1188 réponses à ce sujet

[Battlebloodmage]

Within my personal perspective, could be different with others, focusing on the writing means - If you make a good and solid story, people will enjoy it regardless about a person's race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc... Ben Sisko, Kate Janeway, and Mara Jade are three good examples. While their stories do reflect gender and ethnicity, the selling point behind those characters was 'father/commander/emissary' - 'captain/lover/guardian' - 'assassin/mother/lover/anti-hero-hero'. Zahn was all about women empowerment; however, he never said, 'buy my book because its a female hero'.

Even though a studio may diversify a cast, the main driving point should be about how 'well' they are written.

"Dragon Age" should not be about having 'more' sexual diversity, as the thread applies, the game should be about the 'context' of the sexuality.

"Buffy the Vampire Slayer" is another great example. As Willow and Tara came together as a couple, the audience didn't focus on them being gay. People saw two loving individuals.

I just don't see what's the difference between the cast having diversity with good writing. Maybe the writing is just good and just happen to include a diversity. It's impossible to say that the cast happens to be diverse with intentionally diverse the cast. It's usually stand out more when you often only see a white cast and when the main cast happens to have diversity in it, it seems stand out and there has to be a reason for it. I'm not saying you, but just in general, it seems as outside the norm, so people have to justify a reason for it. 

 

What do you mean by "context" of the sexuality? Are you having problems with the number? The way the characters' sexuality being portrayed? I need to know more before commenting on it.

[Sylvianus]

That is what I have some problem with. What does it mean by focusing on the writing. Is it kinda implied that by focusing on the writing, would the cast be defaulted to white? What make them think that the writing wasn't just happened to have these minority characters? 

 

Personally, I'm not a fan of Star Wars, so I wouldn't watch it regardless, so having a diverse cast wouldn't mean that those who care about diversity would still watch it. 

 

Well, I'm not exactly a fan. But I liked it enough in the past. But I don't think I'm going to see that star wars movie. That seemed too bad in the trailer lol. I have a bad feeling about all the characters, especially the black guy with a big gun. He seems too cliche, too gross for my taste. No thanks.  Also rehashing the context around the empire and the rebels doesn't appeal to me at all. 

 

Also I agree with your last sentence by the way. 

 

Personally, I'm fine with any cast. I never complain. I just want good movies, there are many that only contain white people, and I enjoy them when it's  good. Though, i'm always happy when I see a diverse cast because I see less of that. But when it doesn't happen, i don't care. However, the more I see people complaining about having a diverse cast, the more I think it's a good thing, while before I was more neutral. Obviously, they don't consider it as normal, and they should. Seeing different things isn't a bad thing.

 

In True detective, the first season, you had only two white main protagonists I really enjoyed the show, so much that I watched it twice. In the second season, you had four white main protagonists, you had a woman and a gay , I liked both characters and was very unhappy that the gay guy was killed, since he was by far my favourite in the group. Yeah, I like the good, tortured badass guy type.   I still enjoyed the second season while it had a more diverse cast. Maybe less than the first season though. ( but only for different reasons )

 

If people truly care about the writting, as much as me, then they shouldn't care about the cast, unless it's because they see bad actors or such things. But there is no correlation with the writting, unless someone is willing to show me how. I'd be happy to learn. 

 

If a movie has bad writting, it's because it's badly written, not because it has a more diverse cast. 

[Heimdall]

I just don't see what's the difference between the cast having diversity with good writing. Maybe the writing is just good and just happen to include a diversity. It's impossible to say that the cast happens to be diverse with intentionally diverse the cast. It's usually stand out more when you often only see a white cast and when the main cast happens to have diversity in it, it seems stand out and there has to be a reason for it. I'm not saying you, but just in general, it seems as outside the norm, so people have to justify a reason for it.

These perceptions mostly arise from a political pressure to include not-white-men that sometimes results in the impression that a leading white man is being construed as a bad thing to be avoided and that no truly "progressive" film can ever star a white man. It's the impression that characters are being valued according to their socially perceived victim status rather than the quality of the character. And of course there's the emphasis on the character's non-white-male race/gender as a selling point in advertisement that promotes this impression.

There's an argument to be made that the emphasis placed on the race/gender of the character in the work and/or marketing is actually counterproductive to the supposed ultimate goal of normalizing their inclusion, as it turns them into an "other", set apart from the norm. This is what can make pandering a problem.

