MovieChat Forums > Lost in Space Discussion > Judy Robinson (Taylor Russell)... black?

Judy Robinson (Taylor Russell)... black?


Wha...? The whole family is white in the 1965 tv series, 1973 animation series, and 1998 movie. Think the comics depicted them as all white family as well. So how does an all white family produce a black daughter? Mind blown.

I feel like Hollywood always need to meet some diversity quota by adding at least one token character into the main group if it consists mainly of white people. I also feel its never any other minority mostly besides black (maybe cause they complain the loudest). You rarely see if at all hispanic or asian as that one standalone along the sea of white.

reply

If they wanted to diversify the series, it's make much more sense to have Mr. and Mrs. Robinson be of different races.

Having just one child of a different race makes you wonder what Mrs. Robinson has been up to!

reply

Haha... yeah... THAT CHEATING SLUT. Although to be fair, Mr. Robinson could've done the same as well. Guess we'll see how they managed to have a black daughter out of an all white family (unless they magically changed her into an adopted child).

reply

Of course it'll probably turn out to be something mundane like adoption or a first husband who died young.

The cheating slut scenario is so much more entertaining!

reply

Black Judy is Maureen Robinson's daughter from a previous relationship. Not sure if it was a marriage or not, though. Other details remain unknown as of now.

reply

Oh, that must have been from Maureen's spring break trip to Jamaica, and the night she had too many tequila shooters, started shaking her booty in the local club, and then let Raz-mo and his buddies pull an all-night train on her down on the beach.

reply

ROLFMAO! Of course! What else could it possibly be? ;)

reply

Hah! That gave me a chuckle there Sandoz.

I heard she stuffed all the gathered jizz from the gangbang she had down her snatch hole and watched the seamen soldiers battle it out on who gets to her ovaries first. Few months by we find her puking down some alleyway with a round belly and had to get an illegal birth extract from some shady non-licensed doctor to keep this affair a secret. The doc wanted to give her the name of Laquisha or Sha’Nay Nay or Latoya or La’Taniana’Bo’Vanashrianiqualiquanice but that would've triggered the husband too much so they just gave her a white name instead.

To be continued...

reply

Those are proud names from African descent what culture do you have starbucks

reply

"Coo coo ca-choo, Mrs. Robinson"!

reply

Or MR. ROBINSON but yeah

reply

As might be expected, the network is doing everything it can to ethnically cleanse white people and men from the cast, but it's a hard proposition, given that in the original series, the story focused on Professor John Robinson, a white man; his white wife, Maureen Robinson; Major Don West, a white man; Will Robinson, a white boy; and Dr. Zachary Smith, a white man.

The show-runners started by replacing Dr. Smith with a woman, Parker Posey. Yes, Dr. Smith is now a girl (in much the same way that Britain's Dr. Who is now Nurse Who).

Then Major West was replaced with a Hispanic character, played by Ignacio Serricchio. Okay, Major West is Spanish now. Maybe he should be called "Major Oeste."

But the most confusing part is that Judy West is now being played by black actress Taylor Russell.

What?

In the show, Judy, Penny, and Will Robinson were the biological children of John and Maureen Robinson. Since John and Maureen were white, it was pretty much a given that the children were, too.

In their endless quest for diversity, the diversity-mongers in Hollywood are about to rewrite the laws of genetics. I see three possibilities:

1. John and Maureen Robinson adopted Judy. Why, we don't know.

2. Maureen had an affair with a black man who impregnated her with Judy, and the helpless cuckolded John Robinson forgave her and adopted Judy as his own.

3. Judy actually started out white but had a bad encounter on a planet of aliens whose touch caused her to become black.

"Diversity" has come to mean that minorities must be in every television show, even remakes of ones that never had them, even remakes where the cast had to be white by reason of family relations.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/02/new_emlost_in_spaceem_has_a_black_judy_robinson_a_hispanic_major_west_and_a_female_dr_smith.html

Amusing read.

reply

Oh, grow up.

reply

Stfu that was a racist comment toward Hispanics and white men have everything if they want diversity

reply

[deleted]

Almost everyone on TV in the 60s was white because of discrimination. We're in a new century now. You may want to join it.

reply

I think most have joined it, just not everyone. It'll take time though. I think the reason for backlash is due to remaking old movies with a more lets say 'diverse' cast if you will rather than just moving forward with newer original movies with a diverse cast.

reply

Hollywood appears to want a sure thing which is why we're getting rehashed TV shows and movies. And younger generations don't want to watch "old" shows/movies unless they're rebooted. That means the show needs to be updated. Color instead of b&w. Improved FX. Diversity. And more egalitarian women roles. Otherwise people would complain that it's "old" and not relatable.

