Can Diversity Casting cause more harm than good?

[worstblogever]

Poll asks the wrong question... why is it diversity casting instead of just casting? Does the process suddenly change if the performer isn't white? Or straight? Or male?

Yeah, when MacBeth with Denzel Washington came out, I don't think any serious person could call that "diversity casting", because it's, "he wins roles like that because Denzel's more talented than everyone else."

[Username taken]

It's true, it was unfair to frame it as black people are in a position of privilege rather than of greater privilege than some. My apologies. Clearly the privileged position is and likely will be for some time white folk like myself. I am still not comfortable in wading into the classification of latino or black folk because I feel even if I tried in earnest it would be a potential landmine, and I'm sure there's probably a pretty healthy debate on some of those issues within their own communities (let alone among outsiders).

It's all good.

It's a good debate to have.

[Besouro]

There has a big push for more diverse casting in movies and television in the past several years. While this has led to more roles for people of color, LGBTQ+, women and other marginalized groups, it has also led to a lot of backlash. As a result, there is always controversy whenever someone who isn't a straight, white male gets a major role. But there are other areas of the discussion that aren't talked about, like tokenism and roles that don't really match the person playing it. Here's an article talking about it:
https://www.newsweek.com/when-divers...pinion-1736903

Does diversity casting cause more harm than good?

(1) NO......it does NOT do more harm when the nature of the actor [in this case the actor's race] does not contradict the role being played by said actor SPECIFICALLY roles directly based on bio-geography. For instance, there is no such thing as a native Chinese man who is Caucasian [white actors playing Asian characters] or native sub-saharan African who is Chinese or native real life historical British Queen who played by a black actress or a black actors playing a Norse Gods [MCU Thor movies] or white actors playing an Egyptian gods, etc.

(2) YES...it can do more harm SPECIFICALLY when racebending is unnecessary and forcefully applied in a context that directly contradicts the character being played and/or world within which the character exists. See examples in (1).

(3) NO.... diversity casting does NOT cause more harm where the race or religion or sexuality has no bearing on the character/s being played by said actor/s and the story involved especially in purely fictional worlds or stories.

(4) Adaptations- Creative liberties VS Respectful authenticity to source material....this is where all (1), (2) and (3) split hairs heavily dependant on the context of the story being adapted. In my opinion,...

4a)... this depends on the character descriptions and/or illustrations in the source material whereby even when the fictional characters not human being described/ illustrated to have a Caucasoid aesthetic then Caucasian actors should play the roles, where the described aesthetic is Negroid therefore Black actor/s should play the role, etc.

However, where the descriptions/ illustrations the characters in the source material have NO basis on or to any real human race, gender or sexuality....here, anyone can play the character thus diversity is welcomed.

4b)...Creative liberties can be applied perhaps where ...

-i.....the physical description of character/s in the source material cannot be adapted to animation or live action fot any myriad of reasons [stringent budget or violate socio-cultural norms, overly degrading/ offensive, etc]

-ii.... aspects of the story is outdated

-iii.... changes help enhance the story by adding new CONTRIBUTIVE angles to expand and compliment the plot. Here is the perfect time to point out Finn's arc in StarWars The Last Jedi/ TLJ which made ZERO CONTRIBUTION to the central plot in contrast to Peter Jacksons expansion of the Hobbit adaptation in a bigger trilogy where the added angles all enhanced the central tale more contributively and/ meaningfully compared to Finn's arc in TLJ. During such plot enhancement, new characters can or are created who can be of any race or gender as long as their existence in the story does NOT create direct contradictions in the source material.

-iv... spin-offs whereby the originate source material is used as a foundation to create original stories with new characters (or not) within the same literary mythos/ universe which can go in its own direction within the pre-established plot OR separate direction all together OR continuing as a legacy AFTER the original plot concluded...just as long as this spin off story and characters do NOT contradict the original story and with the new characters diversity can be applied.

Creative liberties can also make changes to the direct plot in terms of re-arranging some events in the linearity of the plot but

(5)...NO!....Diversity does NOT do more harm when the diverse characters are original creations and/or legacy characters.