[Battlebloodmage]

Well, I'm not exactly a fan. But I liked it enough in the past. But I don't think I'm going to see that star wars movie. That seemed too bad in the trailer lol. I have a bad feeling about all the characters, especially the black guy with a big gun. He seems too cliche, too gross for my taste. No thanks.  Also rehashing the context around the empire and the rebels doesn't appeal to me at all. 

 

Also I agree with your last sentence by the way. 

 

Personally, I'm fine with any cast. I never complain. I just want good movies, there are many that only contain white people, and I enjoy them when it's  good. Though, i'm always happy when I see a diverse cast because I see less of that. But when it doesn't happen, i don't care. However, the more I see people complaining about having a diverse cast, the more I think it's a good thing, while before I was more neutral. Obviously, they don't consider it as normal, and they should. Seeing different things isn't a bad thing.

 

In True detective, the first season, you had only two white main protagonists I really enjoyed the show, so much that I watched it twice. In the second season, you had four white main protagonists, you had a woman and a gay , I liked both characters and was very unhappy that the gay guy was killed, since he was by far my favourite in the group. Yeah, I like the good, tortured badass guy type.   I still enjoyed the second season while it had a more diverse cast. Maybe less than the first season though. ( but only for different reasons )

 

If people truly care about the writting, as much as me, then they shouldn't care about the cast, unless it's because they see bad actors or such things. But there is no correlation with the writting, unless someone is willing to show me how. I'd be happy to learn. 

 

If a movie has bad writting, it's because it's badly written, not because it has a more diverse cast. 

I could care less about the race or the sexuality of the cast. I would only find it a problem when they try to change the races of the characters for commercial reasons and stray away from the authentic of the story. Gods of Egypt featured a bunch of white characters, 47 Ronins were changed to focus on a half white half Asian instead of the Asian cast for the show to even get into production, 21 was an Asian cast in adaptation and turned white in the movie adaptation, "insert anime Hollywood adaption", The Last Airbender has all white cast on a heavy Asian influence culture, strangely enough, Asians are all extra in the movie. Orange is the New Black wasn't gonna get made if the main protagonist wasn't white. These are the things I'm against, it wasn't about good writing, it was specifically about typecasting and pandering to the mainstream audience. 

 

If a piece of work is actually use good writing and cast it based on the setting or writers' intention then I don't mind the race or the gender of the material. Pandering happens in many pieces of works, it wasn't a problem because it's being considered the norm. You don't see anything out of place when you see the majority on film. I personally don't have a problem with it, it's their decisions, but I just find it to be hypocritical when they choose to "pander" to the other audience then it's because a problem. 

[Battlebloodmage]

These perceptions mostly arise from a political pressure to include not-white-men that sometimes results in the impression that a leading white man is being construed as a bad thing to be avoided and that no truly "progressive" film can ever star a white man. It's the impression that characters are being valued according to their socially perceived victim status rather than the quality of the character. And of course there's the emphasis on the character's non-white-male race/gender as a selling point in advertisement that promotes this impression.

There's an argument to be made that the emphasis placed on the race/gender of the character in the work and/or marketing is actually counterproductive to the supposed ultimate goal of normalizing their inclusion, as it turns them into an "other", set apart from the norm. This is what can make pandering a problem.

White males are being promoted as the selling point everywhere. When you look at the main characters in the media in general. It's just the notion of something people being used to now being challenged when a piece of fiction is not aligned with how they perceive thing supposed to be, like there has to be a reason why a minority is the lead or why that character isn't white or male or something like that. That is why the majority doesn't usually see it as a problem with the lack of diversity, they are the norm, they are used to see the norm, they are used to be the norm. They can't understand why other groups want to see diversity. They may see that it shouldn't pander and would watch it with minority ignoring how almost all the media has already featuring them. They see the piece of work as pandering exactly because that piece of work go against their expectation of what the norm is supposed to be, so there has to be a reason why things happen the way it is. They must be pandering to the minority because why else would the main characters aren't straight white males?

[Heimdall]

The Last Airbender has all white cast on a heavy Asian influence culture, strangely enough, Asians are all extra in the movie.

