• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Racism is contextual

Isn't that just racism by proxy? "I'm not racist, but people I don't want to upset are."

But that was used as the start of this thread. I wouldn't question it if the choreography was about traditional african dance vs robots but the choreography was never addressed.
 
Oh. I thought they were from the same line, Boba Fett's daddy or something.

In fact, that's what Wookiepedia says.



No idea if that's canon, but I'm just guessing that folks contributing to a Star Wars wiki are a little anal about things like that.

If you're right, and there's more than one genetic line, then a clone can look like anyone. If they're all descended from Jango, then seems to me they should all look very much like Jango.

Again, not that it's essential to the story.

That is cannon and addressed in the Force Awakens when one leader of the New Order talks about going back to clones.
 
My recollection is that it was mostly coming from alt right groups rather than comic fan boys, so if I remember correctly, racism.

Seemed to be coming quite a bit from the fan boys, from my own recollection. But then, identifying alt-right individuals is sometimes, let's say, subjective.

That's not the same as flat-out never hiring someone of a specific race because you believe their race makes them inferior or less capable of doing the job, or because you're convinced that people of that race, by definition, steal or are unreliable, etc.

Yeah but see, that's the old definition of racism. Now it's a lot, erm... broader.

Okay, I stopped paying attention to Star Wars for a while now, so I haven't thought about this before. But aren't all the clones from a single genetic line?

Up until the Empire came along. Then they recruited.
 
Choosing not to rent/sell to black people because they might drop the property value is racist even if it's not motivated by hatred for the race. It's the acceptance and perpetuation of the system that's racist.

Imagine saying, "I know I pay my female employees 65 cents on the dollar for what I pay my male employees. I don't do it because because I don't like women. I love women. I do it because I can and it saves me money."

It's still sexist.

Well, again I guess it depends on your definition of racism and sexism.

Really? Even in the UK, with a smaller non-white population, calls from the latter for greater representation on screen is pretty much a constant.

Sorry, who's the latter?
 
Nonsense that is just what sells, a totally non-racist business decision. In the entertainment industry you can always fob the racism off on someone else.

Well, again I guess it depends on your definition of racism and sexism.

I would posit that any definition of racism that only includes unverifiable thoughts and feelings while excluding actions and institutions that systematically disadvantage members of a race (gender or whatever) is incomplete at best.
 
I would posit that any definition of racism that only includes unverifiable thoughts and feelings while excluding actions and institutions that systematically disadvantage members of a race (gender or whatever) is incomplete at best.

By systematically you mean deliberately?
 
I would posit that any definition of racism that only includes unverifiable thoughts and feelings while excluding actions and institutions that systematically disadvantage members of a race (gender or whatever) is incomplete at best.

You have to remember that the primary goal is to define racism as the act of Racists who are of course swastika waving Nazis only. And certainly to keep it away from any actions the person involved in the discussion might have done. This is most easily done by keeping racism as a binary state instead of a spectrum that everyone is on.
 
You have to remember that the primary goal is to define racism as the act of Racists who are of course swastika waving Nazis only.

No, the goal is to define racism as being anything that disadvantages minorities, regardless of whether it's intentional or not, natural or man-made, and as something that can only be done by white people.

Hell, my hyperbole is more accurate than yours, but at least mine doesn't imply that you're a racist. As usual your strawman adds nothing to the discussion except try to paint everyone who disagrees with you as a terrible monster.

How about we use a WORKABLE definition of racism? Not one that keeps changing with the mood and the intent of the speaker would be preferable.
 
And of course hiring someone whose race is not specified it always defaults to white because white is the default nothing racist about that either.

I don't know who said that, or were you got that premise from, but I wouldn't be making that claim as if it was somehow universally true.
 
I don't know who said that, or were you got that premise from, but I wouldn't be making that claim as if it was somehow universally true.

Well in Hollywood it is. That in america unless one makes a point of calling a character out as ethnic they default to white. Just like they default to male most of the time. It only leaves that when someone is trying to make a point.
 
On Finn, didn't he say in the movie that he was taken from his family as a baby and raised as a trooper? So not a clone. I also thought the troopers in the original series weren't clones either. But then I thought the clone wars had been 100s or 1000s of years in the past not less than a generation as depicted in the prequels.
 
On Finn, didn't he say in the movie that he was taken from his family as a baby and raised as a trooper? So not a clone. I also thought the troopers in the original series weren't clones either. But then I thought the clone wars had been 100s or 1000s of years in the past not less than a generation as depicted in the prequels.

That would make more sense, given how people thought that "the force" was completely made up...

Regardless, I suspect that a large part of the backlash is due to the fact that social media makes it possible to bitch about how superheroes aren't 99.9% white men now. Sites like Patreon make it fairly easy for various content creators - including both good comedy and interesting takes on news, as well as asinine opinions of all stripes, with the "SJWs are ruining my favorite entertainment form!!!" being in the latter category.

Regardless, there's a lot that can be broken down when it comes to movies - the relative strength of black men as lead actors compared to women and actors of any other minority group, being in front of the camera versus behind it (How long did it take for the US industry to figure out that the same folks that flocked to Tyler Perry's movies might be interested in movies that didn't hit all of his tropes?), but...I honestly would just rather not at the moment.
 
On Finn, didn't he say in the movie that he was taken from his family as a baby and raised as a trooper? So not a clone. I also thought the troopers in the original series weren't clones either. But then I thought the clone wars had been 100s or 1000s of years in the past not less than a generation as depicted in the prequels.

Well that all depends on how old Kenobi is thought to be. The clone wars are mentioned as him having fought along Leia's father in them after all. That being the original reference to them. So they couldn't be generations ago as it was fought by the previous generation. Though the extent of Jedi existence in them asside from the odd general was not established until later. So if Jedi had been very rare and semi mythical even before the empire it would fit nicely.

Of course the military running galactic police men of 25-30 years ago being a legend now makes little sense. The clone wars being around WWII given actors aging after all.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom