Is to break down the evidence.
-
BruceTJenner — 9 years ago(May 18, 2016 05:27 PM)
Where do you prove those deciding the nominations did so by racism?
I prove it below. See[
bold part
]:
This is you using a fallacy that has nothing to do with your original argument :
In other words you can't deny that pointing out that a group is mostly white does not prove said group is racist.
You want to say that the Academy being mostly white proves it is racist. Pointing out that a group is mostly white
Straw Man (also "The Straw Person" ""The Straw Figure"): The fallacy of setting up a phony, weak or ridiculous parody of an opponent's argument and then proceeding to knock it down with a wave of the hand. E.g., "Vegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy? Vegetarianism is nonsense!" Or, "Pro-choicers hate babies!" Or, "Pro-lifers hate women and want them to spend their lives barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen stove!" This fallacy is only too common in America1c84n politics and popular discourse.
And has NOTHING to do with your original gripe against Lee as outlined here:
This is your Original argument:
Re: No One Likes to be Called Racist But Hollywood definitely prefers Wh
image for user Bard_Battalion
by Bard_Battalion
Thu Mar 3 2016 20:52:03 Flag | Reply |
IMDb member since December 2015
Spike Lee
is upset because of a lack of Oscar nominations for black people this year. Diverse casting would not satisfy him. He seems to believe an Oscar ceremony without nominations for black people must be due to racism.
That's an assumption he can't back up with proof.
He does no one any favors by such an inarticulate position. I respect his artistry, but he has become a caricature of himself.
Where do those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism?
I am asking you where those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism.
I ask for proof that the nominations were decided by racism.
You simply can't show those deciding the nominations did so by racism can you?
This is where its been proven:
With this:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/30/entertainment/la-et-mn-race-and-movies-20131030
"USC study: Minorities still under-represented in popular films"
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-women-minorities-underrepresented-actors-directors.html
Study finds that women and minorities are still underrepresented among actors, directors and executives
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ucla-diversity-study-blasts-hollywood-679871
'UCLA Diversity Study Blasts Hollywood as 'Woefully Out of Touch'
http://time.com/7278/agencies-hollywood-racial-diversity/
The Hidden Factor in Hollywoods Racial Diversity Problem
And this LOL:
If there is racial bias in directing, writing, acting, and casting then there MUST be racial biased in the Academy since the Academy is made up of those very same directors, writers, actors, and casting that exhibit racial bias.
And this:
Those articles state that there is a racial bias industry wide. The article states that the bias is in favor of whites. The Academy is part of the industry. The article states that the Academy is overwhelmingly majority white. The Academy is made up of the same industry wide people that the articles are criticizing for having racial biased.
And this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/29/oscars-so-white-an-institutional-racism-perspective/
And this:
You keep leaving out the racial bias part that currently exists within the industry that was used in making the determination that the collective actions by the above group - displayed that same bias when selecting their nominations.
And this:
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2016/01/26/institutional-racism-comparing-oscar-nominations-higher-education-faculty/
And this:
Also the fact that the Academy is 94% white and 77% male in 2016 is indicative of it's racism as a unified entity since currently the only way to become a member is to either win an Oscar or be sponsored by several current members (pending approval from the committee). Since minorities have had limited nominations the past 88 years - it certainly wasn't going to be diversified via winning an Oscar. That would mean that minorities in the industry would have had to been sponsored - and with it currently still being 94% white - it means that most past and current members - were still overwhelming sponsoring other whites to become members and disproportionally overlooking minority membership - like they do for nominations.
And especially this:
The
Argument from Ignorance
fallacy.
I know you want a press conference - where every academy member goes on record - with hoods and sheets on - and tells the world that they are racist - with crosses burning in the background - before you deem there is sufficient proof nominations have a racial bias.
You keep looking for overt racism - which unless you're part of a hate group - is no longer sociably acceptable - when at least three people including myself categorized it as Institutionalized/subliminal/adverse racism. -
BruceTJenner — 9 years ago(May 27, 2016 03:48 AM)
Those articles don't say those deciding the nominations did so by racism.
The information provided assert Mr. Lee's position as outlined below.
Also, This is you using a fallacy that has nothing to do with your original argument :
In other words you can't deny that pointing out that a group is mostly white does not prove said group is racist.
You want to say that the Academy being mostly white proves it is racist. Pointing out that a group is mostly white
Straw Man (also "The Straw Person" ""The Straw Figure"): The fallacy of setting up a phony, weak or ridiculous parody of an opponent's argument and then proceeding to knock it down with a wave of the hand. E.g., "Vegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy? Vegetarianism is nonsense!" Or, "Pro-choicers hate babies!" Or, "Pro-lifers hate women and want them to spend their lives barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen stove!" This fallacy is only too common in American politics and popular discourse.
And has NOTHING to do with your original gripe against Lee as outlined here:
This is your Original argument:
Re: No One Likes to be Called Racist But Hollywood definitely prefers Wh
image for1c84 user Bard_Battalion
by Bard_Battalion
Thu Mar 3 2016 20:52:03 Flag | Reply |
IMDb member since December 2015
Spike Lee
is upset because of a lack of Oscar nominations for black people this year. Diverse casting would not satisfy him. He seems to believe an Oscar ceremony without nominations for black people must be due to racism.
