TCTTS said:

---

And normal people don't give a sh*t about any of it.

---

I don't know if you've been paying attention the last 6-8 years but there aren't many "normal" people left in this country.

"Normal people." LOL

There is a large cohort of Americans who:

1. Believe representation is important.
2. Also believe it is lazy -- and frankly, offensive to everyone -- to take an established story that originally featured white actors and simply change the race of the characters in the name of "diversity." That's the '70s-'80s response to representation. "I got an idea ... let's do a remake of 'The Jackie Gleason Show' but with black people!"

On a broader note, it is disingenuous for people in the entertainment industry to complain about pushback to their approach to issues such as diversity. People in that industry are always quick to shout that they want to shape perceptions and influence all spheres of public life, including politics. You can't do that in a vacuum.

Hollywood started this; they need to grow up and learn from criticism of their ham-handedness.

Has this been posted yet?

https://www.reddit.com/r/MadeMeSmile/comments/xec2c3/disney_fan_with_down_syndrome_reacts_to_the_new/

Yeah, COMPLETELY spontaneous reaction. No coaching beforehand whatsoever.

Hungry Ojos said:

---

Yeah, COMPLETELY spontaneous reaction. No coaching beforehand whatsoever.

---

I actually think it is spontaneous and will continue to believe it is.

TCTTS said:

---

You and The Debt keep making points like this, as if it's some kind of clever trump card, when it really just shows your willful ignorance.

I can't believe I have to explain this, but whites and blacks don't share a 50-50 split of the population, haven't equally controlled/been equally represented in film for the past 100 years, and, not to mention, whites enslaved blacks for 300 years prior to that, while blacks earned equal rights to whites only 60 years ago.

In other words, the race that so suffocatingly eclipsed nearly every facet of life for so long, particularly when it comes to film/pop culture, doesn't have the same claim to otherwise moronic questions like, "wHy cAN't BLaCk paNtheR bE WhiTe!!!???"

Because *whites* weren't the repressed, underrepresented race for the past 100 years of film history.

Because there have been *countless* white superheroes depicted in film, and only a small handful of black superheroes depicted in film.

Because, since the 1920s, the vast majority of Disney characters have been white, not black.

Again, this isn't rocket science.

And this archaic idea that race representation in movies or music or entertainment in general should *only* equate to the exact racial makeup of our country is utter nonsense. Because, again... one of those races was actively held out of the spotlight for so long, disproportionate to their percentage makeup in terms of population.

So if Disney wants to make *one* of their previously white characters black, and doing so helps certain members of their community feel like they're finally getting their time in the sun, so to speak - especially when white people have enjoyed seeing themselves represented in Disney movies for 100 years now - I say go for it.

How can that *possibly* annoy you, given the context and circumstances?

---

Staff, since he is breaking the rules yall established for us and calling me out specifically, permit me some leeway with my response.

First, thank you TCTTS for finally conceding the true motivation of what the trashy "carnies" have keenly discerned. You have finally admitted what has taken years to pull out of you. Your first-stage deflection is "casting directors choose the best talent for the role." Then you moved onto "this is financial, representation will open up markets to new people." But this is abandoned because little black girls are not a numerically large demographic compared to Hispanics and whites. So finally you come around to the place you mocked the "carnies" for correctly identifying. This isnt about the best actress; this isnt about the market. This is about correcting past offenses.

But FFS the way you go about it is slapping blackface on Ariel and you pat yourself on the back. "Remember slavery, this will not fix that but this is a gesture of support and good faith." Disney has no problem making original ethnically friendly films like Coco, Encanto, Moanna, Mulan, etc. But when it comes to black representation the best Disney can do is blackface the white characters (yes Tiana exists, but Princess & Frog wasnt exactly a smash hit. Cars which came out 3 years before had twice the box office revenues, and was merchandised to infinity.)

Go make good black stories. Give little black girls a sense of wonder and identity and belonging. Make it the best you can. But if you or Hollywood thinks tokenizing Ariel is healing any wounds, or bridging people together, there is a black hole in yalls brain cavity.

