>>124640987>>124640636It;s not always that. Most of the industry is male run so it only happens every so often for that reason, we can safely presume.
It's because they're trying to pander to the 'hot new thing' like they used to do with environmentalism back in the 90s and be IN YO FACE and have ATTITOOD. You've seen the twitter accounts of some of these animators, and their attitudes. That's what they're thinking
the fact that sometimes it's in response to actual cringeworthy racist idiots getting very vitriolic about a black character rather than a pointless changeup notwithstanding And often it's without actually putting anything of the substance behind it in there. Either that, or they're fans who want to do their own take on it. Or they want to just adapt their own stories so they get the label and bran recognition of a more famous work and use inclusivity as a shield from criticism.
There are plenty of reasons and they usually boil down to shit being done by committee or other things that fuck up the writing process.
I mean it's like this
>look, this character is a NON-BINARY WOMAN NOW!>Watcha gonna DO ABOUT IT, SHITLORDS!>LOOOOK AAAAT IIIITT!>we're not going to do anything with it in the story though.They make all this din about changing stuff to be more inclusive like it's really brilliant of them, and then don't actually DO anything with it.
They should either just put them in and let it show through naturally, like, the non binary woman is referred to as 'they', without making a big deal (I thought we were at that stage now, bigotry's on the back foot) or, if they do put it front and centre, DO SOMETHING WITH IT.
Don't just give me black Clark Kent. Explain why a black kid made it Earth and how he became superman. Give him a new backstory. Do SOMETHING more than a recolour.
Or the black guy in Vikings. Explain why he's in Norway! It's interesting. It gives the story more layers!
>>124640473You mean these hotpants?
