Because you're taking something fictional and declaring it belongs to white people forever. What does it matter if Superman or Captain Kirk are played by a minority actor, as long as they are capable?
Thoughts on Burnham's relationship to Sarek
- Thread starter JRoss
- Start date
Because you're taking something fictional and declaring it belongs to white people forever. What does it matter if Superman or Captain Kirk are played by a minority actor, as long as they are capable?
I never said I was tired of white people - I said white guys. And I'm not arguing for more white people.
I never said anything of the sort. I said there should be equality and that if whitewashing is bad then the reverse is equally bad.
It is very frightening that a moderator doesn't even take the time to read up on the discussion but simply jumps to conclusions or twists the facts to suit their purpose.
While I understand why they would want to do this, to have a name to match their identity, this "Some will refer to their birth name as their dead name" would be painful to a parent to hear.
As for the "Michael" name, as was discussed elsewhere recently, while it's not common, it's not unknown for a female to bear the name (Michael Learned for one).
The super-short version is that no one likes to be a fifth wheel.
Instead of adding a new character outside the core group, who would have a random dynamic and a relationship to the lead not proven to be successful, it's why today we're open to making Perry White and Jimmy Olsen black in film and on TV. That's why Iris West is black on TV. Going back to the previous millennium, it's why casting Billy Dee Williams to play Harvey Dent was no big deal. It's why the genius of casting Idris Elba to play Heimdall isn't foolishly dismissed.
[edit - Not to mention, Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury. Etc. Etc.]
Make sense?
Last edited:
Yes I now. I was simply comparing the two because the jump to a far fetched conclusion is very similar when the simplest explanation is the most likely.
I meant I thought it was mentioned in the episode that Spock was the first Vulcan in Starfleet and that Sarek didn't like it. I was sure that it was mentioned in the show because this was something I had "always known" and I wouldn't have had reference material or fan fiction, just the show.
Is it confirmed that the Intrepid crew were actual Starfleet officers? Maybe the ship was Starfleet but on load to Vulcan. Seems like a big error for the official site to name Spock as the first.
I guess it only makes sense if the intent is for whatever you are producing, is clearly identified as a re-imagining which is it's own distinct thing, rather than trying to explain it or set it within canon, and that the new version of that character is not re-treading the personality and experiences of the original. The new versions of these characters should be written by people who can bring something new to it, and that the new version of the character can justify the reason for the change.
And when I say justify, I mean the viewer gets something they could not have gotten from the original version.
Nothing has ever been said about Spock being the first Vulcan in Starfleet. We all did this dance when Enterprise hit the airwaves.
Could Burnham be Guinan from TNG?
With Hollywood in remake/sequel mode, it would eliminate whole racial groups of actors from taking part in films. I'm sure some folks would love that.
"Why isn't Aquaman white?!?"
mdtauk is doing nothing of the sort.
And it is perfectly fine for a black, Asian,etc. actor to play Superman or Kirk.
However, that is not the same thing as replacing an actor of one ethnicity with another in a series. Kono can't suddenly turn black in Hawaii Five-0 from one season to the next just nor can the Huxtables have a biological son who is white.
That dance is irrelevant because not every posting here now was doing so back then. The whole "why are we discussing this again" is rude and quite unnecessary.
On the topic itself, I'm not denying it was never mentioned, simply stating that I was very certain it was mentioned. I never said my memory on it was correct.
^ Given that I ALSO believed that it had been established/was accepted as Canon truth that Spock was, if not the first Vulcan in Starfleet, than at least the first HALF-VULCAN in Starfleet, it's not just you being wrong in this regard.
We simply don't know, because it has never been mentioned on screen. Which is the standard for something being canon.
You're arguing for the amount of white people to stay the same. That's still an imbalance because white people already make up the majority of characters in media. Plus it verging on reverse racism which does not exist.
Also while I am a mod, I have just as much right to post here as you.
It's even more painful for the trans person because it can bring up a lot of tragic memories.
How ironic that if fully Human, she wants to be/winds up being more Vulcan even than Sarek's own child, who at least has the genetic heritage. We might get a Spock jealousy thing that adds a new side to his Vulcan/Human inner war.
Maybe she chooses kohlinahr or changes her species to one she IDs better with?
Maybe she chooses kohlinahr or changes her species to one she IDs better with?
No, Guinan was on Earth in the late 19th century and she looked the same as she does in TNG.
Would it be acceptable you if Grace Park was replaced with a white actress?
I am doing no such thing. Show me where I said anything of the sort. Did you even bother to read any of the posts on the topic?
Further evidence you didn't read my posts. At no point did I say you or any moderator shouldn't be posting. I criticised the fact that you were so wrong about everything I posted that you must not have even read the comments - hence why I said it was frightening that even a moderator can't be bothered to get the facts straight.
I saw daily mail - I'm not clicking that link and I'm embarrassed on your behalf that you'd use it a source or reference for any thing.
Last edited:
Again, removing what little minority representation there is in media by recasting the characters with Caucasian actors seems like a silly idea.
Adding diversity be recasting some traditionally white characters (because almost every character was white, you know?) with minority actors makes way more sense.
I also find it interesting that people would whine when an originally white character is recast with a black actor, but for some reason nobody cares that Simon Pegg looks nothing like James Doohan.
So apparently it's okay when the new actor looks completely different as long as the skin color is still the same? But skin color for some reason is THE big issue? You don't care that a dark-haired character is blonde all of a sudden and vice versa, but the skin color is a major issue?
It would depend. Is being "Asian" central to her character? If not, then no it wouldn't be a problem. It might be a poor choice depending on the racial makeup of the rest of the show she's on.
Being white isn't an important character trait for Superman or Captain Kirk. Heck, being male really isn't important.
Similar threads