Personally, I prefer just watching the original because I know the revised will be crap. "Lost in Space" without Jonathan Harris? No thanks.

reply

>>And younger generations don't want to watch "old" shows/movies unless they're rebooted. That means the show needs to be updated (...) Diversity. And more egalitarian women roles.

What? I've never met a member of younger generations that would refuse to watch a movie or TV show due to the lack of diversity or feminism. Sure, there's a small minority of them who would get a heart attack and feel obliged to write an angry deconstructionist blogpost if you accidentally showed them one scene of Dirty Harry...
But from my experience, most of them don't care about such stuff.

reply

Younger generations don't want to watch "old" shows/movies (from 1920's-1960's) specifically because they don't like them in B&W or with crappy FX. They prefer reboots. I don't know how you misinterpreted the rest.

If Hollywood reboots a movie then they're going to update the actors roles with diversity and egalitarian women roles to reflect the modern era. For instance, there is an "I Love Lucy" scene that's meant to be funny in which Ricky puts Lucy over his knee and gives her a spanking. That would never be acceptable today.

In "Lost In Space", June, Judy and Penny prepared all the meals like housewives were expected to do during the 50s. I'd be surprised if they keep those roles in the reboot.

The social revolution in the 60s and 70s, changing demographics and advertisers discovering new target audiences are the reasons why you see more diversity in TV shows and movies.

reply

Younger generations don't want to watch "old" shows/movies (from 1920's-1960's) specifically because they don't like them in B&W or with crappy FX. They prefer reboots. I don't know how you misinterpreted the rest. [/quote]

I think KD637 "misinterpreted" the rest because you also said:[quote]Diversity. And more egalitarian women roles.


I personally have no problem with the character changes (I am still in the first episode) but no matter how they create the cast having characters do stupid things to create tension (and having water freeze upward) makes fora bad show.

reply

No... most everyone on TV was white because most everyone that owned a TV was white. People tend to want to see people they relate to. When blacks start owning TV sets then it made more sense to put blacks on TV, which is why in the networks started putting on shows with black casts in the 1970's... Black TV ownership reached a point that it made sense.

It still makes sense to cater to various races with shows that have a predominately black, Asian or white cast depending on the target audience. What doesn't make sense is the way Hollywood tries to force fit races into shows where it just makes no sense. This is as ridiculous as the Fantastic Four remake with a white sister and black brother. I stopped watching Lost in Space when I realized this was just another diversity driven charades. If it had been all white I would have given it more of a try. And for the record I'm not white so it isn't a matter of a white guy getting upset... I just want stories that are decent and the last thing I need is contrived BS that sticks out like a sore thumb.

reply

That's ridiculous. Discrimination is the reason for white only shows. I'm old enough to have seen only white males delivering news broadcasts when I was a child. There was a class action suit against all the major networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) for discrimination. One year after that, women and black news commentators began to appear.

Black people were also stereotyped. Ugly stereotypes exist throughout American entertainment even before TV like Amos n Andy on radio and Stepin Fetchit in vaudeville and movies not to mention black face performances. Vile racist movies like the first talkie "Jazz Singer" and "Birth of a Nation" were the norm.

I read a history book about the Golden Age of television that discussed a TV code networks followed to keep blacks, Jews and other minorities off TV shows to present a homogenized WASP America because seeing minorities was "offensive". Yes, the word "offensive" was used.

Don't forget this was a time when black records (rock and roll was invented by black people) were highly controversial and being destroyed as corrupting white people.

People fought to bring change to TV shows and movies by fighting for it during the 60s and 70s. That was the social revolution (Civil rights and black pride movements).

