That doesn't happen. No one is writing movies where people who aren't Latino just have Latino children to score "progressive points" or whatever.
Interracial couples do exist. Asians and Latinos exist, and their portrayal in media isn't any more "progressive" than portraying any other race or ethnicity, it's just realistic. And anyone of any race, including interracial couples, can have gay children. Most of the "farce" you've described is perfectly normal.
>It's labelled as progressive but it's regressive and mocks each minority group along the way.
I doubt there is anyone in any minority group who feels mocked by greater representation. But, as a Gay Black Asian Latino yourself, you can probably tell us what it's like.
Are you unfamiliar with the concept of tokenism?
To me and to many others, though not to you, certain parts seem to exist purely to collect diversity points. This seems like pandering to me, and I expect it is insulting to anyone who views it that way. For some people, being a token is even more demeaning than being excluded.
Just feels like there's a bit of goalpost-moving in this subthread. The poster farther up was annoyed that there are shows where seemingly all the characters have some non-cis-straight-white characteristic to them. And now you're talking about nearly the opposite, all-cis-straight-white casts except for a token something-else.
Which is it, eh? If y'all want to disingenuously whine about more diversity in casting, at least get your stories straight...
It's like, you can have Asians OR Latinos OR Blacks OR gays but no more than two, and they can't stack, and you definitely can't rewrite an existing character to represent some other race, religion, gender, sex or nationality even if you yourself are of that race, religion, gender, sex or nationality. That's a narrow minded view and unfortunately a common one.
This is the crux of the issue. To me, "attempts at representation" are demeaning by definition. Giving someone a part because of their skin color or sex or sexual orientation is demeaning.
Diversity has to be genuine for it to be good. You have to cast an actor or write a part because you thought the actor was good or the part works, not as part of an "attempt at representation".
I really hope you're not suggesting that the reason why nowadays casts aren't solely composed of straight, cis, white people is because all of the unqualified other actors are being given jobs they don't deserve.
Maybe "attempt at representation" can also mean producers, writers, casting directors, etc. just finally realizing that the world is full of more than just white people, and maybe stories should be written that include those people too. It doesn't have to be some awkward forced diversity where it doesn't make sense.
> Diversity has to be genuine for it to be good.
Sure, and yet I just see a lot of hand waving about all this rampant non-genuine diversity without any evidence that this is widespread. Certainly that sort of thing exists: of course we've all cringed at a character or casting decision that was clearly made for the wrong reasons. But I just don't think I see that happening that often these days. Maybe broaden the types of TV shows and movies you watch to stuff that isn't targeted squarely at straight, cis, white people?
I can't parse this, sorry. Too many negatives.
> Maybe "attempt at representation" can also mean producers, writers, casting directors, etc. just finally realizing that the world is full of more than just white people, and maybe stories should be written that include those people too. It doesn't have to be some awkward forced diversity where it doesn't make sense.
This is exactly the issue. Good art does not come from earnest people "trying to tell important stories about more than just white people".
> Sure, and yet I just see a lot of hand waving about all this rampant non-genuine diversity without any evidence that this is widespread. Certainly that sort of thing exists: of course we've all cringed at a character or casting decision that was clearly made for the wrong reasons. But I just don't think I see that happening that often these days. Maybe broaden the types of TV shows and movies you watch to stuff that isn't targeted squarely at straight, cis, white people?
I'm unsure how I could provide "evidence" of a movie being "non-genuine". Do I need to explain how I calibrate my Genuineness-index? Should I show my work? We're talking about movies. If I watch something and can't get into it because I judge it to be "non-genuine," I'm allowed to say so without offering evidence and, of course, you're allowed to disagree.
It's too funny to be accused of watching "stuff that is targeted squarely at straight, cis, white people". 90% of the movies I watch are foreign movies, low budget/arty American movies, or classics. You're assuming I'm a bigot when, in reality, I'm making a very basic point about where art comes from (not from people trying to "pursue equity, diversity, and inclusivity").
Aren't you moving the goalposts? I thought we were talking about characters, not actors. Two entirely different arguments, and I know a lot of LGBTQ+ people who would be offended at a straight person playing gay or transgender, and a lot of POC people who take issue with "whitewashing" in Hollywood. But the people who complain about the "agenda" behind non-straight, non-white characters don't tend to complain when non-white roles get cast by white actors.
Do you consider writing non-white, non-straight characters to be demeaning by definition?
Is a Muslim, Pakistani-American Ms. Marvel demeaning to Muslims and Pakistanis? In a field where Muslims and Middle-Easterners are rarely portrayed in a positive light, if at all? Even if Kamala Khan is written by a Pakistani Muslim, and based partly on her own lived experiences?
Is adding the possibility of gay romance or sex in a video game demeaning to gay people? If so, why isn't straight sex in a video game isn't demeaning to straight people?
>You have to cast an actor or write a part because you thought the actor was good or the part works, not as part of an "attempt at representation".
And what I'm saying is that's exactly what happens more often than you and many people seem willing to believe. It's just assumed that every non-white, non-straight character or role exists only for the sake of "diversity points."
Not every minority in real life acts like a sterotypical minority. The idea that, say, Black characters should only be allowed to "act Black" would really be tokenism.
I'm not complaining about "too many non white gay people in movies". I'm complaining about bad movies that I judge to be bad because of the po-faced pursuit of diversity rather than an attempt to make something beautiful, meaningful, strange, funny, or some other quality associated with good movies.
I'll have my (future) sons watching old James Bond and Indiana Jones movies before I ever show them most of the crap that Hollywood shovels to us as black males. A strong white character is a better role model than a weak black one.
My coworker is mixed Jamaican/ Italian and a staunch Catholic. He and his black/Hawaiian wife homeschool their sons (both early teens I think). He shared his difficulty with finding media content for them to consume that isn't heavily laden with homosexuality, especially in the black male characters. I suggested he introduce them to ST: TNG, Babylon 5, and ST:DS9. Worf, Geordi, Sisko, and Dr. Baxter are all useful role models. Those were positive and inspirational black characters.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/emasculation-black-male-image...
https://negromanosphere.com/hollywood-emasculation-black-mal...
https://youtu.be/0aYo8nxedOM "Boskoe100 Thinks There's An Agenda to Make the Black Male Image Effeminate"
https://youtu.be/gyjblZqw2dE Brandon Tatum's take on a recent rap video heavily depicting prison homosexuality
Dave Chappelle shined a light on this 15 years ago: https://youtu.be/oCahQtiEYb4
This sort of content is nowhere near as popular or desired as the bubble-dwellers in LA/Atlanta/SF/NYC seem to think it is. One might retort "why does someone else's representation negatively impact you?" IMO, the answer should be obvious. Amplifying the "edge cases" of representation colors the expectations and perceptions of community outsiders who don't necessarily understand that they are not indicative of the majority. Wealthy drug-dealer rappers are a tiny fraction of the black male community, but walk into any nightclub in Asia and SOMEBODY will look at you askance and question why you don't dress like 50 Cent. I don't sell cocaine but that media representation of someone who does impacts how others interact with me. How long before I'm dealing with women asking me "Why don't you wear lip gloss, sparkles, and a dress like those other black men I see on TV/Instagram?"
https://www.vogue.com/article/billy-porter-oscars-red-carpet...
So yeah this stuff feels like they are mocking us, and no representation would be better than representation of this sort. Malcom X was right (and his quote below is my favorite one to drop into HN discussions). https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/8869214-the-white-liberal-i...