That's an assumption he can't back up with proof.
He does no one any favors by such an inarticulate position. I respect his artistry, but he has become a caricature of himself.
Where do those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism?
I am asking you where those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism.
I ask for proof that the nominations were decided by racism.
You simply can't show those deciding the nominations did so by racism can you?
This is where its been proven:
With this:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/30/entertainment/la-et-mn-race-and-movies-20131030
"USC study: Minorities still under-represented in popular films"
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-women-minorities-underrepresented-actors-directors.html
Study finds that women and minorities are still underrepresented among actors, directors and executives
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ucla-diversity-study-blasts-hollywood-679871
'UCLA Diversity Study Blasts Hollywood as 'Woefully Out of Touch'
http://time.com/7278/agencies-hollywood-racial-diversity/
The Hidden Factor in Hollywoods Racial Diversity Problem
And this LOL:
If there is racial bias in directing, writing, acting, and casting then there MUST be racial biased in the Academy since the Academy is made up of those very same directors, writers, actors, and casting that exhibit racial bias.
And this:
Those articles state that there is a racial bias industry wide. The article states that the bias is in favor of whites. The Academy is part of the industry. The article states that the Academy is overwhelmingly majority white. The Academy is made up of the same industry wide people that the articles are criticizing for having racial biased.
And this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/29/oscars-so-white-an-institutional-racism-perspective/
And this:
You keep leaving out the racial bias part that currently exists within the industry that was used in making the determination that the collective actions by the above group - displayed that same bias when selecting their nominations.
And this:
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2016/01/26/institutional-racism-comparing-oscar-nominations-higher-education-faculty/
And this:
Also the fact that the Academy is 94% white and 77% male in 2016 is indicative of it's racism as a unified entity since currently the only way to become a member is to either win an Oscar or be sponsored by several current members (pending approval from the committee). Since minorities have had limited nominations the past 88 years - it certainly wasn't going to be diversified via winning an Oscar. That would mean that minorities in the industry would have had to been sponsored - and with it currently still being 94% white - it means that most past and current members - were still overwhelming sponsoring other whites to become members and disproportionally overlooking minority membership - like they do for nominations.
And especially this:
The
Argument from Ignorance
fallacy.
I know you want a press conference - where every academy member goes on record - with hoods and sheets on - and tells the world that they are racist - with crosses burning in the background - before you deem there is sufficient proof nominations have a racial bias.
You keep looking for overt racism - which unless you're part of a hate group - is no longer sociably acceptable - when at least three people including myself categorized it a -
Bard_Battalion — 9 years ago(June 01, 2016 06:04 AM)
The information provided assert Mr. Lee's position as outlined below.
The information? Lol, I am referring to the articles you cite. Including the one that says whitewashing does not occur due to the Academy. -
BruceTJenner — 9 years ago(June 01, 2016 12:30 PM)
The information? Lol, I am referring to the articles you cite.
Yes. The information includes the six articles that are coupled with explanations about how the information outlined in those articles back up Mr. Lee's (and several others) professional opinion(s). It's been explained to you for three months yet for some reason you are still having trouble grasping the content below.
However, I don't mind using my knowledge to help teach you - you're welcome
Please see below:
Also, This is you using a fallacy that has nothing to do with your original argument :
In other words you can't deny that pointing out that a group is mostly white does not prove said group is racist.
You want to say that the Academy being mostly white proves it is racist. Pointing out that a group is mostly white
Straw Man (also "The Straw Person" ""The Straw Figure"): The fallacy of setting up a phony, weak or ridiculous parody of an opponent's argument and then proceeding to knock it down with a wave of the hand. E.g., "Vegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy? Vegetarianism is nonsense!" Or, "Pro-choicers hate babies!" Or, "Pro-lifers hate women and want them to spend their lives barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen stove!" This fallacy is only too common in American politics and popular discourse.
And has NOTHING to do with your original gripe against Lee as outlined here:
This is your Original argument:
Re: No One Likes to be Called Racist But Hollywood definitely prefers Wh
image for user Bard_Battalion
by Bard_Battalion
Thu Mar 3 2016 20:52:03 Flag | Reply |
IMDb member since December 2015
Spike Lee
is upset because of a lack of Oscar nominations for black people this year. Diverse casting would not satisfy him. He seems to believe an Oscar ceremony without nominations for black people must be due to racism.
That's an assumption he can't back up with proof.
He does no one any favors by such an inarticulate position. I respect his artistry, but he has become a caricature of himself.
Where do those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism?
I am asking you where those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism.
I ask for proof that the nominations were decided by racism.
You simply can't show those deciding the nominations did so by racism can you?
