outlawauron said:
Because something that is done for the sake of being that is not creating depth. It's literally the most shallow thing a trait can be and usually gets placed instead of actual meaningful character development. Multiple viewpoints and having a diverse casts are a good thing, but doing things for the sake of doing is lazy and worsens the product 99% of the time. |
There is no provable metric that shows doing something for the sake of it worsen's the product, especially since you yourself also say its shallow and thus, doesnt really matter.
Angelus said:
This is spot on |
Yes, I agree.
Azuren said:
I mean, not really, no. The population of the US is still majority white, majority straight, and majority cis. Gender is totally split into different genres, as men and women are attracted to different types of fiction. While other groups have expanded since the early days of film, America at least is still mostly white, hetero, and cis. And you can't argue in favor of changing white cis straight males to something else while arguing against changing, say, Miles Morales into a white guy. Its hypocritical. The problem is instead of introducing new characters, they're changing established characters. Don't pretend it's more complicated than that. And finally, he pretty much sums up his entire post, though he thinks he's summing up opposing posts. |
Gonna start at the end and say that oh well if you're looking at this as so simple, because every issue on earth is more complicated than it seems. This will be the only part of my comment that is snarky.
Now for the rest, and I dont really get what the US population has to do with anything, because my post was about pandering. No matter the protag, people are being pandered to. I'm saying that people dont care that pandering has begun, they care that more groups other than them are now being pandered to. And even with a majority white population, you're still looking at millions of people of colour, and even more women (isnt the US' population around half women?) and we shouldnt say that these people shouldnt get pandered to as well. Not to mention, and this was gonna go at the end but I put it up here, people still complain about new characters that are created as black. People complain when new games come out with black people and women, they complain when comics have female or muslim superheros, they complain when a cartoon has gay characters even if they are all original.
For the part you have a big problem with, I dont think I'm hypocritical at all, because the two situations simply arent equal. Because I'm looking at the wider CONTEXT. In a world where everyone was always equal from the beginning of time, all instances of changing the race or gender of a character would be equally a problem. In this world, where media was 99% white and male for hundreds of years due to racial and gender biases deeply entrenched in society, things get a bit more nuanced. Making a white protagonist in a movie black will change one movie out of 6 coming out that week. making one black protagonist white will remove probably one of 3 films with a black protag coming out that year. You cant ignore the context of these situations and the wider world we are in, the history, or any of that. Because the reason for so many people being white wasnt just a natural part of society, it was because of certain biases that entrenched that as the default.
It's the same reason Black Panther became political, because a major superhero movie with that budget, that cast, and a black director being so successful is a major deal in terms of representation, and until it becomes commonplace, people will make a big deal about it.
