Yes, and it wasn't just yesterday that she said it either. She's said it many times - and a long time ago before she was as well-known as she is now.

I have a friend in the US, who is an actor - and who hasn't enjoyed anything even remotely like the personal success that Meryl Streep has had.

As a point of note - she happens to be from an Indian family. She is very obviously not white-skinned and therefore is usually considered for non-white roles. That is obviously a source of frustration to her at times but she understands why it is so.

Like Meryl Streep, my friend also considers being an actor to be a privilege because she is able to pursue a career she loves, working with talented people and bringing characters to life and fleshing them out on stage and in films for others to enjoy.

I don't find that terribly hard to understand.... do you?

Of course voting on Strictly is not a life or death situation. It isn't concern for the welfare of particular celebs that has caused comment to be made in the media. I think voting patterns attract interest because of what they may or may not say about attitudes within society as a whole.

But there are other things that influence voting too. People can appear to come from similar backgrounds and have similar ability (e.g. Edwina Currie and Ann Widdecombe) but have very different levels of success on Strictly. Even you had some controlled experiment .e.g two long legged, glamorous beautiful models with no previous dance experience, one Black and one White, you would still have to factor in the impact of personality, the dances they get to do and what pro they are partnered with. So it is very difficult to infer anything conclusive from SCD voting patterns, especially given that the statistical sample is quite small.

The rise of social media has given us the perpetually offended. Continually on the hunt for things to take offence at.

Mary Whitehouse of course was always on the twitter

Whoa, who said anyone was offended on here?

I don't think it is either - that's why I said apples and oranges.

At least, it isn't in an historical sense since it describes open discrimination within communities of colour, rather than a possible subconscious bias from outside those communities.

But, since part of the thrust of the argument being so roundly shouted down is that the darker you are the more significant the unconscious bias might be, it's not such a completely off-topic analogy, is it? That some people might be conducting a completely unconscious brown paper bag test in their heads when choosing a contestant to vote for? Even though it never consciously occurs to them this is what they're doing?

For example: why is Judge Rinder loud but funny and vote-worthy while Tameka is loud but obnoxious and not vote-worthy?

I think all sorts of unconscious biases are at play when we choose who to vote for and it's silly to be convinced that race isn't one of them just because you (not you personally: general you) don't consider yourself a racist person. And sillier still to get outraged that the topic is even brought up.

Oh... and just to put this one to bed before it starts, I used Meryl Streep as an example only because she was the first well-known actress who came to mind.

Nothing should be inferred or implied from that.

Indeed. If you look at who's eliminated in the first couple of weeks, it's likely to be older contestants (Tony Jacklin, Johnny Ball, Richard Dunwoody, Phil Daniels etc). Is this because voters are unconsciously ageist, or is it because dancing well is harder for the older celebs?

Of course, one can point to a Pamela Stephens or John Sergeant who did far better than might have been predicted at the start, and for very different reasons, just as there can be a surprise early boot for a black celeb.

The difference between the judge and Tameka is the how they are loud and funny.

Incidentally I may be whiter than white, but it doesn't mean that I am ethnically not mixed race and that others in my family haven't had to cope with racism. I am a genetic quirk.
In fact my whole family from great grandparents to the next 2 generation after me are completely a mixed bag, you would never think most of us are related.

So I would doubt I have any unconscious bias acting on my voting decision making. My husband,100% white through and through , and I tend to jointly decide who to vote for and we rarely disagree. Then not over race.

As an experiment of 1 couple , not statistically relevant I know, the decision on whom to vote for does not appear to be in anyway racist.

Not at all given that she appears to be a successful actor. I know someone, white , who landed one large part in the West End, had rave reviews for his role.

Has never been able to get another acting role except in am dram productions. He works as a driver now, continues to audition regularly, his marriage split up from the pressure of him not getting acting roles and his feelings of continual rejection. He no longer sees his children. He has been homeless person n the past and sofa surfed for about 3 years.

Alcohol and drug abuse in the last couple of years have become very important in his life. I wouldn't say he was living a privileged life. I don't find that hard to understand ..... Do you?


Proportionally in the acting proffession there are very few Meryls to my friend.

Sorry, but not quite true about popularity, she is probably a lovely person in herself, but I found her very annoying on TV.

Total nonsense, the race card is so over used. Wether you are white,pink,blue,black orange, does it really matter?

The facts are that the first two that left didn't dance well enough to pull in enough votes, the colour of ones skin had no bearing on the outcome from those two shows.

It annoys me that when two black contestants go everyone starts saying the r word, total rubbish.

Indeed, that is the case... and with no disrespect intended toward your friend, but if he has only ever had one professional acting role in all that time, then he night need to consider that perhaps it's no longer appropriate to consider that as his main career. So no, he isn't living a privileged life - but he's not really living the life of an actor either. Rather, he's living the life of a driver who would like to get back to being an actor.

That's not to suggest that he should not continue to audition - and if he is genuinely talented then I certainly hope he gets a deserved break and is offered something worthy of his ability.

What you appear to have taken from my reference to "privilege" is some idea that I was talking simply simply about financial rewards. That's not all it is about. It is about personal satisfaction in pursuing a career, doing something you enjoy. That IS a privilege.

My OH is a doctor and whilst it earns him a good living, it is also the thing which motivates him most. He wanted to be a doctor from the age of 4 and never wavered from that. He's now not all that many years away from retirement but he still loves what he does and considers it a privilege to enjoy his career after 34 years doing it.

I can't speak for all actors either - but I guess in a lot of cases, a lot of them carry on acting even when they don't need to for financial reasons - simply because they love it and don't want to stop. There are a whole host of reasons why acting is a rewarding and desirable career choice - but it's not all about money. Whilst I have never had any inclination to be an actor myself, I totally "get" what the appeal is.

Best of luck to your friend in his auditions.

No I haven't taken it all being about financial rewards.

You said being an actor is a privilege, I am saying no, not for every actor it isn't.
For some being an actor ruins their lives.

To return it back to the original for those actors who are unsuccessful on the show, this can have a disproportional effect on their self esteem and future career. If this were due to racism, which I don't think it is, that would be an horrific added injustice.

The public votes for the ones they prefer and those with the lowest votes are in the dance off. It's that simple.

Not every winner is white.

So what is this difference?

Apart from their gender and ethnicity, that is...

I second this. I've heard reports from friends she is lovely in real life, but on TV she came over as annoying.

Basically, she was lower mid-table and thats always dangerous considering the EE fanbase don't always come out and vote (remember Kellie was in bottom2 twice last year).

Well, to be frank, if being an actor ruins their life, they probably need to reassess whether that's actually the career for them. That doesn't mean that acting is not a privileged career - it simply means that that person may not actually be good enough to be successful - or even to make a living from it.

The point I made about my own friend is that she derives a sense of privilege from being allowed to create and portray the roles she takes on and to work with other creative people. She speaks of it often. I guess perhaps not all actors feel the same way as she does about it.

I personally feel the "racism" thing on Strictly has been blown up way out of proportion and it's in danger of detracting from the show itself, which would be a great shame indeed. It certainly shouldn't escalate out of a situation where someone who is a sore loser is unwilling to accept that she wasn't as good a dance or as popular as she thought she was. I don't blame Tameka for the racism suggestion being bandied about but I think she could do a great deal to generally calm things down if she chose to do so.

Wit and self deprecation from the judge.

Neither of which have to do with gender or ethnicity.

I certainly was never a fan of her screaming and actually didn't find it funny. I wasn't actually concentrating when Tameka started crying when Ore was, and then was suprised when it seemed she was making it all about her, then on rewatching, because I am sad like that I saw what it was all about. I wonder how many half caught things and then got the wrong end of the stick too?


Incidentally if the judge ever starts screaming I shall go right off him as well.
But none of that is to do with race.

Oh how I hate the racist card. And OP, how can someone be a little bit racist, one is either racist or not. I didn't realize two persons of colour had been eliminated first till a friend pointed it out.
Does this mean the poor dancers should be allowed to stay in because they are not white? Why cant we have a competition based on the best dancer winning and forget all this racist rubbish

Quite.

Being racist is not the same as being pregnant - ie. you can't be a 'little bit pregnant;'

It's more helpful, I reckon, to think of it as a spectrum.

At the far end there may be people with extreme views. For example somebody who felt apartheid was a brilliant idea.

But even at thepeople who still might have one or two unhelpful assumptions or preconceptions.

I am mildly amused by the idea mooted earlier on that those winners/runners-up with dark skins were mostly (if not all) 'mixed race'. So, our unconsious racism is able to calculate how many 'acceptable' genes comprise their make-up (I take the point about shades of colour). In that case, they should have been booted off first go with the paler side voting against the dark genes and the darker side voting against the light genes.

Maybe as the public apparently just cannot be trusted not to hold a bias even if they don't know they do (and even though you don't get to vote out only in) they should cancel the public vote and have it based on Judges scores only , either with a dance off or without as it was originally.

What about the audience's love for Danny and Oti?
No sign of racism there...or maybe viewers are just racist towards the celeb in any pairing?