|
|
|
|
PLEASE NOTE: The Reality TV World Message Boards are filled with desperate
attention-seekers pretending to be one big happy PG/PG13-rated family. Don't
be fooled. Trying to get everyone to agree with you is like herding cats,
but intolerance for other viewpoints is NOT welcome and respect for other
posters IS required at all times. Jump in and play, and you'll soon find out
how easy it is to fit in, but save your drama for your mama. All members are
encouraged to read the
complete guidelines.
As entertainment critic Roger
Ebert once said, "If you disagree with something I write, tell me so, argue
with me, correct me--but don't tell me to shut up. That's not the American way."
|
|
|
"Racial question"
 |
EnglProf 888 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Fitness Correspondent"
|
11-17-03, 10:43 AM (EST)
 
  |
|
16. "RE: Racial question" |
I absolutely agree. I would love to see the interactions of a majority of African Americans and a couple of white people. That would be enlightening and interesting. It does, though, seem to break status quo so much that people would interpret it as an experiment, or worse-- as a spectacle. "Let's all tune and watch these African Americans play Survivor..." I don't know-- thinking that would be racist, but how could the show avoid seeming like "something to behold?" Darn, now I'm getting mad about that state of our country where it would be SO outrageous to have a game show with Survivor's popularity with mostly African American contestants. I guess statistically speaking more white folks apply so they probably choose their casts based on percentages (to a degree) BUT it also HAS to be about what sells--and no one can convince me that NETWORKS wouldn't see a mostly African-American Survivor as appealing to too small a niche to be successful. Maybe things are changing. Now we have straight audiences watching 'gay' shows like Queer Eye, Six Feet Under, Boy Meets Boy, etc. And white audiences must like Bernie Mac and Wanda, but the George Lopez show doesn't seem to have a huge audience. In some respects we don't seem ready... But I'm ready! Bring on All-Latino Survivor, Mark Burnett-- I'd welcome the chance to make my darn tv screen a little less WHITE!
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
|
|
sittem 4186 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Jerry Springer Show Guest"
|
11-17-03, 03:18 PM (EST)
|
|
20. "RE: Racial question" |
Hey ronpurvis - it's always great to see a new person on the boards and I want to extend a welcome to you.I certainly respect your opinions and you have a right to think Sean sucks and you can say pretty much what you want to about the people dumb enough to put themselves on reality TV. However, as you do so I have a couple of suggestions for you if you want to hang around SB for any amount of time and enjoy your experience. First, SB is arranged into a number of forums. If you really want to hate on the people on the show then you'll be much happier posting on the Basher forum right next door. Lots of venom gets spewed there and the downer and dirtier you get, the more approval you'll get from others. This part of the board more attracts people who actually enjoy the reality experience a little and sometimes we actually like some of the people on the shows. Second, it's my experience that we don't go after each other on these boards. That may happen on other sites, but it's pretty rare here and will get you banned pretty quickly. Phrases you've used here like "people like you" and "you have lost all credibility with me" don't really work to build bridges with your fellow posters. We're generally a pretty happy community here and we'd like to keep it that way. If you disagree with someone about a person or issue you can certainly discuss it, but do it with respect and without getting personal. The phrases you've used get into the personal and can be viewed as a personal attack. Now, you're saying to yourself, I've just been personally attacked. I'd say back I hope you don't feel that way. I'd like you to become a valued member of the SB community who gives and receives respect. We're all a bunch of people with too much time on our hands, but we'd all like to feel like respect exists between us for talking a few minutes to express an opinion. And, finally you'll say who in the world is he to talk to me like this? I'm nobody - just been hanging around here for a couple of years and my opinion is no more important or less important than anyone elses. However, you should now that there are moderators that will want to pursue you if you keep going down the critical path toward other posters on SB.
