Where's the line between diversity and tokenism?

[craftymarten]

I would say that tokenism is having a PoC character that was undeveloped or underdeveloped while you have a cast of white characters with backstories and personalities. They've added an extra character because they don't want to be called racist but that in itself is a racist thing to do, because unless the story is autobiographical and you don't know any PoC, or race is an actual part of the story, they've made the cast all white intentionally.
You've created your character to be black and female as an incidental factor so that isn't tokenism. It could have been a white guy but it's not. I usually come up with the story for a character and work on their appearance and personality afterwards.

[lartianmartian1]

Having not read your story, it still looks as though you are in the process of making a well-rounded main character, regardless of race, gender, etc., and for that I would not accuse you or anyone like you of tokenism. It might be that way if she were just a flat side character in a mostly male/white or what have you cast, but that seems doubtful here.

In a zombie story, you have the advantage of including diversity without really having to point it out within the story proper (unless you deem it necessary), because in an apocalyptic scenario, would any of this even matter? I never got into the Walking Dead, and I'm fairly certain they brought race up with that one racist character (correct me if I'm wrong), but it was still refreshing to see all these different people banding together. Even if the series itself got.... bad. Sorry, I only watched the first season, but now I don't think I'll ever get past that.

And if you're worried about your main character being the point that draws people in, that just makes me weep for our society a little more. Because I feel the same way about my stories! And why shouldn't that be a point to draw audiences in? Just write a good story around her to make them stay, there's nothing wrong with that. Obviously, the folks who would accuse you of "baiting the audience" need to re-examine themselves, and are not worth your time.

I'm white though, so I'll step back and see what other people have to say about this. Bye!

[ar-ninetysix]

@Zugaikotsu
Yeah, that's how I'm trying to work at it, no one is more or less than another based on their skin color, religion, sexuality, or whatever. And in that same strength, I'm not trying to pander, I'm better than that lol I just wanted her to be the way she is now, but was worried if it was a bad way of going about it.

@A_Toad
I agree, I'm sticking with my decisions on the story unless I myself lose interest in certain aspects of it. In which case, rewrites would help. People pleasing isn't much of an issue, same with the ideological doubt. I want people to be happy with my choice, but I'm not gonna change said choice for them.. if that makes sense? Character designs are the most solid thing I have that aren't gonna change~

@craftymarten
I'm the same exact way, personality and story comes way before character design and appearance. I do this with every character I've written in general. So then if the race for characters was already determined, adding or making one different for the sake of being different is tokenism for sure? Good to know that now, I'd like to keep avoiding that in the future.

@lartianmartian1
I meant more in the sense that like.. I don't want to come across as "look at how diverse my story is, I have a black female lead" .. like, I don't want that to be the advertising point, is what I'm saying. The character herself is good enough to draw people in, but I don't want her appearance to be the sole reason that they're there, you know?

[DiegoPalacios]

You can have the character design you want for your protagonist. Is your story.

Adding characters from a minority is not tokenism. Tokenism is when this is forced or half-assed.

Is also important to point out that minor and major characters from a minority work the same way that non-minority characters. Because in the end, people are people.

So, for a major character of a minority, it is expected that they had a solid characterization. Not just "i am from minority X"

Minor characters don`t need that much characterization. But avoiding a blatant stereotype is recommended.

Also, one of the differences between natural diversity and forced diversity is how preachy and "in your face" is the story about it. How much a story speaks about those issues like race, sexuality, etc depends of how plot relevant they are and if it`s part of the themes of the story.

If you wanna get creative with your character design using different races, sexualities, religions or any factor, go for it, have fun!.

One example i can think of a show having a minority lead and not being in your face about it, is Craig of the creek.

The main character is a black kid, but him being black is not a big deal, and him being black is not the selling point of the show. The selling point are the stories and adventures he and his friends have in the creek.

