|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 4, 2019 18:15:45 GMT
Having racial quotas, like what Brie Larson wants, isn't changing the status quo. It's continuing the status quo of racial discrimination.
When Brie Larson says it's OK to discriminate against white males because black people have been discriminated in the past, Brie Larson is basically saying it's OK for Congress to say "Since black people weren't allowed to vote in the first 21 Presidential elections, we're going to make up for that past wrong by passing a law that says white people aren't allowed to vote in the next 21 Presidential elections."
When Brie Larson says it's OK to discriminate against white males because black people have been discriminated in the past, Brie Larson is basically saying it's OK for Japan to say "Since Japanese living in America during WW2 were put in internment camps, we're going to correct that past wrong by putting all Americans living in Japan in internment camps."
When Brie Larson says it's OK to discriminate against white males because black people have been discriminated in the past, Brie Larson is basically saying "It's OK to correct 1 wrong with another wrong so racial discrimination is OK." What a shitty metaphor, as usual.
It's more like ending segregation in school and you're like... 'ok this school is all white but let's just keep it all white so no one gets separated from a friend'
and Larson is like
'the only way to integrate is to make room for the black students by moving some of the whites to a different school'
Your metaphor is the shitty metaphor. Desegration isn't taking away any rights from white people. The children go to a different school but they still have their right to an education.
Denying black people the right to vote in the first 21 Presidential elections took away their right to vote. When Brie Larson says it's OK to discriminate against white males because black people have been discriminated in the past, Brie Larson is basically saying "It's OK to deny white people the right to vote in the next 21 Presidential elections because black people were denied the right to vote in the first 21 Presidential elections."
Putting Japanese living in America in internment camps took away their rights. When Brie Larson says it's OK to discriminate against white males because black people have been discriminated in the past, Brie Larson is basically saying "It's OK for Japan to put Americans living in Japan in internment camps because America put Japanese living in America in internment camps."
When Brie Larson says it's OK to have racial quotas and discriminate against white males because black people have been discriminated in the past, Brie Larson is basically saying "It's OK to deny rights to a specific group of people based solely on their race."
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Mar 4, 2019 18:23:17 GMT
It's more like ending segregation in school and you're like. ok this school is all white but let's just keep it all white so no one gets separated from a friend' the only way to integrate is to make room for the black students by moving some of the whites to a different school You present a dangerous precedent. If the all white school had students who deserved their place there, then why break it up to include coloured student just for diversity purposes? It just lowers standards. What brie Larson said is not based on meritocracy grounds where earning a position of power should be deserved. Instead she is suggesting giving out places on the basis of colour and ethnicity alone, which is racist by definition. And the quote she said about A wrinkle in time not being made for 40 year old white men is a Freudian slip supports that theory.
|
|
|
Post by poutinep on Mar 4, 2019 19:01:46 GMT
What a shitty metaphor, as usual. It's more like ending segregation in school and you're like... 'ok this school is all white but let's just keep it all white so no one gets separated from a friend'
and Larson is like
'the only way to integrate is to make room for the black students by moving some of the whites to a different school'
Your metaphor is the shitty metaphor. Desegration isn't taking away any rights from white people. The children go to a different school but they still have their right to an education.
There's already discrimination in favor of white people.
It's more like ending segregation in school and you're like. ok this school is all white but let's just keep it all white so no one gets separated from a friend' the only way to integrate is to make room for the black students by moving some of the whites to a different school You present a dangerous precedent. If the all white school had students who deserved their place there, then why break it up to include coloured student just for diversity purposes? It just lowers standards. LOL this meme is for both of you
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 4, 2019 19:09:51 GMT
LOL this meme is for both of you The jokes on you because the "You can get a job without experience, but you can't get experience without a job" isn't something that only happens to black people or specific races or women. It happens to everyone, regardless of their race or gender. So using the "You can get a job without experience, but you can't get experience without a job" as an argument for instituting racial quotas is an invalid argument.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 4, 2019 19:12:07 GMT
It's more like ending segregation in school and you're like. ok this school is all white but let's just keep it all white so no one gets separated from a friend' the only way to integrate is to make room for the black students by moving some of the whites to a different school What brie Larson said is not based on meritocracy grounds where earning a position of power should be deserved. Instead she is suggesting giving out places on the basis of colour and ethnicity alone, which is racist by definition. And the quote she said about A wrinkle in time not being made for 40 year old white men is a Freudian slip supports that theory. No surprise that an MCU actress would advocate using racial quotas instead of meritocracy since Disney/MCU pressured the Academy into giving them Oscar nominations based on the race card instead of meritocracy.
|
|
|
Post by poutinep on Mar 4, 2019 19:17:26 GMT
The jokes on you because the "You can get a job without experience, but you can't get experience without a job" isn't something that only happens to black people or specific races or women. It happens to everyone, regardless of their race or gender. So using the "You can get a job without experience, but you can't get experience without a job" as an argument for instituting racial quotas is an invalid argument. The thing you refuse to acknowledge is that the deck is already stacked in favor of whites because of generations of discrimination against everyone not white. You refused to answer this several times but is it more racist to maintain a status quo established by discrimination or to change that status quo?
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Mar 4, 2019 19:29:22 GMT
What brie Larson said is not based on meritocracy grounds where earning a position of power should be deserved. Instead she is suggesting giving out places on the basis of colour and ethnicity alone, which is racist by definition. And the quote she said about A wrinkle in time not being made for 40 year old white men is a Freudian slip supports that theory. No surprise that an MCU actress would advocate using racial quotas instead of meritocracy since Disney/MCU pressured the Academy into giving them Oscar nominations based on the race card instead of meritocracy. So Black Panther has no merit because: A. Its a superhero movie B. Its an MCU movie C. Its an all black cast D. All of the above
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 4, 2019 19:38:24 GMT
The thing you refuse to acknowledge is that the deck is already stacked in favor of whites because of generations of discrimination against everyone not white. You refused to answer this several times but is it more racist to maintain a status quo established by discrimination or to change that status quo? The thing you refuse to acknowledge is that having racial quotas, like Brie Larson is advocating, is racist because it continues a policy of discrimination against people based solely on their race, which is what racism is. So Brie Larson and you and everyone who defends Brie Larson is basically saying "We're going to correct 1 wrong with another wrong."
Well, why stop there? Black people were slaves for hundreds of years and that was wrong, so to correct that, why not make white people slaves for the next few hundred years. That is basically what Brie Larson is saying it's OK to do.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Mar 4, 2019 19:47:32 GMT
The thing you refuse to acknowledge is that the deck is already stacked in favor of whites because of generations of discrimination against everyone not white. You refused to answer this several times but is it more racist to maintain a status quo established by discrimination or to change that status quo? The thing you refuse to acknowledge is that having racial quotas, like Brie Larson is advocating, is racist because it continues a policy of discrimination against people based solely on their race, which is what racism is. So Brie Larson and you and everyone who defends Brie Larson is basically saying "We're going to correct 1 wrong with another wrong."
Well, why stop there? Black people were slaves for hundreds of years and that was wrong, so to correct that, why not make white people slaves for the next few hundred years. That is basically what Brie Larson is saying it's OK to do.
If I'm wrong show me where it says I am...but I'm pretty sure she never mentioned quotas, rather talked about more inclusion. And if you don't understand that inclusion does not in turn mean exclusion, then you are a lost cause
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 4, 2019 19:50:59 GMT
The thing you refuse to acknowledge is that having racial quotas, like Brie Larson is advocating, is racist because it continues a policy of discrimination against people based solely on their race, which is what racism is. So Brie Larson and you and everyone who defends Brie Larson is basically saying "We're going to correct 1 wrong with another wrong."
Well, why stop there? Black people were slaves for hundreds of years and that was wrong, so to correct that, why not make white people slaves for the next few hundred years. That is basically what Brie Larson is saying it's OK to do.
If I'm wrong show me where it says I am...but I'm pretty sure she never mentioned quotas, rather talked about more inclusion. And if you don't understand that inclusion does not in turn mean exclusion, then you are a lost cause Brie Larson wants to choose her press tour based not on their merits and qualifications but based solely on their race. If you don't understand that's the same thing as advocating racism, then you are a lost cause.
|
|
|
Post by poutinep on Mar 4, 2019 19:56:16 GMT
The thing you refuse to acknowledge is that the deck is already stacked in favor of whites because of generations of discrimination against everyone not white. You refused to answer this several times but is it more racist to maintain a status quo established by discrimination or to change that status quo? The thing you refuse to acknowledge is that having racial quotas, like Brie Larson is advocating, is racist because it continues a policy of discrimination against people based solely on their race, which is what racism is. So Brie Larson and you and everyone who defends Brie Larson is basically saying "We're going to correct 1 wrong with another wrong."
Oh noes poor white men how will we ever manage? Stop playing savior to white men, we don't need you. I know 100% you wouldn't make this argument publicly, that you only do it here because it's anonymous and 90% white anyway. You would get eaten alive by other POC for being a traitor and you know it. Well, why stop there? Black people were slaves for hundreds of years and that was wrong, so to correct that, why not make white people slaves for the next few hundred years. That is basically what Brie Larson is saying it's OK to do.
Argumentum ad absurdum, one of your favorites.
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Mar 4, 2019 20:28:59 GMT
If I'm wrong show me where it says I am...but I'm pretty sure she never mentioned quotas, rather talked about more inclusion. And if you don't understand that inclusion does not in turn mean exclusion, then you are a lost cause Brie Larson wants to choose her press tour based not on their merits and qualifications but based solely on their race. If you don't understand that's the same thing as advocating racism, then you are a lost cause. There you go again, with this "merit" shit. Sounds like you think POC don't have merits and qualifications, only white males do. Now that's racist.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 4, 2019 21:40:20 GMT
Brie Larson wants to choose her press tour based not on their merits and qualifications but based solely on their race. If you don't understand that's the same thing as advocating racism, then you are a lost cause. There you go again, with this "merit" shit. Sounds like you think POC don't have merits and qualifications, only white males do. Now that's racist. No, I think the person selected should be selected because they're the most qualified person and not selected solely because they're a certain race. That's not racist. What's racist is what Brie Larson wants - selecting people not based on merits and qualifications but based solely on their race.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Mar 4, 2019 21:40:46 GMT
If I'm wrong show me where it says I am...but I'm pretty sure she never mentioned quotas, rather talked about more inclusion. And if you don't understand that inclusion does not in turn mean exclusion, then you are a lost cause Brie Larson wants to choose her press tour based not on their merits and qualifications but based solely on their race. If you don't understand that's the same thing as advocating racism, then you are a lost cause. So she didn't say anything about quotas then. As for the rest...your interpretation is pretty much fucked
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 4, 2019 21:46:32 GMT
I know 100% you wouldn't make this argument publicly, that you only do it here because it's anonymous and 90% white anyway. Just as you were 100% wrong about Tom Brady cheating in DeflateGate, you're also 100% wrong about this. I would say this in public also because I would never want my co-workers to think that I got a job or a promotion simply because the boss was trying to satisfy a racial quota. I want my co-workers to know that I got the job or promotion because I'm the most qualified for the job and I'm most capable of doing the best job. Of course, for someone like you who defends and supports cheaters who take shortcuts (like Tom Brady) rather than earn their achievements through hard work, it's no surprise you would favor people based solely on their race rather than based on their merits and qualifications.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 4, 2019 21:53:10 GMT
Brie Larson wants to choose her press tour based not on their merits and qualifications but based solely on their race. If you don't understand that's the same thing as advocating racism, then you are a lost cause. So she didn't say anything about quotas then. As for the rest...your interpretation is pretty much fucked Yes, she did. She said she wants more non-white interviewers. That means less white interviewers. Because … Math Lesson for anyone who hasn't gotten that far in school yet: The total must always add up to 100%. So if you increase 1 part by a certain percent, then another part must decrease by the same percent in order for the total to remain 100%. So Brie Larson wants more non-white interviewers. That means Brie Larson wants to limit the percent of white interviewers. So Brie Larson wants a quota based solely on a person's race. That's a racial quota and that's pretty racist.
