- 4,916
- Posts
- 11
- Years
- Seen Apr 18, 2025
So I really wanted to respond to some points in this thread but I didn't want to derail it from its original purpose, and as the nature of the replies changed it seemed more suited for this forum, so the discussion can continue in more depth here. As always, remember to be respectful even if you may not agree with some opinions!
The "parent" post that spawned the discussion:
Hope you don't mind me quoting, and feel free to elaborate your points if you'd like because I'm still a little fuzzy on what you consider tokenism and what you consider "good" minority representation - I think that's the root of the discussion since in your other replies you don't seem to disagree that there should be more minority representation, just that representations of minority characters shouldn't be tokens, which is fair.
--
and the response I wanted to make to this:
Chinese people exist outside of being Kung Fu masters and immigrants with emotional tales to tell, and I think representing them as "normal people" who just happen to be of colour is not necessarily shoehorning or tokenism, it's just... depicting us as real people too. In fact, I don't want every show or movie where there are Chinese people in it to have "Chineseness" be the focal point, just as I'm sure gays don't want to be seen as just a flamboyant stereotype or whatever. Giving people of colour roles that could otherwise go to a white person is not segregation or lip service.
That said, I can definitely understand not wanting details shoehorned where it's not necessary, example being something like Dumbledore - JK Rowling added the detail that he's gay after the fact despite there being no evidence actually within the books or films themselves that suggest he's gay, to me it seemed like she just kind of added a "btw he's gay" to be more LGBTQ+ friendly, and that I think is kind of lame. But I don't think that argument can be applied to people of colour, especially in films, unless Disney suddenly comes out with a statement like "btw Han Solo is black and future portrayals of him will reflect this" or something
The "parent" post that spawned the discussion:
This might as well be a fad, but I'm getting real tired of people crying out "representation" in everything.
And I'm more tired of having it catered to. Way to stick to your guns and not be artistic or have any conviction, that you feel you have to shoehorn in couplings or characters to 'appeal' to a demographic.
It's sickening and only strengthening the notion of segregation.
And it's one of the worst aspects of Hollywood right now. As if Asians (Chinese to be specific) won't like a film because there aren't Asians in it.
How about just make a good story without worry about any of that crap and let people like it for that? By the same reasoning, even a bad movie is good so long as you're 'represented'. Give. Me. A. Break.
It's a 'fad' I'd love to see eliminated.
When did this BS mentality even start?
Hope you don't mind me quoting, and feel free to elaborate your points if you'd like because I'm still a little fuzzy on what you consider tokenism and what you consider "good" minority representation - I think that's the root of the discussion since in your other replies you don't seem to disagree that there should be more minority representation, just that representations of minority characters shouldn't be tokens, which is fair.
--
and the response I wanted to make to this:
I don't think that's the issue people are battling when they make the decision to put more people of colour into movies, maybe Hollywood is just opening their eyes to the reality that aside from some European countries, any given setting in the world is not 99% white and movies shouldn't be, either.It only propagates the notion of segregation. That "well black people can't like something if it has no blacks in it" and the like. It's nonsense that needs to be done away with.
Chinese people exist outside of being Kung Fu masters and immigrants with emotional tales to tell, and I think representing them as "normal people" who just happen to be of colour is not necessarily shoehorning or tokenism, it's just... depicting us as real people too. In fact, I don't want every show or movie where there are Chinese people in it to have "Chineseness" be the focal point, just as I'm sure gays don't want to be seen as just a flamboyant stereotype or whatever. Giving people of colour roles that could otherwise go to a white person is not segregation or lip service.
That said, I can definitely understand not wanting details shoehorned where it's not necessary, example being something like Dumbledore - JK Rowling added the detail that he's gay after the fact despite there being no evidence actually within the books or films themselves that suggest he's gay, to me it seemed like she just kind of added a "btw he's gay" to be more LGBTQ+ friendly, and that I think is kind of lame. But I don't think that argument can be applied to people of colour, especially in films, unless Disney suddenly comes out with a statement like "btw Han Solo is black and future portrayals of him will reflect this" or something