Next Season Of Survivor: Race vs. Race

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
80sU2isBest said:


Again, no one here thinks that any of that will be the result, so your sarcasm is misdirected.

Not to mention that the sarcasm was rude and uncalled for, Snowlock.
 
Bonochick said:


Not to mention that the sarcasm was rude and uncalled for, Snowlock.

I don't think it was. This entire thread basically is calling everyone who watches the show and who is interested in this particular season a racist. I found it really offensive and arrogant and I wanted to call them on it.
 
80sU2isBest said:


Again, no one here thinks that any of that will be the result, so your sarcasm is misdirected.

K, but if that's the case, then why is "everyone" considering it such a bad idea?
 
Snowlock said:


I don't think it was. This entire thread basically is calling everyone who watches the show and who is interested in this particular season a racist. I found it really offensive and arrogant and I wanted to call them on it.



yes, but you see, when you get into the whole, "i think that you're thinking the following ..." you're being absolutely no different.

ah, watching so-called conservatives who try to throw down against liberals for thinking they're smarter than everyone, when *really* the hidden agenda is that the conservative is trying to show that, really, he's secretly smarter than everyone because he's thinks he's smart enough to know when other people think that they're smarter than everyone and because he thinks he knows when other people think that they know that they think they are smarter than everyone, he thinks that calling them on this will make him look like the truly smart one, but, really, he just winds up making the same pratfall he accuses everyone else of. one of my favorite activites.

and i don't give a shit about "Survivor."
 
Snowlock said:


K, but if that's the case, then why is "everyone" considering it such a bad idea?

I've already explained that. It will stir up feelings of race superiority and competition within the cast members. Will society start following suit, and start race riots? No. But it's still not a good thing.
 
Snowlock said:


I don't think it was. This entire thread basically is calling everyone who watches the show and who is interested in this particular season a racist.

Who said that?
 
The ironic thing about all this reaction, from quite a few people who apparently don't watch the show, is that this is only going to last for a few episodes before there is a merge. It's going to be over and done with very quickly.

I personally don't care for the arrangement, but if the people involved don't have an issue with it, then I don't either.
 
phanan said:
The ironic thing about all this reaction, from quite a few people who apparently don't watch the show, is that this is only going to last for a few episodes before there is a merge. It's going to be over and done with very quickly.

Are you sure about that? When they did women vs. men, I think it lasted longer than a few episodes, didn't it?

I think one episode of race vs. race is one too many, anyway.

By the way, I've watched every season.
 
The format is the same as last season, when they split it up into four tribes instead of two. It was older men, older women, younger men, younger women.

Obviously, it makes for small tribes, so it only takes a few episodes before they have to merge the four into two.

When it was just men vs. women, since it was only two tribes, it lasted much longer.
 
phanan said:

I personally don't care for the arrangement, but if the people involved don't have an issue with it, then I don't either.

A lot of Italian-Americans spoke out against The Sopranos because it depicted them as gangsters, even though Italian-Americans acted several of the parts. So I don't see that as a valid argument. I think the main issue is that false stereotypes can emerge of entire groups based on the portrayal by a few.
 
maycocksean said:
Well, I guess I'm going to be very much in the minority here.

First of all, I watch Survivor. Furthermore, I'm what you might call a fan of Survivor. I've watched every season since the first and I've enjoyed them all. I've even tried out for the show (gasp!), though obviously I didn't make it on. (And I'd add that most contestants on the show are like me--not looking to get rich on TV, but instead wanting to test themselves to see if they could do it, to see if they could be the "Sole Survivor." The arrogance towards the show, the fans, and the contestants I've come across on this topic is just breathtaking.)

So now that my "secret shame" is out there for all to see. . .

My thoughts on this new season. I'm really surprised that CBS has chosen this route. It's kind of insane really, and filled with all kinds of pitfalls, I predict.

However, I'm not nearly as stirred up with horror as most of the posters are here. Perhaps that has to do with my not looking down my nose at the show to begin with, I don't know.

