Laurence Fox - New Political Party
Discussion
Murph7355 said:
You do seem to want to put spin on the things you read.
Alternative spin...
One massively privileged actor bemoans the fact that he wasn't the lead part in a film/given a high enough profile/top billing/enough $s. Also moans that he's been cut out of an advert in China.
Another massively privileged actor decides he's had enough of woke culture and wants to start a political party to go against it.
I would expect most people's, irrespective of colour, gender, sexuality or any other angle, hearts will be bleeding for the first privileged actor. I would think most people won't look twice at the second or even know he exists.
If the second privileged actor, once his party is started, starts moaning about how he's not given as much publicity as Boris, or isn't earning as much as others from the venture, I fully expect he will get pilloried on this thread too. (My guess is he probably won't go down that path because he seems to appreciate he's a massively privileged actor. But you never know with massively privileged actors. As a group they are naturally "me me me" to a greater or lesser extent
).
If you look for racism everywhere, you will find it.
Alternative spin...
One massively privileged actor bemoans the fact that he wasn't the lead part in a film/given a high enough profile/top billing/enough $s. Also moans that he's been cut out of an advert in China.
Another massively privileged actor decides he's had enough of woke culture and wants to start a political party to go against it.
I would expect most people's, irrespective of colour, gender, sexuality or any other angle, hearts will be bleeding for the first privileged actor. I would think most people won't look twice at the second or even know he exists.
If the second privileged actor, once his party is started, starts moaning about how he's not given as much publicity as Boris, or isn't earning as much as others from the venture, I fully expect he will get pilloried on this thread too. (My guess is he probably won't go down that path because he seems to appreciate he's a massively privileged actor. But you never know with massively privileged actors. As a group they are naturally "me me me" to a greater or lesser extent
).If you look for racism everywhere, you will find it.
I haven't accused anyone of racism, I've only ever mooted the idea that some people, by their life experience, might be better qualified to comment than others on the subject, and then suggested people compare a couple of threads.
Your description of the John Boyega story is a bit odd - you've left any mention of race and racism out of it, when that was one of the key points of the interview, and the thread was called 'John Boyega - Disney was racist'. Maybe if you try to pretend racism isn't anywhere, you'll never see it?
El stovey said:
Murph7355 said:
If you look for racism everywhere, you will find it.
Same as looking for wokism or pc gone mad or whatever else people are overly upset by and looking for everywhere. So what's the answer?
Don't go on a hunt for isms? Or hunt them all out?
It's a crazy polarised world. I suspect all the isms in it will eventually extinguish each other. Whether anyone's around to tell the story is anyone's guess
Murph7355 said:
So what's the answer?
First step would be to get across to people that the UK =/= US when it comes to the social issues around race. The internet has made it very easy for the collective consciousnesses of our two nations to merge and as a result has persuaded some Brits that we face the same issues over race that the US does when it's manifestly not true.
doesthiswork said:
I haven't accused anyone of racism, I've only ever mooted the idea that some people, by their life experience, might be better qualified to comment than others on the subject, and then suggested people compare a couple of threads.
Your description of the John Boyega story is a bit odd - you've left any mention of race and racism out of it, when that was one of the key points of the interview, and the thread was called 'John Boyega - Disney was racist'. Maybe if you try to pretend racism isn't anywhere, you'll never see it?
Maybe.Your description of the John Boyega story is a bit odd - you've left any mention of race and racism out of it, when that was one of the key points of the interview, and the thread was called 'John Boyega - Disney was racist'. Maybe if you try to pretend racism isn't anywhere, you'll never see it?
I purposefully left out any mention of racism from my post. I struggle with it being racist that he didn't get a bigger picture on the advertising posters, or bigger billing. It was covered in the thread on the topic. And in the overall annuls of racist endeavour, that one (if it was that) hardly seems the most heinous thing to get upset about (then again, I'm white middle class so what would I know. Coming from a working class background I do know that plenty of people get passed over for top jobs though. Even ones more qualified than those who get them).
How many other actors didn't get a big slot on the poster? Or top billing? And what race were they? In galaxies far, far away, what sort of racial representation is appropriate?
