I'm on the side that this is a non issue, but I fail to understand your argument, and I think people responding to you misunderstand it, too. I have to say, any misunderstanding on other's is your fault here.

Later you say that the "complexion" quote is not real, but here you open up with the quote and even give it a page it's sourced from. So is it real or not? Because if it is from the book (page 416 of Sword of Destiny) and the word "complexion" is used, than that is saying the chick is white. Again, to me that doesn't mean using a nonwhite actress would ruin the entire show, but that doesn't make your argument any less puzzling.

It simply amazes me how much people who are in "why not?" camp don't understand this very part - Ciri is not just some random girl, her lineage is of great importance to the whole lore and world of Witcher.

Have a snickers, dude.

I'm not entirely familiar with the lore of the Witcher, but with Game of Thrones at least, it does seem to pull from a larger pool of individuals than just Scandinavians.

The Dornish are more Mediterranean, the Wildlings are more Scottish, the Unsullied are African, the Dothraki are maybe Middle Eastern, etc.. There are certainly a few families which could originate from similar areas, but families such as the Lannisters and Starks are still distinguished physically by characteristics such as hair color.

From what I understand about the Witcher, it seems to focus on a much small scope than Game of Thrones, focusing more specifically on Scandinavians, which is more likely to cause issues than a show which utilizes a far broader range of human factions.

As for the point that it is an issue because they are changing the canon, I still struggle to see why it really matters. Because this is not based in our reality, you don't really have to align people the same way to certain cultural groups. You don't have to change anything about their culture just because you are changing a group's skin color. From all the arguments I've read in this thread, skin color just isn't particularly relevant to the character, whether or not it was established in the books. As such, I don't see much issue with this change. If the core of the argument against this is that someone can't suspend their disbelief to accept minorities in their Middle Ages-esque fantasy shows, I don't really think that is a problem with the show, but instead a problem with the viewer.

I wouldn't go so far as to call someone a racist, simply a canon absolutist, which is fine, but I don't believe that an adaptation should pander to that type of person.

I see.  You actually had no argument and are just reaching for a chance to imply the other side is racist.  OK...

Reading that made me feel like I dropped a few IQ points.  It's both sad and hilarious how they think just because Egypt is in Africa that means the whole cast should be black.  Of course, the truth is the ancient Egyptians would more resemble those from the Middle East.  And then they do cast a black man and they are pissed because it's the "magical negro stereotype."  Whatever the fuck that is.  Sounds more like they made it up, looking for more ways to get outraged.  So, for SJWs, all movies set in Africa, regardless of the true race of those that lived there, must have an all black cast.  Oh, but don't cast a black person as someone who does magic, cause that's racist, too.

And one actually said that Egypt was never ruled by whites.  Well, it was under Roman rule for few hundred years, so...

Is there really backlash over this issue? Are the same people up in arms about this also banging down the studios' doors about the many examples that have gone the other way over the years?

It's a fictional character. If this bothers you enough to make you disinterested, you might need to reevaluate things. Maybe you're a purist and the books are your life, but in that case you weren't going to be happy with the adaptation anyway.

So, "let me break it down"...

You never say "this isn't the actual quote", you just talk about "other versions", and you even quote yourself the book Sword of Destiny, page 416.

And then, you say "let me break it down, fair hair and ashen white complexion, so where does it say anything about being white?". This right here shows that you don't understand the word complexion. Nothing about "it's not the actual quote", just "you guys don't understand the sentence, let me explain is to you", before failing in your explanation.

It's nice to try to accuse others by saying "I didn't say that, learn" and trying to change what you said with each new comment, but it's not that hard to check your original comment, you know? You should try to learn how to remember what you said, and to accept that you did a mistake instead of digging deeper and deeper.

1. Yes

2. Yes

3. Nope. I don't need to reevaluate anything. Respect the source or don't bother is my motto.

4. You can't know that. I'm not against some changes in adaptations, like cutting away bits of the story to streamline it for a short run time, but stuff like this needs to be called out for what it is: Forced Diversity BS.

Maybe I've just become desensitized to the issue because I'm a minority and this isn't anything new, but I just can't give this any weight when it's a fictional character without any real cultural significance.  Somehow I kinda doubt the answer to question 2 even if it may be the case for you. 

Whitewashing won't end because entertainment is made for its audience. The biggest consumer base is western Caucasians. Diversity is fashionable and minority groups continue to grow in influence in these nations. It's not surprising that this is occurring. As China has grown in influence, Asian stars have become more commonplace and are actively sought out to portray roles to be marketable in those territories. Directors have artistic license with a movie because it is an adaptation. 

There are cases when this might be inappropriate, but this just isn't worth being bothered by.