This is where its been proven:
With this:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/30/entertainment/la-et-mn-race-and-movies-20131030
"USC study: Minorities still under-represented in popular films"
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-women-minorities-underrepresented-actors-directors.html
Study finds that women and minorities are still underrepresented among actors, directors and executives
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ucla-diversity-study-blasts-hollywood-679871
'UCLA Diversity Study Blasts Hollywood as 'Woefully Out of Touch'
http://t1ebcime.com/7278/agencies-hollywood-racial-diversity/
The Hidden Factor in Hollywoods Racial Diversity Problem
And this LOL:
If there is racial bias in directing, writing, acting, and casting then there MUST be racial biased in the Academy since the Academy is made up of those very same directors, writers, actors, and casting that exhibit racial bias.
And this:
Those articles state that there is a racial bias industry wide. The article states that the bias is in favor of whites. The Academy is part of the industry. The article states that the Academy is overwhelmingly majority white. The Academy is made up of the same industry wide people that the articles are criticizing for having racial biased.
And this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/29/oscars-so-white-an-institutional-racism-perspective/
And this:
You keep leaving out the racial bias part that currently exists within the industry that was used in making the determination that the collective actions by the above group - displayed that same bias when selecting their nominations.
And this:
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2016/01/26/institutional-racism-comparing-oscar-nominations-higher-education-faculty/
And this:
Also the fact that the Academy is 94% white and 77% male in 2016 is indicative of it's racism as a unified entity since currently the only way to become a member is to either win an Oscar or be sponsored by several current members (pending approval from the committee). Since minorities have had limited nominations the past 88 years - it certainly wasn't going to be diversified via winning an Oscar. That would mean that minorities in the industry would have had to been sponsored - and with it currently still being 94% white - it means that most past and current members - were still overwhelming sponsoring other whites to become members and disproportionally overlooking minority membership - like they do for nominations.
And especially this:
The
Argument from Ignorance
fallacy.
I know you want a press conference - where every academy member goes on record - with hoods and sheets on - -
Bard_Battalion — 9 years ago(June 12, 2016 01:18 AM)
Yes. The information includes the six articles that are coupled with explanations about how the information outlined in those articles back up Mr. Lee's (and several others) professional opinion(s)
Including the article that says whitewashing does not occur due to the Academy? -
BruceTJenner — 9 years ago(June 19, 2016 04:02 PM)
Including the article that says
Yes. All the articles that back up Mr. Lee's position on nominations having a racial bias.
Please see below:
Also, This is you using a fallacy that has nothing to do with your original argument :
In other words you can't deny that pointing out that a group is mostly white does not prove said group is racist.
You want to say that the Academy being mostly white proves it is racist. Pointing out that a group is mostly white
Straw Man (also "The Straw Person" ""The Straw Figure"): The fallacy of setting up a phony, weak or ridiculous parody of an opponent's argument and then proceeding to knock it down with a wave of the hand. E.g., "Vegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy? Vegetarianism is nonsense!" Or, "Pro-choicers hate babies!" Or, "Pro-lifers hate women and want them to spend their lives barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen stove!" This fallacy is only too common in American politics and popular discourse.
And has NOTHING to do with your original gripe against Lee as outlined here:
This is your Original argument:
Re: No One Likes to be Called Racist But Hollywood definitely prefers Wh
image for user Bard_Battalion
by Bard_Battalion
Thu Mar 3 2016 20:52:03 Flag | Reply |
IMDb member since December 2015
Spike Lee
is upset because of a lack of Oscar nominations for black people this year. Diverse casting would not satisfy him. He seems to believe an Oscar ceremony without nominations for black people must be due to racism.
That's an assumption he can't back up with proof.
He does no one any favors by such an inarticulate position. I respect his artistry, but he has become a caricature of himself.
Where do those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism?
I am asking you where those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism.
I ask for proof that the nominations were decided by racism.
You simply can't show those deciding the nominations did so by racism can you?
This is where its been proven:
With this:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/30/entertainment/la-et-mn-race-and-movies-20131030
"USC study: Minorities still under-represented in popular films"
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-women-minorities-underrepresented-actors-directors.html
Study finds that women and minorities are still underrepresented among actors, directors and executives
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ucla-diversity-study-blasts-hollywood-679871
'UCLA Diversity Study Blasts Hollywood as 'Woefully Out of Touch'
http://time.com/7278/agencies-hollywood-racial-diversity/
The Hidden Factor in Hollywoods Racial Diversity Problem
And this LOL:
If there is racial bias in directing, writing, acting, and casting then there MUST be racial biased in the Academy since the Academy is made up of those very same directors, writers, actors, and casting that exhibit racial bias.
And this:
Those articles state that there is a racial bias industry wide. The article states that the bias is in favor of whites. The Academy is part of the industry. The article states that the Academy is overwhelmingly majority white. The Academy is made up of the same industry wide people that the articles are criticizing for having racial biased.
And this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/29/oscars-so-white-an-institutional-racism-perspective/
And this:
You keep leaving out the racial bias part that currently exists within the industry that was used in making the determination that the collective actions by the above group - displayed that same bias when selecting their nominations.
