Once again ResetEra Banned me.....for not caring about all people being all white in Squadron 42?

[MrCalavera_v1legacy]

Also I want to say sorry to the others who put so much energy to the Thread, but sadly I don't speak very good English and sometimes I get lost with the conversations you have.

Well, that explains a bit.
Unfortunately, the proverbial well have been poisoned by an outlook on racial politics specific to the US. So, people not familiar with it enough might find those kind of discussions... frustrating.

 

[SweetShark]

Also I want to say sorry to the others who put so much energy to the Thread, but sadly I don't speak very good English and sometimes I get lost with the conversations you have.

Well, that explains a bit.
Unfortunately, the proverbial well have been poisoned by an outlook on racial politics specific to the US. So, people not familiar with it enough might find those kind of discussions... frustrating.

I am the kind of person I want to see different subject problems as simple as possible.
Of course this is not solid way to see every problem like this, but what I can say?
I care more for the gameplay that the politics behind the games. That all.

I won't think why the heck the whole main cast of a game are all white.
Ridiculous.

 

[SweetShark]

Identity politics have done nothing to unite this country, and are basically a modern form of segregation. When minorities themselves understand this then we are clearly on the wrong path.

You're technically right. For the wrong reasons. See, some people seem to think that identity politics only exists within minorities. They act like there aren't Christian identity politics, white identity politics, male identity politics, 1% identity politics. They are. And frankly, I see minority identity politics reacting to these identity politics more than popping out of nowhere. Because it wasn't like minorities were just walking around someday and decided to base a good part of their identity on their skin color for no reason whatsoever.

I don't know about you, but I've felt more alienated by the demand that everything bow towards Christianity (on the dollar, on the coins, in pledges to the state, in the pledge I have to hear every time I'm at work, the President of the United States screaming about it) than black people wanting more respect and representation.

Ah yes, but if everyone?s pledging a different allegiance or no allegiance at all, what are we left with? Conflict or apathy, and neither is all that appealing. There should be enough room in the world for ?everyone?, but how the resources are divied up will always be an issue. Humanity?s greatest qualities can be both a blessing and a danger, and I?m honestly not sure if that can ever be corrected. Minimized, sure, but that would of course require sacrifice and at the very least compromise. We can even all be in agreement on it, but how much to actually make a difference.

 

[TheVampwizimp_v1legacy]

I feel the ban is silly, but it's also important to care about diversity. The whole world is diverse, so it should be represented in the art we consume, which is, in my opinion, fair to suggest.

I believe that is a racist attitude and a horrific thing to suggest. People's skin colour shouldn't matter and judging people by their skin colour is regressive and bigoted. The arts are under no obligations to represent notions of diversity to satisfy bigots with a social justice agenda. Artists should be free to create any art they choose without having to kowtow to political sensibilities. Please note, I want it clear that I'm discussing your point and not you personally.

Whether or not diversity is something you care about or not isn't the issue, but you have made your presence known in a discussion about diversity saying you don't care about the topic being discussed and that's pretty rude.

He didn't say he didn't care about the topic, he said he didn't care about the skin colour of the actors/characters. All that means is he disagreed with the original premise that Star Citizen needed more diversity and that's different from not caring about the topic.

I have recently noticed this weird disconnect between what the conservative right considers racism and what the liberal left considers racism.

The left (where I land) will look at a game like this, see that there is no representation for anyone who isn't white, and have a negative reaction. That reaction can range from "that's kinda messed up" to "these racist bastards should die!" Obviously the second one also stupid, but the concern arises from the fact that white people do not make up 100% of any population larger than a single family, and non-white people deserve recognition and representation.

The right looks at this game and will say anything between "how nice, a truly post-racial society where skin color doesn't matter" and "awesome, all the coloreds are gone!" Again, one seems reasonable and the extreme is disgusting. But for some reason, the first point of view here seems to ignore that, while color blindness sounds like a great goal, it's simply not reality, and treating things this way is the wrong way to go about it.

