There Will Be a Revolution in this Century

Shortly after the 2016 general election I had expressed that I could tell a Revolution was coming. However there was no way for me to even begin to understand how accurate that statement was. Following the Parkland shooting we have seen a huge uprising of Millennials and younger generation becoming involved in politics, becoming involved in marches, actually speaking out against the NRA, speaking out against congressmembers. I saw a post saying that millennials and younger 18 up at the 2020 election will add an extra 90 million volts into the electorate this is huge.

In the 2016 general election roughly 127 million people voted. In the 2020 election there will be 90 million young voters. I said a Revolution was coming and that the political landscape of this country would change and it will change. Young people tend to skew more liberal. If the Democrats will lose in 2020 It Is by their own fault. The Democrats have such a way riding with them into 2020 due to the amount of young voters that it can appeal to.

So I still believe it. I still believe that A revolution is coming. I support this revolution. It is time for change to come in America and it’s going to be us and the younger generation who’s going to bring in that change and you can either sit back and watch it happen or help. You can either be on the wrong side of History or the right side. And the right side is not right of Center. We have an opportunity to change the landscape of our country. We have the opportunity to ensure Justice and equality and a congress that’s able to run correctly and a president who does not make us fear nuclear war war everyday. So let’s do something. Let’s win this and end this dystopian Society we live in. We must not throw away our shot. It’s our time, let’s win this.

Ready Player None (RPO spoilers within)

Anyone who has met me in the past five or six years would know that the first book I would recommend to them, no matter what it was that they were looking for, would be Ready Player One by Ernest Cline. The film for Ready Player One was released yesterday, April 29th, 2018, and it had some serious problems. Coming solely from a perspective of a fan of the book, I have to say that I was entirely disappointed. Knowing a lot of the arches and what the characters represent within the book that the film seemed to completely disregard was probably the most disappointing.

One of the such arches that was left out of the movie was the arch regarding Aech’s sexuality. In the book it is made clear by the end that Aech is a lesbian, however there is no such reference to that in the film, which relates to my last post about LGBT representation in Hollywood. By refusing to acknowledge this in the movie it just further goes to show how Hollywood seems to disavow anything that goes against the normal culture and goes out of it’s to eliminate any possibility of progression.

Even further than simply being a lesbian, Aech is portrayed in the book as a lesbian of color, which is even more so a subculture that remaines to be ignored in Hollywood.

I’m not saying that this is the only bad thing about the movie, because it isn’t. In fact, there is a lot wrong with the movie even solely from someone who is disregarding what the book is. There are a lot of plot holes, there are many parts that are just way too convenient in the movie.

I have been looking forward to this movie since it was announced. I was introduced to the book by a friend who competed with me on the Las Positas forensics team. This was in 2011. I have read this book well over a hundred times and I have listened to the audio book even more it is safe to say that this is my favorite book and it is also safe to say that this movie did not do the book Justice. This movie removes everything that made Ready Player One, Ready Player One. This movie, in traditional Hollywood fashion, removed any rhetoric from the story l that could have been placed in the film but was chosen not to be.

LGBT Representation in Hollywood

Again, this is an assignment from one of my classes at CSU, East Bay.


If anything, Hollywood is consistent. However, this is a problem, because the consistency of Hollywood comes at the expense of anyone who is not a straight, white, cis male. There have been some strides to change this, however, not nearly enough. When we think of the LGBT community and the way that the community is portrayed on screen, we can see that there is a huge issue in the way that Hollywood presents this group. Nearly every instance where there is a prominent LGBT character, it is a white female lesbian whose sole purpose in the film is to get naked and have sex with another white female lesbian. This is a huge issue because it is not even trying to be an adequate representation of the LGTB community. For Hollywood to truly make a difference and change the consistency that they have relied on for so long, Hollywood needs to stop having the gay characters stand out and be abnormally different from everyone.

The most important action that Hollywood can take that will make it more LGBT friendly is to eliminate the hegemonic view that white, cis, and straight is dominant. By having more LGBT and actors of color have lead roles in films, it will bring up the community to new heights, because the community will finally be represented as a group of people who aren’t different from the straight people and who aren’t there for the sole purpose to get naked and have sex with another woman for the sole purpose of the straight man’s enjoyment. Furthermore, the Motion Picture Association of America needs to stop treating the LGBT as a community that is so obscure and controversial that the films need to have a rating of Not Rated or risk a rating of NC17. This would help to normalize the community and help to fight the stigma of the LGBT community.

