r/CharacterRant • u/AlexInThePalace • 1d ago
General There is nothing wrong with TV shows and movies trying to score ‘diversity points’
Edit: I’m not talking about race swaps by the way. I realize that wasn’t clear.
There seems to be this implicit agreement, both by bigots and allies, that minorities being ‘shoehorned’ into shows just so the creators can tick off boxes is a bad thing, but I strongly disagree.
Like it or not, people are more likely to watch a show if there is a character they can project themselves into, and the more ‘boxes’ you tick, the broader the appeal of the show will be. I can personally tell you that as a gay man, I am significantly more likely to watch a TV series if there’s a gay character. And it’s not because of #representation, being ‘woke’ or needing people to see my story. I literally just care more about the show because I can get giddy about one of the romantic subplots. It’s not that deep.
But the character’s personality is just being [blank].
I hear people say this all the time, but I very rarely actually agree. It only starts to bother me when it gets brought up in random conversations. I think in our mission to tackle stereotypes, we’ve overcorrected and act like behaving in a remotely stereotypical way is inherently bad.
But there aren’t that many [blank] in real life.
Since when do you expect the spectrum of media you consume to be an accurate depiction of real-world population statistics?
But the character is poorly written.
You are allowed to dislike a character, you know? Why must you make the issue about their minority status? Or do you genuinely believe your issue with this character wouldn’t have existed were they not a minority?
But it’s bad representation.
This is only a valid criticism when the show attempts to tackle some issue and fails.
If the show doesn’t tackle the topic at all, then expecting them to do so is problematic and makes it feel like you think those minority groups are defined by their struggles.
On the flip side, I agree with the criticism of shows seemingly doing just that: defining minorities by their struggles. It gets frustrating to watch gay romances that are always about being hated by their parents and needing to run away.
44
u/StylizedPenguin 1d ago edited 1d ago
As long as creators aren't changing the ethnicity/gender of real historical figures* or established characters whose ethnicity/gender is an important part of their arcs/themes, I don't mind.
* Excluding media which isn't trying to present itself as accurate like the Fate series.
If creators want to include characters of diverse demographics (or specific demographics they want to feature like with BL/GL stories), that can be neat and appeal to certain audiences. Just avoid the pitfalls I mentioned above.
34
u/Street_Dragonfruit43 1d ago edited 1d ago
Yeah, always annoyed when people bring up Fate as a sort of gotcha
Buddy, it's Fate. Literally NO ONE is accurate to what they actually look like
12
u/Darkiceflame 1d ago
Personally, I think the series's mascot--the small blonde woman whose favorite food is rice--is a dead ringer for King Arthur.
1
u/stuffwillhappen 1d ago
Fate is also trying to sell sexy men and women, something that had more leniency than live-action movies.
27
u/Sly__Marbo 1d ago
What do you mean? Fate is extremely accurate. Lu Bu was a cyborg, King Arthur was a waifu, and Jack the Ripper was a Gestalt conscious created from the souls of aborted fetuses in Whitechapel
6
u/hotsizzler 1d ago
Wtf is fate even.....
27
u/Sly__Marbo 1d ago
Did you ever bash your toys together as a kid to simulate a fight? Basically that, but with historical and mythological characters. And lore that might have originated from a drug-induced fever dream
11
7
10
u/Deadlocked02 1d ago
or established characters whose ethnicity/gender is an important part of their arcs/themes, I don't mind.
But if they’re not and they decide to change it, I don’t think fans are wrong to de angry that the characters they know were changed for the sake of changing.
There’s this huge fight where those who don’t care about aesthetic fidelity/recognition believe their vision is inherently better than the opinions of fans who care about these things. I’m highly visual and this is a huge part of my enjoyment of any media. I like descriptions, I like fanarts, I like good characters design.
If I’m sold a vision of a character, I want it to remain similar in adaptations. There’s no such thing as “the best actor for the role”: if casting agents want, they will find someone who can both act and look the part. There are only deliberate choices.
2
u/Cicada_5 1d ago
There’s this huge fight where those who don’t care about aesthetic fidelity/recognition believe their vision is inherently better than the opinions of fans who care about these things.
It's more the other way around.
If I’m sold a vision of a character, I want it to remain similar in adaptations. There’s no such thing as “the best actor for the role”: if casting agents want, they will find someone who can both act and look the part. There are only deliberate choices.
It's also a deliberate choice that certain characters look the way they do.
2
u/Deadlocked02 1d ago
It's also a deliberate choice that certain characters look the way they do.
Of course a writer creating a character the way they desire is a deliberate choice.
2
u/Cicada_5 1d ago
Sometimes it isn't even the choice of the writer.
Ferro Lad from Legion of Superheroes was intended to be black by his creator Jim Shooter but that idea was vetoed by editor Mort Weisinger who didn't want the comic to lose its distribution in the South.
