Disney BLACKWASHES Tinker Bell in coming Peter Pan live-action remake - General Discussion Discussion

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

Yep, past bored with it all now.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

I know what you mean. The same happened in comic, that went full woke before movies did. People got angry about it, but wokes doubled down. Right now, Marvel and DC are just in the queue to be closed, the question moved from "whether" to "when"... and nobody cares anymore.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

The funny thing is Woke people don't watch these films anyway so this could be another one for the go woke go broke list.

Not surprised about comics going broke,the majority of comic fans would be white.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Right now, it seems that the most likely scenario DC Comics is gonna become a exclusively digital platform with every creator fired. In a nutshell, a couple of IT guys in a room distributing the catalogue through internet to get some money. Probably Marvel will end up the same.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

They are definitely mining the back catalog more than ever. If not digitally thru comixology, they are reprinting "Facsimile edition" reprints of old issues and $1.00 reprints (minus the old ads and letter pages) called "True Believer" (Marvel) or "Dollar Comics" (DC) .

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Cool! I think she will do a great job as Tinker Bell.

reply

[–] jonathan_k80 (6436) 4 years ago

She's cute.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Yes, she is. She can sprinkle her magic pixie dust on me anytime.

reply

[–] samoanjoes (58599) 4 years ago

She's 15.

Just kidding, I had you worried there.

reply

[–] Kowalski (79078) 4 years ago

LMAO

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

FBI wants to know your location.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

But they only do that for minor or supporting characters. I would like to see black Peter Pan, black Tarzan and black Mulan.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

Black Tarzan would be funny. Not only would it negate the whole premise, I'd love to see them deal with the outrage over a black man swinging from vines like a monkey.

reply

[–] NotoriousRio (12927) 4 years ago

Made me laugh too, but how about a black female Tarzan from a multicultral Victorian London with the Queen making a cameo played by a male Eskimo?

Also Cheeta should be played by a real Cheetah this time!

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

And the monkeys that bring this person up are transexual and multicolored themselves. May as well go for broke! Because it will flop like most Woke productions do.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39849) 4 years ago

Or how about Cheeta played by a bag of Cheetos.

reply

[–] NotoriousRio (12927) 4 years ago

I'd buy that! And eat it too!

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

I'd love to see them deal with the outrage over a black man swinging from vines like a monkey

😂😂😂

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

They're doing a black Ariel, the mermaid.🙄

This is not "colorblind" casting, if anything they look more at skin colour than ever before.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

All right! Can't wait to see it! Now the story will be worth watching! :-)

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Alrighty then, racist!👍

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Yes, it will be worth watching now that Ariel is black. Blackwashing is awesome! :-)

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Yes, I already got that you're proud of being a racist.🙂

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Blackwashing is cool! Three cheers for blackwashing! :-)

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Ok, what's next? Black princess and the frog??

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

That movie ruined the original fairy tale in every single way. Awful music as well. The animation looked great, though.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39849) 4 years ago

What colour will the frog be?

reply

[–] NotoriousRio (12927) 4 years ago

I wonder how multicultural 1800s Denmark will be in this adaption.🙄

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

It will probably be laughably unrealistic.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Probably as unrealistic as mermaids.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

I guess black mermaids living at the coast of Denmark are asylum seekers, huh?

People really need to stop with the so-called "suspension of disbelief" argument. The existence of mermaids does not explain a multicultural 1800s Denmark.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Mermaids are sailors' fantasy. Multicultural 1800 Denmark is SJWs' fantasy. They are all the same: fantasies.

Thus, SJWs are sailors. Q.E.D.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Yeah, nice try, but no go.

Multicultural 1800s Denmark is a modern fantasy projected onto the past.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Modern people can't haz fantasies?

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Political fantasies don't belong in kids movies.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Just like innuendos. Yet there were innuendos all over kids moviez.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Innuendos are perfectly fine, exactly because they are innuendos. Kids don't get these and their heads are certainly not filled with propaganda.

But if you have a problem with them, go ahead and express your disagreement. If you can find enough supporters, Disney would be foolish not to take you seriously.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

It's not like the animated film was specifically set in Denmark, nor was it remotely faithful to the source material.

reply

[–] Furienna (3375) 4 years ago

I don't believe that Mulan will ever be anything but Asian, because that story takes place in China.
Likewise, I believe that Tarzan, who's a British aristocrat from 19th century, has to remain white.
Peter Pan could be made black though, I guess.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Tarzan is just a fictional character, the skin color does not matter. They can just change it not British but American. Or Moroccoan, or whatever. Won't affect the story a bit. Also there were black people too in England in the past. In ancient China as well. RZA made a movie about it.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Lol, Tarzan's skin color totally matters.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Like James Bond you mean?

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Even more so, as he's supposed to be a complete outsider in the African jungle.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Well, a posh black British baby would also still be a complete outsider in the African jungle.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

So does he wear a little tuxedo instead of a loincloth just to show everybody how posh he is???

Don't be silly, actionkamen.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

The whole premise of Tarzan is silly AF. George of the Jungle is more realistic.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Not as silly as the premise of a black Tarzan.

George of the Jungle is as realistic as any gay porn, I guess.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Brendan Fraser was so beautiful he would make any man to consider being in a gay porn with him.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

So that's what made you decide to pursue a career in the gay porn industry???

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Nah. But I can imagine what happened to him in Weinstein's Hollywood...

reply

[–] NotoriousRio (12927) 4 years ago

Only a few thousand black people in Victorian England, and not any Viscounts.

reply

[–] Furienna (3375) 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

One of them could be Tarzan. It's not like I wanted to see more than a thousand black Tarzans... that would be silly.

reply

[–] NotoriousRio (12927) 4 years ago

So would a black Tarzan be silly, I pointed out there were just a few thousand black people in Victorian London compared to millions of white people, and no Viscounts. If you know anything about Tarzan, he was the son of a Viscount.

So can we have a white Black Panther if you seemingly think its ok for a black Tarzan?

Or how about respecting the author and source material on both accounts.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

They can just change it so Tarzan was not a son of a Viscount. Tarzan did not exist. He's just a fictional character in a fictional story.

They can make Tarzan in SPAAAACE... or Tarzan vs Godzilla, or Tarzan joining Avengers. It doesn't matter.

Yes, I would like to see a white Black Panther too. Just like a white Black Widow. But it's up to Disney to make them, not me.

The authors SOLD their rights. They have already been "respected" by the moneyz they recieved. If they don't want the rights holder to do whatever they want to their works, just don't sell them in the first place. You can't have a cake and eat it too.

reply

[–] NotoriousRio (12927) 4 years ago

Take it too far away from the source and it’s deconstructed so much that it’s not Tarzan, or not Black Panther or whoever, just in name only. A great way to alienate the fanbase and lose money.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

That's their prerogative.

reply

[–] OratiaGlake (1259) 4 years ago

The character of Tarzan does need to be ‘white’ though because of his character and background.
Even though he’s a fictional character, he’s in our world, so constrained by the times the story is set in. If Tarzan was set in a different ‘world’ maybe he could be anyone - any race, skin colour etc.

To cast him as a non-Caucasian (specifically English/Western European looking) would be like casting a black actress to play Tess in Tess of the D’urbevilles.

As a viewer, I’m expecting historical accuracy, which does cover class, ethnic diversity etc., it’s not being racist.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Like I said, just change it to not British person. It doesn't matter. Tarzan does not exist in real life.

reply

[–] OratiaGlake (1259) 4 years ago

But the character is British?

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

It is not written in stone ffs.

reply

[–] OratiaGlake (1259) 4 years ago

No, but it is written like that by the author for a reason because it’s the story they wrote.
Saying that it’s not written in stone is ridiculous - if that’s the case, that all mythical, fantastical and fiction can be interpreted and changed however one likes (for what purpose?), then what’s the point?!
What next, Odin is going to have five eyes, Santa is going to be a talking seal, The Phantom of the Opera is going to be set in Iceland and Jane Eyre is going to be Chinese?!

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Well, if you have all the rights to the stories you can. Doesn't mean people will pay to watch your movies.

Probably this is one of the reasons why "woke" movies usually flopped. Other reasons might be that those movies sucked. But they surely can do whatever they want with their own Intellectual Properties.

Sometimes it works tho'. Stargate changed Egyptian Gods into aliens. Others don't work, like the movie Noah that looks like it's not set on Earth complete with giant monsters, etc.

Why would Tarzan be any different?

reply

[–] OratiaGlake (1259) 4 years ago

I think Stargate mixing the aliens into ancient Egyptian mythology etc isn’t such a bizarre thing because that is actually a thing already in existence that’s believed by Ancient Alien theorists.
I found the Noah film just weird!

reply

[–] Furienna (3375) 4 years ago

NotoriousRio and OratioGlake gave you a good reply each.
Tarzan is bound to be white by accuracy to both the source material and to actual history.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Exactly. Why is that so hard for some people to get?

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

They are SJW's they don't care about any form of accuracy or realism even if the character or story are fictional. They would be very happy with a movie about the Battle of Waterloo with a Japanese actor playing Napoleon and the French army being made up of Africans and the Brit side being made up of Indians and Wellington is now played by Rupaul.

reply

[–] Furienna (3375) 4 years ago

Not that I doubt that some people are nuts, but I sure hope that such a movie will never be made.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

They've already made an Indian David Copperfield. No not the magician, the Dicken's novel.

reply

[–] OratiaGlake (1259) 4 years ago

and I don’t know how I feel about that

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

How about the black Dr.Doolittle (Eddie Murphy version)?

reply

[–] OratiaGlake (1259) 4 years ago

For some reason I’ve never thought about that, maybe because I don’t know the story as well etc. and I’ve not seen the film as not a Murphy fan.

Was the film very much based on the original character, storyline etc or was it just taking the concept of a man who could talk to animals/Dr Doolittle? I think it’s also set in contemporary times, which negates the ‘washing’ situation.

If it’s the latter then it really doesn’t matter who portrays the character because it’s not recreating the original story.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

The Eddie Murphy movie is NOTHING like the novels, it just has the same concept of a doctor who can talk with animals.

And Eddie Murphy was cast because he was Eddie Murphy. Not because they wanted the character to be black to promote diversity.

reply

[–] OratiaGlake (1259) 4 years ago

Thank you...and yes, I’d hope and agree that he was cast for his comedy acting, not the colour of his skin. I’m sure if viewers are fans of his, it was a fun little franchise.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

What about The Wiz? I’m pretty sure L. Frank Baum didn’t envisage his characters as black either, and yet it was still made 42 years ago without the additional butt hurt moaning of people afraid of blackwashing. It was made and people moved on.

I miss those days.

reply

[–] OratiaGlake (1259) 4 years ago

Is that the Wizard of Oz you’re referring to?
I really can’t remember the racial diversity in the cast if so.....and it definitely wouldn’t bother me at all in that, because it’s pure fantasy.

When I watch things, I just watch them, usually not questioning the casting choices unless it’s seemingly bizarre to me (this could be acting quality, height, gender - anything!)....but at the end of the day it’s really unimportant to me and in the grand scheme of things because people are just people and film makers make whatever they want. Yes, I may quibble over certain specifics whether historical or literary - like if they cast a non-Caucasian as Queen Victoria or Tarzan was black....but I’m certainly not going to go nuclear about it.

