Author Topic: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality  (Read 10448 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #90 on: March 06, 2018, 07:43:13 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37516
  • Tommy Points: -27478
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Roy, I'm getting a tad confused. I get how maybe an employer can't say "We're gonna hire this many of this" but I'm not sure why an actor can't say in their contract "I won't be in the movie unless you hire this many".   Does that make it an illegal contract because you're trying to force an illegal action?

Yes. Clauses that require unconstitutional discrimination are unenforceable.



Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #91 on: March 06, 2018, 07:47:36 PM »

Offline green_bballers13

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2246
  • Tommy Points: 273
Asking for an inclusion rider isnít racist.  I fail to see this point of view. White males have all the power and obviously have so much power they feel completely safe sexually harassing women in Hollywood.  Letís take some of that power away by giving jobs to other races and genders so white men donít have complete control in Hollywood because clearly that hasnít been working well since the inception of movies.

Denying someone employment based on their race is by definition discriminatory.  Attempting to right one type of discrimination with another is every bit as bad as the original discrimination and will lead nowhere good.

I get that we should strive to create a world where there is equality, I want that too.  But come on folks, use your brain a little and take the time to actually think about what you're saying.

This doesn't make sense. How does a complex history of power struggles by women and minorities compare to any potential loss that a white guy might have in 2018. This is assuming that the demand for labor in the movie business is static. Good money will go to finance good projects, regardless of how many other movies are out there. A young black kid and a woman getting hired for some small role in a big production is barely a rounding error.

They don't need to make quotas. McDormand didn't say they needed quotas. Stacy Smith is a proponent of an inclusion rider (something I did not know about 48 hours ago). She says: "tertiary speaking characters should match the gender distribution of the setting for the film, as long as it's sensible for the plot," (https://annenberg.usc.edu/faculty/communication/stacy-smith)

I think it is interesting to see the fear that such words strike in people. It's almost like some are making stuff up about quotas and the scary government taking our rights when valid concerns about equal representation are addressed.

Besides, why do people want to see more guys than women on screen?

Right, more diversity that makes sense for the setting and plot makes sense.

Shoe-horning in ďdiversityĒ characters, miscasting actors / actresses, and hiring less qualified cast and crew to meet quotas ó which is the implication of McDermondís post-Oscars comments ó doesnít do anybody any good.

You mean, beyond the women and minorities (probably 75% +/- of the population)?

Also, did she use the term "less qualified"? That was not my interpretation.

Whether you liked it or not, a lot of young people were inspired by the Obama presidency. The idea is that kids should have role models. I don't mind watching women and minorities if there can be some type of social gain.
A quota system means that at some point you put skin color or gender above level of qualification.

Maybe I'm wrong, so please inform me as I feel like I'm taking crazy pills: I don't know where the quota system came from. I haven't seen any reference to "inclusion rider" and "quota system" from anything coming close to a neutral website.

People are creating this notion of a quota system as a last line of defense against initiatives that are trying to expand the available qualified labor pool in the movie business.

What is the source of the fear?

Did you ever bother to read McDormand's statement, or are you just going to pretend it never happened? She literally said the words "demand 50% diversity". That is by definition a quota.

Also, I don't fear diversity. I embrace it.

What do I detest, is this concept that there must always be an equal outcome. If there are 10 jobs available and 8 of the best 10 applicants were of a particular race/gender, it is not discriminatory if the end outcome is that 80% of the workforce is of a singular race/gender. That's just common sense.

I just found the transcript for her Oscar's statement: http://www.macleans.ca/culture/movies/transcript-frances-mcdormand-delivers-the-2018-oscars-speech-of-the-night/

No mention of a quota system.

I then saw her comment after the event: ďI just found out about this last week,Ē she shared. ďThere has always been available, to everybody that does a negotiation on a film, an inclusion rider, which means that you can ask for and/or demand at least 50 percent diversity in not only the casting but also the crew. And so the fact that I just learned that after 35 years of being in the film businessÖ weíre not going back. So the whole idea of women trending? No. No trending. African Americans trending? No, no trending. It changes now. And I think the inclusion rider will have something to do with that.Ē

Is this what you think a quota system is?

She's saying that there's a negotiating tool available for actors to demand for diversity. There's no governmental enforcement mechanism to say that the production company has to hire some cool guy actor because he has an inclusion rider. They can choose to ignore his contract demand, or accept it. It is the actors (laborers) themselves, not the government, that is looking to create change. It is a market-based approach. There's no legislation or punishment levied.

Itís a contractual quota that discriminates on the basis of race and gender. 

Do you understand what a quota is?