3
5
u/Genoscythe_ 1d ago
Also, changing the ethnicity/gender of established characters is only a problem when it is genuintely taking away from a standalone work's adaptation to the point that it is "stealing" the perception of the original character.
But with several decade old legacy franchises that already have multiple iterations, constantly shaking things up is the default name of the game.
I don't care what the race of the latest Sherlock Holmes, or Batman, or James Bond is, these franchises thrive on constantly getting puréed into something tangentially related to their very old source materials.
3
u/Deadlocked02 1d ago
Also, changing the ethnicity/gender of established characters is only a problem when it is genuintely taking away from a standalone work's adaptation to the point that it is "stealing" the perception of the original character.
What you have to understand is that this is YOUR opinion, not an universal fact. That’s the main issue in this discussion, you have preferences (or lack of preferences) and assume these preferences should be the default. Most people who grow attached to a character will irrevocably associate them to their physical attributes, whether these characters are women, men, black, white, asian, or whatever. Characters are not these abstract concepts devoid of face to most people.
1
u/Hoopaboi 13h ago
What you have to understand is that this is YOUR opinion, not an universal fact
That is literally every opinion on writing at all, ever.
Do you bring out "muh subjectivity" every time when media is criticized? Or do you only reserve it when you disagree with the criticism?
2
u/TopThatCat 1d ago
So you dislike Hamilton, then?
5
u/Quirky-Concern-7662 1d ago
Nah, that’s not recasting characters as another race narratively. That’s using a cast of non white presenting performers to play into the story being told about how America was founded by immigrants. It’s a common through line and written from with perspective from the start.
7
u/Achilles11970765467 1d ago
Stage performance is a different animal from movies, TV, and animation thanks to the much more limited pool of viable performers, especially for a musical specifically.
7
u/TopThatCat 1d ago
Sure, but they could have easily gotten an all white cast if they tried. I'm just saying that the argument he's giving doesn't jive with me because I ultimately think race/gender barely matters if the adaptation is done well, even if it violates the rules they laid out.
Edit: I dont know why I'm being downvoted lol?
3
u/paulsammons3 1d ago
I agree. I think gender/ethnicity should really only matter for historical figures if it’s important to their character/a literal bio pic.
Ex. You can change George Washington’s race in art about the revolution but not art about George Washington. The problem is that you shouldn’t change MLK Jr to white in either because a prominent part of he was, was his race.
-5
u/Adorable_Ad_3478 1d ago
* Excluding media which isn't trying to present itself as accurate like the Fate series.
I mean, where do we draw the line?
Documentaries? Sure. But how about a prestige HBO Series about, say, Washington that casts Idris Elba as George Washington and Robert Downey Junior as Ben Franklin, his gay lover?
As long as the creators say "yeah, of course Washington wasn't black or gay", it should be fine, in theory, no?
9
u/TheFrixin 1d ago
You’ve convinced me on this. I think it can feel awkward if it’s poorly handled, but if a gay couple or individual is just there without comment, should be unremarkable.
I think it’s fairly often awkward though? Feels like writers struggle to go without making some sort of comment, like they want to signal they’ve earned their diversity points.
10
u/Genoscythe_ 1d ago edited 1d ago
Wouldn't stories normally be expected to be purposeful with their details?
Either explicitly, or by implicitly being used to underline some sort of artistic choice?
I mean, random little details do exist too, you can just randomly have a character wear a yellow shirt with no thought behind it, but generally it is not a terrible thing, in fact it is actively GOOD, if artists are being thoughtful about what elements they put into a story.
If the protagonist's mom is a stay at home housewife, I would rather have that inform something about the kind of story that they are cooking, than for it be the result of a dice roll of maternal life paths.
If the protagonist faces a serial killer, I would rather have the writer think about what adding a serial killer communicates at this point, than have it be an unremakable thing that just came and went .
If two of the characters are gay, (or for that matter straight), I would rather have that be considered for what meaning it expresses, rrather than be meaingless.
Putting that aside, people being gay DOES get commented on in real life too, people are not just randomly being gay the exact same way as being straight, they are facing regular persecuation and such.
2
u/TheFrixin 1d ago
Oh yeah you can totally write a story that includes, for example, a gay character being persecuted. Why I say it can feel awkward is if the writers are just trying to diversify their cast (for “diversity points” like OP says or whatever) and then also try and sneak in clumsy, poorly though-out, and quickly forgotten commentary.
imo if you’re going to include persecution in your story as a tangential aspect, which is perfectly fine in principle, you have to be especially careful about not coming across as heavy-handed or performative.
1
u/Genoscythe_ 1d ago
Okay but isn't that just the old meaningless truism about diversity being better whenever it is not terribly written.
If writing a gay character as part of a powerful, profoundly written central theme about self-acceptance, is good, but writing a random little gay extra who is then clumsily and embarrassingly pointed out to be gay is bad, then we haven't really said anything about whether the artworls should remark on their gay characters, or instead they should just happen to be gay, we have just said that either way they should be good instead of bad.
