Diversity and Representation in Media

but was it really representation if they completely escaped notice?

Edited by Ultimatum on Apr 6th 2024 at 12:36:02 PM

New theme music also a box

That can get complicated. If there's a trans character, usually they're depicted by a trans actor or actress. If that character doesn't get a lot of focus or have someone explicitly state they're trans, then the fact the character is trans can fly over people's head, especially if the actor/actress in question passes really well. In voice acting, that means the character design is in the hands of an artist, while in big Hollywood things the actors have access to make up artists and costumers who tend to make them pass even more.

Something I though was interesting in regards to Trans representation was Hunger Games: A Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes. The protagonists' sister, Tigris, is played by Trans actress Hunter Schafer. The thing is, she's not playing a woman who's trans (though I suppose the film never says Tigris isn't trans), she's playing a woman. Not that the character would be less of a woman if the character was trans, just that I think it's good for representation when people who are trans can play characters of their gender who aren't explicitly trans. I can't speak for all Trans people, or any since I'm Cis, and I imagine there are many who want to play trans characters. However, Schafer herself has said that she wants to play more cis women (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68721310) so I think it's nice we're at a point where there are (at least some) opportunities for trans people who want to play cis characters of that gender.

I'm finding this quite hard to articulate so sorry if I've caused offense. In a nutshell, what I'm saying is that I think it's good that there are more trans roles for trans actors, but I also think that it's nice that there are opportunities for trans actors to play cis people of their gender. Naturally, all trans people are different and will want different types of roles, so it's nice that more of them are starting to be accommodated.

Edit: Changed it from "good for Trans representation" to "interesting in regards to Trans representation" since Tigris isn't explicitly trans so it isn't representation, just a character played by a woman whose trans.

Edited by king15 on Apr 6th 2024 at 2:30:44 PM

The representation in Monkey Man is very clear, and powerfully unsubtle.

It's viewed a bit more through a gender fluid, non binary perspective, with a parallel made to Ardhanarishvara, a Hindu deity who is both male and female.

Yeah, if the transperson wants to play a certain role and is clearly comfortable with it, they shouldn't really be judged and I think the idea of them being allowed to play a role they want is a positive thing.

Erased due to just making myself look like a doofus.

Edited by BigBadShadow25 on Apr 6th 2024 at 4:21:36 AM

The Owl House and Coyote Vs Acme are my Roman Empire.

...

Like i said, its really hard to miss.

Good.

Edited by AegisP on Apr 6th 2024 at 1:13:18 AM

Discord: Waido X 255#1372 If you cant contact me on TV Tropes do it here.

I don’t know what else to say other than I’m embarrased I didn’t see it and I’m just gonna shut up.

I added the film to the LGBTQ representation index.

Edited by BigBadShadow25 on Apr 6th 2024 at 4:56:27 AM

The Owl House and Coyote Vs Acme are my Roman Empire.

I don't think there's anything wrong with misinterpreting something. You shouldn't feel shame about making a mistake.

Thanks.

The Owl House and Coyote Vs Acme are my Roman Empire.

You're a terrible person, and you should *feel* terrible. Just so we're clear.

Given how 'busy' the film is it's not surprising to me that you could have seen but failed to register stuff. There's a lot to pay attention to and remember.

Edited by Melendwyr on Apr 7th 2024 at 4:13:33 AM

I think is normal to become more moderate on the kind of social changes as new generation come. My uncle (who is in his 60s) mentioned me how he was very supportive of LGBT rights on his youth (be a former hippie and everything) having openly gay friends and opposing discrimination against them at the time, but he still to this day can really “swallow” the idea of gay marriage (don’t opposes it but just didn’t get it). While I support LGBT rights including gay marriage since my teenage years in the 90s, but nowadays there are some things I have my doubts like not sure if I support sex-change surgery on underage children or trans people in women’s sports, and probably younger generations than me would see a similar change on their own. Well as others have pointed out the terms may vary wildly depending on the country. For example Bernie Sanders is –I can be wrong about this things I’m not Ameircan- considered far-left in US politics but he will be considered center-left even borderline rightwing in LATAM and Europe, as countries with long tradition of social democracy and mainstream democratic socialist parties exists there. Current Spanish president and German Chancellor are democratic socialists and their parties have rule plenty of times, same in the UK; have you heard of Tony Blair? He’s from the same ideology as Bernie. In a similar way people like Joe Biden or Hilary Clinton which are considered left in the US would be right-wing in Europe and LATAM, and Trump, Marjorie Taylor and others who are just plain “right” would be far-right and rarely go mainstream. Also while at least in the US the economic politics and social politics are very intertwine is not the same elsewhere. In LATAM for example is common for Catholics and even the Catholic Church to be economically left-wing whilst socially conservative, and interesting a lot of the social liberalism comes from the right, as many right-wing liberals especially does of the Academia and high society are liberals in both sense (in the original economic sense and the social sense). Although of course right-wing conservatives also exists as do socially liberal leftwings, especially among anarchists.

I already did my taking on this, and I see a lot of users have similar points of view, in that superficial representation is meaningless, at least for me as a POC myself. I feel no representation whatsoever just because some of the extras are Brown and no effort is done to make true cultural and ideological (and even sexual) diversity.

That sounds a lot like Latin America indeed.

Personally when I have argue online with Holocaust deniers I often bring that up. I mention that even if I grant them that all Jews get together and “lied” about it (not that I believe it but for the sake of argument) how can they explain or the non-Jewish people who also died or expend time in camps and can bare witness of it, including disable people, Romani, Blacks and their families? People who did not get any kind of compensation nor got their own country (which is what they say the real reason behind the lie is) and they kept saying it until today? Why would they gained with lying? What they normally do is that they don’t answer anymore or say they all part of the same Masonic-inspired conspiracy so…

Have you notice that people who is speaking about gays all the time and hate gay people, and everything they see is gay propaganda and then they come out of the closet? I wanted to give Rowing the benefit that she’s old. She’s like almost 70 and I thought; meh, she’s like a grandma who comes from another generation she’s progressive for her time but in practice would have some other prejudices. What can you do? But now I’m starting to think there’s something more behind. I mean, her insistence on the issue is not natural. She’s showing symptoms of some underlying emotional conflict on her own psyche than anything else. I don’t know, is not normal.

I'd hazard a guess that she keeps talking about the matter because people keep attacking her on that matter.

There aren't many people who consider her an ideological enemy because of the colors on Harry's scarf. (Please tell me there aren't, please.)

You have a point about how social left/right versus economic left/right and how different it is in the US versus other countries, which is something that bugs me every time I hear about the 'in ___ this US politician would be considered right wing' as it only applies to economic terms.

RE: Rowling, obsession with hating someone doesn't mean they're secretly from that group and that's often a way to essentially blame the group for their own repression. People can become obsessed with hating a group because it gives them a sense of safety (Everything Wrong with society is due to Them, so if we get rid of Them then society will be Right) or superiority. A lot of TERF rhetoric also includes the idea women are inherently superior and tends to define womenhood among white western cultural ideals, so a trans person is transgressing or making a mockery of the ideal they uphold to make themselves feel safe/superior. That's how you get the idea that transmen are 'women too hurt by the patriarchy' and transwomen are 'nasty infiltrators trying to harm women and steal their power'

My home country (The Philippines) was conquered by Spain and we became a colony for them for 300 years w/c explained the cultural similarities between my country and Latin America. While the colorism was already present here before the Spanish arrived, the Spanish did import transphobia and machismo here.

I always loved the Philipines or at least I started to when I learned about it on TV Tropes.

Discord: Waido X 255#1372 If you cant contact me on TV Tropes do it here.

While there are a lot of flaws here, like the traffic in Manila, there are a lot of charms here as well. Anyway to keep it on-topic, there's the movie 1521: The Quest for Love and Freedom w/c details Magellan's (played by Danny Trejo) voyage w/c ultimately led to his death in the Philippines when he got caught up in a battle between rival datus (chieftains), most famously at Lapu-Lapu's (whose played by Michael Copon aka Blue Timeforce Power Ranger) hands. In terms of local talent, Bea Alonzo made her Hollywood debut here. There's also Lisa Frankenstein w/c had local actress Lisa Soberano make her own Hollywood debut here and the trope Just Here for Godzilla in the film's YMMV page is pretty accurate on how it was received here.

https://variety.com/2024/theater/global/tom-holland-romeo-juliet-racial-abuse-francesca-amewaduh-rivers-1235961672/

Once again, another black actress gets online racist backlash. This time it's for daring to play Juliet in a stage play with Tom Holland. Many are quick to say that it's because "Francesca's too ugly to play Juliet" (as though that justifies online vitriol). This of course is a lie when many people are complaining that it's race-swapping another white character and that the "woke mob" is ruining Shakespeare.

