Support NeoGAF

[ShdwDrake]

This thread is fucking hilarious.

 

[Wings 嫩翼翻せ]

This thread is fucking hilarious.

It's not yet over bud. *wink*

 

[reggie]

.

 

[Nobody_Important]

As far as I can tell the movie is gonna have a big opening on par with most other MCU films. Not gonna be a Top 5 MCU film in terms of overall numbers though I think, but its gonna do respectably. So it seems like the ideas about her comments affecting the release of the film were way overblown.

 

[slugbahr]

As far as I can tell the movie is gonna have a big opening on par with most other MCU films. Not gonna be a Top 5 MCU film in terms of overall numbers though I think, but its gonna do respectably. So it seems like the ideas about her comments affecting the release of the film were way overblown.

The opening is mostly irrelevant. It's the overall numbers and attitude to it that will mean something.

 

[Red Crayon Aristocrat]

Brie Larson is racist and sexist, fuck her and fuck this modern culture for not calling her out on her bullshit.

 

[Nobody_Important]

The opening is mostly irrelevant. It's the overall numbers and attitude to it that will mean something.

True, but generally a big opening is a good sign of big numbers for the movie overall. Not always, but its usually a good bet.

 

[slugbahr]

True, but generally a big opening is a good sign of big numbers for the movie overall. Not always, but its usually a good bet.

This might be one of those times, for the reasons we've already gone into.
Time will tell.

 

[Nobody_Important]

This might be one of those times, for the reasons we've already gone into.
Time will tell.

I highly doubt it this will be one of those times myself given that its Marvel and that the movie is pretty good, but stranger things have happened I guess. We will just have to see.

 

[slugbahr]

I highly doubt it this will be one of those times myself given that its Marvel and that the movie is pretty good, but stranger things have happened I guess. We will just have to see.

Yes, well, we all know that your opinion is the only one that matters.
In all things.

 

[Nobody_Important]

Yes, well, we all know that your opinion is the only one that matters.
In all things.

Never said that in any way, but okay? lol

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

Brie Larson is racist and sexist, fuck her and fuck this modern culture for not calling her out on her bullshit.

In the speech I posted, I think a page back, she cites statistics to validate why she feels inclusion is lacking in mainstream movie reviews. Did you watch it?

Controversial? Sure. Truly racist and sexist? No, I really don’t believe so.

 

[sol_bad]

Brie Larson is racist and sexist, fuck her and fuck this modern culture for not calling her out on her bullshit.

She is not rascist or sexist. What she said was just blown way out of proportion. What she said was at an awards night aimed at women, yes there were men there but she was talking to her audience and they clapped at what she said.

She never said she wants to get rid of white male critics, she just wants the industry to be more inclusive.

She said that she personally didn't care about what a white male thinks about A crack in Time, she wants to know what white women and women of colour thought of the film. Im a white male and thought the film was a piece of shit so she might have a point. There could be people out there that loved the film but their voices aren't heard.

 

[slugbahr]

Never said that in any way, but okay? lol

Well, you highly doubt it will be one of those times because the movie is pretty good.

But whatever, I'm only kidding with you a bit.
Time will tell, either way.
Neither of our worlds will crumble as a result

 

[Nobody_Important]

She is not rascist or sexist. What she said was just blown way out of proportion. What she said was at an awards night aimed at women, yes there were men there but she was talking to her audience and they clapped at what she said.

She never said she wants to get rid of white male critics, she just wants the industry to be more inclusive.

She said that she personally didn't care about what a white male thinks about A crack in Time, she wants to know what white women and women of colour thought of the film. Im a white male and thought the film was a piece of shit so she might have a point. There could be people out there that loved the film but their voices aren't heard.

Exactly. She even clarified her statements.

What I’m looking for is to bring more seats up to the table. No one is getting their chair taken away. There’s not less seats at the table, there’s just more seats at the table. - Brie Larson


If she had said she didn't want white people or men reviewing her movie then yeah that would be racist/sexist, but thats not what she was saying.

 

[oagboghi2]

Exactly. She even clarified her statements.

What I’m looking for is to bring more seats up to the table. No one is getting their chair taken away. There’s not less seats at the table, there’s just more seats at the table. - Brie Larson


If she had said she didn't want white people or men reviewing her movie then yeah that would be racist/sexist, but thats not what she was saying.