Race is important. It's not ideal, it would be nice if literally no one cared, but almost everyone cares. And conservatives saying "race doesn't matter" does not make it true. Color blindness is better than outright racism, but it's still faulty. It ignores a significant factor in a person's background, situation, and perspective. See, we're not going to get to a truly equal place by ignoring the inequalities that exist, even if it's with good intentions. Equality will come with effort, and facing unpleasant realities, and making concessions and sacrifices.

Calling someone a racist for noticing skin color is wrong-headed. I'm not a racist for wanting a reasonable level of fair representation for POC, and I'm not a racist for admitting that race and ethnicity matters to people.

 

[Hawki]

I have recently noticed this weird disconnect between what the conservative right considers racism and what the liberal left considers racism.

The left (where I land) will look at a game like this, see that there is no representation for anyone who isn't white, and have a negative reaction. That reaction can range from "that's kinda messed up" to "these racist bastards should die!" Obviously the second one also stupid, but the concern arises from the fact that white people do not make up 100% of any population larger than a single family, and non-white people deserve recognition and representation.

The right looks at this game and will say anything between "how nice, a truly post-racial society where skin color doesn't matter" and "awesome, all the coloreds are gone!" Again, one seems reasonable and the extreme is disgusting. But for some reason, the first point of view here seems to ignore that, while color blindness sounds like a great goal, it's simply not reality, and treating things this way is the wrong way to go about it.

Or, people regardless of affiliation, may not notice either way? Both of your examples assume that noticing the racial makeup in one way or another is the only outcome that's going to occur, and all that changes is the reasoning behind it. Again, hate to hammer this point, but when I saw the trailer, the first thing that entered my mind was "wow, this isn't really that well put together, what with the editing and lack of worldbuilding" not "wait, what's up with the racial makeup?" Similarly, in watching trailers for Star Wars Resistance for instance, my thought wasn't "wow, it's great that the cast of this show is so racially diverse," it was more along the lines of "wow, this doesn't look good - don't like the animation, and the style and tone suggests it's Star Wars for babies." In both cases, the idea that people were looking at either of these things this way never entered my mind until people brought them up. In both cases, neither of them change that I still see the Star Citizen trailer as being terrible, and the Star Wars Resistance trailers as being lacking (though apparently the show itself is decent, but can't comment on that).

I, like you, fall on the left on most issues, but you can probably guess from this thread that how I evaluate art is different from how you might. I doubt that's down to politics, I'd attribute it more to my background in writing and reviewing rather than any kind of political division. For instance, in the writing group I mentioned, something I and another member debated extensively was the role of wordpainting, but the question of representation never came up on either side in the context of those arguments.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Or, people regardless of affiliation, may not notice either way?

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that, if every single character was black, or every single character was asian, you would have noticed. You might not admit that you noticed, but you probably would have gone "huh, that's weird", because it would be weird for an American production to cast only Asian actors, or only black actors, in a story that wasn't explicitly and textually about race.

So, I'm white, and when I first saw the trailer I actually didn't notice the white cast. My friend, who is asian, noticed immediately. The OP in the ResetEra post clearly noticed immediately. The reactions seem to be split between people who noticed immediately, and people who are just noticing at that moment.

The reason people notice isn't because they're racist. It also isn't because they're superhumanly perceptive. It's because they have a perspective on the world which doesn't see whiteness as "normal", or the default for telling these kinds of stories. That's not about how you analyse media, having a white cast doesn't make something technically incompetent or mean its story can't have merit, it's a more baked in set of individual biases about how you see the world and (often) the kind of environment you grew up and live in.

The important thing is not whether we can notice immediately, but how we react when we do notice or when it's brought to our attention. Do we simply dismiss people's perspective as "irrelevant" because only the stuff we intuitively see is important, or do we treat those perspectives as valid and important because they offer an insight into the world which we couldn't achieve on our own?

