Academy takes historic action to increase diversity — Page 6

FindingNamo said: "pick for "the best" the people who most resemble them. And this is why it is a good idea to get away from the old and the male and the white as the dominant arbiters of who gets an Oscar. NOT that it will necessarily result in immediate change.."

So you think people per definition pick only what resembles them? Then why are you so sure the new people won't do that? These are 2 assumptions you also can't make.

Of course this will not result in change. The origin of this problem lies somewhere else, where films are created.

Even if "diverse people" in the commitee will only pick what resembles them, it is still not the solution, but the opposite.

Updated On: 1/28/16 at 06:08 AM

Reginald Tresilian said: "But to claim it is in everything that does not include a black person is a point you can't make.

You must be glad that no one here thinks that.

"

So whoever came up with the fable that it is happening at the Oscars?

So whoever came up with the fable that it is happening at the Oscars?

All I know is you came up with the fable that race never plays a part in anything that occurs in these United States of America.

FindingNamo said: "So you think people per definition pick only what resembles them?

t's not an assumption. I don't think it, I know it and the scads and scads and mountains and miles of behavioral research prove it. It's called "homophily" and it is what people do. And it's what happens at the all-white Oscars.

"Its true. It is exactly what Will Smith taught Margot Robbie in Focus

Updated On: 1/28/16 at 10:44 AM

And nobody said it did. Why are you arguing against assertions only you have made?

Try to pull your narcissism out of what the research proves groups of similar individuals do. It's not a fantasy. It's a proven fact.

I answered all these questions already in my 10:39 post. Clearly, you don't understand. Are you just not up to the task, intellectually?

Are you able to determine what the solution is? Intellectually?

Adding more bad guys, because everybody thinks that way, like you say, is not it.

Updated On: 1/28/16 at 12:05 PM

I can't understand what kind of mental glitch you have that has added "bad guys" to this narrative.

A discussion of human nature, scientifically verified human behavior, is not a discussion of "bad guys." It's funny the nonsense you inject in this discussion. I lay out the demonstrated behavior of human beings in the discussion of "homophily," which is about how people make decisions in groups, and you come back with the fact that you, one white person, love Whitney Houston. The two things have nothing to do with each other.

Diversifying the voting block for the Oscars away from old, white and male is not adding more "bad guys." It is increasing diversity and having a group less vulnerable to homophily.

I'm sure you're going to misread this now, or come up with a new frame to add in like "bad guys," but once again this is all ON YOU. Nobody is arguing the things you're pushing back against except yourself.

I said I accuse everybody of picking only what resembles them?


You're not good at reading, or understanding the results of behavioral research, are you?

What is it in yourself that makes you, who seems to have a great deal of difficulty with comprehension, immediately respond to anything about race that RACE ISN'T IMPORTANT?


I think it's the overreaction of a guilty conscience.

Homophily is neither good nor bad, it is what HAPPENS. Diversify the group, decisions are then no longer reflective of one homogenous group of decision makers. Good and good.

FindingNamo said: "Homophily is neither good nor bad, it is what HAPPENS. Diversify the group, decisions are then no longer reflective of one homogenous group of decision makers. Good and good."

There is the core of the problem. A diverse group of people, where each person is picking only what resembles that person is BAD. Just as bad as a homogenous group that would do that. Thinking like that in general is bad.

The solution lies not in the outward characteristics of the judges themselves but in the level of personal complex they have with race or other minority. Test that elaborately and you get an objective group of people, regardless of how they look. Adding people with the same or bigger complexes works as a good counterpart in your opinion? That is your solution? Then the prizes have worth? What on earth are you thinking?

Updated On: 1/28/16 at 12:30 PM

It's not my problem at all, for all I care the Oscar winners are all white or all black for 5 years in a row.

Talent above race, something like that. Not turning it around like saying more races choosing themselves is the solution.

FindingNamo said: "Test that elaborately?" WTF are you going on about?

"

Well, you know, a psychological test to see how much worth a person actually gives to race and how much that person actually makes conclusions about that. Hyperventilating when you don't see your own race in the finalists is a good example of that.

Updated On: 1/28/16 at 12:51 PM