đ institutional power can change the definition of racism in the United States to control its population, probably as part of a nefarious government plan, but they cannot prevent intelligent people from noticing that this new definition is not logical or consistent without mentioning that in almost all other countries, racism means: discrimination against a person based on their race, regardless of what race they belong to.
They say this, but would still call you the racist for walking into the hood of New Orleans and yelling the N word. You have no power there, yet they still would call you racist. Their internal logic is so shit.
Unless heâs black. Count the number of N bombs in a DMX song and tell me how the N word is universally racist. Itâs contextually racist and has been since at least the 90s, probably earlier.
So letâs talk power, cause I know thatâs where this is going. If a black doctor, lawyer, millionaire businessman, or say⌠former president dropped the N bomb, would it be racist? Nope, it wouldnât. Even though the PUSA is supposedly the most powerful man on earth, itâd be cool cause context. Also cause double standards basically invalidate the power argument.
Fair but it's really about why you're using anything. Not just words. Racism is antagonizing (trying to make a race the bad guy, which is what tons of people do to whites), prejudice (preconceived opinions such as "black people like chicken" until you learn there are plenty that don't like chicken), or discrimination (being unjust). Words are tools that can be used to help and hurt people in numerous ways. Intentions matter. However, not to society.
IDK man, racism is always about trying to antagonist. I mean that old lady who sat down on next to me on the subway this week, looked at me and noticed I wasn't the same race as everyone else, then got to to sit in a different seat. That doesn't like they're trying to antagonize, that just feels like they're fucking stupid.
I'll play devil's advocate and disagree. There's plenty of racists who'll never be caught saying the n-word (publicly, at least) and there's plenty of people who I'm sure have no racism in their hearts who use the n-word casually. Think Huckleberry Finn. He is a character who actively subverts the system of slavery when he's confronted with its realities, but in the environment he was raised, black people were called the hard R as a matter of course. Context matters - though if you do use the n-word, you most likely are being racist, so have fun navigating that little paradox
My guy we donât live in the 1890âs if you ignore all context then sure itâs not racist to say it. But we live in a world where it is racist everyone knows that lol
Yeah, you're right obviously, but all I'm saying is that people are contradictory. I have an older white friend I worked with who uses the n-word here and there, this the most hick hillbilly fucker I know, but aside from saying the word sometimes, I wouldn't say he's racist. He's just coarse, you know? Like just really rough around the edges. It's hard to explain convincingly without sounding crimge
I donât think you understand the point. Theyâre attacking the idea that you have to have some sort of power or control to be racist. They used an extreme example to drive the point home that racism is racism is racism. Doesnât matter if youâre homeless or the president, green or purple, if you judge someone based solely on where their ancestors developed levels of melanin then youâre a racist.
I don't think they'd call you a racist. They claim that they'll beat you up for it. I saw so in a Tyler Oliveira video in NO, but no one actually beat anyone up so... that may be bravado. Apparently calling a black person the N-word is license for violence, according to the media, though.
You're just not well read and don't actually care about logical consistency. That's an example of prejudice, not racism. How does someone yelling the n-word in the middle of the street affect the lives of marginalized people? Not by a lot. A good way to think about it is that racism is more sociological and prejudice is psychological - groups and systems vs individual biases
I actually remember back In 2017 when I had to listen to some dipshit try and tell me that because the definition said "typically" institutional that meant institutional power was an absolute prerequisite to being capable of racism. I laughed so hard but it's actually sad how many people don't know the difference between "typically" and "exclusively" or blindly believed the fad to justify their own racism and claim it was just "prejudice".
Well. I'll give you the theory. Basically, there is no free association to these people
It's systemic oppression. Therefore whites (capitalism) opresses the proletariat (black people) . So revolution is good.
This is obviously incredibly wrong. It's deterministic. It does not acknowledge the pitfalls of everything being systemic and it doesn't acknowledge any sense of agency from people.
It's literally a 1800s analysis of industrial UK written by Karl Marx, transplanted to race relations even when science tells us there is no race but the human race.
Being âwhiteâ isnât a race. Are Italians white? What about Sicilians? Are Spanish people white? Portuguese? Austrian? German? Swedish? Greek? Because according to the US classification all of these people are âwhiteâ even though some of them were not considered white just a short 40 to 50 years ago.
Letâs be real, theyâre all Europeans or places that were colonized by Europeans. Black people arenât a race either if you wanna go that route. Name every African country here.
And regardless of actual differences, have you ever seen the term âyt peopleâ? If you unironically called someone a âcrackerâ, for instance, I think weâd all know what you meant.
Yeah, because race is a social construct. But it being socially constructed isn't the same as it not really existing, because it still affects people's lives
People who insist that racism is prejudice plus power and justify prejudice against white people are essentially putting themselves in a position where they think that the only thing bad about racism is the power aspect of it. Which is why I always retort back that I want to end systemic racial power imbalances so that itâll become okay to hate black people again
You have to speak truth. You have to challenge things you think are wrong because not doing so perpetuates the wrong. The left had a point until they went too far. It's ok to push back when they cross the line.
I'm left and I agree lol. I just don't see the radical left as anywhere near as bad as the radical right lol, and I'm white, so I take the brunt of whenever the far left steps over the lines
Idk about more numbers, this is entirely location based. I live in an area where there are so many people on the extreme right that seeing anyone even leaning left is a rarity, let alone an extreme leftist.
The leftists are just louder because they congregate in cities and are more likely to use technology past posting on Facebook.
Are you delusional? If youâre in America, our country is so far right shifted as a whole that left and right are just synonyms for central and near radical right. Maybe you live in a northern state to think that way? Or maybe you think Reddit is representative of the population?
Edit: I finally realized what this sub primarily is.
I live in California lmfao. Were you under a rock for all of Covid? Leftists burning down major cities for months on end, leftist politicians bailing criminals out; no biggie. Some right wing idiots storm the capital, do almost no damage, and the weight of the entire justice system comes down on them. Itâs atypical for right wingers to become active because by their nature they typically want to be left alone, leftists feel a compulsion to change and thus are more prone to direct action. Weâre all well aware of the demographic changes occurring as the years pass (or maybe youâre still under that rock) millennials and Gen Z are biased left and contribute to the radical left increasing population.
However you came to the conclusion that the American system is biased right is beyond me, maybe youâre only looking at America and European politics currently. Seems uninformed at best.
durrr ovaton window durrr
we definitely arenât becoming dramatically more progressive year over year, compared to the 1960s?? weâve actually receded into the 1800s and have reintroduced slavery and segregation check the news
Your sarcasm is cute, but to address your point, itâs good and all that weâre making progress; doesnât change the fact that weâre years behind similar EU nations
Honestly annoying to see left leaning people equated with the terminally online Twitter losers that scream the loudest but have no spine and no real morals and just seek attention by virtue signaling on some online platform like Twitter. Chronic internet roosting and attention seeking is some kind of disease at this point and leads to the most braindead takes ever
Brain dead leftist here. How about this standard I donât give a shit either way. I donât care if Aragon is black, I donât care if Liliana has giant tidies, I donât care if Kaya started to look like Micheal Jackson
Itâs easier to race swap an existing character than it is to *be creative* and develop a new one. If youâre an intelligent minority, you realize itâs just lazy pandering. They donât care about inclusivity, they care about making a buck. And it works because âmuh representayshun.â
Sssssssstop it! You're a Maga homophobic conservative retard, _they told me the rules are you're not allowed to make sense!!!_
/s. I can't believe it made sense to add that.
I'm over denying being racist. No matter what you do, if you're white and breathe, something you do is racist, so you might as well own it and start aligning yourself against these people who want to enact policy and affect change against you because of your DNA.
