White Privilege

  • Thread starter Earth
  • 1,707 comments
  • 79,117 views
I asked when you first asserted the claim and ask again, why?
The reason for it is partly to make you question why it makes you uncomfortable. No one has called for boycotts of any of these movies, and there are a fair number of movies from the 70s, 80s and 90s that have such comedic representations. Why dont the ones you seem to think should take offense mostly dont. Why are the subjects of the jest able to see the is no offense meant and able to laugh, but you get butthurt? Why are you unwilling or unable to differentiate between true racism and a portrayal of a different race where no racism is expressed or implied? And that I ask out of curiosity and wont of understanding of the position.
 
Last edited:
I don't know a thing about the science of it but I would not be surprised in the slightest if it turned out that taking offence/being outraged was neurologically addictive. Add in a specifier like "virtue signalling" and there may be the release of yet more intoxicating chemicals.

Again, I don't know, but it would fit with what I see as a major epidemic. It would also pull that supposed virtue even further away from altruism.
 
LeMansAid
I don't know a thing about the science of it but I would not be surprised in the slightest if it turned out that taking offence/being outraged was neurologically addictive. Add in a specifier like "virtue signalling" and there may be the release of yet more intoxicating chemicals.

Again, I don't know, but it would fit with what I see as a major epidemic. It would also pull that supposed virtue even further away from altruism.
Click to expand...
Now that's an interesting hypothesis. I wonder if anyone has studied that.
 
PocketZeven
The scene in trading places doesnt offend me. But like I explained these are my personal opinions.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. :)

In the future, I would still heed the context of a situation though around potentially offensive media. It may help how you come to your opinions.
 
Rallywagon
I asked when you first asserted the claim and ask again, why?
The reason for it is partly to make you question why it makes you uncomfortable. No one has called for boycotts of any of these movies, and there are a fair number of movies from the 70s, 80s and 90s that have such comedic representations. Why dont the ones you seem to think should take offense mostly dont. Why are the subjects of the jest able to see the is no offense meant and able to laugh, but you get butthurt? Why are you unwilling or unable to differentiate between true racism and a portrayal of a different race where no racism is expressed or implied? And that I ask out of curiosity and wont of understanding of the position.
Click to expand...

You are misrepresentating my opinion. I am not criticizing that specific movie as a whole. I nowhere shared the opinion of this movie being racist. Why do you think I am criticizing these representations in cinema as a whole? I am referring to specific scenes in certain movies. The scenes that make me cringe. Bad stereotypes that I find beats the purpose of humor in my opinion. But that does not mean I think a person who enjoys this specific piece of art as racist.

Like breakfast at Tiffany is a wonderful movie. But the Mickey Rooney scene offends me for the same reasons. If you think it’s funny though, I respect your opinion. I would just disagree. The same with bad jokes. Some think their funny, some don’t.

And why are you suggesting that I don’t differentiate between true intentional racism and where racism is not implied? What made you come to that conclusion?
I actually do see racism in a lot of ways like I posted a few times. Specifically racism with intent and racism without intent. The second is where empathy comes into play. (From both sides)
The offender needs to recognize that something has offended for a certain reason and the one offended needs to recognize if there was malicious intent. In the case of the movies you are referencing there wasn’t malicious intent and it was for comedic purposes. Perhaps I feel this way because dan akroyd has better comedic timing then c. Thomas Howell. In context this scene was even a social commentary on racism. But the portrayal itself felt wrong in my opinion.

Link contains profanity:


To be clear my opinion of white chicks is different from soul man. Because the premise is different. I do think this movie is racist as a whole, because the Wayans do not look at all as the women they are trying to potray and the way they used whiteface is unrespectful and insulting. Others might not find it racist. I would have found it perhaps not racist if they used a body switch plot where they just switched minds with the white field in stead of whiteface.

Johnnypenso
Opinion and Current Events Discussion Forum. That's where we are. It's literally the whole purpose of this forum to ask questions and discuss.
Click to expand...

I am aware. But what did James earl jones have to do with me finding that scene offensive? What was your motive to talk about the actors that weren’t in that scene?

Northstar
Well, you and a couple other people constantly nitpick every little thing he and @ryzno say, so I'm guessing he is just returning the favor.
Click to expand...