 2002 IceCat Originals, Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
ronpurvis 4 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "American Cancer Society Spokesperson"
|
11-17-03, 04:07 PM (EST)
|
|
22. "RE: Racial question" |
First Sittem, I know how the forums are arranged. If you read my post enough to complain, you should have read it enough that I didn't attack or bash the people on the show. I observed that Sean is not the type of person that should be anyones favorite. If you are going to take me to task. Please know what you are talking about. I have never bashed any of the contestants and don't really plan to.Second,I have zero respect for the people who use race as a weapon. That is what the two people that I wrote about were doing. If you see someone acting in a really bad way, you call them on it. Otherwise the behavior continues. That is what you are trying to do, so don't complain about me doing it. And yes you are making a personal observation, just like I did. So you really don't have any right to complain about my observations that are personal. It is amazing how some people can be so tolerant, unless of course they disagree with someone. Isn't it? You might want to think about, before your next reply that takes someone to task for intolerance when you are intolerant of their position. Lastly, I never accused you or anyone else of being nobody. I aslo did not make any statements that are not truley deserved. I don't waste what little time I have left on something that stupid. However people who try and use the race card do deserve to be called on it. People who do that are the ones that really try to cause strife and hate to go on and on. I have enough racial discrimination against my family, that I understand the issue first hand. Yet I don't go out and blame everything that happens on discrimination. That will only serve to make it rougher for my family down the road. If you can't understand my position on how hateful and rascist the original remarks are and wish to complain to the moderators feel free to do so.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
sittem 4186 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Jerry Springer Show Guest"
|
11-17-03, 05:44 PM (EST)
|
|
24. "RE: Racial question" |
>First Sittem, I know how the
>forums are arranged. If you
>read my post enough to
>complain, you should have read
>it enough that I didn't
>attack or bash the people
>on the show. I observed
>that Sean is not the
>type of person that should
>be anyones favorite. If you
>are going to take me
>to task. Please know what
>you are talking about. I
>have never bashed any of
>the contestants and don't really
>plan to.
It's my bad for assuming that you wanted to bash contestants. I made an assumption and was suggesting there's a better forum for that. I see now you had a different motivation. I apoligize and ask that you forgive me for this one. I thought your primary concern was the contestants, that's why I suggested Bashers. However, it's clear to me now you have...
>zero respect for the
>people who use race as
>a weapon. That is what
>the two people that I
>wrote about were doing. If
>you see someone acting in
>a really bad way, you
>call them on it. Otherwise
>the behavior continues. That is
>what you are trying to
>do, so don't complain about
>me doing it.
Good observation - I did see your postings and I felt they went over the line so I decided to call you on it. Is what I did the same as what you did? Obviously I know my intent and I don't know your intent. I'm willing to ascribe positive motivation to you if that's what you say you had. I admit it's very hard to read between the lines some times and understand a person's intent. >And yes you are making a personal
>observation, just like I did.
>So you really don't have
>any right to complain about
>my observations that are personal.
>It is amazing how some
>people can be so tolerant,
>unless of course they disagree
>with someone. Isn't it? You
>might want to think about,
>before your next reply that
>takes someone to task for
>intolerance when you are intolerant
>of their position. Well, in 2 years here I've never felt a desire or need to take "someone to task for intolerence". That's probably because when issues like race or religion or politics come up that I have a context of understanding who the people are because they have a history of posting here and I think I "know" them enough to trust their intent. We've had a number of these types of discussions in the past with a variety of opinions being expressed without any personal attacks. I do want to emphasize here that I'm operating off of MY perception that this was a personal attack and am not implying that was your intent. I do want to say that my responses to you have nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with your attitudes or opinions about race. You are entitled to those opinions unless they become a personal attack on someone. Again, the "personal attack" I speak of is my perception for what you did. I haven't consulted with those who were the targets of your posts. They may have had no problem with it and they can speak for themselves if they so desire. >Lastly, I never accused you or
>anyone else of being nobody. I didn't mean to imply you did. I'm the one who said "I'm nobody". I genuinely don't feel like I have the right to tell you what to do, how to feel or what kinds of attitudes you should have about race or any other issue. I'M NOBODY! I was meaning since I'm not a moderator you don't have to take me seriously, but I was suggesting that you might want to consider the tone of your posts for the future if you want to hang around. Maybe I'm just feeling overly sensitive today!! >I aslo did not make
>any statements that are not
>truley deserved. Now, that one is your opinion.
>I don't waste what little time I have
>left on something that stupid.