Not the best example. The lead actor was apparently part Native American, the two characters from the Inuit influenced culture were lily white, the Fire Lord and his son were Indian (While the brother and uncle respectively of the two characters was played by a white guy). And the whole thing was written and directed by an Indian director.

I'd put the bizarrely nonsensical casting in that film down more to the director's known capacity for making nonsensical bad movies than anything else.

[Battlebloodmage]

Not the best example. The lead actor was apparently part Native American, the two characters from the Inuit influenced culture were lily white, the Fire Lord and his son were Indian (While the brother and uncle respectively of the two characters was played by a white guy). And the whole thing was written and directed by an Indian director.

I'd put the bizarrely nonsensical casting in that film down more to the director's known capacity for making nonsensical bad movies than anything else.

You think that the audience will check wikipedia to see if someone is 1/16 Indian or something like that? People like half-Asians in Hollywood talk about not being white enough or not Asian enough to play a certain roles. It's more about how certain actors look white enough for the role. The director is Indian, so there's a certain biased view in how they cast. 

 

He makes bad movies, but it's one thing if it's an individual case, but Hollywood itself has a history of whitewashing characters' races, especially in lead roles. 

[Hellion Rex]

You think that the audience will check wikipedia to see if someone is 1/16 Indian or something like that? People like half-Asians in Hollywood talk about not being white enough or not Asian enough to play a certain roles. It's more about how certain actors look white enough for the role. The director is Indian, so there's a certain biased view in how they cast. 

 

He makes bad movies, but it's one thing if it's an individual case, but Hollywood itself has a history of whitewashing characters' races, especially in lead roles. 

Even still, it was hardly an all white cast. That much is blatantly obvious.

[Battlebloodmage]

Even still, it was hardly an all white cast. That much is blatantly obvious.

The main cast is all white while the villain is the minority. 

[Heimdall]

White males are being promoted as the selling point everywhere. When you look at the main characters in the media in general. It's just the notion of something people being used to now being challenged when a piece of fiction is not aligned with how they perceive thing supposed to be, like there has to be a reason why a minority is the lead or why that character isn't white or male or something like that. That is why the majority doesn't usually see it as a problem with the lack of diversity, they are the norm, they are used to see the norm, they are used to be the norm. They can't understand why other groups want to see diversity. They may see that it shouldn't pander and would watch it with minority ignoring how almost all the media has already featuring them. They see the piece of work as pandering exactly because that piece of work go against their expectation of what the norm is supposed to be, so there has to be a reason why things happen the way it is. They must be pandering to the minority because why else would the main characters aren't straight white males?

Note that when I speak of promotion, I'm speaking of how media sometimes explicitly taut the inclusion of a non-white-cis-gendered-male specifically for their non-white-cis-gendered-maleness as a positive.

White males aren't being promoted for being white males precisely because they are the norm. Their white maleness can't be used as a selling point precisely because it is an accepted norm. If a film did actively promote the fact that the character was a white male as a reason to see the movie, such promotion would be called out as misogynist and white supremacist. This is because white males are already perceived as a norm such promotion is considered unneeded, or worse, seen to promote white men as better than everyone else.

The problem is that the push for diversity can go too far, to the point where an ideology of inclusiveness becomes an ideology of excluding white men. This is becoming a problem with the identity politics of the social justice movement more broadly. As many white men, especially those of low socioeconomic status, are disaffected by a movement they feel vilifies them and proudly boasts that it will never ever fight for them.  They're frustrated by an ideology that they feel demands they show empathy while showing none to them in return.

This is part of the backlash you see to the pandering to social justice in media.  The backlash is that of an indiscriminate angry mob and attacks anything that seems to overvalue diversity. That's why you see it toward even films that don't actively promote diversity in their marketing or content.

You can play the "majorities don't understand the perspective of minorities" card, and I would agree that's a factor, but I would also suggest that the same is true in reverse and the kneejerk tendency to label any critical view as racist bigotry is part of the problem.

[Steelcan]

The main cast is all white while the villain is the minority.

well TIL Zuko was a bad guy

[Colonelkillabee]

Well, you once mentioned that you're a tall guy so I figured it was a good match.


And I'm a platypus.

Yea, I'm six foot four. I'm used to seeing women below my eyelevel. Honestly, seeing women on or above my eyelevel is so weird and rare that it throws me off. I much prefer short women.