We’re Ready

Growing up, my generation and the generation younger than us were taught to question everything. We were raised reading Harry Potter, the Hunger Games, the Handmaid’s Tale, and other Dystopian books. We were taught these books as literature in various classes. And now, now we’re ready.

We are living in a classic dystopian society. The books we read for fun are now the books we read  to prepare ourselves to fight back against this corrupt and evil regime. We know what to do, because we learned what to do in school. We were being prepared to fight back through the books we would choose to read for fun. And now, we have passed the final stage. Within the Hunger Games, we are gearing up for our Mockingjay. Within Harry Potter, we are reached the Final Battle. Within the Testing, it’s Graduation Day. We have had enough, and we are ready for this fight.

It never ends well for those in charge in a Dystopian book, and hopefully, it won’t end well for those in charge of the USA. Millenials are ready. We are ready to take down Trump and his Death Eaters, as Harry took down Voldemort and his. We are ready to fight.

The Perfect Candidate

In the 2016 election, the vast majority of voters were split into three groups, Republicans, Bernie Fans, and Hillary Supporters. The last two greatly outnumbered the first, but there was a surprising result. The two hated each other. Some Bernie supporters were so diehard for Bernie that they refused to vote for Hillary after she secured the nomination, and Hillary supporters would have done the same thing had Bernie secured the nomination. The 2016 Presidential election was rare because it wasn’t that Trump had the bigger supporter base. He didn’t. It wasn’t because he was popular. He wasn’t. It was because there were Democrats who were so caught up in their candidate that they refused to vote for their party’s nominee that many Bernie supporters actually voted for the complete and polar opposite of him and voted for Donald Trump.

It is interesting to note differences in Republican and Democrat leadership prior to understanding how the 2016 election was different. According to their 2016 publication, Fiona M. Davidson, Tad Sours, and Rebecca Moll, all instructors from the University of Arkansas and Hass Hall Academy, wrote :

the Republican Party broadly supports lower taxes, smaller levels of social welfare, strict limits on immigration, limited environmental and business regulations, and strict adherence to traditional, often Judeo-Christian, social norms. The Democrats, conversely, are more likely to support higher taxes, wealth redistribution, generous immigration policies, a strong social welfare network, stronger environmental and business regulations, and more inclusive and progressive social policies. These philosophies appeal to very different groups in part because they are designed to do just that. Each party acknowledges that they have a “base,” or a group of core supporters to whom they tailor their main policies (2016).
Clearly, the two parties have a very different base. So, how then was Trump able to capture the enthusiasm of Bernie supporters and bring them to his side? According to an NPR report on August 24, 2017, nearly 12% of Bernie supporters ended up voting for Donald Trump. Interestingly, it seems that the major reason that many Sanders defectors voted for Trump was the idea of White privilege. In the same NPR report, “nearly half of Sanders-Trump voters disagreed with the idea of ‘white advantage'” (2017). These voters didn’t like that Hillary wanted to even the playing field among everyone, whether based on race, sex, or creed. For these voters, Trump would better serve their personal interests better than Hillary would have. Their revolution was fake, and faltered at the idea of having someone who agreed somewhat with them and voted for the polar opposite. White people, amiright?
According to an article on the Root, Bernie Sanders’ biggest problem was that he didn’t try to appeal to African-American voters. Terrell Star writes, “For all of Sanders’ talk of a “political revolution” and economic inequality, the candidate never seemed to understand that it’s all but impossible to make it out of the Democratic primary without winning over black women—especially those over 35 years old” (2017). Black women win elections. You can see that Barack Obama. In fact, in the 2012 election, Black women made up the largest voting block. So, why did Bernie largely ignore them? Bernie talks a good talk, but fails to back up his words. Bernie talks about equality for all, but his plans would largely help poor white people, which is why many of them switched to Trump, a candidate who ran his campaign on racism, hate, and whataboutism.
The point that I’m making here is that the reason Trump won is because many Democrats were so hurt by the 2016 primaries that they failed to see the big picture, and they handed the election over to Trump. Bernie supporters who voted third party, who voted for Trump, who didn’t vote at all, all because their candidate didn’t secure the nomination is what put us in this situation. The fact of the matter is that the perfect candidate doesn’t exist. Plain and simple. The perfect candidate for every Democrat won’t run in 2020, but we need to unite together and get Trump out of office because if the Democrat vote is split again, we can be stuck with another 4 years of racist rhetoric and the world laughing at the United States. I am willing to vote for a candidate I don’t love, whether I supported them on the primary road or not, because the bigger picture is there. Democrats need to win in 2020, need to win in 2018. Democrats need to unite together for a good candidate, because your perfect candidate will only lead to another Republican landslide.
Davidson, F. M., Sours, T., & Moll, R. L. (2016). Demography, Identity and the 2016 Presidential Election. Geography Teacher, 13(3), 106-111.
Kurtzleben, D. (2017, August 24). Here’s How Many Bernie Sanders Supporters Ultimately Voted For Trump. Retrieved February 08, 2018, from
Starr, T. J. (2017, July 19). Bernie Sanders Black Women Problem. Retrieved February 08, 2018, from