It’s actually the other way round with JohnnyP.
I don’t have anything against @ryzno though.
 
Last edited:
PocketZeven
I am aware. But what did James earl jones have to do with me finding that scene offensive? What was your motive to talk about the actors that weren’t in that scene?
Click to expand...
James Earl Jones is one of the most respected actors in Hollywood and he appeared in the movie so I would presume he didn't think it was racist or offensive otherwise he wouldn't have been in the movie. I wonder how it is you balance your own personal offense with the fact that the people whom the offense is targeted at, like Jones and Chong, don't seem to have a problem with it. If they aren't offended by it, your offense seems rather misplaced.
 
Northstar
Well, you and a couple other people constantly nitpick every little thing he and @ryzno say, so I'm guessing he is just returning the favor.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't put PZ in that group of people. I do appreciate the thought though and get what you're saying.
I also feel PZ. He's tried to explain himself and for some reason I/us/we/whatever honestly can't figure out his thinking and it appears he, like I do, am starting to get frustrated at the constant barrage of questions. I'll admit I've been a little hard on PZ when he was pushing anti-gun, pro-socialist in the America thread.
But like JP I'm honestly curious why he's offended by a movie that has nothing to do with his race at all. I believe he's Asian right?
I wasn't offended by "White Girls" but I did find the movie to be stupid.
I'm genuinely curious why he's offended. Like JP said, did J.E. Jones do it purely for the check or was he able to look at the grand scheme of things?
 
Johnnypenso
James Earl Jones is one of the most respected actors in Hollywood and he appeared in the movie so I would presume he didn't think it was racist or offensive otherwise he wouldn't have been in the movie. I wonder how it is you balance your own personal offense with the fact that the people whom the offense is targeted at, like Jones and Chong, don't seem to have a problem with it. If they aren't offended by it, your offense seems rather misplaced.
Click to expand...

I am neither an actor, black or american. I dont see why i should have any insight in their opinions. I dont speak for them and can only speak for my self. So In this instance I dont see the connection between their performance in the movie and me and why it should be balanced?

That said they could have possibly just did the movie for the paycheck and have a different opinion in hindsight. There are a lot of actors who regret acting in certain movies. For example Jim Carrey regretted his violent potrayal in Kick-ass 2. But you should look for interviews or ask them yourself what they think now.
 
PocketZeven
I am neither an actor, black or american. I dont see why i should have any insight in their opinions. I dont speak for them and can only speak for my self. So In this instance I dont see the connection between their performance in the movie and me and why it should be balanced?

That said they could have possibly just did the movie for the paycheck and have a different opinion in hindsight. There are a lot of actors who regret acting in certain movies. For example Jim Carrey regretted his violent potrayal in Kick-ass 2. But you should look for interviews or ask them yourself what they think now.
Click to expand...
Rae Dawn Chong:
“I’ve never forgiven [Spike Lee} for that because it really hurt me,” Chong told The Wrap recently. “I didn’t realize [at the time] that not pushing the Afrocentric agenda was going to bite me. When you start to do well people start to say you’re a Tom [as in Uncle Tom] because you’re acceptable.”

“Nothing is more annoying then people who loudly complain about something without seeing it first. Uninformed but loud complaints are counter-productive to any cause, especially the black cause,” Chong told me in an email this week. “30 years ago it was often the case that certain people would drag others down to make themselves look like saviors… 30 years later we see there is never a savior, just a loud 🤬”

“It was only controversial because Spike Lee made a thing of it,” she said during a recent interview. “He’d never seen the movie and he just jumped all over it,” she added, recalling that it was a time when Lee was coming up in his career and making headlines for being outspoken.

“He was just starting and pulling everything down in his wake,” Chong asserted. “If you watch the movie, it’s really making white people look stupid.”

Can't find anything from James Earl Jones. It's also important to note that the scene you linked above is out of context. That's not how C. Thomas Howell's character acts in the movie, that's Leslie Neilson's imagination of what he prejudges Howell to be. That's gives it an entirely different context and meaning. It's satire poking fun at how white people stereotype black people. Other actors in that scene each had their own imagination come to life with Howell portrayed as Mandingo and Prince. I just can't see how anyone could find that offensive in context, especially when it's poking holes in the prejudicial attitudes of white people. I guess one could be offended as a white person who doesn't think that way and doesn't want to be associated with white people that are, but that's a lot of hoops to jump through for a single doggie treat.
 