Liberal Gene Roddenberry had to fight to have a black person on the bridge of the Enterprise. The TV show "Julia" was a big deal because it was the first TV show starring a non-stereotyped black person. The first Star Wars movie had no black actors until blacks complained.

Instead of crying about miscegenation (which was also against TV policy and illegal), you should educate yourself about history.

reply

You know why stereotypes exist? Because they are based on facts. Do you really think someone just pulls stereotypes out of thin air? They are based on facts. You want to talk about blacks in America and the stereotypes? Well consider this for your little history lesson, the only blacks that were brought to this country as slaves were the black too stupid to get away from the people capturing black...probably a reason that blacks in Africa are smarter than the ones we have in this country by and large. Now give that a thought you ridiculous moron.

reply

Your post shows that you're a bigot.

reply

your posts show you are racist yourself.

reply

You're projecting.

reply

Damn, thomas998. Can't recall if I've ever seen such a ignorant post that was so devoid of any logic. That post was so indicative of a obtuse intellect that I seriously doubt you're even worth having a spirited debate with regarding the subject.

reply

Liberal Gene Roddenberry had to fight to have a black person on the bridge of the Enterprise.

And nowadays he would have to fight if he wanted to have a white male which is not portrayed as a psychopath or a clown.

reply

Is John Robinson a psychopath or a clown?

reply

Well, a little bit of a clown. Mainly in the fact that he's a d*~kless pansy who walks around sniffing at everything his wife says. One thing that's truly false on this show: any woman acts that high and mighty (NOT saying she's not intelligent, NOT saying she doesn't have excellent leadership skills) but like she's beyond reproach, makes all the decisions, and brooks no interference would not have a husband- he'd have walked away years ago, the exact same way any woman would to a man that acts the same way.

She's the typical liberal woman today. Holier than thou, always taking the moral high ground for an argument - until something happens like her son doen't qualify for the voyage - then she breaks laws, and does what she wants, because well, SHE wants it so.

..Joe

reply

John and Maureen are separated which is why she's treating him like crap. The family appears to have a problem with him not being around often because he was in the military.

She can't be too liberal since she's still the only one cleaning up after dinner. I thought they would've updated who does housework from the 60s show.

reply

Why wouldn't the mother explain to the little brats that the man is protecting the country and that means being away, and to STFU about it from now on? It's not like he's out looking for trim.

Why would he go on the voyage if the's going to be a dick to him every time? Why would she invite him?

She's Liberal: "I said no weapons in the house." And that's IT? Her way is the only way? That's Liberal.

I definitely would have spaced her.

..Joe

reply

I've haven't watched all the episodes yet, but I'll try to answer.

I think the family is used to living without the father since he wasn't around much, anyway. It sounds like that's what broke up their marriage. He's almost like a stranger or interloper within the family and is trying to learn to co-parent and live together. I don't believe this family would've been chosen to live on a space colony since compatibility is important.
Telling children that dad's work is more important than they are doesn't work well.

She didn't invite him. She needed permission to permanently leave Earth with their children and his never seeing the children again didn't sit well with him. He didn't want to deny his children a better future in a space colony, so he decided to come along.

I'm not sure a family that bickers as much as they do should have guns readily available.

reply

>>I'm not sure a family that bickers as much as they do should have guns readily available.

Then you must not know anything about guns. I'm a quick-tempered dolt. I also have guns. I mean a LOT of guns.

Those two statements have NOTHING in common. Knowing the true destructive power of a gun means that I know that it's never to be used in anger. In fact, that's the secret of all the killings: guns should NEVER be used in anger.

To date, I have never killed anything more than a paper target, (well, some water bottles and golf balls also) and next year it will be 5 decades since I got my first .22 rifle at the age of 12. No one with a brain would ever touch a gun when angry, and if nothing else, these people seem to have brains.

..Joe

reply

You're probably a very responsible gun owner with plenty of common sense. Unfortunately, there are people (I personally know some) who are dead because someone used a gun while angry. Knives and fists are used also, but guns are more lethal. Crimes of passion are common.