I'm shocked that the side that goes on and on about dog whistles are now mysteriously deaf.

 

[Nobody_Important]

I'm shocked that the side that goes on and on about dog whistles are now mysteriously deaf.

I want more representation among the movie review industry = Not racist or sexist. That what she was getting at.

I don't want white people or men reviewing my movie = Absolutely racist and sexist. But thats not what she said. Its what people are trying to say she meant by the comment.


As she pointed out wanting more representation is not taking away seats at the table. Its adding them. She could have definitely worded it better so that she didn't need to come back and clarify her statements though. I will definitely admit that.

 

[Papa]

Brie Larson is racist and sexist, fuck her and fuck this modern culture for not calling her out on her bullshit.

1. Can’t be racist against whites.

2. Can’t be sexist against men.

3. She started a conversation.

4. It’s about inclusion and diversity* because those are the only things that matter to the Cult of Social Justice.

*It was discussed earlier in the thread, but the proportion of white male film interviewers is roughly on par with their proportion of the US population (around 61% I believe). What she is asking for is therefore overrepresentation of non-white females. It’s a power grab pure and simple and it is justified by the doctrines of intersectionality. “Inclusion” and “diversity” are just the terms they use to justify said power grab. These are ideological terms designed to elicit emotional responses from low IQ brainlets.

 

[Nobody_Important]

1. Can’t be racist against whites.

2. Can’t be sexist against men.

3. She started a conversation.

4. It’s about inclusion and diversity* because those are the only things that matter to the Cult of Social Justice.

*It was discussed earlier in the thread, but the proportion of white male film interviewers is roughly on par with their proportion of the US population (around 61% I believe). What she is asking for is therefore overrepresentation of non-white females. It’s a power grab pure and simple and it is justified by the doctrines of intersectionality. “Inclusion” and “diversity” are just the terms they use to justify said power grab. These are ideological terms designed to elicit emotional responses from low IQ brainlets.

Except it would only be a "power grab" if she was demanding that those already in the business should be fired in order to add those new people. Nowhere did she say that though. She wants to add people. Not replace them. That is a really important distinction.

 

[Papa]

Except it would only be a "power grab" if she was demanding that those already in the business should be fired in order to add those new people. Nowhere did she say that though. She wants to add people. Not replace them. That is a really important distinction.

“My interviewers are overwhelmingly white and male”

Versus

“I would like to see more non-white females interviewing me”

The difference is clear to anyone not on board with the Cult. I believe your side would call this a dogwhistle.

As I said on the previous page:

Both you and her know that it’s not about more seats at the table. The number of seats at the table is fixed in this argument. If she wanted to include more non-white females, she could work overtime to do extra interviews. But she’s not doing that — she’s complaining about too many white males, i.e. replace them with non-white females.

Moreover, it’s just another spurious equality of outcome argument. There is absolutely nothing stopping non-white females from going out and following that career path if they want to. There are far more variables in play than discrimination, yet that’s the only one that gets any attention (with very little quantifiable evidence of its influence, mind you). Freedom means self-determination — it doesn’t mean getting to fuck over anyone else who made better life choices than you based on their race or sex when the outcomes don’t turn out equal.

 

[quickwhips]

Larson is an idiot. But she didn’t write the script and just reads lines others wrote. Also make kids that are older are the reason these movies even have a built in audience. Bringing more people in is great but don’t shit on your fans while doing that.

 

[oagboghi2]

I want more representation among the movie review industry = Not racist or sexist. That what she was getting at.

I don't want white people or men reviewing my movie = Absolutely racist and sexist. But thats not what she said. Its what people are trying to say she meant by the comment.


As she pointed out wanting more representation is not taking away seats at the table. Its adding them. She could have definitely worded it better so that she didn't need to come back and clarify her statements though. I will definitely admit that.

oh please. She spouted left wing dog whistles at a hollywood gala. Crapping on "40 year old white guys" probably plays well in Hollywood, but lets be clear what this was. A publicity stunt designed to help further her brand of being a feminist activist.

She isn't "adding more chairs to the table" she is growing a fanbase by dividing people up by partisan lines. Which is fine, but don't pretend you are a fucking saint while you're doing it.

 

[Nobody_Important]

oh please. She spouted left wing dog whistles at a hollywood gala. Crapping on "40 year old white guys" probably plays well in Hollywood, but lets be clear what this was. A publicity stunt designed to help further her brand of being a feminist activist.

