[ SECRET POST #3811 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3811 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.
[resized, not a repeat]











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 45 secrets from Secret Submission Post #546.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: tokenism versus diversity

[(Anonymous)]

It's hard to get beyond tokenism with only one character of insert race/sexuality/class/whatever. No matter how nuanced and well-rounded a single black character among 10 other white characters is, or one poor character among 10 other rich characters is, they're going to seem token in some respect because there's only one character of that race and one character, by way of being one character and not multiple characters, can't be representative of multiple facets of that group... they can only be the ones that fit them.

The more characters you have of each subgroup, the more diverse it gets. Eight straight characters and one gay character makes the gay character seem token no matter how realistic or unstereotypical they are. On the other hand, if you have six straight characters and three gay characters who are all distinct and different people, it has a much better chance of showing real diversity.

Tokenism = "hey this other group exists."
Diversity = "this other group exists and they're all different types and styles of people too."

Re: tokenism versus diversity

[(Anonymous)]

This is also why every "Chick" in a band of Everyone Else is Male, no matter how awesome or unstereotypical she is, is going to be a token. She can only represent the type of girl she is, and there's an implication that she's supposed to represent all girls.

Re: tokenism versus diversity

[(Anonymous)]

*generally speaking. Obviously not 100% of the time and rare exceptions exist.

Re: tokenism versus diversity

[morieris]

^^^

Re: tokenism versus diversity

[(Anonymous)]

Bob's the nice one! Bill's the nerd! Joe's the punk! Chad's the jock! Jenny's the... girl.

Re: tokenism versus diversity

[(Anonymous)]

And this is why so many women hate so many female characters, but no, let's blame "internalized misogyny."

Re: tokenism versus diversity

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think that's always why, though

Re: tokenism versus diversity

[(Anonymous)]

DA

I agree it's not always why but I do think a lot of what is labeled internalized misogyny can be caused by characters like this. There are female characters I love but it took longer for me to find them than it should have because so many of the one or two slots reserved for "the Girl" in so many series used the same damn tropes and there were no slots left for any other women than the most common popular tropey types.

Re: tokenism versus diversity

[(Anonymous)]

Are you talking about real people and not characters? Because if so, this is nonsense. Artists represent themselves and their work, not demographics.

Re: tokenism versus diversity

[(Anonymous)]

They're talking about characters in tropaic language, I'm pretty sure.

Re: tokenism versus diversity

[(Anonymous)]

What on earth makes you think this is talking about real people? Do you apply "tropes" to real people?