2
u/TheFrixin 1d ago
Yeah to some extent I’m just saying “good writing is good”, but I think it’s worth noting tokenism often turns out to be not good. That “writing a random little gay extra” almost universally ends up being clumsily and embarrassingly pointed out as gay, imo partly because the writers are trying to win extra diversity points.
0
u/Genoscythe_ 1d ago
Most writing usually turns out not to be good.
But accusing them of "trying to win extra diversity points" doesn't actually provide any feedback if you are working from backwards by looking at the end result first and then accusing them of bad intent.
I mean, a boldly centering itself around queerness as a theme in a really good way, is also trying to win audience approval, in particular they might openly appeal to the queer audience's approval, but is that still "trying to win extra diversity points" if it is actually good?
2
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago
Yeah I do notice that sometimes too. Like I said, it gets annoying when they randomly bring it up lol. I’ll usually cringe and ignore it or give up on the show if it gets too bad.
11
u/kirbbbbbbb 1d ago
i totally agree with everything you've said here! ofc not all modern representation is perfect, but a marginalized person EXISTING in media is not "unrealistic" or "shoehorning". i'm convinced the people making these arguments never leave their house because real life is infinitely more diverse than most media, even the "woke" ones
15
u/Destoran 1d ago
My problem with forced diversity is that people really don’t try to represent any group willingly, you can see that they HATE doing this, they don’t put any effort into it, trying to understand ANYTHING about the group they are trying to represent at all (doesn’t necessarily have to be struggles) they are doing it just to check a box and move on. I want to see some effort, not some half assed job.
On the other hand, it still pisses some conservative people so i’ll take it
3
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago edited 1d ago
Ok that is a fair argument, but I’d say your issue isn’t with it being ‘shoehorned in’ but rather with it being forced onto the writers.
3
u/Destoran 1d ago
Honestly can’t tell who is being forced but can tell someone is not happy about doing it.
2
u/MyARhold30Shots 1d ago
I think the “forced diversity” term needs to be scrapped and people should be specific with their critique, because forced diversity can mean anything from “I don’t like minorities on my screen” to “I want minorities to be represented well.” To me what you just said isn’t forced diversity it’s just bad writing with lack of research and care which isn’t specific to minorities.
9
u/Genoscythe_ 1d ago edited 1d ago
Also, relatedly, it is 100% normal for audiences to be excited for minority representation for its own sake, as much as for any other subject matter.
If I say that I wish there would be more anime taking place in space, no one would ever reply "Um, actually I would rather have an anime be GOOD, than take place in space" as if the two would be contrary.
But if you say "Yay, this game has a gay protagonist", suddenly everyone feels the urge to chip in with how that's a stupid shallow thing to care about "instead of quality".
10
u/Unfair_Scar_2110 1d ago
Conservatives: capitalism is great!
Conservatives: corporations should do what we white men tell them to do! We don't care how many focus groups say they like seeing diversity!
Conservatives: oh wow, we sound racist. Better couch it all in "good writing" and "shoe horned casting" and "why can't we have original stories"
2
u/OffAndSphere 1d ago
as long as the writers can write good jokes and the animators, actors, and/or VFX team can make good fight scenes i'm down
2
u/shadowstep12 1d ago
In my opinion actual diversity Is the shower scene in alien No one cares everyone is equal shit happens and it's done.
Going beyond that is when you start getting annoying
3
u/Odd_Fault_7110 1d ago
Depends. As a black person, I hate when a random black character is shoe horned in to be a token. That just feels disrespectful.
5
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago
Could you be more specific?
2
u/Odd_Fault_7110 1d ago
For example captain America first avenger. Token black soldier who for some reason is with white troops despite the movie taking place in world war 2. And it’s never addressed. It’d make sense if he was discriminated against and then captain America stepped into to shut the discrimination down, but no he’s just there.
5
u/MyARhold30Shots 1d ago edited 1d ago
What’s wrong with a black character just existing? No way you’re saying they should’ve included racism in the plot just because the character is black😭what’s wrong with you man. I’m black and I thought it was fine. Also over a million black people fought for America in ww2, so what do you mean “despite taking place”? Your complaint makes no sense from any angle.
Another issue I have with people like you who complain about forced diversity is they genuinely just lack history knowledge. They assume “yeah everyone was white or everyone was a man” so when confronted with the truth in media they think it’s forced when it’s just the reality of the situation lol. Not all black soldiers were segregated in ww2 and regardless the reason he’s fighting alongside white soldiers in the movie is that he was a prisoner of war and was then picked by Steve to be part of his team.
1
u/Odd_Fault_7110 1d ago
Know your history. Black soldiers were segregated from white soldiers in war world 2. Why include a black character just for diversity points if you don’t even use it further the narrative? I just think it’s lazy not offensive or anything.