 

[Hawki]

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that, if every single character was black, or every single character was asian, you would have noticed.

You can suggest that, and you may be right - we'll never know. However, I can only suggest that in all honesty, I wouldn't have noticed, as:

a) In similar scenarios, I tend not to notice on the conscious level.

b) Even if I did, there's already enough stuff capturing my attention in the trailer (in a negative way) for me to really notice

What's tragic is that I probably notice a lot more these days, but it's mostly due to the fuckwits that whine about "shoehorned diversity" in media. Hate to use these as examples, but as someone who watched Power Rangers and Captain Planet as a kid (both racially diverse), and over two decades later read about people praising them for their diversity when looking back on them, my reaction was "huh. Guess you're right. Never noticed that."

Except watching them as a kid and the concept of race never entering my mind, it feels like a regression (of course, neither have aged particuarly well, but meh, nostalgia's still nostalgia). Course, don't tend to notice that much now (again, see Star Wars Resistance), but I'd rather not notice at all.

 

[TheVampwizimp_v1legacy]

I have recently noticed this weird disconnect between what the conservative right considers racism and what the liberal left considers racism.

The left (where I land) will look at a game like this, see that there is no representation for anyone who isn't white, and have a negative reaction. That reaction can range from "that's kinda messed up" to "these racist bastards should die!" Obviously the second one also stupid, but the concern arises from the fact that white people do not make up 100% of any population larger than a single family, and non-white people deserve recognition and representation.

The right looks at this game and will say anything between "how nice, a truly post-racial society where skin color doesn't matter" and "awesome, all the coloreds are gone!" Again, one seems reasonable and the extreme is disgusting. But for some reason, the first point of view here seems to ignore that, while color blindness sounds like a great goal, it's simply not reality, and treating things this way is the wrong way to go about it.

Or, people regardless of affiliation, may not notice either way? Both of your examples assume that noticing the racial makeup in one way or another is the only outcome that's going to occur, and all that changes is the reasoning behind it. Again, hate to hammer this point, but when I saw the trailer, the first thing that entered my mind was "wow, this isn't really that well put together, what with the editing and lack of worldbuilding" not "wait, what's up with the racial makeup?" Similarly, in watching trailers for Star Wars Resistance for instance, my thought wasn't "wow, it's great that the cast of this show is so racially diverse," it was more along the lines of "wow, this doesn't look good - don't like the animation, and the style and tone suggests it's Star Wars for babies." In both cases, the idea that people were looking at either of these things this way never entered my mind until people brought them up. In both cases, neither of them change that I still see the Star Citizen trailer as being terrible, and the Star Wars Resistance trailers as being lacking (though apparently the show itself is decent, but can't comment on that).

I, like you, fall on the left on most issues, but you can probably guess from this thread that how I evaluate art is different from how you might. I doubt that's down to politics, I'd attribute it more to my background in writing and reviewing rather than any kind of political division. For instance, in the writing group I mentioned, something I and another member debated extensively was the role of wordpainting, but the question of representation never came up on either side in the context of those arguments.

Okay, I didn't say that a racial analysis of every piece of media is inevitable for everyone. I'm just speaking to debates like this one. Most people don't see EVERYTHING in regards to sociopolitical theory, but most people see SOME things in that light. This particular trailer set off a discussion, and this is a pattern that I've observed lately. All I meant to say.

 

[Xprimentyl]

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that, if every single character was black, or every single character was asian, you would have noticed.

You can suggest that, and you may be right - we'll never know. However, I can only suggest that in all honesty, I wouldn't have noticed, as:

a) In similar scenarios, I tend not to notice on the conscious level.

b) Even if I did, there's already enough stuff capturing my attention in the trailer (in a negative way) for me to really notice

What's tragic is that I probably notice a lot more these days, but it's mostly due to the fuckwits that whine about "shoehorned diversity" in media. Hate to use these as examples, but as someone who watched Power Rangers and Captain Planet as a kid (both racially diverse), and over two decades later read about people praising them for their diversity when looking back on them, my reaction was "huh. Guess you're right. Never noticed that."

Except watching them as a kid and the concept of race never entering my mind, it feels like a regression (of course, neither have aged particuarly well, but meh, nostalgia's still nostalgia). Course, don't tend to notice that much now (again, see Star Wars Resistance), but I'd rather not notice at all.

I?d wager you?d notice an all-singular minority cast because it?s something you simply don?t see. Like EVER, unless it?s an intentional focus, i.e.: the all black cast of ?The Wiz? or predominantly-if-not-all Asian cast of the more recent ?Crazy Rich Asians.? If you walked outside tomorrow and the sky was green, you?d notice despite seeing and being unconsciously aware of a typically blue sky every day.

I commend your racial blindness if it?s genuine; more people should be that way, but noticing race isn?t a regression; it?s relevant awareness. Much of the media we consume is very much whitewashed, other qualifiable qualities of those media aside, but the real world we live in and share is a racially volatile one, maybe more so than has been since the Civil Rights movement, and instead of thinking people are clamoring for ?shoehorned in diversity,? let?s call it wanting ?inclusion beyond tropes and stereotypes.?

As a half black, half Hispanic male myself, I?m very much aware of my ?not whiteness,? that there exists a concept of ?whiteness,? how the racially aware world sees me and the fact that I can close my eyes, spin around ten times, throw a rock in any direction and have it land on some medium that negatively portrays ?myselves? while that same medium is likely to have a white lead. I like to think of myself as intelligent and reasonably articulate, but I can?t tell you how many times in my adult life that a white person I?ve met has tried to relate to me by putting on a ?black-ccent? or otherwise ?gangsta-fying? themselves to make me feel comfortable with them. Or, most insulting, being told that I?m the ?least ?black? black person? they?ve met; is there a more back-handed compliment? Are people?s worlds and minds so small that a well-spoken black person is worth noting, much less to saying it to that person?s face? Yes, they are, because the world at large most often doesn?t include ?me? save for very specific roles, so what many white people see they believe is what they get.

Spoiler: An Anecdote

This is anecdotal, yes, but an example nonetheless, when I first met my now good friend, he was DJ-ing with music on his cell phone at a small social gathering and other people (all white) were making suggestions, playing mostly Country and Classic Rock songs. When he noted that I hadn?t made any suggestions, he offered his phone saying ?I?ve got a few rap songs on here if you want to see if there?s any you like.? Nevermind that I?m classically trained on the piano, nevemrind that my actual genre of choice is Electronic music, the color of my skin predicated for this man that I must be into what he deemed ?black? music and/or that I wasn?t enjoying the music already on offer. I?d not said or done anything to lead him to believe what he did, but there you go, he had in his mind what ?black? was.

The reason inclusion is important is because, otherwise, the negative and stale perceptions are senselessly propagated. I?d like to think we?re breeding out the ignorance of old as younger generations are far more tolerant and inclusive than those in their prime 60 years ago, but as long as the media we consume sees ?white? as the default, minorities are always going to be relegated to ?the exceptions.? Honestly, as much as I do want to see ?myself? in media, I want it to be natural; I want it to simply be ?a fact? and not ?the reason,? if that distinction makes sense. I don?t necessarily like when they retcon white characters as black because, much like you?re parents forcing you take a younger sibling with you on an outing, it doesn?t change the fact that there?s likely more resentment than appreciable acceptance. I much prefer efforts like the Black Panther, portrayals of positive and powerful black people that don?t ?inconvenience? white people; let a person or persons of a traditionally back-seated demographic carry a story without shining a spotlight on the fact that ?lookie what we did; they?re not white!?