The Debt said:

---

Go make good black stories. Give little black girls a sense of wonder and identity and belonging. Make it the best you can. But if you or Hollywood thinks tokenizing Ariel is healing any wounds, or bridging people together, there is a black hole in yalls brain cavity.

---

I definitely agree with the bolded part but not so much with the rest of your thoughts. Using a highly charged word like "tokenizing" doesn't help the discussion at all. If you watch the reaction videos and talk to anyone who has young black girls the fact that the main character in a major story is black is a huge deal. To suggest that anything in Hollywood is going to "make up for slavery" is insulting and disingenuous.

Quote:

---

Go make good black stories. Give little black girls a sense of wonder and identity and belonging. Make it the best you can.

---

I don't care what color Ariel is, but this is the right answer.

Know Your Enemy said:

---

The Debt said:

---

Go make good black stories. Give little black girls a sense of wonder and identity and belonging. Make it the best you can. But if you or Hollywood thinks tokenizing Ariel is healing any wounds, or bridging people together, there is a black hole in yalls brain cavity.

---

I definitely agree with the bolded part but not so much with the rest of your thoughts. Using a highly charged word like "tokenizing" doesn't help the discussion at all. If you watch the reaction videos and talk to anyone who has young black girls the fact that the main character in a major story is black is a huge deal. To suggest that anything in Hollywood is going to "make up for slavery" is insulting and disingenuous.

---

I wasnt the one who brought up slavery. That was Mr. Pro-Hollywood.

It was part of HIS argument. Don't get mad at me when he freely admits it is a premise to his position.

If you have a problem with someone linking slavery to casting choices, good news brother, I fully agree it is inappropriate and wrong.

I think it's ridiculous to believe that Disney execs are sitting in a room and saying "Hey, let's make a black Ariel to make up for all that slavery stuff."

Look at this thread, isn't it neat?
Wouldn't you say our obsession's complete?
Wouldn't you think that we've talked,
We've talked about everything?

Look at this board
Anger untold
How much bullsheet can one server hold?
Looking around here you'd think
Sure, we've covered everything.

I've got racists and apologists a-plenty.
I've got moral high grounds and triggers galore.
You want the same argument over how many pages?
I've got 20!
But who cares?
No big deal
I want morrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrre.

I wanna be where the normals are.
I wanna see, wanna see them postin'
Walking around on those, what do you call'em?
Oh yeah, eggshells.

Flappin' your gums, you don't get too far
Stars are required for ignoring morons
Slippin' along down that, what's that word again?
Slope!

Up where they rant, up where they rave
Up where they make the same argument day after day,
Spoiler free, wish I could be,
Part of that board.

What would I give if I could live without my phone screen?
What would I pay to spend a day without reading 'F16'?
Bet you on Premium, there's a happy medium,
Where they don't reprimand other posters
Middle-age Aggies, Moms and Daddies
Ready to fire off a harsh, well-worded retort to show how mentally and morally superior they are to the other side of the argument,
proving once and for all that it is in fact THEY who are taking the high ground, and promising to
say their piece and never return to this thread again ... well, maybe, just once in a few hours to see how many blue stars my
incredibly brave post got, because I KNOW smart people agree with me, so maybe just click it one time to make sure there aren't any
typos, and OMG that same self-righteous IDIOT already replied with his same BULLSHEET about me and how I think I'm the best
thing that's happened since sliced bread. Well **** it, I can't let this pass, I'm going to break my rule just this ONE TIME so
I can let him know that he is a trash clown and he WILL NOT HAVE THE LAST WORD OVER ME!

And ready to know what the moderators know,
Ask my questions and then be fed up by their stupid-ass answers,
Who is Brandon, and why does he, what's the word,
Go?

Wait, what, I'm banned?
This will not stand, I will just log right back in as my sock.
I will not stop
I'll post til I drop
Cuz I'm part of this board.

I was getting tempted to respond to something but no one here is changing their mind about anything, so I'll just exit on that. Bravo.