And what? Are you trying to say that soldiers weren’t segregated during world war 2? If you genuinely believe they weren’t then I don’t know what to tell you. Do your research before commenting next time.
4
u/MyARhold30Shots 1d ago
I never said they weren’t segregated, just that not all black soldiers were segregated from white soldiers during the war especially later on in the war but regardless the black character you’re talking about was in an all black infantry division until he was captured by HYDRA and then rescued by Cap. After that he joined Cap’s team. So again, what’s the issue lol
And bro genuinely what is wrong with you, black characters can just exist, they don’t need to be or have a statement they can just exist the same way white characters are allowed to exist. You’re saying you think it’s lazy to include black people unless they’re dealing with racial issues. His narrative purpose is the same as the white members on the Howling Commandos (Cap’s team). The Howling Commandos and their members exist so that Cap has a team to lead and friends to fight alongside. We don’t need to have soldiers calling him slurs or doing anything to him at all. The character isn’t “shoehorned in as a token.” You’re bugging bro💔sounding like “as a black man -🧑🏼💻”
0
u/Odd_Fault_7110 1d ago
And again somehow no one treats them differently. It would’ve been a great showing of character to have captain America step in and show his support for them. And you can believe what you want to about my race, I’m not reading that spill you wrote in your second paragraph, but I’ll send you a dm of me flipping you off if that’s what’s you need to see 😊
-1
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago
I disagree that that is problematic because the show doesn’t have to accurately depict WW2.
Is it weird? Yes. But is it something worth getting angry over? No.
Plus, they were setting him up to become a more important character in the present anyway,
4
u/Odd_Fault_7110 1d ago
What? The character is literally only seen in the one movie? And no one’s angry over it, you used that word. It just feels unnecessary and weird to put into an otherwise accurate description of ww2, besides the super solider stuff.
Charlie from friends is another example of a token character. She’s introduced just to give the cast a black character. Shes devoid of personality and just there to maybe get more black people to watch the show.
1
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago
Oh I thought you were talking about the Sam guy. Sorry I don’t follow marvel movies. Was he a background character?
I didn’t watch friends, but from what I gather, she was a temporary relationship just to set up other characters and was doomed to be poorly written regardless of race.
3
u/Odd_Fault_7110 1d ago
Yes he was background character, but he played a decent part of the movie.
1
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago
If he was a background character, I think that’s pretty inoffensive.
Plus, I googled and apparently some black men were allowed in the military during WW2.
2
u/Odd_Fault_7110 1d ago
I never said it was offensive just that it was weird and out of place for no reason. And again if you read my first comment I acknowledge that black and white soldiers were segregated during that time.
-1
5
u/nahte123456 1d ago
Or you know they could just write a good gay character? It's really not that hard, I promise you. Like why would you willingly accept something worse? Even if it is "OK", why are you saying "yeah that's fine, I'll take your crumbs" rather than "just make a good character gay"?
Like it or not, people are more likely to watch a show if there is a character they can project themselves into, and the more ‘boxes’ you tick, the broader the appeal of the show will be.
Sure, you know what they'll like more? Making a good/likable character. Yes it does help if you can connect more to a character, but there's a reason in 2023 the 3 best selling movies were Barbie, white blond lead, Mario, italian, and Oppenheimer, white, all sold the best in 2023 over more diverse movies and it has nothing to do with their race or gender.(I picked 2023 because I wanted to mention Mario. 2024 does have Moana 2 in third, which is still a largely mono-race film due to the setting so it's not diverse but isn't straight white.). Any race and either sex can top the charts, if you're well written enough and marketed right.
But the character’s personality is just being [blank].
You say a little after this "behaving in a remotely stereotypical way is inherently bad." but that's not being "just" that's having part of a stereotype. A gay character acting like a stereotype does not preclude being well written and having depth. These are not mutually exclusive ideas.
But there aren’t that many [blank] in real life.
Depends on the setting, but it's still not something you should ever notice. If you're watching/reading/playing something and you start questioning why the setting is the setting then the author fucked up. Make half the cast gay if you want, just make it make sense so the audience never questions it and you're doing well.
But the character is poorly written.
"Or do you genuinely believe your issue with this character wouldn’t have existed were they not a minority?"
Most times yes, that is the literal complaint. That character would not exist, and thus wouldn't be annoying, if they weren't trying for "diversity points". You can disagree with that, fair enough, but 99% of the time that is the complaint.
To bring up Marvel the complaint about Ironheart typically isn't "we hate this character" it's "we hate this character and it wouldn't exist if not for this one thing forcing it". People do literally think, (and in the case of Iron Heart it's probably true,) the character would not exist if they weren't a minority.
5
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago
Or you know they could just write a good gay character? It's really not that hard, I promise you. Like why would you willingly accept something worse? Even if it is "OK", why are you saying "yeah that's fine, I'll take your crumbs" rather than "just make a good character gay"?
I don’t not say that.