Maybe he should have applied to be Chewbacca? Admiral Ackbar? Or perhaps gone trans and applied to be Rey?
Boyega was the one calling out Disney as racist. It was on him to prove it. Him not getting top billing on Star Wars is pretty thin proof. No?
The comparison of the two threads you made was, IMO, irrelevant wrt race. One is an actor moaning he didn't get top billing. The other is an actor setting up a political party with dubious merit. Overall summary - meh.
Castrol for a knave said:
...
As 2 Chevrons correctly pointed out, as the woman did to Fox, Boyega is perfectly entitled to say what he thinks, based on his lived experience. It would appear however, that right and "freedom of speech" is only granted to middle class white guys not uppity black dudes. ...
Quite evidently not true.As 2 Chevrons correctly pointed out, as the woman did to Fox, Boyega is perfectly entitled to say what he thinks, based on his lived experience. It would appear however, that right and "freedom of speech" is only granted to middle class white guys not uppity black dudes. ...
Both have the freedom of speech opportunity to say what they want. And have done so.
What nobody is ever granted is that everyone must agree with what they say and/or must never comment upon it. And if they put up a s
t argument, they deserve nailing for it. I suspect both of these will be/have been John Boyega says racism was behind his character not getting as rich a storyline as the two main characters. Just because he's black does not mean that whatever he says about race is automatically true. I think that it's highly unlikely that they cast a relatively low profile (at the time) black British actor to play a relatively central role but then to choose to limit his character's story because he's black or to see less worth in developing his character because he's black, especially considering many lead black actors have been doing bloody well in Hollywood for decades.
I was dismayed to not see more of him, and Rose too, in the later films. It was pretty daft what they did with characters like Captain Phasma who showed up so briefly after the first film that they might as well have been a nameless character, similar for Gleeson's character. Anyway, I digress to make a point, I think he'll regret what he said when he reflects on it in future and he'll acknowledge he was one of many to fall foul of, at worst, poor thinking on behalf of the people who created the films.
So it's not as simple as we don't want to listen to the black man but we do want to listen to the white man. I want to hear from both but judge each on their own merits and not on their skin colour.
It's also not as simple as Fox wanting to tell everyone what racism is and that he denies racism exists. He wants, and many others do too, to encourage the discussion about race, history and social matters to be a bit deeper and less absolute and for the reaction to be less kneejerk. What happened in America, with riots, looting and killing, was not a solution to any problem. How the hell did it get that way? People were allowed to get away with it. People blindly offered support without really knowing who or what they were supporting. Presidential candidates danced around the issue, and added fuel to the fire because they didn't respond to it in a reasonable manner. One was, perhaps, guilty of emboldening militias and the other of supporting those that wanted rid of the police.
That's no good. There is truth in every story but there are also lies and misunderstanding. Dialogue is needed. Through dialogue comes education and knowledge, maybe exposing some hard or inconvenient truths, but hopefully propaganda is squeezed out.
I was dismayed to not see more of him, and Rose too, in the later films. It was pretty daft what they did with characters like Captain Phasma who showed up so briefly after the first film that they might as well have been a nameless character, similar for Gleeson's character. Anyway, I digress to make a point, I think he'll regret what he said when he reflects on it in future and he'll acknowledge he was one of many to fall foul of, at worst, poor thinking on behalf of the people who created the films.
So it's not as simple as we don't want to listen to the black man but we do want to listen to the white man. I want to hear from both but judge each on their own merits and not on their skin colour.
It's also not as simple as Fox wanting to tell everyone what racism is and that he denies racism exists. He wants, and many others do too, to encourage the discussion about race, history and social matters to be a bit deeper and less absolute and for the reaction to be less kneejerk. What happened in America, with riots, looting and killing, was not a solution to any problem. How the hell did it get that way? People were allowed to get away with it. People blindly offered support without really knowing who or what they were supporting. Presidential candidates danced around the issue, and added fuel to the fire because they didn't respond to it in a reasonable manner. One was, perhaps, guilty of emboldening militias and the other of supporting those that wanted rid of the police.
That's no good. There is truth in every story but there are also lies and misunderstanding. Dialogue is needed. Through dialogue comes education and knowledge, maybe exposing some hard or inconvenient truths, but hopefully propaganda is squeezed out.
Murph7355 said:
Fair call.
So what's the answer?
Don't go on a hunt for isms? Or hunt them all out?
It's a crazy polarised world. I suspect all the isms in it will eventually extinguish each other. Whether anyone's around to tell the story is anyone's guess
I agree. It’s all a big fad tbh made by people and their opinions, all sides stoked by the media and social media to get clicks and by people wanting to elevate their profile and get followers and attention or be relevant or some other thing that’s making them unhappy and dissatisfied etc.So what's the answer?
Don't go on a hunt for isms? Or hunt them all out?
It's a crazy polarised world. I suspect all the isms in it will eventually extinguish each other. Whether anyone's around to tell the story is anyone's guess
This is the age of polarisation and -isms. It will just burn itself out as people become more enlightened and less reactionary in their thinking.
People will all get along fine once they shed all their tribal thinking and realise other people are just like them but with different opinions based on their own experiences.
I tend to look at guys like foxy here and think, is what he’s proposing going to make things better or worse. It looks to me like he’s just out to make a name for himself at the expense of others and stoke up more unhappiness.
His party is all reactionary about stopping stuff and getting rid of things and being against types of people and thought, which is just reactionary in itself and bound to cause more conflict.
Same with farage and corbyn, all about stopping things and blaming others and making people unhappy, all very negative. Making unhappy people blame others for their problems.
Old Boris nearly had it all before covid with his message of moving on together post brexit but imho he’s turned out to be a bit incompetent in a crisis so we’ll need someone else to take it on and run with it.
It’s important to remember though that most of this is in the media and online etc. In our day to day lives how often do we ACTUALLY get affected by any of these isms like racism or wokism or pc gone mad or bigotry etc? Not often I would wager. These polarising issues aren’t actually real ot a major problem for most people in Britain.
Murph7355 said:
Maybe.
I purposefully left out any mention of racism from my post. I struggle with it being racist that he didn't get a bigger picture on the advertising posters, or bigger billing. It was covered in the thread on the topic. And in the overall annuls of racist endeavour, that one (if it was that) hardly seems the most heinous thing to get upset about (then again, I'm white middle class so what would I know. Coming from a working class background I do know that plenty of people get passed over for top jobs though. Even ones more qualified than those who get them).
How many other actors didn't get a big slot on the poster? Or top billing? And what race were they? In galaxies far, far away, what sort of racial representation is appropriate?
Maybe he should have applied to be Chewbacca? Admiral Ackbar? Or perhaps gone trans and applied to be Rey?
Boyega was the one calling out Disney as racist. It was on him to prove it. Him not getting top billing on Star Wars is pretty thin proof. No?
The comparison of the two threads you made was, IMO, irrelevant wrt race. One is an actor moaning he didn't get top billing. The other is an actor setting up a political party with dubious merit. Overall summary - meh.
I've got no problem at all with you thinking what happened to JB wasn't because of racism. But you can't say the story wasn't about racism - the whole reason the interview gained any attention and a thread started was because he said his treatment was different because of his race. I purposefully left out any mention of racism from my post. I struggle with it being racist that he didn't get a bigger picture on the advertising posters, or bigger billing. It was covered in the thread on the topic. And in the overall annuls of racist endeavour, that one (if it was that) hardly seems the most heinous thing to get upset about (then again, I'm white middle class so what would I know. Coming from a working class background I do know that plenty of people get passed over for top jobs though. Even ones more qualified than those who get them).
How many other actors didn't get a big slot on the poster? Or top billing? And what race were they? In galaxies far, far away, what sort of racial representation is appropriate?
Maybe he should have applied to be Chewbacca? Admiral Ackbar? Or perhaps gone trans and applied to be Rey?
Boyega was the one calling out Disney as racist. It was on him to prove it. Him not getting top billing on Star Wars is pretty thin proof. No?
The comparison of the two threads you made was, IMO, irrelevant wrt race. One is an actor moaning he didn't get top billing. The other is an actor setting up a political party with dubious merit. Overall summary - meh.
For what it's worth, I think race did come into his treatment (you can just imagine the writers - 'then the stormtrooper lifts his mask... and he's black!' Cue high fives all round), they cast him knowing he's hot property at the time, bound to help profits, he then suffered a s
tload of abuse, Disney decides they don't really know where they're going with the story and drop him down the billing. Add Disney's cowardly/greed-driven acceptance of Chinese racism by modifying the promo material and it's not surprising he's pissed off. Anyway, we're off topic a bit, although I haven't got much more to say about whiney snowflake Laurence Fox. I think the comparison of the reactions to what the two actors have said is a valid and interesting one though.
I have no issues with anyone starting a political party of any leaning (within reason), but I just don’t understand what he thinks is going to happen.
He’s clearly trashed his career by saying the things he has. He must be well aware that the arts is a left-leaning business and criticising left-leaning stuff will potentially result in less people being keen to work with him.
I suspect his political career will splutter into life then fizzle out. Then what is he going to do?
He complained last year that his divorce and legal bills have left him with a severely dented bank account, so it’s not like he can just retire and live off a stack of cash in the bank.
Maybe I’m going to be proved wrong and his ‘new political party’ will be a success. Who knows.
He’s clearly trashed his career by saying the things he has. He must be well aware that the arts is a left-leaning business and criticising left-leaning stuff will potentially result in less people being keen to work with him.
I suspect his political career will splutter into life then fizzle out. Then what is he going to do?
He complained last year that his divorce and legal bills have left him with a severely dented bank account, so it’s not like he can just retire and live off a stack of cash in the bank.
Maybe I’m going to be proved wrong and his ‘new political party’ will be a success. Who knows.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
One of those candidates, is, you know, the ACTUAL president. And there is no 'perhaps' about how he has encouraged fascist groups. Implying there is equal blame for this mess between Trump (in power, clearly racist) and Biden (not) is ridiculous. And while I agree violence is clearly not the answer and people burning down their own communities is insane, maybe if the people who get so cross about the BLM movement had got just as cross about the racism that triggered the movement in the first place, we wouldn't be where we are now.
doesthiswork said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
One of those candidates, is, you know, the ACTUAL president. And there is no 'perhaps' about how he has encouraged fascist groups. Implying there is equal blame for this mess between Trump (in power, clearly racist) and Biden (not) is ridiculous. And while I agree violence is clearly not the answer and people burning down their own communities is insane, maybe if the people who get so cross about the BLM movement had got just as cross about the racism that triggered the movement in the first place, we wouldn't be where we are now.
Both presidential candidates are full of s
t. I don't really care which side you take as I'm not trying to compare or say one was better than the other. Neither engaged in an adult manner and both are guilty. Whichever one wins, well, good luck to the Yanks is all I say.doesthiswork said:
Murph7355 said:
Maybe.
I purposefully left out any mention of racism from my post. I struggle with it being racist that he didn't get a bigger picture on the advertising posters, or bigger billing. It was covered in the thread on the topic. And in the overall annuls of racist endeavour, that one (if it was that) hardly seems the most heinous thing to get upset about (then again, I'm white middle class so what would I know. Coming from a working class background I do know that plenty of people get passed over for top jobs though. Even ones more qualified than those who get them).
How many other actors didn't get a big slot on the poster? Or top billing? And what race were they? In galaxies far, far away, what sort of racial representation is appropriate?
Maybe he should have applied to be Chewbacca? Admiral Ackbar? Or perhaps gone trans and applied to be Rey?
Boyega was the one calling out Disney as racist. It was on him to prove it. Him not getting top billing on Star Wars is pretty thin proof. No?
The comparison of the two threads you made was, IMO, irrelevant wrt race. One is an actor moaning he didn't get top billing. The other is an actor setting up a political party with dubious merit. Overall summary - meh.
I've got no problem at all with you thinking what happened to JB wasn't because of racism. But you can't say the story wasn't about racism - the whole reason the interview gained any attention and a thread started was because he said his treatment was different because of his race. I purposefully left out any mention of racism from my post. I struggle with it being racist that he didn't get a bigger picture on the advertising posters, or bigger billing. It was covered in the thread on the topic. And in the overall annuls of racist endeavour, that one (if it was that) hardly seems the most heinous thing to get upset about (then again, I'm white middle class so what would I know. Coming from a working class background I do know that plenty of people get passed over for top jobs though. Even ones more qualified than those who get them).