I’m watching ‘Cursed’ on Netflix at the moment, telling the story of Arthur’s sword, pre-King Arthur and that’s got a very mixed-race cast in it - Arthur and Morgana are black for example and there are plenty of black and Asian actors cast as fey folk. I’m sure some viewers would get their knickers in a right twist over that, it’s very subjective. Again, personally I don’t care - this is fantasy even though it’s based on very old English folk law (and so technically it’s very unlikely anyone involved was black or Asian!)

reply

[–] OratiaGlake (1259) 4 years ago

Now that would be a sight lol 😂😬

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

WTF are you talking about?

Tinker Bell wasn't any race. In fact, in the broadway musical, she wasn't played by any person. She was just a ball of light that a stage hand projected onto the stage.

reply

[–] R_Kane (15828) 4 years ago

The Disney artists modeled Tinker Bell on Marilyn Monroe, who was white.

reply

[–] jonathan_k80 (6436) 4 years ago

Tinker Bell was modeled after Margaret Kerry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Kerry

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120206152011/disney/images/0/04/Margaretkerry.jpg

reply

[–] NotoriousRio (12927) 4 years ago

Margaret Kerry is still alive, how about her playing Tinkerbell? You'd be just showing prejudice on the grounds of a person's age, if you disagree. I think the original Tinkerbell is due a comeback! 😋

reply

[–] R_Kane (15828) 4 years ago

I stand erected. I referenced what seems to be a popular legend.

What is not legend is that Margaret is white, and that Disney animators often left their female rendering nude to the last minute.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

She is a character from a PLAY and BOOK, written by J.M. Barrie. You know what those are, right? The Disney version is one of many adaptations, and it's not even the most famous one. The most famous one is the 1950s musical, and Tinkerbell is a ball of light in that one.

reply

[–] R_Kane (15828) 4 years ago

*snort-laugh* How old are you? Mary Martin ROCKED in the Broadway play, but Disney OWNED Peter Pan.

Moreover, in the Celtic world ie Faerie, they are all white.

You know: Celts?!

reply

[–] PaladinNJ (21772) 4 years ago

Disney has NEVER owned Peter Pan. They license the character from JM Barrie's estate with the proceeds going to Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London per the terms of his will.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

WTF are you talking about, MORON?

Exactly what you heard: they're blackwashing another traditional white character. One more.

Of course, they only do that with positive characters. The lower the character, the more like is for him to be white. This is how wokeness works.

I can tell you, for example, that there will be zero "diversity" among the minions of Captain Hook. They will be all very white.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Oh, is that what you meant? They're blackwashing a traditional white character? Good. It'll be worth seeing now. :-)

I don't actually mean that (I don't care what color is played by her). I'm just going to play your trollish game.

So, you were saying what now? The new Disney version of Peter Pan will be cooler and more interesting now that Tinkerbell is black? Sign me up! :-)

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

They're blackwashing a traditional white character? Good. It'll be worth seeing now. :-)

Not really.

Of course, since you follow the woke commandment to worship blacks and hate whites, blackwashing Tinker Bell (or any other positive character) is gonna make you feel good. That's natural. It's how religious feelings work.

But that kind of religious rush in people like you doesn't have a lasting effect, it's just a religious high, and movies are quickly forgotten. That's why Christians movies are a "consume and forget" market. It seems that Woke Hollywood is going the same path.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Wow, you really nailed me! How are you so smart!

BTW, when is the release coming out? And thanks for letting all of us know that Tinkerbell is being blackwashed! Best PR stunt ever; I wouldn't have cared about the movie otherwise. Now the remake will be interesting.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Wow, you really nailed me!

It's not that difficult. Once you've seen a religious fanatic, you've seen them all.

Wokeness is just another religion. It's trendy, but nothing more. I'm aware that you're trying to be sarcastic, but the truth is that it's actually easy to nail you. You're just a standard believer.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Blackwashing is the best thing to happen in Hollywood this decade. Thanks for letting us and others know when to watch this new, improved blackwashed version. =-)

reply

[–] Allison44 (602) 4 years ago

I recommend ignoring kukuwhatever his/her name is. He's only interested in furthering an unkind and racist agenda, disguised as movie discussion input.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

I agree. I think he's a disinfo troll, among some others here.

What's interesting is that all the posters screeching about OUR IPs being blackwashed are all foreign nationals. This is how they've been sowing seeds of discourse in America, posting as if they were Americans so that when they post their b.s., other Americans get confused and see all of this so-called divisiveness from within.

reply

[–] Allison44 (602) 4 years ago

I don't know. They might be American grown minions of someone like Richard Spencer.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

You may not know, but I do know. They're everywhere, not just on these forums but others, too. And like I said, they give themselves away with British/Canadian spellings and expressions. Sometimes they will even admit where they're from.

And as much as I hate Richard Spencer, the biggest perpetrator of white nationalism right now is not him. It's English-speaking foreign nationals like Gavin McIness (Canadian), Sargon of Arkkad (British) and Milo Yiannopoulos (British).

reply

[–] Allison44 (602) 4 years ago

Okay. I know they're out there. Not arguing with that. But, Movie Chat isn't exclusively American.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

It's not about whether MC is exclusively American or not. It's the fact that foreign nationals have been given too much a voice about American-exclusive IPs and phenomenons, and I have an issue with that. You don't see Americans camping out at English-language foreign film boards at MC trying to argue with the French, the Spanish, the Italians, etc. about their own movies. If foreign nationals can't be bothered to extend the same courtesy to Americans, then they should be blocked from the site.