Maggie Goes on a Diet Communication Analysis

Here is the transcript of my 1st Place Winning Communication Analysis based on the children’s book Maggie Goes on a Diet. As this is a speech transcription, the citations for this are in the text and not in a works cited page section at the end.

_______ _________ _________ ________ _______ _________ ________ ________ _________ _________

Traditionally, children’s stories have had positive messages to share with the youth. We like Dr. Seuss’s The Sneetches. “I’m quite happy to say. That the Sneetches got really quite smart on that day. The day they decided that Sneetches are Sneetches. And no kind of Sneetch is the best on the beaches.” But today, we have a different story.

The children’s book Maggie Goes on A Diet by Paul Kramer has been met with lots of criticism. Maggie Goes on A Diet is the story of an overweight, unpopular, bullied, 14 year old girl who goes on a diet, gets skinny, and gets popular.

The F Word, a feminist blog from September 11, 2011, stated “do we really need another source telling children that weight loss equates to success? I trust the tween idols of Disney and Hollywood cover this.”

David Katz, senior medical advisor at MindStream Academy, a coed health and wellness boarding school for teens, says, “Essentially, the public is outraged because this book’s title contains the word diet’ and is aimed at young girls. The prevailing opinion is that encouraging kids to diet will lower their self-esteem, cause them to develop unhealthy habits, and maybe even spark weight-related neuroses.”

This leads me to my research question: Obviously, this book is meant to encourage weight loss. Will it be successful, have no impact, or be counterproductive? In order to answer this question, I have chosen STORIES OF HYPEREMBODIMENT: AN ANALYSIS OF PERSONAL NARRATIVES OF AND THROUGH PHYSICALLY DISABLED BODIES by Julie Anne Scott published in Text and Performance Quarterly from April of 2012.

This model is appropriate because it performs a narrative analysis from individuals that do not have a normal body type.

(Today, we will discuss the model chosen for analysis. Next, we will apply the model to Maggie Goes on a Diet. Finally, we will draw some rhetorical conclusions.)

In Scott’s essay STORIES OF HYPEREMBODIMENT: AN ANALYSIS OF PERSONAL NARRATIVES OF AND THROUGH PHYSICALLY DISABLED BODIES, she conducts a performance analysis from personal narratives of physically disabled professionals. The narratives came from a position of hyper embodiment, the ability to transcend their particular bodies, which illuminates mortal embodiment to those unmarked by physical difference. Scott states that there are three components to telling the narratives.

The first tenant, imagining through hyperembodied narrative, talks about how those Scott interviewed would tell their stories had they not been disabled, or disabled in a different way. Scott says that some of the participants struggled with the complexity of their disabled bodies, which offered them opportunities, insights, and understanding, all the while mourning what they have lost due to their disability, so they would tell their stories in such a way as though they had no disability, or a different disability altogether.

The second tenant, performing who one will become through a changing body, talks about how the story will be told after the body is no longer disabled. These narrators had a different struggle. Their struggle came from how their bodies would change, having to imagine what their bodies would become through surgery or physical therapy.