5a)...In the case of LEGACY CHARACTERS, the original characters remains intact while allowing introduction of a new character who can be diverse (different race, religion, nationality, gender and/or sexuality) and can bring new perspective.

5b) ... In the case of non-White Original Characters, its simply WHY NOT?!? ...Original characters can LITERALLY be ANYBODY. For instance, it's entirely possible to create original characters in adaptations who did NOT exist in the source material; again ...as long as they are NOT contradictory.

And of course Original characters can also have the inherent power to exist in their own literary universe or independently.

- - - - - - NOTE...(1) to (4) still applies to 5a)!!!! - - - - - -

To answer the question....it depends on the context of each movie or series respectively.

[Besouro]

Does diversity casting cause more harm than good?

(1) NO......it does NOT do more harm when the nature of the actor [in this case the actor's race] does not contradict the role being played by said actor SPECIFICALLY roles directly based on bio-geography. For instance, there is no such thing as a native Chinese man who is Caucasian [white actors playing Asian characters] or native sub-saharan African who is Chinese or native real life historical British Queen who played by a black actress or a black actors playing a Norse Gods [MCU Thor movies] or white actors playing an Egyptian gods, etc.

(2) YES...it can do more harm SPECIFICALLY when racebending is unnecessary and forcefully applied in a context that directly contradicts the character being played and/or world within which the character exists. See examples in (1).

(3) NO.... diversity casting does NOT cause more harm where the race or religion or sexuality has no bearing on the character/s being played by said actor/s and the story involved especially in purely fictional worlds or stories.

(4) Adaptations- Creative liberties VS Respectful authenticity to source material....this is where all (1), (2) and (3) split hairs heavily dependant on the context of the story being adapted. In my opinion,...

4a)... this depends on the character descriptions and/or illustrations in the source material whereby even when the fictional characters not human being described/ illustrated to have a Caucasoid aesthetic then Caucasian actors should play the roles, where the described aesthetic is Negroid therefore Black actor/s should play the role, etc.

However, where the descriptions/ illustrations the characters in the source material have NO basis on or to any real human race, gender or sexuality....here, anyone can play the character thus diversity is welcomed.

4b)...Creative liberties can be applied perhaps where ...

-i.....the physical description of character/s in the source material cannot be adapted to animation or live action fot any myriad of reasons [stringent budget or violate socio-cultural norms, overly degrading/ offensive, etc]

-ii.... aspects of the story is outdated

-iii.... changes help enhance the story by adding new CONTRIBUTIVE angles to expand and compliment the plot. Here is the perfect time to point out Finn's arc in StarWars The Last Jedi/ TLJ which made ZERO CONTRIBUTION to the central plot in contrast to Peter Jacksons expansion of the Hobbit adaptation in a bigger trilogy where the added angles all enhanced the central tale more contributively and/ meaningfully compared to Finn's arc in TLJ. During such plot enhancement, new characters can or are created who can be of any race or gender as long as their existence in the story does NOT create direct contradictions in the source material.

-iv... spin-offs whereby the originate source material is used as a foundation to create original stories with new characters (or not) within the same literary mythos/ universe which can go in its own direction within the pre-established plot OR separate direction all together OR continuing as a legacy AFTER the original plot concluded...just as long as this spin off story and characters do NOT contradict the original story and with the new characters diversity can be applied.

Creative liberties can also make changes to the direct plot in terms of re-arranging some events in the linearity of the plot but

(5)...NO!....Diversity does NOT do more harm when the diverse characters are original creations and/or legacy characters.

5a)...In the case of LEGACY CHARACTERS, the original characters remains intact while allowing introduction of a new character who can be diverse (different race, religion, nationality, gender and/or sexuality) and can bring new perspective.

5b) ... In the case of non-White Original Characters, its simply WHY NOT?!? ...Original characters can LITERALLY be ANYBODY. For instance, it's entirely possible to create original characters in adaptations who did NOT exist in the source material; again ...as long as they are NOT contradictory.

And of course Original characters can also have the inherent power to exist in their own literary universe or independently.

- - - - - - NOTE...(1) to (4) still applies to 5a)!!!! - - - - - -

To answer the question....it depends on the context of each movie or series respectively.

