By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
vivster said:

@Jaicee
Art and fiction is not and should not be about equal representation so this question is moot.

Calling something over or under represented is suggesting that there is a right amount of representation, which is false.

Within an actual individual work of art, sure, there is no "right" amount of representation. That's absurd. For one, there's no way to measure it, for another, doing so would limit art in absurd ways.

That said, representation in art can matter in the sense that it would be just if everyone had equal access to all artistic mediums, and equitable access to platforms by which to show that art to the world. A woman may have no interest in telling stories about women, may want to make something with an all or mostly male cast for whatever reason, and that's her business. However, if society systematically makes it difficult or impossible for women to make art or distribute art, then the woman will be at an unfair disadvantage to make her art or show it to the world. So how many characters in a work are female, male, black, white, gay, straight, etc. doesn't really matter, it matters that the artist gets to make the art as they see fit, regardless of how closely the demographics of characters in the work match the real world. However, if getting into the industry that makes the art and markets it to audiences systematically excludes people based on things they can't help like their sex or race, that's pretty unfair, wouldn't you say? This doesn't mean that you have to hire female actors, directors, programmers, designers, etc. to meet a quota, it means nothing more than that a world that gives everyone a chance to produce and promote art based on the merits of the art rather than the demographics of the artist is a better world than one that doesn't afford everyone that chance, and if possible, we should work towards making the better world a reality.