3 Examples of Racial Bias in Animation Storytelling
It’s not hard to grasp that a white person, while not explicitly or consciously racist in the sense we might usually imagine, is still inherently racially biased because they benefit from and grow up used to white supremacy.” — Scottishwobbly, Tumblr
This is nothing new. This is something POC (People of Color) have been talking about in separate fandoms. Nevertheless, it needs to be acknowledged by those unaware.
This article is not made to say that some of the animations that I will use as examples are bad. But in the hopes that we, as consumers and creators, will do better in the future in handling characters that are POC.
Most often, racial bias in storytelling is when the narrative treats white or light skin toned characters better than darker skin toned characters. The darker skin toned characters are often POC-coded or actual POC.
White creators often do not notice their racial bias in their storytelling as they benefit from and grow up with white privileges and white supremacy. This can also apply to light-skinned POC who have light skin priviliges.
Some of us don’t often see it but real people who relate to the characters of color do. Especially when it reflects from their experiences with racial bias, microaggressions, colorism and flat out racism.
So when they speak up, it’s important to listen to them to unlearn the racial bias we may have in ourselves.
I will be emphasizing “the narrative” for I am criticizing how the story treats its dark-skinned characters and not because I am criticizing the characters themselves.
This article is critiqued by @visibilityofcolor as a sensitivity reader once and then additions were made before publishing. If you’re looking for a Black sensitivity reader, you can contact her.
Here are three examples that I was made aware of.
Example #1: The Narrative Treats the Light-Skinned Character at the Expense of the Dark-Skinned Character
Steven Universe was one of the animations that pushed lgbt+ representation in cartoon media. However, there are narratives here and there that showed racial bias.
SU creator Rebecca Sugar was raised with “Jewish sensibilities” and both siblings observe the lighting of Hanukkah candles with their parents through Skype. Rebecca Sugar also talked about being non-binary.
But as a white person, she (and the rest of the SU crew) is not aware of the inherently biased values from growing up and benefiting from white privilege.
One example is the human zoo. There are people that have spoken up about this such as @jellyfax of Tumblr who pointed out that the Crewniverse mishandled a loaded topic and reinforced a white colonist propaganda where the captive humans of mostly black/brown people are naive, docile and childlike in order to subjugate the people that they colonized. .
What I’m here is how a character of color from the main cast is more obligated to the lighter-skinned character.
In the episode, Friend Ship, one fan had spoken out about how Garnet, who had been validly angry at Pearl, was compelled by a dangerous situation to forgive Pearl. Garnet is a Black-coded character. While Pearl is a light-skinned character.
Garnet was mad at Pearl for tricking her into always fusing with her. Then they were trapped in a chamber that was going to crush them. In this situation, they have to fuse in order to save themselves but Garnet refuses to because she was still angry at her.
In the end, they were forced to talk it out, for Garnet to understand Pearl’s reason for wanting to fuse with her and everything worked out well.
The narrative focused so much on Pearl’s self-worth issues at the expense of Garnet’s right to be angry.
Yes, it showed that Pearl is trying her best to make up for it but Garnet should have been allowed to work at her own anger at her own pace instead of being obligated to consider Pearl’s feelings over her own.
I wouldn’t have noticed it until someone had mentioned it. Because it was never my experience.
But it’s there, continuing the message that it’s okay to put the emotional labor on Black people and disregard their own feelings for the sake of the non-Black people who have hurt them -particularly light-skinned women.
White Fragility and Being Silenced White Woman Tears
Again, racial bias in animation storytelling is often not intentional because white creators do not experience it due to white privilege.
Without meaning to, that scene alone shows Garnet as the Angry Black woman trope that is ungrateful and rude to Pearl who then ends up in tears. Without meaning to, Pearl with her light skin, became the tearful white girl trope that had to be sympathized over.
The Angry Black Woman trope is a combination of the worst negative stereotypes of a Black woman: overly aggressive, domineering, emasculating, loud, disagreeable and uppity.
The Tearful white girl trope comes from the combination of the stereotypes of white women being morally upstanding and delicate and therefore should be protected.
Which, unfortunately, many white women have taken advantage of.
These two tropes are harmful to WOC (Women of Color) because they experience the “weary weaponizing of white women’s tears”. This tactic employed by many white women incites sympathy and avoids accountability for their actions, turning the tables to their accuser and forcing their accuser to understand them instead. (x, x, x)
In “Weapon of lass destruction: The tears of a white woman”, Author Shay described that white tears turns a white woman into the priority of whatever space she’s in. “It doesn’t matter if you’re right, once her tears are activated, you cease to exist.”
White woman tears have gotten Black people beaten and lynched such as Emmett Till. Carolyn Bryant who had accused 14 year old Emmett Till of sexually harassing her in 1955, admitted she lied about those claims years later in 2007.
In Awesomely Luvvie’s “About the Weary Weaponizing of White Women Tears”, she states that the innocent white woman is a caricature many subconsciously embrace because it hides them from consequences.