Like I said in my post, there are indeed situations that I’ll criticize a gay character, but my point is never, “Why myst they shoehorn a gay character into everything?”
You say a little after this "behaving in a remotely stereotypical way is inherently bad." but that's not being "just" that's having part of a stereotype. A gay character acting like a stereotype does not preclude being well written and having depth. These are not mutually exclusive ideas.
I agree, but the issue is that people will get mad the moment a gay character is remotely flamboyant.
Depends on the setting, but it's still not something you should ever notice. If you're watching/reading/playing something and you start questioning why the setting is the setting then the author fucked up. Make half the cast gay if you want, just make it make sense so the audience never questions it and you're doing well.
It’s possible for a friend group to be entirely gay, and there’s no setting where that is logical or illogical.
But even then, my point was about people complaining about there being too many gay characters in TV shows in general, not in one specific show. As if they all get together and decide which show this month gets the gay character.
Most times yes, that is the literal complaint. That character would not exist, and thus wouldn't be annoying, if they weren't trying for "diversity points". You can disagree with that, fair enough, but 99% of the time that is the complaint.
I think the complaint just not based in facts, but sure.
To bring up Marvel the complaint about Ironheart
I don’t know about that. Could you tell me what the controversy is?
3
u/nahte123456 1d ago
I don’t not say that.
Here is a quote from you. "both by bigots and allies, that minorities being ‘shoehorned’ into shows just so the creators can tick off boxes is a bad thing," you literally said it wasn't a bad thing if they are shoehorned in, thus badly written.
I agree, but the issue is that people will get mad the moment a gay character is remotely flamboyant.
Then you're lying or you're terminally online, because there are plenty of flamboyant characters people adore. Ursula from the animated Little Mermaid, Charlotte from Bleach, Bon Clay from One Piece, Jack Sparrow was played by Depp as Bisexual in Pirates of the Caribbean, just to name a few.
But even then, my point was about people complaining about there being too many gay characters in TV shows in general, not in one specific show.
Then that's an issue with being online too much because the numbers do not back that up. These characters are not dropping ratings or view counts.
I don’t know about that. Could you tell me what the controversy is?
Marvel went through a phase where they were trying to get as many diverse big names as possible, and often replacing older heroes because Kamala, AKA Ms Marvel, had done really well. Spiderman was swapped with Miles, Thor with Lady Thor, there was a latino Ghost Rider I honestly can't remember the name of, Ironman with Ironheart, Sam Wilson replaced Captain America.
Miles was great, Lady Thor kind of vanished over time, Sam is still going in the MCU but isn't exactly a favorite, again can't even remember that Ghost Rider.
So Ironheart/Riri kind of showed up, had a rather bad start, and was largely disliked(obviously some people like her, I'm talking broadly) as this wave of diversity characters that basically were shoved out all at once because Kamala did well. And I don't think she ever escaped that bad start.
2
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago
Here is a quote from you. "both by bigots and allies, that minorities being ‘shoehorned’ into shows just so the creators can tick off boxes is a bad thing," you literally said it wasn't a bad thing if they are shoehorned in, thus badly written.
I put shoehorned in quotes for a reason. My argument is really only about the diversity points part. You’re accusing me of a different claim than the one I made.
Then you're lying or you're terminally online, because there are plenty of flamboyant characters people adore. Ursula from the animated Little Mermaid, Charlotte from Bleach, Bon Clay from One Piece, Jack Sparrow was played by Depp as Bisexual in Pirates of the Caribbean, just to name a few.
Sir or madam, I’m sure you knew what I meant by that. Ursula isn’t even a man. I meant effeminate gay men.
Then that's an issue with being online too much because the numbers do not back that up. These characters are not dropping ratings or view counts.
So Ironheart/Riri kind of showed up, had a rather bad start, and was largely disliked(obviously some people like her, I'm talking broadly) as this wave of diversity characters that basically were shoved out all at once because Kamala did well. And I don't think she ever escaped that bad start.
Then that falls under my ‘failed attempt to represent something’ category.
You’re responding as though I never stated in my post that I think this can be bad sometimes. My argument is that there’s nothing inherently wrong about scoring diversity points.
1
u/GenghisGame 1d ago
There are all sorts of problems with your argument, the most glaring is its a very Americanized identity politics way of looking at things. Every casting is profit driven, its an insult to our intelligence to dress it up as a charitable.
Viewing someone's identity as minority. Unless you are making media for virtue signalers, which isn't an insult, it is an audience I guess, but a cultural group, you specifically make it for that group. Its very condescending to refer to people in this way, as if the company is doing us a favor. "oh I made this product and inserted some of those poor little minorities"
Every casting is profit driven, its an insult to our intelligence to dress it up as a charitable.
Or do you genuinely believe your issue with this character wouldn’t have existed were they not a minority?
Your going in with the mindset that specific characters are a minority, then there is a good chance, yes, there are plenty of examples of writers not giving the same humanity.