[BansheeOwnage]

Technically, Solas doesn't count, as he was our "ally" when we had the chance to romance him, what we don't have is a LI that begins straight in the other side of the board.

So it would be someone like Loghain? They'd probably need to defect to our side pretty early on if there is going to be a meaningful relationship.

 

Ok, you two better stop before the mods come in, now with all due respect, being politically correct doesn't mean we ignore science and logic, I can accept someone changes it's gender and treat him/her like what (s)he wants to be... but chromosomes matter to me, I wouldn't date a transwoman.

It's much more complicated than chromosomes. Look up "intersex". There was one case of an intersex person who identified as a woman, looked like a woman, had functioning female anatomy, but discovered that she had a Y chromosome from an unrelated blood test. Nature is complicated.

 

Although I respect that they have psychological issues, due to a conflict between the mind and body, the reality is that transgender-females are still male. Transgender-males are still females. Regardless about how many drugs they take, while also the surgery they undergo, the reality is that they were biologically born as a female or male. You cannot change your DNA. Transgenders, psychologically, believe they identity with the opposite gender. According to what I have read in psychology journals, the vast majority of transgender teens snap out of it by adulthood. We should be patient with transgender teens and adults. Doctors also don't know the long-term affects of taking hormones; thus, transgenders could be causing themselves biological and psychological damage. We currently lack enough research.

It's funny, we're supposedly on a site that is meant to be inclusive, and being hateful to groups is supposedly worthy of moderation, but people can paint an entire group as actually just having psychological issues that the might grow out of, and that's fine or something. Honestly, I'm more likely to have my post moderated for calling out the mods than any other post, no matter how much vitriol is in it.

 

So I'm finally reading Magekiller and am already predicting that if the main characters, Marius and Tessa, are in DA4, Marius at least will be a LI. And if he's going to be a bisexual LI, he's going to stick to Bioware's trope of bisexual guys who are more into women and have a canonical female LI in their past. He and Calpernia have a romantic history. If he's a LI and if Calpernia is alive and a significant role in the next game, it's going to grind my gears if part of his character arc is dealing with his past with her.

 

So I'm going to hope he's a straight LI if he is indeed a romanceable companion.

 

 

Tessa, on the other hand, has been shown to be attracted to women. And she looks to be a rogue, so she might again be a Bioware trope of roguish charming bisexual companion.

I'm hoping that neither will be companions, but rather side-characters we might run into. And that was before I read what you just said, because that makes them even more unappealing to me. Especially Tessa, personally. I don't even know much about her personality past being a mercenary (which immediately loses some points for me), but I have a very poor track record with female rogues who are at least partially into women. Leliana, Isabela, and Sera have been my least favourite characters in the franchise. It would be cool to have a woman who's into women who I could actually relate to.

[Battlebloodmage]

Note that when I speak of promotion, I'm speaking of how media sometimes explicitly taut the inclusion of a non-white-cis-gendered-male specifically for their non-white-cis-gendered-maleness as a positive.

White males aren't being promoted for being white males precisely because they are the norm. Their white maleness can't be used as a selling point precisely because it is an accepted norm. If a film did actively promote the fact that the character was a white male as a reason to see the movie, such promotion would be called out as misogynist and white supremacist. This is because white males are already perceived as a norm such promotion is considered unneeded, or worse, seen to promote white men as better than everyone else.

The problem is that the push for diversity can go too far, to the point where an ideology of inclusiveness becomes an ideology of excluding white men. This is becoming a problem with the identity politics of the social justice movement more broadly. As many white men, especially those of low socioeconomic status, are disaffected by a movement they feel vilifies them and proudly boasts that it will never ever fight for them.

This is part of the backlash you see to the pandering to social justice in media. The backlash is that of an indiscriminate angry mob and attacks anything that seems to overvalue diversity. That's why you see it toward even films that don't actively promote diversity in their marketing or content.

You can play the "majorities don't understand the perspective of minorities" card, and I would agree that's a factor, but I would also suggest that the same is true in reverse and the kneejerk tendency to label any critical view as racist bigotry is part of the problem.

Give me some instances where inclusiveness excluding white men? 

