>47 milly

And she could have just as easily not said any of it and still would be just as well off. She was not baited into the response, she said it of her own free will. If she did not hate white men, she would not feel the need to publicly attack them without provocation.

>she could have just as easily not said any of it
Exactly. Or at the very least say it better, like by not inserting the "white dude" part into her comment. And let's be real, the majority would react negatively as well if she had said something like "I don't care what a black dude has to say".

Yes. That's life in America. There ain't much that can be done, but I can tell you this speech changed nothing as far as the actual population goes.

>I personally think there should be more diverse voices in the video game review industry
Unironically yes, for some games like Sekiro it would be wortwhile to get a Japanese person to review it too.
That's the entire point. To add to existing voices.

>Brie is publicly degrading the men of her own race to suit her own needs
She is? Did she bring the slave ships to America?

It's unfortunate you're so emotionally invested and can't see the simple truth. America is a diverse place, regardless of whether one part of the populace wants it to be that way or not.
So when there's this idea of "equality", people in power act upon that.
They hire people with credentials regardless of their race/ethnicity.
And the entire point of that speech, quite literally was that people WITH credentials are NOT being hired. That's it.

You get half the picture. Yes, the goal in an "equal" society is to have less of one specific group have bigger influence than another, that IS correct. But the part you don't get is that this doesn't hand control over to another group to be overrepresented, or rather, that's not the goal.

The goal is for everyone to have a say in it. That's it. Whether it's a good goal, that's a whole other subject.

It is not by happenstance that I added the last part of my post. Whether equality is inherently a good or bad goal, that's not for me to say right now, it's another discussion.
The facts remain. America is diverse, whether by choice or by force, and it's something its people have to deal with in some way. The least controversial or invasive option is simply to enable equality in every branch of society, that's it.

Non-white immigrants played such a minor part in the development of America that it is laughable. They have contributed exactly nothing towards the processment of technology or standard of living. They have only ever provided unskilled labor since the beginning of time. Any single one of them could have been replaced by anyone else and there is not a single one who has made and useful advancements in society before the 1950s.

Maybe, but this is about the now. And currently, America is diverse.
Look at equality as a band-aid if you must. Then you'll better understand why these speeches happen.

no you havent heard these marxists talk like i have, they want equity, they are more than happy to oppress anyone in order to aim for their imaginary fantastical concept of "equity", which will wind up causing another mass genocide, these commies never stop and our dysfunctional dystopian societies leaders are far too incompetent and corrupt to do anything about it.

Maybe, but like I said, different topic. This is about the current situation and how you can hold the dam from breaking loose basically.
What I do agree with is that in attempting to create "equality" you CAN alienate people or cause conflict if you aren't good at conveying your message.
And it just so happens that a lot of the left and particularly the media isn't that good at it.

You don't need to make analogies to say that the concept of multiculturalism and all other forms of ethnic equality are bad.
But what I'm saying is that it's not up to the population right now if America is diverse or not. It simply is.
And to make my own analogy, the little kid's room is on fire right now, so while your fire extinguisher may not put all of it out, it will provide you a safe corner for the time being.

That's all there is to this idea of equality in a diverse America. It's a band aid. It's not a perfect solution to anything.
But since it is SOME form of solution, the citizens of America and other places employ it.

As far as actual politics go, that's a different topic that extends far beyond this film or what any actor said.

>to further minimalizing whites control over any facet of industry in the western hemisphere until it is totally eradicated.
They are doing a shit job whites control everything

That's because you're a fricking idiot and you'll live in ignorant bliss the same way our boomer generation did. You will wonder why your children and grandchildren can't succeed in a country that your ancestors built and you will never understand why.

I hate television and film and only come here because it's the funniest board

Your issues stem more from the system itself dude. It is already inherently flawed to you. Brie could go up on stage and say "all non-whites should leave the film critic space" and guess what? Nothing would change. America is already a melting pot.

maybe our country would succeed if white men didn't waste their lives in meaningless film critique careers
you want your child to grow up to be a film critic?

