RANT

[chad]

What the **** are you guys talking about? I was making reference that the media wouldn't make a noise about crap like that if people 'you' the reader wouldn't buy news papers and link to stupid articles like the one you just posted about. The media outlets KNOW news storys like that SELL (same as sex) so they just release news story's about it. I would rather read NEWS about current political and financial situation of Australia housing market than some girl whining that she lost out with her time in the spotlight because the shade of her skin.

[UnSCaRReD]

LOL - and then you edit your post saying "equality is about keeping things equal" - yet you have no problems with someone hiring based on race instead of qualifications or skill set.

I think it's funny that a sugar analogy post included a reference to equal.
Maybe I'm the one that's fucked up.

[rec]

Nah, that's awesome. You're awesome.

[Ratty]

yes chad in 1 aspect you are right, news articles like that only sell to the people that are the reason for the article in the first place, people who believe that its racist to request that someone fit a set of rules needed to fill a position.

when you hire someone to do a job do you not hire the person better suited to the role or do you hire the black dude as not to be seen as racist?

yes the media make a big deal about things like this, but its the people that the stories start with that i blame, yes the media feeds to people what they wanna see, but its the morons that want this sort of news that need to be shot. (which was the point to my original rant)

the world is going to shit because of morons like her, im tolerant and i understand peoples sensitivities to race/religion and if the casting bloke had said "fuck off bitch your too black" then yeh i can understand the uproar..

but all he said was that 'unfortunately she did not match the requirements, her skin tones are to dark for what they need', now if a white chick had gone to that interview and they said sorry we are looking for darker skin tones, would she had done the same thing?? we'll never know but from the total lack of stories in the news that read "IM WHITE AND ITS RACIST THAT THEY WANT A AFRICAN MODEL"... the results speak for themselves.

its the reason i dont watch the news or read the paper anymore (the link was emailed to me) the world is full of soft cock's and whingers just after a few minutes in the limelight.

[chad]

Agreed Ratty

[r00t|{it]

Rec crawl back into your hole please. As an Analogy it works perfectly. As a metaphor it may have failed slightly but the general idea would still be retained.
It's about freedom of choice without fear of being labled and I think your reference to the fact that "wanting white sugar doesn't make me a white supremecist" would guess that you were quite aware of the point I was trying to make.

[rec]

When you advertise for an employee of certain ethnicity, you're not choosing, you're discriminating.

Freedom of choice does not include discrimination against race, as you're then infringing on others' freedoms.

[Ratty]

ah but Rec the casting agent wasn't discriminating against race, he did not tell the woman 'no u cant have the part cos you are 'Pakistani'.

[r00t|{it]

So do you think that the employer in this case "refering to the hiring of hobits" was in the wrong? In your opinion were they just being choosy or were they discriminating against people with darker skin? I would also like to point out that my sisters friend was not stating that she would only hire a malaysian person it was just her preference.

[rec]

What was her reason for preferring a Malaysian nanny? I'm talking about this being discriminatory, not the casting agent from the first post in this thread.

A legitimate example is that you cannot be a pilot if you are over a certain height, or over a certain weight. This is due to the logistics of operating and running certain types of fighter jets. An illegitimate example is then saying you also need to be black.

Another legitimate example is, as per the first first post, for specific castings in entertainment mediums such as film. So to answer your question, no, they weren't in the wrong.

[r00t|{it]

So now you care about the reasons? Isn't it just easier to label people based on the limited information you are given? Her reasons are her own and for whatever reason she would prefer a Malaysian nanny. The agency sells a product, A nanny is not just a person who cleans your house. They are sometimes heavily involved in many aspects of your life and I for one would be quite particular if I were choosing one. However I feel this is off topic yet again and I was merely using it as an example of over sensitivity, which you have quite greatly demonstrated.

[Wrathlon]

By this logic it makes sense to cast Morgan Freeman as the lead in American History X. Sorry, but in some story telling certain physical attributes are needed. Get the fuck over it.

[grandinferno]

I'll say once again. The mistake was in naming the pigment constraints in the advertising of the said position/positions.

If you want to hire a Malaysian nanny (weird btw...) then advertise for a nanny (just a nanny) and hire a Malaysian one! Nobody gets offended and you get what you want. It's quite a simple concept that has worked for a long time.

It's easy not to cause a shitstorm if things are just handled subtly. It's obvious that certain positions are not suitable for certain ethnicities/age groups, etc. but you never say that in an advertisement. Seeing that pretty much all businesses hold public relations pretty high, it's in their best interests not to advertise anything that may be construed as prejudiced. I believe I already posted this anyway...

Edit: This news story is quite obviously a beat up and a ridiculous example to be using anyway...

[DoWhatUWant]

In the case of cinema it is perfectly reasonable to indicate race. You would not for instance have a white guy play nelson mandela in a biopic or a black guy play george washington. The hobbits in the book are described as having light skin tones so its perfectly appropriate for the movie to stick to that. Racial sensitivity in this day and age means the job advertisement needed to specify the reasons to avoid implied offence.

[rec]

So now you care about the reasons? Isn't it just easier to label people based on the limited information you are given?

Ok, fine. Based on the limited information I have, she's racist.