The Instigator
brian_eggleston
Pro (for)
Winning
19 Points
The Contender
SWfiend
Con (against)
Losing
2 Points

It's time to apply positive discrimination to the entertainment industry

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/20/2009 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 7,300 times Debate No: 9523
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (6)
Votes (3)

 

brian_eggleston

Pro

Most people who work in television and the theatre are either women or gay men (and even some of the men you probably think are normal are, in private, screaming homosexuals, though obviously I can't mention any names for fear of legal action but Tom Cruise and John Travolta will know who I mean).

This underrepresentation of straight men extends beyond the stage and screen to the executive management level of the entertainment industry where the decisions on what shows to produce are made.

That's why all the big shows on Broadway and Shaftesbury Avenue are productions like "Mama Mia", "Billy Elliot" and "Grease" which can only appeal to timid old ladies, starry-eyed little girls and roaring poufs. And that's also why there are so many programmes on television about cooking and fashion and housework. And don't even get me started on "Will and Grace".

Furthermore, there are entire channels devoted to shopping so that lazy fat housewives can waste their husbands' salaries on overpriced tat without having to get up and go to the mall. Meanwhile, however, there are very few television programmes about cars and other forms of transport because the female and gay male television executives in charge don't personally enjoy those sorts of programmes.

I, therefore, affirm that in order to redress the balance the entertainment industry must be forced to implement assertive action policies designed to employ and promote more straight men in order to reflect the demographic makeup of the general population.

That way we can look forward to more great programmes like "Top Gear", "Ice Road Truckers" and "The World's Wildest Police Videos" and fewer inane broadcasts like "Can't Cook, Won't Cook", "The Clothes Show" and "How Clean Is Your House".

Thank you.

REFERENCES
---------------
Affirmative action / positive discrimination explained:
http://aad.english.ucsb.edu...

The homosexual male domination of Hollywood explained:
http://www.afterelton.com...
SWfiend

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for posting this argument and the readers and voters who took time to review the debate. I shall begin.

As the name implies, the entertainment industry is there to supply us humans with, well, entertainment. From our favorite Friday night program to Mom's favorite musical to our brother's favorite band, the entertainment industry supplies it all. In many ways, we are personally indebted to the people who make those tough decisions that decide whether or not a television show stays, or our band is kept with a record label, or a show will debut on stage again. Without the people to make those tough decisions, where would our entertainment be? So why should we take those making the decisions away from their position and replace them with another person when the there is no need for it. We all know that there are gays and women in the entertainment industry, we can't deny that, but should they be taken out of a position of power just because we don't like the decisions they are making about what shows to air on T.V. and how a movie should be rated and switched with a straight man so they can represent the "straight entertainment"? Of course not! If someone has worked their entire life to get to the position they are in and earned everything they have, should they be simply switched out because we don't have enough "straight" shows? No! It is for this reason that I stand in opposition of the resolution.

I would like to start off by clarifying the terms used within the resolution:
Apply: to bring into action.
Positive: emphasizing what is laudable, hopeful, or to the good; constructive.
Discrimination: treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit.
Entertainment Industry: those involved in providing entertainment: radio and television and films and theater. (For clarification on Entertainment Industry, go to http://en.wikipedia.org...)
All definitions from www.dictionary.com

My opponent starts the debate by claiming that "most people who work in television and the theatre are either women or gay men" without supplying a single source or statistic to prove what he said. Unless one can be supplied, than this comment should go without consideration in this debate (which would negate all his arguments). He then goes to make a blind assertion about male entertainers, and then associates Tom Cruise and John Travolta to gays, when they have no connection whatsoever. My opponent is counting on a persons dislike for aforementioned people to bring the the reader to Pro's side. Cheap trick.

For my opponent's second point, he shows no evidence to prove that what he says is true. While it is true that executives make the decisions (http://filmtvcareers.about.com...), he has failed to prove that gays and women control these decisions.