On the issue of RACE/ SEXUALITY/ GENDER-BENDING....This should only be allowed where...

(1) ...the character's race, gender or sexuality has no impact, no baring or contradiction in the lore/ pre-established fictional verse/ source material. For instance, Afro-Samurai, Blade, Black Panther, Misty Knight, Luke Cage should never be played by any actor who is NOT black....same thing for Viking Norse Gods should never be played by non-white actors and so on.

(2) ...context is given to USE the race/gender/sexuality as PART of the story is is fitting where the character is perhaps a shapeshifter or where multiverse alternates are part of the plot. Regarding the latter, the multiverse angle MUST BE literally part of the story.

Race/gender/sexuality-bending should NOT be applied to media based on REAL LIFE people. For instance, it would be idiotic to have a white actor play King Shaka Zulu and yet a mini-series about British queen Anne Boleyn was made....played by a Black actress which is VERY WRONG and frankly vividly disrespectful.

Soooo here we go into some characters ...

(A) LITTLE MERMAID...Should or Can Ariel the little mermaid be black or Asian?

My answer...YES

Why?.... Because the myths of mermaids are NOT confined to only Europe. Mermaids occur across made cultures and races of people around the world therefore a fictional tale about a singing mermaid can be played by an actress of any race. The extra fact in the case of Little Mermaid is that it in an entire fictional world where A mermaid tale from Asia can be played by a South America n

(B) TOLKIEN-VERSE...Should there be non-white characters in adapting Tolkien mythos/ books?

My answer...YES and NO!...

Why?.... Depends on whether the non-white characters are original characters and do NOT contradict Tolkien's original works. To clarify, race/gender bending pre-established Tolkien characters is a massive HELL NO.... Original characters NOT created by Tolkien but within and do NOT contradict pre-established lore in Tolkien-verse- HELL YES!

(C) GHOST IN THE SHELL/ GITS... Should Motoko Kusanagi be played by a white woman like Scarlet Johannson did in the live action movie?

C1) Some will say YES... because the character is a full on cyborg robot which can be played can anyone because a robot has no racial identity and the fact that the story occurs in the far futuristic Japan lend to the notion that Japan would be a lot more diverse in that setting.

C2) Some will say NO... because the character is specified as Asian Japanese in identity and it sends a terrible message that a "Caucasoid" aesthetic or body is presumably "better" and more enhanced compared to Asian in a story where the human mind of an Asian Japanese is inside the robot body pf a Caucasoid aesthetic design.

Both points have a strong merit to which i agree BUT i ultimately lean to C2 [the latter]... WHY?... Because it was never stated or shown (other than the lead character Motoko) that raceswapping robot bodies was a norm within the story.

I say that by comparing GITS to ALTERED CARBON where its established that human minds can swapping across different racially aesthetic bodies was the norm which is absent in GITS.

(D) FULL METAL ALCHEMIST/FMA- Should Asian Japanese actors play the White characters?

D1) Some will say YES...because Japan is a very racially mono-ethnic society and population therefore near impossible to find white actors in Japan to play live action adaptations of White Caucasian anime characters which should allow racebending in the casting.

D2) Other will say NO....because Japan can afford to find white actors from abroad because there are very many Daytime soap opera series really good actors who was VERY AFFORDABLE globally and will quickly take such a job for exposure and wider repertoire. The lice action adaptation can be filmed in English and then dubbed into Japanese like its been done to Western Hollywood movies and series showing in Japan. This way, it solves both issues.... authenticity to source material is maintained and Japanese audiences can still watch and understand the movie.

My answer....D2).

[Kirby101]

Idris Elba was fine as Heimdall. As is Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie.

[CSTowle]

I can see pushback if it were say a historical show based on Norse/Viking history and there's diverse casting with no explanation. It wouldn't bother me, but I can understand where it would bother some. In Disney's superhero universe the Norse gods are actually some sort of aliens/interdimensional beings/advanced society and not the gods as worshipped by ancient Norse peoples (or at least, not as they imagined them). So there's no legitimate reason for criticism for diverse casting.