Johnnypenso
Rae Dawn Chong:
“I’ve never forgiven [Spike Lee} for that because it really hurt me,” Chong told The Wrap recently. “I didn’t realize [at the time] that not pushing the Afrocentric agenda was going to bite me. When you start to do well people start to say you’re a Tom [as in Uncle Tom] because you’re acceptable.”

“Nothing is more annoying then people who loudly complain about something without seeing it first. Uninformed but loud complaints are counter-productive to any cause, especially the black cause,” Chong told me in an email this week. “30 years ago it was often the case that certain people would drag others down to make themselves look like saviors… 30 years later we see there is never a savior, just a loud 🤬”

“It was only controversial because Spike Lee made a thing of it,” she said during a recent interview. “He’d never seen the movie and he just jumped all over it,” she added, recalling that it was a time when Lee was coming up in his career and making headlines for being outspoken.

“He was just starting and pulling everything down in his wake,” Chong asserted. “If you watch the movie, it’s really making white people look stupid.”

Can't find anything from James Earl Jones. It's also important to note that the scene you linked above is out of context. That's not how C. Thomas Howell's character acts in the movie, that's Leslie Neilson's imagination of what he prejudges Howell to be. That's gives it an entirely different context and meaning. It's satire poking fun at how white people stereotype black people. Other actors in that scene each had their own imagination come to life with Howell portrayed as Mandingo and Prince. I just can't see how anyone could find that offensive in context, especially when it's poking holes in the prejudicial attitudes of white people. I guess one could be offended as a white person who doesn't think that way and doesn't want to be associated with white people that are, but that's a lot of hoops to jump through for a single doggie treat.
Click to expand...

You are misrepresenting my opinion again dear sir. Why are you defending some imaginary statement?

I already stated I liked the movie and upon second watching found a specific scene offensive to me. I know the movie is a social commentary on racism and affermative action. Did I somewhere made you think otherwise? Have you even seen this movie?
 
PocketZeven
You are misrepresenting my opinion again dear sir. Why are you defending some imaginary statement?

I already stated I liked the movie and upon second watching found a specific scene offensive to me. I know the movie is a social commentary on racism and affermative action. Did I somewhere made you think otherwise? Have you even seen this movie?
Click to expand...
I don't understand how someone can be offended when the scene is in context. It makes no logical sense.
 
Johnnypenso
Rae Dawn Chong:
“I’ve never forgiven [Spike Lee} for that because it really hurt me,” Chong told The Wrap recently. “I didn’t realize [at the time] that not pushing the Afrocentric agenda was going to bite me. When you start to do well people start to say you’re a Tom [as in Uncle Tom] because you’re acceptable.”

“Nothing is more annoying then people who loudly complain about something without seeing it first. Uninformed but loud complaints are counter-productive to any cause, especially the black cause,” Chong told me in an email this week. “30 years ago it was often the case that certain people would drag others down to make themselves look like saviors… 30 years later we see there is never a savior, just a loud 🤬”

“It was only controversial because Spike Lee made a thing of it,” she said during a recent interview. “He’d never seen the movie and he just jumped all over it,” she added, recalling that it was a time when Lee was coming up in his career and making headlines for being outspoken.

“He was just starting and pulling everything down in his wake,” Chong asserted. “If you watch the movie, it’s really making white people look stupid.”

Can't find anything from James Earl Jones. It's also important to note that the scene you linked above is out of context. That's not how C. Thomas Howell's character acts in the movie, that's Leslie Neilson's imagination of what he prejudges Howell to be. That's gives it an entirely different context and meaning. It's satire poking fun at how white people stereotype black people. Other actors in that scene each had their own imagination come to life with Howell portrayed as Mandingo and Prince. I just can't see how anyone could find that offensive in context, especially when it's poking holes in the prejudicial attitudes of white people. I guess one could be offended as a white person who doesn't think that way and doesn't want to be associated with white people that are, but that's a lot of hoops to jump through for a single doggie treat.
Click to expand...
Just for context on the irony of Spike Lee complaining about how Chong wasn't acting "black enough", he was just recently accused for softening the realities over the events in BlacKkKlansmen.
According to Riley, the movie takes many liberties with Stallworth’s memoir and softens the reality of what actually happened, painting cops and civil-rights leaders as a force united against American racism.
....
He also takes issue with Lee’s characterization of civil-rights leader Kwame Ture as a violent revolutionary, when, in Riley’s experience, Ture was more interested in building a “revolutionary Black intelligentsia.”