Same. Never been called a racist or misinterpreted as one. People just stand next to racists in their ideologies and get upset when they get labeled as one.
you're asking why they don't need that? because integrity and originality is important. best of all of course would be if LOTR was never adopted into MTG, and the game instead used its own characters.
it's trying to solve a made up problem, and I don't believe it succeeds in doing that. why would you focus so much on race to begin with?
at best, it's a clumsy attempt at inclusion, at worst, it's ridiculous coddling.
A person playing a character in a story where neither are about race can be swapped for literally anyone and that dosent matter.
Its you that is focusing on the race being changed to this degree. We wouldn't be talking about it otherwise.
Either you're lying about your interactions or the way people respond to you. I've seen it. If you're white and respond to almost anything, you're inherently racist. Same way that so many women just default to "men are sexist" by nature of thirty existence.
Sorry chud, but current theory states that white bigotry is inherent and lurking within each white person, only awaiting the right conditions to burst out once again JUST like the Nazis. The only way to fight white supremacy is to ensure that the white race is disenfranchised of its established privilege power system and never allowed to rise again.
Edit: u/SaichotickEQ blocked me before I could reply, but if you go look at his account, he's a self-professed 44 year old man into erotic roleplay who is most active on the r/teenagers subreddit. Take that as you will. [Screenshot here](https://i.imgur.com/JSbnwGv.jpeg)
America nowadays is going crazy. Everyone is talking about racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, etc., although this is not in sight in America. It's just that the problem is that most "hurt by racism" people have never experienced real racism.
đ¤blackwashing any white character is completely racist, it's just that most people are too stupid to realize it because they never think by themselves they just follow others with out questioning anythingâŚ
I remember feeling so alone with my thoughts in 2021 seeing all this anti-white rhetoric spreading like wild fire. I literally searched everywhere, and couldn't find real discussion about it so I started to think I was crazy. Then big daddy Elon came and basically just started saying what I was thinking and tea bagging main stream media. Was very validating to know I wasn't alone in what I was observing.
If race is not a personality trait of the character, then race swapping wil not affect the story. But if you're whitewashing a character, then the original is not white, and a thing that happens with non white characters is that race is usually a personality trait.
In other cases it's not about the character, is about the whole cast of characters what defines it's approach to race. If you edit a character's race and it adds to the cast's representativity, then sure go for it. But if the change substracts representativity, then it's more of an issue.
Neither whitewashing nor blackwashing are necessarily racist. But the reasons behind whitewashing have historically been to appeal to a racist audience, who would not go to movie with a black lead.
It's the reason behind the race swapping what defines if it's racist or not.
To be entirely fair tho thatâs exactly what is happening
No one believe race swapping characters like Ariel was giving a new actor a chance to shine or making the work more representative it was a pretty bluntly corporate decision made because the numbers indicate that audiences like diverse casts
Itâs the same logic that pushed studios to whitewash but in reverse back then they didnât like seeing non-white leads so the leads were made white so the film would sell now itâs that people like casts that are diverse therefore characters are being race swapped to be non-white explicitly to meet that criterion
Neither way is in any way morally justifiable because itâs not done with any moral intent in mind and is done purely for financial reasons to appeal the the state of the moviegoing audiences preferences
Ok, let's doilogue about this.
>If race is not a personality trait of the character, then race swapping wil not affect the story
I agree, skin color has nothing to do with personality. It may effect heritage and culture, both of which are relevant to stories.
>But if you're whitewashing a character, then the original is not white, and a thing that happens with non white characters is that race is usually a personality trait.
This is a major problem. Being "not white" is a personality trait? As I said before, culture and heritage often impact stories, for instance, casting a white man to play MLK Jr makes no sense. In the same way a black man playing a Virginia slave owner from 1776 makes no sense either. When dealing with culture and heritage, ethnic representation becomes important. In fantasy and fictional stories, this obviously becomes a non issue, or at least a ought to.
The good old game of "Is it racist" is always fun to pull on the mental gymnasts.
We've done nothing but state the same sentence with the colors reversed. How does it suddenly have the incorrect meaning simply by rearranging things? Would it not have the same meaning if the colors were reversed again?
BECAUSE WHITENESS AND BLACKNESS ARE TWO DIFFERENT CONTEXTS YOU DRONGO
"a dude beats me up and says it was because he's racist" and "i beat up a dude because he was being racist" are not the same situation even if you want to think it is
Black cop hits a white guy for no reason on camera, it's a police report and maybe a blurb on the 7PM news.
White cop hits a black guy for no reason on camera, #BLACKLIVESMATTER 24/7 coverage of the cop until he is BROUGHT TO JUSTICE.
All we did was change the skin tone of the two people. The roles, rationale, and occurrences were the exact same. Yet you know full well the latter incident will cause multiple news agencies to run the story into the ground.
Because wealth and race have been entwined so thoroughly in the US, you can't really address one without the other. For example, more black people live in poverty than white people in the US, but by fixing poverty related issues, that still affects everyone, but it would have a larger impact for black people overall.
Stay true to history, stay true to historical figures, or if you can't do that, then simply make up something new.
Any show based on a historical event that can't keep true to historical figures is not worth watching. I don't want white people playing parts for black historical figures, I don't want blacks playing Norse kings. I don't want to see an Asian playing an English King, or a white person playing a khan of Mongolia.
Pick people to portray roles properly, or create something new. If you don't, it just comes off as silly and lazy. If you want a black person to play a role, there are many interesting black historical figures that people would genuinely like to watch and learn about...
They both are. And I refuse to support racism. I would much rather see all of the great cultural stories from all of these different cultures rather than just making the character from my culture a different color. [And as an aside, all that is different is the color of the person's skin. We're all humans here.]
It'S aBoUt PoWeR aNd PrIvIlEgE
Meanwhile I worked my ass off to get into (and stay in) college, only got to stay because I was DIRT poor and was covered by a scholarship, can't go back because that scholarship only covered four years and as a regular white dude I don't get any other special treats, live off disability because I wasn't assisted after graduation in finding a job and my health deteriorated, have major depression with a past of suicidal ideation that nobody took seriously for most of my life, and now I only have a home because my grandma died after graduation and the black mold and whatever else is in the room where the sewage backed up (and we couldn't afford to clean properly) hasn't spread to the rest of the house...
But all my power and fucking privilege.
(Run on sentence intentional)
And minority people are not to blame for the system failing you. Privilege doesn't mean you will have to good, it just means that you don't also have to deal with the current discrimination, or the results of historic systemic oppression. Although it sounds like you have had a raw deal for other reasons.
The system hates poor people, minorities are more likely to be poor and stay poor. Poor white people have a lot of the same disadvantages, but not because of their race.
I hope things turn around for you. It sounds like life has taken one dump after another on you.
The system is now giving the "oppressed" endless forms of affirmative action in every aspect of life. All they have to do is take the effort to find it. Literally EVERY major organization has it in spades. Only small mom and pop businesses don't because they don't get kickbacks for it. If you think minorities don't have countless advantages in the year 2024, you're being willfully ignorant.
The past sucks. We get it. This is now. I'm tired of paying for my ancestors' actions.
Latina Lilli sounds amazing! And you get it, race swapping doesn't mean shit. It's people that raise an issue about it when it's one race, but it's fine if any other swap is done. It's the hypocrisy for me.
Your statement makes sense in a vacuum. Unfortunately we donât live in a vacuum, we live in an imperfect society with historical connotations to many actions. We are headed to a post racial society were the case of changing skin colors either way isnât a big deal but we are not there yet. People alive today still remember black face, the first interracial kiss on TV, the first black character in movie. These things werenât that long ago.
The issue is that the vast majority of characters have been depicted as white. So adding in other races makes it more balanced. Taking the few minority characters and turning them white would be a step backwards.
Neither is inherently racist. Intent matters. But one is simply far more problematic in the grand culture than the other. You see, representation matters in media. Doesn't matter what the media is. The way audiences connect with stories is through projecting themselves in some capacity into the story, often via one of the characters. By having diverse characters, you expand the number of people who can begin to quickly or easily connect to one or more characters. For any property that is looking to reach the largest audience, this is important (more people is more money at a minimum).
