• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Diversity: Multi ethnic and Biracial characters

On the one hand: no story will ever be beloved by every reader. And if you set out to not bother anyone, you probably won't write anything that's magnificent either.

On the other hand: If you're genuinely interested in including the diversity of human experience in your work, you can't ignore those who take issue with your representations, especially if they have the experiences that you were trying to include. I believe it behooves us as writers to listen to people, try to understand their experiences (including with our stories) and try to do better next time. That's how you write better, richer, fuller characters and stories.

It's a sad fact of the publishing and bookselling industry at present that white folk, and especially men, are most strongly represented on the shelves. I believe we should be using that privilege to show a broader scope of humanity. And if it's difficult, well, at least we're being published. Imagine how hard it is to tell a story when no one will publish or buy it.
 
Safest? Or easiest? I'd go with the latter.

And honestly, just because a few people were upset over a representation does not mean that we just say:

"You know what, we gave it our best shot, but nobody's happy, so we give up. Screw representation, it's just not worth it."

Because that success/failure mode is black and white thinking...which is never a good thing.

But that black and white thinking is what dominates a lot of the big companies. An independent writer or smaller company may follow you line of thinking and address the critics and adapt the characters but someone like Penguin or DC or EA? Nope. They'll see it as something their consumers don't want and automatically pass on any project or character that is similar because of the negative publicity it could possibly generate.
 

Jabrosky

Banned
But that black and white thinking is what dominates a lot of the big companies. An independent writer or smaller company may follow you line of thinking and address the critics and adapt the characters but someone like Penguin or DC or EA? Nope. They'll see it as something their consumers don't want and automatically pass on any project or character that is similar because of the negative publicity it could possibly generate.
The good news is that nearly all of us here are in the "independent writer" category. What over-sized media conglomerates (many of which, unlike a traditional publishing company, don't even accept external "unsolicited submissions") do is not within our control. Or has this discussion zoomed out in scope from our own business to that of the larger pop culture?
 
I think it has to include the larger publishers because for the foreseeable future they have dominance in pop culture. Now the surge in independents and smaller publishers, especially those that cater to what the conglomerates would consider "niche" markets may shift that balance in the future, but most people will be exposed to diversity in art through the mega-corps before they will us.

That's why I feel it's important to make your voice heard if one of these Big Companies offends you, but feel that dialogue and critique can be a far more effective tool than virulent hatred and diatribes.

But on a final note I'm just going to quote what a fellow artist on a Diversity in Speculative Fiction panel said when asked "How do I stop from being wrong in my portrayals of diverse characters?"

"You don't. You'll never stop getting it wrong because you can never understand the whole experience of someone different than you. There will always be aspects of another race, culture, orientation, etc... that you will never be privy to. But don't worry, we all get it wrong. The difference is, are you wrong from not being aware of those nuances or are you wrong because you think you already know everything."
 
Last edited:

Philip Overby

Staff
Article Team
"You don't. You'll never stop getting it wrong because you can never understand the whole experience of someone different than you. There will always be aspects of another race, culture, orientation, etc... that you will never be privy to. But don't worry, we all get it wrong. The difference is, are you wrong from not being aware of those nuances or are you wrong because you think you already know everything."

I do think this is an excellent point. There is no way we can really understand the experiences of people different than us fully. As long as I've lived in Japan now, I think I understand the way Japanese are more and more. But if I wrote a Japanese character, I know I'd never get it completely right because it's just an experience different than my own. When it comes to biracial characters, that's a whole other issue because you're dealing with people from blended cultures. I guarantee in most cases their experiences are going to be atypical of what you may think them to be.

It's the same idea as writing a medieval knight though. Or a peasant. Or a woman in 1920s France. There's no way I can understand how these people really lived. My only way to do so is to read more about them and try to understand as much as possible. Most of the time when I see people complain about the way characters are portrayed, it's from a small, vocal group. Not to say they're wrong, but I believe there are a crapload more people that just want to see more diverse portrayals and are more forgiving if it's not 100 percent accurate (I'm one of them). Of course the small, vocal group are also extremely useful. They're giving you invaluable feedback on something they're passionate about. So even if you think it's "too much hassle," just thank these people for taking the time to say anything about your story and let it simmer. You may realize what they've said is on point or you may discard it. As a writer, you have the ultimate choice in everything. Never let anyone dictate how you're supposed to write, but do keep your eyes and ears open. Be a sponge.

