Wonder Woman 1984: When Lack of Diversity Makes Wonder Woman Lose Her Wonder
If you were to ask the typical moviegoer who is the first female superhero you think of, chances are they would say Wonder Woman. While other female superheroes do exist (say Catwoman or Storm for example), they often take a backseat to the male protagonist, serving as a romantic interest or cliche rather than as a nuanced, complicated character. So when Wonder Woman came out in 2017, it provided a much-needed breath of fresh air in an overly saturated male-centric superhero genre. Seeing Princess Diana in her native land with her sister warriors of Themyscira by her side inspired millions of girls around the world, telling them that they too could be the heroes of their own story.
But while Wonder Woman (2017) pushed the boundaries of representation and diversity forward, its sequel, Wonder Woman 1984, failed to break new ground, sacrificing the empowering plot of its predecessor for empty spectacle. And the consequences were considerable. While Wonder Woman (2017) boasted a B Mediaversity rating, 93% critic score on Rotten Tomatoes, and 76 Metascore, Wonder Woman 1984 suffered from a measly C- Mediversity rating, 59% critic score on Rotten Tomatoes, and 60 Metascore. So what went wrong?
Where Wonder Woman 1984 Went Wrong
The film opens with a breathtaking flashback sequence, showing a pivotal moment in the life of young Diana, years before she’d become Wonder Woman. As she competes against fellow Amazons twice her size and age in feats of strength and skill, a perfect euphony of swift camerawork, quick editing, and an epic score fills the screen. The scene showcases Diana’s fearlessness and teaches her the virtue that truth triumphs over deception. Unfortunately, the rest of the film pales in comparison, whether it be in visual cohesion, story structure, or emotional impact.
To start things off, the film treats Barbara, Diana’s coworker at the Smithsonian Institution, as a two-dimensional plot device that reduces her to the strange girl trope. The two bond over a meal discussing how they fit in society, but beside that, Barbara’s role in the film becomes apparent: so Diana can have a big (poorly rendered) CGI fight with a physically imposing antagonist in the third act that seemingly every superhero film has. Considering the lack of nuanced female friendships in superhero films, it’s a shame that the screenwriters favored a heterosexual romance with Steve Trevor rather than exploring a potential relationship between Diana and Barbara, especially given that Wonder Woman is canonically bisexual in the comics. This was a perfect opportunity to represent the LGBTQ+ community that has been historically underrepresented, particularly within the superhero genre.
Instead, the film relies on what we are used to in superhero films, a heteronormative relationship in which the superhero’s purpose is based on their partner. Romance has the potential to be resonating and meaningful, but in Wonder Woman 1984, it feels forced and undeserved, especially given the context of how Steve sacrificed himself in Wonder Woman (2017). Diana’s abilities are regained only when she learns to let go of Steve, and there’s something deeply depressing and illogical about a female superhero whose identity is intertwined so much with a man that she is willing to lose her powers for him. Also, what is going on with the man whose body has been magically overtaken by Steve? Does he have a family or a job? Is he in the white man’s sunken place? Doesn’t Diana, who is supposed to be a beacon of truth and morality, find the notion of Steve inhabiting another man’s body problematic? The plot could have focused on this as the consequence of Diana’s wish, as it would have been much more thematically resonating for her to struggle with choosing her moral code over her love for Steve.
And that begs another question, why doesn’t Diana miss her Amazon sisters or her mentor who inspired her to believe in truth in the opening scene? Wonder Woman (2017) devoted the entire first act to the Amazons, portraying them as warriors, politicians, caregivers, and complex women with nuanced relationships. It set the standard for a feminist plot that didn’t pander to its audience but empowered them. The sequel would have benefitted from furthering this story arc by venturing deeper into Paradise Land, home of the Amazons of Themyscira. Instead, it takes place in a mostly white D.C., even though the city has been majority-Black since the 1950s and white residents made up just 26% of the population in 1984. It also relies on a banal plot device in a stone that can grant wishes, which seems more like a lazy deus ex-machina. rather than something original and exciting. Diana’s wish doesn’t cause a chain of events that lead to her losing her powers, they just magically disappear as a tradeoff for the sake of the plot and theme.
