A Marginalized and Underrepresented Population

Steve Turley on new Oscars guidelines:

The first requirement includes hiring “at least one of the lead actors or significant supporting actors” that belongs to a marginalized population…

Similarly, 30% or fewer “secondary or more minor roles” must be occupied by women, people in the LGBTQ+ community, or a racial or ethnic group, as well as those with cognitive or physical difficulties, or who are deaf or hard of hearing.

The first standard also requires that storylines focus on the same underrepresented groups.

Can anyone think of another “marginalized population” or “underrepresented group”?

One glaringly obvious one comes to mind: smokers.

Smokers everywhere in the world.

So in all new movies at least one leading actor will need to be a smoker. And several minor roles must also be smokers. And the plot should be about the exclusion and persecution of smokers.

Any suggestions?

Possible storyline: Several dozen smokers are sitting in a bar with beer and cigarettes when a bunch of Tobacco Control killjoys come in and put up No Smoking signs. The expelled smokers start dying of cold, exposure, etc, but nevertheless resolutely resist and carry on smoking anyway. A global smokers’ movement grows up all over the world, and eventually defeats Tobacco Control, imprisoning all the killjoys on a remote island. Everyone lives happily ever after.

Something along those lines, anyway…

Lead actor should be Humphrey Bogart. Lead actress Lauren Bacall. Set in Rick’s Bar in Casablanca.


About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to A Marginalized and Underrepresented Population

  1. Claudia says:


  2. Mark Jarratt says:

    People who are oblivious to how ridiculous they look interfering in artistic expression, imposing their ideology on everyone. Arrogance in action, but as with anti smoking bullies, few stand against them, to avoid being bullied themselves.

  3. Lepercolonist says:

    This is cultural suicide. Creative people are constrained with these idiotic demands. Some of the greatest movies of all time would not be nominated. How about a separate Oscar for affirmative action movies.

  4. Joe L. says:

    Shortly after the George Floyd incident, as Black Lives Matter rioting and looting was ramping up, my employer announced that they will be promoting more black employees into leadership roles over the next few years.

    Call me crazy, but I believe promoting someone purely based on the color of their skin is the textbook definition of racism. An employee should be hired and/promoted based on their skills and accomplishments … regardless of their race. That is true equality. What we are seeing take place today is inverse inequality being touted as “equality.” It is absolutely disgusting. These so-called “Progressives” are actually fanning the nearly-extinguished flames of racial prejudice in all directions and inciting a new race war by favoring one race over all others–exactly what they claim to be fighting against.

  5. Clicky says:

  6. DP says:

    Dear Mr Davis

    Completely off topic, have you seen this post and its linked article on Watts up With That?:



  7. RdM says:

    Oscars new diversity standards are ‘deeply dehumanising’

    Sky News Australia
    601K subscribers

    Quotas and identity politics are deeply dehumanising because they deprive people of being rewarded on the basis of their own merit and treats them according to an immutable characteristic, according to the Institute of Public Affairs’ Daniel Wild.

    His comments come after recent announcement from Hollywood that no film can win the Oscar award for the Best Picture unless it casts, or hires behind the camera, a certain number of people from underrepresented minorities.

    “Quotas and identity politics are deeply, deeply dehumanising because they deprive people of being rewarded on the basis of their hard work and merit and the kind of contribution they can make,” Mr Wild told Sky News host Andrew Bolt.

    “It treats people purely on the basis of their race, or their ethnicity, or their religion, or some other immutable characteristics such as their gender.”

    So some people disagree.
    See the comments.

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.