How many other actors didn't get a big slot on the poster? Or top billing? And what race were they? In galaxies far, far away, what sort of racial representation is appropriate?
Maybe he should have applied to be Chewbacca? Admiral Ackbar? Or perhaps gone trans and applied to be Rey?
Boyega was the one calling out Disney as racist. It was on him to prove it. Him not getting top billing on Star Wars is pretty thin proof. No?
The comparison of the two threads you made was, IMO, irrelevant wrt race. One is an actor moaning he didn't get top billing. The other is an actor setting up a political party with dubious merit. Overall summary - meh.
For what it's worth, I think race did come into his treatment (you can just imagine the writers - 'then the stormtrooper lifts his mask... and he's black!' Cue high fives all round), they cast him knowing he's hot property at the time, bound to help profits, he then suffered a s
tload of abuse, Disney decides they don't really know where they're going with the story and drop him down the billing. Add Disney's cowardly/greed-driven acceptance of Chinese racism by modifying the promo material and it's not surprising he's pissed off. Anyway, we're off topic a bit, although I haven't got much more to say about whiney snowflake Laurence Fox. I think the comparison of the reactions to what the two actors have said is a valid and interesting one though.
The reaction to what the two actors said is likely to be different because they said totally different things.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 30th September 21:44
doesthiswork said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Maybe the way you read that statement says more...yadda, yadda, yadda.
Why would you not assume John Boyega got the role based on his talent, because he auditioned well or impressed in a previous role? Why would you insinuate it was a matter of tokenism?
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Well, LOL at you too. Progressive, in that a more diverse cast in Star Wars films wasn't an accident, it was a deliberate decision from Disney. The fact that you can clearly remember one black actor from the original trilogy shows how few there were. The prequel trilogy had what, two black actors with speaking roles?
Subversive, in the sense of subverting expectations, given that it was previously implied that all stormtroopers were clones...of a man of Maori ancestry.
Writers' brief fulfilled, high fives, early drinks.
I assume JB got the role because of his acting talent and the reception of his previous work, and Disney wanted to cast a black actor for the role. He was at exactly the right level in his career for that type of role in that type of film.
You'll have to decide for yourself why you've interpreted what I said as 'tokenism' I'm afraid.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Anyone remember "Back to Basics"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back_to_Basics_(camp...
That went well.
doesthiswork said:
Well, LOL at you too.
Progressive, in that a more diverse cast in Star Wars films wasn't an accident, it was a deliberate decision from Disney. The fact that you can clearly remember one black actor from the original trilogy shows how few there were. The prequel trilogy had what, two black actors with speaking roles?
Subversive, in the sense of subverting expectations, given that it was previously implied that all stormtroopers were clones...of a man of Maori ancestry.
Writers' brief fulfilled, high fives, early drinks.
I assume JB got the role because of his acting talent and the reception of his previous work, and Disney wanted to cast a black actor for the role. He was at exactly the right level in his career for that type of role in that type of film.
You'll have to decide for yourself why you've interpreted what I said as 'tokenism' I'm afraid.
So where was the racism?Progressive, in that a more diverse cast in Star Wars films wasn't an accident, it was a deliberate decision from Disney. The fact that you can clearly remember one black actor from the original trilogy shows how few there were. The prequel trilogy had what, two black actors with speaking roles?
Subversive, in the sense of subverting expectations, given that it was previously implied that all stormtroopers were clones...of a man of Maori ancestry.
Writers' brief fulfilled, high fives, early drinks.
I assume JB got the role because of his acting talent and the reception of his previous work, and Disney wanted to cast a black actor for the role. He was at exactly the right level in his career for that type of role in that type of film.
You'll have to decide for yourself why you've interpreted what I said as 'tokenism' I'm afraid.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I've already said what I thought in an earlier comment - that race played a part in his treatment by Disney and he seems to have been let down by them. You think race has absolutely nothing to do with it, fair enough. The man at the centre of the story thinks something different to both of us. None of that is particularly relevant to the original point, which was the reaction and tone of some people replying to that particular thread and how it compares to this one. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff