Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:He totally interrupted her, and then talked over her when she tried to interrupt him back. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njFBkJSpUrY
If you honestly think a man would generally be just as sensitive to a female prostitute's point of view than a woman would, I think you're nuts.
But I guess I'm not really that surprised that the only black woman got talked over in a room filled with 7 mostly white guys and a white woman.
I don't think Damon is racist, but he definitely did a little whitesplaining soft shoe there.
I think PP above had a good point about the panelists perhaps being at cross purposes: Damon didn't want to have to change the rules of the contest to make it about picking the best directors FOR THIS SCRIPT, he wanted to pick the best directors, period. Whereas Brown was basically saying, given the script we have, we have to pick the best directors for this script who will be able to deal with sensitivity to racial and gender dynamics, and I don't think our best options are necessarily the teams of two white guys.
This is bull.
A Soldier's Story and Amistad were directed by Jewish white guys. You can be a good director regardless of what you look like. So women don't always need to direct movies about women and black directors don't need to limit their movies to stories about black people.
Give me a break, it's not about just being "a good director" -- it's about being able to tell the story from an authentic place of personal experience and perspective. I hate to be the one to break it to you, but there are a lot of movies out there that a lot of folks think are "great", but the people who are the subject of the story -- think suck -- the perspective is off, the viewpoint is skewed and it comes off as just another stereotypical piece of mess. Blind Side is a good example. That story was so way off from the "real" story it is shameful.
Give people a chance to tell their own story -- share their viewpoints.
I only saw this movie on a plane so admiteddly wasn't paying much attention but can you elaborate? I did read Michal Lewis' book because for one thing I love Michael Lewis' style and for the other, I'm a born and raised NY Giants fan and a book about LT's evolution of the o-line was going to be right up my ally. I clearly loved the book and Oher and family never had any issue with it from all the pieces I watched with him during his college and then draft into pro career. But I didn't intensely watch the movie so the parts I saw seemed to line up pretty closely with Lewis' narrative (as he worked with them directly as subjects). What did they veer away from?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:He totally interrupted her, and then talked over her when she tried to interrupt him back. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njFBkJSpUrY
If you honestly think a man would generally be just as sensitive to a female prostitute's point of view than a woman would, I think you're nuts.
But I guess I'm not really that surprised that the only black woman got talked over in a room filled with 7 mostly white guys and a white woman.
I don't think Damon is racist, but he definitely did a little whitesplaining soft shoe there.
I think PP above had a good point about the panelists perhaps being at cross purposes: Damon didn't want to have to change the rules of the contest to make it about picking the best directors FOR THIS SCRIPT, he wanted to pick the best directors, period. Whereas Brown was basically saying, given the script we have, we have to pick the best directors for this script who will be able to deal with sensitivity to racial and gender dynamics, and I don't think our best options are necessarily the teams of two white guys.
This is bull.
A Soldier's Story and Amistad were directed by Jewish white guys. You can be a good director regardless of what you look like. So women don't always need to direct movies about women and black directors don't need to limit their movies to stories about black people.
Give me a break, it's not about just being "a good director" -- it's about being able to tell the story from an authentic place of personal experience and perspective. I hate to be the one to break it to you, but there are a lot of movies out there that a lot of folks think are "great", but the people who are the subject of the story -- think suck -- the perspective is off, the viewpoint is skewed and it comes off as just another stereotypical piece of mess. Blind Side is a good example. That story was so way off from the "real" story it is shameful.
Give people a chance to tell their own story -- share their viewpoints.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The exchange between Damon and Brown was fascinating to say the least, and I did learn something.
Brown was not inferring that quality should be sacrificed for diversity. She was simply making a point about racial sensitivity. Damon took it to another level, and emboldened by his liberalism and sense of racial inclusiveness, felt justified in doing so.
I gather, the entirety of this exchange is one that many professional Black people have experienced, when they find themselves “the only one” in a room full of white colleagues. Many of people of color have felt the pressure of challenging the ways that whiteness is operating unnoticed, even as they are also saddled with the baggage of representing for our race/gender. When they demand, politely of course, that diversity take place on every level from the boardroom to the stage, frequently they are met with white defensiveness (hence Damon talking over/ lecturing Brown).
Predictably, the media and many of the commenters on this thread have decided take the golden carrot of "the best people should be decided based on merit" comment instead of actually trying to understand the other side's view. You have placed the discussion under the "affirmative action" argument and assume that black people want other blacks to advance under lower standards than others (anyone who understands how affirmative action works knows this view is highly inaccurate). Major props to Damon and BA for airing it. It forces those of us in the majority to see how this looks in action, whether we choose to accept it or not.