I don't believe mentally ill, clinically depressed, or substance abusers should be near guns either.

BTW, I was actually being sarcastic about the Robinsons. They're on a planet with hostile life forms so guns make sense for them. The 60s Robinsons did use guns.

reply

Julia, the first TV series starting an African-American lead, Diahann Carroll, debuted in 1968. Your timeline is wrong.

reply

"We're in a new century now. You may want to join it."

If this is an example of the new century, I will never join it. I wish I had been born twenty or thirty years earlier, so that I would have checked out by now and missed the current nonsense. But at least I can take some comfort in the idea that I will be leaving in another twenty years or so, and won't have to deal much with the new world and the lunatic PC direction it is taking.

reply

The irony is if there's an afterlife and you end up in a heaven where love, brotherhood and other PC concepts exist. You know where you really need to go.

reply

Why is it just assumed that white families can only exist because of discrimination? You think that by staying within your own race that you're just being a discriminatory racist white supremacist? How come you never see this logic translate to the entirely homogeneous populations of Japan or India?

reply

"How come you never see this logic translate to the entirely homogeneous populations of Japan or India?"

It's obvious that you don't know anything about the history nor culture of Japan or India since both societies are notorious for racism. Google "caste system" and "untouchables" in regards to India and "racism" and "xenophobia" in regards to Japan.

"You think that by staying within your own race that you're just being a discriminatory racist white supremacist?"

No. Having a fit over one black character in a fictitious TV show does. Ditto the insulting bigoted comments from some of the posters that you conveniently ignore.

reply

"It's obvious that you don't know anything about the history nor culture of Japan or India since both societies are notorious for racism. Google "caste system" and "untouchables" in regards to India and "racism" and "xenophobia" in regards to Japan."

Yes but you never hear of the lefty liberal types attacking Japan or India for remaining homogeneous do you? Or China for that matter. Or Morocco. Or Jamaica. Or Algeria. Or Iran. It only ever seems to be an issue in white countries. As if the fact that white majority countries are the most multicultural countries in the world isn't enough to prove how unracist white people are. Because the idea of a white family having only white children is blasphemy in the eyes of the modern liberal.

"No. Having a fit over one black character in a fictitious TV show does. Ditto the insulting bigoted comments from some of the posters that you conveniently ignore."

That's not what you said though. You said that every white family tv show in the 60s was so because of discrimination, and that discrimination is the only reason for white only shows. And then implied that we shouldn't have white only families anymore because we live in a new world. So tell me exactly what is specifically "advanced" and "modern" about having children outside of your own race. What do we gain from them on tv now, that was somehow absent back then?

reply

India isn't homogeneous. Most of the countries you named aren't which has nothing to do with a multicultural country like the U.S., anyway.

Since reading history books isn't your strength, I'll tell you that Spaniards and black people settled in the U.S. before the English. And Native Americans (Indians, Innuits and Hawaiians) were here before Spaniards and black people. This country started as a multicultural country - not homogeneous.

Even though the U.S. was multicultural, broadcasters had a policy to show WASP suburban families especially during the 50's. There was a tremendous amount of bigotry and discrimination against Jews, blacks, gays, women, etc. that you may not be aware of because of your age which is why I emphasis reading history books if you're young.

There were exceptions, but they were more often stereotypes. Things began to change during the 60s because of struggle and changing demographics.

"...And then implied that we shouldn't have white only families anymore because we live in a new world...."
That's dumb and I never implied that. I said many old shows/movies that were once all white and sexist are being updated with diverse casts and egalitarian roles.

Statistics: One generation ago 1/100 babies were multiracial, now, it's 1/10. In the 50s, white Americans were 89.5%, in 2000, 72.4% and dropping. Lost in Space is showing the new demographic reality.

reply

What does ANYTHING you wrote in your post have to do with the point I made? How in the living fuck did you post that and think "yeah, this makes total sense in relation to what he's saying"? Are you chromosomally deficient? You may want to brush up on your history yourself because prior to the founding fathers, there was NO MULTICULTURAL AMERICA. You had Hawaiians in the island we now call Hawaii, And Inuit and Native Americans in the continent we now call America. It was one big multiracial, multiethnic, multicultural country we have now. I don't know what the fuck you're even talking about.

