wow… a lot of closet racist/bigotted douchebags.
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Jada Pinkett Smith
xthe_shiznitx — 10 years ago(January 30, 2016 07:10 AM)
you are all pathetic and you know it. i mean in this day and age this cowardly fearful bigotry still is going, seriously?
you cant subjugate and dominate anymore, so you lash out with passive aggressiveness insults and random douchebaggery, like the skulking b!tches you are
if it werent so hilariously pathetic, it would be sad and disappointing.
seriously though, let's all drop this douchebag cowardly attitude.
only one race, its called Human. get over it Fckers. -
BruceTJenner — 10 years ago(January 30, 2016 09:28 AM)
She was the one who made it about race. Race baiters are just as bad.
Lol but it is about race. The issue of race didn't start and will not end with Jada Pickett Smith. You're giving her WAY to much power.
The OP is right just a bunch of sulking crying bitches because they realize that people are coming for a rightful portion, not piece, portion on that cake lol
TROLL
http://imdb.com/user/ur6534108/boards/profile/ -
BruceTJenner — 10 years ago(January 30, 2016 01:47 PM)
No it wasn't about race. You want it to be about race because it benefits you. Now it is about race. Quotas grosssssssss.
Yes because the privileged never benefited ever in the history of this country because of their race. Be for real. lol
Some people just want to continue to be ignorant. People aren't asking for the whole cake, they are just asking for things to be balanced. It's going to happen whether you cry, bitch, and moan about it or not.
TROLL
http://imdb.com/user/ur6534108/bb68oards/profile/ -
BruceTJenner — 10 years ago(February 28, 2016 07:29 PM)
Recognizing quality is not about balance, but the exact opposite.
How can people be recognized when they aren't even considered?
TROLL
http://imdb.com/user/ur6534108/boards/profile/ -
-
BruceTJenner — 10 years ago(February 29, 2016 11:38 PM)
Are you therefore in favor of quotas for awards?
No. I'm for diverse casting AND a diversified academy.
Such awards would seem without worth to me, not to mention incredibly e]
condescending.
Why is a diversified academy condescending towards minority winners - yet all the campaigning, favoritism, and everything else besides acting that has gone into determining the winner for the past 88 years not considered condescending to the white winners?
People are not that dumb. It's like when people say that Affirmative Action takes away the "actual" accomplishments of minorities thus hurting their race in the long run yet NEVER bring up how the white children of college donors, the white children of privilege, the white children of politicians got ahead based on who they are and not their merits. I never here people say how the latter has hurt the white race.
It's amazing how the majority hold unrealistic standards for the minority that they THEMSELEVES don't even abide by.
TROLL
http://imdb.com/user/ur6534108/boards/profile/ -
Bard_Battalion — 10 years ago(March 01, 2016 10:53 PM)
No. I'2000m for diverse casting AND a diversified academy.
I thought the issue was over awards?
Why is a diversified academy condescending towards minority winners
I didn't say that. I said quotas for awards would be condescending.
It's like when people say that Affirmative Action takes away the "actual" accomplishments of minorities thus hurting their race in the long run yet NEVER bring up how the white children of college donors, the white children of privilege, the white children of politicians got ahead based on who they are and not their merits.
Again, I was not referring to opportunities, but recognition.
It's amazing how the majority hold unrealistic standards for the minority that they THEMSELEVES don't even abide by.
That is amazing, but does not apply to me or anything I have said. -
BruceTJenner — 10 years ago(March 02, 2016 06:47 AM)
I thought the issue was over awards?
The issue started prior to the awards show. Since there were no awards given out when this issue took center stage then most normal people should be able to deduce that the lack of nominations is the issue. If you are not nominated how can you win?
More diversity nominations' equates to a better chance at a win. More Oscar caliber roles >> More nominations >> better chance of winning. See how they are all connected? Not sure why you are having a hard time comprehending that - everyone else seems to get it - please try to keep up.
I didn't say that. I said quotas for awards would be condescending.
Who called for quotes for giving out Oscars? I never said anything about quotes in this thread nor on this board.
Again, I was not referring to opportunities, but recognition.
If you don't have the opportunity, how can you be recognized?
That is amazing, but does not apply to me or anything I have said.
It is amazing isn't it? I don't think I've seen hypocrisy of such a level before. Have you?
TROLL
http://imdb.com/user/ur6534108/boards/profile/ -
Bard_Battalion — 10 years ago(March 03, 2016 01:52 AM)
the lack of nominations is the issue
Nominations for and winning of awards is what I was referring to.
More Oscar caliber roles
Oscars are not given for roles, but performances. You leave out what an actor can bring to the table. I think Jeffrey Wright for example, would've done more with the role Will Smith played in Concussion.
In any case, "diverse casting" in "Oscar caliber roles" will not satisfy those who cry racism in years there are no "diversity nominations". -
BruceTJenner — 10 years ago(March 06, 2016 12:44 PM)
Nominations for and winning of awards is what I was referring to.
Huh? Lol what exactly are you arguing about? You started off on quotas - then when I pointed put that I never mentioned quotas - you went off on something else.
I don't think you know what you're arguing about. Let me know where you stand and what exactly you disagree with about what I said in my posts.