 

[Hawki]

I?d wager you?d notice an all-singular minority cast because it?s something you simply don?t see. Like EVER, unless it?s an intentional focus, i.e.: the all black cast of ?The Wiz? or predominantly-if-not-all Asian cast of the more recent ?Crazy Rich Asians.? If you walked outside tomorrow and the sky was green, you?d notice despite seeing and being unconsciously aware of a typically blue sky every day.

The green sky analogy doesn't quite work, because the sky is never green. Never has been, and barring some kind of catastrophe, never will be. I think a better analogy would be noticing if the sky was overcast - I mean, I'm technically aware of it, but unless there's the sound of thunder, it's not really a concious revelation because it doesn't change anything.

But I'll put it this way since the sky's been brought into things. Let's look at three cartoons that I was introduced to at different times - The Simpsons, The Boondocks, and The Cleaveland Show.

When I saw the Simpsons for the first time, one of my first questions was "why is everyone yellow?" As in, I literally asked the kids and adults around me, because despite being little ol' me at the time, my understanding of the world was sophisticated enough to know that human beings weren't yellow. No-one had the answer of course, and the Simpsons became something I was hooked towards. But then, I challenge anyone to be exposed to the Simpsons for the first time and not at least raise an eyebrow at the skin colour upon first viewing because again, it simply doesn't happen in the real world (Doug is another example, where I wondered "wait, why's that guy (Skeeter) blue?)

Second example is The Boondocks. Now, never watched too much of this, but the fact that the main cast is all black is something that became very apparent very readily, because it's something that's touched on within the context of the show itself (e.g. Uncle Ruckus), even down to its style of presentation.

Third example is The Cleaveland Show. Now, this is where we shift from our proverbial green sky (the Simpsons) to an overcast sky (Cleaveland Show). So, Cleaveland and his family are all black. That's something I'm technically aware of, but like the overcast sky, it's not something that's consciously registering. It's an example where skin colour is academic to the setting or characters (I'm sure there might be some episodes where it is, but in the initial run I watched, it was never really brought up). As in, someone saying that "Cleaveland and his family are black" would be like someone saying that on a cloudy day, the sky is overcast. My reaction would be "...and?" Boondocks on the other hand, is where our proverbial cloudy sky has proverbial thunder.

Now, you're right in saying that all-minority, all-singular casts are rare unless it's directly relevant to the plot itself, but if it isn't, it's not usually something that conciously registers with me. To cite another example, Martha Jones from Doctor Who. Now, Martha being black is brought up in two past episodes (Shakespeare Code, 1590s) and the Family of Blood (1913), because it's dealing with the prejudices of the time. But those episodes aside, Martha and her family being all black in 2000s Britain would have never really entered my mind - as in, not something that really stuck out in any meaningful way.

(Not that I'm complaining about it being brought up the way it is, as it's relevant to both episodes, especially FoB, where Martha has to deal with sexism and classism in addition to racism.)

As for Crazy Rich Asians specifically, well, I did notice, because it's in the title, and the trailer makes it clear from the outset that this story is going to be taking place mostly in Singapore. But within the film, it's a moot point in a lot of regards, because the characters are engaging enough regardless.

I commend your racial blindness if it?s genuine; more people should be that way, but noticing race isn?t a regression; it?s relevant awareness. Much of the media we consume is very much whitewashed, other qualifiable qualities of those media aside, but the real world we live in and share is a racially volatile one, maybe more so than has been since the Civil Rights movement, and instead of thinking people are clamoring for ?shoehorned in diversity,? let?s call it wanting ?inclusion beyond tropes and stereotypes.?

I'd have hoped I'd have made it clear in this thread by now what I think about morons who whine about "forced diversity."