I think the worry for many people that have issues with portrayal has more to do with stereotyping or caricatures. That's something we should all avoid whenever possible.

I think trying to approach this topic is always confusing for many and that's why these threads keep popping up. Some see including diversity as shoehorning or trying to hit as many demographics as they can. Others see it as the natural evolution of the genre. I see it as a way to experience new stories from new lenses. If they're imperfect, I leave that for other people to decide. I just want to read and write them.
 
Last edited:

Gryphos

Auror
ascanius said:
With all these discussions about diversity that pop up I figure I'll share my problem with any argument that an author should include diversity.

Your problem with the argument that authors should write stories with more than just straight white dudes? K

My problem is that diversity is all fine and dandy so long as it is a politically correct portrayal shown in a positive light, something often time mistaken for a good writing. It's not about a true diverse cast it's about affirming the political correct views of the readership on the diversity.

Who exactly said that minority characters needed to be presented positively at all times in every story? They sound like an idiot. Good thing I've never ever come across them.

Case in point. 'Batgirl' #37 Criticized For Transphobia; Creators Apologize Common your telling me a trans cannot be a villain? doesn’t seem very diverse to exclude them. or that upon finding out that the villain is a trans that a shocked reaction is hate filled.

I'll assume you read the article, else no doubt you wouldn't have linked it, but the problem had was not the fact that the trans character was a villain, but rather the fact that this character played into harmful stereotypes, and that the revealing scene completely disregarded Batgirl's previous character development. Again, if a person tried to say that a trans character could never be the villain, that would be stupid, but luckily I haven't seen that happen yet.

I do see a book where a minority group is looked at with scepticism as being trashed horribly by the modern readership despite it's merits.

What exactly do you mean by 'looking at a minority group with scepticism'? Because, while you may have phrased it badly, it sounds quite a lot like prejudice. If what you mean to say is, as you've implied, simply having minority characters not all be saints, then I'd very much like to see an example of a book that has been 'trashed' for this. I've seen books that have been firmly and intellectually criticised for their portrayal of a certain group, but, thing is, those criticisms have always had their basis in genuinely questionable stuff.

Let me pose a question. If I were to write a book where the ability of a woman to fight in a war amongst men is examined and questioned I'll bet money the version where the women is not able to keep up with her male counterparts would be criticized and labelled misogynistic regardless of the reasoning, while the version where she can carry 150 lb man out of combat is a 'strong female character.'

As Feo said, it would depend on the angle the book takes. Saying that women can't be soldiers is clearly wrong. Saying that women shouldn't be soldiers will offend a shit load of people (rightly so). Having a book examine the experience of a woman in the army and her possible struggles would be a very interesting read, so long as it got its facts straight and didn't make any sexist assumptions or statements. Not too difficult for someone who isn't a sexist.

When did readers become so weak that we must coddle their beliefs, what happened to challenging beliefs and the status quo.

As sad as it s, diversity is in itself challenging the status quo. For years that status quo has been white dudes, white dudes and more white dudes, with the oogie boogie black tribesman and the damsel in distress thrown in every so often. Writers, by writing diverse casts are not 'coddling' the beliefs of the new generation of readers, they're portraying the world as it really is. Because, in case you hadn't noticed, not everyone is a straight white dude.

The only thing I see with these diversity threads and every other blog post and review I read that mentioned sex and diversity in pop culture is a the new status quo that we cannot question. People don't want diversity, people want what their beliefs to be right, they want to hear only what they want to hear and that is my problem with diversity.

Uhuh, and are you questioning the belief fact that people don't fit into harmful stereotypes? And what exactly do people 'want to hear'? Diverse casts of complex characters that don't fit into harmful and outdated stereotypes? F*ck, you're right, I do want to hear that. I really bloody do. Shame we don't get enough of it, eh?

So long as diversity means reaffirming the political status quo it will stay out of my writing, I think well written characters are much better thank you very much.

When you say that diversity will 'stay out of your writing', are you literally saying that you won't write about characters that aren't white? Because, please, just think about how sad that sounds. And well written characters are awesome, and diverse casts are, too! Wow, ain't it fan-tucking-fastic those two aren't mutually exclusive.
 