[Kirby101]

In Thor Love and Thunder, minor spoiler....


Russell Crowe hilariously plays Zeus with a thick Greek accent. Kind of puts all those Shakespearean Zeus in perspective.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

I was indifferent about a person of color cast as Ariel until yesterday morning while watching the local morning news, a clip was shown where a little black girl, maybe six or seven, was unbelievably happy at watching Halle Bailey in that Little Mermaid trailer and squealed, “Mommy! She looks like me!” That’s when I fully understood the importance of diversity casting, and Disney made the right call in what they did.

As for the trolls, knuckledraggers and yeah, racists with their panties in a bunch because Ariel, a FICTIONAL CHARACTER wasn’t white, they can pound sand.

[CSTowle]

In Thor Love and Thunder, minor spoiler....


Russell Crowe hilariously plays Zeus with a thick Greek accent. Kind of puts all those Shakespearean Zeus in perspective.

One of the few things I liked about the movie, that choice over the traditional "anything historical for an American audience needs to have a British accent because...?" Also, happy to see Hercules though his wheelhouse is funny/randy version of Thor (which we already have, in the Disneyfied version of Thor).

I was indifferent about a person of color cast as Ariel until yesterday morning while watching the local morning news, a clip was shown where a little black girl, maybe six or seven, was unbelievably happy at watching Halle Bailey in that Little Mermaid trailer and squealed, “Mommy! She looks like me!” That’s when I fully understood the importance of diversity casting, and Disney made the right call in what they did.

As for the trolls, knuckledraggers and yeah, racists with their panties in a bunch because Ariel, a FICTIONAL CHARACTER wasn’t white, they can pound sand.

Honestly, the happiness this will bring vs the slight contentment folks would have seen with just a live action ginger playing Ariel is worth the change in and of itself. I doubt Disney would have the balls, but if they could have a drag version of Ursula in homage to Divine that would be phenomenal. I actually might go to the theater to watch it, whereas now I'm unlikely to bother (loved the original, but again not a fan of the live action remakes).

[Besouro]

I can see pushback if it were say a historical show based on Norse/Viking history and there's diverse casting with no explanation. It wouldn't bother me, but I can understand where it would bother some. In Disney's superhero universe the Norse gods are actually some sort of aliens/interdimensional beings/advanced society and not the gods as worshipped by ancient Norse peoples (or at least, not as they imagined them). So there's no legitimate reason for criticism for diverse casting.

Read about a british tv show titled Troy: Fall of a city which had black Greek gods (plural) including Zeus.

The series sparked a massive hoopla online about racebending and diversity as whether or not the Greek gods were technically
White or Black or not. All in 2018-2019.

[Besouro]

I can see pushback if it were say a historical show based on Norse/Viking history and there's diverse casting with no explanation. It wouldn't bother me, but I can understand where it would bother some. In Disney's superhero universe the Norse gods are actually some sort of aliens/interdimensional beings/advanced society and not the gods as worshipped by ancient Norse peoples (or at least, not as they imagined them). So there's no legitimate reason for criticism for diverse casting.

Gods are and have always been "aliens" by the very fact that they have their own realms "in the sky" or "among the stars" in possession of abilities to bend various aspects of nature and traverse across planes of these dimensional realms "looking down" from above at mere mortals and sometimes partake in schemes which they involve humans.

So the whole "MCU Norse Gods are aliens" schtick is NOT an idea created by Marvel... It has always be inherent to what Gods are.

[Mister Mets]

I can see pushback if it were say a historical show based on Norse/Viking history and there's diverse casting with no explanation. It wouldn't bother me, but I can understand where it would bother some. In Disney's superhero universe the Norse gods are actually some sort of aliens/interdimensional beings/advanced society and not the gods as worshipped by ancient Norse peoples (or at least, not as they imagined them). So there's no legitimate reason for criticism for diverse casting.

Yeah, the idea that gods who are supposed to represent all humanity/ have come from outside Earth should somehow all be Norse seems ridiculous.