My opponent's third point is solely personal opinion and has no factual basis whatsoever. I personally enjoy musicals whenever I have the chance to see them, even though I'm not a timid old lady, a starry-eyed little girl, or a roaring poof; I also have many friends who are exactly like me in that respect. When it comes to television, executives try to come up with ideas that will draw in certain demographics to their channel, allowing those channels to receive funding from a wider range of companies who are looking to sell their products. (http://en.wikipedia.org...)(For example, if you create a show that is geared towards an older female demographic, and that show is a success, then companies trying to sell products primarily for that demographic will buy adds for that show's time slot, thus giving you more money, which is good. If a show doesn't do well on the T.V. and is not bringing in any viewers, then the television station is not earning any money from advertisers. Simple.) And Will and Grace was a really successful show, so there is no reason why it should be brought up. (http://en.wikipedia.org...)

The fourth point my opponent presents is still missing those key sources to show that what he says is true. (http://en.wikipedia.org...) If you take the time to look at the link I just provided, you will see that these categories are made for both male and female demographics, not just "lazy[,] fat housewives.." As for the lack of shows about "cars and other forms of transport..." I offer this link: (http://www.speedtv.com...) An entire channel dedicated to "transport". And as I was searching for more information, I came across this link: (http://dir.yahoo.com...) And again, my opponent claims that "gay male television executives in chage don't personally enjoy those sorts of programmes" without a single source to back his claims up. If he is not able to do this, then how can we believe anything he says?

My opponent's final point, in which he states that he stands in affirmation of the resolution, is (again) missing some much need sources to prove that what he is saying is true. As I have said earlier, we all know there are gay men and women in Holliwood, but just because there aren't that many television shows on air that you like doesn't mean that they are taking over and "gaying it up". Also, why should we try and reflect the population in the entertainment industry? It's not politics. As I stated earlier, why should we take someone out of their position of power just because we don't like their decisions? For example: I don't like the fact that the History channel is airing so many religiously based programs on the air, but that doesn't mean that the decision makers in the company need to be switched out, so why should that be done to those who just so happen to be gay?

I again would like to thank my opponent, and wish him luck in the next round.
Debate Round No. 1
brian_eggleston

Pro

With many thanks to WSFiend for accepting this debate and for his valiant attempts to find fault in my watertight arguments, I should like to respond as follows:

My opponent demanded proof that the entertainment industry is dominated by women and gay men. Well here's some proof.

Here is an extract from the original draft* of the screenplay for Brokeback Mountain.

/////

INT. DAY. MLS.

Ennis, a gun-toting, no prisoner-taking, hard-drinking, tobacco-chewing cowboy walks into a saloon in rural Wyoming and sees Jack, a cattle-rustling, wife-beating, ten gallon hat-wearing desperado standing at the bar. Ennis reaches down, undoes his holster and pulls out his pistol.

Ennis – Turn around, Jack, I'm going to fill you full of lead.

Jack – Hot diggerdy dang. Is that so, Ennis? Goddamit, you'll have to be quicker than a rattlesnake on a hot tin roof to beat me to the draw, yee-ha!

CUT TO MONTAGE. Ennis and Jack having a shootout before rolling around in the dusty street outside in a deadly embrace.

/////

Now when the writer submitted the script to the film studios, the heterophobic producers said they loved it and would make the film, but they would have to edit it slightly first. So the screenplay was duly revised to the following:

/////

INT. DAY. MLS.

Ennis, a gym-going, no animal product-eating, herbal tea-drinking, non-smoking cowboy walks into a gay bar in rural Wyoming and sees Jack, a musical-loving, flower-arranging, leather cap-wearing contemporary dance instructor standing at the bar. Ennis reaches down, undoes his flies and pulls out his pecker.

Ennis – Bend over, Jack, I'm going to fill you full of love custard.

Jack – Ooh, well knock me down with a feather! Is that so, lover-boy? Well, you'll have to buy me a pina colada first, sweetie-pie.