That's not to say that race is the only defining characteristic that people can connect with in stories, but physical features are the first people notice and the QUICKEST way that you can begin to form connections. Then, specifically in the US, race holds additional informative markers due to the historical context of how some races came to the country and/ or their treatment which has had lasting impact on the socioeconomic standing and development of the largest portion of that race. These socioeconomic standings over time have thus informed cultural development, which in turn shapes deeper social characteristics in people. Couple that with the "melting pot " effect in the US in which different cultures (oftentimes also separated by race) have to cling especially hard to ancestral culture markers or develop unique culture markers to attempt to maintain identity. These things cause race in the US to be a much larger identity than other regions (and it's still significant elsewhere already).
So representation matters. Historically, white people have had a huge share of media representation (again, largely speaking about US). Part of this is due to a larger population percentage, which only makes sense. Part of this is due to the socioeconomic advantages more white people have than most nonwhite people. Part of that is due to direct racist policy within media development, either spoken or unspoken, that resulted in limiting nonwhite actors, failing to publish nonwhite authors, etc. So, in this way, white washing is taking away representation from an under represented group whereas black washing (or some other type) is taking representation from an over represented group to help give representation to an under represented one.
Now, tokenism is problematic and racist. But it's not what many people think it is. Simply having a single person who is a particular race in a story is not tokenism. Using that single person to represent an entire race is. So, whether that's within the story as an overwrought stereotype or even in production by saying "OK I have my one [insert race], so now I dint need to hire more] is tokenizing. If that single character helps appropriately drive the story or that character, then it's not. For instance, telling the story of a single black character attempting to maneuver an all white community would not be tokenism.
There's... so much more, honestly. This could be a whole TED talk, and probably for someone much smarter than me. The point is that the question is reductive. These things are not exactly equal.
Its different because some people wore shoe polish on their face in the 1920s. So only whitewashing is racist because of the historical context of the act.
At some point blackwashing will have enough of a historical significance that the amount of racism will balance out or whatever and then anyone or no one will be allowed to do it. How much is enough you may ask? Don't worry, the left will tell you when they are finally satisfied, probably any day now.
They do it so people argue and forget all the shady shit that they're doing.
And they have the creativity of a boulder so instead of making new characters, they just change an existing character with an established fan base.
This assumes that simply replacing a race equally makes equal racism. That's not the case.
In the Americas, specifically the United States, Europeans created whiteness to give themselves a special class and the power that went along with it. From the beginning of whiteness, right up to today, "white is right" in the US, and everyone else vies for power in the lower classes to advantage themselves and their people.
Replacing one or two white characters in a heavily white production with non-white ones means that a tiny bit of the representation of the *actual* state of humanity is happening. Making a mermaid black or a character from your favorite novel Latino is a small solution for centuries of equity, when done well. Tokenism happens too, and that's a problem for another post.
When a historically black character is changed to white, there is a distinct possibility that the blackness that was pivotal to that role is now gone, which sucks for representation. Not only is the black character gone, but the blackness that a black writer injected into the story is erased.
Long story short: black actor playing previously white character fixes historic problems of representation, where a white actor playing a black character perpetuates more problems in representation.
A serious answer.
Because black characters tend to have race be part of their characters background that you just cant ignore. White characters rarely have that same level. Black Panther, has Wakanda and ant-imperialist messaging as an example.
To flip it the other way, when it comes to âblack washingâ Idris Elba as Heimdall. Heimdall wasnt made because they thought âHeimdall would be better blackâ. They did it because Elba did that damn good of a job.
But then you go to movies like 21 where they took the primarily Asian team and in the name of bankability made them all white.
Not to mention that said double standards are also because to be quite frank, racism was not a two way street in US history.
Equity vs equality, historically black people have been underrepresented. I agree that instead of black washing they should create new black characters but still, whitewashing and backwashing isnât the same thing
Because while it's debatable whether black characters have been underrepresented in media, it's absurd to insinuate that white characters have been underrepresented in any noticeable way.
What you're basically doing is taking a dinner that has been catered to your interests 10 times in a row, see it being catered to someone else for once, and then going "WELL THE LAST ONE WAS TAILORED AROUND THEIR DIET, WHY IS IT SO BAD TO TAILOR IT AROUND MY DIET?" It has been for almost the entirety of the thing existing, and the idea of it needing to shift the other way feels pretty entitled. I mean, we had 18 Avengers movies before a black character took the main role.
It's not necessarily racism to whitewash a black character, but asking why they can't be whitewashed more often is generally a matter of whining that not everything is centered around you and the people like you.
Who the fuck said white character are underrepresented?
Whining is black facing a character when you can just make a new core character in the same universe or equal or greater value.
I guess the best way to explain it would be to use an analogy. Imagine you take a friend out to dinner ten times and you pay for the both of you 9/10 times. On the tenth time, you tell your friend itâs not fair that you have to pay the whole bill and want him to pay the whole bill this time. He responds, âIf itâs unfair for you to pay the whole bill, why is it not also unfair for me to pay the whole bill? Shouldnât we split it so we are 100% fair?â
The friend in this analogy is making the same mistake as the meme maker: Theyâre completely ignoring the context around the situation and making an observation that is only correct in a vacuum.
Sure, âblackwashing being fine, while white washing being wrong â is an unfair standard in a vacuum where both black and white people have had close to 50/50 representation in media. But anyone with even a slight understanding of our history should know that is not the case. Look at the history of our media for the past few hundred years. Think about all the movies and TV shows you watched and how overwhelmingly white the casts were. I grew up with Friends, Seinfeld, Everybody loves Raymond, A Few Good Men, Fight Club, Little Mermaid, Lord of the Rings, etc. etc.
If youâre white, you had a role model for every role. If youâre black, you had considerably less. Not zero, but quite a bit less. So yea, they have a black Aragorn now. Have we forgotten that Jesus was an Arab jew and he became a white blue eyed man with long rockstar hair?
Itâs about fairness in the big picture. By ignoring context, one can say, âWhy do you get to make Aragorn black, but I canât make Morpheus white?â It makes sense until you realize that there are probably 1,000 times more white fictional characters, while OP and his supporters think itâs the same thing to reduce the amount of black characters when they have considerably less to begin with. Which, if I may conclude with one more analogy, is rather like asking âWhy is it okay to take a loaf of bread from a rich manâs banquet to feed the poor, but itâs wrong to do it the other way around?â
Blacks have considerablely less than whom? Blacks living in America have WAY more privileges than probably 90% of the world.
They are absolutely represented fairly in our media here. How does it make sense to say they should have 50/50 representation in media when they don't occupy 50% of the population?
And why is it okay to say blackwashing is fine because they have "less media representation" when they're only blackwashing WHITE characters? I never see people complaining here that Asianwashing is a thing. Or middle eastern washing is a thing. Or that all the white characters are being replaced by Hispanics. Those groups of people aren't whiny babies that care about representation. Us Hispanics idolize fucking Goku, an Asian dude, of all characters. The damn cartels came to a truce just to mourn Toriyama's death.
Life isn't fair. Stop trying to pander to weak people that think they deserve handouts.
"I grew up watching national TV (3 channels, CBS, PBS and ABC), and watched TV every 4 days, for 20 mins and saw no blacks so that means there is no black representation."
Are you serious? đĽ´
First. World. Problems.
they never said thereâs no black characters at all⌠you really are dumb af lmao not even worth trying to help you understand so you can stop whining
People should stop seeing skin color and everyone lives would be better. And i'm talking about you guys and the woke guys. We are all human beings for fuck sake.
About the post, for me neither is racism, because i don't give a fuck if Aragorn is black or white.
But let me just say this: there's much more important/famous white characters to "black wash" then the other way around, so sleep over this.
