Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

For discussion of Amazon's new television show "The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power"
User avatar
Alatar
of Vinyamar
Posts: 10578
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by Alatar »

I think a lot of the problem with colour blind casting is that it only goes one way? We can cast POC as Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, Valerians, Eliza Doolittle, Ariel and anything else, but we can't have a White Hamilton, or T'challa, or indeed even put on a production of "In the Heights" or "Ragtime" unless you have Latino or Black actors. Where is the parity?
Image
The Vinyamars on Stage! This time at Bag End
User avatar
elengil
Cat-egorical Herbitual Creativi-Tea
Posts: 6248
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:45 pm
Location: Between the Mountains and the Sea

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by elengil »

Alatar wrote: Mon Sep 26, 2022 10:36 am I think a lot of the problem with colour blind casting is that it only goes one way? We can cast POC as Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, Valerians, Eliza Doolittle, Ariel and anything else, but we can't have a White Hamilton, or T'challa, or indeed even put on a production of "In the Heights" or "Ragtime" unless you have Latino or Black actors. Where is the parity?
The "parity" is the 100 years of Hollywood where every POC character was played by a white actor, often excessively offensively, with the white actor not just playing all the white characters but playing any non-white character to extreme negative stereotypes.

We still cast white actors to play POC characters - Tilda Swinton being cast in Marvel's movie when the original character in the books was Asian; The Martian film which changed many of the characters from the book from POC to white, white actors routinely cast in movies like Prince of Persia or as Egyptian gods - even when an POC actor is actually cast as an POC role, people will whine about "that's not how *I* pictured the character!" like with Rue in Hunger Games.

I am purposely not including the worst historical offenses, these are modern movies still doing this, and modern audiences.

If we ACTUALLY had parity then any person could play any role - with few exceptions for when it's integral. But we've never had any kind of balance, and correcting that historic imbalance is not what is creating a disparity.

But again, the ultimate point is no part of Tolkien's world hinges on his invented races being reflective of northern European white skin tones. Honestly, I'm still a little unhappy that neither RoP nor Jackson's movies made any attempt to include actual people with dwarfism in any meaningful capacity but as a few size doubles.
The dumbest thing I've ever bought
was a 2020 planner.

"Does anyone ever think about Denethor, the guy driven to madness by staying up late into the night alone in the dark staring at a flickering device he believed revealed unvarnished truth about the outside word, but which in fact showed mostly manipulated media created by a hostile power committed to portraying nothing but bad news framed in the worst possible way in order to sap hope, courage, and the will to go on? Seems like he's someone we should think about." - Dave_LF
User avatar
Alatar
of Vinyamar
Posts: 10578
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by Alatar »

Sorry, but I don't agree with the logic that "Hollywood did it for years, so being equally discriminatory now is somehow equality" Also, most of your references of even "newer" movies are before this latest dramatic shift. Its accelerating rapidly, such that up to two years ago, in amateur dramatics, we could perform shows that we no longer can. I can only hope that after this ridiculousness goes too far it will reset to somewhere more rational.
But we've never had any kind of balance, and correcting that historic imbalance is not what is creating a disparity.
But we're not correcting an imbalance if we don't apply the rules equally. We're just creating a different imbalance.
Image
The Vinyamars on Stage! This time at Bag End
User avatar
elengil
Cat-egorical Herbitual Creativi-Tea
Posts: 6248
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:45 pm
Location: Between the Mountains and the Sea

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by elengil »

I'm sorry I couldn't provide up to the minute movie examples as I largely don't watch movies any longer and I don't exactly make a point of going out and searching for these, this is just what I've come across over the years.

And it's not just 'Hollywood' - Most western society has been this way, Hollywood is just a reflection of what has happened across the board.

But there is no imbalance *against* white actors. There is no mass spate of POC actors getting *all* the roles. There is no anti-white bias in movie casting.

The vast majority of movies are still casting white people in all roles.

The fact that the *few* POC actors that are being cast now causes such an uproar is not proof that this is some new imbalance to the other direction, it's proof that we've seen white-only for so very long that *any* change to that suddenly feels like too much.

It isn't.

100% white was an imbalance.
That has not been corrected by 90% white, 10% POC.
That has not been corrected by 80% white, 20% POC.

We are in no way close to having some alternate reality in which we're suddenly having 90% POC actors in roles and 10% white.

We have a few notable POC actors getting roles that didn't *explicitly* call for skin color.

Even if I know very well the reaction is happening, I honestly *cannot fathom* why people care so very much if *one* elf role out of dozens or hundreds was given to a black actor. One black dwarf out of how many!? They didn't set Lord of the Rings in sub-Saharan Africa - they included a few POC actors in the cast!

Does that really prove there's some massive imbalance in movie casting? Sure - it's just the opposite problem from the one you seem to think it is.
The dumbest thing I've ever bought
was a 2020 planner.

"Does anyone ever think about Denethor, the guy driven to madness by staying up late into the night alone in the dark staring at a flickering device he believed revealed unvarnished truth about the outside word, but which in fact showed mostly manipulated media created by a hostile power committed to portraying nothing but bad news framed in the worst possible way in order to sap hope, courage, and the will to go on? Seems like he's someone we should think about." - Dave_LF
User avatar
Smaug's voice
Nibonto Aagun
Posts: 1085
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2013 9:21 am

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by Smaug's voice »

Alatar wrote: Mon Sep 26, 2022 2:37 pm Sorry, but I don't agree with the logic that "Hollywood did it for years, so being equally discriminatory now is somehow equality"

It is not even a fraction of it being equally discriminatory. Hollywood didn't just switch POC characters for white, it actively had white actors with painted on skin, exaggerated facial features and mannerisms to mock well established "punchline" stereotypes - this has gone even as far as the 2000s, over a 100 years of film and tv history. I haven't seen this happen even once in the opposite case. You may have POC actors taking up traditionally white roles but none where they paint themselves pastel-white or mock caucasian stereotypes (which is notably not a thing because orientalism came directly from the West.)



Saying that POC actors reclaiming their hundred plus years of lost chances and dehumanisation by playing white roles is the same and equal thing as whitewashing completely ignores the difference between punching down vs punching up.
User avatar
Alatar
of Vinyamar
Posts: 10578
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by Alatar »

Sigh. I can tell this is going to be a pointless conversation if we can't even agree that equality means equality.
Image
The Vinyamars on Stage! This time at Bag End
User avatar
elengil
Cat-egorical Herbitual Creativi-Tea
Posts: 6248
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:45 pm
Location: Between the Mountains and the Sea

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by elengil »

Alatar wrote: Mon Sep 26, 2022 4:29 pm Sigh. I can tell this is going to be a pointless conversation if we can't even agree that equality means equality.
Perhaps we can't because we fundamentally disagree on what constitutes equality.

I can't agree that 100 years of history of discrimination was somehow nullified in the last few years because of a few movies that cast POC actors where a white actor might have been cast before.
I can't agree that a few token POC actors being cast in roles not specifically noted as white somehow equals reverse oppression.
I can't agree that a few POC actors being cast in roles of *invented fantasy races* is somehow the same as erasing white people or white representation in these roles.

What exactly would equality look like if *this* is seen as anti-white discrimination??
The dumbest thing I've ever bought
was a 2020 planner.

"Does anyone ever think about Denethor, the guy driven to madness by staying up late into the night alone in the dark staring at a flickering device he believed revealed unvarnished truth about the outside word, but which in fact showed mostly manipulated media created by a hostile power committed to portraying nothing but bad news framed in the worst possible way in order to sap hope, courage, and the will to go on? Seems like he's someone we should think about." - Dave_LF
User avatar
RoseMorninStar
Posts: 12731
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 11:07 am
Location: North Shire

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by RoseMorninStar »

I was reading through some of Tolkien's letters recently and I was reminded he said that hobbits had "hair short and curling (brown)" (letter 27). Jackson's Frodo, Sam, Merry, & Pippin had what I'd call mid-length hair with a little body/wave, certainly not short & curly. Jackson's female hobbits didn't have short hair and some, like Rose, had golden locks. Not exactly canon. Hobbits are a different race of humanoids, as are elves, dwarves. I'll point out we only have one human race, of various shades, available to act the part of Tolkien's differing races.

'Blind' casting works for some creative works, but not others. The premise of 'My Fair Lady' doesn't change based on the color of skin or, arguably, gender, depending upon how one reads the end of that storyline, which I find kinda sad/defeating. Ariel in 'The Little Mermaid' IS of a different race: she's a MERMAID. She's not a white, brown, or black person. It's the point of the story- someone from a truly different world.. a different race becoming part of another. The point of 'Hamilton' is to re-imagine history. In Miranda's words: "America then, as told by America now," as the author/actor/composer sees it. 'Roots' is about slavery and 'race' (as in skin color) is integral to the story and history of enslavement. Try re-imagining that and swapping white/black actors and you've got a very different story. Wouldn't that create an uproar.
My heart is forever in the Shire.
User avatar
Alatar
of Vinyamar
Posts: 10578
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by Alatar »

elengil wrote: Mon Sep 26, 2022 4:48 pm I can't agree that 100 years of history of discrimination was somehow nullified in the last few years because of a few movies that cast POC actors where a white actor might have been cast before.
I can't agree that a few token POC actors being cast in roles not specifically noted as white somehow equals reverse oppression.
I can't agree that a few POC actors being cast in roles of *invented fantasy races* is somehow the same as erasing white people or white representation in these roles.
None of which represent what I actually said. I expected better from you than strawmen, but if you insist on my knocking them down:

100 years of discrimination was not nullified by anything, it happened. Tokenism does not help to erase that. Equality means the same rules apply to POC and White actors NOW. "Affirmative action" style tokenism will damage the legitimacy of talented actors of colour, instead of helping them.

"token POC actors being cast in roles not specifically noted as white" does not equal reverse racism. Refusing to apply the same yardstick to white actors does.

"I can't agree that a few POC actors being cast in roles of *invented fantasy races* is somehow the same as erasing white people or white representation in these roles." I didn't even come close to saying this, so I'm not going to try to support a position you're inventing.
Image
The Vinyamars on Stage! This time at Bag End
User avatar
Alatar
of Vinyamar
Posts: 10578
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by Alatar »

RoseMorninStar wrote: Mon Sep 26, 2022 5:09 pm The point of 'Hamilton' is to re-imagine history. In Miranda's words: "America then, as told by America now," as the author/actor/composer sees it. 'Roots' is about slavery and 'race' (as in skin color) is integral to the story and history of enslavement. Try re-imagining that and swapping white/black actors and you've got a very different story. Wouldn't that create an uproar.
You make an interesting point. What exactly do you see as the difference between those two? Not that I'm for one second advocating for an all-white "Roots", but if the author/actor/composer said it was their re-imagining of history, how would that be any different to Hamilton (which I love btw, so this is merely an exercise in logic)
Image
The Vinyamars on Stage! This time at Bag End
User avatar
elengil
Cat-egorical Herbitual Creativi-Tea
Posts: 6248
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:45 pm
Location: Between the Mountains and the Sea

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by elengil »

Alatar wrote: Tue Sep 27, 2022 9:56 am
elengil wrote: Mon Sep 26, 2022 4:48 pm I can't agree that 100 years of history of discrimination was somehow nullified in the last few years because of a few movies that cast POC actors where a white actor might have been cast before.
I can't agree that a few token POC actors being cast in roles not specifically noted as white somehow equals reverse oppression.
I can't agree that a few POC actors being cast in roles of *invented fantasy races* is somehow the same as erasing white people or white representation in these roles.
None of which represent what I actually said. I expected better from you than strawmen, but if you insist on my knocking them down:

100 years of discrimination was not nullified by anything, it happened. Tokenism does not help to erase that. Equality means the same rules apply to POC and White actors NOW. "Affirmative action" style tokenism will damage the legitimacy of talented actors of colour, instead of helping them.

"token POC actors being cast in roles not specifically noted as white" does not equal reverse racism. Refusing to apply the same yardstick to white actors does.

"I can't agree that a few POC actors being cast in roles of *invented fantasy races* is somehow the same as erasing white people or white representation in these roles." I didn't even come close to saying this, so I'm not going to try to support a position you're inventing.
Sorry, but I don't agree with the logic that "Hollywood did it for years, so being equally discriminatory now is somehow equality" Also, most of your references of even "newer" movies are before this latest dramatic shift. Its accelerating rapidly, such that up to two years ago, in amateur dramatics, we could perform shows that we no longer can. I can only hope that after this ridiculousness goes too far it will reset to somewhere more rational.
I disagree absolutely that anything happening today is discriminatory against white actors. HENCE I can't agree that 100 years of history of discrimination was somehow nullified in the last few years because of a few movies that cast POC actors where a white actor might have been cast before.

I think a lot of the problem with colour blind casting is that it only goes one way? We can cast POC as Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, Valerians, Eliza Doolittle, Ariel and anything else, but we can't have a White Hamilton, or T'challa, or indeed even put on a production of "In the Heights" or "Ragtime" unless you have Latino or Black actors. Where is the parity?
Saying that now that we have A FEW shows that are solidly rooted in a person's skin color being non-white does not in the slightest create a situation in which "it's okay for POC but not okay for white?!? Discrimination!" Because as I've pointed out we *still* have plenty of instances where a character in the 'original' was a POC and the actor cast was white - or where the character's skin color is neither specified nor intrinsic and yet somehow POC actors are rarely ever even considered for these roles. We have not even begun to approach equality let alone gone out the other side into discrimination against white actors.

HENCE I can't agree that a few POC actors being cast in roles of *invented fantasy races* is somehow the same as erasing white people or white representation in these roles.
But we're not correcting an imbalance if we don't apply the rules equally. We're just creating a different imbalance.
What imbalance is it you imagine is being created??? First, there are no "rules" there is a greater and greater push for equality and representation - that representation - and equality, and justice, and fairness - that has for hundreds of years been denied to segments of the population. There is no "difference imbalance" being created because an Elf and a Dwarf are played by black actors. That's *the same imbalance* 1. because it's the barest tiniest token nod toward casting POC actors, and 2. because of the segment of the audience that finds it unconscionable that a black actor is playing a character of an invented fantasy race.

HENCE I can't agree that a few token POC actors being cast in roles not specifically noted as white somehow equals reverse oppression.


They weren't strawmen, they were how I took every one of your statements.

Again, I don't understand what equality is supposed to look like if THIS is what looks like oppression of white people.
The dumbest thing I've ever bought
was a 2020 planner.

"Does anyone ever think about Denethor, the guy driven to madness by staying up late into the night alone in the dark staring at a flickering device he believed revealed unvarnished truth about the outside word, but which in fact showed mostly manipulated media created by a hostile power committed to portraying nothing but bad news framed in the worst possible way in order to sap hope, courage, and the will to go on? Seems like he's someone we should think about." - Dave_LF
User avatar
elengil
Cat-egorical Herbitual Creativi-Tea
Posts: 6248
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:45 pm
Location: Between the Mountains and the Sea

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by elengil »

Alatar wrote: Tue Sep 27, 2022 10:00 am
RoseMorninStar wrote: Mon Sep 26, 2022 5:09 pm The point of 'Hamilton' is to re-imagine history. In Miranda's words: "America then, as told by America now," as the author/actor/composer sees it. 'Roots' is about slavery and 'race' (as in skin color) is integral to the story and history of enslavement. Try re-imagining that and swapping white/black actors and you've got a very different story. Wouldn't that create an uproar.
You make an interesting point. What exactly do you see as the difference between those two? Not that I'm for one second advocating for an all-white "Roots", but if the author/actor/composer said it was their re-imagining of history, how would that be any different to Hamilton (which I love btw, so this is merely an exercise in logic)
That would be White Man's Burden. It's been done. Not exactly Roots but very much reimagining history.
The dumbest thing I've ever bought
was a 2020 planner.