EclipseAg said:

---

"Normal people." LOL

There is a large cohort of Americans who:

1. Believe representation is important.
2. Also believe it is lazy -- and frankly, offensive to everyone -- to take an established story that originally featured white actors and simply change the race of the characters in the name of "diversity." That's the '70s-'80s response to representation. "I got an idea ... let's do a remake of 'The Jackie Gleason Show' but with black people!"

On a broader note, it is disingenuous for people in the entertainment industry to complain about pushback to their approach to issues such as diversity. People in that industry are always quick to shout that they want to shape perceptions and influence all spheres of public life, including politics. You can't do that in a vacuum.

Hollywood started this; they need to grow up and learn from criticism of their ham-handedness.

---

This. 100%

I laugh about it when I see it, and call it out because it's moronic. Apparently, all the white liberals in Hollywood have been racist for over 100 years and didn't cast black people. They are now overcorrecting and casting black people in every role they can, which are usually just replacing a historically white character with a black one. I mean... fine, go for it. It's stupid and helps no one, but go for it.

However, you actually make an original movie or around a black character and make it good, the general public loves it. Into the Spiderverse... fantastic. The Princess and the Frog, great throw-back animated movie.

Soul is another great example. They didn't just remake an old movie and stuff a black character in there. They gave us a new character with his own unique life experiences and culture. That was great to see, and no one with any basic rational thought had a problem with him being a black character.

Also, the fact that Hollywood literally politicized the industry by requiring representation for Academy Award eligibility is also a big reason why it's discussed.

Know Your Enemy said:

---

I think it's ridiculous to believe that Disney execs are sitting in a room and saying "Hey, let's make a black Ariel to make up for all that slavery stuff."

---

They definitely don't say it that way. But as demonstrated here, it plays a role in their thinking.

The historic guilt is engrained into their rationalizations, and the calamine lotion to soothe their consciences is "representation." But making good black films isn't on their radar. What was the answer?

Quote:

---

So if Disney wants to make *one* of their previously white characters black...I say go for it.

---

You don't like the "charged" word "tokenization." By all means find me a better term that means what TCTTS says when they knowingly decide the slate of Disney princesses is too white so they click the paint can icon and start darkening characters for "representation." Tokenization is the best fit.

Slapping blackface on Ariel? So… you don't even know what blackface is.

And tokenization… no, I don't think that's the right word because:

A. It's a lead role in a feature film. Seems kind of a big old waste of money to cast somebody of color just for perceptions to a lead role. In fact, I thought the actress was a kind of a known entity in that whole Disney kids space already? That's not perfunctory. Now… the black guy in Frozen 2… yes… laughable tokenization.

B. You haven't even seen the actress in the role to say if she is deserving or not

C. You are probably a male between 25-60 years old (like me). Neither of us are probably ever going to watch this so you'll never be able to claim with a straight face that this is tokenization.

ATM9000 said:

---

Slapping blackface on Ariel? So… you don't even know what blackface is.

And tokenization… no, I don't think that's the right word because:

A. It's a lead role in a feature film. Seems kind of a big old waste of money to cast somebody of color just for perceptions to a lead role. In fact, I thought the actress was a kind of a known entity in that whole Disney kids space already? That's not perfunctory. Now… the black guy in Frozen 2… yes… laughable tokenization.

B. You haven't even seen the actress in the role to say if she is deserving or not

C. You are probably a male between 25-60 years old (like me). Neither of us are probably ever going to watch this so you'll never be able to claim with a straight face that this is tokenization.

---

Blackface is where white actors would apply black makeup on their face to portray a character as black, often but not always, in a disparaging light.

Originally, the canvas was a white actor. Now the canvas is an established white character. The fact that you sniff your farts and say "it's a black actress" tells us that you do little abstract thinking.

And if you are a male 25-60, I suppose you do not have children or grandchildren. Yea...men 25-60 never see children's movies.

The Debt said:

---

ATM9000 said:

---

Slapping blackface on Ariel? So… you don't even know what blackface is.

And tokenization… no, I don't think that's the right word because:

A. It's a lead role in a feature film. Seems kind of a big old waste of money to cast somebody of color just for perceptions to a lead role. In fact, I thought the actress was a kind of a known entity in that whole Disney kids space already? That's not perfunctory. Now… the black guy in Frozen 2… yes… laughable tokenization.