Lastly, I want to talk about the theme of the film: truth. Wonder Woman 1984 bashes the viewer in the head with this theme through dialogue that lacks subtlety and relies heavily on telling the audience rather than showing them. Its connection with the main plot seems incoherent at worst and passable at best, reducing the complex issue of longing for what you don’t have into something that is black and white (reminiscent of Kendall Jenner “solving racism” by handing a police officer a Pepsi) rather than addressing class differences and social/economic inequality. Barbara wants to be cool and confident so that she can become likable, but must stay a nerd because if she wishes to be like Diana then she becomes a cheetah? That just seems cruel and anti-feminist. And the film’s solution of Diana magically convincing the entire world to stop being greedy over the span of a painfully ignorant monologue was as tone-deaf as when Gal Gadot sang “Imagine.” The world may be beautiful if you’re a gorgeous Amazon superhero, but for most people, telling people to put rose-colored glasses over their terrible situation is patronizing. I’m sure the filmmakers’ intentions were in the right place, but the execution of the theme was mediocre and is obviously pandering to today’s political climate, sacrificing its authenticity in the process.
Why It Matters
You might be thinking, why do all of these things matter, can’t Wonder Woman 1984 solely be based on entertainment value? While I would argue the film doesn’t even meet that quota, we as a society cannot settle for mediocrity. And from a financial standpoint, there is a great benefit to having authentically inclusive representation. Yes, there is content that represents underrepresented communities in a profound way, but there’s still a huge room for improvement before we can get complacent. Very few films have the audience and reach that the Wonder Woman banner has, which is why it’s so important that the film, along with movies that have similar platforms, empower underrepresented communities instead of kicking them to the curb. Yes, there will be bumps and bruises along the way, but that’s to be expected with generational long-lasting change. The late great novelist James Baldwin put it best, “Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced.” Take risks as creatives and challenge the status quo, and then just maybe Wonder Woman can have a shot at getting back her wonder.
Actionable Insights
Take tests like the Race in Entertainment Media (R.E.M.) Test to help evaluate Authentically Inclusive Representation in your content.
Use your platform to empower underrepresented communities instead of avoiding them in your film.
Hire more women and POC in behind-the-scenes positions who can incorporate their lived experience into the plot, otherwise, their characters’ storylines may lack authenticity or even be depicted as raceless.
Write characters that defy both negative and positive stereotypes to help prevent prejudice and discrimination.
Showcase stories that are authentically diverse, as meaningful representation consists of more than simply casting women and people of color.
CSS Intern
Disclaimer: The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this blog belong solely to the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Center for Scholars & Storytellers.
Dreams of a Six Year Old Girl
Have you ever spoken to a six year old girl? Seemingly the epitome of confidence,the world is her oyster, and she believes she can be anything:
An astronaut;
A ballet dancer;
The President;
All at the SAME TIME.
Moreover, young girls frequently do better than boys in elementary school, where their abilities to sit still and follow rules often makes their teachers give them plenty of gold stars.
The traditional thinking is that young girls’ confidence doesn’t drop until they hit puberty. But something else is happening during the ages of five to seven, as children develop cognitively, becoming aware that others are evaluating their behavior.
As a well designed experiment found, at five years of age, girls say that both genders are smart, but by six years old, they classify boys as belonging to the “really really smart” category at a higher rate. Thus, what children see and hear during this developmental stage shapes thinking in ways that adults may not always see or recognize.
In fact, even at younger ages, children quickly absorb the stereotypes we communicate about activities and skills associated with each gender. Children learn in the context of their social and cultural milieu and the messages they are given (from parents, media, teachers and other socialization agents) promote gender identities, sometimes with stereotypes attached to them.
The good news is that in the US, things may be starting to change. One study found that when asked to draw a scientist, kids in the United States increasingly draw women. Back in the sixties and seventies, when asked the same question, less than one percent of children drew a female scientist. Today the average is twenty eight percent. But still, as kids get older, they begin to draw more men in this role. At five or six girls draw the same number of men and women, but by seven and eight they begin to draw more men.
So there is still plenty of work to do. Luckily research has helped us become more aware of these biases. Moreover, companies who create media and product for kids are helping change entrenched patterns. Many companies are focusing on creating strong female characters, and their audience is responding – even boys!
What can you do to help encourage your child to dream big and help your girl recognize that boys and girls are equally “really really smart? One answer: Play! Play helps girls understand the possibilities because this is when children practice the gendered behaviors they see from role models. And young kids like to play with the objects that will teach them the most.
Here are a few ways caregivers can support their children so they start to internalize gender equality:
Choose media that highlight strong female role models.
Why? Because research shows that representation shapes the way we think.
2. Highlight real life female role models, including yourself if you are a woman.
Why? Because connecting to the real world helps make children understand what’s truly possible. And young girls focus on what their female caregiver is doing.
3. Encourage boys to diversify their play patterns. Support their play with dolls, and help them recognize that women are equally brilliant to men.
Why? Because until we recognize that boys can enjoy more “feminine” pursuits, masculine stereotypes of strength and brilliance will persist and undermine progress for women.
Yalda T. Uhls, Ph.D.
Founder and Executive Director of the Center for Scholars & Storytellers
Disclosure: This blog post was written independently and reflects the author’s own views. It was written in support of the Dream Gap project and was paid for by Barbie.
Challenging Racism on the Screen
Challenging Racism on the Screen
When one hears the term “white supremacist,” it might call to mind vivid film depictions like Edward Norton’s vicious neo-Nazi skinhead in American History X or the ineffectual Ku Klux Klansmen that Quentin Tarantino used for a laugh in Django Unchained. But modern white supremacists are just as apt to hide behind anonymous online hate manifestos before enacting solitary attacks as they are to rally in public with swastika flags and white hoods; and narrow representations of visual villains in film and television don’t adequately prepare us for the insidious realities of everyday extremism.
Moreover, when film and television reflect images of “bad racists” as those who wear symbols of prejudice with pride while verbally and physically assaulting people of color, this extreme imagery leads to the false comfort that as long as we’re not acting out with explicit bias, we are not engaged in racism. This good/bad binary limits our understanding of what racism is and how white people participate in it.
Studies done by the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity have shown that everyone possesses implicit racial biases, even if they “do not necessarily align with our declared beliefs or even reflect the stances we would explicitly endorse.” So what shapes these implicit biases from an early age? One of many factors is the narrative content we consume in film and television. You don’t have to look far to find racist stereotypes perpetuated on the screen; but some of the most problematic narratives actually emerge out of films that purport to be on the racially progressive “good” side of the spectrum.
For example, the recent Oscar-winning film Green Book was widely criticized for perpetuating the “magical negro” stereotype, offering a buddy comedy in which the one-dimensional wise black character merely serves to help the white man grow in his fully-fleshed-out journey.
Another stereotypical narrative is the “white savior,” as exemplified in The Blind Side: the story of a middle-class white woman who “rescues” a young black man from a world where every black person is rendered impoverished and/or criminal. And she does so by guiding him towards an arena where whites can accept a black man’s success: sports.
While some filmmakers might defend their work by claiming it’s “historically accurate” or “based on a true story,” these defenses shut down the larger conversation about the creative choices storytellers often make to either glorify or simplify human characters along racial lines.
These well-intentioned but ultimately misguided films demonstrate why it is crucial to change the way we dramatize racism in film and television to encompass both the nuanced offenses as well as some guiding light solutions.
In order to effectively challenge racism on screen, here are some actionable story insights for writers.
1. When portraying white supremacist characters, avoid caricatures that allow the audience to distance themselves without self-reflection. Instead, shine a light on the sinister reality of everyday racists and extremists who might not wear their prejudice on their sleeves.
2. When depicting characters engaged in racist behavior, show the subtler ways in which racism operates (e.g. using coded “us” vs.“them” terminology, as when talking about “safe” vs. “sketchy” neighborhoods as a veiled commentary on how many people of color live in these areas) – and have this racism identified and called out by another white character.
3. Write a story arc for a white character who is openly coming to terms with their own white fragility and privilege; and then growing to consciously engage with racism and challenge white supremacy.
4. Portray people of color as fully realized characters with rich inner and outer lives, rather than stunted stereotypes in service of a white character’s journey.
While these story-focused insights are a great jumping off point, I would encourage every writer to do the work not just within their creative writing, but also within themselves. In order to undo centuries of racial conditioning, we need to engage with and internalize more inclusive perspectives. Although the film and television industry is starting to have more active conversations about diversity and inclusion, the 2019 UCLA Hollywood Diversity Report shows that only 12.6% of writers and 7.8% of directors are people of color.
For this reason, I offer a few more actionable insights that entail putting down the pen to do some larger work.