Foreign nationals have NO RIGHT to start arguing with us about OUR movies and TV shows, about OUR music, convincing us that we should be up in arms if Disney decides to cast Ariel with a black person or if Star Wars decided to cast an Asian character. It's not their IP. It's not their culture.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

This is how they've been sowing seeds of discourse in America, posting as if they were Americans so that when they post their b.s., other Americans get confused and see all of this so-called divisiveness from within.

1. MovieChat is not US exclusive.
2. Peter Pan is a Scottish story. And the story is set in London.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

I think that it was whitewashing to make Tinkerbell white. The fae are very diversified within lore. Sometimes they are green, grey, blue, or purple. So just because Disney used what was deemed to be attractive at the time doesn't mean that it's "woke" to do something different now. There are also plenty of adaptations that you can watch with a blonde, white Tinkerbell.

Also, you are aware that on the stage Peter Pan is almost always played by a woman right?

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

"I think that it was whitewashing to make Tinkerbell white."

You honestly and truly believe that??? It's not something logical that just happens when people from a predominately white industry and country adapt a piece of literature from a predominately white culture?

"Sometimes they are green, grey, blue, or purple"

The most well-known depictions of fae depict them as white-skinned, like the flower fairies drawn by Cicely Mary Barker. Not strange since they're part of European mythology.

"Disney used what was deemed to be attractive at the time doesn't mean that it's "woke" to do something different now. "

Except when it becomes a pattern, with Disney also releasing statements about following a diversity policy.

"Also, you are aware that on the stage Peter Pan is almost always played by a woman right?"

But he's still supposed to be a boy, right?

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

It doesn't surprise me that a lot of faeries are drawn to be white. So is Jesus, but that doesn't mean that it's accurate.

The only point that I'm trying to make is that Faeries are mythical creatures that are not bound by human "race". Just look up pictures of faeries and there are all different body types, and skin colours. I just don't see the big deal. Was it a big deal when Julia Roberts played her as well?

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Lol, you're not actually comparing a historical figure who probably existed in real life with mythological creatures, are you?

"The only point that I'm trying to make is that Faeries are mythical creatures that are not bound by human "race"."

Well, they kind of are, since they're part of European mythology.

Julia Roberts was awful as Tinker Bell. But the big deal is that this has become part of an actual policy at Disney. And just a trend in general.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

Well, I think that Jesus, whether he was a historical figure or not, wasn't white, so why isn't there outrage at all the white Jesus paintings?

So if the fae are part of European mythology and therefore should have white skin, are you offended when they are painted grey? Blue? Green? Sure, a lot of them are depicted as having white skin, which totally makes sense as a lot of artists tend to paint what they are familiar with, and that includes white skin. But, traditionally fae come from the otherworld, so why should human definitions of race have anything to do with them?

Look. if Disney changed the race of the Darlings, I would see your point. Even Peter. The faeries, merfolk, pirates, and the lost boys could be from anywhere, Africa, Asia, or South America so it really makes no difference to me the skin tone of the actor who will portray them.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Why are we talking about Jesus? That seems like deflection. I think Jesus would most likely have had dark hair and olive skin, so I personally disagree with any other depiction. But the image has been a symbol for so long, what do you expect people to do? Besides, in Africa and Asia he has been depicted as non-white, so I don't see a problem here. It's not like there's a political agenda at play here. Disney has publicly admitted their diversity policy and they're applying it every, single movie nowadays. And it's just extremely peculiar they're suddenly changing the appearance of their iconic characters.

"So if the fae are part of European mythology and therefore should have white skin, are you offended when they are painted grey? Blue? Green?"

With Caucasian features, right? Not like they're from a different continent, no?

Lol, are you thinking of Somali pirates? I think the Lost Boys could come from anywhere, but not the other characters since they're clearly British or from European mythology.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

I used Jesus as an example as it's a widely accepted depiction, and is whitewashed. We don't have to talk about that anymore. I just find it hypocritical that an image like white Jesus is okay, but changing the skin tone of a non human character, who lives in a place that is not actually on planet earth is something worthy of outrage. When it comes to the pirates, as far as I knew they were from Neverland as well and not from this world, so again they could be any skin tone.

It doesn't bother me that Disney is aiming for diversity. It bothers me that Disney has no new ideas and is constantly remaking movies, that they have already altered so much from the original source material.

With Caucasian features, right? Not like they're from a different continent, no?
Europe wasn't the only place who had faeries in their folklore. The Aziza are part of West African folklore, and there are also Yumboes who, while not like the aziza or the european faeries, they still are considered part of the fae. Both Asia, and the Americas have their own versions of faeries as well.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

European Jesus is simply a religious symbol, just like black Jesus and Asian Jesus. And it's almost two thousand years old. What do you want people to do, call for all those images to be painted over? Disney's blackwashing is something that's happening NOW and there's an agenda behind it, of course people are more vocal about that (outrage is an exaggeration).

Hook is from England and Smee is Irish. I guess it's possible one of the other nameless pirates could be black.

I'm sure there are creatures in other cultures that are similar, but they are not called "fairies". It's possible they could live in Neverland, but Tinker Bell is not one of them. And it's funny you mention the Yumboes because apparently they are white!

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

My faerie book says that Yumboes are a silvery white, so not Caucasian.

Just out of curiosity, how will it change the story for you if Tinkerbell is not white? I'm not asking this with malice, as I really like you as a fellow poster and I just don't understand why it's a big deal. Disney changes the stories, no one cares. I mean The Little Mermaid didn't have a name and she dies. Sleeping Beauty is not for kids at all. Tinkerbell dies in the novel and Peter doesn't remember her. Those are just a few examples, and I'm not saying that they shouldn't have made the changes, I just want to know why some changes are totally acceptable, and others, like something as minor as skin tone, are reasons for outrage?

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

They're still always white, so never black. Is the actress going whiteface for this part?

