Let's talk about Forced Diversity and DEI

[@gangofheroes]

What I consider to be Forced Diversity is when an established IP/character is changed or altered from its original state for the obvious reason to be diverse, like for an example Velma is a prime example of Forced Diversity as there is no clear reasoning for changing her ethnicity other than diversity for diversity sake unlike a character like Korra as there is already an established lore behind the Avatar giving her credence for being reincarnated as a different ethnicity and gender.

[@Shoulderpads-mcgee]

I don’t think there ever needs to be a reason for a character to be a certain race, for example Nick Fury being black in the ultimate universe and the mcu doesn’t mean anything. People are their race or sexuality or whatever for no reason and for Velma’s character alone I think the idea was to make her closer to Mindy Kaling, her voice actress. However! I think there are times when you can see something is soulless. With Velma, everything in it is soulless and devoid of sincerity so why would the audience believe the characters were race swapped for any reason than to be controversial and piss people off, like they did with that line insulting adults who watch cartoons in a cartoon made to be watched by adults. I think a genuine Scooby Doo reboot could pull off giving every character a different race or ethnicity if by doing nothing but writing a Scooby Doo show they love and want others to love.

[@jenijive3319]

The character may be established, but art itself is fluid. Always has been. There are new renderings of art or character building constantly. Wolverine in the movies was not Wolverine in the comics. Harry Potter in the movies was not Harry Potter in the books. The newer writers are influenced by stories around them, and that's diverse in 2024. I'm a millennial white woman, and most of my absolute best friends are not white at all. If I wrote a movie, book, or comic, I would be heavily inspire by the fucking warriors my friends are. Your thinking is outdated, at the core of it. As our world becomes more integrated, the only way to keep stories alive is to CHANGE them, to include all races. Serious, you may consider yourself a historian, but you don't seem like you care much about the future.

[@blazefang49-isgamer21]

​@@jenijive3319It's not outdated to want consistency with lore in your stories, having it make the whole thing better. In something like God Of War: Ragnarok, having a character like Angrboda (who is of the race of giants) out of nowhere being black was very clearly for diversity's sake. (Bear in mind, I'm a black person aswell.) They had already established the giants with Atreus's mother, Laufey, who was a white woman. This would also make sense since that story is based upon Nordic mythology. So if the original intent was to have angrboda be black, why not just make the giants a black race? It's not consistent and it ruins immersion knowing that it was only done for DEI points. This is the problem we're seeing throughout all entertainment media right now, that's what Forced Diversity really is.

[@NeoPokebonz]

Istruggle with this because to me as long as the character remains the same to me, I have little problem with a race or ethnicity change. Half the time the characters aren't made with actual thought behind the race that was picked. It was just picked. Like, in my head, I think I could watch a multi-ethnic cast of Scooby Doo because (outside my view of Freddy) it wasn't important to their character or arcs that they were White

[@ozzie_theotter]

Bravo!​@@jenijive3319

[@darthgonk5648]

Can we forget the Velma show even happened

[@giantpinkcat]

REAL

[@catguy31]

i cant believe that good shows get cancelled but then complete hot garbage like velma gets a second season

[@Januaryof28]

@@catguy31it was famous even though its becasue its a boring satrie

[@sinfulrat287]

Forced diversity isnt bad writing, bad writing is bad writing. Miles Morales is good writing and Velma is bad writing. I think its pretty simple to understand

[@jameswilson6758]

I'd argue that Miles Morales isn't good writing. Most of his story details are just him riding on the coat tails of Peter Parker. His powers' origin, his girlfriend, his villains, all come from regular Spider-Man. This was slightly more workable when he was confined to the Ultimate universe, and thus entirely separate from the main story, but then they forced him into the 616 and gave him... honestly not that much to stand out from being certain writers' attempt at replacing Peter Parker with a black guy because... despite Spider-Man being the most popular and one of the best selling Marvel heroes by far, having him be white is somehow a bad thing in and of itself. Put in less serious fashion: Peter Parker is Spider-Man. Miles Morales is Miles Morales.

[@sinfulrat287]

@jameswilson6758 dont really care, im not reading all that, miles is spiderman, peter is spiderman blah blah blah anyone can wear the mask, thats the whole point, spiderverse makes miles one of the most interesting spider people out there

[@Akeche]

@@sinfulrat287 Anyone who says "I'm not reading all that" has the intelligence and maturity level of a child.

[@sinfulrat287]

@Akeche reading useless fluff just to have the point be "peter spiderman, miles miles" is a waste of time

[@mariaavalon3730]

Forced Diversity is bad writing. If diversity is natural it dosen't have to be forced.

[@kionyfey7740]

Honestly, I don't care. I just like stories.

[@sircorny2894]

As someone who writes myself i always say a good story will be naturally diverse anyways cuz the same copy and paste male and female characters just with different names don't make good stories. But as a Black Hispanic i again like i commented on a different video find the insinuation racism disingenuous cuz like i agree with the points these people make. Not cuz i hate myself but because a lot of recent media is trying to force it in and if you say you don't like it your called out to be racist,sexist whatever other ist exist. So pointing out why lots of these stories are also straight up bad and talk down to the audience is the only way too i guess prove no they aren't racist your product is just shit. Diversity should never be something forced into media do i think some people might be racist and or over exaggerating of course some people are. But the main crowd talking about this the loudest aren't some random racist who don't like diversity cuz unless its a race swap lots of times the main issue is the writing of the character trying to prove a point or shove a message into the story that does not need to be there. And if those writers still want to force it in at least don't be so damn lazy about it and make an actual good story for heavens sake first.

[@ArbitraryOutcome]

I think there's also another issue where some people seem straight up media illiterate and won't actually notice deeper messages unless the writers or so have to spell it out for them.

[@sircorny2894]

@@ArbitraryOutcome and they will be called out for missing the point by the people who didn't. Stories don't need to be made worse cuz some people don't understand something unless it's just spoken out loud

[@ArbitraryOutcome]

@@sircorny2894 Agreed. I don't want art dumbed down just because of a few bad faith misinterpretations.

[@gravethestampede3454]

A 94% audience score? That doesn't sound bad to me.

[@cryo9017]

Right

[@Banished-rx4ol]

That threw me off, he said he’s never watched both of them and there’s nothing wrong with that but to say both had bad writing because the critic score(what I’m assuming he’s talking about) is higher on the 2016 ghostbuster one is disingenuous. He’s disregarding the context of the time it was released as it was during the beginning of the culture war so it got favorable reviews from critics trying to send a political message. It re-contextualizes the success of the new ghostbusters because the last one was so widely panned or hated. It was quite the comeback story

[@xxtianxx11]

Because 5 people who liked it rated it 😂

[@Achieme]

Heres my take theres nothing wrong with diversity and inclusivity its been around for since colored television was invented. Because back then it felt authentic with compelling writing, it didnt feel like it was pandering to a specific group or beat the audience over the head to show they care. It also feels like nowawadays it feels like companies/Studios use these terms as a badge of honor. Maybe its just me but i never heard Diversity or inclusivity until 2019 and it kinda annoys me. If the first thing you tell me about your IP is how diverse you are that turns me off, youre not telling me what the story or what the character is about. You can be diverse without telling me how diverse you are. Just create interesting stories with cool and interesting characters regardless of race gender etc. And yes im going to be that person but hear what im actually saying, As a black man who likes seeing representation I dont wanna see a reskin of Ben tennyson, create a totally new character that can rival or even be better than the og. They did it for Miles morales and i like that. 2 spidermen who are different characters.

[@tonyt1680]

I think you're forgetting the huge backlash Miles got when he was first introduced, because initially, he was a Peter Parker re-skin. Miles Morales got shitted on for a good number of years and it wasn't until the Spider-verse movies that the concept was really sold to the public. Being a big Marvel fan myself, I didn't see the point of some derivative Spider-man to replace Peter, and wondered why they couldn't just come up with a new Black superhero. But then we got to see Miles truly blossom into his own character through the Spider-verse film, and years of comics featuring Miles. It took a lot of time. So, all that to say that some of these concepts aren't bad perse, and not necessarily inauthentic. Sometimes it will just take time for them to truly grow into their own. And they kind of need the space and time to be able to do so without everyone immediately shitting on the concept instead of giving it a chance.

[@Achieme]

@@tonyt1680 oh no your right I totally forgot about comic miles where he has a bunch of relaunces and revampes, I'll admit I didn't see any difference between him and Peter except one of his parents is alive, I think he has his own clone saga. Even in the spiderverse comics I didnt care much plus there wasn't really much chemistry towards Gwen and miles. This is a minor pet peeve but I wish he had his own villains, not saying peter can't share but id like to see more interesting villains for Miles. I dont like comic miles, insomniac Miles is eh. I just prefer Sony Spiderverse

[@Shoulderpads-mcgee]

I think a lot of companies are trying to shield their rehashing of the same IPs by giving it a “diverse twist” which is kinda insidious because it makes people point at diversity being the problem rather than the real problem of the entertainment industry lazily selling people the same thing over and over again

[@lionmom7629]

​@@Shoulderpads-mcgeeI mean, your not wrong. Changing race, gender, etc is a way to make the character different so people see the new version as something new. Its a more dramatic change then just hair or eye color, or height, etc. Problem is, a lot of people bad mouth anything new and at least say they don't want to give new stuff a chance, that only old stuff is any good. So what are they going to do? Make new things that only young people will even glance at? That's why reboots and remakes got so popular. Studios just want an audience. They just keep trying to give us what we are asking for, and by the time they get anything done the public is all mad and like "naw, I don't want that now!" Personally, I think we need fewer movies. Fewer new shows that run longer, with more episodes. Longer seasons. A chance to slow down and appreciate things. The audience, the actors, the writers, the directors all need that. But the studios shareholders want more, more, more! Now, now, now! So we keep getting 300 million dollar duds that were based off any IP a studio can still get their hands on that did well decades ago. But anything done with an old property, even just to avoid flat out plagiarizing the existing IP, just pees off the fans, even though they might claim some old show or movie is the only thing that was ever any good and say they want it brought back.