"Statistics: One generation ago 1/100 babies were multiracial, now, it's 1/10. In the 50s, white Americans were 89.5%, in 2000, 72.4% and dropping. Lost in Space is showing the new demographic reality."

What in the living fuck do statistics have to do with any of it? We're talking about a FAMILY here. FAMILIES do not pander to the statistics of the rest of the country. By that logic, because there's less white people and more minorities than ever before, than STATISTICALLY, every family should be giving birth to one black child in every three to reflect that changing statistics right? Does that make sense to you? Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds? A white man that has sex with a white woman, is still going to have white children. Biology doesn't just magically change to reflect the racial statistics in a given country.

So I'll ask again, tell me exactly what is specifically "advanced" and "modern" about having children outside of your own race. What do we gain from them on tv now, that was somehow absent back then? You're saying that white only families can only exist out of discrimination. Where did you get that? Do white only families today in real life exist out of discrimination as well?

reply

Changing demographics.

reply

Again, what do changing demographics have to do with it? We're talking about an all white family with a single black child. The child doesn't just magically change color based on the changing demographics of society. And I still want to know why all white families are inherently rooted in discrimination.

reply

How is that? The black population is the US is a little over 15%. That's means that only .4 of the crew should be black. Can't have less than half a person so they make it one. They're right on the money.

..Joe

reply

"Can't have less than half a person so they make it one."

Judy is biracial if that helps.

reply

Nothing to do with the character; everything to do with SJW's.

..Joe

reply

Judy is from Maureen's first marriage. Divorce and diversity are reality. It's also introducing another dynamic because Judy is angry at John. I'm not sure if it's because he's a stepfather, wasn't around enough or something else.

reply

So is happy marriage and homogeneity.

reply

Divorce and separation are more common though. The divorce rate for first marriages is around 50% and even higher for second marriages. This is Maureen's second marriage.

In regard to homogeneity, non-Hispanic whites were 62.06% of the U.S. population in 2014. Less than 50% of children under the age of 5 are non-Hispanic whites as of 2015. This show takes place in the future so bi-racial Judy and Hispanic Don make plenty of sense demographically.

Anyway, they already showed a happy marriage and homogeneity in the 60s show. They're trying to be more realistic with the reboot.

reply

Here's a great article about blacks on TV:

https://jfredmacdonald.com/bawtv/bawtv10.htm

reply

It's an interesting article.

"It is not an absolute term since it does not intend to describe the best possible epoch. "

I agree with that sentence. Even though progress started in the 60s, I wouldn't call it a Golden Age by any stretch. The overwhelming number of shows had no black people in them. Other shows had a token black person or someone rarely seen including those listed. That article makes it sound better than it actually was.

The appearance of non-stereotyped blacks on TV was influenced by the Civil Rights Movement and the Black Pride Movement.

I think what started in the 60s is still progressing to this day. A show like Lost in Space which never had any black actors is diversified in its reboot.

reply

"I feel like Hollywood always need to meet some diversity quota by adding at least 1 minority character into the main group if it consists mainly of white people."

This is very true.You can have a show that has an all black or hispanic cast and every ones fine with it.But there's this stereotype that if you have a show with a predominantly white cast then your giving off a racist/non inclusive vibe.Lately whenever there's a show or a movie with a predominantly white or male cast Hollywood goes out of it's way to diversify the crap out of it for fear of offending any one.In other words changing the ethnicity or gender of characters not for the sake of necessity but just to appease behind the scenes racial/feminist Hollywood politics.

reply

I do recall in the late 70's or early 80's that CBS did instituted a quota for diversity on Saturday morning cartoons. So it wouldn't surprise me if they still have one..... Guess they aren't smart enough to understand that any race driven quota is discrimination by its very nature.

reply

I do get the drift of what everyone is saying in the comments...about how diversity only seems to matter when the cast is white (or male...or straight)..
But the Judy aspect I'm fine with..It's not unusual to have a blended family that looks like that these days. This Judy is a product of Maureen's first marriage although she seems to look on John as her father...so he must have helped raise her. I'm fine with this and I like the actress.
I'm also fine with the Hispanic Don West..he's American Hispanic and it makes no difference to me that he's not Anglo.
No need to get as nit picky as the PC crowd.