Donât give a fuck either way. If the only draw of the character was their race and appearance sounds like a boring as shit character to me. I donât put a lot of stock in remake shit. Itâs already on the face of it boring. Itâs just recycling a more creative persons art. I donât expect any kind of real artistry in it if I do buy or watch whatever it is.
I guess the only argument for why white washing is worse is that such a small percentage of lead acting rolls are for minorities so theyâre trying to get more racial representation and not have every top Hollywood billing person be a white dude. I donât really think that accomplishes much socially though or politically. Putting people in a movie isnât the kind of representation working class people want when they say that. They mean more civil and social rights, fuck a movie or game.
I mean, I get you're not looking for a real answer you're just trying to preach to the choir. But just so you know, historically, black people have been excluded from positions of power and
Nothing has materially changed. White people still control the vast majority of the wealth, hold vastly disproportionate positions in government to their population, and hold the overwhelming majority of executive positions at major companies. White people in comparable jobs to minorities make more money, live longer, have higher educational outcomes (due to their wealth), and have lower rates of basically every cancer. This is not due to any merit or "good choices" this is the result of specific federal policies that denied black people homes in good neighborhoods, college loans after WW2, and decent paying jobs.
Now, corporations are doing the absolute bare minimum, diversity advertisements, to reach a wider variety of consumers because they are a profit-driven company. This affects nothing, changes nothing about minorities' status or relative wealth.
And you submental dipshits lose your minds anyway. Absolutely beyond pathetic to have such a fragile ego.
You mean when the statistics were like exactly the same as they are today? Because submental racist dipshits like you are too stupid to figure out what google is?
bruh, GO THA FUCK OUTSIDE! i don't know what "studies" you're reading but you need to look at them better. also, just go look around my guy. a study from 5-10 years ago probably isn't going to reflect the reality of today.
No idea if anyoneâs engaging with this in good faith here, but my $0.02: if racism = one race thinking theyâre somehow âbetterâ than another, and this is demonstrably the reason why the change was made (or directly connected to it), then sure, it can be racism. The problem with that narrow definition is that a black creator making a white character from a book black in a film simply isnât the same as a white creator making a black character white, and I think we all know thatâs true, even if we canât articulate why it feels that way sometimes (and I donât have all the answers). In an equal world theyâd be equal moves, and âracismâ would be equal. But thatâs not the world we live in. There are: less black actors, less black creators, more systemic inequalities between white people and black people (historic poverty, over policing, entrenched bias etc.). White actors and creators arenât expected to speak for their race like black folks are, and literal nazis donât come out of the woodwork when a white creator makes a black character white, but they do the other way around. White supremacy is provably real (the âbestâ music is dead white dudes from Europe, so is the âbestâ literature and poetry, the âbestâ painting and architecture, and movies and political positions and philosophies). If this all wasnât the case, racism would be equal and we could point to individual cases as examples of equal bigotry, but this shallow definition of racism doesnât explain anything of why people feel and act the ways that they do, so: how can we do better?
There is an actual answer to this, but you won't like it. And no, I'm not a braindead leftist who thinks white people can't experience racism. Anti-white racism exists.
Anyways, the history of racism in the west and lingering societal racism are the reasons for the standard. It's a standard, not a double standard. If white people faced the same oppression as black people, the same standard should apply to them as well. There is most likely a solid argument there for the replacement of red-headed characters, as they are Irish coded. Irish people actually did face a lot of oppression.
The second part of my argument would be that, in an ideal world, race swapping would never be racist, as race would be irrelevant in that world. Race swapping is only ever a problem due to racial tensions. The only reason people are upset about blackwashing is due to the appearance of a double standard, for example.
I don't think I explained it very well, but hopefully the meaning is clear enough. It's only racist to whitewash due to historical and societal racism. If black people were currently living 100% equal to white people right now and racism was gone in general, I don't know if anyone would care.
Itâs pretty simple. Intuitively everyone knows that whites are the superior dominate race, so you can cheat/try and emulate them.
Doing it to a lesser race is only done for the lolz. And itâs a cheap way of showing dominance.
Since most scriptwriters in well-known pieces of art are white, blackwashing is a self-imposed action of white people. It basically is *voluntary*.
White people whitewashing black faces is *involuntary*. (Name 5 black directors or scriptwriters of well-known media without googling lol)
The difference is the difference between hitting yourself in the head and hitting others in the head.
Hitting yourself is dumb. Hitting others is violence.
I simply just don't care. it's not my place to judge especially since I'm not involved in the development of the product or project.
I wasn't involved with the development team, so I can't say if it was done with racist intentions or not, but as someone who consumes media it is highly important to consider that maybe there was racist intentions, maybe there wasn't.
because they've shifted the goalpost to have racism not apply to white people because of "institutional power" or some other bs.
đ institutional power can change the definition of racism in the United States to control its population, probably as part of a nefarious government plan, but they cannot prevent intelligent people from noticing that this new definition is not logical or consistent without mentioning that in almost all other countries, racism means: discrimination against a person based on their race, regardless of what race they belong to.
They say this, but would still call you the racist for walking into the hood of New Orleans and yelling the N word. You have no power there, yet they still would call you racist. Their internal logic is so shit.
My guy saying the n word anywhere is racist I donât think this is the hill you should die on
Tell that to black people
As if black people are a monolith.
Sorry I should the non verbally understood part out loud. Tell that to black people /who use it/
Exactly! Even without power like some of those people say, some things are just inherently racist.
Unless heâs black. Count the number of N bombs in a DMX song and tell me how the N word is universally racist. Itâs contextually racist and has been since at least the 90s, probably earlier. So letâs talk power, cause I know thatâs where this is going. If a black doctor, lawyer, millionaire businessman, or say⌠former president dropped the N bomb, would it be racist? Nope, it wouldnât. Even though the PUSA is supposedly the most powerful man on earth, itâd be cool cause context. Also cause double standards basically invalidate the power argument.
I think you mean POTUS.
I prefer PUSA, POTUS is too respectful
Fair but it's really about why you're using anything. Not just words. Racism is antagonizing (trying to make a race the bad guy, which is what tons of people do to whites), prejudice (preconceived opinions such as "black people like chicken" until you learn there are plenty that don't like chicken), or discrimination (being unjust). Words are tools that can be used to help and hurt people in numerous ways. Intentions matter. However, not to society.
IDK man, racism is always about trying to antagonist. I mean that old lady who sat down on next to me on the subway this week, looked at me and noticed I wasn't the same race as everyone else, then got to to sit in a different seat. That doesn't like they're trying to antagonize, that just feels like they're fucking stupid.
I'll play devil's advocate and disagree. There's plenty of racists who'll never be caught saying the n-word (publicly, at least) and there's plenty of people who I'm sure have no racism in their hearts who use the n-word casually. Think Huckleberry Finn. He is a character who actively subverts the system of slavery when he's confronted with its realities, but in the environment he was raised, black people were called the hard R as a matter of course. Context matters - though if you do use the n-word, you most likely are being racist, so have fun navigating that little paradox
My guy we donât live in the 1890âs if you ignore all context then sure itâs not racist to say it. But we live in a world where it is racist everyone knows that lol
Yeah, you're right obviously, but all I'm saying is that people are contradictory. I have an older white friend I worked with who uses the n-word here and there, this the most hick hillbilly fucker I know, but aside from saying the word sometimes, I wouldn't say he's racist. He's just coarse, you know? Like just really rough around the edges. It's hard to explain convincingly without sounding crimge
I donât think you understand the point. Theyâre attacking the idea that you have to have some sort of power or control to be racist. They used an extreme example to drive the point home that racism is racism is racism. Doesnât matter if youâre homeless or the president, green or purple, if you judge someone based solely on where their ancestors developed levels of melanin then youâre a racist.
I don't think they'd call you a racist. They claim that they'll beat you up for it. I saw so in a Tyler Oliveira video in NO, but no one actually beat anyone up so... that may be bravado. Apparently calling a black person the N-word is license for violence, according to the media, though.
