The New York Times ran a piece recently on the struggle Asian Americans face in Hollywood, pointing out the low number of Asians cast in movies and TV, and highlighting alleged vicious, stereotyping humor at Asians’ expense. It also cited Asian actors now taking to social media to criticise the industry's perceived injustice.
The claim that Asians are cast in a minority of roles is obvious. However, more dubious is the claim that discrimination is necessarily involved. The movie industry is just that: an industry. And Hollywood is the capital of the movie industry in the U.S.
The U.S. happens to be 66 percent white, and just six percent Asian. So of course there is less opportunity for Asians. Movie makers want their product to be relatable to as many people as possible, and the 66 percent have much more money than the six.
Also, the movie industry is reflective of the culture. I’m not gonna complain if not enough black people are cast in Bollywood movies. That industry is pretty much dominated by Indians, and that’s not a bad thing. It’s a reflection of the environment that produces the movies.
So no, the fact that there is a minority of Asian roles in Hollywood is not proof of racism. It’s just the normal way to do business. Another good witch hunt down the drain.
The article further tries to prove discrimination by noting the casting of white actors in roles that “should” have been given to Asians.
Most interesting to me was the complaint that Tilda Swinton is playing a character in Marvel’s upcoming “Doctor Strange,” which was originally a Tibetan monk in the comics. The explanation from the writer was surprisingly pragmatic. He stated that the studio did not want to alienate the Chinese market by featuring a Tibetan monk.
Tibet is a very politically sensitive issue for China; China occupied Tibet in 1951, and is very hostile towards outside powers referencing Tibet. The studeo simply did not want to run the risk of being banned in China and losing the revenue (an argument that makes a lot more sense than the illogical and abstract desire to keep Asians down at all costs by some anonymous and all-powerful entity nobody can specifically point out).
Same thing happened with casting Emma Stone as the lead in “Aloha.” It’s not really that surprising that Sony would cast a big star to bring revenue to the movie. The character was supposed to be a quarter Chinese and a quarter Native Hawaiian (I assume the other half was supposed to be white). Name one big-name, Chinese-Hawaiian, mixed-race actress.
If you can’t, then don’t complain about the choice.
And these are just two of the many instances of “discrimination,” but I’m absolutely certain there is a logical, reasonable explanation for all cases. One that doesn’t involve some unnamed, omnipresent, white supremacist.
The second issue, that the humor directed at Asians by use of stereotype is offensive, is just jumping on a gravy train. It’s taking the easy way out when a cause needs to prove itself.
People make fun of friends, they make fun of enemies, they make fun of everything. So the easiest way to prove discrimination is to take humor and use it as an instance of discrimination, since literally anyone can.
But that’s just it though. Everybody gets made fun of. And it’s funny. So get over it.
Racism is not an inherently self-interested motivation. Someone can be selfish, greedy, and seek only for their own personal gain (as in people in the movie industry) and not be racist. But those motivations are much more probable than racism. The perpetrators actually gain something.
Accusing someone of racism can also be a very self-interested move. All these Asian actors are gaining something very tangible by their accusations: publicity. No matter the motivations behind the crusade being waged by the Asian actors, they certainly garner good press from liberal media outlets such as the New York Times. Which is not to say that they are necessarily motivated by selfish interest, but it is important to remember that their campaign is not without personal gain.
The bottom line is that charges of discrimination are at best unfounded, and the actors leading the charge are not necessarily above reproach.