I probably don't. I am certainly not going to win a legal argument.

I still think it's interesting that people would like to align their opinions with the "let's maintain the status quo", especially as it pertains to the executive decision making in the movie business.

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #92 on: March 06, 2018, 08:01:26 PM »

Offline smokeablount

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2003
  • Tommy Points: 149
  • When my account was born, Mark Blount was our C :(
Having worked in Hollywood, I can say that this is a very tough area for equality because of the stakes of it all. There are only 8 major studios and thus 8 studio heads in all of Hollywood, and for the past 10 years it’s very possible to get fired for bombing once.

In a job where execs can’t make a single mistake, with a mistake meaning to make an unprofitable movie, talent isn’t even the most important thing. Making money is. Will Smith is black and was the top actor in Hollywood for years because after Leo made Body of Lies, he was the only actor to make his film budget back during opening weekend every single time, until he made I Am Legend. But you can see that since he bombed in I Am Legend, he isn’t appearing in much for unknown reasons.

All this is to say, Hollywood execs will cast whoever they think will make money. If top white actors make more money, they will likely be cast more. The studio heads’ career stakes are too high to take risks. Hollywood execs openly admit to passing on deals because they ‘aren’t in the business of taking risks’ (Paramount on passing on the Netflix Scorsese movie). 

I also feel like with everything today being a franchise, sequel, reboot or based on source material, if the original characters were white, it can limit the choices. I for one would like more original screenplays and alternatives to a $30mm marketing budget. This would allow for more diversity.
Give us this pick, Almighty Red
And forgive us our tanking
As we forgive those who tanked against us
And lead us not into the lottery
But deliver us from losing

-Sexyscottish

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #93 on: March 06, 2018, 08:20:13 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 35393
  • Tommy Points: 5870
Having worked in Hollywood, I can say that this is a very tough area for equality because of the stakes of it all. There are only 8 major studios and thus 8 studio heads in all of Hollywood, and for the past 10 years itís very possible to get fired for bombing once.

In a job where execs canít make a single mistake, with a mistake meaning to make an unprofitable movie, talent isnít even the most important thing. Making money is. Will Smith is black and was the top actor in Hollywood for years because after Leo made Body of Lies, he was the only actor to make his film budget back during opening weekend every single time, until he made I Am Legend. But you can see that since he bombed in I Am Legend, he isnít appearing in much for unknown reasons.

All this is to say, Hollywood execs will cast whoever they think will make money. If top white actors make more money, they will likely be cast more. The studio headsí career stakes are too high to take risks. Hollywood execs openly admit to passing on deals because they Ďarenít in the business of taking risksí (Paramount on passing on the Netflix Scorsese movie). 

I also feel like with everything today being a franchise, sequel, reboot or based on source material, if the original characters were white, it can limit the choices. I for one would like more original screenplays and alternatives to a $30mm marketing budget. This would allow for more diversity.
To further this point, the highest paid actor in Hollywood right now is The Rock.

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #94 on: March 06, 2018, 08:58:29 PM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11145
  • Tommy Points: 1312
Asking for an inclusion rider isnít racist.  I fail to see this point of view. White males have all the power and obviously have so much power they feel completely safe sexually harassing women in Hollywood.  Letís take some of that power away by giving jobs to other races and genders so white men donít have complete control in Hollywood because clearly that hasnít been working well since the inception of movies.

Denying someone employment based on their race is by definition discriminatory.  Attempting to right one type of discrimination with another is every bit as bad as the original discrimination and will lead nowhere good.

I get that we should strive to create a world where there is equality, I want that too.  But come on folks, use your brain a little and take the time to actually think about what you're saying.

This doesn't make sense. How does a complex history of power struggles by women and minorities compare to any potential loss that a white guy might have in 2018. This is assuming that the demand for labor in the movie business is static. Good money will go to finance good projects, regardless of how many other movies are out there. A young black kid and a woman getting hired for some small role in a big production is barely a rounding error.

They don't need to make quotas. McDormand didn't say they needed quotas. Stacy Smith is a proponent of an inclusion rider (something I did not know about 48 hours ago). She says: "tertiary speaking characters should match the gender distribution of the setting for the film, as long as it's sensible for the plot," (https://annenberg.usc.edu/faculty/communication/stacy-smith)

I think it is interesting to see the fear that such words strike in people. It's almost like some are making stuff up about quotas and the scary government taking our rights when valid concerns about equal representation are addressed.

Besides, why do people want to see more guys than women on screen?

Right, more diversity that makes sense for the setting and plot makes sense.

