If Denzel said “I will only play a parent in a film if my child in the film has a disability, played by a young actor with a disability. I don’t think kids with disabilities get enough screen time in Hollywood and it makes them more marginalized in the real world.” … would you say he’s anti-ableist?
“implied” describes how the movie shows it to the audience, as the attachment would have taken place during a time jump. It’s very clear in the movie that they’re either married by then or life partners, after having developed their relationship throughout the course of the movie.
Sent from my LGMS631 using Tapatalk
Just asking questions, amirite?
Your working way too hard here. He’s not racist. You need to step away from your big ol’ shoehorn.
Isn’t black man + white woman more “progressive”? Especially when the counterpart is such a famous actress an not a c-list or first-timer?
The white man + black woman seems much more common and was a key factor in “Jungle Fever.”
I don’t think it is racist (at least not big R racist) but judging people by the color of their skin should be avoided. I get his point as stated. Also, whoever get the part will be a replacement. I can’t imagine, say, Halle Berry taking that role and be “black Julia Roberts”
In The Mighty Quinn
? Jungle fever was about a black guy + white girl.
I think it’s more of a moan.
Which bit of
did you fail to understand?
Well, “consistently preferred” is not the same as “only does romance arcs with black women.”
Moreover, I have no idea if that is true or not, but I cannot imagine coming to a conclusion that there is anything racist about that if it is true. Maybe because you’re not American, you don’t understand what he’s trying to do and why its perfectly legitimate. But I doubt it.
So why didn’t you just ask, "Has Denzel Washington had romantic arcs in films with white women or just with women of color? Why even mention racism?
And there we have the answer. The accusation in the article is indeed false.
Not necessarily. The “accusation” (what a strange way to phrase it) is about preference. Not hard and fast rules. Back in 1989 Mr. Washington may not have had enough clout to enforce his preferences. Or may not yet have cared.
I have a feeling Quartz is angling at something else here; what it is, I don’t know. Clearly he must know that “having a preference” does not translate to “never did a love arc with.” But I’m fine with just saying, yes, the article is false, and the answer to the OP is therefore “no” and let it lie.
Yes, he is a racist bastard. One day last year as I emerged from a Greek restaurant in Chicago, he and three of his cohorts attacked me, shouting anti-Greek slurs and beating me with cudgels; I ran back inside and nursed my wounds with the slime from some raw octopus, and regenerated my health with a dish of tender lamb shank until I felt ready to return to the fray, but by that time he had moved on to wailing on an Irish soda jerk on the corner, screaming racist imprecations. I didn’t call the cops though, I’m no fucking snitch.
Indeed. Racism is defined as:
This story (since it seems to not be the case) was decidedly the opposite. It is intending to lift up those of the actor’s own race who have been seen to be inferior.
I think what you guys are missing in Quartz’s post is that you are assuming that the reason given is true. I don’t believe he is doing so. He is assuming that the reason is merely an excuse for a racist action. I can’t get too mad at him for that: I tend to assume that racists lie about their reasons for racism myself.
Of course, there is still the undercurrent of assuming the black guy is being racist as a tu quoque style situation. And there is focusing too much on the supposed statement and not his actual body of work. And, yes, the whiff of this being the type of article you’d find on one of those right-wing outrage porn sites.
So I still don’t support the assumption that this would be racist, but I can at least see where he’s coming from, both for good and for ill.
That said, it appears the whole thing was made up, as the type of thing right wingers think that a progressive might say that they could argue was racist. And that does make me less considerate.
If you’re going to fact check, leave out the assumptions until you prove what was said was actually said.
That’s bizarre. You’d have to be pretty damn racist not to want to make out with Julia Roberts. I find the reason’s offered (if there is any truth to them) to be perfectly reasonable, believable, and legitimate.
Based on what logic?
Would you say that it is sexist if a prominent, powerful gay actor said that they would only accept a role where they were portrayed as gay?
Would you say that it is anti-rich if a prominent, powerful actor said that they would only accept a role if the producers set the film in a nation with a lot of poverty, and hired only locals from a town on the edge of famine, to fill out all the extras and 40% of the cast?
Would you say that it is anti-healthy if Michael J Fox said that 10% of the box office for his next film has to go to research for Parkinson’s?
Which part of “is Denzel Washington a racist?” wasn’t a question *you *were asking?
Your particular question at the end of your OP was already answered in the negative in post #2. Everything after has been anti-anti-racism theatre on your part.