Hetero White Males underrepresented on British TV

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

And that entrenched institutional power is made up of ethnic minorities?

No, it is made of fanatical warriors for a new age religion who will tear down any standard, legal or otherwise, to bring about their Utopia. A hostile ethnic group would be much easier to fight. This one is a religion.

Vote them out of office then.

[Bear Stearns]

No, it is made of fanatical warriors for a new age religion who will tear down any standard, legal or otherwise, to bring about their Utopia. A hostile ethnic group would be much easier to fight. This one is a religion.

Vote them out of office then.

Kind of hard to do because...

1) Due to immigration their numbers are increasing at a faster rate than the rest of us
2) You can't vote out institutional power, especially when it is moneyed

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Vote them out of office then.

Kind of hard to do because...

1) Due to immigration their numbers are increasing at a faster rate than the rest of us
2) You can't vote out institutional power, especially when it is moneyed

1) just means a bigger democratic mandate. That’s democracy. If you feel your human rights are being violated, you can make that claim.
2) so, there is institutional power backing ethnic minorities, yet every metric show that ethnic minorities face more poverty, more discrimination and more violence than any other group. How does that work? If there is an institutional power backing minorities, why do they have it so bad? And why are they underrepresented in actual positions of power?

[Bear Stearns]

Kind of hard to do because...

1) Due to immigration their numbers are increasing at a faster rate than the rest of us
2) You can't vote out institutional power, especially when it is moneyed

1) just means a bigger democratic mandate.

From whom? Not from the people that's for sure.

That’s democracy. If you feel your human rights are being violated, you can make that claim.

I take it you don't have a problem with India flooding Kashmir with several million Hindus in order to flip a vote then.

2) so, there is institutional power backing ethnic minorities, yet every metric show that ethnic minorities face more poverty, more discrimination and more violence than any other group. How does that work?

Because our system is actually that shitty. They're given all of these institutional advantages and still fuck it up. You can't put lipstick on a pig. Shit in, shit out I say.

If there is an institutional power backing minorities, why do they have it so bad?

Idk how they manage to fuck up all the opportunities their given - you tell me

And why are they underrepresented in actual positions of power?

They aren't.

[The East Marches II]

No, it is made of fanatical warriors for a new age religion who will tear down any standard, legal or otherwise, to bring about their Utopia. A hostile ethnic group would be much easier to fight. This one is a religion.

Vote them out of office then.

Ah, one can vote out the police. If only we'd thought of that sooner. I'm sure that will bring much comfort to those who had exculpatory evidence suppressed in the crusade to fight rape!

Edit: infact, is that what you tell the BLM protestors :^)

[Zapato]

I had never seen this, but now I'll have to.

Looked it up. It seems to have below-average reviews so the "you probably won't do so well" comment still applies, technically.

If you disregard the fact that it was a financial success, hitting number one at the box office in the United States for its first two weeks in the theater and ending up making $36 million domestically (45th highest grossing movie of 1995).

For comparison, this means it made more money in the US than Heat, Forrest Gump, The Usual Suspects, The Lion King, and The Shawshank Redemption.

[Cekoviu]

And a silence has suddenly befallen our friend Ostro. Certainly a coincidence. :thinking:

It is Friday evening here. It's entirely possible he's gone out.

Immediately after being challenged on a position which is, without hyperbole, indefensible; how curious.

[The East Marches II]

It is Friday evening here. It's entirely possible he's gone out.

Immediately after being challenged on a position which is, without hyperbole, indefensible; how curious.

He isn't one to run from a fight. It is entirely possible the old boy went out. TG him a friendly reminder to finish the fight sometime this weekend if you think he'll miss your post.

[Ostroeuropa]

I'll get to all these replies at some point. There are floods in my area. I had to catch a train, but the tracks were flooded. So I tried a bus, the station was flooded. So I got a taxi.

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wale ... e-17833164

https://www.facebook.com/stephen.richar ... 015435199/

Not me or anyone I know. Nor even where I live.
But neighboring.