Shoe-horning in ďdiversityĒ characters, miscasting actors / actresses, and hiring less qualified cast and crew to meet quotas ó which is the implication of McDermondís post-Oscars comments ó doesnít do anybody any good.

You mean, beyond the women and minorities (probably 75% +/- of the population)?

Also, did she use the term "less qualified"? That was not my interpretation.

Whether you liked it or not, a lot of young people were inspired by the Obama presidency. The idea is that kids should have role models. I don't mind watching women and minorities if there can be some type of social gain.
A quota system means that at some point you put skin color or gender above level of qualification.

Maybe I'm wrong, so please inform me as I feel like I'm taking crazy pills: I don't know where the quota system came from. I haven't seen any reference to "inclusion rider" and "quota system" from anything coming close to a neutral website.

People are creating this notion of a quota system as a last line of defense against initiatives that are trying to expand the available qualified labor pool in the movie business.

What is the source of the fear?

Did you ever bother to read McDormand's statement, or are you just going to pretend it never happened? She literally said the words "demand 50% diversity". That is by definition a quota.

Also, I don't fear diversity. I embrace it.

What do I detest, is this concept that there must always be an equal outcome. If there are 10 jobs available and 8 of the best 10 applicants were of a particular race/gender, it is not discriminatory if the end outcome is that 80% of the workforce is of a singular race/gender. That's just common sense.

I just found the transcript for her Oscar's statement: http://www.macleans.ca/culture/movies/transcript-frances-mcdormand-delivers-the-2018-oscars-speech-of-the-night/

No mention of a quota system.

I then saw her comment after the event: ďI just found out about this last week,Ē she shared. ďThere has always been available, to everybody that does a negotiation on a film, an inclusion rider, which means that you can ask for and/or demand at least 50 percent diversity in not only the casting but also the crew. And so the fact that I just learned that after 35 years of being in the film businessÖ weíre not going back. So the whole idea of women trending? No. No trending. African Americans trending? No, no trending. It changes now. And I think the inclusion rider will have something to do with that.Ē

Is this what you think a quota system is?

She's saying that there's a negotiating tool available for actors to demand for diversity. There's no governmental enforcement mechanism to say that the production company has to hire some cool guy actor because he has an inclusion rider. They can choose to ignore his contract demand, or accept it. It is the actors (laborers) themselves, not the government, that is looking to create change. It is a market-based approach. There's no legislation or punishment levied.

Itís a contractual quota that discriminates on the basis of race and gender. 

Do you understand what a quota is?

I probably don't. I am certainly not going to win a legal argument.

I still think it's interesting that people would like to align their opinions with the "let's maintain the status quo", especially as it pertains to the executive decision making in the movie business.

Who said this? I certainly didn't.

I said the best qualified applicant should get the job, regardless of race or gender. I don't even know what the status quo in Hollywood is. And I certainly don't know what qualifies as "best applicant for the job". But what ever that criteria is, that should be what is being used, again, irrespective of race or gender.

That's shouldn't be so difficult to understand.

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #95 on: March 06, 2018, 09:25:57 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
Having worked in Hollywood, I can say that this is a very tough area for equality because of the stakes of it all. There are only 8 major studios and thus 8 studio heads in all of Hollywood, and for the past 10 years itís very possible to get fired for bombing once.

In a job where execs canít make a single mistake, with a mistake meaning to make an unprofitable movie, talent isnít even the most important thing. Making money is. Will Smith is black and was the top actor in Hollywood for years because after Leo made Body of Lies, he was the only actor to make his film budget back during opening weekend every single time, until he made I Am Legend. But you can see that since he bombed in I Am Legend, he isnít appearing in much for unknown reasons.

All this is to say, Hollywood execs will cast whoever they think will make money. If top white actors make more money, they will likely be cast more. The studio headsí career stakes are too high to take risks. Hollywood execs openly admit to passing on deals because they Ďarenít in the business of taking risksí (Paramount on passing on the Netflix Scorsese movie). 

I also feel like with everything today being a franchise, sequel, reboot or based on source material, if the original characters were white, it can limit the choices. I for one would like more original screenplays and alternatives to a $30mm marketing budget. This would allow for more diversity.
To further this point, the highest paid actor in Hollywood right now is The Rock.
Are we using the term "actor" sorta broadly on that one?

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #96 on: March 06, 2018, 09:30:53 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37516
  • Tommy Points: -27478
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Having worked in Hollywood, I can say that this is a very tough area for equality because of the stakes of it all. There are only 8 major studios and thus 8 studio heads in all of Hollywood, and for the past 10 years itís very possible to get fired for bombing once.