The third and final tenant, performing oneself beyond embodiment explains how personal sentiments move away from the lived experience to the cultural constitution of physically disabled identity as stigmatized within society. These cultural constructions expose prejudices towards bodies that the dominant culture stigmatize and devalue. Essentially, it is the idea of moving away from how a disabled bodied person feels about themselves to how a larger society views an individual with a disabled body. (So far we have covered the model, now lets apply the Maggie text to the model)

The book, has 2 title pages. The first shows Maggie in a compromising position while the second gives the reader a sense of where the story is going, that the easy fix of going on a diet will solve all of her problems, both physical and social. T

he first tenant describes how the story would be told had they been not disabled or disabled differently.We can see this through this picture, where we see shows her imagining herself being athletic. In an article published in March, 2008 in the Journal of Sports Science says that imagery served cognitive, motivational and healing purposes in effectively rehabilitating from an injury. Throughout the book, Maggie is imagining what life is going to be like after she has lost the weight and what she is going to be able to do.

Additionally, this tenant is shown through this picture, which shows Maggie imagining herself wearing a pair of skinny jeans. Finally, the text specifically says “She also knew she would look better, feel better, and run faster if she lost the weight.”

The second tenant discusses how the story will be told after they are no longer disabled. In the book, we can see this because she begins to smile more once she looses the weight. The text puts that “With added self-confidence Maggie was less and less afraid.” In an article published in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology from April, 2007, Yael Benyamini emplains that confidence is gained as the weight is being lost, not after the weight is lost. If the scale shows a plateau, even after losing a high amount of weight, then self-confidence can be extremely low. Another example of this tying in with performing oneself through a changing body is the fact that within a couple short months, Maggie goes from fat and unpopular to skinny, pretty, and popular. This shows how important image is to kids as written by Paul Kramer. The most important thing was for Maggie to get skinny and popular, not worrying about health or the importance of how you feel about yourself. This gives a false hope about how fast healthy weight loss truly is.

The third and final tenant explains how personal sentiments move away from the lived experience to the cultural constitution of physically disabled identity as stigmatized within society. This is shown in the book by the kids laughing at Maggie when she is walking away from the school. The book says “Most everyone chuckled as Maggie got up to bat. Maggie was not only clumsy, she was also quite fat.” The European Eating Disorders Review from August 2009 says that, particularly to girls ages 11-14, The most important predictors of body dissatisfaction were self esteem, body mass index, and the perceived views of society. The perceived views of society are cemented pretty clearly with the stereotypical school kids making fun of at the expense of Fat Maggie without any signs of repercussions from adults condemning this behavior.

(Now that we have gone through the model and applied it to the text, we will now draw some rhetorical conclusions)

The first conclusion is that this book gives an inaccurate perception that losing weight equates to happiness. However, according to Gretchen Ruben, author of the book The Happiness Project, says that losing weight does not help people to be happy, but the actual exercise is the responsible party. She puts emphasis on that fact that if you stop working out, even if you have lost 100 pounds, you are going to feel the same way that you did before you began to lose the weight.

As we all know, there are issues in our lives that definitely do not have an easy fix. This book provides a false hope that there are easy fixes for any problem that you may have. In the book, Maggie loses 50 pounds in a couple short months. By the book showing such a quick change, it gives the hope that dieting is a quick and easy fix and that it is healthy to lose such a high amount of weight in such a short time, although the truth reveals otherwise.

Another conclusion is that it serves to promote stereotypes with kids. If a kid who is not overweight were to read this book, it would serve as a reason to bully people who are overweight. It would make them think that by them bullying people who are overweight, it would give them the drive to lose weight and that it is ok to do because the book shows no repercussions to bullying those who are overweight.. An article from USA Today last accessed on September 12, 2012, expresses that when bullies are given a reason to bully, not that they need one in the first place, it will only drive them to do it more and to a more harmful degree. By showing the bullying having a positive impact in making Maggie want to lose the weight, it gives people who aren’t overweight a reason to bully, which is leading to more severe consequences. According to combined studies by Yale University and Oxford published on July 13, 2010, victims of bullying show the following characteristics: low Self-esteem, difficulty in trusting others, lack of assertiveness, aggression, difficulty controlling anger, and isolation. Shockingly, this study showed that victims of bullying are between 2 and 9 times more likely to commit suicide, not change what they are being bullied for. The most shocking of this study says that 10-14 year girls , girls Maggie’s age, who are bullied, are at an even higher risk of suicide, being 14 times more likely to commit suicide.

(Today, we have looked at the model. Then, we applied the model to the text. Finally, we drew some rhetorical conclusions. We will now answer our research question)

Obviously, this book is meant to encourage weight loss. Will it be successful, have no impact, or be counterproductive? We can see from our conclusions that this book is more counterproductive, ultimately leading to opposite actions than the book encourages. Children who are overweight who read this book will be miserable, given false hopes about dieting, and have the idea that there is no hope for them to escape from the bullying, which could lead to even more suicide. Children who read this story will not get the happy feeling that children’s books, such as the aforementioned Doctor Seuss book should give them.