Incidentally the taximan was all ancapistan and whining about how bus drivers should just take the risk of driving on the flooded roads. About 40 minutes into this shit I decided it was worth asking; "Dude, can I have a cigarette?" (You cannot smoke in taxis.).

He said no, it was against the rules.

Wah wah wahhhhhhhhhhhh.

And now I am too drunk to reply, even though I was drinking earlier. This is too drunk. Tommorow morning.

[Proctopeo]

I wonder where all the people who complain when there's insufficient "diversity" in media are right now.

"No u" is a really hot mode of debate rn, but I prefer to stick to tried and true modes of debate like sitting in the peanut gallery and making fun of people who are arguing

Ostro whining that the BBC isn't stuck in the days of Shakespeare where all the roles including feemaales were played by white men is rather silly.

It's amazing how little of what's actually going on you understand.

This really depends on the show.
Perhaps you think they are underepresented on the shows you watched, but you would have to watch every single British TV show in order to actually show this is the case.
In fact, with the number of TV shows in the UK, Caucasian hetero males and females are still the major groups in most British TV shows.

Yes. Ostroeuropa says that white people make up 77% of the characters on British TV shows, but that this is not enough.

Fwiw if we want shows, especially ones that explicitly take place in the UK, to be representative of their society as a whole, around 92% would be white. Much like how a show that's representative of American demographics would have a cast about 5.4% asian.

Not all shows need be like this, especially if they take place in a different time or place, with different demographics, but when one wants to be representative, one should strive to be actually representative.

People would bitch if a movie set in the Congo in the 15th century had a cast consisting mostly of Latinos, after all.

[Cekoviu]

I'll get to all these replies at some point. There are floods in my area. I had to catch a train, but the tracks were flooded. So I tried a bus, the station was flooded. So I got a taxi.

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wale ... e-17833164

https://www.facebook.com/stephen.richar ... 015435199/

Not me or anyone I know. Nor even where I live.
But neighboring.

Incidentally the taximan was all ancapistan and whining about how bus drivers should just take the risk of driving on the flooded roads. About 40 minutes into this shit I decided it was worth asking; "Dude, can I have a cigarette?" (You cannot smoke in taxis.).

He said no, it was against the rules.

Wah wah wahhhhhhhhhhhh.

And now I am too drunk to reply, even though I was drinking earlier. This is too drunk. Tommorow morning.

Welp, my foot is firmly in my mouth. Sorry about the flooding, sounds like a pain.

[Jello Biafra]

Fwiw if we want shows, especially ones that explicitly take place in the UK, to be representative of their society as a whole,

We wouldn't want shows that explicitly take place in the UK to be representative of their society as a whole, we would want them to be representative of the location in which they're set. (If they're meant to portray realistic representations of where they're set.) A show set in London probably shouldn't represent the UK as a whole, it should represent London.

around 92% would be white.

Where did you get this number from?

[Bromagia]

#CancelBritishTV

That's what we do when things don't meet the intersectional quota, right?

[Proctopeo]

Fwiw if we want shows, especially ones that explicitly take place in the UK, to be representative of their society as a whole,

We wouldn't want shows that explicitly take place in the UK to be representative of their society as a whole, we would want them to be representative of the location in which they're set. (If they're meant to portray realistic representations of where they're set.) A show set in London probably shouldn't represent the UK as a whole, it should represent London.

True, but not all shows should be set in London, as it's not representative of the UK as a whole. A city like York would actually be fairly close, at least in terms of demographics, though nobody actually cares about cities that aren't London.

around 92% would be white.

Where did you get this number from?

Wikipedia, though that's actually the 2001 census figure. The more recent 2011 census is 87%, which is still more than 77%, though it has been nine years since, but I don't expect it to be less than 77% today.

#CancelBritishTV

That's what we do when things don't meet the intersectional quota, right?

We could cancel it because much of it is garbage, but so is most TV. British TV just has the added bonus of everyone having a weird accent.