As a half black, half Hispanic male myself, I?m very much aware of my ?not whiteness,? that there exists a concept of ?whiteness,? how the racially aware world sees me and the fact that I can close my eyes, spin around ten times, throw a rock in any direction and have it land on some medium that negatively portrays ?myselves? while that same medium is likely to have a white lead. I like to think of myself as intelligent and reasonably articulate, but I can?t tell you how many times in my adult life that a white person I?ve met has tried to relate to me by putting on a ?black-ccent? or otherwise ?gangsta-fying? themselves to make me feel comfortable with them. Or, most insulting, being told that I?m the ?least ?black? black person? they?ve met; is there a more back-handed compliment? Are people?s worlds and minds so small that a well-spoken black person is worth noting, much less to saying it to that person?s face? Yes, they are, because the world at large most often doesn?t include ?me? save for very specific roles, so what many white people see they believe is what they get.

And you have my sympathy. Really. I may not have experienced these anecdotes based on skin colour, but I've experienced similar ones based on other factors (e.g. gender), or at times, put my foot in my mouth (had a customer asking for books in Macedonian, blurted out without thinking that we have some in Greek...yeah, you can imagine how that went).

But that said, I really don't get the attitudes you're describing. That isn't doubting your accounts, or that they exist, just a comment on wider society.

Honestly, as much as I do want to see ?myself? in media, I want it to be natural; I want it to simply be ?a fact? and not ?the reason,? if that distinction makes sense. I don?t necessarily like when they retcon white characters as black because, much like you?re parents forcing you take a younger sibling with you on an outing, it doesn?t change the fact that there?s likely more resentment than appreciable acceptance. I much prefer efforts like the Black Panther, portrayals of positive and powerful black people that don?t ?inconvenience? white people; let a person or persons of a traditionally back-seated demographic carry a story without shining a spotlight on the fact that ?lookie what we did; they?re not white!?

Again, can't speak for all (white) people, but speaking personally, I can only say that "blackwashing" (or any washing) isn't an inconvenience (to me).

Being honest, I can't say I don't always notice. If we're going into personal anecdotes, I can think of two contrasting examples.

First is Nick Fury, as portrayed by Sam Jackson. Now, I was technically aware of Nick Fury, solely from Spider-Man: The Animated Series, where he does show up a few times, where he's white. Then there's Sam Jackson, who's black. So, on some, nearly subconcious level I was aware of "hey, they changed his skin colour," but it was (and is) so minor, because a) short as his appearance in Iron Man was, it was enough to leave an impression, and b) in the animated series (can't comment on the comics original) skin colour was never relevant (don't think it was ever relevant - certainly it was before I was aware of race as an issue). Nowadays, when I think of Nick Fury, the MCU version is the one that enters my mind first. Similarly with Domino as portrayed in Deadpool 2.

Second example is Hermione Granger, the whole "black Hermione controversy" that like almost all such controversies, should never have been controversial in the first place. So, when I first saw the actress, I can't deny I rose an eyebrow, because I had such a strong image of Hermione in my mind, mainly due to the cover of Prisoner of Azkaban (her first depiction), and Emma Watson in the films. However, on reflection, I quickly recalled that a) race was never relevant in the context of the series (not as we Muggles imagine it at least); certainly not to Hermione, and b) as J.K. pointed out, she never actually specified Hermione's skin colour in the written text. So, while white!Hermione is still my de facto Hermione that occupies my mind, black!Hermione is something I don't have an issue with.

There's certainly some colour washing of any direction that can be awkward at times (see Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan as STID for instance), but most of the time, I find it academic (e.g. Fury) or at least, have the awareness to appreciate that it's academic (e.g. Hermione).

But on the subject, I do find it asinine if people try to score brownie points for casting in such a manner. Similarly as the whole "forced diversity" nonense got very tiring very quickly, the idea of brownie points is also assinine. That said, people whining about "forced diversity" seem to whine more, and whine louder.