It's not that it's a worthless job, even if it isn't vital, but the idea here is that the more perspectives you get in terms of these movies, the better, if they require them of course.
I mean, would I trust a Chinese person on a movie about Chinese mythology? Yeah, I would. Would I trust a Puerto-Rican? Not as much. It doesn't mean I hate Puerto-Ricans.

Non-white immigrants played such a minor part in the development of America that it is laughable. They have contributed exactly nothing towards the processment of technology or standard of living. They have only ever provided unskilled labor since the beginning of time. Any single one of them could have been replaced by anyone else and there is not a single one who has made and useful advancements in society before the 1950s.

It's abuse because you chose to perceive it as such. You're a film critic who doesn't like sharing the office with some darkie, that's it.

I wasn't talking about the movie though, I have no interest in seeing it.
But I don't think this message is abuse unless you're a white supremacist. And I don't mean that as a dig, I'm simply being objective. You'll either hate diversity for a reason or you won't.

I'm simply trying to be as objective/truthful to the source as possible.
I don't know if you're racist, I'm saying it's not a big deal whether you are or aren't, It's your choice whether you want to share an office space with a non-white, or not. But that's the extent of which your race is being denigrated. And if that alone insults your being, then of course you'd have a fundamental issue with it.

You didn't answer the question
It was an easy yes or no

I don't know. It depends on whether israelites are considered white or not, and there isn't a consensus on that, at least on the left.
For the sake of the argument and due to recent events, I'll go on a limb and say that most leftists put israelites in the "priviledged whites/Caucasians" category.

It's not really the same because she was talking about people who have credentials and still can't break into the industry.
Now whether this entire thing is simply one big lie is beyond me. It's possible. But that is her argument. People of color with credentials to be critics can't become critics, even if there are movies that could benefit from their specific perspective as a target demographic. That's her argument.

>It depends on whether israelites are considered white or not
they dont consider themselves to be white, and we all consider them to be subhuman

Cool, but that has nothing to do with the argument here. If the left decides the israelites are "priviledged whites", that's how they'll view them as. And right now a lot of them view Israel as white colonizers and fascists.

The whole idea is that the pro-critic space is dominated by white men and anything that falls outside of that has a more difficult job of getting in, regardless of credentials.
She said "I don't hate white dudes" to stress that this isn't about exclusion.
And if she truly hated them, she would've simply said so. Other actresses have said edgier things in regards to white men.
Brie approached the situation too casually and worded herself in a dumb way, but there's worse out there.

I mean, I have to or the hole closes over.

>It depends on whether israelites are considered white or not
they dont consider themselves to be white, and we all consider them to be subhuman

even if israelites themselves don't think they're white, the majority of non-whites think they are
it's a big mess

And Brie isn't a white woman who said less whites should be in media. She said there should be more seats at the table because not all movies are targeted at whites.
This isn't all that "left" of an argument to make, as the right supports inclusion too, or at least its politicians claim to.
But the way in which it was worded was somewhat awkward and it doesn't surprise me that it fell on deaf ears. RLM pretty much summarized this moment in their review of the Captain Marvel movie.

Didn't she say to her publicist "please don't kill me" in that same speech?
I'm debating how insulting that speech was because I think it's mischaracterized.

I think her issue is actually that she wants the opinion of too many people, either genuinely or for brownie points.
This is an issue of being too egalitarian as opposed to selfish and it did her dirty because she's not that great with words.

Honestly it was a fairly ignorant thing to say and it was said very clumsily, especially given that those same old white dudes gave overwhelmingly positive reviews to the indie drama she was in just prior. Very little denying that. Yeah, it was stupid and she shouldn't have said it. Not very funny, though. Just kind of cringe. On the other hand it's fricking hilarious that permavirgins on this board were so furiously assblasted by what she said that they've decided to wage a lifelong war against her and every property or product she's a part of even though she has no idea any of them even exist. I strain to think of anything more pathetic.

If Brie misspoke then she should apologize for her words

>White women are the only race who willingly and eagerly degrade their own men.
you have not met asian-american women kek

And what about the israelites who are by far the most over-represented demographic in all of filmed media? Do their women call specifically for less israeli representation?

I absolutely 100% guarantee if, after Brie made her comments, if the interviewer said "what about israeli representation?" She would have said "we need more of it."