[@Shoulderpads-mcgee]

@@lionmom7629 I agree with this comment. I don’t love when people see a race swap character in a reboot and say they wish they’d just made an original X character instead. Because like, ok, if they did that, would y’all actually read or watch it? People make original characters all the time who are minorities but they get much less attention. And yeah we definitely need less entertainment because it’s not art anymore it’s Content. Netflix will drop a season of a show all at once, people will binge it, talk about it for a week, and then forget it ever existed. I’d 100% be fine if we got less movies and tv shows and less often if it meant better quality storytelling and better conditions for the people making it.

[@hype3224]

My answers for you and your questions throughout the video. How often does this happen in the writers room? - I'm not exactly sure what he meant with this since he could later change to situation that he was describing so im gonna answer assuming when he said this as forced diversity. And my answer is that it happens a lot of times, in the west mostly of course since that is part of the Hollywoods message that they try to spread. -I don't blame Az (aka Heelvsbabyface) for that as he has played trough 8 or so hours of terrible Starfield gameplay and realized that pronouns took higher priority than everything and i mean EVERYTHING else. -Cast and production that has done something like this before: -Netflix's Damsel and Cleopatra -Almost every Disney's live action remake -Marvel/s with M-She-U -Dustborn -Concord -Velma ofc -Everything made by Kathleen Kennedy and Lucas films -Willow -Latest season of Doctor Who -and so on... -Critics reviews in 2020 don't matter as they are spineless Hollywood or Western game dev bootlickers, fan reviews are really only ones that are trustworthy as they aren't paid by someone else to give good reviews (most of the time at least). Good example of this is the fact that on IGN you can find a review of Dustborn (the game with peak 68 players at some point) is rated 7 while Black Myth: Wukong is rated an 8 (The game with over 10 million players that kept breaking steam records.). - I haven't watched the Ghostbuster movies either but from what I can tell,the afterlife wasn't at least trying to insult the fans or be annoying. What exactly is Forced Diversity? -"Forced diversity" is a term used by some people to criticize the inclusion of diverse characters in media, such as movies, TV shows, books, and video games, when they perceive this inclusion as being done in an inauthentic, tokenistic, or agenda-driven way rather than for the sake of the story or character development. The term suggests that diversity is being "forced" into a narrative to meet social or political expectations rather than occurring naturally within the context of the story. What criteria do we judge this by? -If it doesn't break verisimilitude,or simply said isn't out of place for the story,character and everything else while feeling organic. Organic as in the writers trying to shove politics down your throat by inserting their message of whatever political view they have into the entertainment. Could it also not be that we are annoyed by or uncomfortable by with the concept of diversity in fiction? -I would say no, no one gave a shit that Blade was black or Dylan from Predator or Ripley from Alien or Muses in the Disney's hercules being Black or that Goku is an alien from another planet,both are diverse and yet everyone loves and see themselves in those characters.(Mostly everyone of course.) And could we also say that people making scathing reviews and commentaries on the next FORCED DIVERSITY films are not themselves looking for things they dislike purely on the basis politics? -This one is weird to answer since most of the time,forced diversity IS done out of political or agenda driven reasons. While there are obvious outliers of individuals which make sense for them to dislike something like forced diversity most of the people making commentaries are just sick of bad content from the west and are pointing it out and earning cash by making such commentaries by being more entertaining. Also missed the apolitical part so let answer it here... -I don't see how it is ironic to point out that someone is Apolitical unless they are Matt Walsh,Ben Shapiro or other self proclaimed right wing person. -No comment to personal bias part since I don't have full understanding to how you mean it and I don't want to interpret it the wrong way. Does diversity make a bad movie worse? -This depends on the movie and it's setting and whether it does or doesn't break verisimilitude.For example if the movie is medieval Europe and people of medieval look as diverse as downtown LA,it breaks verisimilitude and harms the movie. Or is it that we are biased against it and that bad writing makes us look at it as the root cause? -No,we are not biased against diversity. Japanese and Koreans running circles around western entertainment is more than enough proof needed. ---I'm gonna stop writing this since likely you or anyone else won't read this at all but if you do I'll watch the rest of the video and give you my answer.

[@toasturhztoastbunz896]

I don't like "diversity" when it feels lazy and half-assed. You seriously cannot look at something like Velma 2023 and tell me that is good representation and diversity.

[@LadCorazon]

But he didn't. The whole point is that media with diversity should be allowed to be bad when it's bad and not be used to argue that "that's why we should have no diversity". The fact that Velma 2023 is diverse means nothing, because if the cast was all white it'd still be a steaming pile of trash. That's kinda the point of this video. The unbalanced response.

[@toasturhztoastbunz896]

Also, wow. This video is... very hypocritical and filled with many contradictions. The biggest one is you calling out others for harshly judging Black characters to this "high ideal of representation"...... whilst in you previous video about this subject, released no little than 13 days ago, you constantly lambasted Black characters, good ones mind you, for having "stereotypical features" like the "same hairstyle" and "having lightning powers." Nevermind the hairstyle in question is a very common one that many Black men like having, and the characters that had lighting powers didn't have it as their primary power, let alone their only power. Sorry, just a little thing that irked me a tad bit too much... 😅

[@Darth_Bateman]

@@toasturhztoastbunz896 If you're referring to the Killmonger cut? No, no it is not. . . . . First off, that cut is so overused now its corny. Second, it is SO bad for the hair and isn't meant to be used with natural hair. Third, its not that Lightning Powers are bad ? It's just that we've gotten to a point where there aren't really many Black Superheroes who DON'T have lightning powers. It's like. . . .It was Cute when it was Static and Storm and Black Lightning.

[@toasturhztoastbunz896]

@@Darth_Bateman Ehh, still not enough to convince me that Velma but painted brown is considered better representation than Miles Morales all bc he had lightning powers and is "stereotypical" like the other black heroes.

[@Shoulderpads-mcgee]

I think you might be misinterpreting some things? I don’t think this video was saying Velma is good representation, but rather that what’s wrong with Velma isn’t the race changes. Velma is a bad show and it’s pissed off the crowd that hates race swaps and cries about forced diversity while also pissing off people who want to see themselves represented in media by representing them in such an awful, soulless show lol. Basically the point of the video is that diversity is rarely what makes a piece of media bad, but people will latch onto that as the reason the media is bad. People will say the star wars sequels are bad because the main characters is a woman and not because two directors had very different ideas for a story that had zero planning. And as for the hair and lightning powers thing, those were never being used as as ways a black character is bad. He never called any of those characters bad, rather it’s a callout to the people creating and designing these characters on their lack of creativity. It’s showing that creators will do paint by numbers with black characters and just copy what’s popular and worked in the past rather than doing something original. Miles is not a bad character for having lightning powers or getting that haircut once, but it raises the question, why did the people behind these choices for him make those choices?

[@Shoulderpads-mcgee]

It’s this argument that stresses me out whenever I see diverse content, especially content I think will be bad. I think most marvel stuff is not great right now but when I saw the trailer for The Marvels I gave me a slight sick feeling because I knew it would be clowned on and have anything wrong with it be blamed on it’s female cast even though projects like secret wars do just as poorly and movies like (the first) Wonder Woman do just as well. But people don’t notice things like diversity when something is good like The Owl House or Spiderverse, but they notice it when it’s bad like Lightyear or Strange World. I want to get excited when I see diverse media but I get nervous that it’s gonna end up being bad and the subject of so many conservative think pieces. Especially when it’s diverse characters in media made by big companies that praise the almighty audience charts before the fundamentals of storytelling and then people point at girl Jedi and black stormtrooper being everything that’s wrong with star wars and not the everything else.

[@lionmom7629]

Yes. Its the fact that if its bad, its blamed on "diversity" even when its clearly just bad because its been rushed, or they just didn't get the characters personalities right, or there's too much bad CGI. Doesn't matter. Its blamed on "diversity" and "ESG" and "DEI" even though most people only learned those words from bad actors who warped what they really mean and what they are for. Bad movies just happen, sometimes. Its not like there are no bad movies with all straight white men in the cast. There are plenty of bad movies with no "diversity" at all!

[@Shoulderpads-mcgee]

@@lionmom7629 yeah I’ve never heard DEI until I heard people complaining about how it’s “ruining” media. And it’s not fair that media with diverse casts isn’t allowed to be bad. Adam Sandler literally funds low effort bad movies to pay for his vacations but they’re always just “bad movies” but not “bad white boy” movies. But if your movie with a minority isn’t Citizen Kane it’s blamed on DEI and whatever. It’s that saying that you have to work twice as hard to get half as much. It’s awful.

[@charlie8829]

YES OMG. It’s not the fact the cast is diverse it’s how it’s written

[@Unworshipediety]

Diversity is awesome, but folks shouldn't expect a diverse project to suddenly be written well. Attempts are made but not every attempt will succeed especially if you're injecting something new to a genre. The trouble with diversity is there's often not an overabudance of blueprints to follow, so a lot these projects are sorta playing it by ear and just seeing what works and what doesn't. It's a very interesting time to be alive. I like failures because I've seen what comes out of that and it's usually a better product that helps to inspire those who want a better world for all.

