I have to agree. I remember watching a talk show in America where they did the brown paper bag test. If you were darker than the bag, you were screwed, if you were the same or lighter than the bag, then you were acceptable. All of the darker skinned people do go quite early.

In so far as racism exists within every country I suspect that for some people this will strongly influence who they vote for.

Like many people I was surprised to see Tameka in the dance off but wouldn't have been surprised to see Naga, not because she is 'black' but because she hasn't be able to relax into the competition and this has impacted on her performance. Melvin deserved to be in the dance off because of his overall performance. The colour of his skin had no bearing on this.

If Naga is the next to go followed by Ore then

Proposition proved.

Last month a Polish guy in my town got beaten to death by a gang of kids after they heard him talking Polish on his phone. That is racism.
What isn't racism is a poor - average black dancer being voted off a talent show after they fell to the mid table curse which has been happening for years on the show now.
Frankly I find this whole discussion an insult to real victims of racism.

If your first paragraph were true, why are Ed and Lesley still in? Most people don't vote for the best dancer. If they did, Natalie would have won and Pixie wouldn't have been hoyed out so early.

To people who say it's trivial - that if we're not talking lynching and genocide it really isn't worth discussing - I'd say this.

I imagine that there's a huge career boost for people who make it to the final rounds of Strictly. Essentially it's week after week of primetime exposure. The agents for successful celebs will be deluged with approaches. Your economic value increases hugely.

If you're voted off in the first two or three weeks, you are back where you started.

So casual and/or unconscious racism in voting choices, hurts people in their wallet.

Working as a 'celeb' is just that. Work - not fun.

Is that the plaintive sounds of violins I hear in the distance....?

I suppose if they find the glamour of appearing on TV, attending awards ceremonies and the like to be too much like work, they could always consider a change of career... maybe to something much more "fun" like....

.... being a carer for elderly dementia patients living in a care home.... or stacking shelves in a supermarket for minimum wage on a zero-hour contract?

The point I'm making is that indirect discrimination is unpleasant, wherever you are..

It's unpleasant if you get given the worst shifts in the care home. It's unpleasant when you don't ever get cast as the heroine in the high-budget movie, but only given the cameo role as the heroine's best mate.

The two black dancers voted off already have good careers and were hardly going to make the final rounds anyway

Actually one doesn't have to stack shelves or look after a dementia patient to work hard, there isn't a sliding scale of effort dependant on the outcome, that's just inverted snobbery and I think your violins are playing very loudly.

These people are putting in effort to entertain us, some haven't and quite frankly to be hoofed off a show where people vote on popularity must be personally quite heart wrenching. I know I wouldn't ever want to do that.

Also as Mrs Moose says, your career plans have been halted in their tracks. So not only now do you know are you not likeable , you also may find it difficult to get work. A horrible combination.

Jan Ravens has been out in the wilderness quite some time following her emotional outburst on SCD to name one.

The point I am making is that being an actor is a privilege. Landing a role in a successful TV soap opera is an indicator of having some talent and all the trappings of media exposure bring considerable fringe benefits, as well as financial rewards.

Tameka enjoys all those things, so I'm finding it quite difficult to feel very sorry for her.

Not everyone can enjoy success at the highest level all the time, in everything they do for a variety of reasons. Some people just reach a plateau and remain there. Look at Adam Woodyatt who plays Ian Beale. It's practically the only job he's ever had... but he's done very nicely as a result of it, nevertheless.

I don't feel sorry for him either, funnily enough.

I hardly think most people have a paper bag to hand when deciding who to vote for.

I also think light skinned mixed race people would argue a lot with that statement.

Also what about people who are seasonally darker than the bag?

I don't see a bag as being at all relevant

Being an actor isn't a privilege, it's a job, being a successful actor and working routinely is a privilege.

There are many, many people who may be talented but will never know as they haven't ever been given the chance to shine, it's often because they haven't got talent, but if they work hard at their job, are really talented but still can't get a break, that's very hard.

I certainly am not saying Melvin and Tameka didn't work hard, but they didn't have dancing talent, or the personality to win over others to vote for them. The fact that both are black is co incidental for me, if Quentin Wilson or Tony Jacklin had been in their year both would probably still be on the show.

I know that. I simply used those two examples as they are not generally known as being "fun" careers. They are examples of mundane and arguably unglamorous jobs. Inverted snobbery doesn't even enter into it. I could just as easily have used "accountant" and "librarian" - or "IT programmer" and "church warden". I'm sure they all consider themselves to work pretty hard too.