>However people who try and
>use the race card do
>deserve to be called on
>it. People who do that
>are the ones that really
>try to cause strife and
>hate to go on and
>on. I have enough racial
>discrimination against my family, that
>I understand the issue first
>hand. Yet I don't go
>out and blame everything that
>happens on discrimination. That will
>only serve to make it
>rougher for my family down
>the road. If you can't
>understand my position on how
>hateful and rascist the original
>remarks are and wish to
>complain to the moderators feel
>free to do so.
And, I'd point out that there are a number of people here who have also felt the effects of racism, both black and white. I know of several on this very thresd who have had experience in this area. So, when you suggest that someone "grow up" or that another person has lost "credibility with me" I am suggesting you are a little new here to be taking people to task in that way over this particular issue. One more time - I did not mean what I posted to be a personal attack on you. It was meant as a friendly welcome and a request that you be careful about going after others. Had you not referred directly to the posters with the two phrases I first suggested and "grow up" I'd have had absolutely no problem with what you said. There are several other opinions in the thresd I disagree with pretty strongly, but I'm not going to challenge them because the whole issue elicits a lot of disagreement. I love to discuss issues of race because I believe I have some fairly unique perspectives on it, but sometimes we do end up talking around in circles about this issue and I've had a lot of discussions about it here in the past. I responded to you only because of the level of disrespect for posters I interpreted (whether correctly or not) in what you said. Thanks for your input. Again, I hope you'll stick around and that we can have a lot of great discussions in the future. I don't want to be your enemy here. 2002 IceCat Originals, Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
ronpurvis 4 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "American Cancer Society Spokesperson"
|
11-17-03, 06:37 PM (EST)
|
|
25. "RE: Racial question" |
>It's my bad for assuming that
>you wanted to bash contestants.
> I made an assumption
>and was suggesting there's a
>better forum for that.
>I see now you had
>a different motivation. I
>apoligize and ask that you
>forgive me for this one.
> I thought your primary
>concern was the contestants, that's
>why I suggested Bashers.
>However, it's clear to me
>now you have...
>
>
Apology accepted.>>zero respect for the
>>people who use race as
>>a weapon. That is what
>>the two people that I
>>wrote about were doing. If
>>you see someone acting in
>>a really bad way, you
>>call them on it. Otherwise
>>the behavior continues. That is
>>what you are trying to
>>do, so don't complain about
>>me doing it.
>
>Good observation - I did see
>your postings and I felt
>they went over the line
>so I decided to call
>you on it. Is
>what I did the same
>as what you did?
>Obviously I know my intent
>and I don't know your
>intent. I'm willing to
>ascribe positive motivation to you
>if that's what you say
>you had. I admit
>it's very hard to read
>between the lines some times
>and understand a person's intent.
>
>
Yes, what you did was the same as what I did. You saw something that you assumed was incorrect behavior and you tried to call me on it. You presumed my intention without any knowledge of me and thought my behavior was bad enough that you ought to set me straight on what good behavior was. The only difference was that you did not understand what my point and I did understand the original posters point. >Well, in 2 years here I've
>never felt a desire or
>need to take "someone to
>task for intolerence". Correction, you just did with me.
>>I aslo did not make
>>any statements that are not
>>truley deserved.
>
>Now, that one is your opinion.
>
Yes it is my opinion which I am free to give, just like you have given your opinion. However, I think my opinion is correct and I did not make assuptions of people, just what they actually said.
>And, I'd point out that there
>are a number of people
>here who have also felt
>the effects of racism, both
>black and white. I
>know of several on this
>very thresd who have had
>experience in this area.
>So, when you suggest that
>someone "grow up" or that
>another person has lost "credibility
>with me" I am suggesting
>you are a little new
>here to be taking people
>to task in that way
>over this particular issue.