[@sugarzblossom8168]

I hate when the main critic people have for something is this character black or this character is a woman. I sometimes think that people put more thought into race than writers do. For examples the wish movie, when i saw the trailer I certainly wasn't think about the characters race but people were complaining about the villain being white and the mc not being white. The same people who say race doesn't matter. If a character is badly written their race doesn't need to be mentioned

[@WannaBNice]

I agree kinda but 2 be fair for that wish movie it was set in a Latin based kingdom where everyone was the same race except the very few white people in it and those white people were antagonistic and considering who the movie was made by people will obviously pay attention to it

[@sugarzblossom8168]

​@@WannaBNice but they can't be preaching about race not mattering. Also Didn't the 7 dwarfs consist of some white people? Also also a lot of them could be the same race but lighter or darker

[@pandabanaan9208]

In my mind it's complicated, the big problem is that many people talking about forced diversity have a clear blatant bias against diversity entirely meaning the term is a bit shaky, rather I sorta prefer to see it as bad diversity something I do have a problem with, I feel like you can often tell what a writer had in mind when including a certain group, sometimes you can see all the effort and research they put in to get the best possible understanding about the people they were writing about(or alternatively they are part of that group themselves in wich case it's very easy as long as you have good writing skills), then you have the more weird ones those were it feels like the writer had good intentions but just fumbled the execution, finally you have the really bad cases with either a writer who wanted to include a group hut put 0 effort into properly representing them or corpos trying to seem progressive by adding some diverse cameo in they can edit out in certain releases because they don't really care, so like let's take a trans character, if you put in some research you can find there is actually a ton of ways to orginically intigrate them into the story and create interesting narratives, but if you're just including them for the sake of it that lack of effort can show and make them feel forced, it sorta comes down to the what's worse thing, no representation or bad representation, I wanna say that if you're not fully dedicated to putting in the effort to accurately represent a group you shouldn't try at all but I'm not one for limiting artists(as long as it doesn't cross a certain line offcourse like glorifying disgusting behavior) and that would reduced the already small rep out there, but I can't lie I've seen a bit too many poor representations of autism to were I would like to see people try harder instead of just using something like a mental or physical disability as a character gimmick

[@ONEPEAKFRFR]

Yes.

[@Darth_Bateman]

No, we do not have a “blatant bias” against diversity. I’m black, and I got called anti Black by a white kid who lives in the suburbs…. What did I do? I disliked Anette from Castlevania Nocturne. I even raised a point about how Annette’s storyline and character was completely inappropriate to add to Castlevania of all things and felt jarring to watch. I didn’t come here to Castlevania to hear about the Revolution or Slaves being free for the unpteenth time. I came here to see the Belmonts kill vampires and character chemistry. I got …. 5% of the former 2% of the latter.

[@iagomartinezdealegriamader52]

Lets be honest a lot of people, maybe most people, aren't all that politically active in their day to day life and consuming media and consuming products are the most "politically meaningful" thing we do

[@pandabanaan9208]

@@iagomartinezdealegriamader52 it depends, some people have to care about politics because of how it effects them, like how I think special education needs to be improved because I had to experience its problems first hand

[@iagomartinezdealegriamader52]

@@pandabanaan9208 i'm not saying that most people don't care. I would say that most people care somewhat about politics. What i'm saying is that most people don't take more action that voting and posting on the internet.

[@mon0lithic629]

Look, I get your point -- but why does your argument hinge on the idea that forced diversity applies to diversity in general? The whole point is that the two are wildly different, and the reason why forced diversity is so frowned upon isn't that it just portrays minorities (although some would cling to that), but because it does so to virtue signal, often at the expense of good writing. To me, forced diversity is when you either: A) change a pre-established character or group of characters to fit real minority archetypes that said character or group did not belong to beforehand, or B) introduce minority character(s) into the plot for the sole reason of virtue signaling. That is, either their narrative purpose is so minor that their inclusion is pointless, or they are portrayed in such a disproportionately positive light in comparison to other characters that their inclusion can only stem from the desire to pander to the real identity group that said character belongs to. The reasons as to why the two are correlated to bad writing are thus; For A, it is because such changing of pre-established characters is often a symptom of either contempt for a character or a notion that the new writer “knows better” and sees the character or their group as something to be “fixed” rather than a blueprint to be translated into a new medium. Of course, that is not always a negative and the change CAN work out for the better. The cases where such changes work out, however, are not so much the result of the change itself but the actor fitting the character or bringing them out in an especially compelling manner. For B, however, there is no such saving grace. The reason why narrative suffers at the inclusion just for the sake of inclusion is that the writer is either too scared to write minority characters as, well, characters with flaws at the fear of appearing racist, sexist, etc., or is so ardent with the desire to pander to said minorities that play out their character as a power fantasy, of sorts, where they turn them into a tool to directly address the audience either out of spite or out of arrogance. Many Mary Sues are the result of such. You may say that the reason why these are bad isn’t that they propose inclusion but because they are a result of bad writing, and you would be correct. However, the writers guilty of these do not see their mistakes as mistakes - they see them as methods of “fighting the power” and dismiss any criticism with cries of bigotry, even when they aren’t so. Hell, the reason why so many people latch on to changes such as “Ghostbusters but women” or “Little Mermaid but black” is not necessarily because they think that either concept cannot work, but because such changes became red flags to people. They no longer see it as “wow, what an interesting concept - I wonder why and how they will do this” but as “wow, so they will make a shit film and call critics bigots again, won’t they?”

[@pandabanaan9208]

I think it comes down to the whole bad diversity or no diversity, trust me if I would have it my way every single rep would be accurate and well done, but sadly that's not the world we live in and many younger people have to rely on latching onto innacurate representations that still give them something to relate to, like say we got rid of all the bad autistic and trans rep, sure that means we don't have the bad anymore but the problem is that isn't automatically going to be filled up with good rep again, it sucks that it has to be like this but until we have more widespread proper representation we will have to tolerate the existence of some of it, I'm not saying don't critisize it though heck rip it to shreds that's how we will one day get better rep

[@mon0lithic629]

@@pandabanaan9208 But why are no diversity or bad diversity the only options? Diversity just shouldn't be treated as anything special -- positive or negative. The issue today is that writers believe that just having characters of different identities is a net positive when, if anything, it just muddles whatever theme you're trying to convey. It shouldn't be a requirement just as it shouldn't be demonised. Just let creatives be creatives. If the result is bad, then it's bad -- good cause doesn't excuse it in the slightest.

[@tonyt1680]

​@@pandabanaan9208I have to agree on your take. What's more, I believe that with sound criticism where these writers go wrong, and praise when they do something correctly, it can lead us to getting some really complex characters, and narratives--and I love a good story, I'm always looking to gain new insights and perspectives. So I want to see stories and experiences outside of myself. Yeah, there might definitely be some crap to slog through, no doubt, but I believe that eventually the wheat will be separated from the chaff. We shouldn't be afraid of having diversity for the sole risk that it could be done wrong/poorly, if these writers have integrity, they will be looking to hear feedback, to actually include the people they depict as team members in the writing rooms, to improve, and bring about interesting untold stories and narratives for everyone. But it doesn't help when they aren't being given the space to improve, and do better. I want to give them that chance. We can say, this is what's wrong with this portrayal, now do better, without throwing the baby out with the bathwater by saying we don't want to see it at all.

[@pandabanaan9208]

@@mon0lithic629 well that's the thing the creatives that have a strong desire to make good rep are often in the minority, it is more complicated then none or bad but you do sorta need those filler ones to exist to increase the chance of people finding what they need, this mainly goes for disability wich is were my perspective comes from, disabled people need representation to often even come to understand themselves and since the only good rep for that comes from disabled creatives it probably wouldn't have the reach it needs, I also have a trans perspective on this, growing up the best I had were bodyswap episodes wich got me thinking but not much more, eventually Ianded on some of the less perfect trans characters after coming to understand it about myself and nowadays I have the ones I can honestly say are well written, sure I would definitly prefer if there were more strive bridgets but for as flawed as those trap gag characters were it was nice to have something to latch onto for that time Also I don't think that's how the industry goes, forced diversity doesn't often seem to be writers being forced to add diversity to their stories but corpos wanting to cash in on a market wich doesn't have a lot of options, and I imagine corpos probably believe themselves to be creatives being creatives, I do believe that when done right characters of different identities is a net positive because it can really help with feeling less alone, but there is a problem you see while I agree it shouldn't be required that also means that there will be less of it meaning that in order to slightly increase it the corpos do need to ad their slop onto the collection, unless a giant rise of diverse authors suddenly appears there aren't enough creatives to get the message to those that need to hear it, though maybe that is just a me thing, my perspective comes from my own life experiences so maybe things have changed since then and I'm just viewing it through an outdated perspective

[@lionmom7629]

But who decided that "virtue signalling" equalled "bad writing?" For the sake of argument, think for a moment, what if "virtue signalling" was really a completely different thing than good or bad writing?? What if not all "virtue signaling" is even a bad thing? What if adding diverse characters was done because the writer needed or wanted their characters to reflect people that inspired their writing?? What if the narrative you have been sold, the thing nobody is ever allowed to argue about, the part where "virtue signalling" MAKES the writing impure, imperfect, bad, what if that assumption isn't true? What then? Maybe bad writing is just bad writing. And good writing is just good writing. Think about it. Does having less diverse characters, or non diverse characters suddenly, all by itself, IMPROVE the writing? Would Velma have become a better show if everyone was just white? And straight? You believe that there are no shows or movies with all white casts, no queer representation and women only cast in supporting roles that had bad writing????? Really??? If media can have bad writing WITHOUT diversity, doesn't it stand to reason that its not really diversity that's affecting the writing, one way or another, most of the time? If media is worse "because of diversity, because of virtue signalling" then can you point out something specific? Something where virtue signalling, alone, caused an otherwise good show or movie to go downhill in the writing? Specifically? Not because of any other issue?????

[@josesosa3337]

Depends. I think diverse cartman is a really funny character from the clips that I saw and I wouldn't mind seeing them again. But Velma, april o neal, and black deadshot i think are huge missteps with regards to "inclusive casting".

[@Shoulderpads-mcgee]

What about April bothers you? And is it just Mutant Mayhem, ROTTMNT, or both? Because I love ROTTMNT April. MM April is ok, I just didn’t like the puking bit lol

[@enitsu393]

April was originally black/mixed race

[@josesosa3337]

@@enitsu393 April wasnt actually originally black. That's misinformation. Her curls in some original comics arent even natural curls. Kevin eastman and peter laird have said that April at some points was going to be asian as well. But both creators have said that April is White and/or mixed race. From my understanding we don't know the racial makeup of one of the creators' girlfriend who inspired April but I could go back and check.