Compared to their percentages in real life, blondes and redheads have always been overrepresented but they're also more appealing to many men than black or brown hair. Same with blue eyes. Brown/brown is the most common combination in the world, and thus usually considered the least interesting visually but it probably doesn't help in the diversity discussion because these traits are almost exclusively white ones. Though those with black/brown skin and green eyes tend to get a lot of attention as well.

As far as cultural diversity, a different discussion from racial diversity, it may be that we should look at representation there though I would say it's not as historically skewed in favor of urban vs rural as it is white vs everything else. Small town life, "traditional values", christian traditions and such were actually probably more represented in the mainstream in previous generations and culture started shifting away from Middle America and towards the larger urban population.

There's still plenty of representation, and with a splintered media with TV/streaming/etc. if you're looking for entertainment targeted at a rural white audience you won't lack options. Far more options than say latino, East Asian, or Native American audiences.

There are some messy questions when it comes to cultural diversity.

Beyond race, there are arguments that members of some groups should only be played by members of those groups, so that Jewish characters should only be played by Jewish actors and gay characters could only be played by gay actors. This is not something that's universally agreed (Brendan Fraser seems to be an Oscar frontrunner for playing a morbidly obese gay man and Bradley Cooper seems to be in contention next year for playing Leonard Bernstein), but it's an argument that is taken seriously in cultural spaces.

It's a fair point that small town life has been well represented in previous generations, although that doesn't matter when we're looking at diversity audits now. Comparisons between entertainment targeted to rural white Americans and different ethnic groups is a bit messy since rural white Americans tend to be a larger percentage of the population (rural white Americans are a little over 10% of the population while Native Americans are roughly two percent, a majority of whom are interracial.

[CSTowle]

Gods are and have always been "aliens" by the very fact that they have their own realms "in the sky" or "among the stars" in possession of abilities to bend various aspects of nature and traverse across planes of these dimensional realms "looking down" from above at mere mortals and sometimes partake in schemes which they involve humans.

So the whole "MCU Norse Gods are aliens" schtick is NOT an idea created by Marvel... It has always be inherent to what Gods are.

Yeah, the idea that gods who are supposed to represent all humanity/ have come from outside Earth should somehow all be Norse seems ridiculous.

There are some messy questions when it comes to cultural diversity.

Beyond race, there are arguments that members of some groups should only be played by members of those groups, so that Jewish characters should only be played by Jewish actors and gay characters could only be played by gay actors. This is not something that's universally agreed (Brendan Fraser seems to be an Oscar frontrunner for playing a morbidly obese gay man and Bradley Cooper seems to be in contention next year for playing Leonard Bernstein), but it's an argument that is taken seriously in cultural spaces.

It's a fair point that small town life has been well represented in previous generations, although that doesn't matter when we're looking at diversity audits now. Comparisons between entertainment targeted to rural white Americans and different ethnic groups is a bit messy since rural white Americans tend to be a larger percentage of the population (rural white Americans are a little over 10% of the population while Native Americans are roughly two percent, a majority of whom are interracial.

On the first quote and to Mets point on the same, these are myths/superstitions that started locally and died out before much interaction with the wider world so it's expected that if we were to talk to ancient vikings or Native Americans or Chinese and ask them what their gods looked like it's expected they would look like the locals, and not like a diverse mix of humanity. The expectation that they would or even might be is the ridiculous take.

But again, we're not talking about the ancient Norse (or Native American/Chinese/etc.) gods, we're talking about Disney's superhero race of interdimensional high-tech beings (who are almost certainly shown not to be "gods" because they'd catch flak from American right-wingers and others in certain parts of the world for blasphemy reasons). By saying we should expect the ancient Norse gods wouldn't just be Norse but represent all of humanity you're attempting to apply logic to religion, which is never a good idea.

As to rural white culture, they're still getting more than their share of available culture and especially when you compare to groups like Latinos or Native Americans.

[Moon Ronin]

I have to push back a bit on this and a couple of things need to be clarified.

1. Black people are the second largest racial group in the US and have been drastically under-represented over time. Latino/Hispanic is not a race as a good chunk of Latinos/Hispanics are white. Progress regarding black representation is only just recently been made on this front. The second largest ethnic group in the US is Latino/Hispanic and I also agree that greater representation of the Hispanic community is necessary too.