She isn't "adding more chairs to the table" she is growing a fanbase by dividing people up by partisan lines. Which is fine, but don't pretend you are a fucking saint while you're doing it.

I don't believe that was her intention at all. We will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[5secondrulesucks]

ugh brie larson and her potato head

 

[kunonabi]

She is not rascist or sexist. What she said was just blown way out of proportion. What she said was at an awards night aimed at women, yes there were men there but she was talking to her audience and they clapped at what she said.

She never said she wants to get rid of white male critics, she just wants the industry to be more inclusive.

She said that she personally didn't care about what a white male thinks about A crack in Time, she wants to know what white women and women of colour thought of the film. Im a white male and thought the film was a piece of shit so she might have a point. There could be people out there that loved the film but their voices aren't heard.

She doesnt have a point because POC critics thought it was crap too. Of course the whole "art has to be color coded for criticism" thing is horseshit anyway. Not to mention the source material is something many white critics grew up.

 

[Scopa]

Yes, let’s create employment positions out of thin air because she meant include more people, not replace existing positions. Because money grows on trees and obviously there is a market to sustain these non-existing jobs. She probably plans to create a few publications and websites herself to create these non-existant positions too.

I’m sure that’s what she meant.

 

[LMJ]

Again, most of the people on here aren't attacking Larson on a personal note, their attacking what she said and the over all percieved dull nature of the movie.

Kudos to Marvel and Disney I guess on an excellent opening day, I will see if it sustainable but all I know is I'm seen a lot of people on YouTube rip this movie a new one for just being very dull and seeming like old school Marvel as many people in here said tier 1...

Hopefully if captain Marvel can be used in the future movies then maybe Larson will learn from her mistakes in this movie, making the character more dynamic and relatable.

All I know is I probably won't see captain Marvel, but I definitely will see Endgame, and I'm really hoping CM inclusion doesn't botch it up considering the cliffhanger was so phenomenal.

 

[DaForest]

Brie Larson is racist and sexist, fuck her and fuck this modern culture for not calling her out on her bullshit.

What's "racist" about her, snowflake?

 

[DaForest]

Yes, let’s create employment positions out of thin air because she meant include more people, not replace existing positions. Because money grows on trees and obviously there is a market to sustain these non-existing jobs. She probably plans to create a few publications and websites herself to create these non-existant positions too.

I’m sure that’s what she meant.

Let's say she meant that white men should be replaced. Is there something inherently wrong with that? Is there something objectionable to giving underrepresented groups more opportunities that might displace a privileged few who are among a group that has been a beneficiary of race based nepotism for as long as the movie industry and the press covering it have functioned?

 

[Papa]

Let's say she meant that white men should be replaced. Is there something inherently wrong with that? Is there something objectionable to giving underrepresented groups more opportunities that might displace a privileged few who are among a group that has been a beneficiary of race based nepotism for as long as the movie industry and the press covering have functioned?

Da, Comrade

 

[DeepEnigma]

I'm shocked that the side that goes on and on about dog whistles are now mysteriously deaf.

Right kind of whistling.

 

[Nobody_Important]

Let's say she meant that white men should be replaced. Is there something inherently wrong with that? Is there something objectionable to giving underrepresented groups more opportunities that might displace a privileged few who are among a group that has been a beneficiary of race based nepotism for as long as the movie industry and the press covering have functioned?

I don't think what she said is racist and I don't believe she meant "white men should be replaced", but yes there would be quite alot wrong if someone said that about any group of people regardless of circumstances. The way to go about bringing diversity to something is not to subtract, but to add.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Let's say she meant that white men should be replaced. Is there something inherently wrong with that? Is there something objectionable to giving underrepresented groups more opportunities that might displace a privileged few who are among a group that has been a beneficiary of race based nepotism for as long as the movie industry and the press it covering have functioned?

Yeah, it's called racism and bigotry, something you seem familiar and comfortable with on a personal level.

 

[DaForest]

Yeah, it's called racism and bigotry, something you seem familiar and comfortable with on a personal level.

Being opposed to white male hegemony doesn't make one a racist. Try again.

 

[DaForest]

I don't think what she said is racist and I don't believe she meant "white men should be replaced", but yes there would be quite alot wrong if someone said that about any group of people regardless of circumstances. The way to go about bringing diversity to something is not to subtract, but to add.