I should point out here for those that don't already know, that I'm black.

To be honest, my first thought was, finally we'll have more than one or two "token" blacks on the show. And multiple Asians! We're lucky if we get one Asian every three years (In fact, Asians seem to be virutally invisible on TV today and I think that's a real shame). I've always disliked how the show was stacked with mostly white contestants and a few token minorities. I often wished there were more black contestants for example, not just to see people of color "represented" but also because I always felt that the token minority was at a disadvantage--already on the "outside" by virtue of race. I thought having several black contestants would change the dynamic of the show in interesting ways. I always sensed that the producers of Survivor (and of most TV shows-- reality or not) were afraid that too many people of color on a given program would make white viewers feel this was a "black" show, and thus not for them. So, my feelings about Survivor and race have never been exactly positive, even though I am a fan of the show.

I think it's kind of sad that this is what it takes to see more minorities on Survivor, and I too question the wisdom of pitting races against one another. Like most crazy decisions--like the soldier that runs straight into enemy fire--it's either really brave or really stupid. I for one prefer to see the show before making the judgement as to which it is.

I don't know. . .I have a lot of conflicting thoughts on this and I'm afraid to really pursue any of them since I'm not even sure I agree with me yet.

I know that I disagree with the contention that people will "band together for the shallow reason of race." In our country, I'm not sure that reason is so "shallow." There is often a lot more behind race than skin color. People share cultures, worldviews, heritage, and that factors in too. People who are in the minority often feel a sense of solidarity with those who are share that minority status, and there's nothing inherently shallow about that.
So I'm not going to have to see one black guy trying to fit in with a bunch of white folks this season.

I'd also suggest that racism is an uncomfortable subject, but I don't think that means it shouldn't be addressed. I read an undertone of fear in many of the posts on this thread--what if the show plays out our stereotypes and prejudices, what if the white team indeed does dominate? What does that say? What will it mean? Some would say, let's not even think about it, let's not even give an opportunity for that to happen. I say, bring it on. Let's tackle this shit. I don't think there are simple answers here. Let's get into it.

Now, if you despise reality tv then surely you will feel that this is the worst arena in which to deal with "serious issues" such as racism, but then perhaps that is more an issue of how "worthwhile" the arena of discussion is rather than the subject of racism itself.


Indeed. "Let's get into it." This post was briliant.
 
80sU2isBest said:


I've already explained that. It will stir up feelings of race superiority and competition within the cast members. Will society start following suit, and start race riots? No. But it's still not a good thing.

So then what you are telling me is, were you to go on Survivor and be split according to race, you would think your race is superior? I don't know if its fair that you're taking your own racist thoughts and projecting them onto others.

Unless of course you don't believe you yourself would react in that way.
 
Snowlock said:


So then what you are telling me is, were you to go on Survivor and be split according to race, you would think your race is superior? I don't know if its fair that you're taking your own racist thoughts and projecting them onto others.

Unless of course you don't believe you yourself would react in that way.

No, I do not think my race is superior. That's one reason I would absolutely refuse to do the show. I do believe there are non-racists who will do the show anyway. However, I believe that there are probably people on the show who do have racist feelings and of course, they will not refuse to do the show. It will turn into a race war for some of the contestants; I really think that is a big danger in this situation.
 
ntalwar said:



The winner of Season 1 was convicted of tax evasion and accused of using the money from his charity for personal use.
So, I would beg to differ on the financial motivation.

I think they(CBS) are already using stereotypes.
One stereotype is having a Hispanic team. Hispanic is not a race.
Another stereotype is for the Asian team, which seems to be people of East Asian descent and not South, West, or North Asian.

I might buy your argument if multiple winners of Survivor as well as other contestants were convicted of the same crimes. Just because one contestant has greed issues doesn't mean all contestants do. That's like saying that because a preacher is caught embezzling money from his church that proves that all preachers are money-hungry frauds.