You don't see these supposed fans complaining about Romeo and Juliet being turned into lions, seals, or fucking garden gnomes but a black actress is too far. What's even funny is that alot of people think this is a movie and not a stage play, where race-swapping has long been established in the medium.

Scar himself looks like foreign, weak, and with very female moves.

I'm surprised Holland hasn't said anything - you'd think he would, since he's probably the biggest name in the cast (which is probably why this particular production is getting so much press).

So, let's hang an anchor from the sun... also my Tumblr

x7 Well at no point I have said that trans people is in anyway responsible for their own hate, that would be victim blaming (and yes I know you didn't say I say it either just in case). I mean a repressed homosexual who becomes a homophobe is still a homophobe and fully responsable for the hatred he spread and of course not all homophobes are repressed homosexual. Is just that Rowling's obssession with the subject is weird. And no, I doubt is because people is asking her about it because I don't feel most progressive peoples even care at this point, most people just move on. What I may suspect is that she does it to have some publicity causing controversy probably a mid-age crisis or a feeling that she's loosing popularity. Who knows. But it weird.

Yes indeed. I guess the Spanish Empire did kind of influenced all us more than we can think, in a similar way how the British did with the Commonwealth et al countries. We have a lot of Phillipino migrants were I live they generally adapt very well specially in the service sector because of the English proficiency.

No one tell these guys the original Juliette was played by a man.

Edited by TVGuy on Apr 8th 2024 at 7:05:20 AM

I cannot imagine anything more bad-faith than criticism of a Shakespeare interpretation being changed too much. I can confidently say that there is no body of work that has been reimagined in ways that are more disparate than Shakespeare's has been. The settings, races, genders, messages, tones, actions, even the dialogue itself has been mished and mashed throughout the years, because these plays have become a canvas for troupes to tell an extra meta-story upon. But let's be honest, these folks would also say that the original, unedited, staged-as-written Othello and Twelfth Night and Cymbelline are all way too woke.

Edited by IniuriaTalis on Apr 8th 2024 at 8:22:25 AM

When Denzel's Macbeth was going around I remember sharing an article about black actors interpreting Shakespeare... let me see if I can find it. (That project did stir discussion but never got this level of hatred...but I think even the piggybacking racists know better than to come for Denzel.)

In this case, I figure it's because Amewudah-Rivers "gets" to kiss a popular white it boy like Holland that this backlash is even happening because then there's the 'projection' aspect of it all; if it had been a less famous actor as Romeo with mainly theater fans aware of the news the reaction probably would have just been "oh okay".

It would have been so much worse if Romeo was portrayed by a black actor while Juliet was portrayed by a white actor. Where da White Women At? should be a dead trope, but it isn't.

Disgusted, but not surprised

I don't really see how a story about a black man falling in love with a white woman would automatically be a bad thing? As long as it doesn't imply that he's attracted to her because she's white and he's black, and it won't because it's Romeo and Juliet and that would be a weird thing to add in, then it's just a case of a black man falling in love with a white girl. I suppose you could argue that having a race bent production adds in subtext to the feud, subtext I think arguably helps the story, but that would be the same if Romeo was white and Juliet was black.

As for the controversy, race and even gender lifts are often the norm for interpreting Shakespeare's plays today, so it seems very weird for people to start complaining about it. I mean, if they want the play to be fully accurate to Shakespeare, they'd cast boys to play Juliet instead. Or, if they wanted to be accurate to the plot, they'd cast Juliet as a 13 year old Italian (and Romeo as a vague age that's old enough to make the relationship very squicky, and Paris as a straight up pedofile).

Edit: Sorry I think I've just realised that you're not complaining about the idea of a black Romeo, you're just saying that the controversy would be worse if Romeo was black and Juliet white. Sorry if I misinterpreted what you said.

I apologise.

Edited by king15 on Apr 9th 2024 at 1:09:28 PM