>
Again, you are making a lot of assumptions for which there is no basis. I have been here a lot longer than you think. I have read the sit daily for a very long time. I just don't post unless I have something to say. Especially here because I don't care for the forum software that is used. So before you start making assumptions you ought to think about them alot more than you do. As far as the suggestion that I am too new to take someone to task that is not the best argument. I guess if I see a hate crime in the town that I just moved in to, that I should keep my mouth shut because I am too new. When do I get the privellages that others have? Do I have to post a certain number of messages? Do I have to provide YOU proof of when I first came to the site? What satisfies you? Please think your comments over and try it again.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
EnglProf 888 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Fitness Correspondent"
|
11-17-03, 11:33 PM (EST)
|
|
27. "RE: Racial question" |
The only difference was that you did not understand what my point and I did understand the original posters point.Frankly, I don't think you understood my point at all. If you did, you wouldn't have felt the need to attack me (who are you to tell someone to 'grow up'? How does age or maturity figure into this conversation? You can't address someone on her points as opposed to resorting to personal attacks?) Furthermore, if you had understood my point you wouldn't have used the term "race card." It isn't relevant to this discussion. Also, for some reason, you repeated a point I made yet thought you were disagreeing with me, which doesn't make any sense and then you were rude to boot. I don't know where your hostility is coming from, but I don't wish to discuss the matter with you further. Sittem is right-- regardless of how long you've lurked on these forums, when you aren't following the website's guidelines and you have a '3' next to your posting number, you'd better be ready to accept the consequences of personal attacks. Now I could tell you to grow up, but I think I'll skip the acrimony.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
PhoenixMons 4696 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Stuff Magazine Centerfold"
|
11-14-03, 09:37 AM (EST)
|
|
2. "My theory" |
My husband and I (he is Black) have talked about this at length every season when teh new cast is announced. "I hope they finally cast a Black male whose profession or community service work is not related to sports, who is not portrayed as lazy, who is not basically the "stereotype" all wrapped up in a neat little bow. Sean R. (Marquesas), who was and probably will always be my favorite Survivor, while portrayed as a lazy, was the kind of guy I'd want to hang around in real life, something I can't say for too many of the others. First we were given Gervase. The epitomy of the "do nothing" survivor. He was the first. Then came the great to look at but totally worthless (in terms of Survivor) Nick. I had such high hopes for him as he was a brain and was thoroughly let down by his sitting around doing nothing all day. Then there was Clarence. Ah, Clarence. A thief, and lazy. Then finally, Sean came along! Yay! But after Sean, we got Ted. Boy, I had high hopes for him too, but it seems he was also a lazy one...and gee, another athlete (former football star)! What a surprise! Granted the point of the show is to cast characters and not people (otherwise no one would watch)...but a LOT of what we as the viewers see is based upon editing. So we are getting what they want us to see...which for the most part, has been very stereotypical (negative stereotypes, of course) Black men. I actually posted something like this was back during Marquesas (I think before the first episode actually aired...under my old name kmsouthern). It was frustrating to me and my husband then and it's even more frustrating now that we've have 6 Black men and all six were some sort of athlete (Nick was, I believe, a basketbal coach for a community center on the side), and were protrayed as lazy and the viewers, as I see it, were pretty much set up to dislike them - in particular Sean and his "angry black man" persona that was shoved down our throats. IMO, every word he said on that show was dead on and he was one of the most real and likeable characters Survivor has ever had...but we were certainly not supposed to think that based upon editing. Oh well. I've given up on the notion that a Black man will be cast that will NOT be shown to us as some sort of stereotypical Black male...unless they cast my husband (he'd actually be really good on Survivor...just can't see him going out for it), I think we'll continue to see these same stereotypes (and it's not just Black men, though to me it's the most noticeable). It makes for good TV and I guess that's the point, right? Heck, they'd probably figure out a way to make my husband into a charicature, too. 
The 80s are back, like totally!