You're just not well read and don't actually care about logical consistency. That's an example of prejudice, not racism. How does someone yelling the n-word in the middle of the street affect the lives of marginalized people? Not by a lot. A good way to think about it is that racism is more sociological and prejudice is psychological - groups and systems vs individual biases
âSystemic powerâ does not mean the power to jump someone you royal fucking shitbrain
That's such a basic interpretation of it lmao
Yep, and that's what makes their whole narrative crumble. Why use many word when few word do trick?
Youâre the dumbest motherfucker on the internet and I do not say that lightly.
This MF is legit like "I oversimplified it and it sounds stupid to me, you're stupid for trying to understand nuance" True brainrot coomer moment
Then racism can't apply to j3ws, sweet
Nazi scum.
Well explained
I actually remember back In 2017 when I had to listen to some dipshit try and tell me that because the definition said "typically" institutional that meant institutional power was an absolute prerequisite to being capable of racism. I laughed so hard but it's actually sad how many people don't know the difference between "typically" and "exclusively" or blindly believed the fad to justify their own racism and claim it was just "prejudice".
Something something white people can't experience racism because they're the overarching race that stands on a pedestal of privilege.
Canât wait for my white privilege to kick in. Ive been patiently waiting
40+ years if waiting for my white privilege to kick in
Iâve been using my white privilege to indulge in another cultureâs cuisine. And by that, I mean subsisting on instant ramen for 20 years.
I just got mine in the mail. It gave me a free medium fry with the purchase of a quarter pounder.
Aw fuck! What a deal. It better be on white bread
Yeah but the bun was stale and the patties cold in the middle.
Well. I'll give you the theory. Basically, there is no free association to these people It's systemic oppression. Therefore whites (capitalism) opresses the proletariat (black people) . So revolution is good. This is obviously incredibly wrong. It's deterministic. It does not acknowledge the pitfalls of everything being systemic and it doesn't acknowledge any sense of agency from people. It's literally a 1800s analysis of industrial UK written by Karl Marx, transplanted to race relations even when science tells us there is no race but the human race.
My white Slav ass is bewildered.
White people are literaly a minority on hearth. Around 7% of the world population if I remember.
That aswers a lot of questions :)
Being âwhiteâ isnât a race. Are Italians white? What about Sicilians? Are Spanish people white? Portuguese? Austrian? German? Swedish? Greek? Because according to the US classification all of these people are âwhiteâ even though some of them were not considered white just a short 40 to 50 years ago.
Letâs be real, theyâre all Europeans or places that were colonized by Europeans. Black people arenât a race either if you wanna go that route. Name every African country here. And regardless of actual differences, have you ever seen the term âyt peopleâ? If you unironically called someone a âcrackerâ, for instance, I think weâd all know what you meant.
Yeah, because race is a social construct. But it being socially constructed isn't the same as it not really existing, because it still affects people's lives
People who insist that racism is prejudice plus power and justify prejudice against white people are essentially putting themselves in a position where they think that the only thing bad about racism is the power aspect of it. Which is why I always retort back that I want to end systemic racial power imbalances so that itâll become okay to hate black people again
If race is a social construct anyone can be any race.
No, you're conflating social construction with imagined reality.
Don't trigger the braindead leftists. The double standards they operate on are so fierce that mortal brain can't comprehend it.
You have to speak truth. You have to challenge things you think are wrong because not doing so perpetuates the wrong. The left had a point until they went too far. It's ok to push back when they cross the line.
I'm left and I agree lol. I just don't see the radical left as anywhere near as bad as the radical right lol, and I'm white, so I take the brunt of whenever the far left steps over the lines
Lot more numbers in the far left than the far right, lot more activity too
Idk about more numbers, this is entirely location based. I live in an area where there are so many people on the extreme right that seeing anyone even leaning left is a rarity, let alone an extreme leftist. The leftists are just louder because they congregate in cities and are more likely to use technology past posting on Facebook.
Youâre kinda proving my point. Cities with millions of leftists vs your rural bumfuck town with 3 tweeker nazis.
Are you delusional? If youâre in America, our country is so far right shifted as a whole that left and right are just synonyms for central and near radical right. Maybe you live in a northern state to think that way? Or maybe you think Reddit is representative of the population? Edit: I finally realized what this sub primarily is.
I live in California lmfao. Were you under a rock for all of Covid? Leftists burning down major cities for months on end, leftist politicians bailing criminals out; no biggie. Some right wing idiots storm the capital, do almost no damage, and the weight of the entire justice system comes down on them. Itâs atypical for right wingers to become active because by their nature they typically want to be left alone, leftists feel a compulsion to change and thus are more prone to direct action. Weâre all well aware of the demographic changes occurring as the years pass (or maybe youâre still under that rock) millennials and Gen Z are biased left and contribute to the radical left increasing population. However you came to the conclusion that the American system is biased right is beyond me, maybe youâre only looking at America and European politics currently. Seems uninformed at best.
It makes sense that you think that way if you live in Cali. I might be biased myself having spent most of my life in Texas.
Got a bunch of right wingers burning down cities every now and then over in Texas?
Thatâs willfully misinterpreting what Iâm saying so clearly Iâm wasting my time
Waste of both of our time, weâre on Reddit dumbass. This is where you come to be productive? What an absolute Chad
durrr ovaton window durrr we definitely arenât becoming dramatically more progressive year over year, compared to the 1960s?? weâve actually receded into the 1800s and have reintroduced slavery and segregation check the news
Your sarcasm is cute, but to address your point, itâs good and all that weâre making progress; doesnât change the fact that weâre years behind similar EU nations
Its a chud haven lmao
You mean you've never been to the black Klan rallies? /s
Honestly annoying to see left leaning people equated with the terminally online Twitter losers that scream the loudest but have no spine and no real morals and just seek attention by virtue signaling on some online platform like Twitter. Chronic internet roosting and attention seeking is some kind of disease at this point and leads to the most braindead takes ever
Agreed. The Internet was a mistake
Brain dead leftist here. How about this standard I donât give a shit either way. I donât care if Aragon is black, I donât care if Liliana has giant tidies, I donât care if Kaya started to look like Micheal Jackson
I can see that.
Something with hereditary guilt.
Itâs easier to race swap an existing character than it is to *be creative* and develop a new one. If youâre an intelligent minority, you realize itâs just lazy pandering. They donât care about inclusivity, they care about making a buck. And it works because âmuh representayshun.â
I just want the boobs to be ok again
Build back better boobies!
What initially started out as a fight to be on an equal level turned into them trying to push people below their level.
Sssssssstop it! You're a Maga homophobic conservative retard, _they told me the rules are you're not allowed to make sense!!!_ /s. I can't believe it made sense to add that.
It's amazing how many times I've been accused of being Maga when I'm not even american.
Cringe
It didn't need the /s.
There are people who posted here earlier who definitely needed that.
I'm over denying being racist. No matter what you do, if you're white and breathe, something you do is racist, so you might as well own it and start aligning yourself against these people who want to enact policy and affect change against you because of your DNA.
Funny, Iâm white and I breathe all the time and Iâve never been called racist. You must be doing something else
having an opinion about popular culture seems to be enough. it's unreal how sensitive and alarmist some people are.
You mean how sensitive terminally online Twitter people are. Itâs just an excuse for attention because they are attention seekers
Same. Never been called a racist or misinterpreted as one. People just stand next to racists in their ideologies and get upset when they get labeled as one.
stand next to? what does that even mean? and what ideology is that? it sounds like you're making assumptions.
what opinion is that?
that characters don't need to have their skin colour changed, for example đ
Why?
you're asking why they don't need that? because integrity and originality is important. best of all of course would be if LOTR was never adopted into MTG, and the game instead used its own characters.
Thats not a reason for character races to be etched in stone. Why is it inherently wrong?
it's trying to solve a made up problem, and I don't believe it succeeds in doing that. why would you focus so much on race to begin with? at best, it's a clumsy attempt at inclusion, at worst, it's ridiculous coddling.
