I also don't like the idea, that liking pokemon or star wars makes you "white". There is something wrong with this,I can't seem to put into words.
Mace Windu? Master of the Jedi high council.
Lando Calrissian? Permed out badass who is in charge of Cloud City
Vader? The original voice actor was black but does anything else need to be said?
Can Finn really compare to any of these? Is he a hero I can personally identify with? No way.
(I get tired of so many stores where the lead characters have some "special" family origin that is so clear to their situations and this erases any discussion of what is it you have to do to become "special" as a member of the mass.)
I so much identify with that guy, see
IMO he doesn't have to be rich like Lando or powerful like Windu. He just has to be cool and portrayed positively, and I think he is. If he was like Jar Jar then yes, I'd complain.
Either way, we went from tech diversity to Star Wars, so maybe we should stop here :-)
> Mace Windu
> Vader
Mace Windu was a completely bogus effort to put Samuel L Jackson in front of Black ticket-buyers. It wasn't even a good role for the incredible (but range-limited) performer Jackson is.
I am still incensed by this. The marketing of the movie totally misrepresented what Finn's role would be. I thought he would be the lead jedi. I doubt I will watch any of the forthcoming Star Wars movies.
Finn made me smile and root for him every time I saw him on screen. He was awkward at times (hey, not much social interaction since he was a ST from early childhood), but his heart was always in the right place. I smile when I think of his character, and look forward to seeing him in the next part of the story, EVEN if he's not a Jedi.
Jar-Jar makes me cringe when I hear him or look at him move. (That's saying a lot considering how bad the writing was for Anakin, IMO.) Jar Jar's purpose seemed to be the Comic Relief, whereas Finn has a much bigger and better-integrated role.
This changed when Americas immigration opened up to people from Asia and get central.
But as those groups assimililate we are going to revert to the old style view of race. Black and then everyone else.
So when people say white culture they really just mean mainstream American culture.
I found the above passage strange. Within the same paragraph they talk with one student who says it is all white and asian and then in the next sentence the same student says there aren't many "people of color" in the valley. What are asians if not people of color.
(This is not an opinion that I agree with, but a lot of people actually think that way).
Sarcasm aside, a lot of people believe whatever serves them better. When they realised that "racism = discrimination" wan't enough to let them achieve their goals, they changed the definition to "racism = discrimination + power". Or, us geeks only became "patriarchal opressors of minorities" when non-geeks realized that the smart kids that got bullied at school were becoming really rich.
I have found a near perfect antidote: I point out that the USA is the world's most powerful nation (I'm from a small weak nation that has historically been trashed a lot). So, I continue: are you saying that only Americans can be racist, for they are so powerful?
Nobody that I threw that at has been able to recover, they stutter, stumble, flail their arms, start to sweat and change the subject.
That's a really good point.
There's this idea in the world of "white guilt" - that white people have been exceptionally cruel, by enslaving, killing, colonizing other races/nations.
The reality is that most people/races were viciously cruel; people fought wars, killed/raped their opponents, enslaved their prisoners, ... for generations. The difference is simply that whites (Europeans) have been so much more efficient at it (as with so many other things), because they were the first to develop advanced technology.
Well, it's a "rhetorical technique" then that appears to have gripped mainstream discussion on the matter. It's why blatant double-standards are accepted when it comes to the topics of race, sexism and equality. Either that, or it's the whole "outrage culture" that's causing me to see way more of the blatant outrage rather than the reasoned discussion.
While I understand the critique, I disagree with the academic terminology, and think insisting on it leads to misinformed intepretations of others' arguments, like saying "black people by definition can't be racist".
I don't think they consider those things racist though, so that can't be their definition.
On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that Twitter would explode if a black candidate was denied for "speaking black" (personally, I find it hard to understand non-mainstream dialects of English). Although tecnically, that still wouldn't be racism, but rather just generic discrimination.
What an amazingly stupid generalization. Some of my favorite Pokemon and video game youtubers are black. Tons of black Star Wars fans exists too. It's pretty offensive to associate an entire group of people with certain preferences.
According to a quoted student (around 1/3 of the text), Silicon Valley is "a startlingly homogeneous culture, made up of white and Asian people who “like Star Wars and stuff like Pokémon.”"
http://i.imgur.com/9btMHIT.png
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5b/Continen...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovene_dialects
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Polska-d...
etc/und so weiter/and so on/et ainsi de suite/...
Hell, if Germany was a province of China, it'd barely crack the top five in population. Spain wouldn't even crack the top 10. West Bengal in India would be the largest country in Europe, and it's only the fourth largest state. UP is twice its size.
Wow. This completely blew my mind. It's incredibly ignorant how we (Americans) lump the provinces, languages, cultures, and 55 ethnicities[0] of China into Chinese people, and then lump Chinese people into Asians.
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_minorities_in_China
Yes, especially programmers from India - typically not quite as dark-skinned as African-Americans, but pretty close, and many of them have a thick accent, too.
For example Irish people weren't considered white until they gained significant economic power. [1]
Interestingly enough it was somewhat at the expense of Black Americans at the time.
Today, Blacks have significant economic and political power, yet only a handful have achieved "white" status and they are almost all politicians (Pres. Obama) and military leaders (Colin Powell).
[https://www.jointventure.org/images/stories/pdf/index2015.pd...]
I thought the article was supposed to be about efforts made to empower blacks, but when the writer drops a phrase like that, it's hard to avoid concluding that the efforts are aimed at removing whites.
He could simply have said "not black enough" or "missing black workers" or something similar. Why attack white people?