[ar-ninetysix]

Adding characters from a minority is not tokenism. Tokenism is when this is forced or half-assed. It's also important to point out that minor and major characters from a minority work the same way that non-minority characters. Because in the end, people are people. So, for a major character of a minority, it is expected that they had a solid characterization. Not just "i am from minority X"

Minor characters don't need that much characterization. But avoiding a blatant stereotype is recommended. Also, one of the differences between natural diversity and forced diversity is how preachy and "in your face" is the story about it. How much a story speaks about those issues like race, sexuality, etc depends of how plot relevant they are and if it`s part of the themes of the story.

YES. Absolutely agree with everything here. Race doesn't define a person, but on the off chance that it actually affects an aspect of their life or personality, I wanna treat that with love and care. Same with sexuality and religion, identity, you name it.. The contents of the character matter so much more to me than just dropping a "you're only saying that because you're ___" or "as a ___ person, I feel like.." Like, no, I feel like that's just lazy. I don't do lazy. Though context matters for such phrases, of course. I don't plan on writing in such phrases, or making note of the fact that somebody is ___ or whatever. It doesn't take much place in an apocalyptic setting, you gotta set race aside and work together regardless

[shazzbaa]

A character doesn't need a reason to be a thing. Like, you don't have to have plot justification or personality justification for a character to be black or a lady or gay. I like this post's take on it, the idea that leaning on stereotypes is gonna feel like an icky token character, but it's not the fact that you "forced" them -- it's the fact that you represented them badly. "There's no such thing as gratuitous diversity" is a takeaway I like a lot -- just including diverse characters in your work is not virtue signalling, even if you get accusations of this from people who are a bit blind to how diverse the world is.

tho if you're worried about a character being "token," there's one super easy answer: include another one. Like, if you have a decent-size cast and only one character is a person of colour, or only one person is queer, it might feel a lil tokeny no matter how well you write them.

But I kinda think the main thing is how you treat this stuff outside the story. Like, deciding to make a character black because you want to challenge your own defaults or because you just don't see enough of that isn't a bad thing to do, but if you pat yourself on the back for you diverse you are, it's gonna feel weird and self-congratulatory if you're not speaking about an identity that you personally are.

[lartianmartian1]

Ah, I see, that makes sense. I've been drawn into weak stories that advertise LGBT+ inclusion, and that's great and all but like... you need more? And underrepresented groups deserve more. I totally see where you're coming from.

[Jenny-Toons]

A lot of people have definitely hit the mark in the previous replies, and I just wanted add to that by offering a reply I made a while back to a similar topic:

Well, as an African American myself, when I was younger and beginning to write stories, I often had African American characters as my main characters. Because, as a child, these characters were based on people I knew and loved. However, as I grew older, and began to see more of the world and learn more about race and culture and diversity, I expanded my characters to different backgrounds (including, but not limited to race). I do have different races in my stories, yes, but that comes with do…

Overall, Tokenism is just forced diversity. Usually, diversity in its general form will show how different people can be without trying too hard. It acknowledges those differences, those possible experiences/struggles without making that the only focal point of the character(s).

If you feel like there's something forced in your cast of characters with different backgrounds, ask this:

Is there a common goal/idea they share? Even if they are different, what are some of the things your characters share among each other?

Likewise, if you have a cast that have similar, if not the same, backgrounds -- what makes them their own person? What separates your characters so that the audience never confuses one for another?

[punkarsenic]

Character is a white male? Cool, that's okay.

Character is a lesbian black disabled transgender woman? Cool, that's okay.

thiiiiiiis is a good point. if characters can be white men without it being for any particular reason, then the vice versa is true

i think the difference is in caring about that character beyond the optics - so, if you have a show full of white men and one black woman, and shes a pretty flat character and kinda just there for brownie points, thats tokenising. if you have a cast of ppl from lots of different groups, but theyre all A: very 2D and B: representatives of their groups, thats more about the optics than the character. characters must extend beyond the political nature of the groups they belong to. white male characters dont revolve around... like... golf, being very privileged... whatever.... so why should black womens characters revolve around experiencing racism and misogyny and black culture?

on the flipside, theres also something to be said about accuracy and depth culturally. so while a character shouldnt revolve around their minority-ness, it should also be portrayed realistically and respectfully, even subversively. if we have an asian character in the main cast of a comic and we dont know where in asia his family are from, or see him engage in any kind of religious or cultural practices - that can be as simple as wearing henna in a scene, or mentioning prayer, whatevers right for the character. for a character to be good representation, you want that character to resonate with the people its representing. if you made a gay character where 100% of the gay ppl who came across them were like 'nah cant relate mate, we dont act like that,' somethings wrong, likely stereotyping and tokenisation.

ultimately, it comes to truly caring about the character, and that characters impact on people.