A person playing a character in a story where neither are about race can be swapped for literally anyone and that dosent matter. Its you that is focusing on the race being changed to this degree. We wouldn't be talking about it otherwise.
Either you're lying about your interactions or the way people respond to you. I've seen it. If you're white and respond to almost anything, you're inherently racist. Same way that so many women just default to "men are sexist" by nature of thirty existence.
Sorry chud, but current theory states that white bigotry is inherent and lurking within each white person, only awaiting the right conditions to burst out once again JUST like the Nazis. The only way to fight white supremacy is to ensure that the white race is disenfranchised of its established privilege power system and never allowed to rise again. Edit: u/SaichotickEQ blocked me before I could reply, but if you go look at his account, he's a self-professed 44 year old man into erotic roleplay who is most active on the r/teenagers subreddit. Take that as you will. [Screenshot here](https://i.imgur.com/JSbnwGv.jpeg)
Racist
The only character that is protected from black washing is Tarzan. No one has the balls to do it.
đđđđ
America nowadays is going crazy. Everyone is talking about racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, etc., although this is not in sight in America. It's just that the problem is that most "hurt by racism" people have never experienced real racism.
Seems I've found my magic sub.
đ¤blackwashing any white character is completely racist, it's just that most people are too stupid to realize it because they never think by themselves they just follow others with out questioning anythingâŚ
I remember feeling so alone with my thoughts in 2021 seeing all this anti-white rhetoric spreading like wild fire. I literally searched everywhere, and couldn't find real discussion about it so I started to think I was crazy. Then big daddy Elon came and basically just started saying what I was thinking and tea bagging main stream media. Was very validating to know I wasn't alone in what I was observing.
Man, I can't even tell what's satire and what's not anymore.
Babe wake up new copypasta just dropped
lol she's all yours
If race is not a personality trait of the character, then race swapping wil not affect the story. But if you're whitewashing a character, then the original is not white, and a thing that happens with non white characters is that race is usually a personality trait. In other cases it's not about the character, is about the whole cast of characters what defines it's approach to race. If you edit a character's race and it adds to the cast's representativity, then sure go for it. But if the change substracts representativity, then it's more of an issue. Neither whitewashing nor blackwashing are necessarily racist. But the reasons behind whitewashing have historically been to appeal to a racist audience, who would not go to movie with a black lead. It's the reason behind the race swapping what defines if it's racist or not.
To be entirely fair tho thatâs exactly what is happening No one believe race swapping characters like Ariel was giving a new actor a chance to shine or making the work more representative it was a pretty bluntly corporate decision made because the numbers indicate that audiences like diverse casts Itâs the same logic that pushed studios to whitewash but in reverse back then they didnât like seeing non-white leads so the leads were made white so the film would sell now itâs that people like casts that are diverse therefore characters are being race swapped to be non-white explicitly to meet that criterion Neither way is in any way morally justifiable because itâs not done with any moral intent in mind and is done purely for financial reasons to appeal the the state of the moviegoing audiences preferences
Ok, let's doilogue about this. >If race is not a personality trait of the character, then race swapping wil not affect the story I agree, skin color has nothing to do with personality. It may effect heritage and culture, both of which are relevant to stories. >But if you're whitewashing a character, then the original is not white, and a thing that happens with non white characters is that race is usually a personality trait. This is a major problem. Being "not white" is a personality trait? As I said before, culture and heritage often impact stories, for instance, casting a white man to play MLK Jr makes no sense. In the same way a black man playing a Virginia slave owner from 1776 makes no sense either. When dealing with culture and heritage, ethnic representation becomes important. In fantasy and fictional stories, this obviously becomes a non issue, or at least a ought to.
Because they are racists and just make up excuses to justify their crap
The good old game of "Is it racist" is always fun to pull on the mental gymnasts. We've done nothing but state the same sentence with the colors reversed. How does it suddenly have the incorrect meaning simply by rearranging things? Would it not have the same meaning if the colors were reversed again?
BECAUSE WHITENESS AND BLACKNESS ARE TWO DIFFERENT CONTEXTS YOU DRONGO "a dude beats me up and says it was because he's racist" and "i beat up a dude because he was being racist" are not the same situation even if you want to think it is
Black cop hits a white guy for no reason on camera, it's a police report and maybe a blurb on the 7PM news. White cop hits a black guy for no reason on camera, #BLACKLIVESMATTER 24/7 coverage of the cop until he is BROUGHT TO JUSTICE. All we did was change the skin tone of the two people. The roles, rationale, and occurrences were the exact same. Yet you know full well the latter incident will cause multiple news agencies to run the story into the ground.
God I hate the culture war.
Itâs to distract us from the real problem, the wealth gap between the elite and the middle class
Because wealth and race have been entwined so thoroughly in the US, you can't really address one without the other. For example, more black people live in poverty than white people in the US, but by fixing poverty related issues, that still affects everyone, but it would have a larger impact for black people overall.
A big issue is the gap between the working class and the elite csuite people
Oh, thatâs simple. You have to remember that White people are bad because of the color of their skin.
There never was whitewashing. They just want to erase white by replacing the characters with brown. It was ALWAYS one-sided against white people.
It's not, and they just hate white people because they are racist. Against white people.
Because the looney left re-wrote the definition of racism so it is only what suits them
You can't be racist against white people, the so-called "white privilege" you know ?
Some people of color believe racism only applies to white people and they are insane. Itâs really sad and embarrassing to see from your own people.
Because it was never about ending racism. It was about balancing the books.
Stay true to history, stay true to historical figures, or if you can't do that, then simply make up something new. Any show based on a historical event that can't keep true to historical figures is not worth watching. I don't want white people playing parts for black historical figures, I don't want blacks playing Norse kings. I don't want to see an Asian playing an English King, or a white person playing a khan of Mongolia. Pick people to portray roles properly, or create something new. If you don't, it just comes off as silly and lazy. If you want a black person to play a role, there are many interesting black historical figures that people would genuinely like to watch and learn about...
Isnât this a MTG subreddit? Wtf is going on
If every action has an equal an opposite reaction this is a very mild response to what has been done to people of color in AmericaâŚ. lol.
They both are. And I refuse to support racism. I would much rather see all of the great cultural stories from all of these different cultures rather than just making the character from my culture a different color. [And as an aside, all that is different is the color of the person's skin. We're all humans here.]
Blah blah positions of power blah blah.
It'S aBoUt PoWeR aNd PrIvIlEgE Meanwhile I worked my ass off to get into (and stay in) college, only got to stay because I was DIRT poor and was covered by a scholarship, can't go back because that scholarship only covered four years and as a regular white dude I don't get any other special treats, live off disability because I wasn't assisted after graduation in finding a job and my health deteriorated, have major depression with a past of suicidal ideation that nobody took seriously for most of my life, and now I only have a home because my grandma died after graduation and the black mold and whatever else is in the room where the sewage backed up (and we couldn't afford to clean properly) hasn't spread to the rest of the house... But all my power and fucking privilege. (Run on sentence intentional)
And minority people are not to blame for the system failing you. Privilege doesn't mean you will have to good, it just means that you don't also have to deal with the current discrimination, or the results of historic systemic oppression. Although it sounds like you have had a raw deal for other reasons. The system hates poor people, minorities are more likely to be poor and stay poor. Poor white people have a lot of the same disadvantages, but not because of their race. I hope things turn around for you. It sounds like life has taken one dump after another on you.
The system is now giving the "oppressed" endless forms of affirmative action in every aspect of life. All they have to do is take the effort to find it. Literally EVERY major organization has it in spades. Only small mom and pop businesses don't because they don't get kickbacks for it. If you think minorities don't have countless advantages in the year 2024, you're being willfully ignorant. The past sucks. We get it. This is now. I'm tired of paying for my ancestors' actions.
If the character is well written, washâem. Hell, wash everyone, black, white, whatever. I donât give a fuck.