[@animestreamer85]

@@josesosa3337Yeah, April is a white woman. Twitters user uses some panel of April with puffy hair and said that April was black because that hair style looks like an Afro. I think one of the artist/writer come out and explain that it was a perm and not an Afro hair style.

[@haydencarn8737]

@@enitsu393 That is a lie.

[@ONEPEAKFRFR]

This is a very well put-together video. I used to be one of those anti-woke agenda people without actually knowing what I was talking about. I just hated something because I saw a lot of people hate on it, and thus, they must be in the right. To be honest, it's a lot easier to hate on something than it is to love. I used to watch way too many anti-woke KZbinrs, but then I went outside and actually started thinking about the world around me and realized all this woke agenda and forced diversity is all total BS.

[@pandabanaan9208]

This is very common, I feel many of us were dumb teenagers some feeling hurt and wanting to listen to the people claiming to hear us out when no one else would(or at least that's what it felt like), I 've heard a lot of people go from anti sjw(or anti woke as it is called now) to becoming progressive

[@audreyharris7643]

Based on the recent thing with sweet baby inc I'd say it is a thing. Just that people can or fake seeing it in places where it's not there and whine just as much as the people they claim there better than. Which is why I'm not big into it much myself.

[@lionmom7629]

I'm really glad you found your way out of that. When I followed more negative, angry social media I found it kind of emotionally exhausting. So I really hope you are enjoying life even just a little bit more now.

[@darthgonk5648]

@@audreyharris7643 true, companies like Blackrock and SBI using diversity as a bullying tactic to get paid and have creative control is a pretty scummy thing to do.

[@Shoulderpads-mcgee]

Hey I just wanna commend you on taking a step back from the influences around you to really think about the ideas they were feeding you a decide how you actually feel about it! And for having the humbleness and humility to talk about a way that you changed and grew as a person. I think a lot of people get trapped in anti-woke echo chambers because it’s easier to double down and insist you’re right than to self reflect and change course. That, and the sunk cost fallacy or something.

[@psommorr]

"Forced Diversity" to me is when you make minority characters or change characters to be minorities make them politically acceptable. It's a bad thing to me because back when I was growing up, Black Panther was cool to me. I saw Ultimate Avengers 2 and thought, "That dude was badass." but now thanks to a shift in the culture and everyone wanting to politicize being black, the Black Panther movie was a pain in the ass to watch. I've only seen it once and that was enough, because the movie wanted to rely heavily on being black and being African that it just became grating to me. I don't want black movies and black characters to rely on being black to sell the movie, nor do I want white characters to be sidelined in favor for a black character to shine. But there's a cultural push to make characters diverse, which makes any legitimate characters that you want to make that are minorities look like it's being done for a political reason. We were always accepting of diverse characters, hell, they even made Cole Train black because the actor was so good at embodying the character that they modeled the character after him. I personally don't feel represented when a movie makes changes to established characters or adds in characters that are diverse to make a quick buck. Even when it is genuine, it rarely feels genuine because the people who are after the money dilute the market for good diversity. And I have a different idea of why people freak out over these changes. Put yourself in their shoes. They're nerdy guys and their hobbies and interests just started to become mainstream around 2008 with Iron Man kicking off the nerdy craze. Well, these guys have always been told their hobby is trash. Back in the 80's, it was the satanic panic over DnD. In the 90's and 00's, it was violence (and sexism to a lesser extent) in video games. Now since it's mainstream, the people who would've bullied them back then are now 'loving' what they deemed to be trash back in the day since it's palatable to them now. Well in the '10's it changed to, "This culture is problematic because they don't allow women or minorities to join" even though there wasn't as big of an issue with it when the community was smaller. Think about it, you spend your entire life being told that what you like is bad for one reason or another and now they're actively changing characters that you like because it fits the culture. It's not that they are diverse, it's that the market is so diluted that you can't tell on the surface what is legit diversity and what isn't. That's why they bring up the minority characters that they do like, because in the past, there wasn't really a push to make characters diverse. Diversity can be a good thing. But the culture itself makes it toxic to even have minorities because you're either praised or damned for your character's skin color rather than the content of the film. John Wick rides this line perfectly. They have a legitimate diverse cast and characters. John himself is a Romani and they deal with the Bratva, il Camorra and Ruska Roma, all while celebrating the cultures of many different national groups and then some. That's good diversity. The shows and films shown in the video aren't.

[@HopeReviews]

Yeah, if it's forced then yes

[@noofzoof]

Hey, ex-Anti woke guy here. Honestly I think the main problem with "woke" as a descriptor is that its such a vague and subjective definition. Like in my mind, I see "woke" media as stories that have progressive themes that feel too corporate in a sense. Like a show having underrepresented groups in it doesn't automatically make it "woke" or have "forced diversity", its the way that the underrepresented groups are treated that makes it "woke" in a sense. Like the diverse cast feels like it only exists to increase a corporation's ESG scores, and not because the corporations actually give a shit about representation. That's at least what I understood the definition to be back when I actually gave a shit about the culture war back in 2017-2019. Of course there were malicious people back then who just hated series with characters that weren't straight, white or male, but it seems like back then, what made something "woke" was more clear and those morons seemed to be more of a minority. Like the problem nowadays is that words like "woke" and "forced diversity" have been thrown at literally everything to the point where the definition might as well be that it has underrepresented groups in it, which sucks, because there's no longer a decent word to call out that sort of fake corporate slop representation you get from big corporations like Disney. Honestly I'm glad I moved on from giving a shit about culture war stuff because it just feels like most "anti-woke" people nowadays are just as annoying as the "woke" shit that they hate. Also just for some added context, I'm a bisexual woman, and I'm not uncomfortable with diversity in media, and as a writer I want to add diversity because its a great thing, and not in order to please investors.

[@audreyharris7643]

You are right anti sjw people became the same whiny complaining and jump at whatever you see group they call the other side snowflakes for. And now there two sides of the same ignorant coin.

[@IsabellaMathew]

That also, why left as well because of how anti-woke became woke are just toxic.

[@IsabellaMathew]

Same boat.

[@lionmom7629]

I get that shallow, inauthentic representation can suck. But I also get that its not THAT widespread! Every single non white, non weak female, queer, disabled or ethnically/religiously diverse character can't be inauthentic panderining and shallow. I mean, statistically, that just not likely! But look on the internet, and you'd think that's the case. So to me, I think "woke" was always just a way to hide flat out irrational bigotry in plain site, and that we just didn't know it until it got completely out of control. Now, I see LGTBQ people, black people, especially black women, all women, and all kinds of other targeted people just get harassed to hell and back online. That would not have flown just a few short years ago, at least, not everywhere on the internet. But its the norm, now. Its like the anti "woke" ruse fooled us all into backsliding, back to open bigotry being just normal again.

[@audreyharris7643]

@@lionmom7629 people being openly bigoted was always a thing

[@AScaryDude2008]

Forced diversity is bad writing. It’s in the name itself, writing should never feel “forced” only natural

[@charlie8829]

I personally think “forced” diversity can unintentionally make stereotypes. For example the strong female character is making a new stereotype of women having to be perfect at everything and be better then all the men. The Barbie movie explains this so well, especially the speech at the end where we as women are expected to do everything and to just be grateful for it, and touches on how men are also affected by the system as they are forced to suppress their emotions and to be strong or else they are “weak”

[@rise.-mikey]

Forced diversity for me is, if you have a character from a different race/gender/disability and give them no flaws or nothing interesting to work with basically a background/token character. (Just make them feel human please) but that's really it. It's like this one series about this doctor, who has autism, a lot of people in the spectrum can't identify with this characters and tend to feel relatable to other characters like let's say Donnie from Rise of TMNT, he has flaws and quirks, doesn't really shy away from what he's doing. But it was written in a way that people were able to resonate with him without feeling like a complete joke because Donnie's siblings didn't take him as a joke, unless he was going too far but even then they notice if they did something wrong or not. Another series called Shera also has this going with a character called Entrapta, however she was put on a leash and I think you can tell how people felt about that scene- Peridot also falls into that category, a character who was accidentally written to be autistic coded but people who are on the spectrum love her. However, I do understand a few things about this hate campaign, I resonate a lot with Moxxie from Helluva Boss. He's written very well character wise, not once did he felt written out of character. But other people call it bad writing and that they ruin Moxxie specifically in one episode, the one episode in which he snaps and gets rightfully frustrated about something (Should he yell at Millie because of this? nah, he clearly should have told her early what's wrong). Sometimes even good critics don't understand him, which sometimes makes me feel lonely and gives me a harsh reminder that people can't understand me or my viewpoints because it's more wrong then anything other people do, I take the example Millie, even though she's just as wrong with doing things as much as Moxxie in their relationship, people tend to take her side and just dislike Moxxie for being selfish like seriously? Millie was selfish a lot of times too (Maybe more so then Moxxie but I could be wrong here) no one really sees that and just blame Moxxie for everything (I was honestly relived to see that in TikTok, a lot of people could understand Moxxie and also resonate with this character in that episode, didn't make me feel alone) I think in this case, Millie isn't complicated enough to have majority understand her side over Moxxie- like dang, if people know me irl, will they also call me out of character because I do something stupid that could have been prevented by simply telling what's wrong at the start? I don't get it. This is reminding me of Avatar the Last Airbender as well, people say that the live action is awful because: 'It's not like this in the cartoon!!!' but i'm here thinking they did a pretty good job trying to make this more realistic, i'm currently at episode 5 and yes they did way too much here at once to the point it sort of ignores the rules or ideas the cartoon has portrayed with the spirit world but else the last 4 episodes were really good, there was also comedy in some scenes but guess what the people say...they say it doesn't have any comedic moments at all (which is just a lie) not really in a laughing out loud funny scenes but yeah, I can even understand why Aang isn't smiling a lot in certain scenes- why should he smile while being treated like this by his friend Bumi? yeaaah, no. Best to form your own opinions, instead of parroting what other random people say on the internet.

[@axolotlman8309]

see for me I don't have a problem if your characters are diverse my problem is when we get established characters and changer their race or gender but the writer dose nothing with this, like Velma from the newest show. they changed her race but never explored how this would change some of the personality traits the original velma had like speech attitude or and even small things like that. in general if your characters is written well then it shouldn't have the issue said before like nick furry or wally west from the flash tv show.

[@ZeeBlueShork]

Tbf if shows back in the day like KD Edd Ed and Eddy, Danny Phantom, etc etc (most 2000s and late 90s shows) can have a lovable diverse cast of characters and the issue with what I have as a black guy is the hand outs and replacements of these characters. The writing in alot of these shows (not korra that show was just badly written) Is that they attack the old property and those characters through the new ones to elevate them Like yakuza recently replaced its main lead with another and didn't do a damn thing bad to the old lead either. Yet stuff like The last jedi and thou2 always find away to shit on the old lead (usually the male) to push for the new characters to be unique. Maybe its a western world issue idk

[@patroba3392]

4:36 I love how you used a morrisey clip when talking about condescending people. My favorite morrisey quote "Chinese are a subspecies"

[@FurryestX]

STOP THERE, RIPLEY is a good female character and a tomboy Mommy, SHUSH

[@BloodBornShadowWalker]

Nobody said she wasn't. And she wasn't forced diversity

[@Yipper64]

0:40 its almost as if... they arent doing it because they actually believe in any of it, but because it gets them money. And not by people agreeing with it either. We're so polarized its obvious that this kind of stuff loses money on the actual products. No its all in ESG. 2:42 when you have characters that are more ESG checkboxes than actual characters. Which is usually any characters that fall under protected progressive groups.\ 3:20 well I think its rare that people actually try to say that their own political biases have nothing to do with how they dislike these things. Like there's a lot of things that are quality that I dont like purely based on my political and moral biases and opinions. 3:32 well from the perspective of it being for ESG, I think its a little more complicated than that. Or at least, it can be framed far differently. So basically anything made purely for ESG, or in other words "woke media", is often made cheaply, and by people hired purely for boosting that ESG score, just because the real goal isnt in selling the product, nobody actually would care about it, because so many are biased against it, its polarizing. But its made cheaply because the point is those ESG stocks, and since it is made cheaply, and by people who arent competent just "diverse" its going to be low quality. This also accounts for quality things that happen to also be woke, they just happened to have a budget, and if they cant sprinkle in some ESG boosting stuff they of course will. 4:55 that is true, but why are there so many things with forced diversity that are bad? Again ESG explains it. All the stuff with sweet baby inc points directly to this. 5:08 minorities dont make me uncomfortable. Especially not ethnic minorities. It is not a discomfort I feel, rather, when it comes to minorities that dont fall into the ethnic category, I have moral reasons to reject the promotion of the actions those minority groups practice, by definition of being part of those groups. Mainly the LGBT thing. See, I notice in society a lot today people dont separate action from identity. If you act white, you are white, even if your skin is dark. "if you dont know if you should vote for me or Trump then you aint black" That's stupid. Actions and identities are different. Actions can be changed, debated, argued. 7:22 again you keep mixing LGBT and ethnic minorities like they are the same thing. They arent. One constitutes promotion of a certain action, the other is just people existing.

[@pandabanaan9208]

seems more like the issue is corporations being soulless then diversity, good diversity comes from those who are passionate about giving a broader perspective, bad diversity comes from corpos seeing the success and trying to imitate it while missing the point entirely

[@audreyharris7643]

LGBT people are also people who exist who just so happen to be gay bi trans or other. Hell there not all in the same community and view how identity is used differently

[@Darth_Bateman]

@@audreyharris7643LGBT are a small fraction of the population, and Blizzard is trying to say having 10% gay staff isn’t enough and are racking their brains on how to boost that number.

[@audreyharris7643]

@@Darth_Bateman that's just blizzard being ridiculous

[@Yipper64]

​@@pandabanaan9208 Yes, companies being greedy is the core of the issue, at least we can find that common ground, and i'd like to focus on that, regardless of my own opinions on the more specific aspects. But yes people who call themselves "LGBT" and partake in those practices are people, I 100% agree with that. I just disagree with the practices that the "LGBT" group promotes. And I would say that the main reason that that it seems like there arent that many people that do disagree with those practices is probably *because* of money grubbing companies promoting those practices purely for these ESG stocks. But that's just my take. Let me just ask, just to get to the heart of the disagreement, is it immoral for me to have my views assuming being LGBT is a choice. Like regardless of what you think is fact, if we took "its a choice" as a given, would my position still be immoral?

[@Davetonitheone]

The thing is that because of ESG the big wigs forces the writers and other creators to meet dumbass check lists and force them to stupid censors, just check what they just said about DND

[@hungaryhippo7294]

This vid about "forced diversity" in media seems to be a straw man misrepresenting the actual critiques being made. The claim that people are arguing against having any diversity at all in media, or that they believe diverse media is inherently bad or not allowed to have flaws in writing, is disingenuous. The main issue raised is about changing the established race or ethnicity of existing fictional characters, or including ethnic representations in historical dramas and reenactments when it does not align with the factual historical context. I feel this can come across as an inorganic effort to promote diversity at the expense of creative integrity or historical accuracy. When it comes to fictional characters and properties, I am typically not a fan of race-swapping them unless one of two conditions is met: A) The new actor hired to play the race-swapped character is extraordinarily talented and can still capture the essence of the character they are portraying despite the racial change. Or B) The writers put a fresh, unique spin on the character that differentiates them enough from the original version that it feels like a distinct interpretation rather than just an arbitrary race swap. A good example would be Samuel L. Jackson's portrayal of Nick Fury in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. While originally conceived as a white character in the comics, Jackson's Fury has enough distinctive character traits, and swagger that he stands apart as his own take rather than just being the same Fury with a different skin color.

[@PumpkinSwag]

That part. I do believe that forced diversity is a thing, but that DOES NOT mean that I want every main character ever to be a straight white male. There are more than just two positions on diversity. It's not either "race swaps are God's gift to minorities" or "every movie needs to take place in a white ethno-state." I'm very much in favor of movies and shows with ORIGINAL black and female characters. For example, I loved Arcane and Cyberpunk: Edgerunners. Heck, even in movies that have token race-swaps, I think they're good even when I don't agree with the race-swap. Though I think even race-swaps can be good when used as a creative tool that affects the character rather than just a lazy approach to diversity (Django Unchained is a good example of where I think race-swapping is done right). It's just that most of the time, these are done for no reason but just to say "we have diversity," and especially in the case of comic books, the race-swaps come at the expense of characters who were already black but never got their chance to shine.

[@LearningGabriel]

For me when it comes to forced diversity, I have gone through a time in which I really agreed with all the anti woke rabbit hole. I think to a certain extent that many are right and there is a large (I’ll be it semi large) portion of media that panders for diversities sake alone, not really for its audience or good writing, but simply to fit into a certain mold pushed onto them by corrupt organizations to fill a certain quota. I don’t think it’s realistic to pretend that it doesn’t exist some how for this reason. But with that said I do value diversity a lot, even if only to a certain extent. And the anti woke crowd is not only getting out of hand and being quite hypocritical as they do it, but they are become just as paranoid as the people they criticize. Frankly when it comes to the whole culture war I find it to be quite idiotic although I may find myself agreeing at times with the more conservative side of things. And the same goes for politics. I’m not conservative, but I have conservative values as I am a Christian. And with my own research on how devastating certain political ideologies such as Marxism’s and Socialisim and sayings such as “equality is the ultimate good”. Even with that fact however, I find politics to be quite, in a word; retarded. For me it’s just another period in the cycle of humanity before things collapse. Nothing is new under the sun. With that too said however I think it’s important that with diversity, there should be good writing. Having diverse characters can be great. But without good writing it’s almost pointless. Which is why I agree more with people like Master Samwise and Pilgrims pass more than people just saying that we should have diversity in stories regardless of whether or not it’s well written. And even if I don’t agree with certain kinds of diversity (without biase because I’ve done actual research that supports my own views) if it’s written well then I find it to be passable and even enjoyable at times. I believe it’s the same with the minority in the anti woke community that actually criticize a story for its objective qualities such as Mauler rather than than souly its meta ones. A perfect example is Arcane: League of Legends. That show is one of my favorite animated series of all time. But as a Christian I don’t feel entirely comfortable with the lesbian relationship that happens in the show. And yet I find enjoyment and deep story inspiration from the relationship in such wonderful ways. Even though in my personal opinion, while it was written excellently, I feel like if Vi was a man almost nothing would be different, but that’s just my pov. In many shows if it’s at least decently written, I believe it to be passable in my eyes. Case closed. But if I encounter a show in which it has something I don’t like and is badly written, such as the dragon prince, then I simply just stop watching it. I don’t make a hissy fit. I’m not going to go into the internet and shame people for not agreeing with me on what I believe to be true and untrue. Moral and immoral. And I’m happy to have an open conversation with someone who may disagree with how I view things. After all I’m still learning. Although I feel it important to also point out that there is a certain caution in engaging such conversation because just like how many feel that they will receive hate for liking a diverse character/story that the anti woke crowd don’t like, I feel that I may receive hate because of me being Christian and because of topics such as homosexuality are so emotionally charged. And I don’t think we should also ignore the biase that is clear within more liberal or just left leaning content. Such as Pop culture detective. As they dismiss and claim that traditional ideas are “harmful” when in reality said ideas and principals such as stoicism can be a valuable thing and have kept humanity alive for thousands of years.

[@NeoPokebonz]

Outstanding video, dude. This one and You Suck at Writing Black People have a special place in my heart.

[@MxMothra]

My family loves the female ghostbusters. It’s fun. It’s not a masterpiece, but it’s very entertaining.