I'm not sure how often it needs to be pointed out that these changes are made because of an agenda. The original ending was obviously changed because it was too sad. White characters are blackwashed, why exactly? Because white is bad? When Disney keeps mentioning diversity, racism and white privilige, it certainly seems that's what they're implying. They keep calling attention to these changes, so it's not exactly minor.

No outrage.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

I just don't think that faeries and mermaids have human skin tones, so I really don't care. White privilege is an issue, especially in North America currently. Diversity is an issue. I understand that Bollywood, and other Asian cinema isn't diverse either. I also think that Hollywood is run on the almighty dollar. If these types of movies keep losing them money, they will change what they are making. I can see from Disney's point of view that while diversity is great for lip service, I think that their agenda is selling more merchandise to a wider demographic.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Except most of these movies aren't exactly big box office hits. How much wider can their demographic get by making Tinker Bell black? Aren't they losing their white audience because they can't identify with these characters anymore???

I do not at all think white privilege or diversity are serious issues in the US or Europe. But even if they were, I don't think it's Disney's business to promote politics in their movies and there are certainly other ways to do it than by blackwashing and erasing white characters.

I thought it was absolutely hilarious that Parasite was presented as some kind of example of diversity. But do I desire to see more white people in Korean movies? I can't say that I do.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

I thought it was absolutely hilarious that Parasite was presented as some kind of example of diversity.

For a woke, "diversity" means less white people. A movie with a 100% black cast, or white a 100% chinese cast or korean cast or indian cast is considered "diverse".

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

If the leads in the movie are white, how is a movie like this losing it's audience? Again, a faerie is not a human being. I don't know what else to say to you. If a character with a darker skin tone makes you not want to see a movie, don't see it. I don't understand how more melanin changes who Tinkerbell is. Faeries don't have races as far as I know, and I'm not about to assign any to them. Same with mermaids. The only way a white character gets erased, is it every previous version of that character no longer exist.

Arts have always been a place for social commentary and political change. I didn't think that Parasite was an example of diversity in itself. Asian movies are not diverse. Neither are their societies.

Do I think that Hollywood is shooting itself in both feet? Perhaps. I'm not excited about movies that gender swap characters, and I am really bored with remakes. I have no problem seeing more people of colour in film. I would much rather see those movies told authentically. Historically that doesn't happen in Hollywood.

For myself, when it comes to changing the skin colour of a character, unless there is a reason why the character needs to a certain colour, I don't care who plays them. Perhaps that's my theatre background? Skin colour doesn't really matter much on the stage. When it comes to imaginary creatures, then I really don't care because I don't understand why a non human creature should have our racial issues.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

When you look at depictions of imaginary creatures like fairies you'll see that almost always cultures assign their own race to them. And melanin has a reason. If there are no black people in Europe, then it doesn't make much sense for imaginary creatures from Europe to be black.

There's more merchandise of Tinker Bell out there than there is of Peter Pan. Isn't Disney going to lose little white girls with this new movie because they suddenly can't relate anymore?
And Ariel is a main character, how are white girls supposed to relate to her now that she's black?

We'll see what the lasting effect is of erasing white characters from these stories. Disney, unfortunately, seems to consider itself the great keeper of (mostly European) fairy tales.

I will say it again just in case you missed it. It's not like these characters are suddenly black by accident. There's an agenda behind it. A very disturbing one that mostly seems to target white people. It certainly doesn't belong in a kids movie.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

These creatures aren't from Europe though. They are from an imaginary land, far away, not on this earth. They are not human and not bound by our constructs .

White girls still have blonde Tinkerbell. She still exists and has her own movie(s). But, why can't white girl relate to a darker skinned Tinkerbell? I guess no other children than white kids ever related to a Disney character?

I read what you said about this agenda. The original movies still exist. They have not been erased. You can still see all white casts if that makes you happy. Why is it threatening and sinister to allow black children to have a character for them in a movie where the leads are all white? Personally I hope to see a greater mix with the Lost Boys and the Pirates.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Can you provide some examples in the last decades of Asian mythological creatures, or African mythological, or Indian mythological creatures or any other current ethnic group mythological creatures played by white people?

Because all those excuses don't explain why this washing goes always one-way, the same way.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

No. Other than the genie in Aladdin being played by a white man and then a Black man i can't really think of any Asian mythological creatures that I've seen in a movie period. Well, the Djinn in Wishmaster was also played by a white guy but thats not recent or an Asian movie. I can't think of many Asian movies that I've seen that have had Americans or any white people in them who haven't been bad guys.

Asian societies are pretty homogeneous, and somewhat racist. That doesn't mean that we should be too.

Like I said to Stratego, if you want to watch all white movies there are plenty you can choose from.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

No. Other than the genie in Aladdin being played by a white man and then a Black man i can't really think of any Asian mythological creatures that I've seen in a movie period.

Actually, the genie in Aladdin was played by Will Smith, who is black. Hollywood actually blackwashes Arab mythological creatures too (the same they're blackwashing Freemen in Dune (2020), even though Freemen were heavily inspired in Bedouins).

If you're talking about the animated movie, Robin Williams didn't play the role. He dubbed the voice.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Apparently they ARE bound by our constructs because they've pretty much always been portrayed as humanlike, that is, European humanlike. I can guarantee you there would've been outrage if Dwayne Johnson's character had been portrayed as a white guy. Why not keep these creatures like the cultures they're from? I thought cultural appropriation was a bad thing? Next we get a leprechaun from Nepal!

"I guess no other children than white kids ever related to a Disney character?"

Wait, isn't that what YOU are saying? That Disney's motivation for blackwashing is to reach a wider audience?

That white characters have been erased in the new adaptations, that's a fact. And this may have a lasting effect, since many people associate Disney's creations with these stories.