How To Hook Up

Author Umberto Eco is the inspiration for this paper, written for my Communication, Media, and Culture class in the Fall of 2016. This piece is completely satirical, and was difficult to find the inspiration to write. I was, at first, going to use personal experience and write a How to Lose a Parent, but found that the piece was too emotionally challenging for me, so I wrote this instead. Again, this is completely satirical.

How to Hook Up

              I don’t know how it was in the olden times, prior to the existence of the internet, but it is way too easy nowadays to just have a meaningless hookup. It seems that everywhere you look, a new group, app, or website is set up with the intention of hooking up or cheating on your current significant other. It doesn’t matter the website in particular. What does matter is the way in which you go at it. So here are things to remember in hooking up with someone from the internet.

  1. Always make sure to use your real name. No one wants to hook up with someone who they think is lying to them. By using your real name, you make sure that when you do end up meeting in person, you won’t slip up and tell them that you’ve been lying to them the whole time. No girl likes being lied to.
  2. When using the site/group/app, make sure to always go against the terms of agreement. If you are using Tinder, make sure that you have a very flattering, naked picture of yourself. Every girl wants their first impression of you to be a dick pic. If you are using Facebook, send a message saying what you would like to do to him or her. Nothing stimulates the imagination more than a complete stranger being totally sexual at the first interaction. The preceding statement is intended for the male sex. Women can get away with parading their bodies as their profile pictures. It will get them more perverts to want to talk to them.
  3. Contrary to number one, if you are a guy, make sure to tell the girl prior to the hookup that your size is minimally two inches bigger than in actuality. Girls will expect this, and do the calculation in their head. If you don’t, they will expect a smaller package, and feel cheated. If you are a girl, you want to make sure to send the most flattering pictures of your chest to your hookup. They want to imagine your chest as big as possible, whether it’s true or not.
  4. Meet somewhere dark and alone. You don’t want everyone to know that you’re meeting up with someone on the internet. The world is so full of people who will judge you for that the risk of being murdered by some truck driver named Greg is worth the risk. If you must meet somewhere public. Make sure it’s a place full of well-rounded people, like a bar, or a honkytonk. There’s no way that anything bad will happen to you if you meet up there.
  5. If possible, have the rendezvous at a private place. A hotel is not the place for a secret meetup for a hookup. There are too many watchful eyes and video cameras. No, the best place to cheat on your significant other is in the room where you sleep with him or her. That way, (s)he won’t suspect a thing because there is no way that you would be stupid enough to sleep with someone else in their bed.
  6. Never use a condom. You don’t know if the condom is expired or not, or if it’s been in the wallet. No, the best idea is ditch the condom entirely. Besides, you’re hooking up with someone from the internet. Clearly health is not an important aspect of this for you.
  7. When you wake up in the morning after your night full of rough and fun sex, stay in bed with each other. Exchange pleasantries about how the evening went. Nothing is better after a night of sex than a recap of the best, and not so best, events of the previous evening occurred.
  8. When it is time to leave, if you are the party that must leave the private residence, leave a note in a very obvious place. No one will think to look in the top right drawer of the desk for something someone might be hiding. Never use the left drawer though, that is just asking for trouble.
  9. Text immediately to say that you enjoyed your time and hope to meet up again, next time one of you are in the vicinity of the other. Exchange pleasantries, knowing full well that the previous night was the only night that you will be seeing them.
  10. Go get tested. You don’t know where the other person has been in the past, and, as such, you should immediately get tested for herpes or gonorrhea, or chlamydia. Actually, just get tested for all of them. Odds are that you are going to have at least one of them.
  11. When the results come in that you now have gonorrhea, text the douchebag that he or she gave it to you and that you hope they rot in hell. After all, your genitals are now rotting with the sexually transmitted disease. On second thought, maybe that condom would have been a really good idea.

