British Oscars will no longer give awards to WHITE MOVIES | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 55457783 South Africa 01/03/2017 02:12 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | According to a Bafta statement, films will not be eligible for two of their main awards if they do not meet new “diversity criteria” to bring in “under-represented groups,” that is, anyone who is not white, male, or heterosexual. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 4877466 [link to newobserveronline.com] :racist: |
ScrumpTheTexan
Forum Administrator User ID: 73183063 United States 01/03/2017 02:14 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I am a Christian. Christian does not equal doormat or pushover "I Have Sworn upon the Altar of God... Eternal Hostility against every form of Tyranny over the mind of man." -Thomas Jefferson, Sep. 23, 1800 The Election of Donald John Trump: [link to www.godlikeproductions.com] For previous Newsletters, click 'Scrump's News Letters' @ [link to www.godlikeproductions.com] |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 26853195 United States 01/03/2017 02:14 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
deplorable but adorable davvi
User ID: 3677166 United States 01/03/2017 02:15 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Mayor of Simpleton
User ID: 1134490 United States 01/03/2017 02:17 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Also, BAFTA? A) I 've never heard of it, and B) who uses it as a criteria to watch a movie? MoS Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. |
Nameless the Deplorable
User ID: 8533752 United States 01/03/2017 02:18 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | According to a Bafta statement, films will not be eligible for two of their main awards if they do not meet new “diversity criteria” to bring in “under-represented groups,” that is, anyone who is not white, male, or heterosexual. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 4877466 [link to newobserveronline.com] Anyone who is not white, or a male or heterosexual? So...they aren't planning on giving anyone awards then? 'If you're going through Hell, keep going." -Winston Churchill "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke Hard times create strong men, Strong men create good times, Good times create weak men, Weak men create hard times, |
Nameless the Deplorable
User ID: 8533752 United States 01/03/2017 02:19 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | He's heterosexual and male...can't win an award. 'If you're going through Hell, keep going." -Winston Churchill "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke Hard times create strong men, Strong men create good times, Good times create weak men, Weak men create hard times, |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 24269659 United States 01/03/2017 02:22 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Chickenhead
User ID: 72396375 United States 01/03/2017 02:23 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
GreatCaesarsGhost!
User ID: 38676961 United States 01/03/2017 02:23 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 14880553 United States 01/03/2017 02:23 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
deplorable but adorable davvi
User ID: 3677166 United States 01/03/2017 02:24 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | According to a Bafta statement, films will not be eligible for two of their main awards if they do not meet new “diversity criteria” to bring in “under-represented groups,” that is, anyone who is not white, male, or heterosexual. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 4877466 [link to newobserveronline.com] Anyone who is not white, or a male or heterosexual? So...they aren't planning on giving anyone awards then? Either that or they will give each and everyone a "participation" award... It cheapens the award something like giving Obama the Nobel Peace Prize...who in their right mind would want one now? |
CaptiveR User ID: 73720192 United Kingdom 01/03/2017 02:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | According to a Bafta statement, films will not be eligible for two of their main awards if they do not meet new “diversity criteria” to bring in “under-represented groups,” that is, anyone who is not white, male, or heterosexual. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 4877466 [link to newobserveronline.com] Ayy? I'm pretty sick of all of it quite honestly, even the dirt i kick up during a walk. Sigh |
Rorschach Watchmen
User ID: 72115403 United States 01/03/2017 02:28 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | According to a Bafta statement, films will not be eligible for two of their main awards if they do not meet new “diversity criteria” to bring in “under-represented groups,” that is, anyone who is not white, male, or heterosexual. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 4877466 [link to newobserveronline.com] Isn't this the very definition the minorities use to explain racism? “When you’re dead you’re dead, but you’re not quite so dead if you contribute something” -John Dunsworth |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 73526810 Canada 01/03/2017 02:29 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | According to a Bafta statement, films will not be eligible for two of their main awards if they do not meet new “diversity criteria” to bring in “under-represented groups,” that is, anyone who is not white, male, or heterosexual. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 4877466 [link to newobserveronline.com] In other words, if you are not part of the Communist Movement, you will be shunned. Time to start boycotting everything Gay, Muslim, Niqqerfied, and Feminist |
Spoon Boy
User ID: 70243037 United Kingdom 01/03/2017 02:29 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | what fucking bullshit, at end of day need to blame the writers people who cry no diversity in films the writers could start adding more black culture to films & casting will get blacks and it not just bafta the bbc even does job adverts which clearly states white people should not apply Last Edited by Spoon Boy on 01/03/2017 02:33 PM |