The only things that somewhat trouble me is they way they seem to have Maureen somewhat dominate John. I'm a woman and I love strong women but hate this trend of making (white) males sort of subordinate. I would prefer them more equal. It's not good to see either side take back seats.
Like I said..I hate this trend; especially toward white males and I consider myself sort of a "classic" feminist which doesn't jell with the current hard core crop.
Becoming the exact thing that you don't like has never made sense to me.

And I don't know know if a female Dr Smith is going to work as well...but then again; Jonathan Harris is kind of iconic and hard to live up to.

reply

https://youtu.be/OJf8g_tVe1M?t=50s

As long as you're not this kind of feminist, you're the right kind of feminist in my book. :3

reply

Of course I'm not.
I refuse to change what I am because it's getting twisted by current culture . I always only wanted opportunities for woman or minorities or gays or whatever..But the pendulum has swung to the extreme and it seems like the oppressed are becoming the oppressors . I don't like any of it.
I'm glad to see people speaking out against these things, this swing in media and popular culture going too far, but it's good to be careful to not get caught up in any extreme oneself as one extreme or the other is the whole problem.

reply

I do get the drift of what everyone is saying in the comments...about how diversity only seems to matter when the cast is white (or male...or straight)..

Actually, "gay" is the new "white". "Gay" has lost the oppressed card and it's joining "straight", "white" and "male" in the pantheon of Humanity Oppressors. Nowadays, a gay man is a binary oppressor that oppresses non-binary-sexually-oriented and a male oppressor that oppresses females and non-binary-gender people.

In the original 60s series, Smith was a gay man. They've made him a female (likely straight).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXIbRjpQMNY

reply

You're taking and micro-interpreting everything just like current culture is prompting you to. The truth is that absolutely no kid thought of Dr Smith as having any sexuality at all..and I doubt adults did either. It's only in hindsight that we consider these things.
Why they made Dr Smith a woman is probably simply than all that. If they're not over empowering minorities over whites they're empowering females over males.
The truth is also that there are not 62 or whatever genders non binary or otherwise and hopefully kids won't get so screwed up that they'll believe that actually having a sexual preference (gay or straight) and actually being a specific gender is not phobic and rigid but natural.
There is a condition called gender dysphoria but it is, in reality, a very tiny percentage of the population and not common.
It's just so hard to be different that this nonsense is working overtime striving so hard to be so.
This too shall pass.

reply

Of course this shall pass... once we die out.

By the way, you're right about the micro-interpreting. But so it happens when it comes to being straight. Unless you have a romantic plot, which is a minority of characters, your sexual orientation is not really defined in the movie. All you can do is micro-interpret. And if you can micro-interpret to establish that the majority of characters in movies were straight, then for the sake of fairness it should be fine to do the same in those particular cases where the opposite happens. ^^


reply

Things never stay the same, for better or for worse. It seems it's sometimes 1 step forward 2 steps back or vice versa.
But don't expect that things will remain this way until we die out. There will always be bias and prejudices but they will shift like the wind.
Typically an extreme shift (to the current far left) ultimately brings about an extreme shift to the other side. In this instance it would be to the right. Also not the solution.
The best solution that might someday be discovered is that extremes in either direction never works.

reply

100% agreed. And it's starting to happen. A couple of weeks ago I had a debate with a friend and I had to defend Jonathan Pie, which whom I don't even agree in many things (British youtuber and journalist, https://www.youtube.com/user/tomwalker78 ). And I've being defending classical left more than once last months.