And this:
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2016/01/219086/institutional-racism-comparing-oscar-nominations-higher-education-faculty/
And this:
Also the fact that the Academy is 94% white and 77% male in 2016 is indicative of it's racism as a unified entity since currently the only way to become a member is to either win an Oscar or be sponsored by several current members (pending approval from the committee). Since minorities have had limited nominations the past 88 years - it certainly wasn't going to be diversified via winning an Oscar. That would mean that minorities in the industry would have had to been sponsored - and with it currently still being 94% white - it means that most past and current members - were still overwhelming sponsoring other whites to become members and disproportionally overlooking minority membership - like they do for nominations.
And especially this:
The
Argument from Ignorance
fallacy.
I know you want a press conference - where every academy member goes on record - with hoods and sheets on - and tells the world that they are racist - with crosses burning in the background - before you deem there is sufficient proof nominations have a racial bias.
You keep looking for overt racism - which unless you're part of a hate group - is no longer sociably acceptable - when at least three people including myself categorized it as I -
BruceTJenner — 9 years ago(June 28, 2016 01:32 PM)
an article that says whitewashing
Does occur. Yes. Those articles are in this post.
Please see below:
Also, This is you using a fallacy that has nothing to do with your original argument :
In other words you can't deny that pointing out that a group is mostly white does not prove said group is racist.
You want to say that the Academy being mostly white proves it is racist. Pointing out that a group is mostly white
Straw Man (also "The Straw Person" ""The Straw Figure"): The fallacy of setting up a phony, weak or ridiculous parody of an opponent's argument and then proceeding to knock it down with a wave of the hand. E.g., "Vegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy? Vegetarianism is nonsense!" Or, "Pro-choicers hate babies!" Or, "Pro-lifers hate women and want them to spend their lives barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen stove!" This fallacy is only too common in American politics and popular discourse.
And has NOTHING to do with your original gripe against Lee as outlined here:
This is your Original argument:
Re: No One Likes to be Called Racist But Hollywood definitely prefers Wh
image for user Bard_Battalion
by Bard_Battalion
Thu Mar 3 2016 20:52:03 Flag | Reply |
IMDb member since December 2015
Spike Lee
is upset because of a lack of Oscar nominations for black people this year. Diverse casting would not satisfy him. He seems to believe an Oscar ceremony without nominations for black people must be due to racism.
That's an assumption he can't back up with proof.
He does no one any favors by such an inarticulate position. I respect his artistry, but he has become a caricature of himself.
Where do those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism?
I am asking you where those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism.
I ask for proof that the nominations were decided by racism.
You simply can't show those deciding the nominations did so by racism can you?
This is where its been proven:
With this:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/30/entertainment/la-et-mn-race-and-movies-20131030
"USC study: Minorities still under-represented in popular films"
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-women-minorities-underrepresented-actors-directors.html
Study finds that women and minorities are still underrepresented among actors, directors and executives
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ucla-diversity-study-blasts-hollywood-679871
'UCLA Diversity Study Blasts Hollywood as 'Woefully Out of Touch'
http://time.com/7278/agencies-hollywood-racial-diversity/
The Hidden Factor in Hollywoods Racial Diversity Problem
And this LOL:
If there is racial bias in directing, writing, acting, and casting then there MUST be racial biased in the Academy since the Academy is made up of those very same directors, writers, actors, and casting that exhibit racial bias.
And this:
Those articles state that there is a racial bias industry wide. The article states that the bias is in favor of whites. The Academy is part of the industry. The article states that the Academy is overwhelmingly majority white. The Academy is made up of the same industry wide people that the articles are criticizing for having racial biased.
And this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/29/oscars-so-white-an-institutional-racism-perspective/
And this:
You keep leaving out the racial bias part that currently exists within the industry that was used in making the determination that the collective actions by the above group - displayed that same bias when selecting their nominations.
And this:
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2016/01/26/institutional-racism-comparing-oscar-nominations-higher-education-faculty/
And this:
Also the fact that the Academy is 94% white and 77% male in 2016 is indicative of it's racism as a unified entity since currently the only way to become a member is to either win an Oscar or be sponsored by several current members (pending approval from the committee). Since minorities have had limited nominations the past 88 years - it certainly wasn't going to be diversified via winning an Oscar. That would mean that minorities in the industry would have had to been sponsored - and with it currently still being 94% white - it means that most past and current members - were still overwhelming sponsoring other whites to become members and disproportionally overlooking minority membership - like they do for nominations.
And especially this:
The
Argument from Ignorance
fallacy.
I know you want a press conference - where every academy member goes on record - with hoods and sheets on - and tells the world that they are racist - with crosses burning in the background - before you deem there is sufficient proof nominations have a racial bias.
You keep looking for overt racism - which unless you're part of a hate group - is no longer sociably acceptable - when at least three people including myself categorized it as Institutionalized/subliminal/adverse racism. -
BruceTJenner — 9 years ago(June 29, 2016 11:56 AM)
You didn't answer the question.
Yes I did. It must be an over-site on your part. No worries. The answers to all your questions are in this post.
Please see below:
This is you using a fallacy that has nothing to do with your original argument :
In other words you can't deny that pointing out that a group is mostly white does not prove said group is racist.
You want to say that the Academy being mostly white proves it is racist. Pointing out that a group is mostly white
Straw Man (also "The Straw Person" ""The Straw Figure"): The fallacy of setting up a phony, weak or ridiculous parody of an opponent's argument and then proceeding to knock it down with a wave of the hand. E.g., "Vegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy? Vegetarianism is nonsense!" Or, "Pro-choicers hate babies!" Or, "Pro-lifers hate women and want them to spend their lives barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen stove!" This fallacy is only too common in American politics and popular discourse.
And has NOTHING to do with your original gripe against Lee as outlined here:
This is your Original argument:
Re: No One Likes to be Called Racist But Hollywood definitely prefers Wh
image for user Bard_Battalion
by Bard_Battalion
Thu Mar 3 2016 20:52:03 Flag | Reply |
IMDb member since December 2015
Spike Lee
is upset because of a lack of Oscar nominations for black people this year. Diverse casting would not satisfy him. He seems to believe an Oscar ceremony without nominations for black people must be due to racism.
That's an assumption he can't back up with proof.
He do1908es no one any favors by such an inarticulate position. I respect his artistry, but he has become a caricature of himself.
Where do those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism?
I am asking you where those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism.
I ask for proof that the nominations were decided by racism.
You simply can't show those deciding the nominations did so by racism can you?
This is where its been proven:
With this:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/30/entertainment/la-et-mn-race-and-movies-20131030
"USC study: Minorities still under-represented in popular films"
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-women-minorities-underrepresented-actors-directors.html
Study finds that women and minorities are still underrepresented among actors, directors and executives
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ucla-diversity-study-blasts-hollywood-679871
'UCLA Diversity Study Blasts Hollywood as 'Woefully Out of Touch'
http://time.com/7278/agencies-hollywood-racial-diversity/
The Hidden Factor in Hollywoods Racial Diversity Problem
And this LOL:
If there is racial bias in directing, writing, acting, and casting then there MUST be racial biased in the Academy since the Academy is made up of those very same directors, writers, actors, and casting that exhibit racial bias.
And this:
Those articles state that there is a racial bias industry wide. The article states that the bias is in favor of whites. The Academy is part of the industry. The article states that the Academy is overwhelmingly majority white. The Academy is made up of the same industry wide people that the articles are criticizing for having racial biased.
And this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/29/oscars-so-white-an-institutional-racism-perspective/
And this:
You keep leaving out the racial bias part that currently exists within the industry that was used in making the determination that the collective actions by the above group - displayed that same bias when selecting their nominations.
And this:
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2016/01/26/institutional-racism-comparing-oscar-nominations-higher-education-faculty/
And this:
Also the fact that the Academy is 94% white and 77% male in 2016 is indicative of it's racism as a unified entity since currently the only way to become a member is to either win an Oscar or be sponsored by several current members (pending approval from the committee). Since minorities have had limited nominations the past 88 years - it certainly wasn't going to be diversified via winning an Oscar. That would mean that minorities in the industry would have had to been sponsored - and with it currently still being 94% white - it means that most past and current members - were still overwhelming sponsoring other whites to become members and disproportionally overlooking minority membership - like they do for nominations.
And especially this:
The
Argument from Ignorance
fallacy.
I know you want a press conference - where every academy member goes on record - with hoods and sheets on - and tells the world that they are racist - with crosses burning in the background - before you deem there is sufficient proof nominations have a racial bias.
You keep looking for overt racism - which unless you're part of a hate group - is no longer sociably acceptable - when at least three people including myself cat -
Bard_Battalion — 9 years ago(July 11, 2016 06:21 AM)
Yes I did.
No.
Here is the question as I asked it:
So an article that says whitewashing does not occur due to the Academy proves that the Academy decided nominations via racism?
Here is you trying to take it out of context:
me: an article that says whitewashing
you: Does occur. Yes. Those articles are in this post. -
BruceTJenner — 9 years ago(July 11, 2016 04:07 PM)
The answers to all your questions are in this post. It outlines and provides factual proof that there is a racial bias in nominations - which is the topic at hand.
Please see below:
Before we start I want to point out that this is you using a fallacy that has nothing to do with your original argument :
In other words you can't deny that pointing out that a group is mostly white does not prove said group is racist.
You want to say that the Academy being mostly white proves it is racist. Pointing out that a group is mostly white
Straw Man (also "The Straw Person" ""The Straw Figure"): The fallacy of setting up a phony, weak or ridiculous parody of an opponent's argument and then proceeding to knock it down with a wave of the hand. E.g., "Vegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy? Vegetarianism is nonsense!" Or, "Pro-choicers hate babies!" Or, "Pro-lifers hate women and want them to spend their lives barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen stove!" This fallacy is only too common in American politics and popular discourse.
And has NOTHING to do with your original gripe against Lee as outlined here:
This is your Original argument:
Re: No One Likes to be Called Racist But Hollywood definitely prefers Wh
image for user Bard_Battalion
by Bard_Battalion
Thu Mar 3 2016 20:52:03 Flag | Reply |
IMDb member since December 2015
Spike Lee
is upset because of a lack of Oscar nominations for black people this year. Diverse casting would not satisfy him. He seems to believe an Oscar ceremony without nominations for black people must be due to racism.
That's an assumption he can't back up with proof.
He does no one any favors by such an inarticulate position. I respect his artistry, but he has become a caricature of himself.
Where do those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism?
I am asking you where those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism.
I ask for proof that the nominations were decided by racism.
You simply can't show those deciding the nominations did so by racism can you?
This is where its been proven:
With this:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/30/entertainment/la-et-mn-race-and-movies-20131030
"USC study: Minorities still under-represented in popular films"
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-women-minorities-underrepresented-actors-directors.html
Study finds that women and minorities are still underrepresented among actors, directors and executives
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ucla-diversity-study-blasts-hollywood-679871
'UCLA Diversity Study Blasts Hollywood as 'Woefully Out of Touch'
http://time.com/7278/agencies-hollywood-racial-diversity/
The Hidden Factor in Hollywoods Racial Diversity Problem
And this LOL:
If there is racial bias in directing, writing, acting, and casting then there MUST be racial biased in the Academy since the Academy is made up of those very same directors, writers, actors, and casting that exhibit racial bias.
And this:
Those articles state that there is a racial bias industry wide. The article states that the bias is in favor of whites. The Academy is part of the industry. The article states that the Academy is overwhelmingly majority white. The Academy is made up of the same industry wide people that the articles are criticizing for having racial biased.
And this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/29/oscars-so-white-an-institutional-racism-perspective/
And this:
You keep leaving out the racial bias part that currently exists within the industry that was used in making the determination that the collective actions by the above group - displayed that same bias when selecting their nominations.
And this:
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2016/01/26/institutional-racism-comparing-oscar-nominations-higher-education-faculty/
And this:
Also the fact that the Academy is 94% white and 77% male in 2016 is indicative of it's racism as a unified entity since currently the only way to become a member is to either win an Oscar or be sponsored by several current members (pending approval from the committee). Since minorities have had limited nominations the past 88 years - it certainly wasn't going to be diversified via winning an Oscar. That would mean that minorities in the industry would have had to been sponsored - and with it currently still being 94% white - it means that most past and current members - were still overwhelming sponsoring other whites to become members and disproportionally overlooking minority membership - like they do for nominations.
And especially this:
The
Argument from Ignorance
fallacy.
I know you want a press conference - where every academy member goes on record - with hoods and sheets on - and tells the world that they are racist - with crosses burning in the background - before you deem there is sufficient proof nominations have a racial bias.
You keep looking for overt racism - which unless you're part of a hate group - is no longer sociably acce -
Bard_Battalion — 9 years ago(July 24, 2016 05:25 AM)
The answers to all your questions are in this post.
You did not answer the question I repeatedly put to you:
So an article that says whitewashing does not occur due to the Academy proves that the Academy decided nominations via racism? -
BruceTJenner — 9 years ago(July 25, 2016 01:42 AM)
You did not answer the question
The answers to all your questions are in this post. Your original concern was that Mr. was making an assumption without proof - the proof is in this thread. It outlines and provides factual information that there is a racial bias in nominations - which is the topic at hand.
Please see below:
Before we start I want to point out that this is you using a fallacy that has nothing to do with your original argument :
In other words you can't deny that pointing out that a group is mostly white does not prove said group is racist.
You want to say that the Academy being mostly white proves it is racist. Pointing out that a group is mostly white
Straw Man (also "The Straw Person" ""The Straw Figure"): The fallacy of setting up a phony, weak or ridiculous parody of an opponent's argument and then proceeding to knock it down with a wave of the hand. E.g., "Vegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy? Vegetarianism is nonsense!" Or, "Pro-choicers hate babies!" Or, "Pro-lifers hate women and want them to spend their lives barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen stove!" This fallacy is only too common in American politics and popular discourse.
And has NOTHING to do with your original gripe against Lee as outlined here:
This is your Original argument:
Re: No One Likes to be Called Racist But Hollywood definitely prefers Wh
image for user Bard_Battalion
by Bard_Battalion
Thu Mar 3 2016 20:52:03 Flag | Reply |
IMDb member since December 2015
Spike Lee
is upset because of a lack of Oscar nominations for black people this year. Diverse casting would not satisfy him. He seems to believe an Oscar ceremony without nominations for black people must be due to racism.
That's an assumption he can't back up with proof.
He does no one any favors by such an inarticulate position. I respect his artistry, but he has become a caricature of himself.
Where do those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism?
I am asking you where those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism.
I ask for proof that the nominations were decided by racism.
You simply can't show those deciding the nominations did so by racism can you?
This is where its been proven:
With this:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/30/entertainment/la-et-mn-race-and-movies-20131030
"USC study: Minorities still under-represented in popular films"
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-women-minorities-underrepresented-actors-directors.html
Study finds that women and minorities are still underrepresented among actors, directors and executives
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ucla-diversity-study-blasts-hollywood-679871
'UCLA Diversity Study Blasts Hollywood as 'Woefully Out of Touch'
http://time.com/7278/agencies-hollywood-racial-diversity/
The Hidden Factor in Hollywoods Racial Diversity Problem
And this LOL:
If there is racial bias in directing, writing, acting, and casting then there MUST be racial biased in the Academy since the Academy is made up of those very same directors, writers, actors, and casting that exhibit racial bias.