MarkinAZ
User ID: 4358225 United States 01/03/2017 02:33 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Will someone please tell me why we should care what BAFTA does in their pursuit of racial balance in their films? The good thing is that if a film has their seal of approval, then it's a sure bet that no one living in reality wants to bother spending a few pounds or euros to see this drivel. So their rating system does come in handy in one small way, after all! |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 73611909 United States 01/03/2017 02:34 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 70835309 United Kingdom 01/03/2017 02:34 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 12752342 United States 01/03/2017 02:35 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Let's look at some numbers: In the 2001 Census, 565,876 people in the UK had reported their ethnicity as "Black Caribbean", 485,277 as "Black African", and 97,585 as "Black Other", making a total of 1,148,738 "Black or Black British" residents. This was equivalent to 2 per cent of the UK population at the time. Quoting: [link to en.wikipedia.org (secure)] This tells me that in order to be properly represented in film, blacks must represent 2 out of 100 actors in British movies. US films (I assume they can win BAFTA awards too?) would have to include a higher 13 out of 100 actors to represent the proper representation in the United States. And yet, something tells me these professional race baiters will require much more than that, essentially demanding that blacks are way OVER-REPRESENTED, just as they are in television commercials. Reverse racism. I'm sick of it. |
Spoon Boy
User ID: 70243037 United Kingdom 01/03/2017 02:36 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | only reason there doing this is cause it january and it award season which makes me sick all self aggrandizing, oh lets give actors an award, cause you know oscar will have people crying not enough blacks there, blame the writers, actors this past year have really started to rustle my jimmys thinking there words mean anything lecturing us all it like who hell do you think they are there there to make us laugh, there are the jesters of this time to keep us entertained not tell us how to live Last Edited by Spoon Boy on 01/03/2017 02:38 PM |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 54068365 United Kingdom 01/03/2017 02:37 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
FBHO
User ID: 71219554 United States 01/03/2017 02:37 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | LOL, Britain is a gonner. Marxism is the true enemy of our civilization. What is Cultural Marxism: [link to www.bitchute.com (secure)] |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 73611909 United States 01/03/2017 02:39 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
deplorable but adorable davvi
User ID: 3677166 United States 01/03/2017 02:40 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'm wondering how BAFTA defines "under-represented." Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12752342 Let's look at some numbers: In the 2001 Census, 565,876 people in the UK had reported their ethnicity as "Black Caribbean", 485,277 as "Black African", and 97,585 as "Black Other", making a total of 1,148,738 "Black or Black British" residents. This was equivalent to 2 per cent of the UK population at the time. Quoting: [link to en.wikipedia.org (secure)] This tells me that in order to be properly represented in film, blacks must represent 2 out of 100 actors in British movies. US films (I assume they can win BAFTA awards too?) would have to include a higher 13 out of 100 actors to represent the proper representation in the United States. And yet, something tells me these professional race baiters will require much more than that, essentially demanding that blacks are way OVER-REPRESENTED, just as they are in television commercials. Reverse racism. I'm sick of it. I agree with everything that you have written except please don't call it "reverse racism." That implies that the US is a racist nation and their "reverse racism" is justified. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 73718919 Netherlands 01/03/2017 02:40 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 73720179 United States 01/03/2017 02:41 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 12752342 United States 01/03/2017 02:41 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Your method of acquisition is irrelevant. Whether the movie is purchased, rented or stolen makes no difference. The problem here is that in their quest to achieve equality and diversity, white males are getting the shaft, as always. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 12752342 United States 01/03/2017 02:42 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'm wondering how BAFTA defines "under-represented." Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12752342 Let's look at some numbers: In the 2001 Census, 565,876 people in the UK had reported their ethnicity as "Black Caribbean", 485,277 as "Black African", and 97,585 as "Black Other", making a total of 1,148,738 "Black or Black British" residents. This was equivalent to 2 per cent of the UK population at the time. Quoting: [link to en.wikipedia.org (secure)] This tells me that in order to be properly represented in film, blacks must represent 2 out of 100 actors in British movies. US films (I assume they can win BAFTA awards too?) would have to include a higher 13 out of 100 actors to represent the proper representation in the United States. And yet, something tells me these professional race baiters will require much more than that, essentially demanding that blacks are way OVER-REPRESENTED, just as they are in television commercials. Reverse racism. I'm sick of it. I agree with everything that you have written except please don't call it "reverse racism." That implies that the US is a racist nation and their "reverse racism" is justified. Agreed. And I thought of that too after I wrote it. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 70234462 United States 01/03/2017 02:42 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |