Let's get down to brass tacks... (SJWs/influence in movies)

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

This is an odd exchange of ideas. While I don't have much to say about the dynamic of treating him in such way or the other, I'm not sure if there is much room for the more racially introspective text or subtext as Madner's pointing out. Nick Furry being director of a spy organization also would be a weird place to park that car.

The weird thing being though that you guys are disagreeing in principle where as the substance for consideration you both agree on as being great for the most part. There's two established episodes where race is explicitly brought up. I'm really not sure if the New Orleans episodes involved any; did they? Anyways I felt like Madner's initial point was that it's not laiden throughout the show, which was immediately agreed upon. I'm of the mind that there would be disagreement if there was more of it in the show, but I'm not sure how the show as is serves as an example for either side of argument.

My point is, that being black was tangential to Sisko's character. Racism against black people gets brought up in the frame of two episodes, directly when it involves a black man in the 1950s USA and once when speaking about the past and it's treatment of black people. And this is how it should be treated.

To be clear, that was precisely my take on your position. I understand that my words get lost on people sometimes, and you'd hardly be the first.

And it isn't at odds with showrunners conceiving the show with a black captain in mind. I doubt Star Trek would be the last show to opt for diversity for the sake of diversity itself. If you get into matters of representation in lieu of diversity, then a lot of people might expect it to get into racial issues just on the basis that that would be a distinctive topic to address for a big number of the people being represented. That said, the New Orleans episodes, while not dealing with racism IIRC, do flesh out the characters distinctively, and I think that has a positive effect on representation. The significance of that btw for anyone concerned is that I kinda doubt it would get as much blowback from people that have qualms with what you're saying in your second paragraph.

At the very least, when the show runs for 6 seasons and the show never explicitly gets into such subjects, I feel like it's just peculiar that they hadn't gotten into it at that point (I'll leave people to make of that what they will on their own terms). And I really liked that episode. It's normal for Star Trek to go back to more modern history, so their execution of story with that subject in my mind was a grand slam for lack of a better word.

[Mecha82]

I find "diversity for sake of diversity" accusation always problematic. It pretty much tends to give impression that only white males should be cast to avoid that accusation from some people even when by doing so they would have to ignore every talented actor who isn't one and fits to role just to please vocal minority on internet. Let me remind everyone that while they wanted black actor for role of the Captain Sisko they still kept option open for suitable actor from any other ethnicity as well.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Well thankfully I don't much at all encounter people that argue against that specifically.

[Yukaphile]

Again, it's amusing people hate Brie Larson. I can name similar foreign female actresses who are worse. She, at best, said something dumb. Not actively at odds with decent humanity.

[Yukaphile]

Here's one thing I note about the anti-SJW crowd. They think trying to change the language means "censorship," but honestly... no one is stopping you from saying what you want. We're just trying to get you to realize the deeper implication of what our words as a society means.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Here's one thing I note about the anti-SJW crowd. They think trying to change the language means "censorship," but honestly... no one is stopping you from saying what you want. We're just trying to get you to realize the deeper implication of what our words as a society means.

Not sure if that has the most to do with reactionarism to progressive oriented media.

[Yukaphile]

Left-wing progressives get the label "SJW" the most. Ask anyone here, like Slash.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Left-wing progressives get the label "SJW" the most. Ask anyone here, like Slash.

I wasn't talking about SJWs per the title of the thread, I was talking about influence in movies.

And you don't go to slash. Slash comes to you.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Pay attention how there is bascially only one episode at all, where Sisko being black is made a theme and it's the one episode where he switches positions with Benny Russel, the novel writer in 1950s' New York.

Incidentally this is also how you write a good black character: You do not draw attention to his skin and treat him like every other human character in your play. This creates true equality. His skin-colour just did not fucking matter, as it should.

Because drawing attention to our differences dehumanizes them? I'm guessing you Don't See Color?

There are other episodes where his race is a part of it. Think about how many times his New Orleans heritage plays into, not major arcs, but minor things with the cooking. Also there was the Save Vick Fontaine episode where his girlfriend brings up racism of the past.

There aren't many episodes where racial predjudice against black men becomes relevant, it is true, but you don't need to sweep a character's race under the carpet like it's something dirty.

When people say they don't see colour, they are not saying "help me I'm blind" they are saying "I don't give a shit what colour you are, I am going to treat you like I do everyone else."

The word for that is equality btw.

It's certainly what they think they are saying. In actuality, it means "if I notice bad things disproportionately affecting black and brown people, I'll call you racist for drawing attention to it."

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

This is an odd exchange of ideas. While I don't have much to say about the dynamic of treating him in such way or the other, I'm not sure if there is much room for the more racially introspective text or subtext as Madner's pointing out. Nick Furry being director of a spy organization also would be a weird place to park that car.

The weird thing being though that you guys are disagreeing in principle where as the substance for consideration you both agree on as being great for the most part. There's two established episodes where race is explicitly brought up. I'm really not sure if the New Orleans episodes involved any; did they? Anyways I felt like Madner's initial point was that it's not laiden throughout the show, which was immediately agreed upon. I'm of the mind that there would be disagreement if there was more of it in the show, but I'm not sure how the show as is serves as an example for either side of argument.

My point is, that being black was tangential to Sisko's character. Racism against black people gets brought up in the frame of two episodes, directly when it involves a black man in the 1950s USA and once when speaking about the past and it's treatment of black people. And this is how it should be treated.

Now mind you, if you have a character who is confronted with racism, then of course the adressing of racism is necessary within the story, but you do not have to bring up racism whenever there is a black or asian or native american or a mestizo or god knows what combination thereof character in your story and that is the concern I have and that I was aiming at. You actively normalize racism if every single one of your black characters has to deal with racism somehow. Like with Sisko. Racism is not an issue in his case, so there is no need to adress racism against black people or somehow make it an integral part of his character. You show him as what he is: A normal human being and by showing him as a normal human being, who got where he is based on his merits, you normalize black people being normal people and create a thousand times better role model without any effort.

Well, when you put it that way, I see your point.