2003 winner of the coveted "Punky"
|
|
|
Top |
| |
sittem 4186 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Jerry Springer Show Guest"
|
11-14-03, 11:35 AM (EST)
|
|
3. "RE: Racial question" |
Well, as you can see from PM’s response this is an old issue on the board, but one I can never just “let go”. I agree with many of her observations and that we’ll probably never see much more out of MB than what we get when we see African American males cast on this show. He loves to fill in the slots with provocative characters and imo it’s just too easy to go with the flow and give the public a characterization that is “acceptable” in our white culture. It’s highly disappointing to me, but it is what it is. I still get frustrated, but it’s almost as predictable as the sun coming up in the morning that we’re going to get lazy, dishonest, thief, lazy (or did I already say that?).My favorite of all characters on the show has been Roger from S2. A very close second was Sean, S4. While portrayed as lazy, there was much more depth to him and every week was interesting to see how he was going to react/respond to his situation. He ended up having great affection for many of the people there and he went deep into the game. AND, he expressed some provocative “racialized” attitudes that resonated with me and my experience. I don’t have time to go over all this again right now. If you want to see what I think about this, go to the archives back during S4 days. Again, I agree with PM here – he’s someone (as well as Roger) that I’d like to hang out with and get to know and I can’t say that about many of the 112 people who have been paraded before us. I’ve communicated a bit with one of these men via e-mail. He was committed to the show and his experience even in retrospect, but he is also very disappointed with the editing and the way men of color are represented and has talked to MB about it. Suffice it to say that Osten and his performance didn’t help matters any (though in a CBS chat Andrew Savage said “What you don't see is Osten gathering oysters and muscles and firewood every day, and contributing to the tribe” – that could have been shown to mute our impression of him as well as his giving up – to me that’s vintage MB at work). I also have thought about this like Fast Eddie – why can’t we just throw away the numbers for once and really mix it up? I think a show with either more balance or with skewed numbers racially would make for great drama. That at least would represent where I live and my life experience a whole lot more. And, of course, it’ll never happen because it’s not “marketable”. 2002 IceCat Originals, Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
Blow by Blow 895 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Fitness Correspondent"
|
11-14-03, 01:17 PM (EST)
|
|
4. "RE: Racial question" |
This has been bugging me for awhile too and I can't believe they don't cast more people of color in this show. I'm sure the producers have a tremendous challenge casting this show with people who have personalities, camera presence, physical ability, etc. The problem is that with just 16 people and one black guy, the odds of him looking bad are extremely high. Let's face it, 90% of Survivors come off looking like jerks, jocks or stupid/lazy people.Not to spoil here, but it doesn't look like they're doing any better in ASS. About Osten, I think it's irrelevant that he's black. He was edited in a poor light because he went on to quit the show. There's no way they were going to make him look like a great contributor to the tribe. Speaking of contributors, there were very few instances when the Morgan tribe was shown doing any work (an occasional log hauled in, getting water, fishing). -P "Never criticize a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes. Then you'll be a mile away and he won't have any shoes." - Bob Hinck
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
|
|
DEVILRAYS 398 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Cooking Show Host"
|
11-14-03, 02:36 PM (EST)
|
|
7. "RE: Racial question" |
You're absolutely right about Osten being a dud. He had a whole heap of potential - he tried to bring two bottles of liquor into the game and he went toe-to-toe with Rupert in IC3, lasting over two hours even in a losing cause. I don't know what it is about the game he couldn't take. Maybe he has an irrational fear of wild animals or something...I definitely agree that his race had nothing to do with how he was portrayed. However, I definitely would like to see someone who doesn't fit that mold other than Sean, and even he had a lazy spell (see: Sean on Rotu.)
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
|
Fast Eddie 625 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"
|
11-14-03, 02:34 PM (EST)
|
|
6. "RE: Racial question" |
I find it appalling that people would have such a high opinion of a blatant racist like Marquesas Sean. But that's the problem, IMO, with attitudes in America (and Canada) today. If you can't apply the same rules for racism, sexism, etc. in both directions, you'll never destroy these evils. But that's a discussion that belongs elsewhere.The point was made that lots of whites have also looked like jerks. It's just a lot less noticable when there are so many more. True enough. Maybe it's just bad luck with the black men. Some people, like Nick and Osten, must have looked like excellent candidates - intelligent and well-educated, in good physical shape. Yet they came across terribly. Editing? C'mon. You can't edit in Osten's poor performance at the challenges and certainly not the fact that he quit. I'd like to believe that it's just bad luck with the candidates. But this many in a row is getting awfully suspicious. If I were MB and this is just coincidence, I'd be getting worried. Sooner or later some black leader is going to make a stink and there will be all kinds of trouble for CBS.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
cqvenus 9765 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
11-16-03, 08:17 PM (EST)
|
|
10. "how about..." |
instead of S6 Amazon, men v women, we do the next tribes according to race. blacks v whites. or even americans v canadians. new yorkers v californians. would this fly? if not, why is it okay to do it with women v men, but not these other ways of categorizing people?I think it sucks that all the black males to date have been disappointing stereotypes, but they are what they are, whatever that is. We've had crappy white contestants. Crappy men. Crappy women. People suck. Should MB go out of his way to make sure a cast member isn't a sucky stereotype? I really, really don't think so. It wouldn't be fair at all. So, while I think it sucks that this has been the case thus far, I don't think it's necessarily MB's fault. It might be. I just don't think so. YMMV.
- wishes they would have a HS survivor. gotta stay cool to win.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
|
bubbastan 625 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"
|
11-16-03, 08:40 PM (EST)
|
|
11. "RE: Racial question" |
I agree, either through editing or through cast selection, or both, MB certainly does convey negative and sterotypical behavior traits for the African American contestants who have appeared on the show. I also feel that he has used the same negative editing and casting to reinforce gender and age sterotypes. The longer the show goes on, it seems the more we see the lazy or angry (or both) black man, the under 25 year old bimbo whose only strategy is to use her body to further herself in the game, the physically feeble, emotionally unstable, "older" woman over 40, and the kindly, physically weak, strategy-devoid "older" man over 50 who plays the role of "dad" and who never finishs higher than 4th or 5th. I think that's one of the reasons that the ratings aren't quite as high as they were for the initial installments. Sure, some viewership fallout was going to occur once the novelty of the show wore off, but I also think that the obvious steering away from portraying the contestants as actual, real-life, guy or gal-next door folks to portraying the contestants as characitures (I can never spell that word correctly) has also heavily contributed. The original cast was a bunch of folks that you would likely meet in your day to day life. For the most part, the second cast was as well, although you could already see the trend towards casting younger, and "prettier" people. By the time the Amazon installation rolled around, you had nothing but a bunch of plastic barbies and walking cliches on the cast, including the nerdy techno guy who shows a brilliant gift for strategy but whose only real aim is to get some. MB also seems to love playing up the folks with caustic personalities and to reinforce how well these folks get on in the game, almost seeming to imply that the same holds true in real life. How else can you explain the countless amount of face time alloted to blantantly assy and self-centered digits like Rob M, Robb Z, or Jon?? I often wonder if MB's whole point is now focused on giving us his opinion of modern society rather than just letting his contestants and his show be. I for one really wish he would give up the heavy-handed editing and let us just see these folks and the game for who and what they are.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
|
beckyjac 27 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge"
|
11-17-03, 12:15 PM (EST)
|
|
17. "RE: Racial question" |
Are you suggesting that MB recruit appropriate contestants?
The pool of potential contestants is made up of only those that apply. Do you think that there is an equal number of nationalities that apply and MB only picks the stereotypes?The thread has grown to 2 different subjects
One that the black men chosen are stereotyped as loud or lazy
Second that not enough minority have been chosen. The ratio of age, sex and personality has become pretty standard on all the shows, not because of stereotype but demographics. I completely agree it would be more interesting to have more of a diversified group – but again – you can only pick from those that apply But I would suggest that until there is data and fact that proves there were plenty of minority’s that applied, (I guess you believe that would include hard working liberal black men) then I believe a better strategy would be to find a way to motivate more minority’s to apply for the show. There is always a lot at risk for a person chosen for one of these shows. To be quite honest society has inhibited minorities from thinking their selves capable or they are afraid they will do something that would stereotype them or their race. Hence they don’t apply – That is the real problem – not malice on the part of The Survivor Series.
You were brave enough to post your opinion, I mine
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
Fast Eddie 625 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator"
|
11-17-03, 04:01 PM (EST)
|
|
21. "RE: Racial question" |
>Are you suggesting that MB recruit
>appropriate contestants?Some contestants have already admitted to having been recruited. >The pool of potential contestants is
>made up of only those
>that apply. Do you think
>that there is an equal
>number of nationalities that apply
>and MB only picks the
>stereotypes? Tens of thousands of people apply. Should be plenty to choose from in any category. >The ratio of age, sex and
>personality has become pretty standard
>on all the shows, not
>because of stereotype but demographics. As I said earlier, that's pretty obvious, yet it's a false (or rather, an artificial statistical) demographic. Is that what your world looks like? Does anyone's? >But I would suggest that until
>there is data and fact
>that proves there were plenty
>of minority’s that applied, (I
>guess you believe that would
>include hard working liberal black
>men) Do you have any data or fact to suggest that very few blacks have applied, leaving the casters with little choice? And as for "hard working black men", it seems to me that most of them were hard working types in real life. As have the white contestants been.