|
|
|
Post by poutinep on Mar 4, 2019 22:06:20 GMT
I know 100% you wouldn't make this argument publicly, that you only do it here because it's anonymous and 90% white anyway. Just as you were 100% wrong about Tom Brady cheating in DeflateGate, you're also 100% wrong about this. I would say this in public also because I would never want my co-workers to think that I got a job or a promotion simply because the boss was trying to satisfy a racial quota. I want my co-workers to know that I got the job or promotion because I'm the most qualified for the job and I'm most capable of doing the best job. Of course, for someone like you who defends and supports cheaters who take shortcuts (like Tom Brady) rather than earn their achievements through hard work, it's no surprise you would favor people based solely on their race rather than based on their merits and qualifications. Well I guess we'll never know, as the only way to prove you would say it in public would be for you to actually do it and show us... like with a Twitter or FB account with your real name. I know you won't do that though, it's OK, it wouldn't be fair to ask you to do that. Even if you did do it, everyone would be like 'Why the fuck is an Asian guy arguing in favor of maintaining white-male privilege at the expense of chronically oppressed POC and women?' deflategate lol your whole argument is ultimately 'Marlow is right in backing Exponent's demonstrably flawed science, the dozens of scientists disagreeing with him are wrong.'
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Mar 4, 2019 22:09:11 GMT
So she didn't say anything about quotas then. As for the rest...your interpretation is pretty much fucked Yes, she did. She said she wants more non-white interviewers. That means less white interviewers. Because … Math Lesson for anyone who hasn't gotten that far in school yet: The total must always add up to 100%. So if you increase 1 part by a certain percent, then another part must decrease by the same percent in order for the total to remain 100%. So Brie Larson wants more non-white interviewers. That means Brie Larson wants to limit the percent of white interviewers. So Brie Larson wants a quota based solely on a person's race. That's a racial quota and that's pretty racist. Math Lesson...only if the total is a set total. If there are 100 people and 20 are added the total is 120....100% of 120 is 120. If you add 1 to what is a 100% total that new total becomes 100% And here is a English lesson for you...quota is a fixed share...has she stated a fixed share she wants to see? Also if the job is given to someone with equal "merits and qualifications" but also black/female/disabled would that be OK? Because that was one of the findings of the study she has been advocating...that people of colour, female or disabled, equally able to do the job are being overlooked for certain opportunities in the industry. If you think that is OK I think you should stop throwing the racist accusations and have a long hard look at yourself
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Mar 4, 2019 22:13:21 GMT
Oh noes poor white men how will we ever manage? Try and play it down all you want, but it is still reverse racism at the end of the day no matter what context you look at it. She wants more POC at the press junkets, not because they may be more qualified and skilled but largely due to their identity. In a competitive industry like film journalism, that gives too big of an edge to POC when up against equivalent white candidates. And even if historically whites have dominated the field through positive discrimination, why should a young upcoming white journalist be held up for the crimes of his forefathers. This original sin fallacy has no boundary if its allowed free reign.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 4, 2019 22:24:28 GMT
Yes, she did. She said she wants more non-white interviewers. That means less white interviewers. Because … Math Lesson for anyone who hasn't gotten that far in school yet: The total must always add up to 100%. So if you increase 1 part by a certain percent, then another part must decrease by the same percent in order for the total to remain 100%. So Brie Larson wants more non-white interviewers. That means Brie Larson wants to limit the percent of white interviewers. So Brie Larson wants a quota based solely on a person's race. That's a racial quota and that's pretty racist. people of colour, female or disabled, equally able to do the job are being overlooked for certain opportunities in the industry. If you think that is OK I think you should stop throwing the racist accusations and have a long hard look at yourself You really are slow at getting things. No one ever said overlooking the most qualified person is OK. In fact, I've been saying overlooking the most qualified person simply because they're a certain race is wrong, regardless of who does the overlooking. That is what you and other Brie Larson supporters don't seem to understand. But I'll try to explain it to you more simply. Brie Larson and you and all the other Brie Larson supporters basically have a Chicago 1920s mafia-style mentality. When Al Capone's gang whacked 1 of Bugs Moran's gang, Bugs Moran's gang would retaliate and whack 1 of Al Capone's gang. But that's not justice. That's just a 2nd murder, which is equally as wrong as the 1st murder. Brie Larson is basically saying "When qualified non-white people are overlooked, that's wrong, but when qualified white people are overlooked, that's not wrong." Brie Larson basically wants to correct the wrong of racial discrimination by committing a 2nd wrong - more racial discrimination.
Bottom line: Brie Larson is advocating for discrimination based solely on a person's race, and that is racism.
|
|