Philip Overby

Staff
Article Team
Ultimately, I find (not all, but some) of these arguments against diversity come down to "I don't feel like it." Not saying that's the case with everyone, but I remember a post several months ago when a writer from another forum basically said, "It's too much of a headache to make everyone happy." It's another layer of character development and world-building that certain people don't want to do. And that's fine. It could be because they don't want the extra challenge or they don't want their mistakes in depicting certain characters to overshadow their stories. Or it's because they just don't want to. Simple as that.

For the sake of discussion, I think these kind of threads are important though. It's a way to see what the future is going to look like in our genre. Maybe a microcosm, but it's still something. I do think good fiction will rise to the top no matter what kind of characters are in the books. But it would be nice for the brightest and best we have in fantasy to tell the stories of people who haven't been told (as much) yet.

Even if it feels like we're just saying words at each other and no one is changing their stance, I think keeping the discussion alive is important.

And a reminder for everyone to stay civil in these threads (not to say anyone's crossed the line as of yet here.) There's a reason so many of them get locked. When people start attacking each other, we have zero tolerance for that. So have a discussion, but don't start attacking someone because they don't agree with you. It's fruitless. One of the things I never like to see is a locked diversity thread. Because to me it means we're more interested in shouting at each other than listening.
 

DeathtoTrite

Troubadour
Sometimes, I feel like discussions like these can take away from the main purpose of writing fiction- a good story. Trying too hard to create diversity can be distracting at best and offensive at worst when real world stereotypes are leaned on too much-- I hate seeing any culture/nation/empire that just is "Rome, but with magic!"

Also different skin colors and diversity are not the same thing. Europe is a very diverse place- religion, culture, etc. all are part of diversity too! India is perhaps the best example of how skin color and diversity are not the same thing.

Funny this thread should come up though, considering my story has a nation that's blended nomadic, Turkic-inspired culture with the old, white imperials (Byzantine, Britain inspired) in the area. Of the main characters, one is a nomad, one is from the imperial north-east, and the third is biracial (kind of... his father has both imperial and nomadic blood, his mother imperial, but his own skin tone is much darker- so much so some people think he's a bastard)

But I wasn't thinking "Hm, I need to make sure I meet quotas of different ethnicities-- maybe adding some people with brown skin will make it seem better (it doesn't, by the way)." It was natural, and so, I hope, reads better. If you want to make a fantasy book an allegory about racism, fine, but make sure a reader knows that going in.
 

Jabrosky

Banned
Also different skin colors and diversity are not the same thing. Europe is a very diverse place- religion, culture, etc. all are part of diversity too! India is perhaps the best example of how skin color and diversity are not the same thing.
Thing is, I would argue "diversity" isn't really the underlying concern behind this whole thing. Otherwise it wouldn't seem much different from the usual discussion of genre cliches and overused tropes. What makes this stand out is that it has developed from one particular sociopolitical context, namely that of post-1960's Western liberalism and its struggle to create a more egalitarian environment for certain historically marginalized groups. I would elaborate more on this, but I've got to go to school soon.

Let me wrap up with one question: what do you think the landscape of spec. fiction, and the larger pop culture, will look like once racism, sexism, and the other old forms of marginalization cease to become culturally relevant on a large scale?
 

Devor

Fiery Keeper of the Hat
Moderator
What makes this stand out is that it has developed from one particular sociopolitical context, namely that of post-1960's Western liberalism and its struggle to create a more egalitarian environment for certain historically marginalized groups. I would elaborate more on this, but I've got to go to school soon.

Let's try to adhere to the rules and take a half step back from the politics.
 

ascanius

Inkling
Your problem with the argument that authors should write stories with more than just straight white dudes? K



Who exactly said that minority characters needed to be presented positively at all times in every story? They sound like an idiot. Good thing I've never ever come across them.



I'll assume you read the article, else no doubt you wouldn't have linked it, but the problem had was not the fact that the trans character was a villain, but rather the fact that this character played into harmful stereotypes, and that the revealing scene completely disregarded Batgirl's previous character development. Again, if a person tried to say that a trans character could never be the villain, that would be stupid, but luckily I haven't seen that happen yet.



What exactly do you mean by 'looking at a minority group with scepticism'? Because, while you may have phrased it badly, it sounds quite a lot like prejudice. If what you mean to say is, as you've implied, simply having minority characters not all be saints, then I'd very much like to see an example of a book that has been 'trashed' for this. I've seen books that have been firmly and intellectually criticised for their portrayal of a certain group, but, thing is, those criticisms have always had their basis in genuinely questionable stuff.