[@tonyt1680]

Very well written video. I was born in the 90's, and the cartoons I grew up with would be called "woke-ism" and "forced diversity" today. The Magic School Bus, Captain Planet, The Puzzle Place (a puppet show, but I digress), all were shows that intentionally showcased a diverse cast of characters. It's so weird for me to see all the complaints, because this has been something in media for literally decades. The only difference I see today is that the representation has been extended to also incapsulate lgbtq, more gender identities and expressions, overt and intentional portrayals of neurodiverse characters, etc.

[@pandabanaan9208]

Avatar the last airbender was also extremely progressive

[@tonyt1680]

​@@pandabanaan9208True say. Also one of my favorite series. It's a shame about the live action though😅

[@pandabanaan9208]

​@@tonyt1680 avatar had a group of a pacifist vegan monk boy, two dark skinned people one who starts as a sexist who develops over time, a little blind girl who is very strong and a redeemed prince with a giant permanent deformity on his face and they were all well written, nowadays a group that diverse would 100% be seen as woke no question about it

[@tonyt1680]

​​@@pandabanaan9208Oh, one hundred percent! And imagine if that crowd was so loud back then when it first aired, a lot of people might not even have given it the chance it so deserved.

[@pandabanaan9208]

@@tonyt1680 ironically though many of those people pretend avatar isn't progressive wich sorta proves that what is considered political media is very artificial, like avatar can have all that and so much more yet it isn't political but hey arnold has one gay wedding and it's immediatly woke indoctrination, avatar truly was ahead of its time especially with non standard bodies because sure there aren't many disabled characters but toph and teo are still very good and hold up really well even if toph kinda does the daredevil thing, not to mention the legend zuko because it is soooooooooooooo rare to see a good person have a physical deformity or intense scar, the only other ones I can think of are quazimodo from hunchback, igor from the igor movie nobody watched and I guess shrek and fiona

[@WarsunGames]

I am gonna respond to this since i made the whole thing. Look. Diversity is when you have people of different nations all in one production an they have a story to tell for each. That is diverse. Having a single race tell a single story is not diverse. An does not mean they cannot make a good story. What these Gen z an Millennials are doing is not being creative an making their own thing to add to productions. They are taking what YOU ALREADY HAVE then changing it to be political activist on MY behalf. I said "Make your own thing so you have something you can gate keep." I did not say "Take someone elses work an Gatekeep it."

[@marcchanel]

Awesome video dawg, but the music is kinda distracting. It sounds like it's going in and out and just too quiet. Of course, it shouldn't be too loud idea. Other than that, I enjoyed the premise of the video as no one really brings it up.

[@zhnigo]

you raised a good point about the criticism of "forced diversity" often being applied to media that is already of poor quality because of aspects not related to diversity, only to not examine that notion further and instead produce cold takes for the remainder of the video

[@oththakom9327]

All the examples I remember outside of race-swaps involve historical pieces. And God of War Ragnarok missing out on exploring the Sami-Jotun relationship and instead make Agriboda black despite the Jotun being described as living East with exception to the Fire Giants of the South. Anyway I'm making a game that explores East Aftican mythology out of both spite and an obsession with Anubian hound girls.

[@brooklyn5755]

Ghost busters after life was so fun!!❤❤

[@lauchaso47]

Bon Clay is the best "woke" character ever written

[@WeebGuru6]

When it’s done for no reason other then to meet a standard and trying to shove it down our throat especially with an established theory is where I draw the line

[@lionmom7629]

So, please tell me what "non diverse" characters look like.

[@WeebGuru6]

@@lionmom7629 sure Virgil hawkin is the gold standard in my honest opinion

[@lionmom7629]

@@WeebGuru6 And do you expect me to believe that the average "anti woke" guy doesn't consider Static Shock a BLACK superhero, instead of A superhero? Or do you mean "there's one black superhero I'm okay with. Why do they NEED any more?" BTW, he's named for a black man that integrated FL all white universities in the 1950's. So the whole concept of Static Shock is not "accidentally black." Hawkins was a deliberate nod to civil rights and ending segregation, FYI.

[@WeebGuru6]

@@lionmom7629 no cuz most people agree with that sentiment

[@lionmom7629]

@@WeebGuru6 not understanding. Most people agree with which sentiment???

[@dracocrusher]

"Forced Diversity" is when 'thing bad', and people go "Well, it must be because they hired blacks, right?" But people know it sounds REALLY bad to say that out loud, so instead they just go "The new Little Mermaid is bad because it's 'forced diversity'. Not because of the cinematography, bad creative decisions, weak writing, etc. It's bad because it's 'woke' now." And then they literally just ignore every other movie where there's women or minorities that aren't bad. Because those are the 'good' ones, it can't be 'forced diversity' when the thing happens to be popular, right?! That'd be crazy, lol. I once saw someone unironically say "Blazing Saddles isn't woke, it's just good." The logic really is just that simple.

[@ArbitraryOutcome]

God, is it me or is there a problem with media illiteracy lately?

[@dracocrusher]

@@ArbitraryOutcome It's unironically just a bunch of idiots who make a living convincing people that "Being woke/diverse is bad and ruins media". They literally just point to every negative example of diversity possible and then their fanbase gets primed to go "Oh yeah, that bad remake did have a black person. That must be why it sucked and not the fact that it's a bad remake." Like to reactionaries, misunderstanding media isn't a bug, it's a feature, right? They need to miss the point or their arguments just don't work.

[@AgentNero9]

@@sabersin5368-c2c just saw the weird ass art you made on your account, go outside PLEASE

[@mr.eliteaz2385]

sweet baby inc black rock new female ceo for star wars mentioning making men uncomfortable(heard she was let go recently) Flashgitz did a video who how x amount of characters from x amount of companies was race swapping she hulk, velma, the witch, rings of power, legend of korra and many more race swapping historical characters we've seen in netflix shows Rebooting old shows and movies for the 500th time changing things that never existed or made since for it in the first place localizer changing thing in dub, sub and translation to meet a certain political agenda There's many many things i can say and point out that would prove why this is a problem. We can all sit here and act like this is being blown out of proportion but these weirdos are in power, these weridos take older properties time and time again with barley making new ones and destroying them.

[@Vesperad0]

My main problem is that, with "forced diversity" (meaning changing a preexisting character to be brown in some way, brown as in not white)...brown people aren't at fault for something like Ariel. Yeah a lot of people liked Halle in that role (i think that's how you spell her name), I did too and i thought she was a beautiful Ariel. Didn't change the fact it was another live action that had nothing to add, but beautiful and a good character nonetheless. But again, this all falls on the companies and corporations. Others have already said this, but with additional comments interlinked that i personally feel still missed the point, if a little bit. I've seen in so many different spaces with such different people, all yelling and demanding that mainly black people stop "forcing their way into everything". That black people write their own stories if they don't like the lack of inclusivity, ESPECIALLY when it pertains to an environment where black people are the majority or a prominent demographic. There's a lot of white people in america, but there's also a lot of black people in america. I dont live in the UK but it seems they also have a prominent black population, alongside indian and muslim people as far as I'm aware. Having black, or again just brown in general, characters in those spaces make sense. Having black/african characters in something based in history also makes sense, especially when you know your history and learn that a surprising amount of events overlap in ways you wouldn't realize until it was laid out. Having brown characters in sci-fi settings still makes sense, unless there's an unspoken plot about white people having genocided almost all if not every single brown person on earth, which I'm sure is a subplot line nobody would actually want to have...as a positive. And yet when brown people do try to make their own characters, to create their own stories whether inspired by spiritual folk tales of their culture or a simple slice of life, they're met with radio silence. Nobody picks up their works, shows, books, and so on. It may not happen as much now, but unfortunately companies are still relying on this imagined "relatability" factor (as if brown people aren't humans that can be just as cool and cringe and corny as white people). To them, any nonwhite identity is an "untapped market", almost like women when it came to them having the right to work. It wasn't for the sake of women's rights, or for this case actual diversity, but because they know there's a profit to be gained from capitalizing on unacknowledged identities. Again if this wasn't overly clear-this isn't for diversity sake, for genuine inclusion and a dismantling of the world's oftentimes racist perceptions of each other, this is for money. That's all it is, and that's all it'll ever be, and they'll keep straddling this line of "making profit off of discrimination" and "having just enough vagueness to appeal to a outwardly bigoted or subconsciously resistant audience". Even if it seems like it's bad for them, as long as they don't go too hard with brown characters actually having depth or acknowledging their background or being undeniably human with flaws and positive traits, they get money from those so desperate to even see a fragment of themself in a genre they love while also getting the ragebait and hatewatching from bigots. It's a win-win, and they're literally playing in our faces. The world isn't just West and sometimes central Europe, America, and whatever ethnicity of the week people want to lowkey highkey sexualize, like Mexican or Japanese or vaguely Middle Eastern people. There's a lot of people here, and especially with the technology we have it's not a stretch to see a white person in Brazil, or a brazilian in South Korea, or a korean in Angola. Less likely in history of course, especially with certain idenities that did not or ceased to exist, but definitely not impossible. If there was one thing going for the people of history before planes and whatnot, its that those fools were determined. Not one of them wasn't running off of audacity and some sort of vengeance. There's nothing wrong with someone wanting to show as many backgrounds as possible to flesh out a fictional world, in fact for anyone that actually cares about the story they're writing/telling it would be a lot harder to do what's considered "forced diversity", because they'll be so focused on making sure everything fits in a way that makes sense. And there's nothing wrong with having a character just be, i dunno, trans for fun. We're all different, and while there's people that are always going to want and appreciate a particular subject being explored and discussed deeply like how a magic system would work in the real world, there's also going to be people who don't mind base line answers and don't care for a character who details how it sucks to be marginalized. There's something to be gained from both, like one being lighter on the soul because you can just see people exist without having to acknowledge racism, but the other can also bring awareness (in this case, the magic system example doesn't matter in reality but it's still a fun thought experiment) to things people have never thought too deeply about. And to act like one is better than the other, or that only one i necessary is genuinely an insult to the art of storytelling on its own. So, again, so what if a character is just trans because the creator said so? So what if, instead of being lighthearted that character's focus is on how you aren't exactly treated right for being trans? So what if a character is mixed just because, or because the author/creators want to expand on that in whatever way? Honestly, none of this matters as long as nobody is encouraging violence against others/self harm, or perpetuating stereotypes. If a piece of media isn't hurting anyone or encouraging dangerous behaviors (without framing something like murder as bad) or trying to convince people that a surface level understanding/desire to dig deeper is stupid, literally go off. Also somewhat barely related, and my last bit of my essay that nobody will read, meanings and messages shouldn't always be handed to viewers/readers/listeners. Nothing wrong with being aggressive about, say the existence of pedophiles being gross POS, or making a message intentionally vague. Exceptions listed twice above. But people should really stop expecting a story to always be obvious/direct when it requires you to think, and being upset when the message is too overt like "capitalism is really bad actually". There's a myriad of ways to perceive and interact with media pieces, works of art. Same goes for the "relationship" between creator and audience, in the case of "death of the author", in which the author's intention with their work (like lolita, unfortunately) is buried beneath the billions of different ways their stories can be interpreted. Not saying all authors are saying something profound or genuinely respectable, there's probably tons of millions of creators that have shitty intent or backwards thinking, but i personally think the author's intent should always be on the forefront of a person's mind, then they can either adjust their initial understanding or push their perception to be side by side with the author's. Even if bad, an author's intent has value in how it can be spread (say helping others), how it can be expanded upon, or inverted (in the case of pretending pedophiles are ""actually"" helping children and totally not destroying them in every way possible). Media can't be dumbed down to a few sentences, and to actively do so is a disservice to honestly one of the greatest aspects of the human mind, inherent disrespect to human creativity. Anyways at the very least diversity is fun and adds a lot to a story (in regards to ethnicity and queerness, but so much more as well) and at the very most beneficial to changing perceptions of the world. Art imitates life and vice versa.