 

They don't need to promote it because it's the already the selling by having them in it because they are being viewed as cash makers, no point in promoting something that has already promoted itself and that's why movies keep following the same pattern and become a catch-22 where they see white males as profitable and minorities don't get the chance to prove themselves, so they keep using the white males. As I have already given you that some movies wouldn't even be in production without including white characters in it. Is there any time where including a white character would have stopped production? Any film where they intentionally avoid white characters for the purpose of avoiding them? 

[Colonelkillabee]

Lol I knew that moment of peace in the thread couldn't last that long, lol.

All I'm gonna say on the subject of what is a man and a woman is I go by the biological definition. Meaning someone that is of the sex that produces eggs (female) and of the sex that fertilizes (male). Of the sex, meaning if they have a disability that makes them infertile or keeps them from functioning normally, that is irrelevant as it is simply that, a disability. Abnormality, born defective, or something made them defective later on. Like was said, social construction of labels has no bearing on biology.

THAT SAID, in a social environment, since we are social creatures, I will call you whatever your chosen pronoun is. For instance, Krem I call he. Not always in the past, but that's mainly because some people are so defensive in these conversations and get so hostile that I'm practically required to go against them sometimes when common sense is defied. In a debate on the subject when talking about biology, I'd call him a she. In any other setting however, such as this where we are just talking about characters, I'll call Krem or whoever whatever they want to be called. That's just common courtesy. Do I agree with it? Honestly, no. But, not every discussion needs to be a platform for disagreeing with something that isn't even on topic.

[Steelcan]

If I understand him correctly Heimdall is saying that it is as much down to perception as it is to hard facts or any other rationale.

[Battlebloodmage]

If I understand him correctly Heimdall is saying that it is as much down to perception as it is to hard facts or any other rationale.

It's all down to perception since people often draw their perception from what they experience from the world, and those who lacks the perspection of a minority may not see why it's a big deal and dismiss it instead of understanding why they want to see characters like themselves in films. I have many friends who were dismissing racism even exist many times. I try to put myself in the other group's shoes and I can see some of their thought process but a lot of others just use their own perception to judge things without really see it from the other people's point of view. 

[Artona]

 

 

Gods of Egypt featured a bunch of white characters

To be fair, gods don't have race, right ? Besides, Marvel's Thor had black guy, Idris Elba, playing (nomen-omen) Heimdall. Funny enough, the same black guy will be playing Roland Deschain in the coming adaption of S. King's "Dark Tower", while Roland was written as white character. 

Btw, I like the idea of gay Luke; it makes me think of another great warrior, who was probably gay - the Great Alexander. 

[Battlebloodmage]

So it would be someone like Loghain? They'd probably need to defect to our side pretty early on if there is going to be a meaningful relationship.

 

It's much more complicated than chromosomes. Look up "intersex". There was one case of an intersex person who identified as a woman, looked like a woman, had functioning female anatomy, but discovered that she had a Y chromosome from an unrelated blood test. Nature is complicated.

 

It's funny, we're supposedly on a site that is meant to be inclusive, and being hateful to groups is "supposedly" worthy of moderation, but people can paint an entire group as actually just having psychological issues that the might grow out of, and that's fine or something. Honestly, I'm more likely to have my post moderated for calling out the mods than any other post, no matter how much vitriol is in it.

 

I'm hoping that neither will be companions, but rather side-characters we might run into. And that was before I read what you just said, because that makes them even more unappealing to me. Especially Tessa, personally. I don't even know much about her personality past being a mercenary (which immediately loses some points for me), but I have a very poor track record with female rogues who are at least partially into women. Leliana, Isabela, and Sera have been my least favourite characters in the franchise. It would be cool to have a woman who's into women who I could actually relate to.

Just wanna say that it happens to me when the mods often moderated my posts despite there are many people making more offensive comments sometimes. I thought the mods have it out for me sometimes. lol, Aria is a rogue masculine Asari that prefers the women. It's a shame she or someone like her wasn't a romance. 

[Sylvianus]

If I understand him correctly Heimdall is saying that it is as much down to perception as it is to hard facts or any other rationale.

 

Well, okay. I removed my post, since perception is his point. I thought he was saying that there was an emphasis on race / gender in marketting, and i was curious to know what. 