[SD_Film Artists]

That is because the media and culture are so focused on just a few metropolitan areas such as London, Birmingham, Manchester, etc. They forget that the demographics of these cities do not reflect the demographics of the nation.

Indeed. When growing up in Norfolk I really did see more non-white faces on TV than IRL.

[The Black Forrest]

It’s TV. Watch the show or don’t watch it. Why should I care if there aren’t enough white males?

[The East Marches II]

It’s TV. Watch the show or don’t watch it. Why should I care if there aren’t enough white males?

Because it is a sign of discrimination against your gender and racial group. If intersectionality is the order of the day, then you may as well care. We told discrepancies in ratios of gender and race in pop make ups is evidence of systemic bias, why not for your group too?

[Vassenor]

It’s TV. Watch the show or don’t watch it. Why should I care if there aren’t enough white males?

Because they aren't a big enough majority of TV characters any more and that's the worst thing ever according to a super majority that totally exists.

[Albrenia]

Wow, this really got to twelve pages already.

I've discovered I find people whining about how the world is biased against white dudes as annoying as I find people who think anything that happens to a minority is an example of racism.

Edit: Sorry, thirteen pages.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

The onscreen aspect could be something to do with cast size. In a cast of four, having one BAME would be 25%, twice the national working average. But having none would be commented on.

Not having watched any of it except some BBC, I think it's very unusual to have a cast of 2, 3 or 4
I also don't know how the investigators counted minor characters.

[Valentine Z]

Wow, this really got to twelve pages already.

I've discovered I find people whining about how the world is biased against white dudes as annoying as I find people who think anything that happens to a minority is an example of racism.

Edit: Sorry, thirteen pages.

You probably can't win with either arguments, and it will delve deeper and deeper the more you go, so... Just sit back, and watch the chaos unfold in front of your eyes!

- Your stranger Valentine, a Lurking NSG Reader

-----

As for the British TV, I unfortunately have nothing to say because of cultural differences. Hell, I never even watched TV shows that frequently, maybe except channel surf, or go to movies now and then. So... I ain't in any position to talk or opinionate.

The topic of adaptations is pretty neat, though.

[Ostroeuropa]

I domt actually need to. A super majority acceet it is true already.

Then why are the theoretical people in power who sell out their culture for the Woke Hordes (trademark pending) a problem?

A minority in power ignoring the will of the population to push a racist and sexist agenda is still a problem, especially if they have overrun institutions where they can't be voted out.

I domt actually need to. A super majority acceet it is true already.

Okay, and where's your proof that a supermajority accept that as true?

I'm going to keep digging until you either provide factual evidence for your claims, give up and accept your fate, or admit that you're just making this up. So don't think I'm going to get complacent if you stonewall me.

That a supermajority reject the progressive lefts ideas?

Well here's some evidence of it:

A high-end result for this among the populace is 27% identify as feminist, while 80% of the country supports the notion that men and women "should be equal in every way". This suggests that around 53% of the country who are amenable to equality conclude there is a difference between feminism and equality. Essentially this means that when we adopt feminism, over half of the country will conclude we are advocating something *different* from equality.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/c ... ines_w.pdf

Low-end surveys for feminism in the country push 7% support for feminism.

https://www.fawcettsociety.org.uk/news/ ... -feminists

You might notice that the first uses a push-polling frame;

Here is more evidence of it, with less than 20% of young women identifying as feminist;
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47006912

Further, that poll notes feminism appeals most to white, upper-middle class professional women. They are however, a very powerful demographic in terms of media narrative and so on, as Journalists tend to be of this group, and this particular demographic has a lot of sway in our culture.