My arguments are based on the fact that I'm a fan of the show and someone who would have liked to be on the show (Shoot, I'd do the show even if it weren't televised. In fact I'd even prefer it that way). So when I talk about motivation I think I speak from "experience" of a sort. (Unless you'd like to argue that I wasn't nakedly greedy enough and that's why the producers didn't put me through). On the other hand, I suspect your arguments may be based on your derisison for the show and it's fans and contestants. Which is hardly what I'd call firsthand experience.

I've already stated that I don't like what Survivor (or CBS or TV in general) has done in the past regarding race. And I agree with your points about the stereotypical "Asians" and the Hispanic "race." I'm not saying it's the best idea, but when you realize that TV has rarely been real conscientious when it comes to race, you also realize perhaps this idea may be ill-conceived but not as nefarious and horrifiying as you think it is.
 
80sU2isBest said:


No, I do not think my race is superior. That's one reason I would absolutely refuse to do the show. I do believe there are non-racists who will do the show anyway. However, I believe that there are probably people on the show who do have racist feelings and of course, they will not refuse to do the show. It will turn into a race war for some of the contestants; I really think that is a big danger in this situation.

Which is exactly why I said this:

"It's your own damn arrogance that you believe people less intelligent than you (which is everyone that doesn't agree with you) will use the results of the show as an excuse to deport illegal immigrants, burn crosses, and uh, copy the asian kid's math test."

Which of course is an exaggeration, but gets to the heart of the matter. Let people make their own decisions rather than decrying something for the "greater good". This "outcry" is a perfect example of PC going too far.

And as to the danger... What danger? Lets say your right and some idiot is a racist on the show... So what? It would probably show the world how much of an idiot he/she is.
 
Last edited:
Irvine511 said:




yes, but you see, when you get into the whole, "i think that you're thinking the following ..." you're being absolutely no different.

Not really. I just proved it. Whenever someone is worried about the decisions of others, not their well being, or whatnot; but the choices they make, it just seems to always come down to the fact that they think they know what's best.
 
^

What a broad statement you're making.

I just think it's a stupid idea coming from an incredibly boring show that's still trying to stay relevant.
 
Snowlock said:


Which is exactly why I said this:

"It's your own damn arrogance that you believe people less intelligent than you (which is everyone that doesn't agree with you) will use the results of the show as an excuse to deport illegal immigrants, burn crosses, and uh, copy the asian kid's math test."

Which of course is an exaggeration, but gets to the heart of the matter. Let people make their own decisions rather than decrying something for the "greater good". This "outcry" is a perfect example of PC going too far.

It's your own arrogance that makes you think you know what people on here "really mean" by what they're saying, especially when most of the people you're talking about have been around here a heck of a lot longer than you and know each other's style a lot better than you. If you knew anything about me, you'd know I'm not PC.

Unless of course, you call it being "PC" to be against race-baiting (which is what the coming season of Survivor is all about).

I think that the producers are aiming for an additional market with this coming season. They've got the reality crowd hooked, now they're trying to entice the Jerry Springer - loving crowd.
 
Well, I suppose it depends omn who we are comparing 80's to...haha!!!!:wink:
 
This really is a fascinating argument, isn't it :D It's like when nbc and I agreed on something and he commented, if you scratch the surface enough you are bound to find common ground.

:up:
 
Snowlock said:


Not really. I just proved it. Whenever someone is worried about the decisions of others, not their well being, or whatnot; but the choices they make, it just seems to always come down to the fact that they think they know what's best.



it's funny when you think that people who don't agree with you are less intelligent than you.

:cute:

martha's right: you have no idea.

but keep on your jihad against your own self-serving definition of "political correctness" and find it wherever you think it's lurking (especially when in the hearts of the very most conservative on this board).

onward conservative soldier!
 
Could we knock off the bickering, please? If we can't just discuss this in a civil, respectful manner, the thread will be closed.
 