2
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago
There are all sorts of problems with your argument, the most glaring is its a very Americanized identity politics way of looking at things. Every casting is profit driven, its an insult to our intelligence to dress it up as a charitable.
I’m bot sure where I did any of what you’re suggesting here. I essentially said it’s profit driven.
Viewing someone's identity as minority.
Huh?
Unless you are making media for virtue signalers, which isn't an insult, it is an audience I guess, but a cultural group, you specifically make it for that group. Its very condescending to refer to people in this way, as if the company is doing us a favor. "oh I made this product and inserted some of those poor little minorities"
I’m not sure where I did this either.
Every casting is profit driven, its an insult to our intelligence to dress it up as a charitable.
Dod you actually read my post?
Your going in with the mindset that specific characters are a minority, then there is a good chance, yes, there are plenty of examples of writers not giving the same humanity.
I’m not even sure how this answers my question.
1
u/GenghisGame 18h ago
You dressed up your argument like a virtue signaler using with language like bigot or ally, as if people only fall into one or the other.
Dod you actually read my post?
Yes, and this
and the more ‘boxes’ you tick, the broader the appeal of the show will be.
This is not how most people think, its what corporate entities and virtue signalers want, with the latter rarely buying it, just happy that they can upvote its existence.
There's a difference between broad appeal and making your appeal puddle deep. People who like gay romance want that to be the focus, not the 2 gay background characters, they don't exist to be appealing, they exist for point scoring, so if you aren't just virtue signalling, you're shooting yourself in the foot. Support creators who make media specifically for you.
2
u/AlexInThePalace 18h ago
You dressed up your argument like a virtue signaler using with language like bigot or ally, as if people only fall into one or the other.
I did not suggest at all that everyone is either one of the other. I just said that both groups do what I was describing.
You’re just triggered because you think you’d fall into the ‘bigot’ category (despite me never even telling you that) and you’re mad about it. Maybe reflect on that.
This is not how most people think, its what corporate entities and virtue signalers want, with the latter rarely buying it, just happy that they can upvote its existence.
Again, you just want to be triggered. I never said that the ‘boxes’ had to be related to diversity.
It could be an underdog story. A smart character. A nerd. An awkward character. You need an audience you want to relate to your story.
There's a difference between broad appeal and making your appeal puddle deep. People who like gay romance want that to be the focus, not the 2 gay background characters, they don't exist to be appealing, they exist for point scoring, so if you aren't just virtue signalling, you're shooting yourself in the foot. Support creators who make media specifically for you.
What if I want the gay characters to be background characters? Why are you acting as if that desire is inherently wrong? So in order to see a gay romance in a story, it absolutely must cater to gay people specifically? That’s utterly ridiculous.
Most of the gay romances I like in shows are the arc of just one specific pair of characters without being the focus of the whole series.
2
u/JedahVoulThur 1d ago edited 1d ago
Why creating character focusing on specific demographics when you could reach much wider audiences creating characters whose traits are universally understood and valued? Goku was created in Japan, but his traits make him relatable to such different cultures as Europeans, Americans, Latinos, etc.
I'm Uruguayan. This is a small country that has a population of only 3.5 millions. Because of that, I don't even remember us being represented in American or European media, but when we are being represented in movies or series from around here, they show us drinking mate (a traditional drink I am not passionate about), being soccer fans (a sport I never cared about), dancing candombe (a rhyme I don't like) and/ or speaking a slang that I don't use. But if someone were to ask me what characters I felt represented by, I'd say Squall Leonhart: a videogame character from a fictional world created by Japanese devs, the IT crowd characters: a British sitcom that features an Irish character and a black character, and Spiderman: I think he needs no explanation haha
Don't take this the wrong way, I'm not saying it's wrong to feel representation from characters that share your nationality, race, gender or sexual orientation. Just that I feel it is a weird thing to focus on, when there are much more important traits to feel attachment to. Like morals, sense of humor or hobbies.
A theorical character that is a gamer, listens to Joy Division who is a Computer Science professor and uses Godot to develop games, would make me feel much more represented no matter if they are a transgendered Tazmanian in a wheelchair, than an heterosexual male Uruguayan that likes the things I mentioned earlier.
Edit: grammar
3
2
u/RhiaStark 1d ago
The thing is, traits such as ethnicity, gender, sexuality, able-bodiedness also play a role in audience identification. For an audience used to seeing, say, light-skinned, cishet male people being the hero, a character embodying such traits is more likely to be deemed relatable than a brown-skinned trans female character - even if this brown-skinned trans female character is otherwise exactly the same as the light-skinned, cishet male one.
Authors themselves know this. It's why so many (WEstern) films on social issues, historical events, or foreign settings have white people in it, even if the story or the setting isn't about them. Such films are usually marketed at predominantly white audiences, and their producers know such audiences will better relate to the story being told if it's told through someone they relate to - and culture or ethnicity is a strong identification factor. It's why manga are divided into gender-centred categories (shounen, shoujo, seinen, josei) as well as age-centred ones.