Accept that racism is an issue for white people to actively engage with and educate yourself with books like White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism, and The New Jim Crow.
Proactively foster both creative and personal relationships across the racial divide.
Advocate for more diversity and representation for people of color behind the camera and on the screen.
If you witness racism on set or in a writers’ room, speak up and make yourself an ally.
Brian McAuley, MFA
WGA Screenwriter
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Columbia University School of the Arts
Collaborator of the Center for Scholars and Storytellers
Disclaimer: The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this blog belong solely to the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Center for Scholars & Storytellers.
Scoring Points with Athletic Characters
Scoring Points with Athletic Characters
Tough. Driven. Focused. Determined. Winner.
Dumb jock. Butch. One-dimensional. Bully.
All of the above describe athletic characters we commonly see on TV and in movies. While we have started to move past so many stereotypes in the media it seems the role of the ‘athlete’ hasn’t caught up. Unfortunately, I’m sure we have all seen the far too common scene where a ‘jock’ pushes a ‘nerd’ into the lockers many times.
Some of the most common stereotypes seen onscreen portray athletes as self-absorbed, bullies, ‘dumb jocks’, one-dimensional and selfish. However, in reality, athletes are incredibly diverse and have the potential to display a number of positive traits. For example, research has found that student athletes have better leadership skills than non-athletes and kids and teens who partake in team sports develop important social skills including empathy and leadership. Furthermore, one study found that compared to non-athletes, student athletes had higher school attendance, graduation rates, and lower dropout rates. These findings should not be simplified to “athletes are smarter or better than non-athletes”, but rather athletes are not simply ‘dumb jocks’ who are only good at one thing, sports. Within sport, they learn specific skills and develop certain qualities such as motivation, discipline, determination, and time management that help them succeed not only in sports, but in school and other domains as well.
One other very common misconception in the media is that most athletes onscreen are boys. Girls are often are portrayed as 1) being bad at sports, 2) simply not athletic at all or 3) participating in only stereotypical ‘feminine’ sports (i.e., cheerleading, dance), which is very problematic. Young girls are constantly being bombarded with characters and messages that suggest they will be viewed as butch, unattractive and masculine if they participate in sports. In fact, research has found that children (8-10-years-old) are aware of gender stereotypes that are prevalent in sport. This awareness actually affects their behavior and participation in certain sports such that girls avoid more masculine sports to fit the social norms related to gender.
As creators of characters that kids love to watch (and emulate), you have the power to create characters and settings that go beyond the common stereotypes we still see onscreen. You have the power to not only entertain kids, but to inspire them as well.
Here are some actionable insights to help you do this!
Expand your repertoire. There are so many unique physical activities that aren’t necessarily competitive sports but are quite common such as hiking, yoga, dance, bowling, paddling, skiing and frisbee. By showing children a range of physical activities and sports, you are not only introducing them to activities they are likely not exposed to, but you are also showing them that there is a sport for everyone!
Show being sporty or active as attainable. An athlete does not always have to be extremely talented or super strong to participate in sports or physical activities. Thus, showing a range of diverse characters participating in sports and having fun may help encourage children to participate in activities they may think they ‘aren’t good enough for’
Break out of old gender stereotypes. Firstly, not all female athletes have to be portrayed as butch or masculine. You can show girls being tough, focused, and successful and still show them being girly and fashionable (Or not!). Secondly, not all male athletes have to be portrayed as strong or aggressive. You can show boys who are more fragile and not aggressive and enjoy participating in more stereotypical ‘feminine’ sports such as skating (Or not!). Having complex characters with a range of athletic abilities and interests is imperative to help children see that participating in sports is not only for certain types of people with only certain qualities and talents.
Cut the scenes where athletes (and all kids) hide how smart they are. In real life, kids who excel in school are often respected and admired and kids should not be observing characters being ashamed of their intelligence or ‘good grades’. Athletes should not be portrayed as one-dimensional such that they do not only have to be good at sports, but they can also be good at school as well.
Show the other sides to athletes. A lot of athletes are high achievers, leaders, extremely well spoken, and outgoing. They can also be very creative, musical, and involved in the community. Showing all aspects of a character is very important.
Show kids being active. A lot of characters on screen are either an ‘athlete’, or they do nothing. Show your characters partaking in a range of physical activities or sports and explain how important and fun exercising can be!