[Heimdall]

It's all down to perception, and those who lacks the perspection of a minority may not see why it's a big deal and dismiss it instead of understanding why they want to see characters like themselves in films. I have many friends who were dismissing racism many times. I try to put myself in the other group's shoes and I can see some of their thought process but a lot of others just use their own perception to judge things without really see it from the other people's point of view.

I'd argue that many or even most do actually understand why minorities want to see more of themselves in films. It isn't about that. It's more that they feel this movement is promoted through the devaluing or even vilification of the type of protagonists that THEY connect with. There's a reason this anger is particularly prevalent when a previously white male character is changed in a new iteration as has happened in superhero comics, they feel like a character they have loved and identify with has been arbitrarily changed to suit a political agenda, that their own connection to that character is being dismissed (The counter argument that they should be able to connect with the character regardless of race or gender comes across as incredibly hypocritical, because if that were the case then what was the point of changing the character at all? My personal view on this subject is that diversity in comic heroes is better served by the introduction of new characters than the changing of old ones).

Empathy is good, but I find that people who promote it towards one group often neglect it towards groups they view less sympathetically.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

So if a story tries to appeal to people besides you, heterosexual white male, it's "pandering"?

 

If it's meant to appeal to straight white guys, it's a universally great story that "speaks to the human spirit," because everyone should be able to relate to stories by, for, and filled with straight white men? But if it includes women or blacks or gays, then it's a story that can only appeal to women or blacks or gays, and no one else? Stories about straight white men are about all of humanity and appeal to everyone, but stories about women and minorities speak only to those women and minorities?

 

I'm sorry, but do you have any idea how arrogant and hypocritical that sounds?

 

Did it ever occur to you, "hetereosexual-white man," that women (half the population) and non-white people (a decent percent of the population) might also have trouble identifying with stories for straight white men and not them or their experiences? And that Hollywood and the video game industry already "panders" to straight white men since the vast majority of movies and video games in the history of forever always conscientiously appealed to your tastes, but when they broaden that to try to appeal to other people too (people sorely underrepresented and explored), suddenly "that's pandering"?

 

Not to mention the either/or fallacy that movies and video games can EITHER tell a "strong story" OR include women/blacks/gays. Like, according to you it's not possible to tell a great story AND have characters and situations that appeal to people of different genders, ethnicity, and sexual orientations.

 

Devil's Advocate - If what you say is true, then why is only the Western entertainment industry doing such a thing and being criticized for being not inclusive if they don't do it ?

 

If you look at Asian entertainment industry, there is next to no straight white characters or black characters or homosexuals unless if it is absolutely necessary for them to be there because its part of the story or the script. Asian movies and Asian video games have no racial or sexual inclusiveness yet they get no attention and no criticism from the progressive inclusive crowd ?

 

What, the world is a lot bigger than USA, Canada, Australia and Europe. Surely you people realize that, yes ?

 

Where's the consistency ? Or is the inclusive crowd only interested in policing Western, especially American entertainment industry ?

 

I am an Asian Indian living in Malaysia and I see no inclusiveness in Indian films, in Malay films, in Arabic films and in Chinese films yet where is the outrage of the progressive inclusive crowd ? Why give preferential treatment to non-Western (especially non-American) entertainment ? I mean, India produces the most number of films in the world per annum, far more than Hollywood but where is the inclusiveness crowd at Bollywood or Kollywood or Tollywood ? Where is the equal treatment ?

 

And do not give me the "Western is global" justification. Bollywood films are global. So are Chinese and Japanese films. However, you will never hear a peep from the progressive inclusive crowd demanding the Japanese or the Chinese or the Indians be more inclusive.  Ever since I noticed this discrepancy, I have been waiting for criticisms towards the Indian and East Asian entertainment but so far, nothing.

 

Heck, you people lap up all the Hindi movies, Hong Kong martial arts movies, Japanese games, Japanese comics and Korean romance dramas, Korean songs, even though they give zero f*cks about inclusiveness. Yet, if a Western video game or European film does this there will be a riot. I mean, shouldn't there be massive protests by the inclusive advocates and a subsequent ban or hate campaign on these creative works ?

 

Isn't it rather hypocritical ?

 

Next, I have to ask - What the heck is white ? You do know that the term "white" can cover a large group of very diverse people, each with their unique culture and identity. Examples include English, Australians, German, Belgian, Polish, Russian, Norwegian, Dutch, Scottish, Irish, Italians, French, etc. Sometimes Hispanics, Jews and East Asians are considered as white.

