Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? | |
| Last Edit: whereismikeyfl 09:27 am EST 03/08/21 | |
| Posted by: whereismikeyfl 09:26 am EST 03/08/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? - BroadwayTonyJ 12:18 am EST 03/08/21 | |
|
|
|
| Again as you point out, white privilege was very much the way in Hollywood of that time. Merle Oberon had to conceal that she was Asian and the actors who were "out" as Asian and Black were largely excluded. The paucity of examples you can find says it all. What you write is a great retort for anyone who claims that there was no "white privledge" in the arts. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? | |
| Last Edit: BroadwayTonyJ 06:41 pm EST 03/08/21 | |
| Posted by: BroadwayTonyJ 06:34 pm EST 03/08/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? - whereismikeyfl 09:26 am EST 03/08/21 | |
|
|
|
| The studio claimed that Oberon was Anglo-Indian and described her as exotic. As I've said before, Hollywood was run by white and/or Jewish guys. They saw everything through a white lens so white actors had a big advantage over actors of color, although Hispanic actors fared better than Asian and black actors. It wasn't fair or just and obviously "the powers that were" didn't care about social justice. Nevertheless, I would not define the situation as "white privilege", which is a term that means different things to different people. Most historians of the film industry (that I'm aware of) define "white privilege" differently than the way it has been defined on ATC. I'm not trying to be controversial -- I just have observed that to be the case. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 06:38 pm EST 03/08/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? - BroadwayTonyJ 06:34 pm EST 03/08/21 | |
|
|
|
| "They saw everything through a white lens so white actors had a big advantage over actors of color, although Hispanic actors fared better than Asian and black actors." Which is the definition of White privilege and White Supremacy, both here and everywhere else that I have encountered this conversation among reasonable people. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? | |
| Posted by: BroadwayTonyJ 08:06 pm EST 03/08/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? - Singapore/Fling 06:38 pm EST 03/08/21 | |
|
|
|
| Apparently there has been a lot of discussion about "white supremacy" and "white privilege" on all types of social media (besides ATC) in recent times. I have no doubt what you are saying is accurate, but your definition is much different than what is espoused by many respected historians and journalists of color and a few white guys also. I would say over the last 6 months I have seen at least 3 programs on CNN and MSNBC discussing this subject. On CNN both Fareed Zakaria and Anand Gridharadas strongly disputed your definitions. They also attacked the use of the term "yellowface" as repugnant and an example of tribalism by one Asian group trying to exert seniority over another. It was pretty strong stuff. I believe Bob Woodward and others on MSNBC stated that white privilege should refer mainly to well-to-do white families and not less educated working class whites. Craig Melvin and another black journalist whose name I can't remember (he's a well known writer, he uses gel and white streaks in his hair which stands straight up) referred to white privilege as mostly a myth since whiteness is often more of a perception than a physical fact. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? | |
| Posted by: whereismikeyfl 06:27 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? - BroadwayTonyJ 08:06 pm EST 03/08/21 | |
|
|
|
| WHy do you not tell us your definition of what white privilege means? Since we are all out of step, please help us out. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? | |
| Posted by: BroadwayTonyJ 12:26 am EST 03/10/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? - whereismikeyfl 06:27 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
|
|
|
| I agree with Bob Woodward. That's the definition I was taught when I took sociology courses at the U. of Illinois (1966 -- 1970). I'm not saying that you are necessarily out of step. I am just curious if you are aware that the people I have cited in my previous post have come out so vehemently against much of what you are espousing. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? | |
| Posted by: whereismikeyfl 02:57 pm EST 03/10/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? - BroadwayTonyJ 12:26 am EST 03/10/21 | |
|
|
|
| But you still do not want to tell us what the definition is? Fine. Perhaps you do not want to share it because you realize that a whatever mysterious definition you are using from 50 years ago might not be consistent with current usage. Or maybe you are trolling and if you share the definition your game is up. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? | |
| Posted by: BroadwayTonyJ 03:27 pm EST 03/10/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? - whereismikeyfl 02:57 pm EST 03/10/21 | |
|
|
|
| No, I thought I stated that clearly in various other posts in this thread. I was trying to avoid repeating myself too much. The definition of white privilege I was taught in my college class was that of white guys coming from well-to-do families, living in the best neighborhoods, going to the best schools, attending the finest universities, and getting the best jobs because of family connections. Bob Woodward and other journalists opined on MSNBC or CNN last fall that this is white privilege. He further stated that white guys from working class backgrounds do not necessarily enjoy white privilege. I've been posting on ATC since 1997. I'm not trolling or playing a game. I'm mostly a serious, straightforward poster. Some times I make mistakes, but when I do, I'm quick to admit them. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 09:08 pm EST 03/08/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? - BroadwayTonyJ 08:06 pm EST 03/08/21 | |
|
|
|
| I would add Ibram X. Kendi to your reading list - his writing on antiracism presents a nuance and compassionate way of approaching these questions that I have found very helpful in my own path to dismantling the White Supremacy that I've been complicit in perpetuating. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? | |
| Last Edit: WaymanWong 08:24 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
| Posted by: WaymanWong 08:10 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Gene Nelson -- No "White Privilege" Benefit? - Singapore/Fling 09:08 pm EST 03/08/21 | |
|
|
|
| ''Hollywood was run by white and/or Jewish guys. They saw everything through a white lens so white actors had a big advantage over actors of color'' I agree strongly with Whereismikeyfl and Singapore/Fling, who have been so eloquent in this thread. That's the very essence of ''white privilege.'' Whites ran Hollywood and had all the power. So white actors could play white characters, as well as people of color. Back then, actors of color had no power. They had to fight to play their own race, and even then, only got subservient roles. Actors of color couldn't become stars because they were seldom given star-making parts; those were reserved for white folk. White Hollywood made movies to showcase white folk for white audiences. Minorities meant zilch to them. That's 100% racist. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.031715 seconds.