking from a broad perspective- both in terms of prevalence and in terms of impact on the victims. However, like I say, I do believe that minorities can be racist when expressing views which if they were stated by a white person against a minority would be considered racist, and that should hold as much ethical weight as if that person were white.

I do appreciate that my views are probably more philosophical than practical and it's easy to view things from that perspective when you're the whitest guy (Yorkshireman with Scottish Ancestry!) in a 87% white country

 

[JustAFan]

Do you not see the irony in an attempt to shaping the discussion of racism in a way you see fit? The irony follows the usual Western pattern: "We gave you your damn rights, now stop complaining and don't mention the past that the rest of us are embarrassed about. If you have to complain, we'll tell you how to make that complaint in a manner that's acceptable to us...otherwise, we'll ignore you, shout you down or derail."

So anyways has anyone watching anything else interesting on Netflix?

 

[SteveJ]

So anyways has anyone watching anything else interesting on Netflix?

Judging solely by the summary of the initial movie, the forthcoming tv show sounds a bit drab to me:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dear_White_People

 

[ivaldo]

Do you not see the irony in an attempt to shaping the discussion of racism in a way you see fit? The irony follows the usual Western pattern: "We gave you your damn rights, now stop complaining and don't mention the past that the rest of us are embarrassed about. If you have to complain, we'll tell you how to make that complaint in a manner that's acceptable to us...otherwise, we'll ignore you, shout you down or derail."

Read the flow of posts and then decide who changed the context of discussion, perhaps it'll give you a better idea of who is 'shaping' it.

 

[SteveJ]

Read the flow of posts and then decide who changed the context of discussion, perhaps it'll give you a better idea of who is 'shaping' it.

But it's only natural that the bulk of the discussion would be fundamentally post-medieval and Western in context, in line with the tv series' premise.

 

[WackyWengerWorld]

I know you're not addressing me but person A punching person B because of the colour of their skin is, thankfully, a very rare occurrence.

And when it happens you're not going to get much argument from anyone about whether or not it's an example of someone being racist. It all gets a lot less black and white (no pun intended) when you're dealing with the much more widespread and more subtle forms of racism that people deal with on a day to day basis. It's very hard to think of any white person being significantly inconvenienced by racism in their daily life. Certainly not when they live in a predominantly white culture like the UK or the US (or Norway) so the whole debate about whether or not white people can experience racism seems like such a non-issue that it seems weird for anyone to care about it.

All of which means that it's - at best - insensitive to choose a topic with such hideous historical baggage to try and win a point-scoring contest on the internet. Basically, white people should shut the feck up about people being racist towards white people until it's actually a problem worthy of discussion.

I don't think that's right. While racism, covert/overt and subconscious is a much bigger issue for minorities as it happens constantly. I'm a white man with a black fiance and I see all sides of the racism we come across it constantly. But I've known white people attacked in Pakistani areas.

This video was deliberately racist 'dear white people', if there was 'dear black people' it'd rightly be seen as racist. Intelligent compassionate white liberals likely won't do such racially insensitive acts, so why 'dear white people' and not 'dear racists' or something like that? It's confrontational and generalising unnessarily. I can't imagine my fiance or anyone in her family or group of friends saying any such generalisation. Most black people I come across are not bigots but this comes across as that and represents black people as bigoted as a result, which is wrong.

The video is race baiting and in the current climate certainly isn't welcome.

 

[Drainy]

Anyway, digression aside the film is not racist, yet the title is designed to trigger 'snowflakes'.

Exactly, the title is deliberately provocative. You would have to be incredibly over-sensitive to consider it racist.
Nothing wrong with the show from the video. If people don't like it no-one is forcing them to watch it ffs!

 

[ivaldo]

But it's only natural that the bulk of the discussion would be fundamentally post-medieval and Western in context, in line with the tv series' premise.

Again, I suggest you follow the posts quoted and you'll see who shaped the argue to their own context.

I must be one of those old fashioned idiots who beleives in equality in its entirety.

