How did the "quest for diversity" negatively affect the quality of the writing?
News Martin-Green: Star Trek And Diversity
- Thread starter AutoAdmin
- Start date
- Status
I'm socially liberal, but I dont give a fuck about what the level of diversity is in my television shows.
I don't need a tv show to show me about the importance of diversity and inclusion and being a decent human being who values others.
That comes from other places...more important and impactful places...not entertainment.
I don't need a tv show to show me about the importance of diversity and inclusion and being a decent human being who values others.
That comes from other places...more important and impactful places...not entertainment.
Race and racism are very much an issue in the books.
People felt like they were being preached at rather than entertained.
Trek was affected by this in its early days too: http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Let_That_Be_Your_Last_Battlefield_(episode)
I think some wrap their arms around things not on the basis of its merits but because they've been triggered by haters. I think a lot of the female-ghostbusters controversy was like that. People were not so much rushing to the film's praise on its own merits as simply accusing any and all detractors of being misoginists. So what that kind of thing does is essentially throw an immunity-shield around any work that features women or minority groups since you can't criticize it without being accused of bigotry.
Either way, though, it becomes a case of people being more interested in fanning the flames of a political circus around media than actually assessing the media's true content.
It's a big part of American society, too. We are so media-obsessed that the world of make-believe can sometimes feel more important than the real world to the point where some put more time into raging about Wonder Woman's shaved armpit hairs than a mass-shooting at a church.
This is especially true when you're dealing with properties that go back many decades. These franchises are like a modern mythology and they carry over a lot of quasi-religious baggage. So an ethnic or gender flip can be treated almost like a "black Jesus" or "black Santa Claus". (Dr. Who is dealing with that the most at the moment.) I think this issue is far less pronounced with the scant few originals that come out of Hollywood because there's no preexisting iconography. But I think some look at these preexisting characters as almost like it's a political office in which there is some societal obligation to cycle women and different races through there so each can get their turn. In that case I await a male Wonder Woman with great anticipation.
Last edited:
Which would be to stunningly miss the point. We want to increase the role models for girls, not take away the one they had.
Well Jesus sure weren't white.
Then create new ones. Either a role is designed to be portrayed by a certain gender/ethnicity and should be left alone or it is essentially like a political post that should have different groups cycle their way through them with each reboot. You can't have it both ways.
Really the problem is that these days there's just too much competition for eyeballs. That's why almost nothing goes on in Hollywood that isn't associated with a property that became big decades ago (the newest one I wasn't aware of being the Rampage videogame turned into a movie with The Rock coming out this spring).
If you're dealing with a fixed number of static pieces then it's no surprise to me that they just jettison any notion of that characters' look or identity and cram something else in its place. The only rationale to recycle the property is because of the preset name-recognition.
To get back to Trek here...
Discovery is a great example of a show that surfs on name-recognition but in which they have (in Meyer's language) changed the shape of the bottle rather than pouring in a new vintage.
The Orville is more of an example of a new vintage poured into the same bottle, but with a new label slapped on to avoid a lawsuit.
Then this is likely as true an indication as any that sometimes racism and stupidity are indistinguishable.
Insert "white establishment" in place of the word "some", and you have stated one of the concepts that triggered the civil rights movement in the mid-fifties -- "haters" (racists), refusing to accept on the basis of merit rather than "entitlement". This is also what triggered the "oscarssowhite" movement a few years ago.
The problem that you and others have is the believe that if a racial minority or woman or trans person is given a role that could also have been played by a white actor, then there needs to be a reason, if not, then why not have a white actor play the part? In other words, white is the default setting unless there is a reason to deviate. Then, when the reason to deviate turns out to be for the sake of diversity, there is an outcry against "diversity for diversity's sake". Do you realize that the alternative is white (male) actors only in roles unless the character is written to be a woman, minority, trans, handicapped, etc?
There also seems to be a belief that a number of minorities in a show means that these actors were not chosen for their suitability for the role and acting talent, but for their skin color or gender. This is the very essence of racism and sexism. You do understand, I hope, that choosing the right actors for the part, even if the choice is a minority, is in the best interests of the producers. Doing otherwise would be foolish. Now, sometimes there are casting mistakes made, meaning the actor chosen may not turn out to be right for the given role, but if this happens, try not to think of those mistakes as being related to the actor's race.
In the case of fictional characters, many of them were a reflection of the intolerant times in which they were created and sometimes the personal prejudices and beliefs of their creators. So swapping them out for minorities or a woman should not be a big deal.
Re: Wonder Woman, once again, this is based on a false equivalency. If women and men were equally represented in superhero roles, then you might have a point. But they are not. Far from it, in fact. Now, perhaps one day, after we have gotten so used to female superheros, we can legitimately wish to see a male in a role traditionally played by a woman. Wouldn't count on it being WW, though, her gender is part of her story.
Try to not think of white (male) as the default setting, and it might be easier for you to get what I'm saying here.
BTW, Santa Claus is a fictional creating and can be any gender or race, and as cultcross so correctly and concisely put it, Jesus surely was not white.
In a country like the US that is to a larger part mixed-European white you'd expect the "default" to be white too. In Japan the default is Japanese. In India Indian. Zimbabwean media is, I guess, dominated by black Zimbabweans.
