so in your evaluation…how long does this spectre last? how long has it been now that society has been pushing for everyone to get a fair treatment? started with races, then sexes, now genders all have free reign to do as they will now. So, for how long do those on the sidelines get to say it’s still a systemic issue…
what percentage of gang kids are simply a byproduct of lack of corrective parenting? Those kids who would rather walk into a Tesco and steal a phone, than pay for one? Those who no matter what opportunities are presented to them, will still whine they’re not given a fair shake?
Why do think you think serial murderers are more likely to be white? Cards on the table time.
Do you really think I’m going to get involved in a discussion with you over race just so you can have a hissy fit and try and pin racism on me? No, thanks.
I quite like your discussion style on footy but on social points you get too involved emotionally. Especially race.
Well, I would want to use an empirical approach rather than shifting the conversation to something even less knowable.
Hypothesis 1 - covid fines were more likely to be on urban residents. The UK black population is disproportionately urban, so you would want to control for that.
Hypothesis 2 - covid fines were more likely to be on younger citizens. I don’t know how the UK black population compares demographically to the mean, but if it is a younger population, you would want to control for that as well.
Hypothesis 3 - for reasons of space available to them, less affluent citizens were more likely to engage in behaviour leading to being fined. I would expect an inverse correlation between household income and probability of being fined. The UK black population is less affluent than the mean.
However, once I had a regression model controlling for urban/rural, age, and income, I would really have to consider making Black/White/Brown (apologies if ‘Brown’ is an offensive characterization of other visible minorities in the UK, it is not intended as such) my next independent variable. My suspicion is that such a variable would have significant explanatory power.
That’s an interesting point. In the 70’s in Liverpool 8 (L8 postal code) there was a poor housing estate. All the do gooders were like the kids are getting into trouble cos there’s nothing for them to do (direct quote). They built an adventure playground. Within 3 months it was ruined.
It’s gob smacking, it really is. Go back 30 years. Which shops were open past 5pm? Which chippies (and later take aways) were open in the evenings? Wasn’t the ones owned by the white English. The idea of the p@ki shop being open all the time was a joke, but brilliant business. Even today, the little convenience stores local to us are all open 6-10 ish, family run by our friends from distant sunny climates. Good on them.
Show me a drive in hand car wash with a single white face. Bloody hard work and bloody well done lads. Granted no ladies either.
I’ve no idea, mate. I don’t think it’s ever going to go away. We’re evolved primates trying to run complicated societies on brains that still are wired to view outsiders with suspicion, so until we get to grips with this, and embrace methods to correct for this I can’t see much changing.
What I do think is that frequently a surface attention is paid to issues of equality, without tackling the underlying causes of the inequality, and that is always going to allow these issues to fester. And it doesn’t help when people staunchly refuse to acknowledge the racism that is so glaringly obvious in our societies.
Here is a thought. We all claim to be in favour of equality. You won’t find many people who don’t want to live in an equal society.
But how many of us have really though about what this involves - what would life look like? If you are in favour of people of colour getting more opportunities are you OK with white people getting a bit less as a result? What sacrifices are you willing to make?
To take an example that came up for me in real life, I had an argument with a family member about black characters in the TV adaptation of Great Expectations. His argument was that it wasn’t historically accurate to have as many black characters in a period drama. My retort was ‘So fucking what? Surely suspending disbelieve for a TV show is preferable to sticking up a ‘No coloureds’ sign on the casting call? If we feel unwilling to compromise the historical accuracy of a TV programme for the sake equality, we aren’t going to get very far.
Park near us had £50k raised to build it by the community. Was on fire the first night it opened. They tried again the next night but shall we say met opposition.
It’s very simple, write new stories. Then nobody cares about race, colour, sex or creed. Don’t race swap known characters (and real people) for your own agenda. Oh and if it didn’t matter, they wouldn’t do it. Hello Cleopatra.
We were clearly having a discussion about black on black knife crime. Don’t try and move the goalposts.
You made a glib remark about blaming middle aged white men for black on black crime. It would be nice to know what you think is the reason?
It’s a bit of a simplification to blame black knife crime on white men, but it is at least notable that pretty much all the institutions failing black communities are run by white people.
(On serial killers, it’s exceedingly rare so I don’t really know what you expect to gain from adding this to the discussion)
There are lots of ways you are not arsed about accuracy in historical dramas. Put aside the skin colour, do you honestly think people in the Victorian era looked like they do in modern adaptations.
Casting call! Looking for leading man for new BBC Dickens adaptation. Candidate must be no taller that 5’6” and have rickets.
It’s about putting up a sign that says ‘black people need not apply’. Acting is a job, and unless there is a very, very good reason to specify a particular skin colour, equality (that thing you say you support) in job applications is far more important than a notional historical accuracy.
It goes back to what I said about equality. You are going to have to compromise and accept some sacrifice if we are ever going to have an equal society.
If you are falling at the first hurdle of being unwilling to accept a black lawyer in an adaptation of a Dickens novel, then we really aren’t going to get very far.
Jnr’s last dance comp. The 1st second and third were the 2 girls who weren’t white and the one boy. Convenient and although jnr certainly shouldn’t have placed (how many parents say that?) there were far better performers.
Can you honestly say that Jodie Whittaker was the best actor to play Dr Who? No, she was cast purely because she’s a woman. She was dreadful and had a dreadful script. The new guy? Again, best actor for the job? We’ve just heard that the next Bond will be black. He absolutely isn’t and is only being cast as such to match the current agenda. It really is.
The Great Expectations adaptation was done by the Peaky Blinders people, and I still haven’t forgiven them for their absolutely abysmal version of A Christmas Carol. So I’m not going to go to the wall for them.
But casting people of colour doesn’t bother me because a) when you are absorbed in a drama I think you can quickly overcome things like this b) The historical accuracy of our period dramas is a small price to pay for equality in the job market for actors.
We’ve no idea how good Jodie Whittaker could have been, because as you note, the scripts were embarrassing sixth form shit. David Tennant would have struggled with that bollocks.
As for Ncuti Gatwa, Doctor Who is surely one of the few roles where a casting call can be truly all encompassing. There is nothing to say the Doctor can’t be black. And Ncuti is a phenomenal actor.
We’re you upset in 1982 when Doctor Who was suddenly a young blonde lad in his 20s? In 1987 he was suddenly Scottish. What’s that about? Does Gallifrey have a Scotland?
(Don’t come at me with Doctor Who - I will nerd the shit out of you! )
Why can’t Bond be black? It isn’t the same continuity as the Connery/Moore films. Daniel Craig died at the end of his last one (I loved the Craig Bond films, but don’t have a lot of time for the others). It’s obviously being rebooted, so any make actor is on the table. My casting call would be good looking male, around 6ft, strong build, can rock a tuxedo. Skin colour wouldn’t come into it.
Actors tend to be cast on a variety of factors. In big budget films financal considerations are usually the most important. Artistic intentions will also enter into it. I’m not sure what the main reason for Daniel Craig being cast was, but I seem to recall a bunch of overentitled nitwits loosing their shit at the time because he was blond.
I went to the cinema twice to see Casino Royale, something I rarely do. I thought Daniel Craig was incredible. He absolutely nailed it, retaining the essence of Bond, ditching some of the more overt sexism and silliness, and bringing a dark tragic realism to the role.
Very cleverly, the filmmakers hold back a lot of the familiar tropes and really make Craig earn them. We don’t see the Tux until half way through, Bond is asked if he wants his Martin shaken or stirred (do I look like I give a damn?) and every time he is asked for his name he replies ‘James Bond’ or ‘Bond’. Right at the very end, the last words in the film, he finally says ‘The name’s Bond. James Bond’.
Do second time in the Cinema, we get to the line, and someone right at the back of the cinema, in an almost apologetic voice, someone shouted ‘Not MY Bond!’
)