In a job where execs canít make a single mistake, with a mistake meaning to make an unprofitable movie, talent isnít even the most important thing. Making money is. Will Smith is black and was the top actor in Hollywood for years because after Leo made Body of Lies, he was the only actor to make his film budget back during opening weekend every single time, until he made I Am Legend. But you can see that since he bombed in I Am Legend, he isnít appearing in much for unknown reasons.

All this is to say, Hollywood execs will cast whoever they think will make money. If top white actors make more money, they will likely be cast more. The studio headsí career stakes are too high to take risks. Hollywood execs openly admit to passing on deals because they Ďarenít in the business of taking risksí (Paramount on passing on the Netflix Scorsese movie). 

I also feel like with everything today being a franchise, sequel, reboot or based on source material, if the original characters were white, it can limit the choices. I for one would like more original screenplays and alternatives to a $30mm marketing budget. This would allow for more diversity.
To further this point, the highest paid actor in Hollywood right now is The Rock.
Are we using the term "actor" sorta broadly on that one?

Haha. I think The Rock is awesome.  He probably wonít be winning too many Oscars, though.

Is there an Oscar for voice acting? Because he killed it as Maui.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #97 on: March 06, 2018, 09:40:40 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 35393
  • Tommy Points: 5870
Having worked in Hollywood, I can say that this is a very tough area for equality because of the stakes of it all. There are only 8 major studios and thus 8 studio heads in all of Hollywood, and for the past 10 years itís very possible to get fired for bombing once.

In a job where execs canít make a single mistake, with a mistake meaning to make an unprofitable movie, talent isnít even the most important thing. Making money is. Will Smith is black and was the top actor in Hollywood for years because after Leo made Body of Lies, he was the only actor to make his film budget back during opening weekend every single time, until he made I Am Legend. But you can see that since he bombed in I Am Legend, he isnít appearing in much for unknown reasons.

All this is to say, Hollywood execs will cast whoever they think will make money. If top white actors make more money, they will likely be cast more. The studio headsí career stakes are too high to take risks. Hollywood execs openly admit to passing on deals because they Ďarenít in the business of taking risksí (Paramount on passing on the Netflix Scorsese movie). 

I also feel like with everything today being a franchise, sequel, reboot or based on source material, if the original characters were white, it can limit the choices. I for one would like more original screenplays and alternatives to a $30mm marketing budget. This would allow for more diversity.
To further this point, the highest paid actor in Hollywood right now is The Rock.
Are we using the term "actor" sorta broadly on that one?

Haha. I think The Rock is awesome.  He probably wonít be winning too many Oscars, though.

Is there an Oscar for voice acting? Because he killed it as Maui.
Being a huge wrestling fan, I love The Rock. He's the most charismatic guy in Hollywood and it shows in his movies. His movies might not win awards but I enjoy most of them.

And yes, he was awesome as Maui and he saved the Fast and Furious franchise.

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #98 on: March 06, 2018, 09:53:20 PM »

Offline green_bballers13

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2246
  • Tommy Points: 273
Having worked in Hollywood, I can say that this is a very tough area for equality because of the stakes of it all. There are only 8 major studios and thus 8 studio heads in all of Hollywood, and for the past 10 years itís very possible to get fired for bombing once.

In a job where execs canít make a single mistake, with a mistake meaning to make an unprofitable movie, talent isnít even the most important thing. Making money is. Will Smith is black and was the top actor in Hollywood for years because after Leo made Body of Lies, he was the only actor to make his film budget back during opening weekend every single time, until he made I Am Legend. But you can see that since he bombed in I Am Legend, he isnít appearing in much for unknown reasons.

All this is to say, Hollywood execs will cast whoever they think will make money. If top white actors make more money, they will likely be cast more. The studio headsí career stakes are too high to take risks. Hollywood execs openly admit to passing on deals because they Ďarenít in the business of taking risksí (Paramount on passing on the Netflix Scorsese movie). 

I also feel like with everything today being a franchise, sequel, reboot or based on source material, if the original characters were white, it can limit the choices. I for one would like more original screenplays and alternatives to a $30mm marketing budget. This would allow for more diversity.
To further this point, the highest paid actor in Hollywood right now is The Rock.
Are we using the term "actor" sorta broadly on that one?

Haha. I think The Rock is awesome.  He probably wonít be winning too many Oscars, though.

Is there an Oscar for voice acting? Because he killed it as Maui.
Being a huge wrestling fan, I love The Rock. He's the most charismatic guy in Hollywood and it shows in his movies. His movies might not win awards but I enjoy most of them.

And yes, he was awesome as Maui and he saved the Fast and Furious franchise.

I would have made fun of the Rock a couple of years ago. I think he's really good in Ballers and am now a fan.

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #99 on: March 06, 2018, 10:59:02 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
I can just see The Rock as Shylock right now.

"Hey. Listen up. Don't a Jew have hands? Don't a Jew have organs and stuff? I mean we eat, right? You can hurt us with guns and knives. We get sick. If you cut us we bleed, right? Well then. What goes around comes around. Ok. Go Hurricanes."

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #100 on: March 06, 2018, 10:59:59 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
Wait a second. If you make The Rock the Merchant of Venice....is that diversity or appropriation?

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #101 on: March 07, 2018, 02:41:15 AM »

Online ImShakHeIsShaq

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7476
  • Tommy Points: 778
People are either willfully ignorant or naive to believe that people will pick the most qualified person or of two equally qualified people, the black person, if the other one is white. It's just not reality based!

Viola Davis said it much better than I ever could...


https://youtu.be/Sf0kDGVkVzQ
It takes me 3hrs to get to Miami and 1hr to get to Orlando... but I *SPIT* on their NBA teams! "Bless God and bless the (Celts)"-Lady GaGa (she said gays but she really meant Celts)

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #102 on: March 07, 2018, 04:56:39 AM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14080
  • Tommy Points: 1552
People are either willfully ignorant or naive to believe that people will pick the most qualified person or of two equally qualified people, the black person, if the other one is white. It's just not reality based!

Viola Davis said it much better than I ever could...


https://youtu.be/Sf0kDGVkVzQ

One either believes there is bias or discrimination based on skin color or one doesn't.  If disbelief is rooted in denial or naivete it doesn't matter because if the mindset is to reject that there is a problem, then there would be no reparation needed.   If one accepts race as an influencing variable in a problem labeled as disproportionality, the discussion is only beginning.  Then the degree to which race is influential, and the impact of the bias become part of the equation. Even when we can agree that race is an influencing variable AND that the impact is sizable enough to be considered problematic, we are still left with perhaps the most challenging decision - what (if anything) should be done about it.

Sometimes I think we get so locked into responding to an ill-advised solution, that our points of agreement get lost.  If the common denominator is an agreement regarding the problem (could be applied to unauthorized immigration, unwanted pregnancy, unfair trade...), then it is always possible re-set the discussion.   The "quota" idea may be a misguided or daft "solution" but the suggestion of it shouldn't negate or cloud the point of agreement if such agreement exists.  For those who agree that racial bias or discrimination has led to an inequity in jobs, roles, pay, recognition in the acting profession, what do you offer as a move in the right direction? And responding "no quotas" doesn't really move the needle. .

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #103 on: March 07, 2018, 06:22:25 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37516
  • Tommy Points: -27478
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
People are either willfully ignorant or naive to believe that people will pick the most qualified person or of two equally qualified people, the black person, if the other one is white. It's just not reality based!

Viola Davis said it much better than I ever could...


https://youtu.be/Sf0kDGVkVzQ

Thatís just silly. Millions of ďpeopleĒ / employers will pick the most qualified person for a job. You seem upset about prejudice, while lumping every single decision-maker into the same category.

I mean, if youíre right, how do you account for Dwayne Johnson, Denzel Washington, Vin Diesel, Will Smith, Samuel L Jackson and others being legitimate leading men?

Thatís not to say thereís no racism. There is. The solution isnít forced employment of minorities, however. Itís making great movies regardless of race.  People who are great will be embraced in any profession, I think.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Oscars -- Thoughts About Racial Inequality
« Reply #104 on: March 07, 2018, 06:36:49 AM »

Offline Erik

  • Kyrie Irving
  • Posts: 937
  • Tommy Points: 154
  • The voice of reason
People are either willfully ignorant or naive to believe that people will pick the most qualified person or of two equally qualified people, the black person, if the other one is white. It's just not reality based!

Viola Davis said it much better than I ever could...


https://youtu.be/Sf0kDGVkVzQ

If youíre talking about in general (not Hollywood) you couldnít be further from the truth. Companies have hiring quotas and universities have separate sat scales for black and white candidates. If two candidates are truly equal, the black guy will always win with respect to employment and education. The black guy will even win if heís less qualified. This is called racism and does blacks no justice because it makes society constantly wonder if theyíre actually qualified on merit. Nowadays SJWs like to pin this wonder on white privilege. Yeah, itís such a privilege to be docked 200 points on the SAT due to being white.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsStrong Forums.

Community

Signup to win FREE tickets

* indicates required