It is also not true that characters that are not white need to have a reason to not be white. There is no reason why Will Smith's character in ID4 is black. He just is. That Lily Sloan in First Contact is a black woman is irrelevant to the character. She's just played by the always great Alfre Woodard. There is also no reason why Dr. Miles Dyson is black. Joe Morton is simply great in that role. There is no reason why Janette Vasquez is a women.
The people who whine about "diversity for diversity's sake" should be ignored. Just like the worst of the canonistas and their cries about "change for change's sake".
BTW, Santa Claus is not entirely fictional as that figure has his root in the stories surrounding the historical figure of the Saint Nicholas of Myra.
NONE of the aforementioned countries are immigrant countries. Nor do they have the immigrant and racial minority populations that the US does. Nor were those countries built on the backs of immigrants as was the US. Nor do those countries have the cultural diversity of the US. America is, and has always been, a melting pot with respect to races and cultures which have always heavily influenced overall American culture. The US would not look or sound the way it does without the contributions of many cultures and races.
"White" (male) as the default setting in America didn't just occur organically or by accident as you suggest. It happened because of the systematic suppression of other than white races and women by the dominant culture. That system was perpetrated for many many years in the US. It has slowly begun to change, but only because of pressure applied by the civil rights movement, the women's movement, and more recently, the LGBTQ movement.
Eeeyeahhhh, that's kinda been my point in this thread.
Yes, there have been some black actors who have been given roles which could have been played by white actors. Is that the point of your list?
Well, I agree with you about the canonistas because ultimately that isn't important. However, the subject of diversity is. And as for "whining"; in America, that is where the aggrieved start. Then it builds into a scream and goes on from there. This, unfortunately, many times is the only thing that brings about change and maintains those changes after they've been achieved.
This is the process that started the aforementioned movements which have brought about positive changes. And thanks to people like Bryan Fuller and many others, the "whining" about diversity is not being ignored, to the point where someday (soon), "white" (male) will no longer be the default setting.
Hate to break it to you at this apparent late date, but Santa, the fat dude in the red suit who comes down the chimney with the bag of gifts, is a fictional character regardless of who the character is based on.
I've been an avid sci fi fan and gamer who believes there needs to be more representation and diversity in all types of entertainment media.
I never knew I needed a female superhero movie like Wonder Woman until I saw it and found myself crying when she went over the trenches to try to save the village, feeling a deep sense of recognition and pride. Representation matters, especially if it's positive in ways which have not been seen regularly before. I also can't wait to see Black Panther when it comes out in Feb. I have a feeling this too will resonate hugely with audiences previously uncatered for.
As someone who dabbles in writing (for my own pleasure), I think it's a hugely useful exercise to examine one's own biases and defaults from a narrative perspective.
The concept of something being 'forced' in terms of inclusion can only work if everyone agrees on what the defaults should normally be. Once one realizes why brave hyper competent white cis males have usually dominated as the default heroes in our entertainment media, how can one support the continuance of that particular over-used trope in this day and age?
It's time for many more voices to be heard, many more stories & perspectives to be shared and many more role models to be found.
To those who ask why a main character or *gasp* main protagonist has to be gay, or black or female, or differently abled, or neural atypical, I would ask "why the hell not?"
I never knew I needed a female superhero movie like Wonder Woman until I saw it and found myself crying when she went over the trenches to try to save the village, feeling a deep sense of recognition and pride. Representation matters, especially if it's positive in ways which have not been seen regularly before. I also can't wait to see Black Panther when it comes out in Feb. I have a feeling this too will resonate hugely with audiences previously uncatered for.
As someone who dabbles in writing (for my own pleasure), I think it's a hugely useful exercise to examine one's own biases and defaults from a narrative perspective.
The concept of something being 'forced' in terms of inclusion can only work if everyone agrees on what the defaults should normally be. Once one realizes why brave hyper competent white cis males have usually dominated as the default heroes in our entertainment media, how can one support the continuance of that particular over-used trope in this day and age?
It's time for many more voices to be heard, many more stories & perspectives to be shared and many more role models to be found.
To those who ask why a main character or *gasp* main protagonist has to be gay, or black or female, or differently abled, or neural atypical, I would ask "why the hell not?"
It’s rather funny that the majority of the people whining about diversity are also over-represented in media.
Male wonder woman = Superman, Captain America, or Thor. Take your pick.
In your head did you think that’s clever?
I'm afraid you have misread what I wrote. I was agreeing with you about those people who see diversity as something negative.
Fuller isn't whining. He is doing something to present diversity in entertainment fiction.
Please specifically point out the parts of your post you believe I've misunderstood.
The "whining" part. Your answer to that says that those who are against diversity need only whine long and loud enough to get their backwards way.
That's not at all what my answer said, that is your interpretation of what it said. With the slow but steady evolution of the racial make-up of the American population, I don't see any amount of whining by the anti diversity folks un-ringing that bell. It is especially true now that studios see that diversity means dollars.
But I'll tell you how an error and an ambiguity in your post may have bumped up against the overall idea you may have been trying to get across.
You wrote this:
...where you're equating the density of the Caucasian population in America with that of the Japanese in Japan, whatever is the most populous race in India, and black population in Zimbabwe as (I guess) being the reason for the white as "default setting" in American movies and TV shows. Total bunk, as I pointed out.
Here is the ambiguity:
It's not clear if you're referring to the pro-diversity or anti-diversity groups.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