I think to effect true diversity, of visible representation and ideas, you have to subtract. You can't diversify a group that has been historically hegemonic without subtracting enough of those whose representation within the group has solely been because of their race. Without removing some - if not at all - of them, you are still allowing the worldview that facilitated their presence to go unchallenged. I think starting from a clean slate is the ideal approach, replacing racial nepotism with a meritocracy that both appreciates different opinions informed by one's relationship to the dominant society and the objective value of their contribution.

 

[Nobody_Important]

I think to effect true diversity, of visible representation and ideas, you have to subtract. You can't diversify a group that has been historically hegemonic without subtracting enough of those whose representation within the group has solely been because of their race. Without removing some - if not at all - of them, you are still allowing the worldview that facilitated their presence to go unchallenged. I think starting from a clean slate is the ideal approach, replacing racial nepotism with a meritocracy that both appreciates different opinions informed by one's relationship to the dominant society and the objective value of their contribution.

I could not disagree more. The entire point of pushing diversity is to give representation to those who don't have it. You don't do that by taking representation from those that do. It defeats the entire purpose of what you are doing and then you end up becoming the very thing you are trying to get rid of.

 

[EviLore]

I think to effect true diversity, of visible representation and ideas, you have to subtract. You can't diversify a group that has been historically hegemonic without subtracting enough of those whose representation within the group has solely been because of their race. Without removing some - if not at all - of them, you are still allowing the worldview that facilitated their presence to go unchallenged. I think starting from a clean slate is the ideal approach, replacing racial nepotism with a meritocracy that both appreciates different opinions informed by one's relationship to the dominant society and the objective value of their contribution.

DerFührer, more like. Do you realize what you're writing?

 

[DaForest]

I could not disagree more. The entire point of pushing diversity is to give representation to those who don't have it. You don't do that by taking representation from those that do. It defeats the entire purpose of what you are doing and then you end up becoming the very thing you are trying to get rid of.

But many of those journalists are only there because they are white males who were in the right place at the right time, taking the positions of more qualified minorities who would have contributed different perspectives thanks to their markedly divergent backgrounds. By still allowing the same people whose presence was and is unearned to remain, you are not addressing the exclusionary system that requires diversification. Don't misunderstand me. I welcome white male journalists covering the movie industry. But let's start from the beginning. Let's actually allow a diverse pool of talent to be considered rather than just adding a few tokens to join an already toxic pool. That doesn't do anything to address the problem. And, honestly, that's a problem with liberalism. It is reactive instead of being proactive.

 

[Dr.Guru of Peru]

You really shouldn’t be questioning the IQ of others if you believe that white men represent 61% of the US population.

Comrade.

 

[oagboghi2]

Let's say she meant that white men should be replaced. Is there something inherently wrong with that? Is there something objectionable to giving underrepresented groups more opportunities that might displace a privileged few who are among a group that has been a beneficiary of race based nepotism for as long as the movie industry and the press it covering have functioned?

I think to effect true diversity, of visible representation and ideas, you have to subtract. You can't diversify a group that has been historically hegemonic without subtracting enough of those whose representation within the group has solely been because of their race. Without removing some - if not at all - of them, you are still allowing the worldview that facilitated their presence to go unchallenged. I think starting from a clean slate is the ideal approach, replacing racial nepotism with a meritocracy that both appreciates different opinions informed by one's relationship to the dominant society and the objective value of their contribution.

And thus the mask begins to slip...

But many of those journalists are only there because they are white males who were in the right place at the right time, taking the positions of more qualified minorities who would have contributed different perspectives thanks to their markedly divergent backgrounds. By still allowing the same people whose presence was and is unearned to remain, you are not addressing the exclusionary system that requires diversification. Don't misunderstand me. I welcome white male journalists covering the movie industry. But let's start from the beginning. Let's actually allow a diverse pool of talent to be considered rather than just adding a few tokens to join an already toxic pool. That doesn't do anything to address the problem. And, honestly, that's a problem with liberalism. It is reactive instead of being proactive.

You clearly don't.

This idea that minorities are kept out of the film critique industry is just ridiculous. Anyone can do this. Literally anyone can start a blog, youtube channel, whatever, gain popularity and become a film reviewer or report industry news. It's one of the reasons why Brie's comments are such an obvious dog whistle. It makes no sense. Her "solution" ultimately was to bitch and complain that not enough diverse advertisers and marketers were asking her questions during her press tour.