And this:
Those articles state that there is a racial bias industry wide. The article states that the bias is in favor of whites. The Academy is part of the industry. The article states that the Academy is overwhelmingly majority white. The Academy is made up of the same industry wide people that the articles are criticizing for having racial biased.
And this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/29/oscars-so-white-an-institutional-racism-perspective/
And this:
You keep leaving out the racial bias part that currently exists within the industry that was used in making the determination that the collective actions by the above group - displayed that same bias when selecting their nominations.
And this:
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2016/01/26/institutional-racism-comparing-oscar-nomin5b4ations-higher-education-faculty/
And this:
Also the fact that the Academy is 94% white and 77% male in 2016 is indicative of it's racism as a unified entity since currently the only way to become a member is to either win an Oscar or be sponsored by several current members (pending approval from the committee). Since minorities have had limited nominations the past 88 years - it certainly wasn't going to be diversified via winning an Oscar. That would mean that minorities in the industry would have had to been sponsored - and with it currently still being 94% white - it means that most past and current members - were still overwhelming sponsoring other whites to become members and disproportionally overlooking minority membership - like they do for nominations.
And especially this:
The
Argument from Ignorance
fallacy.
I know you want a press conference - where every academy member goes on record - with hoods and sheets on - and tells the world that they are racist - with crosses burning in the background - before you deem there is sufficie -
Bard_Battalion — 9 years ago(August 06, 2016 05:53 AM)
Once again you evade giving a direct answer. Here again is the question:
So an article that says whitewashing does not occur due to the Academy proves that the Academy decided nominations via racism?
Give a direct answer if you are not a complete coward. -
BruceTJenner — 9 years ago(August 06, 2016 10:29 PM)
Again with the fallacies. All you questions have been answered especially your original assertion which is the topic at hand:
Spike Lee
is upset because of a lack of Oscar nominations for black people this year. Diverse casting would not satisfy him. He seems to believe an Oscar ceremony without nominations for black people must be due to racism.
That's an assumption he can't back up with proof.
Your original concern was that Mr. was making an assumption without proof - the proof is in this thread. It outlines and provides factual information that there is a racial bias in nominations - please stay on topic.
And, see below:
Before we start I want to point out that this is you using a fallacy that has nothing to do with your original argument :
In other words you can't deny that pointing out that a group is mostly white does not prove said group is racist.
You want to say that the Academy being mostly white proves it is racist. Pointing out that a group is mostly white
Straw Man (also "The Straw Person" ""The Straw Figure"): The fallacy of setting up a phony, weak or ridiculous parody of an opponent's argument and then proceeding to knock it down with a wave of the hand. E.g., "Vegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy? Vegetarianism is nonsense!" Or, "Pro-choicers hate babies!" Or, "Pro-lifers hate women and want them to spend their lives barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen stove!" This fallacy is only too common in American politics and popular discourse.
And has NOTHING to do with your original gripe against Lee as outlined here:
This is your Original argument:
Re: No One Likes to be Called Racist But Hollywood definitely prefers Wh
image for user Bard_Battalion
by Bard_Battalion
Thu Mar 3 2016 20:52:03 Flag | Reply |
IMDb member since December 2015
Spike Lee
is upset because of a lack of Oscar nominations for black people this year. Diverse casting would not satisfy him. He seems to believe an Oscar ceremony without nominations for black people must be due to racism.
That's an assumption he can't back up with proof.
He does no one any favors by such an inarticulate position. I respect his artistry, but he has become a caricature of himself.
Where do those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism?
I am asking you where those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism.
I ask for proof that the nominations were decided by racism.
You simply can't show those deciding the nominations did so by racism can you?
This is where its been proven:
With this:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/30/entertainment/la-et-mn-race-and-movies-20131030
"USC study: Minorities still under-represented in popular films"
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-women-minorities-underrepresented-actors-directors.html
Study finds that women and minorities are still underrepresented among actors, directors and executives
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ucla-diversity-study-blasts-hollywood-679871
'UCLA Diversity Study Blasts Hollywood as 'Woefully Out of Touch'
http://time.com/7278/agencies-hollywood-racial-diversity/
The Hidden Factor in Hollywoods Racial Diversity Problem
And this LOL:
If there is racial bias in directing, writing, acting, and casting then there MUST be racial biased in the Academy since the Academy is made up of those very same directors, writers, actors, and casting that exhibit racial bias.
And this:
Those articles state that there is a racial bias industry wide. The article states that the bias is in favor of whites. The Academy is part of the industry. The article states that the Academy is overwhelmingly majority white. The Academy is made up of the same industry wide people that the articles are criticizing for having racial biased.
And this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/29/oscars-so-white-an-institutional-racism-perspective/
And this:
You keep leaving out the racial bias part that currently exists within the industry that was used in making the determination that the collective actions by the above group - displayed that same bias when selecting their nominations.