In The Guardian’s article, “How White Women Use Strategic Tears to Silence Women of Colour”, Ruby Hamad shares her experience:
“Often, when I have attempted to speak to or confront a white woman about something she has said or done that has impacted me adversely, I am met with tearful denials and indignant accusations that I am hurting her. My confidence diminished and second-guessing myself, I either flare up in frustration at not being heard (which only seems to prove her point) or I back down immediately, apologising and consoling the very person causing me harm.”
This is not to say that all crying white women are insincere. But as activist Rachel Cargle said:
One of the most quoted words in “White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism.” is this:
“It is white people’s responsibility to be less fragile; people of color don’t need to twist themselves into knots trying to navigate us as painlessly as possible.”
When white women cry in defense, instead of taking accountability, People of Color are then gaslighted into thinking they’re the bad guy. This is emotional abuse and a manipulation tactic.
People of Color shouldn’t have to bend backwards to accommodate discomfited white or light-skinned people who have hurt them.
How She-Ra and the Princesses of Power (SPOP) Did It Right
Despite SPOP having good lgbtq+ representations, there are other biases in the show. Such as Mara, a WOC whose only purpose was to sacrifice herself for the white protagonist. There was also the insensitive joke in their stream regarding Bow’s sibling that perpetuated an Anti-Black stereotype which Noelle Stevenson has apologized for.
But the scene I have encountered where the Black character was validly angry and his feelings were treated well by the narrative, came from SPOP.
Bow, a black character, was validly angry at Glimmer, a lighter skinned character. Glimmer made a lot of bad decisions, one of them was using Adora and their friends as bait, without their knowledge, to lure out and capture Catra.
Glimmer tearfully apologized in Season 5, Episode 4. Adora readily forgave her. But Bow didn’t.
They faced dangers along the way but the story didn’t put them in a dangerous situation where Bow has to forgive Glimmer in order to get out of it.
This was Glimmer’s words of apology:
“Look, I know you’re still mad at me. Maybe you’ll be mad at me for a really long time. I deserved it. And maybe… maybe we’ll never be friends like we used to be. But I’m not going to stop trying to make it better. I made a mistake with the heart of Etheria. I should’ve listened to you and I’m sorry. You get to be mad. For as long as you need to be. But I’m not going anywhere. And when you’re ready, I’ll be here.”
In short, Bow was allowed to take the time to be mad and not just get over it for someone else’s sake. The story validates his feelings and he was allowed to take his own pace. That is emotional respect the story gave to him.
Example #2: The Narrative Gives Better Endings or Portrayals to Colonizers than Their Victims
Avatar: The Last Airbender has handled dark themes well such as genocide, war, PTSD, disability and redemption with great worldbuilding.
However, I never noticed the racial bias in ATLA until people spoke up of the double standards in ATLA’s treatment of light-skinned colonizers compared to their dark-skinned victims-turned-villains.
The characters in question -Iroh, Azula, Jet and Hama- are all flawed and well-rounded in a believable way. But how the narrative treats them is unequal.
General Iroh is an ex-colonizer who gets to redeem himself and not answer for his past war crimes, living a peaceful life as a tea shop owner. The only reason Iroh changed was when he was personally affected by the negativity of their military subjugation -his son’s death. It wasn’t the harm of the Fire nation ravaging Earth kingdom villages or cities and affecting millions of people that opened his eyes.
Azula, the tyrannical daughter, had closure of her mother’s rejection when she was a child and was able to escape imprisonment.
Jet and Hama, victims of colonization who have done bad things, did not get similar conclusions to their stories OR compensation for what they have gone through from the Fire Nation’s colonization.
Jet was given a second chance but was arrested for trying to expose Zuko and Iroh being firebenders -firebenders who were their enemies for conquering their villages. Then he died from the injuries of the person who had brainwashed and mind-controlled him.
Hama was imprisoned for life.
Compared to the sins of the light-skinned colonizers, the narrative didn’t give Jet and Hama the development where they could heal from their trauma, receive compensation for what happened to them and really have a chance in life.
The dark-skinned victims of colonization just became a lesson to the viewers how they shouldn’t hold grudges for being colonized. The end. They have received consequences for their actions but there is no continuation to their stories after that.
It almost seems like the narrative is saying that because they have harmed colonizers who have no part in their trauma (and in Jet’s case, some Earth kingdom villagers), they are therefore unworthy to be given an actual chance in life.
While Azula and Iroh, who have actively participated in conquering, colonizing and attacking the Earth Kingdom itself, were.
Someone once said that if indigenous people have control over Hama’s story, it would have been done differently. But the ATLA crew are white, non-indigenous people who prioritized redeeming colonizers instead.
The narrative has also affected how the ATLA fandom thinks. If most fans are asked who they would want to be redeemed, the popular option would be Azula over Jet or Hama.
Once again, I don’t think the ATLA crew noticed it due to their racial bias. But still, the harm is done and the racially biased message is continued:
- The colonizers and their descendants don’t have to make amends for the colonizers’ crimes. Or if they do, only lightly since it’s in the past (no matter how recent that past is).
- The colonized who rebel will tend to hurt innocent people and then get a grisly end for getting in way over their heads.
I would venture as far as to say that the narrative may have the added subconscious desire to quiet their white anxiety on the vengeance of the colonized. As I have learned when writing about Vodou stereotypes and how they have stemmed from the history of white anxiety of Black vengeance, of Black fetishization and of dissolution of the white race through intermarriages.
In @visibilityofcolor’s blog, someone asked:
“So I saw some of the really heated debates on here and on twitter about how if Iroh and Azula can be portrayed sympathetically despite their actions then characters like Jet and Hama should’ve been given a chance too. Do you think that the writers understood the implications of only redeeming characters from the colonizer/fascist nation but not giving the characters who suffered because of their fascism a second chance too?”
To which VisibilityOfColor replied:
“No, because at the end of the day, the writers are white. When it comes to stuff like this, it’s no surprise when we see white writers redeem problematic characters before they actually redeem victims of those racist problematic characters. For instance, Dave Filioni, who worked on both avatar and star wars rebels, did the same thing when redeeming agent kallus who was an soldiers in the imperial army and took credit for a genocide. where as victims of the empire were still painted in negative lights. i really don’t think they understand.
They have this ‘be the better person’ view on things, which is what a lot of white people tend to emulate when it comes to people of color standing up to their oppressors. and unfortunately, these are ideas passed on to children, esp minorities. that they should forgive people and communities who hurt them and ‘be the better person’. this is why white ppl don’t need to write narratives for people of color.”
Example #3: The Narrative Favors the Light Skinned Character Than Dark Skinned Character in Similar Situations
I would like to reiterate that racial bias in storytelling is often not intentional. I am not saying the creators and the people who support them are bad people. No.
However, I encourage that once a racial bias is made known in our work, it is our responsibility to change them to stop the perpetuation of its harmful message.
Hazbin Hotel is a popular cartoon with whimsical designs and its concept opens the conversation about redemption. The creator, Vivziepop may not have noticed the racial bias in her cartoon as a white Latina [5] that grew up with and benefits from white privileges, along with the Hazbin crew.
In the Youtbe video, “Hazbin Hotel — How Art took over Writing”, Staxlotl states:
“I understand that there was a lot of time and effort put into this pilot, almost three years worth of effort. But I think most of that time was spent into the art and visuals when it should’ve gone into polishing the writing in the characters.”
Once again, I’m not here to critique the characters but how the narrative treats its dark-skinned characters.
The story treats Charlie, the white-skinned, “Disney-esque” protagonist princess differently from how it treats Vaggie, the dark-skinned, more outspoken and protective Latina girlfriend of Charlie who supports the princess’ cause.
In its pilot episode, both girls experience humiliation. While Charlie is portrayed by the story as someone the viewers have to feel sorry for…
…Vaggie is portrayed in her humiliation as the butt of the joke for the viewers.
While they both didn’t like what Angel Dust did, Charlie was sympathized over in the narrative as a moment…
…while Vaggie’s angry but valid callouts were dismissed and ignored as part of the comedy.
While Charlie was someone that needs to be protected in the narrative…
…Vaggie is left to fend for herself.
Again, I don’t think the creators noticed the racial bias of their cartoon. However, this racial bias is reflected in the harmful perceptions that dark-skinned women, particularly Black women and Black girls, are more mature, tougher and need less protection at a young age.
This adultification bias perceives them as challenging authority when they express strong or contrary views and are then given harsher discipline than white girls who misbehave. And this continues when they grow up.
In a 2017 study, Black women and girls aged 12–60 years old confirmed they are treated harsher by their white peers and are accused of being aggressive when they would defend themselves or explain their point of view to authority figures.
This bias also coincides with the Spicy Latina trope of a brown-skinned, hot-blooded, quick-tempered and passionate woman.
Everyday Feminism described this trope as “Although objects of desire for many, the spicy Latina may have too much personality to handle. So much so that she is often viewed as domineering or emasculating.” [16]
Sounds familiar? (Look at Angry Black Woman trope above.)
Why is it that a light-skinned character, Charlie, is allowed to be vulnerable and be sympathized while the dark-skinned Latina character, Vaggie, is mocked, dismissed and expected to tough it out?
Severina Ware had to remind the world in her article, “America, We’re Not Your Super Women: Why Black Women Deserve Better” that relates to the bias against dark skinned characters:
“Black women are not offered the protection and gentleness of our white counterparts. We are not given permission to be soft and delicate. We are required to exhibit strength and fortitude not only because our lives depend on it, but because so many others depend on us. Black women should not be charged with the responsibility of saving everyone when nobody is here to save us.”
As @cullenvhenan of Tumblr has said in her post:
“if you’re a white creator and your brown/black characters are always sassy, reckless, aggressive or cold and your white characters are always soft, demure, shy and introverted you should think about maybe why you did that”
Detecting Your Own Racial Bias
It would be hard. No matter how much you edit and create, you may miss it because it was never your experience.
So how do we prevent our racial bias from creeping into our creations?
Listen to POC and their feedback.
As @charishjb from Instagram has shared, here is one of the things that we can do:
Consider POC voices. Listen to their experiences. Hire sensitivity POC readers. Put multiple POC voices in positions of leadership in creative projects.
Then we can stop the racial bias that perpetuates again and again in the media. I hope for that future.