I already made it very clear. There's nothing sinister or threatening about a black character. There's something sinister and threatening about the trend of blackwashing white characters because apparently there's something wrong with being white. But why do black kids need a character of their own? I thought they were perfectly capable of relating to Disney characters before?

"Like I said to Stratego, if you want to watch all white movies there are plenty you can choose from."

Now that's a false argument. I never said I want to watch all white movies.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

So, would you be okay if they created new characters in these new adaptations with darker skin?

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

If they make sense culturally and historically, sure. But they should cut it out with all the nonsense about diversity, etc. These characters should not be created just for the sake of an agenda.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

I just don't understand where you are getting the impression that Hollywood or Disney are pushing an agenda that there is something wrong with being white? Again, new adaptations do not erase previous versions or characters.

You have said that white kids won't be able to relate to a black Tinker Bell, but then say that black kids were perfectly capable of relating to Disney characters. Why the double standard?

Peter Pan doesn't take place in this realm, so the idea that the characters have to stick to European culture makes no sense to me.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Where do I get the idea??? The people in Hollywood literally call for their colleagues to give away their jobs to people of color. White characters are being blackwashed and black characters are inserted in historically unrealistic scenarios. And all because Hollywood is "so white" and us white folks have too much "privilege". And Disney doesn't create extra stories with diverse characters, they replace white characters with characters of color. Of course they're implying there's something wrong with being white when they openly give preference to color, even though going white is the most logical choice.

No, white characters ARE being erased from Disney's previous adaptations. Why??? Where's your guarantee that Disney won't do away with their older, iconic white characters?

You misunderstood. I think kids can relate just fine to characters of a different color. But you said that Disney's motivation is to reach a wider audience. Because they assume black kids can't relate to white characters?

The humans in Neverland seem to come from our world. And the imaginary creatures all seem to be based on European foklore. Depicting them as white is the most logical choice, why deliberately cast a black person in such a role?

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

I didn't say that they couldn't relate, I'm saying that they might not want to watch movies that have nothing to do with them. They very well may, I don't know. I'm white, I don't know how black kids feel.

All I'm saying is that I don't think that this is a big deal. There was a black Cinderella in 1997 and the world is still turning.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

My point is, if it's Disney's reasoning that black girls won't watch movies without black characters, why aren't they concerned about losing a white audience by making a popular white character like Tinker Bell black? They can certainly create more black characters, without doing something that risky only for a couple of more sales. That is, if they really care about reaching a wider audience, which I don't believe.

That Cinderella movie wasn't part of a bigger trend connected to a political movement. You may not be concerned about the effect this may have on the relations between different groups in our society, but I am.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

I guess I see it in a different way than you do. I'm not trying to assume how you see the world. I'm only going by my interpretations of what you have said.

I see Hollywood going a little overboard with quotas, I'm not going to lie and say that I think that the diversity requirements for best picture aren't ridiculous. But I can see why. I think it's great that they listened to the Oscars so white, do I think that the response swung a little far? Perhaps. I also think that the backlash is going to swing too far before things find a better balance before we have to do it again.

I live in a place that even though it's the conservative redneck part of Canada, it's incredibly diverse. I went to school and work with people who were born here just like I was, and we have different backgrounds and melanin, but we are all Canadian. So why should I or they have to watch a Bollywood film to see a character of Indian descent? Or a Korean film? Or whatever? We can compare to the movies of those other countries, but they represent those societies which are very homogenous and not diverse at all.

Should Disney change character's colour? I don't know, frankly I don't care. It's nice seeing different people on the screen. I don't want Hollywood to change the skin colour of actual people who lived, or if it changes the story, but when it comes to the land of make believe, I think anything can go. I wouldn't care if they made Tinkerbell purple.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

I was born and raised and still live in a big city where more than half of its inhabitants have a foreign background and the mayor is a muslim. My father is a foreigner. I know all about different cultures and believe me, we've got it good. In a society like that it's only logical that people of different ethnicities are going to show up in movies and tv shows. Nothing wrong with that. If a non-white person wants to make or be in entertainment, they have the opportunity to do so just like anybody else. They even have the freedom to make entertainment exclusively with and for people from their own group. If it happens, it happens. It's really up to them. But there's no good reason to enforce it and to connect it to any kind of political agenda about racism and white privilege, especially not kids movies. Why should non-white people be made happy by making white people feel like crap?

Why does an Indian-Canadian person NEED to see an Indian person on screen? Why is such a superficial similarity with a fictional character so important?

Drastically changing an iconic character is a dumb move by Disney, but making her purple is less concerning as there's no agenda attached to it.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

Why does a white person need to see a white person on screen?

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

No, that's not something I ever implied. But a white person does not need to see a white character being blackwashed because white people are so racist and privileged.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

I just don't understand why changing Tinkerbell's skin tone would make anyone feel like crap. I'm sorry I don't. I can appreciate the privilege I had growing up that almost everyone on tv looked and talked like me. I always had dolls that looked like me. I don't feel badly about that, but I know that that wasn't the case for many other girls around me growing up. Not having dolls and characters that look like you in movies and tv, can send a message to young kids that who they are isn't good enough, or beautiful enough to be represented.

I also think that there are a lot of children's movies that have political agendas. Ferngully, Wall-E, The Iron Giant, Cars 2, The Jungle Book, even the Little Mermaid.

I would rather see movies made by different groups of people. Unfortunately making movies cost a lot of money, and a lot of those "minority groups" in the west don't have the money and without the backing of studios, even when those movies are made, they don't get wide release.

If Disney puts movies like the original animated versions of these movies in a special vault like Song of the South, I will join you, but until then, all these original movies are still available to be seen, the books are still available and the characters are still seen at Disneyland. I don't see them as being erased.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

The fae are very diversified within lore

Fairy diversified lore means you have pixies, and leprechauns, and elves, and brownies, and gnomes, and a hundred others types of less known fairies, with very diverse shapes.