Oscars are not given for roles, but performances. You leave out what an actor can bring to the table. I think Jeffrey Wright for example, would've done more with the role Will Smith played in Concussion.
We all know that Oscars are given for performances however, how can you perform without first a role? Lol
It's5b4 pretty simple. Roles -> Performance -Nomination > Oscar. In that order. You think if Marlon Brando was just designated to extra work he would have been able to win two Oscars? He had to be given the role to showcase his skills. Not sure why this continues to go over your head.
In any case, "diverse casting" in "Oscar caliber roles" will not satisfy those who cry racism in years there are no "diversity nominations".
How do you know what it will satisfy? Are you able to look into a crystal ball and predict the future? That's just an excuse people like to use in order not to usher change. They like to use the * "well it won't effect how you feel anyway so why even change it?"*
Wrong !! No one is going to fall for that. Change is and needs to happen.
TROLL
http://imdb.com/user/ur6534108/boards/profile/ -
Bard_Battalion — 10 years ago(March 07, 2016 01:38 AM)
what exactly are you arguing about?
What you refer to as "diversity nominations".
How do you know what it will satisfy?
I know it will not satisfy those who assume racism is the cause of a lack of "diversity nominations" because its happening.
Change is and needs to happen
I agree, but making assumptions of racism in regards to deciding nominations will not help. -
BruceTJenner — 10 years ago(March 07, 2016 07:18 AM)
What you refer to as "diversity nominations".
No disrespect however, is English like your third language? I literally have no idea what you're talking about. What about "diversity nominations"? I made my position pretty clear on this board yet you seem intent on either misquoting me or putting my argument in a box that you seem to what to counter even though I never agreed to be in that box.
If English is NOT your first language then maybe you should use Google translate to assist with the message you're trying to convey.
I know it will not satisfy those who assume racism is the cause of a lack of "diversity nominations" because its happening.
Ok.
I agree, but making assumptions of racism in regards to deciding nominations will not help.
Whether those assumptions are accurate or not is a moot point. You agree that there needs to be change. That's my position as well. So what exactly are you going on about?
TROLL
http://imdb.com/user/ur6534108/boards/profile/ -
Bard_Battalion — 10 years ago(March 07, 2016 09:05 PM)
is English like your third language?
Asks someone who says "likey" instead of likely. No disrespect.
Ok.
Are you being sarcastic? Are you saying this isn't happening?
a moot point
Maybe to you, but not to those who take accusations of racism seriously and dislike when they are made frivolously as it devalues non frivolous accusations. -
BruceTJenner — 10 years ago(March 07, 2016 09:43 PM)
Asks someone who says "likey" instead of likely. No disrespect.
There my be grammer mistakes an/or obvious typos however at least people can gather my position and KNOW where I stand. I make that clear in every post. On the other hand you change what you're arguing about and/or don't bring anything to back up your arguments.
It's like me saying "I think Strawberry Ice Cream is the best flavor". I will then list the reasons why to back why I think Strawberry Ice Cream is the best favor. You say "I think Vanilla Ice Cream is the best flavor". Then you leave it at that and give no reason why you think Vanilla is best.
All I can say is "ok" and keep it moving. Lol you made a comment about my post and your whole issue was about quotas. I never mentioned quotas and I made that clear in my posts and my response. So again what are you arguing about?
Actually, I'm going to give you the same thing you're giving me. One word and/or vague answers - with absolutely nothing to back up my stance.
LOL What a fun date you must be:
Your date: Want to see a movie?
You: I don't know
Your date: Where would you like to eat?
You: Any place
Your date: How was your weekend?
You: Good
Your date: What did you do?
You: Stuff
Are you being sarcastic? Are you saying this isn't happening?
Sarcastic.
Maybe to you, but not to those who take accusations of racism seri238ously and dislike when they are made frivolously as it devalues non frivolous accusations.
I don't think they're frivolous.
TROLL
http://imdb.com/user/ur6534108/boards/profile/ -
Bard_Battalion — 10 years ago(March 09, 2016 12:06 AM)
So again what are you arguing about?
I will tell you once again since you seem to struggle with comprehension as well as grammar. Many assume the 2016 Oscar nominations are down to racism. They have no proof of this. Diversity casting does not satisfy them as they can continue to make such assumptions any year there are no "diversity nominations".
Sarcastic.
The problem I refer to is the cause of many baseless accusations. You can be sarcastic about that if you like. Others might see it as a problem.
I don't think they're frivolous.
No, just a moot point. -
BruceTJenner — 10 years ago(March 09, 2016 01:04 AM)
Diversity casting does not satisfy
Yes it will.
Others might see it as a problem.
No. Not a problem.
No, just a moot point.
Yes - Not frivolous.
TROLL
http://imdb.com/user/ur6534108/boards/profile/ -
Bard_Battalion — 10 years ago(March 10, 2016 03:27 AM)
Yes it will.
It will not satisfy those who assume without proof that racism is the cause of a lack of diversity nominations because any year there are no diversity nominations the same assumption can be made, like many are doing right now.
No. Not a problem.
Not a problem for those who are comfortable making accusations and not providing anything to back them up.
Yes - Not frivolous.
Not frivolous, just not something to be concerned about. OK.