Meanwhile One third of young people are anti-feminist. (25% of young women, and 42% of young men.).https://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/ ... i-feminism

And 2/3rds of the country think feminism needs to stop.
https://news.sky.com/story/feminism-has ... y-11278752

On international issues;
59% of Britons choose to be proud of the Empire, compared to 19% who say it is something to be ashamed of. 23% say they don't know. Only 15% of the country says the Empire left colonies worse off.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/ar ... its-empire

On immigration;
74% of the public say they want a reduction in immigration.
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/c ... 060315.pdf

Further detailing this is that "Reduce immigration a Lot" is the most popular position. Including among Labour voters. The second most is; "Reduce immigration a little.". In third place is "Keep immigration levels the same", at 19%.

On progressive mentalities regarding offence;
67% of Britons, including a majority of Labour voters, say that they disagree with the notion that people need to be careful with what they say to avoid offending people of different backgrounds, prefering to endorse the statement that people are too easily offended. For the record, this is compared to Trump-era USA, where only 59% prefer the statement that people are too easily offended.
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/maga ... ps-america

Finally as a fairly damning indication the progressive left has failed to sway the public;
Less than half of remain voters, and 5% of leave voters, think stopping immigration to the UK specifically with the motivation of maintaining a white country is racist, meaning over half of remain voters and 95% of leave voters think that "We should stop immigrants coming to the UK so we can have a white country" is a non-racist statement.

https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-conten ... -FINAL.pdf

That means only about 25% of people in the country think something akin to "I don't want any non-white immigrants coming here" is racism. And yet immigration being lowered *at all* even without a race framing is continuously called racism by the progressive left, when we can pretty reasonably conclude this is even less popular a proposition.

"Using survey and qualitative data, this work shows that a majority of American and British people of all races believe that when the white majority seeks lower immigration to help maintain their population share, this is racially self-interested rather than racist behaviour. This distinction is important because racism is a taboo, whereas ethnic self-interest, like individual self-interest, is viewed as a normal. "

Any poll you care to cite on a specific issue shows a similar pattern.

Sudden interw3ctional illiteracy when being intersectional would reveal white male disadvantage. Hmmmm....

Suppose there were 0 white women on TV. Your argument would be the same, right?

There is no white male disadvantage.

---

I hope this isn't one of those "I am not racist...but..." threads.

These statistics demonstrate that you're wrong. This is an example of white male disadvantage. There are also other issues where this is the case. I would suggest that your ideology predisposes you to rejecting this group can be disadvantaged relative to others on a specific topic regardless of the evidence that they are in fact disadvantaged.

I domt actually need to. A super majority acceet it is true already.

You are both oppressed and have majority support. What world do you inhabit...

Institutions can oppress a population even if the majority want that oppression to end.

No, it is made of fanatical warriors for a new age religion who will tear down any standard, legal or otherwise, to bring about their Utopia. A hostile ethnic group would be much easier to fight. This one is a religion.

Vote them out of office then.

It's often not an elected position they are holding.

Kind of hard to do because...

1) Due to immigration their numbers are increasing at a faster rate than the rest of us
2) You can't vote out institutional power, especially when it is moneyed

1) just means a bigger democratic mandate. That’s democracy. If you feel your human rights are being violated, you can make that claim.
2) so, there is institutional power backing ethnic minorities, yet every metric show that ethnic minorities face more poverty, more discrimination and more violence than any other group. How does that work? If there is an institutional power backing minorities, why do they have it so bad? And why are they underrepresented in actual positions of power?

Selecting issues where minorities are disadvantaged to dismiss issues where whites and males are disadvantaged is part of the problem and is the mindset this ideology encourages. The education system is stacked against males, as well as whites, for example. One could easily turn this around on you; Why do whites and males have it so bad if minorities are disadvantaged? Why are they underrepresented in our cultural centers? Etc.

The problem is that issues like this one demonstrating white male disadvantage sets off the progressives like yourself and they adamantly refuse to accept that the problem exists or even can exist. Meanwhile, i'm content to accept issues where they are minorities disadvantaged as well as where whites are, because i'm able to hold both in my brain at once without thinking that one disproves the other.