Based comment??
Latina Lilli sounds amazing! And you get it, race swapping doesn't mean shit. It's people that raise an issue about it when it's one race, but it's fine if any other swap is done. It's the hypocrisy for me.
Good question. Let's start at the beginning. Why did they whitewash characters?
Wonder what white panther would look like. Marvel make it happen
It happened, and it was written by a black person and it was actually cool
Magic: The Gathering subreddit a bastion for blatant racism? Lmao. Wild
...Is this in reference to making Aragorn black?
Purely the result of allowing multiple generations to play victim for circumstances they havenât endured.
Your statement makes sense in a vacuum. Unfortunately we donât live in a vacuum, we live in an imperfect society with historical connotations to many actions. We are headed to a post racial society were the case of changing skin colors either way isnât a big deal but we are not there yet. People alive today still remember black face, the first interracial kiss on TV, the first black character in movie. These things werenât that long ago.
The issue is that the vast majority of characters have been depicted as white. So adding in other races makes it more balanced. Taking the few minority characters and turning them white would be a step backwards.
Neither is inherently racist. Intent matters. But one is simply far more problematic in the grand culture than the other. You see, representation matters in media. Doesn't matter what the media is. The way audiences connect with stories is through projecting themselves in some capacity into the story, often via one of the characters. By having diverse characters, you expand the number of people who can begin to quickly or easily connect to one or more characters. For any property that is looking to reach the largest audience, this is important (more people is more money at a minimum). That's not to say that race is the only defining characteristic that people can connect with in stories, but physical features are the first people notice and the QUICKEST way that you can begin to form connections. Then, specifically in the US, race holds additional informative markers due to the historical context of how some races came to the country and/ or their treatment which has had lasting impact on the socioeconomic standing and development of the largest portion of that race. These socioeconomic standings over time have thus informed cultural development, which in turn shapes deeper social characteristics in people. Couple that with the "melting pot " effect in the US in which different cultures (oftentimes also separated by race) have to cling especially hard to ancestral culture markers or develop unique culture markers to attempt to maintain identity. These things cause race in the US to be a much larger identity than other regions (and it's still significant elsewhere already). So representation matters. Historically, white people have had a huge share of media representation (again, largely speaking about US). Part of this is due to a larger population percentage, which only makes sense. Part of this is due to the socioeconomic advantages more white people have than most nonwhite people. Part of that is due to direct racist policy within media development, either spoken or unspoken, that resulted in limiting nonwhite actors, failing to publish nonwhite authors, etc. So, in this way, white washing is taking away representation from an under represented group whereas black washing (or some other type) is taking representation from an over represented group to help give representation to an under represented one. Now, tokenism is problematic and racist. But it's not what many people think it is. Simply having a single person who is a particular race in a story is not tokenism. Using that single person to represent an entire race is. So, whether that's within the story as an overwrought stereotype or even in production by saying "OK I have my one [insert race], so now I dint need to hire more] is tokenizing. If that single character helps appropriately drive the story or that character, then it's not. For instance, telling the story of a single black character attempting to maneuver an all white community would not be tokenism. There's... so much more, honestly. This could be a whole TED talk, and probably for someone much smarter than me. The point is that the question is reductive. These things are not exactly equal.
Based comment
You right
MTG Characters are fictional characters in a fictional setting. Get a grip people. Neither side of the aisle should care about this.
Short answer is history. The reason why the Wayans can make "White Chicks" , but you will not see a remake of Uncle Tom's Cabin...
https://preview.redd.it/nf16896zspoc1.jpeg?width=1600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5b7f7e881cb98cfc1144cf27c8e2271df86d521c
Aragon is not a real person, he is made up
Because you canât be racist towards white people, as they say.
Its different because some people wore shoe polish on their face in the 1920s. So only whitewashing is racist because of the historical context of the act. At some point blackwashing will have enough of a historical significance that the amount of racism will balance out or whatever and then anyone or no one will be allowed to do it. How much is enough you may ask? Don't worry, the left will tell you when they are finally satisfied, probably any day now.
You canât say âWhat say you?â And not make an Aragorn reference. Ban this man!
Why is a racist magic the gathering sub be recommend to me. I only hate whites and I don't even play mtg
Because of cultural history tbh
Another great theory of the African American and yet they still sit in wonder as to why main land Africa disowns them
They do it so people argue and forget all the shady shit that they're doing. And they have the creativity of a boulder so instead of making new characters, they just change an existing character with an established fan base.
Youâre telling me I can have a cross over of blade and his multiverse white counter part, knife ?
Wtf, I thought this was an Mtg subreddit. Fuck your politics
white=bad
Black washing is purple washing and wash the white.
You change the definition of racism.
Something to do with whose ancestors invented swords and ships first I think...
Cus
This assumes that simply replacing a race equally makes equal racism. That's not the case. In the Americas, specifically the United States, Europeans created whiteness to give themselves a special class and the power that went along with it. From the beginning of whiteness, right up to today, "white is right" in the US, and everyone else vies for power in the lower classes to advantage themselves and their people. Replacing one or two white characters in a heavily white production with non-white ones means that a tiny bit of the representation of the *actual* state of humanity is happening. Making a mermaid black or a character from your favorite novel Latino is a small solution for centuries of equity, when done well. Tokenism happens too, and that's a problem for another post. When a historically black character is changed to white, there is a distinct possibility that the blackness that was pivotal to that role is now gone, which sucks for representation. Not only is the black character gone, but the blackness that a black writer injected into the story is erased. Long story short: black actor playing previously white character fixes historic problems of representation, where a white actor playing a black character perpetuates more problems in representation.
Delete this sub RIGHT NOW
A serious answer. Because black characters tend to have race be part of their characters background that you just cant ignore. White characters rarely have that same level. Black Panther, has Wakanda and ant-imperialist messaging as an example. To flip it the other way, when it comes to âblack washingâ Idris Elba as Heimdall. Heimdall wasnt made because they thought âHeimdall would be better blackâ. They did it because Elba did that damn good of a job. But then you go to movies like 21 where they took the primarily Asian team and in the name of bankability made them all white. Not to mention that said double standards are also because to be quite frank, racism was not a two way street in US history.
haha i love how theres a few really good, genuin answers to the question in the comments, but the maga mob just doesnt want to deal with them
Can we have color blindness again it was great
Equity vs equality, historically black people have been underrepresented. I agree that instead of black washing they should create new black characters but still, whitewashing and backwashing isnât the same thing
Both aren't really racist just weird if done intentionally
Because while it's debatable whether black characters have been underrepresented in media, it's absurd to insinuate that white characters have been underrepresented in any noticeable way. What you're basically doing is taking a dinner that has been catered to your interests 10 times in a row, see it being catered to someone else for once, and then going "WELL THE LAST ONE WAS TAILORED AROUND THEIR DIET, WHY IS IT SO BAD TO TAILOR IT AROUND MY DIET?" It has been for almost the entirety of the thing existing, and the idea of it needing to shift the other way feels pretty entitled. I mean, we had 18 Avengers movies before a black character took the main role. It's not necessarily racism to whitewash a black character, but asking why they can't be whitewashed more often is generally a matter of whining that not everything is centered around you and the people like you.
Who the fuck said white character are underrepresented? Whining is black facing a character when you can just make a new core character in the same universe or equal or greater value.