[@XinxFlenler]

Man, the amount of people out here defining "forced diversity" in various different ways really speaks to it not having any meaning besides to be an jerk towards people, like I get the concept behind what you're going for, but if your phrase can mean any where between "big companies are bad" to "queer folks are bad" i think you might want to consider which one you're going for and word it better. Man, this won't change anybody's mind, why am I even commenting this...

[@audreyharris7643]

That's fair

[@skibidisigma-qh1xw]

I only dislike it when it makes no sense. If there was a regular black dude in a movie about edo period Japan who played a major role it wouldn’t really make sense because thee was no opportunity for black people to immigrate there way back when

[@TB26]

Yeah......yeah shoehorning is pretty disingenuous.

[@inamoratog]

7:22 - "As if diversity on its own must be justified." YES. YES, IT MUST BE. Because if you have a diverse cast in a situation where it doesn't make sense, it breaks kayfabe. Let's say you have a show set during the War of the Roses, and for some reason, a number of the nobles backing the house of Lancaster are black. Why are they there? Well, it's diverse! But 15th Century England WAS NOT DIVERSE, and by putting them in you've broken the rules of the setting just to show off your political leanings (or in some cases, in a bold-faced attempt at historical revisionism). You're sacrificing the logic of the story for a reason that is external to the story. Plus, those who make diversity the focus of their casting are now beholden, either to their own politics or to the crowd of 'journalists' who must not be offended lest they turn on the story. And that means that those diverse characters are now trapped in boxes because the diversity IS their character. Those black nobles from our theoretical example will be Lancastrians, and not Yorkists. Why? Because the Yorkists are the bad guys, and someone whose entire character is 'they are black' can't be a villain (caveat: unless the hero is also black). In these stories, female characters are powerful and their only flaw is letting themselves be held down by the people around them, because that's what women are - or at least, what the writers are allowed to say they are. Black characters are intelligent, noble and kind-hearted - even if they don't seem that way at first - because that's what black people are. White men are the only ones who can be dumb, embarrassing, or evil, because that is what white men are. The writers have chosen diversity of appearance over diversity of character, and because the diversity is the focus, the character's flaws are not those of the character but of the various real-world subgroups that character superficially resembles.

[@RoughEdgeBarb]

The justification for period pieces is as simple as "non-white actors should not be excluded from period pieces solely for the sake of perceived realism", Jessica Henwick had trouble getting work in the UK because period pieces are important stepping stones in the UK industry. And emphasis on perceived realism, people in the past did travel and move and it's entirely plausible to find non-white people in major cities.

[@inamoratog]

@@RoughEdgeBarb If your justification is that the actors are more important than realism (don't give me that 'perceived', you know full well that having a handful of African, probably ethnically Berber or Arab, traders in London during the 1400s does not mean that a work set in that year portraying the latest heir to a long line of European nobility as sub-Saharan African is totally historically justified), then that's fine, as long as the production makes it clear that it's not a historically authentic experience. I'm sure then that you would also be fine with a period piece filmed in South Africa, which (at least for now) has a large minority European population, portraying the founding of the Kingdom of Kongo, and having several of the roles of Mbata leaders played by white South Africans? I'm not saying you can't have diverse casts, but JUSTIFY IT. Come up with a reason, a backstory, something to explain why these people who don't look anything like the vast majority of the population of the setting are here. Put in the goddamn work, don't just lazily shout DIVERSITY and expect your political allies to defend your lack of creativity. And if you can't be bothered to do that, pick a different setting. Nobody's gonna bat an eye at a future space setting having a diverse cast, because that makes sense.

[@mavistheapplepie6331]

You can’t make a definition of "forced diversity" without it being inherently racist/sexist/homophobic/ableist/etc…

[@Lost-r1w]

yup.

[@anieldayyanelday1771]

What do you think of the "Don't like it? Read something else" argument?

[@Entertainment-zh7rt]

It's a shit argument.

[@resistancepublishing]

You obviously haven’t been paying attention to culture in the past 15 years. You’re only half right. The writing for these forms of pop culture is not only trash but writers, directors have said in interviews that they wanted to see themselves in the entertainment they created. Which in writing is the ultimate sin. Also using rotten tomatoes or other movie critic sites is the worst way to form an opinion. Especially when these sites have been caught red handed being paid to review something. 95% of entertainment (books movies tv and music) today is complete garbage and the proof is there to back that up.

[@ScritRighter]

I feel like companies not allowing writers on the production floor, only allowing writers to turn rough drafts in for their scripts, and paying them pennies for 3 month gigs while they make millions has a greater affect on the quality of work being produced than whatever you're yapping about. There was a writer's strike for a reason.

[@resistancepublishing]

@@ScritRighter writer’s strike? Lol funny joke. The industry has been a dumpster fire long before the strike.

[@ScritRighter]

@@resistancepublishing I don't know if you realize what you just said. Put two and two together. The industry was shit before the writer's strike> Therefore writers went on strike to make the industry better And I just explained to you several reasons why they went on strike, because the conditions they were working on were causing the dumpster fire you're so smugly talking about lmao.

[@resistancepublishing]

@@ScritRighter you’re talking about the working conditions. I’m taking about the talent. Nothing has changed as far as talent or content. It’s still hot garbage before, during and will be after the strike.

[@ScritRighter]

@@resistancepublishing Do you think you'd be more 'talented' if you couldn't pay rent or eat?

[@sumbuddy4088]

Too much diversity can become an issue if it doesn’t fit with the setting of the story. For example, if a story takes place somewhere in medieval Europe, most characters should probably be of ethnic groups from the regions and hold values considered sensible for the time. If you don’t immerse your story in the setting, your audience won’t immerse themselves in it either.

[@ScritRighter]

And if my version of medieval europe is not intended to be historically accurate, then your point is moot.

[@haydencarn8737]

@@ScritRighter lol, yeah, sure, but still people watching it will notice and notice how dumb it feels. It's like making a fantasy story about ancient China and daoism and then adding Swedish people, it would be utterly stupid and make no sense. If you are gonna make a story about medieval europe, making it all look like modern-day Chicago, is gonna lower the quality of the story unless you have an established reason for it. And considering what your channel is about, I would have really expected you to know that. I have noticed that you just tend to leave a lot of important things out, and quite frankly just don't bother to actually figure out what it going on.

[@lionmom7629]

Well done. One thing this video calls out that a lot of other similar videos doesn't is that the whole term "FORCED Diversity" is a way to reframe diversity in an unfairly negative way. Nobody is "forced" into more diverse characters. Having diverse characters are not "doing a favor" for minority groups. Media has become more diverse because the world always was, and now, media isn't censorsed so much. Because making the fictional characters predominately the same was always a product of censorship and self censorship (out of fear), NOT a "natural" way to write. So kudos pointing out how just this one term creates a false narrative. I especially like the point that "diverse" characters don't have to be perfect, or more excellent than "non diverse" characters (whatever a non diverse character is!) I mean, nobody's complaining there are too many "strong male leads" and that male action hero's "are too perfect." But female leads are held to impossibly high standards! As soon as somebody says "I only like this (female, black, queer, disabled, etc) character IF they.... Well, people in the real world don't have to follow those rules. Women in the real Army, Navy, Air Force don't have to suddenly become helpless when a man walks in, just to keep him from looking bad. So why do they have to in movies? Or be targeted if they don't? In the real world there are black men AND black women. And non binary, I'm sure. So why does media get to have EITHER a black male character OR a white female character, but hardly ever a black woman? Or one Asian man? Or one Latino/hispanic woman? That's not how it is in the real world. Why shouldn't media reflect the diversity of real life human beings? There is no rule at my job that only one LGTBQ person can work there. Or only one black person OR one female. These unspoken " rules" in media were always artificial. And for those that don't want "diversity" in media, and think that all representation is "pandering" I'd love to know what y'all think a non diverse person or character looks like.