The result of the attitude you are displaying here, which has occupied the progressive left for a while now, is that males and whites become more disadvantaged over time and their problems worsen as they are deemed either racist to acknowledge or talk about, non-existant, or not real problems at worst. At best you get rationalizing and trying to explain them away rather than allocating resources to the demographics issues.

Here we can see how an overbearing focus on the representation and disadvantage of minorities without consideration for the situation of the white populace has led to whites being underrepresented; a clear demonstration of the failure of the progressive agenda to actually deliver equality and how it instead only generates unjust and anti-male, anti-white outcomes.

Fwiw if we want shows, especially ones that explicitly take place in the UK, to be representative of their society as a whole,

We wouldn't want shows that explicitly take place in the UK to be representative of their society as a whole, we would want them to be representative of the location in which they're set. (If they're meant to portray realistic representations of where they're set.) A show set in London probably shouldn't represent the UK as a whole, it should represent London.

around 92% would be white.

Where did you get this number from?

An example of how this is not actually adhered to is doctor who seasons set in wales. 97% of Wales is White British/Welsh.

And yet, the same proportions of demographics were on doctor who as on broader British television.

It’s TV. Watch the show or don’t watch it. Why should I care if there aren’t enough white males?

Because they aren't a big enough majority of TV characters any more and that's the worst thing ever according to a super majority that totally exists.

It's more that they are underrepresented and that this has a number of implications.
Furthermore, the nature of the roles they hold are of a different quality to minorities.

While research on White is not forthcoming, research on Male is available to demonstrate this;

Because of the push for "Positive portrayals" of minorities and women while suppressing attempts to do this for whites and males, you get unjust outcomes. So not only are white males underrepresented, but the white males we do see are villainized or used as obstacles for minorities and women to overcome at a disproportionate rate. One example of this is the Gilette ad, where only white males were shown negatively, and only minority males were shown positively.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/meghancass ... cae39f2caf

Turns that in the hundreds of TV shows, movies and commercials targeting men on the airwaves, male viewers are seeing too many “skirt-chasers,” “metro-sexuals” and “macho-men” and not enough characters depicting the kind of guys they really are.
Just what kind of guy is that?
Good-hearted, hard-working and self-sacrificing men who are just trying to take care of their friends and families.
“Men don’t feel like they are currently being portrayed correctly [by the media],” says Keith Richman, Break Media CEO, who set out to capture "the state of being a man in 2012" in the recent Acumen report, which queried 2,000 males between the ages of 18 and 49

This is also not a new observation.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinkin ... fools.html

[Gormwood]

Upstart Crow is another example of SJW progressive activism because it dares to feature actual women and minorities!

[Ostroeuropa]

Upstart Crow is another example of SJW progressive activism because it dares to feature actual women and minorities!

A general cultural trend means that any specific example you care to pick won't be the most egregious and is defensible in isolation. It's only when you view the statistics divorced of specific example that the problem becomes apparent. It suggests that perhaps scaling back on the push to attack all-white casts as "Lacking diversity" and celebrating the inclusion of more minorities in roles will result in more equal outcomes and a more representative portrayal in the media. Or, that white roles need to be re-examined and positive portrayals in line with what white males want to see themselves portrayed as be put into production more. That means demanding more caring father roles, and so on.

It's much like police shootings. Each one in isolation can be defended and justified. But when you take a step back you realize what that practice of defending them results in, and you might realize that the defending and excuses are more likely to go one way than another. For instance; the notion that an all-white cast movie is exclusionary and lacks diversity and is therefore morally questionable has been pushed for a while now, essentially the position being; "This movie is another example of racist activism because it doesn't feature women and minorities", which you are now trying to claim I hold the reverse of. The result of that activity has been the underrepresentation of white males.

[SD_Film Artists]

I wonder where all the people who complain when there's insufficient "diversity" in media are right now.

They're busy creating Facebook posts about how it's "impossible to be racist against a white person" as they've been called out on their racist hypocrisy so now they're moving the goalposts by suggesting that racism against white people isn't actually racism because "1700s [reeeeee noises] system of privilege [more noises]"