And this:
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2016/01/26/institutional-racism-comparing-oscar-nominations-higher-education-faculty/
And this:
Also the fact that the Academy is 94% white and 77% male in 2016 is indicative of it's racism as a unified entity since currently the only way to become a member is to either win an Oscar or be sponsored by several current members (pending approval from the committee). Since minorities have had limited nominations the past 88 years - it certainly wasn't going to be diversified via winning an Oscar. That would mean that minorities in the industry would have had to been sponsored - and with it currently still being 94% white - it means that most past and current members - were still overwhelming sponsoring other whites to become members and disproportionally overlooking minority membership - like they -
Bard_Battalion — 9 years ago(August 23, 2016 11:03 PM)
All you questions have been answered
Not this one:
So an article that says whitewashing does not occur due to the Academy proves that the Academy decided nominations via racism?
You are obviously too cowardly to answer that question.
Your original concern was that Mr. was making an assumption without proof - the proof is in this thread. It outlines and provides factual information that there is a racial bias in nominations - please stay on topic.
Your "proof" includes an article that says whitewashing does not occur due to the Academy. In your strange mind this proves those deciding the nominations did so by racism. -
BruceTJenner — 9 years ago(September 01, 2016 01:56 AM)
Not this one:
You are obviously too cowardly to answer that question.
That's not your original claim. Your original claim which has been outlined through this exchange has been answered
(see the bold below)
.
Again with the fallacies. All you questions have been answered
especially your original assertion which is the topic at hand
:
Spike Lee
is upset because of a lack of Oscar nominations for black people this year. Diverse casting would not satisfy him. He seems to believe an Oscar ceremony without nominations for black people must be due to racism.
That's an assumption he can't back up with proof.
Your original concern was that Mr. was making an assumption without proof - the proof is in this thread. It outlines and provides factual information that there is a racial bias in nominations - please stay on topic.
And, see below:
Before we start I want to point out that this is you using a fallacy that has nothing to do with your original argument :
In other words you can't deny that pointing out that a group is mostly white does not prove said group is racist.
You want to say that the Academy being mostly white prove5b4s it is racist. Pointing out that a group is mostly white
Straw Man (also "The Straw Person" ""The Straw Figure"): The fallacy of setting up a phony, weak or ridiculous parody of an opponent's argument and then proceeding to knock it down with a wave of the hand. E.g., "Vegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy? Vegetarianism is nonsense!" Or, "Pro-choicers hate babies!" Or, "Pro-lifers hate women and want them to spend their lives barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen stove!" This fallacy is only too common in American politics and popular discourse.
And has NOTHING to do with your original gripe against Lee as outlined here:
This is your Original argument:
Re: No One Likes to be Called Racist But Hollywood definitely prefers Wh
image for user Bard_Battalion
by Bard_Battalion
Thu Mar 3 2016 20:52:03 Flag | Reply |
IMDb member since December 2015
Spike Lee
is upset because of a lack of Oscar nominations for black people this year. Diverse casting would not satisfy him. He seems to believe an Oscar ceremony without nominations for black people must be due to racism.
That's an assumption he can't back up with proof.
He does no one any favors by such an inarticulate position. I respect his artistry, but he has become a caricature of himself.
Where do those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism?
I am asking you where those articles say those deciding the nominations did so by racism.
I ask for proof that the nominations were decided by racism.
You simply can't show those deciding the nominations did so by racism can you?
Your "proof" includes an article that says whitewashing does not occur due to the Academy. In your strange mind this proves those deciding the nominations did so by racism.
The only strange mind is you dear - since you continue to embarrass yourself to anyone reading. You have brought nothing to prove anything are up against several studies, actors, and professionals more mentally equipped than you btw - that all back up Mr. Lee's assertion.
There's something not mentally right with you - it's quite scary how out of touch with reality you are - you need help.
Anyway, the proof is below - please proceed.
This is where its been proven:
With this:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/30/entertainment/la-et-mn-race-and-movies-20131030
"USC study: Minorities still under-represented in popular films"
http://phys.org/news/2015-02-women-minorities-underrepresented-actors-directors.html
Study finds that women and minorities are still underrepresented among actors, directors and executives
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ucla-diversity-study-blasts-hollywood-679871
'UCLA Diversity Study Blasts Hollywood as 'Woefully Out of Touch'
http://time.com/7278/agencies-hollywood-racial-diversity/
The Hidden Factor in Hollywoods Racial Diversity Problem
And this LOL:
If there is racial bias in directing, writing, acting, and casting then there MUST be racial biased in the Academy since the Academy is made up of those very same directors, writers, actors, and casting that exhibit racial bias.
And this:
Those articles state that there is a racial bias industry wide. The article states that the bias is in favor of whites. The Academy is part of the industry. The article states that the Academy is overwhelmingly majority white. The Academy is made up of the same industry wide people that the articles are criticizing for having racial biased.
And this:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/29/oscars-so-white-an-institutional-racism-perspective/
And this:
You keep leaving out the racial bias part that currently exists within the industry that was used in making the determination that the collective actions by the above group - displayed that same bias when selecting their nominations.
And this:
http://www.raci