[joannekwan]

Great points already brought up!

To me, tokenism = "HEY LOOK! I've got a brown person in the main cast!! See, I'm not racist!!"
and then not tokenism = "Here's my character, they just happen to be so and so."

To avoid tokenism, just don't make their 'difference' a big thing and focus on them as a person.

[ar-ninetysix]

@shazzbaa @Jenny-Toons
You two bring up some great points! So, diversity in itself isn't bad, that's a given. Having a super wide variety of characters with different backgrounds isn't bad either. Just don't use stereotypes, and flesh the characters out past their race or whatever it may be. Difference for the sake of difference is not a good way to go about it. It comes back to characters having substance, and shared opinions as well as contrasting ideals.

@punkarsenic
You brought up other interesting points. Such as having characters fall back on common themes with a modern tinge to them, or being careless enough to make the character unrelatable to the people they're trying to represent (not directly represent, but you know what I mean). They shouldn't be exempt from dealing with topics like privilege or misogyny, but again, there has to be more to them than that. In doing so, it should make them become more relatable.. but that's up to the delivery of the depth the characters would have. I believe that depth can be poorly conveyed. You don't want that disconnect between them and your audience.

[ar-ninetysix]

Alright, so given everything I read here today.. I'm really not worried anymore. Matter of fact, I feel more confident that I'm doing a pretty good job of handling my main character, and that she's not gonna come off as bait for an audience. I also feel like I'm handling all my characters in general pretty well as far as ideals, personalities, and relationships go between them. I've been trying to go about it this way on my own, based on many things I've read here on the forums. Just absorbing as much advice as I can and applying it to how I write stuff up. And today's another example of that! I'm much more sure now that things will go smoothly whenever my novel will come to Tapas. Thanks for the input, guys!

[indagold]

How to avoid tokenism: stop seeing race/gender/orientation as a defining trait. It's as easy as that. See someone as a person first with a personality and goals and then whatever else comes second. Many people create token characters because they truly believe these characters sole existence is just their identity but when it comes to personality or character development they fall flat because all they are is a label. Give them hobbies, give them something unique for other people to care about, give them conflicts and motivations.

[TACOBERTO]

Diversity in of itself is often misused anyways. An all Black or Hispanic or Chinese or White American cast isn't by definition diverse but is often used to describe media that contains most of the former. But besides the point.

Diversity would be including people of varying backgrounds, builds, ethnicity, genders/orientations, etc and these differences both do not completely define their character and arc but those differences still add to the story/environment/ their individual story arc.It's a fine line

Tokenism would be falling on either sides of this spectrum where their unique characteristics (race/gender/religion/ etc) are their entire character and become way too much of their focus or those characteristics are just there to be there and just seem arbitrary.

[paperwren]

One of the things I've often heard on this topic is that including a more diverse cast is good, because you get to have stories with characters that don't usually get to be included, which you said is what you're trying to do. So that's great! Usually when it's bad is when you're trying to tell a story that's based on their perspective. So story that's about a zombie apocalypse with a black lady lead = good, story that is centered on a black woman and her experiences with being a black woman = bad, because you aren't living that reality so it's kind of like, telling people what their life is like, or in some cases making a lot of money describing other people's lives and hardships that you haven't experienced. The last one often has the worst concequences because people tend to value and take seriously works written by some people more than others. So white woman writes a fictional memoir about living life as a black woman in the 1960s gets praised for her insight in constructing a moving account of an issue we should all be concerned with, and a black woman writing the same thing but pulling from her own lived experiences gets ignored. Which sucks.

So don't do that second one, and if you find people being like "wow I feel like I really understand what being a black woman is like from reading your comic" maybe be like... That's weird guys go read these things made by black creators.