As Feo said, it would depend on the angle the book takes. Saying that women can't be soldiers is clearly wrong. Saying that women shouldn't be soldiers will offend a shit load of people (rightly so). Having a book examine the experience of a woman in the army and her possible struggles would be a very interesting read, so long as it got its facts straight and didn't make any sexist assumptions or statements. Not too difficult for someone who isn't a sexist.



As sad as it s, diversity is in itself challenging the status quo. For years that status quo has been white dudes, white dudes and more white dudes, with the oogie boogie black tribesman and the damsel in distress thrown in every so often. Writers, by writing diverse casts are not 'coddling' the beliefs of the new generation of readers, they're portraying the world as it really is. Because, in case you hadn't noticed, not everyone is a straight white dude.



Uhuh, and are you questioning the belief fact that people don't fit into harmful stereotypes? And what exactly do people 'want to hear'? Diverse casts of complex characters that don't fit into harmful and outdated stereotypes? F*ck, you're right, I do want to hear that. I really bloody do. Shame we don't get enough of it, eh?



When you say that diversity will 'stay out of your writing', are you literally saying that you won't write about characters that aren't white? Because, please, just think about how sad that sounds. And well written characters are awesome, and diverse casts are, too! Wow, ain't it fan-tucking-fastic those two aren't mutually exclusive.

Ok the sarcasim was entertaining, I chuckled a few times while reading your reply.
First of I want to apologize for the badly written post, I could have explained things much better.

Anyway the thing is you see diversity as diverse skin colors and diverse sexuality while I don't agree with it that’s ok. When i'm in the united states be it a black man or woman or white to me they are American they share many of the same American world views with minor variations on the details. For me that’s what diversity is, a diversity in beliefs and world views. So adding a black character or white the thing that makes them diverse is their world views. Going back to the article I find those criticisms to be the norm and honestly they make no logical sense. Anyway it's late and I have work in the morning.
 

Legendary Sidekick

The HAM'ster
Moderator
Let me wrap up with one question: what do you think the landscape of spec. fiction, and the larger pop culture, will look like once racism, sexism, and the other old forms of marginalization cease to become culturally relevant on a large scale?
That may not happen in our lifetimes, but it will happen. I had a science teacher who told us that someday whites would not always be the majority, but that the majority would be brown-skinned due to the mixing of ethnicities. I found that prediction laughable at the time, and here I am in an interracial marriage with biracial kids, as are several relatives and friends. Guess the joke's on me.
 
So I've been reading this with great interest and there are a couple of common threads that I would like to touch on.

I think it was DeathtoTrite who mentioned something about quotas and I also think others are alluding to the fact that they don't want to include diversity so that they can meet a fairly arbitrary number and be considered a "diverse writer." But I don't think, necessarily, that is how we should think about diversity. If anything our writing needs a "critical mass" of diversity. While the 9 people I stole that notion from didn't and perhaps couldn't define that term I'm going to. To me a critical mass of diversity requires some reflection of reality and good quality characters.

First some reflection of reality is important. I don't mean the world you create needs to match 100% with the real world. Only that certain logical realities are reflected in your world. If your world is set on an island in a world before world travel became practicable for large masses of people then the group would necessarily be homogenous. For simplicity's sake let's just assume that is technology that is worse than the kind of ships they had pre-1492. (I know this isn't entirely accurate but space restrictions and what not). However, if you have a world that is not on earth but set in the future where mass migrations and/or colonization occurred then you would have to have different races. Humans evolved from place to place differently. That's a biological fact. You can't avoid it. What I mean by all this is if you have a world where the lack of transportation technology makes sense to make the people there insular from other races then it makes sense to have fairly homogenous cultures. However, if that is not the case then you probably should include at least some diversity.

Continuing with the point of reflecting real world conclusions you need women in your story. They make up half the population for heaven's sake. They cannot be ignored nor marginalized. They also need not be fighters. They need to be people. So let's turn now to the second prong of the critical mass requirement.

My second prong is that the characters need to be real. They cannot be stereotypes but at the same time they need not eschew all stereotypes. First, let me point out that not all stereotypes are created equally. Some are far more offensive than others. Also, I think when it comes to many different kinds of stereotypes it is not a single isolated trait that is stereotypical that is problematic, rather it is a totality of the character. Meaning that a character can have a single stereotypical trait without actually being offensive. But if you start piling stereotype upon stereotype you'll run into problems.

