Show newer

@icedquinn I suppose thats a step up from my policy that all emails received are automatically deleted when they come in on the server. Productivity has went up 9000%!

Based on another thread discussion about racial bias in film (qoto.org/@tripu/10712881255342), here's a peudo-random list of ten films to critique regarding how they treat black actors/characters.

Lion (2016)
Logan (2017)
Looper (2012)
Mad Max:Fury Road (2015)
Manchester by the Sea (2016)
Midnight in Paris (2011)
Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol (2011)
Moneyball (2011)
Moonlight (2016)
Moonrise Kingdom (2012)

Of those on the list that I hadn't seen yet, only Lion and Moneyball are available for free (that I could find). Lion is about a guy's journey back to his family in India. In a quick scan of the film, I didn't see any black people, mostly Indian actors, Nicole Kidman and another white guy.

**** Spoilers *****
I watched Moneyball and it's a perfect example of what I'm talking about. It's extremely biased against black people. It's a film about baseball. In real life there are a lot of black people in baseball, but in this film the screen is nearly always filled with white faces. There are only a few bit parts by black actors in this dialogue-heavy film and one other black character (small part), a player who got about a dozen lines -- mostly negative and largely in opposition to the protagonist.

The first black actor with lines didn't come until more than a half-hour into the film. In the scene, he was the only black person in a room with about a dozen other white guys. He has a couple of lines and was questioning/opposing the protagonist. The next black bit part had 2-3 lines and again contradicted the protagonist. Later, when the black character/player is being interviewed by a reporter, she interrupts him as he begins to speak. The reporter says, "Excuse me. Could you please get out of my shot.", (speaking to a random extra who was placed into the scene specifically for the reporter to utter that negative line). And there were a couple more bit parts, again same negative tone.

When the team wins its triumphant record-breaking game, it was a white guy who hit the home run, but when the team suffers its crushing loss, it was a black guy who hit the pop fly for the game-losing out.

This is what I talking about -- the racial bias in film. These films are not outliers, they're typical. I'm sure we'd see the same sort of thing in other films in that random list.

Here's a frame from "Moneyball", showing a black man blurred out while the white guy is in focus:

@Pat
I didnt notice it. In fact at first i pulled up the cast list of these films hoping to see a black character who was treated well in the script. Only when i realized there wasnt a single black character to even consider did it dawn on me that neither of these films had any minority characters playing meaningful roles of any kind and was kinda shocked i didnt notice it.
@tripu @bonifartius

Interesting fact of the day. In ancient egyptian culture the saying "Eaten the heart" was a reference to grieving without justification, which was one of the mortal sins that would keep you out of their version of heaven.

It was one of the negative confessions recited by the dead during the weighing of the heart against the feather of Maat (sometimes called the feather of truth).

@Pat

If we are talking about films that entierly lack minority characters from leading or even accompanying roles there is LOTR and harry potter movies. Both are two of my favorites but despite having half a dozen or more in each franchise there wasnt a single minority short of background characters.

These are probably two of the biggest film franchises in the modern era I can think of too.

@tripu @bonifartius

@Pat Not a coincidence at all. Cardiologists are known to love a good steak!

@codepuppy Wheat are a type of fruit, as are all kernels (like corn), but seeds are not fruit in general is what I should have said.

@lucifargundam @Co @QOTO

I profit only very indirectly. Long before I hosted QOTO I had a large amount of content I was developing or developed that was open-source/open-science/open-hardware. I mostly kept it on github. I started QOTO so I had a place to host everything I needed for myself, gitlab for most of my materials, funkwhale because i wanted to start doing podcasts (which I never got around to), and this site as a way to get the word out about my projects and collaborate. In the spirit of open-source I figured I'd open it to anyone to use with a similar need as mine, a place to do open-STEM and collaborate as they do it.

So I profit in much the same way any user of QOTO profits really, by having a STEM platform focused at "creators".

@Raccoondude The thing is while a pedo, in the sense of someone who raped, sexualized, or touched a small child, is a horrific and unacceptable act, and should of course be treated as a crime with penalties and all that... even witht hat being true I dont think even that justifies hating someone. Being evil in any sense is learned and a response to expiernces as is being good, that doesnt make them any less responsible, but it doesnt mean I have to hate the person. I can still go "wow I wish that rapist pedo had better role models growing up or better genes or whatever it would take so he wouldnt be such a bad person and make others suffer along with himself"

@freemo Yeah, different instruments have different learning curves. If instruments were editors strings would be the Vi family.

@likho You are literally 2 or 3 levels in on meta, and defensive about something that I have mentioned half a dozen times at least that wasnt accusing you of anything yet you continue to insist your being accused of things. Frankly I dont care that much what your issue is at this point. Have a great day.

@likho Wow you really do need to find drama in everything dont you... yea have fun with that. I agree, this debate is pointless.

@likho No gramatically as well as accurately expressing my point.

As I said no native english speaker would ever read what I said and take it to mean that I was accusing anyone who happened to read the post of being hateful. I am quite clearly referring on to the people who are hateful but dont otherwise specify who that might be.

Either way, this is a pointless debate. Clearly when you read it you completely misunderstood what I was attempting to say, whether your fault as the reader or me as the writer isnt all that important. I have since clarified my point and explained what I meant. So now if you wish feel free to comment on what I actually intended to say rather than what you incorrectly interpreted me as intending to say. Or dont, and move along, up to you.

@likho If i were writing a professional or formal level of some kind maybe. In casual english, it is perfectly correct.

Show older
CleverLibre Social

CleverLibre Social is an inclusive social instance for open discussion, learning, and community.
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.