All people in the entertainment industry know that it can be a precarious way to make a living. It can be that way even without being booted out of Strictly in the early weeks. Nobody forces them to take part and if they do, they must be aware that they are judged on popularity as much as anything else. They are also quite well rewarded for appearing, so I find it hard to get too over-wrought about it all.

As far as I am aware, Taneka's role in Eastenders is not in jeopardy on account of her involvement in Strictly. If it was ever likely to be (which I doubt), then the decision about whether to participate or not would still be hers.

It's kinda oranges and apples.

The brown paper bag test is an actual and historical thing in the US, dating from those fraternities and sororities they have at their universities. At that time, your skin had to be lighter than a brown paper bag to get into an AFRICAN-AMERICAN fraternity. This is an example of what they call colourism in the States. Within the black community, there is an issue with lighter skin being more prized. Likewise, in some Asian societies - see the huge market in skin lightening creams.

But I don't think this so much applies to Strictly. What does apply to Strictly is the possibility that voters' unconscious bias will make them less likely to vote for contestants in direct relation to how dark their skin is. Strictly voting is not, as others have said, a vote for contestants to leave: it's a preferential vote. The darker you are, the less chance of preference you have. Or not, if you believe "playing the race card" is a real thing rather than a discriminatory trope.

Oh well then, next time I hear Meryl Streep saying in an interview that being an actor is a privilege, I'll be able to point the finger at her, stand up and shout loudly

"OI, MERYL STREEP - NOOOOOOOO IT ISN'T!!!"

And if one of the reasons some actors / presenters / performers are less popular with some viewers is because of the colour of their skin...? That's still okay, is it?

Didn't Tameka just win an award at the Inside Soap awards, something which is voted for by the general public? Here's a though, maybe the public are fans of her acting but not so much so of her dancing? And being black has nothing to do with it?

Yes and I am saying that to,put yourself out there to be judged is really brave.

Re Tameka no I doubt very much her job in Eastenders is in jeopardy, but she may well have gone on to have a much bigger career if she hadn't been voted off so early.

It seems to me that you are underestimating the effect of not doing well on SCD can have on a personal and professional level.

If, which I don't beleive, that were due to racism that would make it appalling.

Meryl Streep is a successful actor who is regularly employed and who at her age is still getting to choose whether she works or not. That's an incredibly rare and privileged position to be in.

I think you would have to prove categorically that someone is perceived to be less popular than someone else, on account of the colour of their skin - and I can see no way that you could objectively do that.

Could you also point out where I may have even hinted that such a thing would be "okay"?

I think you will probably struggle to do so, on account of the fact that I didn't.

Depends on the context, if the marriage breakdown or murder investigation is set in a rural area or perhaps pre-WWII then casting a black actor often does not look right even though some of them will find a convoluted reason to explain it.

I mentioned King and Mandela because if a black actor was cast as a prominent real white historical person then it would be praised by the chattering classes for a whole load of a spurious reasons.

The brilliant Diane Abbott nailed it in the Guardian today.

"The whole show is a brilliant showcase of our multicultural society with dancers and panellists from all over the world. Welcome to the best of multicultural Britain."

All this lefty ist and ism gets on my wick. How about crime dramas when the perp is always white? We get the odd red herring thrown in when we get a black suspect but lo and behold he/she has been framed and the guilty party is always white. Similar to that spate of adverts showing bag snatching/pickpockets and other personal awareness ads, the criminal is always portrayed by white actors actresses, no lefty outcrying about typecasting there I note, but the professional offendees who take offence on other peoples behalf are the same hypocrites that support reverse racism.

That is the risk they take appearing on the programme - isn't their fee not dependent on when they are eliminated.

They still get a lot of publicity in those few weeks and in the final, as well as odd appearances on ITT. I am sure there are quite a number of people who are known for having appeared on Strictly even though they were eliminated quite early.

I didn't know about the sorority thing, that's really awful.

My point is that yes there is a bias to lighter skin, particularly in Asian societies, not sure so much in black society now though historically there certainly was. Edited Beyoncé and Michael Jackson show that's not that historical. . I think over the very recent years it has become less of an issue.

Someone with curly hair and the wide nose that identifies them as not being white, but has really light skin can have it harder than someone with Caucasian features and darker skin.

I am not sure how a paper bag test is relevant to this discussion.

Incidentally as a red head my skin is blindingly white I went for acupuncture at a Chinese acupuncture clinic recently and had the elderly grandmother and father brought in to marvel at my white skin. Colour me embarrassed .

That is privilege being a marvel and admired for something I have no control over.