Athletic scenes are full of potential for conflict, drama, and comedy, without falling back on a narrow view of athletes. Moving beyond athletic stereotypes will not only give you tons of material to work with but you’ll have an inspired and devoted audience!
Sue Comeau, B.Sc. (Kin), M.A., CSEP-CEP
Writes on fitness and healthy lifestyle, and is the author of The F.I.T. Files, for kids.
Let Love Define Family: Portraying a Modern Generation of Foster Parents
Let Love Define Family:
Portraying a Modern Generation of Foster Parents
Media content has the power to shape perceptions and views on a mass scale. Unfortunately, media portrayals of youth in foster care are often negative and perpetuate unhelpful stereotypes. In this special blog series, The Center for Scholars and Storytellers is exploring this topic from multiple perspectives to inform and inspire the creation of accurate, empowering, and socially responsible media portrayals of foster care.
Just as there are many destructive stereotypes about youth in foster care, there are countless misperceptions of the type of people who become foster parents and their underlying motivations. From the perfect, savior, do-good foster couple, to the careless, mean foster parent who is only in it for the money, these unhelpful stereotypes prevent everyday people from seeing themselves as a foster parent, thus reducing the options for children waiting for a family. This is particularly problematic when it comes to media portrayals, as it helps to “see it to be it.” Indeed, in the previous post in this special foster care series, a foster parent noted how they are typically portrayed as either “perfect people” or “system milkers.”
Why is this critical? From talking to countless foster care professionals in the United States and Canada, it’s clear that their number one problem is a shortage of foster parents, particularly from minority groups. Therefore, we flagged this as one of the most important topics to communicate to content creators. Because media has immense power to influence behaviors, portraying foster parents and the motivations behind fostering in a relatable, positive, and realistic way could inspire viewers to consider being foster parents themselves. As Marianne Guilfoyle, Chief Innovations Officer at LA-based Allies for Every Child states, “Media has the ability to drive home the notion-- if not you, then who will answer the call to meet the need of the children in your community?”
More specifically, we need to reach and mobilize a new generation of foster parents. This is the mission behind the LA-based non-profit organization Raise a Child, where they are urging people to “reimagine foster parents.” I spoke with the organization’s founder, Rich Valenza, to learn more about his personal path to fostering and adoption, the goals of the organization, and the message he has for content creators. (Click here to see Valenza and his family featured as the first LGBTQ+ family featured on the annual CBS special, A Home for the Holidays.)
“At Raise a Child, our motto is, Let Love Define Family,” says Valenza. “There are no accidents or sudden decisions in fostering and adopting. You are planning a family and you chose those children. It’s truly a thing of love and acceptance, and it needs to be portrayed that way.”
Valenza suggests we need to “rebrand” what it means and looks like to be a foster parent. Indeed, today, more than ever before, there are countless new drivers for people to become foster parents and adopt through foster parenting. It is more than just heterosexuals couples who can’t conceive biologically who foster, and media content should reflect these modern realities. Foster parents range from same-sex couples wanting to build a family, to single men and women who don’t want to wait for a partner to start a family, to those who are environmentally conscious looking for a way to raise children without increasing their carbon footprint, to people driven by social justice who want to help elevate kids out of a repressive cycle to make a positive impact on thier community. As Ching-chu Hu and Jim Van-Reeth, multi-racial, well-educated, same-sex couple from Ohio who have adopted four children through the foster care system point out, “There is no more effective way to positively impact children and ultimately society as a whole.”
Speaking further to social justice, there are countless horrible circumstances for children around the world, and even in our own country, that often leave people feeling helpless. “People are justifiably outraged,” explain Hu and Van-Reeth. “Perhaps we can’t do anything about these things, but we can at least help out local children in the foster care system who are from broken homes and give them a fresh start. Helping out locally does positively affect the world.”
The system is also more progressive than some may think. For instance, Hu and Van-Reeth assumed that because they lived in a small, conservative town, they would have to adopt internationally. But during the adoption certification program, they noticed that representatives from the local county foster agency kept approaching them to chat. Being used to prejudice in other areas of their lives, they at first thought they were being further checked out to see if their motives to adopt were pure. It wasn’t until about halfway through the courses that they realized these agency workers were trying to convince them to work with the local foster care agency rather than adopt internationally. As they put it, “The foster care workers didn't see color or sexuality - they were simply evaluating based on capabilities.”
