ㅤ
ㅤ
Watching the hands tick on a grand-
father clock across the room, swirling
deep red wine in a glass before she
brings it up towards her nose to smell
the aged, fruity notes.
ㅤ
ㅤ
@Doom_CMYK@TemplarsRoar They do make money, yeah, but we dont see even more because of racism and sexism which you seem intent on acting like do not exist.
One of the most damning things, though, is how successful minority-led films are. They tend to do very well and make a lot of money but that white man statistic is still just so high.
See, we can establish that white led films make money because that's how it's always been because this country was literally built on slavery. We have over a hundred years of film to look at to see it. What you arent able to prove, though, is that minority lead films DONT make money the same way white led films do. Black Panther Box Office was 1.35 Billion for reference.
And that matters why? White Men still held over 77% of lead roles in film. That's over representation. Which is what I've been saying.
It seems like you're trying to say that a simple majority of 26% justifies white men taking 77% of film lead roles, which is obviously nonsensical and only predicated upon the idea that both numbers are a majority.
You are literally relying on ignoring what my argument is in order to make your own. Wild.
My argument has been that White Men are over represented in Hollywood. That would be respective of the 26%.
White men at 26% of the Population in America
White Men hold 77% of the lead film roles in Hollywood. Even if you remove the gender statistic, which im only doing to prove a point, white people are still over represented.
@Doom_CMYK@TemplarsRoar You are impressively stupid. Two of your three examples are genderbent versions of the same character. That doesn't apply to ANY of the characters in the original image. What are you talking about? Oh my god. LOL.