Very much agreed. To write in support, I'm of the firm belief that diversity adds to a compelling story, often without even trying, because we as a generalized audience don't take different experiences into context. And it's not a novelty or for PC because that writing reflects those experiences -- what's different to you might have an impact on me, or vice versa, but it's a way of walking a mile in one's shoes.
To wit, whatever one's opinion on Sisko or Janeway may be, we'd have to take into account that, yes, their experiences would be different than if they were the white male leads that we see in 90% of all TV shows. Janeway, to my knowledge, never faced sexism from her crew; but you don't need sexism to demarcate her femininity and, in many cases, her maternal approach to the crew. Indeed, she ended up a positive influence on the show and on Trek as a whole (just look at the Voyager forums). And for Sisko, even if we removed all of his references to the 20th century civil rights movements, it's still something of an incredibly big deal to see a black man and father as the head of a space station and lead protagonist of a show, precisely because we have strong black leaders in the real world in many fields; so there's definitely a point of entrance to relation and reference (the same way how Whoopi Goldberg and Mae Jemison were inspired by Uhura, who Trekkies often dismiss as just the earpiece lady, but back then was definitely an anomaly -- to Whoopi and Mae, seeing a black person in power in turn empowered them in a world that kept trying to tear down their own power).
Then there's tokenism, and what it is and isn't. Having a minority in a major role just to show that you're PC is tokenism. However, having a minority in a major role because that's the experience of the writer and that's what they envision, is not, because if the minority is a presence in the writer's world view, it translates to sharing the presence in the reader's world view as well. The key difference there, I feel, is cynicism -- tokenism includes minorities because they feel they have to, as if by quota; non-tokenism includes minorities because they feel it's a reflection on reality, and that minority storytelling has contributions to the world of fiction.
It really strikes me as odd that we can take space zombies and cosmic gods and giant amoeba and time travel in stride, but bring a person who deviates from what is considered "the norm" on the bridge and suddenly we shut down our suspension of disbelief out of cynicism.
Last edited:
