It isn't wrong if it was in a vacuum, but we don't live in a vacuum
That's Major Kusanagi, to you. 🤣
It's almost as if that poster is talking out their arse.
I agree with the notion that like, if somebody is good in a role, you should be able to cast them in it. Like, I think she worked in Ghost In the Shell because she could plausibly portray the main character and looked pretty similar to the source material. When it comes to her in this role where's she's playing a trans person, that seems a little more silly. I also haven't seen it so I can't pass full judgment on it.
theres nothing remotely feminist about this statement but go off king
I guess you missed the multiple posts about how she obviously wanted to invoke the attack helicopter meme or whatever the fuck.
Do you know what White Feminism is ?
Show me.
You are saying hollywood is a meritocracy when we have empirical proof it isn't. Not everyone gets a shot to try out for roles, hell they don't even get told about the roles.
Infernal Affairs is just a story about a run-around between cops and organized criminals. Any cultural differences are adapted and adjusted to center around the Irish mafia in Boston. There is nothing intrinsically exclusive to Hong Kong in the premise of that movie.
white feminism is any time a white woman says something that makes me mad.
Fair point. Like I do get that the reason she might've been cast as the lead in GITS is because she was seen as an A-List name and a potential box office draw, but I think that can also be true and that she also credibly fit the criteria of someone who could depict that character.
God i wish it was. LMAO.
So you don't then. Cool.
Art is not restricted. Anyone can make art at any skill level with any budget. Anyone can make new IP without restriction and do whatever they want with it. Anyone with an Internet connection can self-publish anything they want in any medium.
The same excuse was used to cast her in Under The Skin. And the movie still bombed.
Yeah that's the point. What that poster means by "white feminism" is that this is an example of when white feminists completely ignore intersectionality when it suits them. The fact that it flies in the face of intersectional feminist values is what makes it "peak white feminism".
Iron Man did it.
and my point is that Scarlett Johansson isn't claiming to be nor invoking any principles of feminism in this instance, so bringing it up regardless of that fact is kind of puzzling. Feminism is not "any time any woman says anything at all."
You are missing the point. She doesn't have to be invoking principles of feminism in this moment to be saying something incompatible with intersectional feminism.
Seems like you aren't familiar with the concept of whitewashing. First of all, no one said she is a 'bad person', but her playing a Japanese character as a white woman is very clearly whitewashing. Whitewashing is the practice of taking a fictional character or historical person of a certain race and then having a white person portray them in your adaptation because that's more palatable to a white audience. It's basically erasing an opportunity for representation
I understand it clashes with the ideals of intersectionality, that still doesn't mean it has anything to do with feminism in this specific instance. If there were a venn diagram with feminism and insectionality, this would be in the portion of it where feminism doesn't overlap.
I'm very familiar. But you're being purposefully obtuse here. It's exactly the same thing. If you're going to be amped about the Ariel thing and mad about scarjo, you're basically hypocritical. Neither should matter for the actor when dealing with fiction.
Except most modern feminists would tell you that ignoring intersectionality is incompatible with feminism, same thing applies to TERFs. You can't be feminist and also oppress/reject people on the basis of race, sexual, or gender identity.
You clearly don't understand if you think it's the same thing. Whiteness has priviledge, whiteness is considered the default. Blackness is not and thus it's not the same.
I didn't like it when Billy, Zack and Trini were given completely different races in the last Power Rangers movie. No one cared though.
Scarjo taking that role didn't cost anyone anything. The suits that cast the role wanted a mainstream Hollywood actress with star power to hopefully grab ticket sales. If Scarjo said no it would have gone to some other Hollywood name. Like Zoe Saldana or Michele Rodriguez etc. They weren't going to cast an unknown (I can't think of a major actiony Asian Hollywood movie star).
I guess that's contingent on believing that Scarlett Johansson is a supposedly outspoken or dedicated feminist, which I definitely don't associate her as, and the only example I could find of her being described as feminist is a time that she said Trump was bad. Aside from that, "feminist" is not an identity that I would readily ascribe to her and as such I wouldn't inherently attribute to any given quote of hers.
I don't really understand why this forum is discussing it tbh. You're either ok with race being interchangeable in fiction or you aren't. Choose one.
Why are you setting up a false binary? You don't get to decide how people of color feel about whitewashing, lol.