 

[afrocentricity]

I don't think that's right. While racism, covert/overt and subconscious is a much bigger issue for minorities as it happens constantly. I'm a white man with a black fiance and I see all sides of the racism we come across it constantly. But I've known white people attacked in Pakistani areas.

This video was deliberately racist 'dear white people', if there was 'dear black people' it'd rightly be seen as racist. Intelligent compassionate white liberals likely won't do such racially insensitive acts, so why 'dear white people' and not 'dear racists' or something like that? It's confrontational and generalising unnessarily. I can't imagine my fiance or anyone in her family or group of friends saying any such generalisation. Most black people I come across are not bigots but this comes across as that and represents black people as bigoted as a result, which is wrong.

The video is race baiting and in the current climate certainly isn't welcome.

You haven't watched the film or TV show, clearly...

 

[bucky]

I do fear with things like this (and this is judging from the trailer) that it's not a way of including white people in a joke but more of a revenge fantasy.

Read the flow of posts and then decide who changed the context of discussion, perhaps it'll give you a better idea of who is 'shaping' it.

Literally the first post.

Sorry horsechoker, not a dig, but I think @SteveJ's point here is important.

Do you not see the irony in an attempt to shaping the discussion of racism in a way you see fit? The irony follows the usual Western pattern: "We gave you your damn rights, now stop complaining and don't mention the past that the rest of us are embarrassed about. If you have to complain, we'll tell you how to make that complaint in a manner that's acceptable to us...otherwise, we'll ignore you, shout you down or derail."

 

[ivaldo]

Literally the first post.

Sorry horsechoker, not a dig, but I think @SteveJ's point here is important.

Look at the progression of the discussion pal to find the context of the posts, the conversation had developed since then.

 

[saivet]

Yup, it's as if they don't realize that the real problems concern the job market, how people look at them, how people behave when they are around. Those are the real problems, that's what hurts people.

Exactly. It even makes me think to back in school, I didn't see anything by it or just brushed it off, but the number of underhand racist compliments or comments I can think of is crazy. Kids trying to say something nice with all the best intentions, but really and truly they were also expressing their opinions of black people or other minorities.

 

[Manny]

I don't think that's right. While racism, covert/overt and subconscious is a much bigger issue for minorities as it happens constantly. I'm a white man with a black fiance and I see all sides of the racism we come across it constantly. But I've known white people attacked in Pakistani areas.

This video was deliberately racist 'dear white people', if there was 'dear black people' it'd rightly be seen as racist. Intelligent compassionate white liberals likely won't do such racially insensitive acts, so why 'dear white people' and not 'dear racists' or something like that? It's confrontational and generalising unnessarily. I can't imagine my fiance or anyone in her family or group of friends saying any such generalisation. Most black people I come across are not bigots but this comes across as that and represents black people as bigoted as a result, which is wrong.

The video is race baiting and in the current climate certainly isn't welcome.

Its actually not. I'm only 20 minutes into the film version and it's seems to be more about how different black people and groups of black people deal with race, racism, belonging etc.

'Dear white people' is the name of a radio show run by one of the main characters who is a Black Panther type. I wouldn't call it baiting, attention seeking perhaps. But I feel the reaction to the title, without researching it, is way over the top.

 

[ivaldo]

Its actually not. I'm only 20 minutes into the film version and it's seems to be more about how different black people and groups of black people deal with race, racism, belonging etc.

'Dear white people' is the name of a radio show run by one of the main characters who is a Black Panther type. I wouldn't call it baiting, attention seeking perhaps. But I feel the reaction to the title, without researching it, is way over the top.

It is way over the top. But are you saying the title isn't deliberately looking for this reaction?

 

[afrocentricity]

It is way over the top. But are you saying the title isn't deliberately looking for this reaction?

Think about what you are saying, how is 'Dear white people' problematic?

If it was made by a white person with an all white cast, would it still be problematic? What about if it was also recommended to you by a white person?

The title itself isn't problematic imo, it's the assumptions of those that view it without considering the content...