By way of example let's suppose I have a character that lives in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. He is black. There is a famous restaurant in the area called Babe's where they dump a lot of fried chicken on the table. A lot of residents take out of state guests there just for the experience. Suppose he has a friend from out of state and he takes the friends to Babe's. (The friend is whatever race you want him/her to be). Is this in and of itself offensive? No, probably not. Restaurant is famous and the food is pretty good. But if you gave the black character an inordinate love of fried chicken and combined that with a similar passion for watermelon eating you are running into problems. But the Babe's scene alone isn't really a problem is it? I would argue by itself no.

Or suppose you have a different world. In that world there is an Chinese society equivalent you have one student and she is studious. Again not a problem by itself because well students can be studious. Now suppose this is the only race in your novel and every student or even a vast majority of students are all extremely studious then you run into a problem. Now if you have some studious students, some average studying students, and some slacker students then you should be fine. Unless the slacker students are still fairly studious by reasonable standards. (Meaning that they still do work, but are only considered slackers in the context of everyone else in that society.)

To clarify to have a fully fleshed out world and to meet this critical mass of diversity you need to reflect certain realities of life that fit within your story. And the traits you give to a single character must be true to the character. To be real they can have some stereotypes so long as the stereotypes are not so prevalent as to make the character a caricature or so offensive as to be unrealistic and stray into racist territory.

This is a tough line to follow. The standard is vague, but it's vague for a reason. No one single character exists in a vacuum. They are products of their world (your world). It's a balancing test where you have to look at your character and world and balance the needs of the story, the needs of the character, the logical implications from that character's background, while writing in such a way so as to be well racist.

Wow that was long. I'll write about some other threads in this conversation a little later so you don't have to read too much of my insane ramblings and inane babble.

As an aside let me say that I recognize I may have gotten close to a line and if I went over it I did not do so deliberately. It was done in ignorance and was by no means intentional. I know that does not absolve me of my potential wrong doing and I ask for forgiveness and direction if I did offend
 
Last edited:

DeathtoTrite

Troubadour
@ Brian Scott Allen that pretty much sums it up for me. I include diversity, but it more comes from my large interest in middle-eastern and Mongol history.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
On the other hand: If you're genuinely interested in including the diversity of human experience in your work, you can't ignore those who take issue with your representations, especially if they have the experiences that you were trying to include. I believe it behooves us as writers to listen to people, try to understand their experiences (including with our stories) and try to do better next time. That's how you write better, richer, fuller characters and stories.

I think that's absolutely true, and I have friends who are lesbian, for example, who have been invaluable for a lesbian character I am writing. I think listening to people about any aspect of your writing is important.

However, I think some of the commentary above was directed to those who seem to subsist on outrage, who offer vitriol and insults in place of constructive criticism. Those people are toxic, and there is no reason one should allow such toxicity into one's life, and no benefit to be derived from it. People who react in that manner have to be disregarded, in my view. And that kind of reaction is no basis for a change in one's work, whereas a thoughtful and reasoned critique might very well provide such a basis.
 

Gryphos

Auror
Anyway the thing is you see diversity as diverse skin colors and diverse sexuality while I don't agree with it that’s ok. When i'm in the united states be it a black man or woman or white to me they are American they share many of the same American world views with minor variations on the details. For me that’s what diversity is, a diversity in beliefs and world views. So adding a black character or white the thing that makes them diverse is their world views.

Ummm, sure? ... I mean, I don't disagree with you. But I do think you rather miss the point about what people mean when they ask for diversity. People of different races are all the same, they're all humans. The differences between them are (literally) skin deep. But why is it that the market has been (and still is) dominated by stories about white people, stories about men? That's unfair. That's not, you guessed it, diverse. And a lack of diversity in the media and culture can have subtle but horrible effect. So basically, have all kinds of diversity. Have complex and dynamic casts of characters of a range of ethnicities, genders, sexualities, even ideologies and philosophical outlooks.

I find it strange that no one makes a fuss when people suggest they write characters with varied personalities, senses of morality and outlooks on life itself, but when it comes to something as benign as the colour of one's skin or who they're attracted to, suddenly it's a big deal.

Going back to the article I find those criticisms to be the norm and honestly they make no logical sense. Anyway it's late and I have work in the morning.