 

Doesn't that mean that the white man and white woman encompass a large and diverse group ? Shouldn't they be represented ? How many Hollywood films have I seen about the Polish ? or Norwegians ? or Belgians ? I mean when you say straight white men, they can include straight white Jewish men, straight white Polish men, straight white Czech men, straight white Irish men.

 

You do know that the straight Jew was subjected to the Holocaust at one point, yes ? You do know the suffering the straight Poles have endured in their nations under communism right ? You do know how the straight Irish were slaves, hmm ? How are these people privileged exactly ? Why shouldn't they be represented by the Western media, which is a region they live in ?

 

The Western's approach to labeling people according people to their skin color is thoroughly idiotic. Its like when you ignoramuses call everybody from an Arab to an Indian to an African  to a Malay to a Cambodian as Brown people. You do know that this approach is very discriminatory because it undermines the unique identity and culture that people with Brown skin might have right ? Of course you do. However, why is this not applied to Whites ?

 

Where is the consistency here ? Why the hypocrisy ?

 

Like I stated, this is a Devil's Advocate. However, you should realize that you are being highly ignorant, inconsistent and hypocritical here, especially since you needed an Asian Indian guy to point out that whites are not one homogeneous group, that there are whites that not represented at all in the mainstream Western entertainment and that entertainment industries in other parts of the world are not representative or inclusive.

 

 

No, she doesn't.

 

But she's still a woman.

 

Mae is sexually a man in the same way Krem is sexually a female. The fact that Mae feels that he is a woman (and chooses to identify as such) and Krem feels that she is a man (and chooses to identify as such) does not change that.

 

Its like saying that a human who considers himself or herself is Otherkin is Otherkin. Yes they can do that but they are still biologically a human, despite the fact they might feel that they are Elvenkin or Dragonkin or Lionkin or Foxkin. Heck, I can feel that I am attack helicopter kin and demand everybody to address me by my helicopter name, which is no biggie, but it does not change the fact that I am biologically human.

[Battlebloodmage]

I'd argue that many or even most do actually understand why minorities want to see more of themselves in films. It isn't about that. It's more that they feel this movement is promoted through the devaluing or even vilification of the type of protagonists that THEY connect with. There's a reason this anger is particularly prevalent when a previously white male character is changed in a new iteration as has happened in superhero comics, they feel like a character they have loved and idolized has been arbitrarily changed to suit a political agenda (The counter argument that they should be able to connect with the character regardless of race comes across as incredibly hypocritical, because if that were the case then what was the point of changing the character at all? My personal view on this subject is that diversity in comic heroes is better served by the introduction of new characters than the changing of old ones).

Empathy is good, but I find that people who promote it towards one group often neglect it towards groups they view less sympathetically.

There's a reason why it only happens in the comic books instead of blockbuster movies. It's much less of a risk to experiment with it while blockbuster movies need white males to lead since they can't just redo if it fails. At most, it's an assemble team where one character gets their race changes or a side character gets their race changes. When the race got changed, it's usually White to Black. Asians in particular are usually stuck with kung-fu or some funny weird comic relief characters. 

 

Anyway, I still haven't seen any inclusion of characters actually excluding white males on purpose unlike the other way around. This has really gone way off topic. I'll just stop here. 

[Artona]

To be precise, slogan "heterosexual white male" should be changed into "heterosexual english speaking male" . The Witcher is probably the first (or second, if you count Lem's sci-fi books) popculture hit with polish perspective. 

[vbibbi]

I'm hoping that neither will be companions, but rather side-characters we might run into. And that was before I read what you just said, because that makes them even more unappealing to me. Especially Tessa, personally. I don't even know much about her personality past being a mercenary (which immediately loses some points for me), but I have a very poor track record with female rogues who are at least partially into women. Leliana, Isabela, and Sera have been my least favourite characters in the franchise. It would be cool to have a woman who's into women who I could actually relate to.

Yeah at his point I'm not too keen on either of them being companions. Marius is very stoic and brooding and seems like a human version of Fenris, except with no hatred of mages as much as a pragmatic view of magic. Tessa is a business oriented, slightly more mature Isabela. IMO of course, but neither is revolutionary for prospective companions in the next game.