Similarly, going into the foster process Valenza expected to face some discrimnation as a single, gay man. Instead, leadership within LA County Foster Care quickly realized what an incredible foster father and advocate he was, and recruited him to help them encourage more people from the LGBTQ+ community to become foster parents -- the genesis of Raise a Child.
Actionable insights for content creators:
Depict relatable foster parents from a variety of backgrounds (e.g. race, culture, LGBTQ+) and family structure.
- Media that gets it right: A lesbian couple in The Fosters, An African-American couple in This is Us.
Include modern motivations for fostering. Examples include: single parents, same-sex parents, people driven by social justice and/or environmental reasons.
Colleen Russo Johnson, PhD
Senior Fellow of the Center for Scholars and Storytellers
This blog series is supported in part by the UCLA Pritzker Center for Strengthening Children and Families.
Movie Review: Monsters and Men
I had the privilege of attending the premiere of the new feature film, Monsters and Men, at the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) on September 6th. Set in Brooklyn, Monsters and Men almost feels like three short films merged together, each following a separate protagonist’s storyline, woven together by a far too common scenario that has shaken us to our core the past few years — the unnecessary fatal shooting of a black man by a police officer.
All three protagonists are African-American. The first is a young dad who witnesses the shooting and captures it on tape, and subsequently experiences the unjust consequences of releasing the tape. The second is a police officer in the same division as the officer who shot the man, put in the position of having to defend his loyalty to his police community to his clearly hurting black community. And finally, the third is a teenager with a promising future with a baseball scholarship, who risks it all by getting involved with protest groups against police brutality, mirroring timely race issues within the NFL. All three storylines lack resolution, an unsettling yet realistic scenario for these characters and those in similar situations.
This thought-provoking film is a quintessential example of how media coupled with impactful storytelling can used to transport the viewer into not just another world, but someone else’s shoes. In Monsters and Men, this was achieved through director Reinaldo Marcus Green’s inclusion of first-person perspectives, and his brilliant script which imparts empathy for all three protagonists’ storylines.
Movies can undoubtedly influence and shape viewers perspectives, but this is particularly true for young audiences, due to their developing minds, worldviews, and morals. This is one reason why movies that perpetuate unhelpful stereotypes are particularly problematic. Therefore, when it comes to race, content creators should strive for responsibly embedded realistic portrayals and counter-stereotypical depictions.
Fictional movies that are inspired by current events, such as Monsters and Men, offer an ideal entrypoint for introducing your teenager to these sensitive topics which are both timely and important. The fictional storyline also removes part of the taboo nature that can prevent people from talking about race relations, and slightly cushions the topic for particularly sensitive young viewers.
As a content creator, imagine a teen and parents co-viewing this film . What a fantastic launching pad for families to discuss the movie’s content and its relation to real-world events. It’s good to make content that is great, but when it’s great and impactful… even better!
Colleen Russo Johnson, PhD; Senior Fellow of the Center for Scholars & Storytellers
For more information on Monsters and Men, which comes out September 28th, see TIFF’s Synopsis:https://www.tiff.net/tiff/monsters-and-men/
Flip the Script: Reducing Unconscious Race Bias
“You can’t solve a problem unless you talk about.” Beverly Daniel Tatum
Unconscious biases develop our first year of life. These biases affect how we act in ways we may not always understand and recognize. Until we start acknowledging these biases and discussing them without blame, shame OR guilt, they will persist and shape our behavior and culture.
A surprising study found that black boys as young as 10 are seen as less innocent than white boys. Race identification, and the pride or shame associated with it, begins as young as 4-5 years of age. Representation affects our biases and also our own self-concepts in positive and negative ways. For example,
A study of nearly 400 children found that the more TV white boys watch, the higher their self esteem. The opposite was true for white and black girls and black boys.
In fact, just watching a racist scene on video increases blood pressure, long after the scene is over. Fortunately, storytellers can do something about this:
Show characters that identify discrimination and talk about it openly.
Portray positive role models from a variety of backgrounds.
Showing a narrative that is the opposite of what is expected (for example, black heroes and white villains) has been shown to decrease unconscious bias by 40%.
It’s time to flip the script.
Yalda T. Uhls, Ph.D.
Founder and Executive Director of The Center for Scholars & Storytellers