Bonochick said:
Could we knock off the bickering, please? If we can't just discuss this in a civil, respectful manner, the thread will be closed.

I'm not gonna say it again.
 
http://www.tvweek.com/article.cms?articleId=30472

Survivor' Stirs Up Supremacists
Web Posters Embrace Show's Racial Split
By James Hibberd


CBS's plan to racially segregate the tribes for the 13th season of "Survivor" has white-supremacist Web bulletin boards buzzing, prompting concern from the Southern Poverty Law Center civil rights group.


"It has lit up the white-supremacist world," said Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Report at the SPLC. "It's been a fairly remarkable reaction. [The format] plays into the hands of many people in this country who have racist feelings."

The upcoming season of the 6-year-old CBS reality show has contestants separated by race into four groups: The African-American Tribe, the White Tribe, the Hispanic Tribe and the Asian-American Tribe. The tribes will stay segregated for about half the season.

Since the format was announced two weeks ago, the plan has been widely criticized as a racially inflammatory ratings stunt. Show creator Mark Burnett has said the format was a response to criticism that the reality program didn't include enough minorities.

People posting messages on white supremacist Web sites such as Stormfront.org and Vanguardnewsnetwork.com, are greeting the "Survivor" format with a mix of hope and suspicion: Some hail the idea as a way to foster racial pride among whites, but others fear Hollywood will portray whites unfavorably.

"This is a great idea," wrote poster "Drafli Hakon" on Stormfront, which claims 120,000 members. "This will get all those millions of couch potatoes who watch the show [rooting] for their own. Win, lose or draw, millions of whites will start to remember that they ARE part of a tribe. If the Whites win, they will feel pride. If they lose, they will feel resentment towards those who won. It's win-win for us."

Another poster, "Krom," agreed. "This is great and should be really interesting!" the poster wrote. "One benefit I see is that people will really see racial differences are real PLUS they will be able to root for their own people; a sense of racial solidarity. Good luck to the white team!"

Much of the reaction is tempered by fearful certainty that the show will portray whites in a negative light.

"The show will choose the weakest and most indecisive whites to be on the island, and the opposite for the other races (except the asians, maybe)," wrote one poster, "Kragen." "The show will also be carefully edited to fit their agenda ... to make people think whites are nothing without non-whites."

CBS declined to comment about the message boards. Mr. Burnett could not be reached for comment by press time.

Mr. Burnett has denied the show will inspire racism and has called critics "less than open-minded."

Mr. Potok, whose nonprofit group investigates racist organizations, said segregating players is an unhelpful way to address diversity issues. "I'm not sure if creating a mini-race war on TV is much of a solution to an affirmative-action problem," he said. "To some people, this is a chance to get up and cheer for your race. And that's not helpful at a time when race relations are doing poorly in America."

One poster on Stormfront noted that the new "Survivor" format might "double or triple [CBS's] ratings." To which another member hopefully replied: "It might double or triple Stormfront's ratings." Stephanie Robbins contributed to this report.
 
Well

it seems like all the complaining was for nothing


all the contestants behaved well

it seemed like they did not care too much for the segregation


when the tribes merged last night
they all said they were much happier being integrated


I am wondering if some people were not projecting their attitudes and feelings about race on these contestants
 
bonosgirl84 said:
i've never missed a single episode of survivor since the show began.

here's my thought.

if the people who are actually ON the show don't care about being divided into races, why should anyone else?

:shrug:

Good call...

Most of the sentiment here appears to be meaningless anti-survivor waffle.

If it's ok to segregate people based on gender (like they have done in the past), then it's ok to do this racial thing.

That said, it is a shame that there is no Native American representation.

And about perpetuating streotypes....it's no worse than a lot of those sitcoms that are centered around African American families or Caucasian familes, like My Wife And Kids and Married to the Kellys...

Crikey, what an over-reaction...ease up peoples...
 
Back
Top Bottom