Well, just know that a whole lot of people agree with those criticisms, even the creators of the comic being criticised.
 

ascanius

Inkling
Ummm, sure? ... I mean, I don't disagree with you. But I do think you rather miss the point about what people mean when they ask for diversity. People of different races are all the same, they're all humans. The differences between them are (literally) skin deep. But why is it that the market has been (and still is) dominated by stories about white people, stories about men? That's unfair. That's not, you guessed it, diverse. And a lack of diversity in the media and culture can have subtle but horrible effect. So basically, have all kinds of diversity. Have complex and dynamic casts of characters of a range of ethnicities, genders, sexualities, even ideologies and philosophical outlooks.

I know what people mean by diversity, I just disagree with the entire premise which I'll get to below. As to your question about the market I think that mostly has to do with the tried and true mentality where money is involved. The movie industry is struggling to maintain control over the ever open and changing market of the internet and refuses to adapt, the same can be said for publishing and many other markets. With investments reaching hundreds of thousands of dollars if not millions companies are much less likely to take a risk if there is questionable return, especially with the volatility and sway of reviewers like in the article.

I find it strange that no one makes a fuss when people suggest they write characters with varied personalities, senses of morality and outlooks on life itself, but when it comes to something as benign as the colour of one's skin or who they're attracted to, suddenly it's a big deal.

This is why I disagree, it comes down to this. When people suggest varied personalities, a sense of morality and the whole shebang of writing a character well, it's about creating the best possible character that the author wants to write. It still leaves who the character is up to the author, it leaves the character open without pushing the character into a peg if you will. The suggestion of diversity has a much more socio political connotations about appeasing the political masses, and it is political, racial quota's for universities, affirmative action etc. It's the suggestion to the author that they should include the modern political implications of their writing and it should take centre stage. It's saying this group is special and should take priority simply due to the color of their skin. Tell me what makes adding a black person, or Hispanic, or lesbian Philippine woman so special that the author should include them besides them being minority groups. See that's just it there is nothing that makes them different save for our modern political groupings. It's not making our writing more unique it's just strengthening the differences, strengthening the fact that they are minorities, strengthening the fact that it is important to acknowledge those differences and treat people differently because of them. And it goes both ways as is often seen on this forum when people question if they should change a character from white to black or male to female. It's saying one group is better and one is worse.

Well, just know that a whole lot of people agree with those criticisms, even the creators of the comic being criticised.

People can agree but having populist agreement doesn't give their arguments validity. A lot of people used to agree that smoking was good for you, hell even doctors, as an example. The thing about that article is the reviewers/bloggers what ever they are are doing nothing more than stating accusations to give their verisimilitudes weight. "it is 100% transmisogynistic to yell in shocked horror that they are a man." really? that's not an argument, he is just averring her accusation, no logic, nothing. It's what they all do in that article nothing more than say it is because I say so. I feel very sorry for the writers of batgirl that such drivel is able to sway and define their writing. Oh and I think the creators were simply being pragmatic in agreeing, seeing that their bottom line is dependent on keeping people happy regardless of the validity of their critics reasons.

First the reaction makes total sense, I mean what else is she supposed to say? "your a trans, my friend is a trans, we don't have to be enemies anymore. Yay" she yelled in shocked surprise. Ok that's a bit much but really who wouldn't say something similar to what she did? I know a guy who found out the girl he was dating was a trans, he wanted to kill him. It's a total betrayal of trust, and in the batgirl it a betrayal of her self trust, it creates doubt in herself. Second how does it diminish the character arch already built with her friend who is a trans, their friends, and in this case it's a villain. I doubt she is going to treat her friend as a villian, if the creators went that route yeah I can understand the criticism. And the crazy hair and evil creepy vibe, this is a batman or should I say batgirl comic, the villains are usually over the top it makes sense given the context. See it's starting to seem like they have more of an issue with the villain being a trans than how it was done.

And in finality. I asked my little sister if she would read more fantasy if there were more black female main characters and her response was "yeah, I think I would." She reads mostly african amercian historical nonfiction with a little fiction. So including more characters besides the norm may be a good idea in terms of sales. But do it because you want to, not because it's the new norm. To me it seems disrespectful to add a black character, any character, simply because the color of their skin as the only reason. Especially when it serves no purpose but to appease a political motive.
 