 

[DaForest]

DerFührer, more like. Do you realize what you're writing?

I'm not suggesting anything remotely Nazi-like. I'm referring to the pool of journalists, who Brie said is overwhelmingly and uncomfortably white and male. I'm saying that while she was correct, I think even her approach is insufficient. Diversity, from my standpoint, is starting from the beginning and selecting from a diverse pool of people - white, black, Latino, Asian, Trans, Gay - whose experiences contribute to a richer, more varied perspective in coverage of the movie industry. I don't think simply adding to the pool of people whose presence is largely based on racial nepotism, the system that has been in place for centuries, truly does any good in effecting genuine diversity.

 

[Nobody_Important]

But many of those journalists are only there because they are white males who were in the right place at the right time, taking the positions of more qualified minorities who would have contributed different perspectives thanks to their markedly divergent backgrounds.

Wait are you joking?

 

[Dr.Guru of Peru]

A clean slate isn’t possible, and determining who got to where they were based on merit versus favouritism is going to be long inflammatory process that likely won’t unearth any truth.

What we can do is recognize the discrepancy and at least raise some awareness, which is all Brie is doing. It’s not her fault your lives suck bros.

 

[DaForest]

Wait are you joking?

Joking about what? Are we going to pretend that the overwhelmingly white and male journalists Brie referred to didn't have their race and gender taken into consideration when they joined a pool of press members that all happened to be the same? Do you even understand what she was saying?

 

[oagboghi2]

Joking about what? Are we going to pretend that the overwhelmingly white and male journalists Brie referred to didn't have their race and gender taken into consideration when they joined a pool of press members that all happened to be the same? Do you even understand what she was saying?

You actually believe that the race and gender of journalists is an important matter to Disney before they go on a press tour?

Do you think the disney marketing team goes through a jury pool of journalists and throws out the minorities as well?

 

[Nobody_Important]

Do you even understand what she was saying?

I do, but I am honestly wondering whether or not you do at this point. She made it very clear that what she wanted was add more seats to the table not take others away. What you are suggesting is literally the exact opposite of what she was talking about. In fact what you are suggesting would just cause even more damage than there already is.

 

[Red Crayon Aristocrat]

What's "racist" about her, snowflake?

Imagine if she had said she didn't want her press tours to be overwhelmingly black, the racism would be obvious then.

Being opposed to white male hegemony doesn't make one a racist. Try again.

There's no such thing and hasn't been for 50 fuckng years.

This is part of the problem is people today want to roleplay as '60s era revolutionaries ignoring the last half a century of progress, ironically only fucking up this progress and the social cohesion that grew from it.

 

[Kadayi]

But many of those journalists are only there because they are white males who were in the right place at the right time, taking the positions of more qualified minorities who would have contributed different perspectives thanks to their markedly divergent backgrounds. By still allowing the same people whose presence was and is unearned to remain, you are not addressing the exclusionary system that requires diversification. Don't misunderstand me. I welcome white male journalists covering the movie industry. But let's start from the beginning. Let's actually allow a diverse pool of talent to be considered rather than just adding a few tokens to join an already toxic pool. That doesn't do anything to address the problem. And, honestly, that's a problem with liberalism. It is reactive instead of being proactive.

Citations needed.

 

[DaForest]

Imagine if she had said she didn't want her press tours to be overwhelmingly black, the racism would be obvious then.

Of course it would be, since black people are still victims of institutional racism that has prevented them from occupying spaces that have been restricted to anyone who isn't white, straight and male. While she was was speaking on behalf of not just black people but other marginalized classes, I think that was her point. Nuance seems to be lost on you.

This is part of the problem is people today want to roleplay as '60s era revolutionaries ignoring the last half a century of progress, ironically only fucking up this progress and the social cohesion that grew from it.

Objective reality born out by empirical facts that include metrics charting the quality of life for black people in the past 50 years would beg to differ with your concept of progress.

 

[DaForest]

I do, but I am honestly wondering whether or not you do at this point. She made it very clear that what she wanted was add more seats to the table not take others away. What you are suggesting is literally the exact opposite of what she was talking about. In fact what you are suggesting would just cause even more damage than there already is.

How would starting from a clean slate, removing those whose presence is because of historic preference they've benefited from, and selecting from a pool of diverse talent cause more harm?