I don't know about Tiana, I'm sure people would care. I feel like people would care less with Nani.

Mulan on the other hand, kind of needs to be Asian. It's an Asian name, her whole story is joining the chinese army, fighting the Mongolian invaders, and saving the Chinese Emperor. Kind of needs to be a Chinese actor.

If you were to make a different story where Lilly joined the British army, and saved the Queen or something. People wouldn't care that not-Mulan wasn't Asian.

The double standard exists, because other races were pushed out.

It's like if there are 100 seats, 1000 people proportional to the US population. 

If the world were fair, 60 of those seats would be white, 19 would be hispanic, 13 would be black, 6 would be asian, etc.

Instead it's more like 75 of those seats are white, 10 are hispanic, etc.

The reason for that double standard is to correct for the real world bias.  

It shouldn't be done just for the sake of diversity. Really it's better to just come up with new characters of more diverse backgrounds. Samuel L Jackson as Nick Fury is one of the only times changing a character's race worked, mostly because, as far as I remember, MCU Fury's race wasn't made part of the plot.

People do realize these are actors right? Who cares what the fuck they look like if they’re convincing in their role.

Immersion and consistency are also factors for some. I would expect a drastic change in personality to be written well, and similarly I would expect a drastic change in appearance to be beliavable in some way. People of certain appearances can also be very immersion-breaking in certain contexts (and of course this is effect is not limited to just appearances). (I'm probably in the minority, but I'm also a guy who doesn't like, say, seeing a ton of sub-machine guns in World War I games because of the immersion thing, to take one example I've seen that's not related to identity.)

I am strongly against equity. I fully acknowledge that people were more racist in the past. And that things were (and in part are still) unequal because of that. But going for absolute perfect representation is not the way for me at least. I don't think you can correct a past mistake by making another one in the opposite direction.

Equity leads to quotas. And these are repulsive to me. Perhaps that is just me and a few others here. But there cannot be equality of opportunity if you strive for equity. Left alone, groups of people will choose different things. And looking at unequal outcomes and automatically assuming bias (and even a bias of a very specific, very nasty kind, racial bias) is jumping the gun. We have to prove how outcomes occur before we can competently try solutions to change these outcomes. That is not even touching the question if we should change the outcomes in the first place.

To be fair about what Paatar said: people did in fact care that Ariel was played by a black person. They complained a lot. But I do think that the double standard still exists though. People would riot, if we had a white Blade or Shaft.

And you talked about Mulan pretty much having to be asian. And I get your point. I even agree. It just makes sense. And it would not make sense otherwise. But than I have to ask: what did you think about Anne Boleyn being played by a black actress. Because to me that hardly made any sense either. It felt like pandering. It felt like caving in to weird, out of left field demands that should not have been important. And a Mulan that is not asian would just take me out if the experience. Or a king Gezo that is not black. Or an Anne Boleyn that is not white.

Well it does matter in some cases. Race is not the only factor but weight, height, body type etc are factors.

Imagine a michael jackson movie if people said who cares. Lets have an 7.4 foot overweight 800 pound man who knows every move as he been impersonating michael since he was 3 and looked convincing playing that role, let's see how that pans out.

Uh no.

There are plenty of equitable initiatives such as blind resumes that have nothing to do with quotas. 

There's a complicated relationship here.

Assuming that there aren't some strange cultural or genetic differences that cause black people to be more likely to go into certain fields than white people, then the fact that there is a difference is pretty indicative of there not being an equality of opportunity. 

The cultural part is complicated, because there is plenty of evidence that there is basically a chicken and egg situation. There are for example plenty of studies that show that women for example are more likely to go into fields where they have role models. If women see other women becoming scientists, programmers, etc. They're a lot more likely to become those things themselves.

There's plenty of evidence showing various reasons why these outcomes are the way they are. It probably isn't the full picture, but there is quite a bit to it. One reason is issues with access. A lot of these jobs require education that isn't available everywhere. 

My issue here is that you're assuming that someone getting an opportunity must mean that someone else is wrongfully losing an opportunity; and that it seemingly wasn't possible that they were both equally deserving of that opportunity.

People wouldn't riot. They absolutely complain, that's why we have the term whitewashing. 

The primary issue is that opposite groups of people are complaining about opposite biases.

This is a very touchy subject for sure.

Personally I dont think Race swapping should be a thing however there's been two examples of race swapping that has happened in media in the last 20 years or so that imo were a good choice.

Hermione Granger from Harry Potter - from black to white

and

Nick Fury from Marvel - from white to black


These are two memorable characters played perfectly by two good actors (for the roles they were placed in).


Of course it all falls upon the actor who potrays them.


I havent seen the remake of The Little Mermaid so I cant say much about it...except for that one song that was made new for the remake....that went viral - that was awful lol.

Anyways, there's clearly not gonna be a winner in this discussion as both arguments can be used for both good and bad reasons.

I'll just stay neutral.

This is basically my position. People largely care because it's been made into a political culture war feud to the point where people ignore what's actually important.

DP (That means double post... right?)