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
BrassFan 326 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Cooking Show Host"
|
11-18-03, 00:12 AM (EST)
|
|
28. "RE: Racial question" |
>Do you have any data or fact to suggest that very
>few blacks have applied, leaving the casters with little
>choice? I think what the poster was getting at was that if someone wants to accuse MB of picking stereotypes of any particular bent out of those that applied, they should have some type of facts to back it up. >And as for "hard working black men", it seems to me
>that most of them were hard working types in real life.
>As have the white contestants been. This has been my problem with this entire arguement. It seems as though, based on their resume's, they would be hard workers. It's true that the show is edited (and this should be tempered by the fact that I've only watched The Amazon, Pearl Islands, and I just finished watching Palua Tiga), but it seems as though MB has tried to find hard workers of all types and backgrounds. I'm not sure how much editing was done to Gervase, for example, who flat out said that he wasn't doing anything....Or Osten, who was muscular, and worked in a high pressure career field...and then whined and quit (yes, I'm sure much of Osten was edited negatively....but there's no denying that he wanted to quit after day 4)... So, I do think that MB has made an effort to include all ethnic groups...I don't think it's up to us, the viewers to decide that they're being edited unfairly, until the cast members themselves make that accusation. So, if these players have resume's that make them appear to be hard workers in life, and they aren't blaming MB for making them look lazy, I have to wonder if they were that lazy on the island.... Note, this not only applies to African Americans, but all other groups who seem to be portrayed in a negative light (such as the high maintenance pretty people who do little or nothing **cough cough** Jenna and Heidi **cough cough**)...
|
|
|
Top |
| |
dabo 26942 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
11-17-03, 12:35 PM (EST)
|
|
18. "RE: Racial question" |
Well, Survivor does tend to bring out the worst in some people regardless of their race, gender, age, religion, whathaveyou. Personally, if I were a black man (or woman) player Survivor, and I reached a point in the game where it becomes inevitable that I will lose (like Gervase in S1), I'd be the laziest so-and-so you ever saw. Why I be slavin' away for whitey when I got no chance to win? Nuh-uh!!! Actually, I'd probably do that if I was a white man (or woman) playing Survivor and reached the point of inevitable I-can't-win, or red or yellow or whatever other colors we come in. No one would make much of an issue about it with me not being black though. ARRRRRRR!!!!
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
sisyphus 321 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Cooking Show Host"
|
11-17-03, 04:23 PM (EST)
|
|
23. "RE: Racial question" |
I just wanted to add my 2 cents worth to this topic....I agree with most of what has been said...But I really and truly do not think it is a racial issue. As one poster pointed out, MB has only the applicants to choose from, and if you notice it takes a certain personality type to be on this show or any reality show, so that is another limiting factor....plus you also have to take in consideration the percentages...what percent of the general population is black and male; what percent is white and male; etc then think of number of applicants...Now consider any other say white male contestant, have any been lazy?, yes; any scheming? yes; and you could go on and on but since it is not based on the actions of one or two, those traits get generalized and become less significant....unlike the black males the traits become more specific and hence more significant....Was the behaviour of heidi, jenna and shawna sterotypical of 20 somethings, I would say no...but that has been how most 20 somethings have been portrayed on survivor and say big brother...but that has not become an issue.... Bottom line is that the people portrayed on survivor are just that people, you might not like them, you might love them, but none of them are there to represent any demographic, they are there to play a game and try to win 1 million dollars by any which way they can....and if that means being lazy and loud then that is how it is ...... just my opinon anyway...
|
|
|
Top |
| |
|
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
|
|
Email this topic to a friend
Printer-friendly version of this topic
Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)
