Racism and all the bad -isms

How about we keep thr awards as they always have been and have a new catagory for people who fashionably identify as house bricks?

And the award for bigot of the year goes to…:joy:

How about we have awards for best actor, and drop all this actress shit. It isn’t the 19th century. There is no difference between men and women when it comes to acting.

If there is a brick category…

There can be Only One

1 Like

It’s interesting, isn’t it. At no point did Emma Corrin say she wanted a separate category of award.

She said she preferred to have male and female awards merged into a single category. Like the Grammy’s have.

But the immediate bigoted reaction is to mock that we should have separate recognition for…hmmm…what hyperbolic term can I pluck out of my arse. Let’s go with ‘house bricks’.

We should be well past the idea that you need separate categories to recognise female endeavour in arts. It should be gender neutral because there is no good reason to gender segregate.

2 Likes

I remember.

Ah, I’m a bigot for accepting 250,000 years of human evolution.

There’s no difference between men and women when it comes to acting. Absolute horse shite. What made Sarah Conner and Ripley so absolutely brilliant and bad ass??? They were not over powered mary sues who were just better at everything, they were weaker, smaller and over powered by all the men in their stories. But by grit, determination, intelligence and and sheer bloody mindedness they absolutely aced their enemies and won the battle. Men and women ARE different no matter how loudly the left shouts to the contrary. Guessing you loved Thor and Dr Strange being a coward to wonderful wanda?

Same goes for football, motor racing, cricket, baseball etc etc etc. But it isn’t. Why? Because men and women are different. You’re married, I think you might have noticed.

I disagree here. Of course not to the house brick extent. But it means one great performance every year will miss out and more often than not, because of the way society is and people are, it’s going to be the actresses who miss out. So once again it will be women who end up missing out to accommodate the rights of a tiny number of people who probably will never give an oscar worthy performance in their life.

The simple solution here is to allow all films to choose which category they put their actors in. They already can choose if they are considered as leading or supporting. Allow them to choose if they want to be considered as an actor (meaning male or non-binary) or actress (meaning female) regardless of the gender of the character they played.
This way non-binary actors are not gendered but females don’t have to lose out either.

I’m not married, as a point of order :slight_smile:

Anyway, same doesn’t go for football. Or any sport where there is a physical disadvantage through size or power.

I’m to be convinced that a female formula one driver could not be as successful as a male one. Same goes for darts, snooker, archery and so on.

The only reason to segregate in those endeavours, as @deneb has suggested, is because of the sexism and discrimination that would prevent women competing on a level playing field. Not their ability.

So what you are saying is that there is something about the differences in biology between men and women that means that they have to be judged differently when it comes to acting? Would you care to say what you think that is? Is is hormonal? Something to do with muscle mass? Does that have an impact on your ability to emote or carry a dramatic narrative?

No, you’re a bigot because you didn’t listen to their arguments and went straight to equating someone feeling like they are outside gender norms with them wanting to be a house brick, like you’d liquified the daily Mail and and injected it into your veins.

I totally get your point, and a lot of women advocate for the female categories because of the latent sexism in society that means there simply aren’t the Oscar worthy roles for women. But I’d rather address the core problem than sticking plaster the awards side.

Personally, I would merge the gendered tiles, but create more categories to recognise different kinds of role. So best actor, best supporting actor, but then also best comedic performance, best newcomer etc

1 Like

But it’s okay for the males to lose out :thinking:

I think we all know, deep down, that men wouldn’t lose out. And anyway, if we did, we’ve had it our own way for a very, very long time.

I see it’s now fashionable on Sky for the co-commentator to give their ‘Player of the match’
Has someone been offended by a male footballer in a mens football match being referred to as the man of the match?

1 Like

No, but there’s almost no chance that somebody like Corrin playing a woman in My Policeman would win if they were put forward for best supporting actor. Wouldn’t even make the nomination shortlist.

How does this have an impact on you? How are you being inconvenienced?

1 Like

Sorry, made an assumption there.

You do like jumping to conclusions, very often the wrong ones.
Where did I say I was being impacted or inconvenienced?

Messi, Suarez, Fowler. None of them were huge physical units, just very skillfull players. No reason a woman couldn’t do the same.

I’m a huge fan of womens golf, they are amazingly talented, every bit as skillful as the men.
Obviously they’re not as powerful, but that doesn’t detract from their ability.

Same should be said about womens football, regarding skill levels, but it sadly isn’t.
Awful standards of skill in what is becoming a major mainstream TV sport.

They dont roll around feigning injury like men though

I spend all my time working, looking after kids, and I don’t have sex anymore, so it’s an easy assumption to make. :rofl:

Finally we agree on something!