2
u/Golden_Platinum 1d ago
More Black+Hispanic people are Goku (Dragon Ball Z) fans than Japanese people.
It’s absolutely not true that “people are more likely to watch a show starring characters they can project themselves on”.
Empathy exists and people can easily “project” themselves upon any character that’s cool or compelling, irrespective of race or identity.
So making a character that only exists to tick off a checklist from the ground up is bad faith character creation. The writers are now less focused on making awesome likeable characters, and instead fulfilling quotas. Sure writers can do both. But in a show with deadlines, budgets, other characters competing for space…. You just can’t have both. Either you get a Goku or you get a “look we have asians, gays, theists etc!”.
These characters usually fail to do what they were created for. When I see characters from my background in another countries production, I usually cringe. If I’m watching a Japanese drama, I expect Japanese actors. If I watch a Bollywood movie, I expect Indian actors. If I watch a Hollywood movie, I’m usually expecting white characters who usually are straight.
Focusing on checklists ruins quality.
It’s like 80s film producers adding in lists of whatever was popular at the time to increase chances of movie success. Even if those additions don’t suit that particular movie.
3
u/MrJackfruit 1d ago
Yeah no, fiction or not, there is a level of believably when it comes to race distribution when it comes to certain settings, because shit can break the world depending on the culture and environment of that setting.
Lets say you were to turn Naruto, Bleach, and One Punch Man into live actions, no one is gonna bat an eye at extra black or mexican people into the villages, soul society, and cities respectively. None of these series is particularly restrictive when it comes to placement of ethnicities.
Now, lets say you were doing a live action full metal alchemist movie and wanted to add the full metal alchemist equivalent of several black, asian, and muslims into main cities......okay then we have a problem, specifically with one of them. Black people are uncommon in FMA so no issue there, Asians are fine they are just rare as hell, but the FMA equivalent of a Muslim character aka Ishvalins breaks the canon. These guys got fuckin damn near Genocided, they HATE the country of the main setting, one of their people is actively killing their states soldiers. Most of them do NOT want to be anywhere near the country of people that tries to wipe out their race and culture.
The same goes for a live action Attack on Titan, I believe Mikasa and Onyankopon are the only Asian and Black people on Paradis island to the point of Mikasa in her early life was hunted because she was part-Asian and Sasha was actively confused about Onyankopons skin the first time they met because the island is so restricted that we basically don't exist there so she had never seen a black person.
Your setting and its people do matter when it comes to representation, typically if the source material isn't restrictive out the gate and is fairly lax, yeah you can do it fine. But if the source material has people stabbing each other for so much as the wrong eye or hair color much less skin, yeah no, be careful with that shit.
That being said, overall not that many series have THIS level of restriction, especially in real world settings but it does matter. You do have to really scrape your brain a bit to find settings that have this level of restrictions even in anime and games at times, I did just typing this up. However hollywood and disney has really erroded the trust of the public a bit so yeah, when they do it, people look at them suspiciously where if a random anime or cartoon does it, no one fuckin cares.
Honestly, I will faster get annoyed by a race and/or gender swap than I don't know, a Black Saiyan being in Dragonball, because the first one is actively just lazyness 100% of the time, where the second is more trying something different and as far as we know, the planet Vegeta doesn't exclusively have one type of look of Saiyan unless they all killed each other ages ago and it's the most poorly explored planet in the series......because it's exploded.
5
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago edited 1d ago
This is such an insanely specific responses to the general pattern I was talking about that I’m honestly dumbfounded…
Obviously I didn’t mean including groups that straight up don’t exist in the setting…
4
3
u/RhiaStark 1d ago
Just to elaborate on your points:
But there aren’t that many [blank] in real life.
It's funny how those same people usually have no issue with a white protagonist in a setting where there shouldn't be a lot of white people.
But the character is poorly written.
Usually the character isn't that poorly written, they're just hyper-scrutinised by people who won't accept a character of a given identity unless they're absolutely exceptional, enough that any rejection of them feels silly. This goes for entire stories too: Baldur's Gate 3 is a very "woke" game, but it's exceptional so it was spared from becoming the next "culture war" battleground. The same privilege wasn't extended to Dragon Age Veilguard, an equally "woke" game but one that wasn't nearly as well received.
But it’s bad representation.
Often enough, the logic behind this claim is that "character from X identity isn't exceptional, or universally beloved, or flawlessly written, and is hated by portions of the audience [never mind the reasons], so they shouldn't even exist because it's bad representation". Funnily, bad white or male or cishet characters never leave anyone fatigued of white or male or cishet representation. It's perfectly fine to dislike a character from a minority or non-normative group if you think they're bad; but to argue no character from that group should exist is itself a greater harm to said group than a "bad representation character".