>wants less israelites
No she doesn't lol

Okay and what's stopping a qualified Jap from doing that? Literally anyone can start a blog/youtube channel/etc and get rt approved to review movies

>Why do American film critics need to be any specific demographic?
Because they're all demographics. America is more or less the most diverse country on Earth.
> She certainly wouldn't have this same opinion in regards to other racially-dominated fields such as basketball or hip-hop, would she?
See, that would be a good point to consider, if not for the fact that in this context, she was talking about people who have the credentials and STILL couldn't break into the industry, due to alleged gatekeeping or other reasons.
So it's like this: You have a potential Lebron James but he's not getting hired, despite being athletic and capable.

when the seat you're bringing to the table are those tall kiddy seats, you're not exactly elevating the dinner conversation

You could make that argument but this is again tied to America being diverse as frick as of 2016 and also now. And to play Devil's advocate here, there are some colored critics that even Cinemaphile likes, such as Armond Bla.. err.. White.

>she was talking about people who have the credentials and STILL couldn't break into the industry, due to alleged gatekeeping or other reasons.
You're not privy to the racial bias problem that NBA and college recruiters had for the last 30 or so years. It was an actual real bias, whereas I seriously doubt some shitty israeli rag like NYT or WashPo is refusing to hire non-white writers.

I already told you, israelites more often than not fall under "white" and with thus priviledged in the eyes of leftists. Or at least right now they are. It's difficult to say, because some israelites are very adamant on them being their own separate racial group, and as such, leftists would have to appease their wishes. So they could fall under the PoC category too, but I don't think they do.

These women are just saying what israelites tell them to say. All actions that white women take (yes, even the libtarded ones) prove them to be the relatively least "woke" and not at all believers in the shit that celebrity white women say on social media. Show me another race of women that live a more traditional lifestyle or vote for conservative politicians than white women do.

Right, but that's not the idea here.

when the seat you're bringing to the table are those tall kiddy seats, you're not exactly elevating the dinner conversation

>These b***hes really need to just stop talking about politics altogether.
Ideally, artists would simply be apolitical as far as the public goes, and not try to instill their views on others, but many celebrities view their status as a "platform" to speak about these things. And, well, many are paid too.

>there are some colored critics that even Cinemaphile likes, such as Armond Bla.. err.. White.
who made it on merit, which disputes your claim of artificially propping up unqualified rejects

It's not my claim, it's the claim she made during that speech. I don't know how accurate this actually is, but she supposedly cited studies.
Armond is a veteran though. It may in fact be harder for a new Armond to get a gig.

>she was talking about people who have the credentials and STILL couldn't break into the industry, due to alleged gatekeeping or other reasons.
You're not privy to the racial bias problem that NBA and college recruiters had for the last 30 or so years. It was an actual real bias, whereas I seriously doubt some shitty israeli rag like NYT or WashPo is refusing to hire non-white writers.

>It was an actual real bias
It might be. I don't have an interest in basketball so I've never looked into it.
Her argument was in reference to a similar kind of bias but it's very possible that she herself got fooled (if it was she who decided to even speak about this, and not some handler)
But I remember quite a few celebrities citing that same film critic breakdown, not just Brie.

>they're statistics
I agree with you 100% but the thing is that on top of statistics, the speech was about an existing issue wherein qualified folks still weren't getting hired for some reason. So it's a more complicated situation.
But the Devil's in the details. I ultimately think this speech and others that resemble it often do more harm than good, because half the time they're misinterpreted and the other half they contain some skewed bias.
And because society is already polarized as is, if one wants to even touch on these topics, they have to be very mindful of using the right tone and saying the right thing.
And this is where Brie failed, imo. I don't think she "hates" white men, and I never will. But I do think that a) she worded herself in a rather childish way and b) the speech may not have been necessary to begin with.

I've seen some arguments within online film critic spaces that suggest it is easier to break into the field nowadays, but I can't know how accurate that is.
I do know that Brie spends more time on press junkets though, so at the very least she believes in giving a wider pool of people the time of day.

huh I didn't realize she wrote and directed it