B. You haven't even seen the actress in the role to say if she is deserving or not

C. You are probably a male between 25-60 years old (like me). Neither of us are probably ever going to watch this so you'll never be able to claim with a straight face that this is tokenization.

---

Blackface is where white actors would apply black makeup on their face to portray a character as black, often but not always, in a disparaging light.

Originally, the canvas was a white actor. Now the canvas is an established white character. The fact that you sniff your farts and say "it's a black actress" tells us that you do little abstract thinking.

And if you are a male 25-60, I suppose you do not have children or grandchildren. Yea...men 25-60 never see children's movies.

---

Ok. That's still not blackface.

'I'm a grown man and a black Little Mermaid finds itself rent free in my head.'

You should repeat that to yourself out loud. Maybe even say it out loud to a loved one.

See their reaction and it'll be a good gauge on whether or not you need to step away from the internet for a while.

Being white at the bottom of the ocean would not be practical. Too easy for fish predators to spot you leading to natural extinction of white mermaids.

Black mermaids are much more practical and make much more sense.

TCTTS said:

---

They insert a four second scene between a same-sex alien couple made of rocks and it results in post after post of people losing their minds.

They subtly nod to a third lead/teenage character being bisexual and we have to listen to endless rants about Hollywood's groomer agenda.

A suspect rumor leaks that they're not going to show the American flag being planted on the moon, gullible posters take it as gospel, then we have to listen to weeks of griping about how anti-American Hollywood is. The movie hits theaters, turns out the rumor wasn't even remotely true, and not a single poster who b*tched about it admits they were duped. All the while moving on to the next rage-inducing issue.

It's an endless airing of political grievances around here, over the smallest, dumbest stuff.

And normal people don't give a sh*t about any of it.

Normal people want to be able to talk about these movies without having to wade through irrational take after irrational take about why a two-second gay kiss ruined a movie for you.

Normal people are capable of ignoring it. Normal people aren't bothered by it in the first place.

You guys constantly tell me that I need thicker skin, and to just ignore it all, but whenever Hollywood does these minuscule, innocuous things you don't agree with, your skin proves to be so thin it might as well be translucent, and you couldn't not post about it if your life depended on it.

Once again, *you're* allowed to gripe endlessly, but I'm not allowed to gripe about the griping. Always a double standard, and it's always the exact same people complaining about the exact same crap. Over and over and over again.

For some reason, that I will never fully understand, one board (F16) isn't enough. All of these political grievances can't just be aired there. No, the endless b*tching *must* make its way here too, in every last thread, as if these complaints are so important, and so crucial that the masses hear them, that nothing short of two boards will suffice. And if anyone dare speak up or challenge this? They're ridiculed, gaslit, and labeled as personally "attacking" said posters.

It's so incredibly stupid, and I'm so incredibly over it.

---

You apparently aren't over it. I'll grant you there is plenty of idiocy on F16 and other forums including this one (on BOTH sides). You just need to learn to ignore it if you don't want to get into a back and forth discussion (I've ignored replying to plenty of your posts I disagree with fwiw). Resist that temptation to espouse your worldview and move on to something else. Or just ignore the responses you get. Opinions are like *******s - everybody has one, including you AND me. Not a criticism...just some friendly advice to not blow a gasket at a time this country is tearing itself apart.

Ghost of Bisbee said:

---

Being white at the bottom of the ocean would not be practical. Too easy for fish predators to spot you leading to natural extinction of white mermaids.

Black mermaids are much more practical and make much more sense.

---

LMAO

Ghost of Bisbee said:

---

Being white at the bottom of the ocean would not be practical. Too easy for fish predators to spot you leading to natural extinction of white mermaids.

Black mermaids are much more practical and make much more sense.

---

Ackshually, it's depends on the perspective. Most fish within the euphotic zone are light on the bottom so they blend into the lighter colored sky and dark from the top, so they blend into the deep/sand.

So really she should look like those guys from star trek tos