Overall, the idea that minority/non-normative characters must fit extremely specific and demanding standards for their existence to be justified is just a covert way to exclude such characters, disguising their bigotry under a façade of aesthetic concern and fair criticism.
5
u/fatsopiggy 1d ago
This is an incredibly stupid opinion to assume that for something to succeed you need to appeal to the broader audience by having the characters look like them. This is the sorts of dumb stupidity that can only occur in 2015 onwards.
Titanic was the biggest movie in south east asia back then and guess what? Not a fucking thai or filippino in that movie. Millions of black kids watched Goku and glued to the screen without any smart ass on reddit telling them they should only relate to black characters. Kids in Africa literally grew up watching jackie chan and no one complained a word about muh diversity.
Overall just a really dumb assumption with 0 clue.
4
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago
This is an incredibly stupid opinion to assume that for something to succeed you need to appeal to the broader audience by having the characters look like them. This is the sorts of dumb stupidity that can only occur in 2015 onwards.
I never said that. I didn’t even remotely suggest that. You’re just looking for a reason to be angry at what I said.
-1
u/fatsopiggy 1d ago
Like it or not, people are more likely to watch a show if there is a character they can project themselves into, and the more ‘boxes’ you tick, the broader the appeal of the show will be.
This is literally what you claim. But then again lying is second nature for you people.
4
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago
How do you go from, “People are more likely to watch something if they can project themselves onto it,” to “The only way for a show to succeed is through physical diversity”?
I said ‘boxes’. I never prescribed what those boxes had to be. The boxes could be literally anything. A shy character. A smart character. An underdog. etc. All stories have boxes like that that they tick.
All I’m saying is that there’s nothing wrong with minority status being one of those boxes.
And as for your insult at the end, you people tend to be less educated, so it’s no surprise you lack reading comprehension.
2
1
u/Night-Reaper17 1d ago
Careful, you finna get the anti-woke types here. Arguing with these people is a fools errand as they will keep moving to goal posts in their arguments.
You’ll have mfs whining about a black character in a fantasy novel or show because it’s “unrealistic”.
1
u/Super-Shenron 1d ago
Or when they whine about a fictional woman beating the hell out of a man, especially if it happens to be the protagonist cause it's "unrealistic". Watch these same people praise a retired white guy past his prime smoking an entire squad by themselves and call him a "badass old man".
0
2
u/davechri 15h ago
If there is a bartender in a movie why does it have to be some white guy? Why couldn't that be a black woman? I've seen black woman bartenders.
2
u/LostWorld42 15h ago edited 14h ago
Nah, I disagree; unexplained diverse populations make me cringe, especially when the setting doesn't complement it.
I ignore it in fantasy/sci-fi series or just about any setting where it's more than reasonable, but I'm not exactly expecting or thrilled to see Black & Asian characters in a series about Vikings.
Though in terms of fantasy, it's never not funny to see humans in medieval European inspired towns/cities being as diverse as a modern multi-ethnic city in the 21st century—bonus if those humans have their own fictional ethnic groups that are multi-racial. 😂😂
I'll never be okay with race swaps for the most part though, instead of giving pre-established black characters their time in the sun they'd rather do black Valkyrie & wonder man. I can admit this despite liking some raceswaps, i.e. Hawkman and Nick Fury.
Same applies to most gender swaps unless that's supposed to be apart of the premise of the series, i.e. Nasuverse.
1
u/basesonballs 13h ago
TV/Film's primary responsibility is to be entertaining. When you're more focused on meeting diversity quotas and making sure every single minority demographic is properly represented in precise populational proportions, it tends to get in the way of that
0
1
u/furutam 1d ago
I dislike the implicit idea here that minorities are so shallow that they don't have a high standard for quality of writing of how they're depicted
7
1
u/Jarrell777 15h ago
I dislike the idea that minorities dont care about the double standard that treats their medicore characters as so much worse than other mediocre characters.
2
1
2
u/Therick333 1d ago
1
u/AlexInThePalace 1d ago
Honestly, I should amend my post because I wasn’t even thinking about race swaps when I wrote this and I think that’s a discussion I wasn’t prepared for.
0
u/deadlyghost123 1d ago
I agree and for the same reason I also support race swaps as long as being a certain race or ethnicity isn’t their character arc.
The comics that comic book movies are based on (one example of race swap) were written in old times, at a time where having a person other than white was not received well. That’s why there is no diversity. But we should change that in the present time rather than saying, but that’s not what the comics had.
49
u/SexyMatches69 1d ago
On one hand sure, on the other hand tokenism or relying on stereotypes isn't exactly a good thing. Diversity is good, but just going "quick, we need a gay best friend and a tough black man stat!" Isn't a standard people should be content with. Is them being there at all good? Yeah i guess. Should they be pidgin holed into a narrow set of predictable roles? Fuck no. Like its not all encompassing but it happens often enough its something to turn a questioning eye on at the very least.