Just tossing a pebble into the 'Hollywood Demographics' bowl, all for it.
As far as the argument goes, I'm not Jewish (though I am of a minority group), I don't find the article itself offensive (though I do find the title a bit... poor. I don't think the word 'Jews' itself particularly offensive but the phrase 'You Have to Have Jews' ...feels like there's some antisemitic sentiment behind it, without the context of the Python show's No-Sacred-Cows-Tongue-Planted-Straight-Through-Cheek environment, if that makes sense).
Aside from the fact that Hollywood Demographics seems like it would just be a more useful page in general, the current title... makes me feel like we're daring someone to start linking/potholing to it with vaguely racist sentiments. I know that's not exactly the best argument for a rename, but personally I'd rather see the demographics article, as it's much more neutral, clear, and wide in scope.
edited 2nd May '11 2:27:14 PM by savage
Want to rename a trope? Step one: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Have changed article to read "no newspapers have ETHNICALLY Swedish owners". Hope that's clearer. (Have to assume the underlying fact is true - I'm not Swedish).
"I don't think the word 'Jews' itself particularly offensive but the phrase 'You Have To Have Jews' ...feels like there's some antisemitic sentiment behind it"
How about if the person who wrote tells you, clearly and distinctly, that there is no antisemitic sentiment behind it? At what point is the perception of antisemitism YOUR problem?
"the current title... makes me feel like we're daring someone to start linking/potholing to it with vaguely racist sentiments"
Again with the implication that simply NOTICING A FACT and commenting on it makes you racist. What is "vaguely racist" about this? Most 100m sprinters are black guys. Is it racist to notice that? Is it racist to SAY it? If the real world make you uncomfortable, isn't that your problem?
"I'd rather see the demographics article, as it's much more neutral, clear, and wide in scope. "
Great. So name ONE OTHER ethnic minority who are similarly massively disproportionately represented in the media both as characters and as creatives. Change the title to "widen the scope" if you feel you must... but can I propose you widen the scope FIRST? As in, right now this scope is legitimately entirely about the massive disproportionate representation of Jews in media, due to the reasons described. It's a valid observation.
By all means, carefully delineate at least one other ethnic minority which is massively over-represented compared to its numbers in general population. When a number of examples have been given, it may appear (to me) legitimate and sensible to change the title because the scope has been widened.
Until then, changing the title sounds to me simply like nervous, over-sensitive self-censorship.
Das kann doch nicht sein!
Well, we do now.
One would have hoped it went without saying, but if every single thing must be spelled out...
I'm new to this website obviously, but I thought it was a place for pointing out recurring patterns in fiction? Whereas the intro to this article is mostly amateur sociology with no citations.
I see the Awesomeness.
Eh, we don't really do citations. The main issue with this page is that, as you said, it's more of a social analogy, as opposed to the proposed Hollywood Demographics.
Fight smart, not fair.
If we're going to talk about Jews in fiction, then it should be renamed to Token Jewish or something like that. If we're going to talk about the fact that there are a lot of Jewish people working in old media, new media and art then... I dunno. I don't care about sociology and demographics so whatever
"Take your (...) hippy dream world, I'll take reality and earning my happiness with my own efforts" - Barkey
"recurring patterns in fiction?"
It is a recurring pattern in fiction that Jews are represented (both as characters and creatives) disproportionately to their appearance in the general population.
It is odious to attempt give examples directly, since the trope is one of overall statistics and no single direct example illustrates it. However, the trope is unarguably clear enough and identifiable enough that those with the privilege of being allowed to point it out have done so. (See Jon Stewart example.)
Zzzzzzzzzz
NZM, this trope is the exact opposite of tokenism. Tokenism is "We'll put one <fitb> in the cast so that y'all can't complain about not being represented." This trope is "Why is three-quarters of the cast of this show, that's set in Omaha, all Jewish?"
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
"it should be renamed to Token Jewish or something like that"
It's *not* about tokenism. Tokenism implies Jewish characters or actors/writers/directors who are included simply to round out the cast and fill some sort of real or imagined "quota" of minorities. While this may happen with Jewish characters, that's a different thing, something entirely covered by the Token Minority trope.
It's hard to talk about this because no single example works. Bearing that in mind... consider Friends. Half a dozen attractive young people, three male, three female. Two of them, as it goes, Jewish. Tokens? Certainly not. Unrealistic? Well, the show is set in NYC, so no, it's entirely realistic in a New York context, because something like 1 in every 8 New Yorkers is Jewish.
But the world is not New York. In the world, there are hardly any Jewish people outside Israel and the US. In the UK, there are a little over a quarter of a million. By any standards, they're a tiny, tiny minority pretty much everywhere.
Despite that, I, a gentile, know what a bris entails, know the most significant difference between a bar mitzvah and a bat mitzvah, know about sitting shiva and roughly what's kosher and what's not. Why do I know this? Why are the religious and cultural traditions of this tiny, tiny minority so well known to outsiders, and specifically to outsiders such as me who couldn't care less and have never made any attempt to research them? Because they get a degree of exposure in mainstream media far greater than their prevalence in the general population.
This is not a value judgement on that exposure. It is merely an observation of the unarguable fact of it.
"This trope is "Why is three-quarters of the cast of this show, that's set in Omaha, all Jewish?"
It's not even that (although that example would be a particularly egregious one). It's more like "Why is, on average, one (fraction)th of the cast or crew of EVERY show Jewish?"
To which the answer, as stated, is "well, three (fraction)ths of every show are made in New York or LA by a production company owned by a Jewish guy. You do the math."
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
Um, can we just cut this?
Link to TRS threads in project mode here.
I think the majority are in agreement that it should be moved to Hollywood Demographics and made clear that it's about fictional demographics that are egregiously out of place considering the setting, not just the prominence of Jewish characters.
Lets have a crowner, vote on it, and then do it.
I am not Jewish, and have spent my entire life in places with practically no Jewish population, and I've felt this trope was offensive since the first time I saw it.
For one thing, to the extent that this is a real pattern, I suspect it's mostly a function of the fact that media is disproportionately likely to be set in New York or California (which should be its own trope - do we already have one?). I can't actually think of a lot of media set outside those places that still have a really disproportionately high number of Jewish characters. For another thing, if we're going to keep the trope, the title really is problematic; even if it's meant as a joke, the fact is that there are lots of people who say things like "You can't put on a TV show without Jewish characters, because the Jew-run media won't allow it" and mean it, and on the internet nobody has any way of knowing you're not one of those people. It's not reasonable to make a joke like that to thousands of random strangers over the internet and act like it's their problem if they don't magically know we're joking.
edited 15th Oct '11 6:52:08 PM by dangerwaffle
Not exactly on the general topic, but from the article..
"The same trend can be seen outside the U.S., in for example Sweden where no newspaper with a circulation of 100,000 or more has Swedish owners; remarkable when there are only ten thousand Jews in the whole country."
This either implies that all the Swedish newspapers are owned by non-Swedes (in which case the population of Jews in Sweden is irrelevant) or that they are owned by Swedish Jews, but that they aren't to be considered "real" Swedes.
Either way, that could do with a bit of rephrasing...
edited 29th Apr '11 10:26:59 AM by Valentine