[@Shoulderpads-mcgee]

You’re so right about the impossible standards. Diverse characters should be allowed to suck because most media is garbage but people just don’t talk about unimpressive media about white cishet able bodied guys. And lowkey it feels like finding an excuse to condemn characters that make people uncomfortable for the fact they aren’t “default.” You can’t just say a black character or a gay character or whatever makes you uncomfortable, so you have to make up excuses for why they’re bad. You can’t say seeing a female Jedi being a leading character makes you uncomfortable so you gotta paint her as a Mary Sue. And yeah there’s definitely an phenomenon where a character becomes less “acceptable” the further they get from “default.” Audience can hardly relate to or tolerate blackness in a character, making them a woman would be like expecting them to relate to an alien from another planet. People joke about the “woke” disabled gay trans black straw man character but I’m certain disable gay trans black people do exist in this world. There is no way for a person to be too unrealistic when it comes to diversity and it’s sad a lot of people seem to think so

[@audreyharris7643]

​@@Shoulderpads-mcgeepeople calling rei a Mary sue is mainly due to writing/character issues with the movies there are or were people that didn't like her because she was a woman but that's not for everyone.

[@Shoulderpads-mcgee]

@@audreyharris7643 see, I can’t agree that people were calling her a Mary Sue for any reason besides the fact she’s a woman. Is the writing in the star wars sequels bad? Undoubtably. But Rey doesn’t exhibit any skills that are any more unbelievable that Anakin or Luke. Luke hadn’t even used a melee weapon before getting his lightsaber, and still defaults to a blaster of most of a new hope, meanwhile Rey has at least used a staff for most of her life. Anakin was a 9 year old pod racing prodigy that was able not only to beat adults but cheating adults and later was able to successfully pilot a starfighter and help take down a blockade. Media is full of extraordinary people who have unreasonable, unbelievable skills, but female characters are met with skepticism for skills that can be explained (experience in melee weapons, knowledge of large space ships due to working with their parts, being force sensitive and therefore having access to force deus ex machina) on a rate wayyyyyy higher than male characters. (And when this scrutiny is leveled at male characters it’s usually not the white ones)

[@audreyharris7643]

@@Shoulderpads-mcgee I don't fully remember everything related to the movies or every reason. There's one video that talks about Luke vs rei in better detail. As for people giving criticism to male characters or white male characters from what I've seen this has happened many times over the years. In Many videos discussion pages or community's. Especially comic book ones

[@Shoulderpads-mcgee]

@@audreyharris7643 yeah of course every character in media ever has been discussed but we’re talking about trends here

[@IceFireTerry]

i pointed out before that a lot of media that people love came out of "'Forced Diversity" by the logic these people use. the comic Static shock was created because the creator wanted more Black superheroes. Milestone was created to make more diverse heros. Miles & Kamala as well.

[@audreyharris7643]

But that's not forced they wanted more characters and they actually went out and made them. Their race isn't the only thing that defines there character they aren't poorly executed race swaps and their creators didn't brag up and down about how progressive and caring they are for attention and money.

[@PumpkinSwag]

Well, on one hand, people need to stop acting like all good diversity is just incidental. Neither Static Shock nor Miles Morales just "happened" to be black. In both cases, them being black was an intentional choice. On the other hand, I still think that those are better than, say, turning Clark Kent or Batman black.

[@audreyharris7643]

@@PumpkinSwag true

[@PapaLaw426]

Ghostbusters Afterlife is actually pretty good

[@marianacarina2580]

You're clearly not looking at Hollywood's movies right now and how they're getting worse and worse. Bad writing? Sure that's all? That Snow White movie, are you going to imply that people didn't like because they're internally racists and not because it's also racist as fuck to change a character's skin color only for the sake of diversity? WHICH BRINGS US to the point of forced diversity. No it's not a 'being umconfy with diversity' problem, it's a 'being done with having agendas pushed at our throats while we're trying to enjoy a movie' problem. Please address that instead of only taking one side.

[@Le_nutzLe_nutz]

black lagoon was op ı think and revy is hot not that to much woke

[@AgentNero9]

3:04 great video man but IS THAT THINK BEFORE YOU SLEEP😭 sorry its just weird to see him lol

[@Januaryof28]

transformers were hype

[@supersonicsaga]

I'm going to say this because you are probably young, but a lot of people are tribalistic and no rational arguments about how the world should be will ever change those people's minds. I notice you guys try to fight against human nature a lot.

[@ScritRighter]

This is why old people should retire instead of staying in power/politics until they are geriatric. Appeal to nature is a fallacy for a reason. It is human nature to overcome human nature.

[@rotimigbadebo9609]

@ScritRighter i think it's more that on one side we deny human nature, thus banging our heads against the wall....while others are too comfortable within their spaces.

[@ScritRighter]

@@rotimigbadebo9609 Human nature says we should punch kick, and bang our heads against a wall to tear it down. Transcending human nature says we invent a hammer, drill, and wrecking ball to do it for us instead.

[@rotimigbadebo9609]

@@ScritRighter I'm saying that we as humans are both savage and logical. irrational and rational. Yeah we should aim for greatness, to better ourselves but we shouldn't forget the beasts within ourselves lest we get ambushed and devoured.

[@Entertainment-zh7rt]

"Those movies are just badly written." "Why?" "Well it has badly written characters." "Perfect women?" "Y-yeah but ..." "And race-swapped characters with ruined personalities that are nothing like the ones people liked and were looking towards?" "Yeah but ... "

[@audreyharris7643]

The forced diversity is apart of the bad writing because it is bad writing. It's not different identities being there it's what you do with them that makes it bad

[@jgee8421]

Ghost busters afterlife was good bruhhhh

[@ScritRighter]

Rarely hear anyone talking about it. Must've been 'decent' but not 'great'.

[@Entertainment-zh7rt]

He trusts the rotten tomato critics, after all.

[@haydencarn8737]

You are leaving out so much and being honestly quite dishonest or just don't know about anything about what you speak of.

[@ScritRighter]

Like?

[@haydencarn8737]

@@ScritRighter You pretend that there is in essense no point to it, but there is, for example, if you take a character like snow white, and make her latino... well, do you know why she is called snow white to begin with? Forced diversity is not just real, it's an agenda being pushed by some pretty big companies, black rock and vanguard being among them. It can utterly destroy stories because the characters are not there because they fit, or because they need to be, but rather because they check boxes, your approach to the whole matter was just plainly dishonest, OR uninformed, which might also be the case. BTW, this goes as far as race swapping historical figures and trying to alter the history of other countries, there is no argument to be made in defense of this madness. Don't downplay the matter to "Maybe these people just don't like diversity" that is utter nonsense and it's hard to believe that you don't know that.

[@ScritRighter]

@@haydencarn8737 Latin people can be white, I dunno if you're aware of that. Asians can also have white skin. I have no doubt that capitalist corperations are hijacking values of inclusion and diversity to exploit people and make a profit off of it. What you don't seem to understand is that it's not the diversity ruining your stories, it's the need to be profitable and the cutting of corners during production for the sake of greed. You call it dishonest, but you're coming at this by parroting talking points from people who are not you. It's very clear that diversity and inclusion doesn't have any bearing on the quality of a story. You mention checking boxes and such. I think doing things for profit and gaining a return on investment is going to be far more of a driving force for checking boxes and going through motions. Soulless remakes are a product of people trying to make a safe bet on their money to turn a profit. And yet you fixate on someone having a slightly darker skin tone. That is somehow making you angry and writing an essay in my comment section. Why is that?

[@haydencarn8737]

​@@ScritRighter ...Did you not read what this was about "FORCED diversity" not diversity itself. I find characters like the original Mulan and Pocahontas to be quite wonderful. That also goes for Sarah Conner and so on. This is not about diversity, and you never said so either, you were addressing DEI and forced diversity, which does in fact ruin stories as seen in many cases where it just does not fit and was obviously only added for DEI's sake. Then about the Latino thing, the actress playing her does not have snow-white skin, that is the whole point, if they picked a Latino who does, then there would be no issue, but it's just one example where DEI and ESG stuff was forced into something where it did not fit. And again, did you miss the whole "snow white" thing, because that is why. Back when they did something much like this with the "The Last Samurai" movie, I was just as pissed, it was painful to watch the arrogant approach to Japanese culture, taking some dude from the West, and making him the best Samurai within a short time and no proper training was an insult to their culture, and now, now the "progressives" are doing that exact kind of stuff. It reminds me of the horseshoe theory. The people doing this forced diversity stuff are ironically these days quite often the most disrespectful folks toward other cultures. Lastly, these are not "talking points" and if they were, that would still not be an argument. You are once again trying to twist the matter into something that it is not, which you already did in the video. So again, either it's dishonesty or ignorance. I hope it's the second because sadly the first has become all too common among the people supporting this stuff.

[@ScritRighter]

@@haydencarn8737 There's a million and one reasons to not like the idea of a soulless live action remake of snow white, but your main reason is that the lead actress has a slightly darker skin tone. You're trying to say that the meaning of snow white's name is so integral and important to the plot of the story that it ruins your immersion. The reality is you probably didn't know or care why Snow White was called Snow White until someone with a darker skin color played the role. Regardless of whether or not it fits the role, once again there's plenty of better reasons to point to as to why the show is bad. And yet you're blaming it on DEI. You're also claiming the converation isn't about diversity, when DEI literally stands for 'Diversity Equity and Inclusion'. It's literally the subject. Once again, I'll pose this question: What seperates diversity from FORCED diversity in your mind?

[@Laocoon283]

Gaeeeee

[@JaneDoe-xi1sn]

i think your whole channel is just trying to get people to start writing

[@necooo]

A lot of straw man arguments, false dichotomies in this... pretty lazy but makes good rhetoric.

[@ScritRighter]

...like?

[@WeebGuru6]

An example of force diversity in a show are Steven universe hazbin hotel owl house

[@angyvirtu3593]

Those shows don't force diversity at all.

[@pandabanaan9208]

How does owl house have forced diversity though

[@WeebGuru6]

@@pandabanaan9208 let’s keep it a buck what is it know for

[@WeebGuru6]

@@angyvirtu3593 yes they do

[@pandabanaan9208]

@@WeebGuru6 what do you mean my autistic brain isn't understanding this sentence