How I pity those who cannot empathize with your fellow man. I do hope those making judgment on you have empathy if you find yourself to be part of an underrepresented people.
Best response to this issue in eons.
Anonymous wrote:The exchange between Damon and Brown was fascinating to say the least, and I did learn something.
Brown was not inferring that quality should be sacrificed for diversity. She was simply making a point about racial sensitivity. Damon took it to another level, and emboldened by his liberalism and sense of racial inclusiveness, felt justified in doing so.
I gather, the entirety of this exchange is one that many professional Black people have experienced, when they find themselves “the only one” in a room full of white colleagues. Many of people of color have felt the pressure of challenging the ways that whiteness is operating unnoticed, even as they are also saddled with the baggage of representing for our race/gender. When they demand, politely of course, that diversity take place on every level from the boardroom to the stage, frequently they are met with white defensiveness (hence Damon talking over/ lecturing Brown).
Predictably, the media and many of the commenters on this thread have decided take the golden carrot of "the best people should be decided based on merit" comment instead of actually trying to understand the other side's view. You have placed the discussion under the "affirmative action" argument and assume that black people want other blacks to advance under lower standards than others (anyone who understands how affirmative action works knows this view is highly inaccurate). Major props to Damon and BA for airing it. It forces those of us in the majority to see how this looks in action, whether we choose to accept it or not.
How I pity those who cannot empathize with your fellow man. I do hope those making judgment on you have empathy if you find yourself to be part of an underrepresented people.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think this is so overblown. They were having a disagreement. Doesn't mean he's racist -- he had a different idea about how to proceed.
I thought her reaction was unprofessional. If she reacts differently to that comment, I think the racist card doesn't even get played. Her body language, facial expression, and words she used were somewhat inflammatory.
Good TV though.
good lord that angry black womanAnonymous wrote:Whitesplaining and mansplaining. And I ordinarily like Matt Damon.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:He totally interrupted her, and then talked over her when she tried to interrupt him back. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njFBkJSpUrY
If you honestly think a man would generally be just as sensitive to a female prostitute's point of view than a woman would, I think you're nuts.
But I guess I'm not really that surprised that the only black woman got talked over in a room filled with 7 mostly white guys and a white woman.
I don't think Damon is racist, but he definitely did a little whitesplaining soft shoe there.
I think PP above had a good point about the panelists perhaps being at cross purposes: Damon didn't want to have to change the rules of the contest to make it about picking the best directors FOR THIS SCRIPT, he wanted to pick the best directors, period. Whereas Brown was basically saying, given the script we have, we have to pick the best directors for this script who will be able to deal with sensitivity to racial and gender dynamics, and I don't think our best options are necessarily the teams of two white guys.
This is bull.
A Soldier's Story and Amistad were directed by Jewish white guys. You can be a good director regardless of what you look like. So women don't always need to direct movies about women and black directors don't need to limit their movies to stories about black people.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Uh, OP, everybody is a little bit racist, liberal and conservative alike. This is hardly news.
What's your deal anyway? You seem more worried about sticking it to liberals than you do about the issues that are being discussed. Really, you're obsessed with proving how bad liberals really are as human beings. Maybe you should look at that obsession.
I'm sick of seeing Republican demonized for trying to make the country better. Republicans are portrayed as worse than terrorists. I think that is utter bullshit. This is why I try to turn the tables as much as possible to wake liberals up.
Anonymous wrote:Plus, they have Affleck there to represent the POV of the white pimp.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Uh, OP, everybody is a little bit racist, liberal and conservative alike. This is hardly news.
What's your deal anyway? You seem more worried about sticking it to liberals than you do about the issues that are being discussed. Really, you're obsessed with proving how bad liberals really are as human beings. Maybe you should look at that obsession.
I'm sick of seeing Republican demonized for trying to make the country better. Republicans are portrayed as worse than terrorists. I think that is utter bullshit. This is why I try to turn the tables as much as possible to wake liberals up.
Anonymous wrote:Uh, OP, everybody is a little bit racist, liberal and conservative alike. This is hardly news.
What's your deal anyway? You seem more worried about sticking it to liberals than you do about the issues that are being discussed. Really, you're obsessed with proving how bad liberals really are as human beings. Maybe you should look at that obsession.
Anonymous wrote:That comment hardly makes him racist.
Anonymous wrote:I think this is so overblown. They were having a disagreement. Doesn't mean he's racist -- he had a different idea about how to proceed.