And I'm seeing this trend more and more, where the left is the Marxist source of all evil and the right will make everything good again. It's like people can't handle middle points.

reply

Dr. Smith was definitely NOT gay. Gay didn't exist in a 1960s family show. Jonathan Harris took his original serious role and introduced pure camp to it.

reply

"The only things that somewhat trouble me is the way they seem to have Maureen..."
I agree wholeheartedly with this paragraph, and I also like seeing strong female characters. I don't like that so many writers/producers take "strong woman" to mean "subordinate male partner". It's not just White men, I've seen this done with Black men also. The Women's Movement is about equality, not female domination.
I just started watching the show, and I just straight up didn't like some of Maureen's lines-such as, "We need to speak to the children with 1 voice. And that voice should be mine." Wth??

reply

In the original Hawaii Five-O Kono was a man. Now, Kono is a woman. Did that bother you, too? Get over it. :-/

reply

Since I don't watch and never did watch Hawaii Five-0 it would n't bother me if Kono is a man or a woman.
I think it matters more to people if the changes to a character is to a major or minor character. It probably depends more on the skill of the actor. Dr Smith is an important character.

reply

Well we now know that Smith was indeed male in this show, played by Bill Mumy. June Harris is the name of the Antagonist. Lol....

reply

I think its fine that people get upset. I mean how much of an uproar is there when someone originally non white is casted as white? Think ghost in the shell, why is it so bad for the reverse to happen?

In any case I find Judy really attractive shes one hawt doc.

reply

Are you suggesting there was no uproar over the casting of Scarlett Johannson as Motoko? Because it was EVERYWHERE! Same with The Last Airbender too. People lashed out violently against the white washing of these characters. Yet it's perfectly reasonable to cast Edris Elba as fucking Heimdall...

reply

Virus, did you ever get around to complaining about all the non blonde Asgardians, or are you still only ranting about the one black man?

Hell, did you ever acknowledge the Marvel canon of how one blonde Asgardiand hair became black (just Sif) and realize that if hair can magically turn dark, skin could too?

Or are you still just TRIGGERED by one black actor (while the rest are still pearly white to appease the white supremacists)?

reply

Why would I complain about Asgardians with dark hair?

reply

Exactly, only skin color matters to you. You know what THAT is called.

Better question: Why would you spend inordinate amounts of time (many months at minimum) complaining endlessly about one black actor while ignoring all the Thor actors who don't have Scandinavian ancestry?

Why do you appear in basically every topic you can in order to start complaining about black people?

Obviously these are rhetorical questions, everyone who has seen your posts knows you're just an obnoxious racist and a troll, and not to be taken seriously.

reply

"Exactly, only skin color matters to you. You know what THAT is called."

In the context of Asgardians, which were created by ancient Norse mythology, the homogeneous population that created them were white. Therefore it makes no sense that they be black. However the vikings were not all blonde or fair haired, therefore i don't understand why you're implying that it's historically inaccurate to have them with dark hair. Go to anywhere in Scandinavia today and tell me that they all have blonde hair.

"Better question: Why would you spend inordinate amounts of time (many months at minimum) complaining endlessly about one black actor while ignoring all the Thor actors who don't have Scandinavian ancestry?"

Because they're white. What kind of stupid question is this? Do you see me complaining that all the black actors in Black Panther aren't from Africa? Also, it's not just one black actor, Valkyrie was a problem too.

"Why do you appear in basically every topic you can in order to start complaining about black people?"

Because it's only black people that end up replacing white characters.

"Obviously these are rhetorical questions, everyone who has seen your posts knows you're just an obnoxious racist and a troll, and not to be taken seriously."

Even after I give you answers, you still won't accept them. Typical liberal lefty that wants to see racism everywhere they go.

reply

Forget race, she looks like a 14 year old. I know the actress is 23 but it's odd casting for the character. Watching West hit on her is creepy.

reply

i thought she looked too young for the role too.

reply

Maybe the mother or father is a quarter African or maybe less... I'm reminded of an old movie... I think it was gone with the wind there was a white woman who had a black baby.Judy looks younger than the other sister, but I think she's supposed to be the oldest. So maybe it's just she has a different father.
I'm only on episode 4 but while I'm kinda curious about why she's not white like the rest of her family, she's probably my favorite actress in the show so far.

reply

SPOILER ALERT:

[spoiler]I believe it is said that Judy is Maureen's daughter from a previous marriage and John Robinson adopted her. [/spoiler]

reply

Yeah. I hadn't watched the entire show when I commented.

reply

[deleted]