Last edited:

Nimue

Auror
I know a guy who found out the girl he was dating was a trans, he wanted to kill him. It's a total betrayal of trust

Please do not post shit like this. Calling someone "a trans". Calling a transwoman "him". Implying that it's natural to want to murder someone for revealing something about themselves that they can't help. When transwomen across the country are really being murdered for this.

Just don't.
 

Russ

Istar
This is why I disagree, it comes down to this. When people suggest varied personalities, a sense of morality and the whole shebang of writing a character well, it's about creating the best possible character that the author wants to write. It still leaves who the character is up to the author, it leaves the character open without pushing the character into a peg if you will. The suggestion of diversity has a much more socio political connotations about appeasing the political masses, and it is political, racial quota's for universities, affirmative action etc. It's the suggestion to the author that they should include the modern political implications of their writing and it should take centre stage. It's saying this group is special and should take priority simply due to the color of their skin. Tell me what makes adding a black person, or Hispanic, or lesbian Philippine woman so special that the author should include them besides them being minority groups. See that's just it there is nothing that makes them different save for our modern political groupings. It's not making our writing more unique it's just strengthening the differences, strengthening the fact that they are minorities, strengthening the fact that it is important to acknowledge those differences and treat people differently because of them. And it goes both ways as is often seen on this forum when people question if they should change a character from white to black or male to female. It's saying one group is better and one is worse.

I think you have missed the whole point of diversity and the value of including a broad range of characters in literature where it is appropriate.

These groupings are not just political constructs, they are real groups of people. In science or biology they would be called populations.

What is political is how they have traditionally been treated or dealt with, or ignored in culture, politics and literature.

To keep excluding a group for whatever reason, to ignore their existence says something about the author or their culture or their worldview. It means they are intentionally or unintentionally acting as if certain populations don't exist, or don't do anything worth talking about. "Americans" are a socio-political construct. Gays, women, blacks, trans folk, are real populations.

The reason one might advocate that diverse groups should appear in works of art, or novels, is to help break negative stereotypes, and to confirm (indirectly) that such groups and such people are just as worthy of being part of the social condition, or the exploration of the human condition (which is what writing is about isn't it) as larger "in" groups.

To keep those folks from appearing on the page is to further and encourage their marginalization.

Writer, and artists, like all citizens, have some social responsibility, and have choices to make.

A writer is perfectly free to ignore the fact that minorities and disempowered groups both exist and have value. I would suggest on any analysis they are wrong on that, but one is entitled to be dismissive and blinkered as one wishes.

It is nice though that now we are seeing consequences for producing writing that simply reinforces those problems.

But to say that suggesting a marginalized group or person is worth talking about means that someone is suggesting that they are better than some other group is missing the whole point. It balderdash at best.
 
Last edited:

Gryphos

Auror
@ascanius

See, the problem is you're looking at this from a white-centric view, with all other ethnicities being variations from the 'norm'. Truth is, white is not the default. There is no default. Same with gender. There is no such thing as 'shoe-horning' black characters into a story just for the sake of diversity, any more than there is such a thing as 'shoe-horning' white characters into a story. In case you hadn't noticed, the world is full of diverse people. Black people can be black and don't need a justification. Trans people can be trans and not need a justification for it. When you abandon the belief that it's possible for certain types of characters to be 'shoe-horned', you open up a whole new world of possibilities.


On a different note, I've seen this idea come up from a lot of people arguing against diversity that it stifles creativity by forcing writers into fulfilling arbitrary quotas. This is bullshit for one main reason. NO ONE IS BEING FORCED TO DO ANYTHING. Believe it or not, there is still a thing called creative freedom. You, as a writer, can do whatever the f*ck you want. You can write an all white, all straight cast if you want. It's your decision.

Buuuuuuuuuuut, thing is, I'm probably not gonna read your book if you do. I'm gonna criticise you for your decision, because freedom of expression is not freedom from criticism. These diversity threads aren't for telling people they must do this, or they must do that, it's for telling people why it would be a good idea to do this, why it would be beneficial for a writer to do that. Whether you take that criticism into account or completely ignore it is, again, completely up to you.

But now for my final point, which gets right to the root of the matter. Why is diversity good in the first place? Now, I've spent arduous hours toiling away on this matter, and after great effort, I believe I have come to the ultimate conclusion...

Because it's nice, ain't it?
 
Top