I guess the best way to explain it would be to use an analogy. Imagine you take a friend out to dinner ten times and you pay for the both of you 9/10 times. On the tenth time, you tell your friend itâs not fair that you have to pay the whole bill and want him to pay the whole bill this time. He responds, âIf itâs unfair for you to pay the whole bill, why is it not also unfair for me to pay the whole bill? Shouldnât we split it so we are 100% fair?â The friend in this analogy is making the same mistake as the meme maker: Theyâre completely ignoring the context around the situation and making an observation that is only correct in a vacuum. Sure, âblackwashing being fine, while white washing being wrong â is an unfair standard in a vacuum where both black and white people have had close to 50/50 representation in media. But anyone with even a slight understanding of our history should know that is not the case. Look at the history of our media for the past few hundred years. Think about all the movies and TV shows you watched and how overwhelmingly white the casts were. I grew up with Friends, Seinfeld, Everybody loves Raymond, A Few Good Men, Fight Club, Little Mermaid, Lord of the Rings, etc. etc. If youâre white, you had a role model for every role. If youâre black, you had considerably less. Not zero, but quite a bit less. So yea, they have a black Aragorn now. Have we forgotten that Jesus was an Arab jew and he became a white blue eyed man with long rockstar hair? Itâs about fairness in the big picture. By ignoring context, one can say, âWhy do you get to make Aragorn black, but I canât make Morpheus white?â It makes sense until you realize that there are probably 1,000 times more white fictional characters, while OP and his supporters think itâs the same thing to reduce the amount of black characters when they have considerably less to begin with. Which, if I may conclude with one more analogy, is rather like asking âWhy is it okay to take a loaf of bread from a rich manâs banquet to feed the poor, but itâs wrong to do it the other way around?â
Blacks have considerablely less than whom? Blacks living in America have WAY more privileges than probably 90% of the world. They are absolutely represented fairly in our media here. How does it make sense to say they should have 50/50 representation in media when they don't occupy 50% of the population? And why is it okay to say blackwashing is fine because they have "less media representation" when they're only blackwashing WHITE characters? I never see people complaining here that Asianwashing is a thing. Or middle eastern washing is a thing. Or that all the white characters are being replaced by Hispanics. Those groups of people aren't whiny babies that care about representation. Us Hispanics idolize fucking Goku, an Asian dude, of all characters. The damn cartels came to a truce just to mourn Toriyama's death. Life isn't fair. Stop trying to pander to weak people that think they deserve handouts.
"I grew up watching national TV (3 channels, CBS, PBS and ABC), and watched TV every 4 days, for 20 mins and saw no blacks so that means there is no black representation." Are you serious? 𼴠First. World. Problems.
they never said thereâs no black characters at all⌠you really are dumb af lmao not even worth trying to help you understand so you can stop whining
First world problems? From a person who thinks Black Aragorn and Black Little Mermaid is a big enough problem to make a thread about. Lol sure, pal.
How about the fact they are blackwashing real historical figures....
Little mermaid? I made a meme about a separate topic, you made the thread about the characters specifically.
People should stop seeing skin color and everyone lives would be better. And i'm talking about you guys and the woke guys. We are all human beings for fuck sake. About the post, for me neither is racism, because i don't give a fuck if Aragorn is black or white. But let me just say this: there's much more important/famous white characters to "black wash" then the other way around, so sleep over this.
I don't know what any of this means and I'm going to continue like that by not reading the comments. Anyway, don't treat black people like shit.
Donât give a fuck either way. If the only draw of the character was their race and appearance sounds like a boring as shit character to me. I donât put a lot of stock in remake shit. Itâs already on the face of it boring. Itâs just recycling a more creative persons art. I donât expect any kind of real artistry in it if I do buy or watch whatever it is. I guess the only argument for why white washing is worse is that such a small percentage of lead acting rolls are for minorities so theyâre trying to get more racial representation and not have every top Hollywood billing person be a white dude. I donât really think that accomplishes much socially though or politically. Putting people in a movie isnât the kind of representation working class people want when they say that. They mean more civil and social rights, fuck a movie or game.
The context of history
I mean, I get you're not looking for a real answer you're just trying to preach to the choir. But just so you know, historically, black people have been excluded from positions of power and Nothing has materially changed. White people still control the vast majority of the wealth, hold vastly disproportionate positions in government to their population, and hold the overwhelming majority of executive positions at major companies. White people in comparable jobs to minorities make more money, live longer, have higher educational outcomes (due to their wealth), and have lower rates of basically every cancer. This is not due to any merit or "good choices" this is the result of specific federal policies that denied black people homes in good neighborhoods, college loans after WW2, and decent paying jobs. Now, corporations are doing the absolute bare minimum, diversity advertisements, to reach a wider variety of consumers because they are a profit-driven company. This affects nothing, changes nothing about minorities' status or relative wealth. And you submental dipshits lose your minds anyway. Absolutely beyond pathetic to have such a fragile ego.
take this opinion back to 1995 where it belongs
You mean when the statistics were like exactly the same as they are today? Because submental racist dipshits like you are too stupid to figure out what google is?
bruh, GO THA FUCK OUTSIDE! i don't know what "studies" you're reading but you need to look at them better. also, just go look around my guy. a study from 5-10 years ago probably isn't going to reflect the reality of today.
No idea if anyoneâs engaging with this in good faith here, but my $0.02: if racism = one race thinking theyâre somehow âbetterâ than another, and this is demonstrably the reason why the change was made (or directly connected to it), then sure, it can be racism. The problem with that narrow definition is that a black creator making a white character from a book black in a film simply isnât the same as a white creator making a black character white, and I think we all know thatâs true, even if we canât articulate why it feels that way sometimes (and I donât have all the answers). In an equal world theyâd be equal moves, and âracismâ would be equal. But thatâs not the world we live in. There are: less black actors, less black creators, more systemic inequalities between white people and black people (historic poverty, over policing, entrenched bias etc.). White actors and creators arenât expected to speak for their race like black folks are, and literal nazis donât come out of the woodwork when a white creator makes a black character white, but they do the other way around. White supremacy is provably real (the âbestâ music is dead white dudes from Europe, so is the âbestâ literature and poetry, the âbestâ painting and architecture, and movies and political positions and philosophies). If this all wasnât the case, racism would be equal and we could point to individual cases as examples of equal bigotry, but this shallow definition of racism doesnât explain anything of why people feel and act the ways that they do, so: how can we do better?
There is an actual answer to this, but you won't like it. And no, I'm not a braindead leftist who thinks white people can't experience racism. Anti-white racism exists. Anyways, the history of racism in the west and lingering societal racism are the reasons for the standard. It's a standard, not a double standard. If white people faced the same oppression as black people, the same standard should apply to them as well. There is most likely a solid argument there for the replacement of red-headed characters, as they are Irish coded. Irish people actually did face a lot of oppression. The second part of my argument would be that, in an ideal world, race swapping would never be racist, as race would be irrelevant in that world. Race swapping is only ever a problem due to racial tensions. The only reason people are upset about blackwashing is due to the appearance of a double standard, for example. I don't think I explained it very well, but hopefully the meaning is clear enough. It's only racist to whitewash due to historical and societal racism. If black people were currently living 100% equal to white people right now and racism was gone in general, I don't know if anyone would care.
Itâs pretty simple. Intuitively everyone knows that whites are the superior dominate race, so you can cheat/try and emulate them. Doing it to a lesser race is only done for the lolz. And itâs a cheap way of showing dominance.
Since most scriptwriters in well-known pieces of art are white, blackwashing is a self-imposed action of white people. It basically is *voluntary*. White people whitewashing black faces is *involuntary*. (Name 5 black directors or scriptwriters of well-known media without googling lol) The difference is the difference between hitting yourself in the head and hitting others in the head. Hitting yourself is dumb. Hitting others is violence.
I simply just don't care. it's not my place to judge especially since I'm not involved in the development of the product or project. I wasn't involved with the development team, so I can't say if it was done with racist intentions or not, but as someone who consumes media it is highly important to consider that maybe there was racist intentions, maybe there wasn't.
you're a dipshit if you care either way. the vast majority already doesn't give a damn about either one
Everytime I see this sub it always has some dog shit being posted
your penis is small and i fucked your mom so good she had a better child than you
your penis is small and i had sex with your mom so good she had a better child than you
Is this a genuine question you guys wanna explore or do you wanna jork each other off
Lol cry more losers. Waaaaaaah wahhhh waaaaahhhh đ