[ SECRET POST #4444 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4444 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Mary Skelter]


__________________________________________________



04.
[The Final Table, Charles and Rodrigo]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Altered Carbon]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Katie Perry/Orlando Bloom engagement]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Fandom: Fruits Basket]










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 17 secrets from Secret Submission Post #636.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - 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

[(Anonymous)]

Your English is showing. A good chunk of the rest of the world had already figured out Temple of Doom was kind of racist when it premiered in the 80s.

[thewakokid]

So what race IS a group of villains allowed to be in your opinion?

[(Anonymous)]

nayrt: Any race.

But the entire plot of Temple of Doom depends on having superstitious and primitive Shaivites on the one side who are dependent on the divine intervention of the stones for their well-being. On the other side you have evil Shaktaas who practice slavery and ritual human sacrifice. Both sides represent Victorian-era racist propaganda about both religions.

[thewakokid]

But the point i was arguing against is not that it's racist because stereotypes.

I was arguing the above anons point that "it's racist because bad guys are brown"

[(Anonymous)]

The original post didn't say it was racist because the villains were brown, it said it was racist because they were evil caricatures for the furthering of the hero's plot.

[(Anonymous)]

And my comment that they were not all evil, in fact most of the non-white characters were neutral if not outright good.

[(Anonymous)]

The movie is full of racist caricatures of Indians, some of whom are villainous caricatures. There's a pretty complete lack of characters portrayed with any kind of depth or sensitivity, and all of the Indian characters with actual agency are villains. And people have pointed out the specific details of this many times in the thread.

[thewakokid]

YES, and in fact I myself have pointed out the stereotypes, but the origional comment I was arguing about, the point I am making which is somehow being missed is that the while there are many angles you could criticise the move from and still claim it as racism, the "people of different cultures presented as evil caricatures" is not one of them. Because the majority of the characters that are from that culture are not evil.

[(Anonymous)]

First, I would suggest that presenting characters of different cultures as evil caricatures would still be bad and racist even if other characters from that culture were depicted well. It's not a good thing to depict characters from different cultures as evil caricatures.

Second, as regards the actual movie, I think all of the Indians are presented as racist caricatures (I can't think of any counter examples off the top of my head, at least) and the ones who are most important to the plot and have the most agency are specifically villainous caricatures. So it's not really a great situation by any standard.