New Star Wars Movie is Racist

It seems my "opponent' doesn"t get it. I"m remaking the debate anyway but it should be good practice to lay it out very clearly in baby spoons for those who are willfully ignorant of what is pretty obvious. So I will lay it out as clearly as possible. What almost everyone seems to agree regarding what is or isn"t racist revolves around the concept of "fairness." Something fair should not favor any group. If a group is being over represented they are being favored. How do we decide when a group is over represented? There is really only a single way to do so; based on population demographics. After all everyone seems to like to see character they identify better with in roles of movies they like. Nothing else would be fair. Important Implications: The Original Star Wars espidoe V and VI was then the least racist in its racial depictions of all Star Wars Movies. Because in terms of population % it most fairly represented races. Blacks are about 12% of the overall population, Lando was a major supporting character and accurate reflection of 12%. Blacks who complained about the lack of a male lead are the real racist; it would be racist to favor themselves to get a larger representation in the movie than they actually were. Rather the only people who have a right to complain are asian and middle eastern people really who were not represented at all. Why do other people have to wonder why their demographic is under resented at the expense of someone else? What is really important here though; why can"t we call it racist in public? Why is it like anything can be racist except when its racist against whites and particularly white men? Time to embrace the darkish because there is no way I an feel anything other than a whole lot of anger. Kylo Ren at least is ironically accurate. Now Lets sum up my opponents "points." He claims I only give stereotypes and show a poor attitude. He goes not do anything to actually explain how this is so with any logic or specifics but merely baldly states this. What I find frustrating about my opponent is he seems to ignore that there IS something to be upset about. I am complain about nothing that blacks did not about Star Wars in the 80s; except everyone listen to them and apparently in the long term they got what they wanted. That I have to actually start quantifying the unfairness of the new movies/movies in general towards white men; and getting granular with details and logic in terms of ratios and thus essentially shoving his nose into facts before he will even begin to see where the problem exists is part of the more general problem that is breeding resentment. ANYONE else with this exact same complaint get instant attention and acceptance and not this response. "It is not racist that I live in a gated community devoid of blacks. It is not racist that I live in a mostly white area. It is not racist that I like white beaches. It is not racist that Jar Jar brinks spoke like a Jamaican." Some people would disagree with all of those. Note the typical profound liberal arrogance my opponent shows. He decides when things are racist and when they are not in a self serving manner. I am claiming I feel something is racist towards me and my demographic. The new Star wars is a continuing representation of this trend. I am not speaking for anyone else so your baseless claims about irrelevant topics has no bearing here unless you articulate a logical way they do have such a bearing. You have not done this but just listed "stuff" with no obvious relation that we cannot extract meaning from. "Your entire post was about stereo types and your woe is me attitude towards life and had nothing supportive of racism." All racism complaints are a woe is me attitude by your logic then. Go complain to black lives matter while you"re at it. This bland argument is annoying because apparently everyone else can complain about racism until they get what they want at the expense of someone else; namely white guys these days. And when we do it back we get this BS in response. This is just a continuing double standard that you are perpetuating and it is creating enormous amounts of frustration. "You needed to consult a dictionary to figure out the difference between racism, bigotry, and stereotypes. How can you possibly read your first round and conclude it was anything about racism? It goes back to my first round point about it being an easy debate to win." I needed a dictionary because you wanted to prattle about definitions. I just provided a source to shut that nonsense up instead of trying to let to make it subjective which is what semantics fiddlers thrive on. You attempted to say that the word "racist" was incorrectly used in the tittle and you failed miserably in that semantics ploy. You attacked the word; not the argument or ideas up for debate. I"m not trying to do a verbal ballet here but that seems to be all you are really interested in. "What did they do to show whites to be inferior? Not having whites in the movie, or held to a limited roll, or even died in the movie." You haven"t seen the movie; so any denial from you is based on what? Han is implied to be "useless" by his own dialogue. Essentially he quit the rebellion and becomes a smuggler again because that was "all he was good for," except he clearly was NOT good at that either. Thus he is clearly implied to be useless. He later appears to be a failure as a father and a parent, and in his death scene really has very pathetic showing dying as weakly as his character was made out. He didn"t have any kind of memorable line or moment; he just died. He didn"t even say "I am your father." Nothing. Obviously I"m not saying he should live forever; but instead the white male lead who was so good in the originals was portrayed with extreme weakness and dilution of an iconic white male hero from the orignals that just ADDS salt to the wounding fact that there is no white male hero anymore in the new movies to replace him either. We have to be content with the heros from the originals; but wait they just went out of their way to make them NOT seem so great anymore in the new one to be replaced by apparently newer better heros who AREN"T white guys. So we are supposed to be content with WHAT? Nothing? Yea right. It not only that they don't have white hero, but they have made another white male hero from the originals meet a pretty pathetic end. This movie only detracted from Han"s hero status. He didn"t die a hero; a died a failed old man. Also; spoiler alert; potentially that is his daughter who is paired with the black guy. So we can sum up the male roles in Star wars as : Han as a failed old man who dies pretty pathetically, he could have died but the way he did and the way he depicted was extremely negative. Poe was added on as an after thought an originally died in the first 5-10 mins. Kylo Ren you almost never see his face except 3 scenes; and he is about the worst character to be indented. He isn"t even a cool collected villain like vader; he is a tantrum prone brat who the viewer doesn"t respect the way the respected vader just by how he is resented. That is pretty negative only meaningful depiction of young white males on top of how he is an evil sadistic farther killing murderer. Luke is a crazy hermit who looks like a recovering drug addict and plays no part in the movie at all except is "found" like a lost princess at the end. Mind you, the movie it too feminist to even call Princess Leia princess anymore. The main Female lead can"t get recused because that would piss off feminists, oh and the new yoda is a girl and the added a completely pointless female stormtrooper that particular felt like it was just added in "just for the sake of it." I wish i could say it added to movie but it was really just politics on screen in the worst and most obvious way that ruined the real experience. Poe is OK but then he WASNT supposed to be in the movie and his character was kept alive on after the opening as an afterthought when they realized there wasn"t a SINGLE white male face they could show in the movie poster. The villain is a white guy but that isnt flattering since he is put in a vey bad light and you only see his face 3 times towards the second half. Not exactly any real screen time for the white guy and the little of is very negative in its depiction. "If you don't want to continue here, then go make another debate and pretend this one was about my semantics." You started arguing about definitions on R1. Idk where you think there is any "pretending" involved here unless you want to admit something to everyone? "Go march with BLM and tell the world how important it is that blacks and whites be represented equally on TV and in movies." Actually I am saying they should be NOT be represented evenly; as in 50-50. Because last I check 50% of the population in the US wasn"t black, and black male - white female couples that are top quantity of hollywood depictions but are near the bottom in real life statistics. Where are all the other couples who are not being represented fairly if at all? This gets to question of what equality is. Apparently for blacks complain about racism in the 1980s star wars racism for them was not being enter stage and getting the white girl when as 6% of the population they should e lucky they are getting screen time at all. Resolution: It is not racist to not cast black men in male leads; actually since they are such a small % of the population and of interracial couples it is racist to portray them so inaccurately at the expense of other people. If they aren't represented they really can't feel that is racist against them. Because they are demanding over representation to statistical reality. I am demanding fairness, that reality be resented without favoring one group at the expense of another.