The Term Latin America was coined by a French Emperor trying to expand his empire across the ocean, Hispanic means that your land was colonized and controlled by Spain and were lumped in to all Spanish speaking countries in the 1970s for the American Census. So yeah I guess you're not a race any more when your identify gets scrubbed by European empirical colonialization and American identity politics. Most of us, at least where I grew up, have a heritage from native Mesoamerica but being "Native American" only counts if your people are from north of the US border. So just throwing all the people from the Caribbean, Mexico, the Southern Triangle ,and the whole of South America to create "Latino/Hispanic" is a reason that a large group of them identify as "white" and really don't care that much about identity or racial politics.

I'll tell you what. In general, I've had a problem with color-blind casting (which I would say is another name for Diversity Casting), only because if I see a character I've know for years being adapted to the screen, I want to see someone that looks like the characters. But a lot of the time that feeling goes away when I actually see the finished product. Birds of Prey was a good example, I HATED having a Black Dinah Lance right up until I saw the performance, at which point I was sold.

Also, seeing the reaction videos of little Black girls being so excited over the live-action Little Mermaid was a bit of an eye-opener for me. Being a white male, I never really appreciated how much representation meant to someone else until I saw that.

All that said, while I don't think it's harmful to the public, it can be harmful to the actors themselves. Just look at all of the hate actors of color have gotten for being in major franchises, from Kelly Marie Tran in The Last Jedi, to every actor of color in The Rings of Power. The amount of vitriol they've had to put up with, just for doing their jobs, is astounding.

I just have issue with it all is that they can't create any thing new. It's take an old IP, dust it off and give it a new look and there you go now you have a black Little Mermaid ( I don't care about the movie I'm a grown ass man and its not in my wheel house). But its starting to create an "ours and theirs" mentality and the weird non-sense that I can only enjoy something if I see myself in it. It like we are creating some kind of media segregation were you have your version of a character and we have ours. I'm not gonna like Batman any better if he is played by a Mexican actor and in way kind of upset that they changed Namor in the Black Panther movie.

The movie out The Woman King seems more interesting than anything that has come out in a very long time. It is not a re-hash, re-telling, re-boot, re-adaptation, re-imagining, sequel, or what ever. It is a new story never told in movies or TV with characters I've never heard of. I'm some what excited to watch and hope it does great at the box office to the point that movie makers take note and stop making old stuff with different faces and put out genuinely new things altogether.

Gods are and have always been "aliens" by the very fact that they have their own realms "in the sky" or "among the stars" in possession of abilities to bend various aspects of nature and traverse across planes of these dimensional realms "looking down" from above at mere mortals and sometimes partake in schemes which they involve humans.

So the whole "MCU Norse Gods are aliens" schtick is NOT an idea created by Marvel... It has always be inherent to what Gods are.

So every one is all good with the casting of the deities in Gods of Egypt now?

[Catlady in training]

What about redheads though? A bit tongue in cheek, but almost every time an inclusive actor/character is chosen, they replace the redhead. Wally West being a prime example.

Just curious as to why its always the gingers.

This often repeated talking point that redheads are being erased on screen is actually very funny, because:

1) The proportion on redhaired characters in comics and animated movies/series is nowhere close to reality.
2) With some exceptions, most of these characters have red hair color that does not appear anywhere in nature, so we can either assume that these characters have hair of different color that they dye red, or just shrug and take it as the artist's creative licence, same as with characters with platinum/blue/green/purple, etc. hair color.
3) Similar to the above, redhaired characters (especially if they try for comic accuracy with bright red) are rarely played by naturally red or ginger haired actors. Case in point, actors like Nicole Kidman or Benedict Cumberbatch who are ginger rarely play characters with their own hair color, while many famously redhaired characters have been played by actors who dyed their hair for the role, like Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane.
4) Many of these characters that are originally redhaired and white still have red hair in adaptations when they are played by nonwhite actors, for example Starfire in Titans or the new Little Mermaid.
5) This complain rarely comes up when characters are played by white actors but with different hair color (Val Kilmer as Bruce Wayne, Ben Affleck as Daredevil,...)