Representation and diversity aren't meaningless
They are when the only reason for doing it is "because" or "why not". That isn't representation. That is tokenism.
so we accept the actor in a role based on how well he, or she, plays the part
But there also has to be believability to the character and the story. Having Jackie Chan play Luke Cage for example is not believable because you have a predetemined image of what the character looks like. This is no different and shouldnt be treat differently just because she is white.
Since I don't see you, or anyone, posting anywhere else, complaining about anything else, it seems that race is the only thing you take issue with
In short. If I can't see it, it didn't happen and so I will infer you are something whitout any proof of said thing. That isn't how it works .
So again, why does the skin color of an actor matter so much to you?
You do realise that could be spun so easily and someone could just say "why does the skin color of an actor matter so much to you that you require it to be changed, do you have a problem with white people".
See how easy that is and what it can imply wihtout knowing anything about the person.
As stated. Why change it at all. Why not use the countless African and black fairy tales that include black mermiads. Plenty to choose from.
Race swapping has always and will always be lazy and just tokenism.
Why settle for hand me downs instead of having original stories. Doesn't make sense to me.
reply
share