“Without the made up stuff and with what we know of the actual history of police infiltration into radical groups, and how they infiltrated and directed White Supremacist organizations to attack those groups, Ron Stallworth is the villain,” Riley writes. “For Spike to come out with a movie where story points are fabricated in order to make a Black cop and his counterparts look like allies in the fight against racism is really disappointing, to put it very mildly.”
Click to expand...
 
Johnnypenso
I don't understand how someone can be offended when the scene is in context. It makes no logical sense.
Click to expand...

It depends. Have you seen this movie? Tonally the scene seems like a scene from a parodie film like airplane! or Naked Gun (coincidently with Leslie Nielsen) But the movie as a whole wasnt a parodie like those movies. Also what makes the opinion perhaps more personal, the character looks like my foster brother (who is half-black). Emotion is not always logical. I dont understand people with certain phobias or certain tast in things.

What is interesting is you are reacting like I am claiming that others should feel offense as well. Which I specifically did not. Are you perhaps trying to make up a narrative for me to stir things up?

Edit: The movie's plot is actually about racism (in a sense the movie is racist), so I corrected my post.
 
Last edited:
PocketZeven
It depends. Have you seen this movie? Tonally the scene seems like a scene from a parodie film like airplane! or Naked Gun (coincidently with Leslie Nielsen) But the movie as a whole wasnt a parodie like those movies. Also what makes the opinion perhaps more personal, the character looks like my foster brother (who is half-black). Emotion is not always logical. I dont understand people with certain phobias or certain tast in things.

What is interesting is you are reacting like I am claiming that others should feel offense as well. Which I specifically did not. Are you perhaps trying to make up a narrative for me to stir things up?

Edit: The movie's plot is actually about racism (in a sense the movie is racist), so I corrected my post.
Click to expand...
If what you're saying is you are reacting emotionally and you have no basis in logic or reason for your reaction that's fine, you can leave it at that. That's how it appears on the surface anyway. But I don't get the feeling that you understand the context of that scene.
 
Johnnypenso
If what you're saying is you are reacting emotionally and you have no basis in logic or reason for your reaction that's fine, you can leave it at that. That's how it appears on the surface anyway. But I don't get the feeling that you understand the context of that scene.
Click to expand...

Have you watched the complete movie?
 
PocketZeven
Have you watched the complete movie?
Click to expand...
Yes, many years ago, but we're only talking about one particular scene. So are you saying you're just having an emotional reaction or is there some basis in reason and logic for your opinion on this scene?
 
Johnnypenso
Yes, many years ago, but we're only talking about one particular scene. So are you saying you're just having an emotional reaction or is there some basis in reason and logic for your opinion on this scene?
Click to expand...

I have already answered that question. Move on.
 
PocketZeven
I dont need to. But that doesnt mean I agree with your statement. It is only your opinion that fails to see logic.
Click to expand...
I can't force you but this is a discussion forum. You've not made any clear statements about it other than saying sometimes you are emotions are not always logical so that's all I have to go on.
 
Johnnypenso
I can't force you but this is a discussion forum. You've not made any clear statements about it other than saying sometimes you are emotions are not always logical so that's all I have to go on.
Click to expand...

I previously explained I disliked the potrayal tonally and in context of the movie. That whole scene was written and supposed to be a potrayal of a very offensive sterotype. So some people may be offended when seeing it on screen. Perhaps a black person, perhaps a pimp, perhaps a white person thinking that middle aged white fathers dont react that way when their daughter brings home a black person etc.

Johnnypenso
there is no logical basis for being offended at that scene.
Click to expand...

That is a statement. If you think it there is no logical basis then that is your opinion, but not mine. So i disagree with your statement.

giphy.gif
 

Latest Posts

Back