 

[Xprimentyl]

Snip

Aside from your reading a bit too much into my flippant analogy about a green sky (lol, I was just exaggerating the rarity of singular-minority casting,) it sounds like we largely understand one another. What I?d like you to recognize, however, is that if your sentiments are genuine, you are the exception, not the rule. Mind you, I?m not saying sole exception, I?m not even saying RARE exception, but the world at large is very racially aware to varying degrees, and when something so innocuous as a videogame about fictional characters in fictional situations in a fictional future can?t be bothered (or perhaps ?forgot?) to make up, literally imagine out of thin air, anything but white people... WTF? That as many people as there are working on the game, not one person said ?we should probably mix it up a lil? bit; Mufasa Chan al Qadim over in Storyboarding says he?s running out of white ink.?

Look, we ALL want good games; that goes without saying. But if we stop criticism at purely technical issues and act the like the skin under which those one, zeroes, cogs, and gears are churning is secondary, we?re missing a large part of the picture. How many of us have complained about the ?same game?? Whether it be iterations within a franchise or IPs trying to ape the success of another, we?ve ALL had complaints that ?same-ness? is an issue; we don?t like dropping $60 for a near identical experience to what has aged a year or two on our shelves already. Well, I think constantly playing the ?White Knight? is quite same-y, predictable, tired, and I?ve been playing THAT game for decades; is that not a valid criticism? That devs collectively seem to lack the creativity and originality (the BALLS) to diversify the universes they create in a less than nominal way? Is the ?Default White [hu]Man? that easy to go to? And if so, why? Furthermore, when the underrepresented voice a concern with this same-ness, why do responses range from shouting them down as ?whiney SJWs trying to force their way on ?us?? by the more vocal and volatile to being talked down with ?it?s not whether you?re white or black; it?s how the game plays? by those usually in the comfortable majority for whom the problem isn?t, so ?it?s doesn?t bother me, so it shouldn?t bother you.?

And the solution is NOT token-izing, shoehorning or forcing in just to sate or meet some arbitrary quota; that?s pandering, i.e.: changing the Human Torch into a black man did nothing for black folks save plant the idea in our heads (which was immediately confirmed) that ?this is going to piss some white people off.? Underrepresented people don?t just want more of ourselves; we want more substantive selves, and we want those things we identify with to just be facts of the characters, not reasons for them, i.e.: as much as I ultimately hated Halo 5, I begrudgingly lauded 343?s decision to allow Spartan Locke to upstage Master Chief (and yes, I?m aware the character existed prior to Halo 5 it was a ballsy move, putting a black person in the lead of a franchise that is nearly the gold standard for online hate speech and bigotry.

 

[Gergar12_v1legacy]

Why go to a forum for a game that will never come out.

 

[sXeth]

There's certainly some colour washing of any direction that can be awkward at times (see Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan as STID for instance), but most of the time, I find it academic (e.g. Fury) or at least, have the awareness to appreciate that it's academic (e.g. Hermione).

Thats an odd example to use to say the least.

Khan isn't meant to be Genghis Khan or of direct correlation in any Trek media I've ever encountered. He's a "genetic superman" created at some point in the future (originally the 1990s, but obviously the date shifts as our real world time catches up) who conquered Asia/the Middle East. Khan Noonian Singh would (assuming that is some kind of inherited name and not at all simply chosen or assigned), would likely be of Indian descent. While the original series actor was Mexican. He was either always colorwashed, or more likely, simply an ethnically abstract futureman in keeping with (most) Trek characters.

 

[MrCalavera_v1legacy]

First is Nick Fury, as portrayed by Sam Jackson. Now, I was technically aware of Nick Fury, solely from Spider-Man: The Animated Series, where he does show up a few times, where he's white. Then there's Sam Jackson, who's black.

Well there's also this thing, that while original Nick Fury was white, the one used in MCU is based on the Ultimate Nick Fury, who was black and based on... Samuel L. Jackson.

 

[The Lunatic]

Oh no. Not white people! Those guys are evil, or so I'm told!

The crew happens to be white. There are much worse fates. And if that's how the talent assembles and the die fall, then, so what? Do we need to have diversity quotas now or something?