The threat of sexual transmitted diseases, while once constrained to minimal areas, has exploded with the rise of more and more travel and with new websites and apps devoted solely to hookups. If you have to ask yourself if what you are doing is right or not, the answer is definitely not. You will have to reap the consequences of whatever, whoever you do. Whether the consequence is gonorrhea or Donald Trump, our actions have a severe impact on the rest of our lives. So think about it, is the one night of feeling good really worth the pain of Donald Trump? Is the feeling like you voted third party and sticking it to the establishment worth the pain and destruction that is caused by his election? If Donald wins, we all need that condom, because we are all going to be screwed big time, and the gonorrhea of Donald Trump just won’t be worth the hookup of voting for Stein or Johnson.

Welcome to 2018

Hello and welcome to 2018. Surprisingly, Donald Trump is still president. I can honestly say that I never saw that coming. Hell, I never saw Donald Trump becoming president happening. But he did, and here we are. It’s been a bit of a doozy over the last couple of days, and, quite frankly, 2018 is off to an interesting start.

On New Years, starting the year right, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un tweeted that he had a nuclear button on his desk at all times. Being the diplomatic man Donald Trump is, he took to twitter as well. He responded saying, “North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the “Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.” Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!”(source). Not only is Trump  inept at being President, but also inept at speaking the truth (shocking, right?). First of all, there is no such thing as a nuclear button. Secondly, why brag? Why do you fuel the flames and put us all at risk?

On January 3, in an article in New York Magazine, Michael Wolff explained that Trump didn’t want to be the president. Well, Mr. President, neither did the majority of America, so I guess we have something in common. Even Steve Bannon, whose Breitbart Media praised Donald Trump and ran tabloids in support of him, said that when he came onto the scene, it was a “broke-dick campaign.”  No one, not us, not Donald Trump’s staffers, not Donald Trump himself, expected that they could win the 2016 Presidential election. However, he did, and here we are. (source)

If 2018 is anything like 2017, and it seems like it will be, and possibly worse, then please buckle up, because this is sure to be a wild ride.


Thoughts from Job Hunting – A Personal Post

Looking for work is definitely hard, but the end payoff will be well worth it.

When I think about giving up, I think about that, and am motivated to keep looking. I’ve never been the type to simply give up, and I don’t plan on doing so any time soon. It’s been 5 months since I’ve graduated from college, and that means 5 months of being unemployed, and, for the first time in a long time, having nothing to do. At first, that was nice. Now, not so much. However, the amount of time that I have been able to use to grow myself, to learn more about myself, to seek out help for issues long since been ignored. I have been working on myself, ensuring that I am losing weight. I’m not ashamed of the need to lose weight, and I’ve lost 55  pounds in the past 5 months. I’m studying to take to GRE, and am realizing even further that math is not my strong suit.

When we think about what we need to do, it isn’t very often that we think about what we need to do for ourselves. It’s healthy to take care of ourselves, to get help, to spend some time alone, but don’t get lost in it. Netflix is wonderful, but people, and the outside world as a whole, is even better.

I love to play video games, whether it be first person shooters, Grand Theft Auto, or sports games, and I often immerse myself into these games, which can be an unhealthy habit. However, balancing it out with spending time with friends, spending time with my girlfriend, and going outside makes everything better. And then I return to studying for the GRE and looking for work.

Neither the studying nor the job hunt is easy, and, to be honest, I’m happy about that. I like the challenge. I need the challenge. Now, I must get back to studying.

Don’t forget to be awesome,


A Distinct Lack of Diversity in a Show about Diversity

It is widely accepted that the X-Men series serves as an allegory for racism in the United States. The oppression the mutated people in the franchise is a direct parallel to the oppression of African Americans and the LGTBQIA community in the United States. In 1982, X-Men writer Chris Claremont explained, “”The X-Men are hated, feared, and despised collectively by humanity for no other reason than that they are mutants. So what we have…, intended or not, is a book that is about racism, bigotry, and prejudice.”

So, how do we get to the point where a show, the Gifted on Fox, features so little diversity, while preaching acceptance and inclusiveness? The show, based around the children of a prosecutor of mutants who just so happen to be mutants themselves and find themselves on the run from the government for causing an accident at their school after the son is being bullied quite intensely, features only 3 characters of minority status. One of which is Middle Eastern, one is Latino, and one is Asian. The entirety of the rest of the cast is white.

This is a problem. You cannot preach acceptance and inclusiveness while continuing to blast the screens with whiteness. You cannot argue for inclusiveness while simultaneously lacking diversity in your medium. The need for more inclusiveness goes into the show about being accepting and fighting against prejudice and discrimination, yet here we are with the Gifted, lacking in the diversity column.