Straight Outta Casting Calls and the Usual Break Down Suspects

This is from this post on KCRW's Facebook. 

At times, I find it hard not to engage in what I view to be conversations with strangers on the internet, which they generally tend to view as altercations, arguments, trolling, or inciting a riot. 

In this thread I posted the following:

Thought I got a pretty decent receiving. I don't tend to get 10 likes on much - even on my own page! haha

This is in response to the Sande Alessi Extras Casting matter regarding a casting call put out for the film "Straight Outta Compton". There are multiple articles but this is the one KCRW posted that I responded to.

I am a member of Sande Alessi Extras Casting. I read casting breakdowns ALL THE TIME. I read them on Backstage.com and ActorsAccess. I felt these breakdowns were pretty par for the course. I don't get bent out of shape when a casting call asking for "white, hickish rednecks" or "pasty, strung out people - poor, look like they are drugged out of their minds " are put out there - because I am a mature person who works in entertainment. I understand there will be "types." I understand that there will be "stereotyping" and when casting a film from a specific area during a specific time frame - things might seem a little racist. This also lets the actor know what they will be doing, what the attitude of their part is, the mannerisms, the thoughts and time period - how people reacted then as apposed to how people react now. It's information about your character.

If you look the part, or potentially COULD look the part, and you're an actor trying to get work and make ends meet, then well, why wouldn't you do that? I wonder how this could have been worded that wouldn't have people in an uproar. Some people claimed there was a ranking? I don't see a ranking, I see groups for casting. People are reading into this WAAAAAY more than necessary.

What am I saying - people who do not work in the "looks" industry are going to find something wrong with anything said about race. It's just one more thing to latch onto to demonize the industry. Believe me, folks. It doesn't need anymore help! haha

For the record with the top image - I did not press enter and send that comment to the gentleman that wrote about how 

"It is always people of non color vehemently defending racism. Is this a coincidence? 

I think not." 

Sir, I would not consider myself someone of non-color. I've done my genealogy and my ancestors are from all over the world, nearly every continent. Nor would I consider myself a racists or okay with racism. 

I'm just as sad that we put people into boxes. But I work in an industry where people are put in boxes and then BREAK THEM. That's what I'm about.

On another note regarding Racism:

It was less than an hour prior to this that someone on my Facebook who is someone that identifies as a "person of color" posted a video about how "dumb white women" clutch their bags when a "black man" gets on an elevator with them.  I can't face palm hard enough. I don't care WHAT color or gender you are - #1, I'm gonna make room in the elevator for you; #2 If you look like a tweaked-out, super-sketchy person, I'm probably going to move my bag onto my other shoulder and be wary of you. Just saying. 

Okay. *LoudMouthedGal* OUT!

Really #SCOTUS? WHAT YEAR IS IT??

I really have no words for the #SCOTUS ruling - so what you're telling me is that corporations get to be "people" with rights protected by the constitution, but women who want contraception (who are unfortunately having to work for one of these terrible companies) - a valid medical drug that also helps with general hormone issues and prevents certain CANCERS along with unwanted pregnancy - are more important that medical coverage regarding half of the population? WHAT CENTURY AM I LIVING IN WHERE THIS IS EVEN STILL A QUESTION???????

In the long run it's cheaper for them to provide contraceptives than for the woman to take an unwanted pregnancy to term where the government ends up putting a child through the system, or the mother/family has to use government services to make ends meet and is traumatic for all involved OR has to deliberate themselves as a person and whether or not to have the terrible experience of having an abortion.

I KNOW I KNOW! Next let's say that companies don't have to provide coverage for blood platelets or certain vaccines or drugs with pig or cow products in them because of their religious affiliations!

You're basically saying that these extremely religious people are more validated than other extreme religions. How about we keep religion out of it and make sure people are covered medically for their needs and requirements and let them make the choice whether they wish to use those products or not.

seriously. wow.

kthanx
/RantOver


*::EDIT::*
Because apparently I'm a glutton for reading stupid things on the internet and I get sent these links for "What Liberals Don't Want You To Know About the Ruling" kind of articles:

YES. I'm upset about these further restraints on women's health issues. Is Viagra in question ever? Don't see anyone making a stink of that kind of craziness.

This has more to do with the fact that we are treating these profit making businesses like people and giving them a freedom of religion for their for-profit business based on their religion. 

It's just wrong. 

Like I pointed out: are we going to allow Jewish, Hindu, Jehovah Witnesses, Muslim or ANY OTHER RELIGION based companies the right to not pay for / cover blood platelets, vaccines and medicines that have cow or pig gelatin or properties in them? No companies should have an exercised religious standpoint when it comes to the health of their employees. Male or Female. It is the personal choice of the employee. The Plan B pill, IUDs and others are just as important for a woman to make a choice about for herself. It's the principle and their choice.