"Does anyone ever think about Denethor, the guy driven to madness by staying up late into the night alone in the dark staring at a flickering device he believed revealed unvarnished truth about the outside word, but which in fact showed mostly manipulated media created by a hostile power committed to portraying nothing but bad news framed in the worst possible way in order to sap hope, courage, and the will to go on? Seems like he's someone we should think about." - Dave_LF
User avatar
Alatar
of Vinyamar
Posts: 10578
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by Alatar »

elengil wrote: Tue Sep 27, 2022 2:24 pm HENCE I can't agree that 100 years of history of discrimination was somehow nullified in the last few years
Again, please point out where I said anything resembling that? I have no problem discussing what I said, but please don't put words in my mouth.
we *still* have plenty of instances where a character in the 'original' was a POC and the actor cast was white
Have to say I'm not seeing that? In the recent past, yes, but not currently, and as I stated, I have no problem with either, so not understanding your point here. This is what I WANT to see. Colourblind casting both ways.

Finally, I have no problem with Black Elves or BLack Dwarves, and I'm not sure why you think I do? I just expect that a white person should be equally able to play Simba in The Lion King.
Image
The Vinyamars on Stage! This time at Bag End
User avatar
elengil
Cat-egorical Herbitual Creativi-Tea
Posts: 6248
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:45 pm
Location: Between the Mountains and the Sea

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by elengil »

Y'know, I realized on the way to work I've actually missed the point entirely here:

DISNEY remade Disney's The Little Mermaid with a Black actress. A "black" studio did not come and take Disney's The Little Mermaid and remake it with a Black actress.

Why did Disney do it? Presumably because they felt it would draw a greater profit that way.

If the creators of Hamilton *want* to create a Hamilton with an all-white cast, they can do so. Literally nothing is stopping them.

If the creators of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon *want* to do a remake with an all-whit cast, they can do so. Again, there actually are *no rules* like you seem to think.

This is not Black Producers and Black Actors *taking* these roles away from white people. These are studios taking what they presume are profitable steps to have (IMO token) inclusion because they feel it will make them money.

This is not anti-white discrimination. This is, rather, the same old discrimination that now simply sees more profit in not being 100% white, while not actually putting any meaningful effort into real diversity.
The dumbest thing I've ever bought
was a 2020 planner.

"Does anyone ever think about Denethor, the guy driven to madness by staying up late into the night alone in the dark staring at a flickering device he believed revealed unvarnished truth about the outside word, but which in fact showed mostly manipulated media created by a hostile power committed to portraying nothing but bad news framed in the worst possible way in order to sap hope, courage, and the will to go on? Seems like he's someone we should think about." - Dave_LF
User avatar
RoseMorninStar
Posts: 12731
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 11:07 am
Location: North Shire

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by RoseMorninStar »

Alatar wrote: Tue Sep 27, 2022 10:00 am
RoseMorninStar wrote: Mon Sep 26, 2022 5:09 pm The point of 'Hamilton' is to re-imagine history. In Miranda's words: "America then, as told by America now," as the author/actor/composer sees it. 'Roots' is about slavery and 'race' (as in skin color) is integral to the story and history of enslavement. Try re-imagining that and swapping white/black actors and you've got a very different story. Wouldn't that create an uproar.
You make an interesting point. What exactly do you see as the difference between those two? Not that I'm for one second advocating for an all-white "Roots", but if the author/actor/composer said it was their re-imagining of history, how would that be any different to Hamilton (which I love btw, so this is merely an exercise in logic)
I am not the most articulate person when it comes to these issues but I'll try. I think the difference is subtle (but important) and it has to do with what is and what has been, historically speaking. It would be nice to begin anew from a 'clean slate' and not have the burden of our histories, biases, and prejudices, but that isn't the reality we live. I should mention that I have NOT seen 'Hamilton' only bits/have read about it and heard plenty from the talented Lin-Manuel Miranda. I will also point out I am not a POC (that I'm aware of anyway) so I have to go by the words of those who have lived with the burden of this history, such as Lin-Manuel, as they have experienced it. His point, I imagine (I should really read a good synopsis before posting..) , is that there have been gains in equality and that POC could have had important roles in the founding of our country, that the color of one's skin shouldn't matter in qualities of leadership or intelligence and, I would imagine, this is his way of encouraging (?) POC going forward.. that had the color of their skin not gotten in the way they could have done, or been a part of, great things.