Idk if that was helpful but that's the approach ive seen people suggest and generally try to take!

[Zhengo]

Lots of people already put some good things here. Though I do want to add something else of how the context of a setting can affect the inclusion of diverse characters.

I feel like the population demographics of whatever setting that your story takes place in should also affect whether or not you should include diversity or just minority characters in general, and if you do, whether or not that character's minority traits will be brought up by characters around them. If it takes place modern day or any setting where the population is diverse, then yeah be diverse with your cast.

But if it's supposed to take place in a place/time period where the population is homogeneous, then it calls into question with whether or not your story calls for diversity. Of course, that doesn't mean you can't include minority characters, but usually minority groups that live in homogeneous societies usually have their lives impacted heavily by their race/sexuality/etc. Whereas in modern day diverse settings, most minority characters probably won't have as many people putting an emphasis on their race and so.

There's this weird thing I've been seeing a bit in modern media a bit lately. It's kinda like there's TV shows and movies that will take place in modern day and feature minority characters, but their race/sexuality/etc. is constantly emphasized by themselves or by characters around them, even though it's more common these days that people won't bring it up or care (though that doesn't mean it never happens). But then you have movies that are supposed to take place in like 1400s Europe and in the aristocracy, where most people there will be white, and there will be a random important character who's black and also part of the aristocracy. And the weird thing is that none of the characters around him will bat an eye or even mention how uncommon it is to see an aristocratic black person in 1400s Europe. And like that black character will go around not even experiencing any form of discrimination. At that point it kinda just feels token-y in the reverse way, like the character's black but essentially his experiences are equivalent to a white person's even though context-wise it shouldn't work that way. Feels like the two settings just get a mixup of priorities.

[indigodrawing]

Probably the most baseline possible test would be "If you removed whatever it was about your character that makes them a token, would they still be an interesting and/or relatable character?" If the answer is no then stop what you're doing right now and re-evaluate what you're doing. If not then you're at least on a decent foundation.

Of course there's far more to it than just that, but it's a good place to start.

Other things you need to consider: Does anything about this character revolve around their minority status? If no maybe that might be a problem. Does EVERYTHING about your character revolve around their minority status? In this case if the answer is yes then you might have a problem.

[DiegoPalacios]

I feel like the population demographics of whatever setting that your story takes place in should also affect whether or not you should include diversity or just minority characters in general, and if you do, whether or not that character's minority traits will be brought up by characters around them. If it takes place modern day or any setting where the population is diverse, then yeah be diverse with your cast.

This makes complete sense. In Marco Polo (the netflix show), most of the cast were asian, but it makes sense because it focuses the conflict between the huns and China.

There's this weird thing I've been seeing a bit in modern media a bit lately. It's kinda like there's TV shows and movies that will take place in modern day and feature minority characters, but their race/sexuality/etc. is constantly emphasized by themselves or by characters around them, even though it's more common these days that people won't bring it up or care (though that doesn't mean it never happens)

This seems like tokenism.

But then you have movies that are supposed to take place in like 1400s Europe and in the aristocracy, where most people there will be white, and there will be a random important character who's black and also part of the aristocracy. And the weird thing is that none of the characters around him will bat an eye or even mention how uncommon it is to see an aristocratic black person in 1400s Europe

For works that try to go for realistic portrayal of these times, it`s very odd. In fantasy settings, it can make more sense if racism is not an issue in the setting or if the conflicts is against orcs or something.

[darkone4587]

Honestly what defines Tokenism, at least for me, is when their race is all a character is. If there's nothing to them but they are that race then they are a token. If their race is only a part of them then they are a person, just like the way it is in life.

[oakiel]

I'm currently pondering a similar issue with

DEADPAN | Tapas

in a way that, of 10 main characters, there's two asian-americans, two black people, a mixed race guy, an indian woman and two hispanic men...
it did come naturally for them to have these ethnicities, they were never inserted to be the token [asian, black, mixed race, etc] characters, and they are each equally fleshed-out characters so i don't think it's tokenism necessarily, but i do ask myself if people are going to notice the variety and think it's a bit too "PC gone mad" or like i'm trying to check each box on the list of races .__.