CUT TO MONTAGE. Ennis and Jack having a nice quiet drink together before rolling down a grassy hill in a loving embrace.

/////

You see how they queered it up there? They may have even wanted to change the name to "Bareback Mounting" but the scriptwriter probably put her foot down and said no. And, yes, it was a woman – Annie Proulx. What did you expect? A straight man? Don't make me laugh.

http://www.imdb.com...

My opponent then claimed that I insinuated that Tom Cruise and John Travolta were secretly gay because everybody hates them anyway and that it was a cheap trick to associate them with homosexuality. This isn't the reason I picked those two names it is because Tom Cruise threatened to bankrupt a publisher if he released a video that he had of Tom Cruise performing homosexual acts and because John Travolta has been spotted kissing other men - on the lips.

http://news.bbc.co.uk...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk...

By the way, I did provide one source about Hollywood being taken over by the gay mafia in the first round but there isn't much else out there because the male homosexual community wants to keep the real facts hushed up so that they can continue to portray themselves as victims of homophobia and thus get preferential treatment.

And as far as women in entertainment are concerned there are dozens of film festivals dedicated solely to women.

http://widc.org...

And as if there weren't enough female orientated shows on TV already, women television bosses such as BBC2 controller Janice Hadlow wants even more.

http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk...

Media watchers in Britain will not be surprised at this ever-increasing feminisation of the BBC schedules though. Back in 2001, BBC2's top-rated programme was the much loved car programme Top Gear. So what did the channel do? They axed it. That's right – they cancelled it from the schedules completely and replaced it with yet another programme about cooking called The Naked Chef. Makes no sense, does it? So who made this crazy decision? Who was in charge at the time? Step forward the 'high priestess of lifestyle television' Jane Root who also replaced other documentaries with programmes like Coupling (about relationships) and What Not To Wear (about women's fashion).

http://en.wikipedia.org...(1977_TV_series)
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Since it clearly wasn't ratings Root that influenced these decisions we must conclude that it was her own personal preferences, as I stated in the first round.

Finally, I accept that many advertisers are happy with female-orientated schedules, especially if they are flogging cosmetics or groceries or household detergents, but what about adverts for car accessories or power tools or razor blades? They are few and far between in comparison because there are so few programmes aimed at men.

In conclusion, it is imperative that in the interests of both balanced scheduling and fairness in the workplace that positive discrimination practices in favour of straight men should be implemented in the entertainment industry forthwith.

Thank you.

* As the original draft of Brokeback Mountain was not published I have had to re-create it using my imagination.
SWfiend

Con

SWfiend forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Nails 8 years ago
Nails
Even with that last argument, I still would have voted pro.
CON didn't offer any real positive impacts of gay people running Hollywood.
I guess I buy the argument that television isn't totally dominated by gays (not that much to suggest that they are), but as long as there are still positive impacts and no negative impacts to the affirmative action PRO proposes, I don't see why not to vote for him.

P.S. I think a good argument to make would be that gay people are better at acting/ producing/ etc. which is why they get the job, in which case, discriminated against them would harm TV by putting in less qualified heterosexuals.
Posted by brian_eggleston 8 years ago
brian_eggleston
No problem, I understand.
Posted by SWfiend 8 years ago
SWfiend
Sorry about not posting an argument, I just had a lot of stuff to do and I never had the time to post one.
Posted by SWfiend 8 years ago
SWfiend
Don't worry about it.
Posted by brian_eggleston 8 years ago
brian_eggleston
Sorry, SWFiend, I misspelled your name in R2.
Posted by I-am-a-panda 8 years ago
I-am-a-panda
Hmmm.....many possibilities here
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Nails 8 years ago
Nails
brian_egglestonSWfiendTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by wonderwoman 8 years ago
wonderwoman
brian_egglestonSWfiendTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Chihuahuadogz 8 years ago
Chihuahuadogz
brian_egglestonSWfiendTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:52