As for 'Roots' there is the opposite issue (I've not seen nor heard of the film 'White Man's Burden' but I did a quick look-up). To create an all-white 'Roots' slavery movie (where the slavers are black/POC) from an imagined past would be more about fear-mongering.. about POC taking over to crush white people. Because there is not that history there.. I don't know how to articulate it.. but it would be dystopian. Slavery was and is a horrible thing, no matter who is subjected to it. To pretend an imagined history of slavery .. in the America's.. hmm. It would be like creating a movie about the Holocaust where the German's were persecuted and annihilated by Jewish people. That's just twisted. It would further tend to vilify the victims of real history. A mockery of painful history of real people. I don't think 'Hamilton' is a mockery.

Perhaps, at least for me, what it comes down to is that one is uplifting ('Hamilton') and could have/should have been (at least in part inclusively/not all white men) and the other examples, ('Roots'/Holocaust) should never have been.
My heart is forever in the Shire.
User avatar
Túrin Turambar
Posts: 6150
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by Túrin Turambar »

I don't have strong views on colour-blind casting one way or the other. It does seem to me to be a bit of a band-aid solution to a deeper problem - the stories which are known in popular culture and attract the most attention tend to come from European or American history, mythology or fantasy, and so feature mostly white people, particularly white men. Tolkien probably envisioned his characters as European unless he was explicit that they weren't, which is fine, because he was a European living in Europe with an interest in European mythology. But no non-European work of fantasy would get even a tenth of the budget to adapt it into a TV series as Tolkien's mythology has.

In 2018 a film about Mary, Queen of Scots, came out, and the director was clear she would not have an all-white cast. Fair enough. But we've seen Mary, Queen of Scots on the big and small screen a dozen times in the last few decades - I'd rather watch African actors in a film based in African history telling a story that's new to me.

Getting the budget to make these films and TV shows, though, when there's no guaranteed audience for them is a real challenge that'll need a long-term cultural shift.
User avatar
Smaug's voice
Nibonto Aagun
Posts: 1085
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2013 9:21 am

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by Smaug's voice »

Alatar wrote: Mon Sep 26, 2022 4:29 pm Sigh. I can tell this is going to be a pointless conversation if we can't even agree that equality means equality.

If everyone agreed on what equality actually means then there wouldn't be any discussions on "reverse oppression" in modern context.

On an individual level, of course it's possible for POCs be racist towards white people. But if we're talking about institutionalised racism, then that kind of history just can't be ignored since the same power dynamics are still there on a structural level imo
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 45926
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

SV, I wanted to say that I appreciate your willingness to engage in this discussion. I'm sure that it can be frustrating.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
User avatar
Inanna
Meetu's little sister
Posts: 17680
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 5:03 pm

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by Inanna »

I wanted to say that I appreciate Alatar’s willingness as well.
'You just said "your getting shorter": you've obviously been drinking too much ent-draught and not enough Prim's.' - Jude
User avatar
RoseMorninStar
Posts: 12731
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 11:07 am
Location: North Shire

Re: Discussion about the Discussion about RoP

Post by RoseMorninStar »

Inanna wrote: Sat Oct 01, 2022 2:37 am I wanted to say that I appreciate Alatar’s willingness as well.
Agreed.
Smaug's voice wrote: Fri Sep 30, 2022 2:31 pm But if we're talking about institutionalised racism, then that kind of history just can't be ignored since the same power dynamics are still there on a structural level imo
You've articulated the heart of the issue, SV. While it's ideal to strive for lack of prejudice of any kind, I don't know that it is currently possible while institutional racism and such dynamics and attitudes are so wide spread.
My heart is forever in the Shire.
Post Reply