I read the SyFy article and it's pretty gross.
Yeah, that sums it up pretty well. The article is indeed gross.
I don't know if people who write articles like this are wilfully misrepresenting the truth, or if they're just plain stupid. The most ironic and laughable section (amongst many) is when she writes:
"It would be unfair and too general to say that Star Wars has a fandom problem. What it has is a white male fandom problem."
Oh good, glad she wants to avoid being "too general" and "unfair." Maybe she should've taken some time to go through YouTube videos of people voicing their displeasure over changes to Star Wars. Or maybe actually speak with disgruntled fans. She'd find that quite a few of them wouldn't fit her profile of "entitled white males" being the only ones voicing the same exact types of objections she enumerates in her garbage article. But, that would require actual work and intellectual integrity. It's so much easier to be lazy and make broad-sweeping conclusions based on assumptions, especially when it fits perfectly with your pre-existing worldview.
Maybe "writers" like this should take the time to analyze what Star Wars is about, and find parallels here in the real world to understand why you might expect it to look and feel a certain way. The first clue is right in the damn title: Star
WARS. If the saga was called "Earth Wars" it would be preposterous to represent the demographics of the various military branches as anything other than overwhelmingly male. Wars = combat; combat = military; military = mostly males. That may not be the case someday, but it's still the reality today. If you film any real-life battlefield in our current world, then present it on screen, you'd see virtually nothing but males. So, if you have "space wars," a reasonable expectation would be for the battlefield demographics to reflect the reality of "earth wars." Nothing nefarious involved.
Star Wars presented visuals and atmospherics that resembled the conditions of wars as we've known them. And it's no secret that Lucas even took inspiration (and not just aerial combat footage) from our real-life wars when making his SW films. She complains in her laughable article that only 37% of the speaking roles in new Star Wars films belong to women. But, in any other movie(s) about war, you'd have a really hard time accurately depicting the actual events of the war if you tried to maintain anything
even close to a 37% female speaking roles. It's not an objection to women if they're in these types of films; it's an objection to artificially changing an established reality.
We hardly ever got to see on-screen Star Wars (the Lucas ones) scenes that weren't directly connected to the military/war aspect (Rebels vs. Empire & Jedi vs. Sith). In the rare times we did (Lars/Beru homestead, Mos Eisley, Cloud City, galactic Senate/governance, etc.), we did see women (Beru, Padme, Mon Mothma) without any objection from fans (even the evil white male ones). But, Star Wars is more about presenting the "Wars" part. Lucas wasn't being sexist when he cast the original Rebellion and Empire; he was trying to be realistic.
Making a WWII film that would portray the United States military as anything other than predominantly white male would be an odd choice because it would stretch believability beyond reasonable levels. It might take some of the audience out of the film because we know that the WWII American military was mostly white dudes. In much the same way, Star Wars military (especially the Empire - you know, the
bad guys), had been established as predominantly white male. Sure, Star Wars is merely fantasy, so it doesn't have a historical level of accuracy that needs to be adhered to like WWII. But, Star Wars is a fantasy with a 40-year history of defining what the various militaries/groups/cultures look like. The same way you'd expect people to object to a WWII movie changing the demographics of the "war fighters" simply to fit today's social justice perspective, you could expect objections to a changing of the demographics of "Star Wars fighters" from pre-established canon just to fit that same social justice paradigm.
I don't even care about the casting of the ST or Rogue One. Rey is my favorite new character in the ST, and Jyn was my favorite in RO. I like take-charge/capable characters of either gender. But I don't dismiss other fans' objections over their perceived sense of shoe-horning for the sake of checking off boxes in a broader social agenda. I don't just presume these fans are being bigoted. I listen to what they're saying, and reflect on why they might be saying it.
Star Wars was never about race or gender, and SW fans never struck me as sexist/racist trolls. Throwing labels, and slandering a huge section of this large fan base for having objections to on-screen changes - simply because a small minority of fans make bigoted and stupid remarks - is grossly unproductive. White males don't own a monopoly on stupid, slanderous, and dismissive people. The writer of the SyFy article . . . well, she proves that.