That's NOT equivalent to a lore of "black fairy", "asian fairy", "hispanic fairy", "asian american fairy", "lgtb fairy", "trans fairy", "muslim fairy" and such. Trying to push the usual diversity template in the lore of fairies is absolutely ludicrous.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

So faeries have human races now?

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Why is it okay for this poster to use the m-word, but not for others?

Hello, Mod3, where are you???!!!

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Awww, you gonna report my post, troll, like you disinfo trolls always do when someone calls you put on your b.s.? Go right ahead!

Oops. Looks like I just edited my post and it'll stay up. Thanks for the heads up. :-)

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Three cheers for the racist moron who thinks blackwashing is cool!😊

reply

[–] Ladronmc (176) 4 years ago

It triggers right wing racist snowflakes. Love it.

reply

[–] Mrmojo4700 (21714) 4 years ago

Is that an oxymoron?

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Oh hi, sock puppet!😃

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Are you even American? If you're not, where the hell do you get off?

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39849) 4 years ago

"Are you even American?"

Why is that relevant? Just asking.

reply

[–] sslssg (35179) 4 years ago

Yeah, why can only Americans have an opinion on this topic?

reply

[–] Ladronmc (176) 4 years ago

And here they come!!! So. Freaking. Easy.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

These aren't Rightwingers, though. These are racist foreign nationals who've come to weaponize pop culture on multiple forums. You can tell by their alternate forms of spelling (for example, spelling "color" as "colour") and their occasional admittance of where they're from. This is what they do, and they're on every forum.

This is what especially pisses me off about this whole things. It's bad enough that we have our homegrown idiots, but to have their voices amplified by trash from other countries trying to pass themselves off as Americans.

reply

[–] Ladronmc (176) 4 years ago

I have no way of knowing who is or isn't American buts I'm not sure it's that relevant.
We're at a stage where US politics is important and affects people in other countries, and those people have a vested interest in which candidate gets elected.

A foreigner might well be more versed in US politics than an ill-informed, ignorant American.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

I love blackwashing. It makes movies and TV shows so much more interesting to me. Let's have more blackwashing!

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

We heard you the first time, you racist troll!😀

reply

[–] Ladronmc (176) 4 years ago

Stratego describing himself really well there.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Who's this Stratego guy you're referring to???

reply

[–] Ladronmc (176) 4 years ago

Some low IQ poster on here. Represents the fascist, radical right pretty well.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Well, send that guy my way! If he pisses off racist, marxist sock puppet trolls like you, I bet I would just love him!

reply

[–] Ladronmc (176) 4 years ago

Awwww easy there racist snowflake. Wouldn't want you to melt.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Lol, that's funny coming from a puddle.

reply

[–] Ladronmc (176) 4 years ago

Poor baby.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

You're describing yourself really well there!

reply

[–] Ladronmc (176) 4 years ago

Too
Easy.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Yep, that's what you are.

reply

[–] Ladronmc (176) 4 years ago

Done him again!

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Troll removed the word "MORON."

Now you look silly.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Why do I look silly? I got the desired effect, no namecalling from him.

reply

[–] trevorh321 (5495) 4 years ago

Tinker Black? LOL

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 4 years ago

Fairies are like Klingons, not human and presumably not with the same range of skin colors and racial divisions as humans. Therefore, when hiring a human an actor to play one, the race of the human actor doesnt matter. The role was originally cast as a pinpoint spotlight anyway, to be true to the author's vision they should take an as actress and obscure her with glowing CGI, anyway, and what would race matter then!

The 1980s Peter Pan movie had racially diverse Lost Boys, this isnt new.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Fairies are creatures in the European folklore. They're not black, or Asian, or "diverse" in the sense of the usual woke diversity template.

By the way: Chinese spirits are creatures in the Chinese folklore. You won't see them played by white actors. For some (woke) reason, the race-washing only goes one way around.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 4 years ago

The idea of fairies looking like little white girls in flower dresses is recent, not traditional, it dates from the late Victotian/early 30th century era. Before people believed in fairies, but ideas of what they looked like were varied.

FYI "Peter Pan" was a play before it was a book, and with the author's approval, the cast included an adult woman playing a little boy, white people playing Native Americans, and a spotlight playing a fairy. If you want to get all huffy about purity and accuracy in casting, this is NOT the property to stand or die on.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

The idea of fairies looking like little white girls in flower dresses is recent, [...] it dates from the late Victotian/early 30th century era. Before people believed in fairies, but ideas of what they looked like were varied.

I'll repeat: ideas of what they looked varies, but that variation didn't look like the woke "diversity" template. You didn't have the "black pixie" and the "asian pixie" and the "hispanic pixie" and the "muslim pixie" and such.

Not a single thing in history was 100% homogeneous. During the viking period, you had tall vikings and short vikings, vikings with long beard and vikings with short beards, vikings that were fatter and viking that were thinner. There's always variation, but that has zero relation with the usual woke "diversity™" template, which btw 99% of times it's just "blackwash positive characters".

Now, with fairies.

It's ridiculous.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Just so you know, OP and a handful of others appear to be part of some disinformation troll farm, so while it's admirable that you're fighting the good fight, know who you're dealing with. These posts aren't made in any real seriousness but to spread Neo-Nazi/Alt Right memes. The OP--like the trolls who attacked the recent Star Wars film and Star Trek Discovery--have never seen the IPs they complain about being "blackwashed" and couldn't care less about them. For example, you can see how none of them seem to be aware that Peter Pan started out as a book and play and wasn't played by anyone.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

OP and a handful of others appear to be part of some disinformation troll farm [...] These posts aren't made in any real seriousness but to spread Neo-Nazi/Alt Right memes.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 4 years ago

Oh, I don't take HIM seriously!

But perhaps others would like to know that fairies dont have to be twee white girls, and that the original conception of "Peter Pan" included trans-sexual and trans-racial casting. If he wants to knock himself out over this goofy issue, let him and have a good laugh.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

"Just so you know, OP and a handful of others appear to be part of some disinformation troll farm, so while it's admirable that you're fighting the good fight, know who you're dealing with. These posts aren't made in any real seriousness but to spread Neo-Nazi/Alt Right memes"

But you do take this seriously???

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 4 years ago

Who the hell says I take fairy casting seriously?

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

Did you not read the quote I posted? I said nothing about fairy casting.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

"Before people believed in fairies, but ideas of what they looked like were varied."

You mean the idea of them looking like little black girls???

"FYI "Peter Pan" was a play before it was a book, and with the author's approval, the cast included an adult woman playing a little boy, white people playing Native Americans, and a spotlight playing a fairy."

Lol, that was simply a matter of convenience.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 4 years ago

If they want to be true to the author's vision, the role should be played by a green ping pong ball on a stick, the kind used for CGI motion capture!

You trolls should be thrilled it's going to be played by a human female, although having Tink played by a male would also be okay with Barrie. Obviously, he was okay with cross-sexual casting.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

"If they want to be true to the author's vision"

Again, Tinker Bell being represented as merely a light on stage was more a matter of convenience. In the novelization it's clear she is a fairy with a physical body.

"You trolls"

Wtf? I'm troll??? Don't be so freaking childish.

reply

[–] Mrmojo4700 (21714) 4 years ago

Surly there must be examples of roles played by white people that were traditionally characters of other races.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Maybe... Jesus, Noah, Moses? Ba'al? I can't find black roles tho'.

reply

[–] OratiaGlake (1259) 4 years ago

Wasn’t there a hoo-hah with one of the recent Peter Pan films because Rooney Mara played Tiger Lily and traditionally that character was actually not Caucasian?

reply

[–] Furienna (3375) 4 years ago

Actually, it used to be common that white actors played characters from the Middle East and East Asia.
Some even did African or Native American roles. That is not considered acceptable these days though.

reply

[–] damocci (1516) 4 years ago

This is silly. In the Disney animated version of Mulan, which is a story set in ancient China, there is a magical dragon character voiced by a distinctly black actor, when everyone knows there were no black people in ancient China and dragons are not part of African culture. It wasn't a problem 20 years ago so it shouldn't be a problem now wrt Tinkerbell.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Dubbed.

Mushu was dubbed by Eddy Murphy (and brilliantly, by the way).

I repeat: dubbed.

I don't give a shit who dubs a character provided he has the right voice. A black guy can dub a black character, a white character (Dark Vader was dubbed by James Earl Jones), a magical dragon or an pink unicorn. I don't give a shit.

When you dub foreign movies to English, only people from the same race than the original actor are allowed to dub him? This is what you're saying? Seriously?

And by the way, how does a human dare to dub a magical dragon? I want a English-speaker magical dragon to dub Mushu!!

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39849) 4 years ago

I just asked my 6 year old daughter what she thought, since I’m guessing she’s the key demographic for this film. When I showed her the picture of the actress and asked if she’d make a good Tinkerbell, her answer was, “Yes because she looks like my friend’s sister.”

So, there you have it.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Kids like everything provided it's nicely wrapped.

Kids in 30's Germany enjoyed the nice fantasy tales with the charming hero defeating the evil Jews too. So, there you have it.

reply

[–] Stratego (31081) 4 years ago

The kids argument does not work at all for me. If the kids don't care, then they could just as well keep her white. Apparently they don't need a character to physically look like them to be able to relate to them.

reply

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 4 years ago

Who cares? Boooooring.

😎

reply

[–] trevorh321 (5495) 4 years ago

Exactly. A black Tinker Bell makes more sense than a white one. We all know there were tons of fairies (and mermaids like in The Little Mermaid) in African mythology. They have an incredibly rich and superior history too all other cultures. And they did create Peter Pan, after all. And books. And movies. And tv shows. And they are so gracious it's only fair Tinker Bell be black.

reply

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 4 years ago

Whatever, Billy Bob.

😎

reply

[–] trevorh321 (5495) 4 years ago

And, as Al Sharpton correctly points out, black people were building pyramids while white people were building huts. He didn't intend to denigrate white people, of course.

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Now blacks built the Egyptians pyramids too! 😂😂😂

reply

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 4 years ago

https://media1.giphy.com/media/3ornk2Fk3VegMr4bKw/200w.webp?cid=ecf05e47zq9b5vf1qw78ge3145hhhyohqwaeqh4pth4kj4hu&rid=200w.webp

reply

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Exactly. A black Tinker Bell makes more sense than a white one. We all know there were tons of fairies (and mermaids like in The Little Mermaid) in African mythology.

So, since African had mythological creatures too (like every other place in the world)... it's OK to blackwash European mythological creatures. And what's more, it makes more sense to blackwash mythological creatures!

they have an incredibly rich and superior history too all other cultures.

And THIS SUMS UP WOKENESS. Actually, it's the best definition of wokeness I've seen. It's people worshipping blacks and thinking that they have a superior history to other cultures.

Not kidding. Wokes literally think Africa blacks that the richest and superior history in the world. And this is not joke. This is a fucking RELIGION.

reply

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 4 years ago

https://media1.giphy.com/media/3ornk2Fk3VegMr4bKw/200w.webp?cid=ecf05e47zq9b5vf1qw78ge3145hhhyohqwaeqh4pth4kj4hu&rid=200w.webp

reply