Scientific American opinion piece: Star Wars & the Jedi are problematic, racist, sexist, and ableist

[Dial H For Hero]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-the-term-jedi-is-problematic-for-describing-programs-that-promote-justice-equity-diversity-and-inclusion/



The article starts out by discussing the use of the acronym JEDI (justice, equity, diversity and inclusion) as it pertains to programs promoting social justice, but the bulk of it is an attack on Star Wars, Disney and fandom.. Some quotes:

The Jedi are inappropriate mascots for social justice. Although they’re ostensibly heroes within the Star Wars universe, the Jedi are inappropriate symbols for justice work. They are a religious order of intergalactic police-monks, prone to (white) saviorism and toxically masculine approaches to conflict resolution (violent duels with phallic lightsabers, gaslighting by means of “Jedi mind tricks,” etc.). The Jedi are also an exclusionary cult, membership to which is partly predicated on the possession of heightened psychic and physical abilities (or “Force-sensitivity”). Strikingly, Force-wielding talents are narratively explained in Star Wars not merely in spiritual terms but also in ableist and eugenic ones: These supernatural powers are naturalized as biological, hereditary attributes. So it is that Force potential is framed as a dynastic property of noble bloodlines (for example, the Skywalker dynasty), and Force disparities are rendered innate physical properties, measurable via “midi-chlorian” counts (not unlike a “Force genetics” test) and augmentable via human(oid) engineering. The heroic Jedi are thus emblems for a host of dangerously reactionary values and assumptions. Sending the message that justice work is akin to cosplay is bad enough; dressing up our initiatives in the symbolic garb of the Jedi is worse.

........

Star Wars has a problematic cultural legacy. The space opera franchise has been critiqued for trafficking in injustices such as sexism, racism and ableism. Think, for example, of the so-called “Slave Leia” costume, infamous for stripping down and chaining up the movie series’ first leading woman as part of an Orientalist subplot. Star Wars arguably conflates “alienness” with “nonwhiteness,” often seeming to rely on racist stereotypes when depicting nonhuman species. The series regularly defaults onto ableist tropes, memorably in its portrayal of Darth Vader, which links the villain’s physical disability with machinic inhumanity and moral deviance, presenting his technology-assisted breathing as a sinister auditory marker of danger and doom. What’s more, the bodies and voices centered in Star Wars have, with few exceptions, historically been those of white men. And while recent films have increased gender and racial diversity, important questions remain regarding how meaningfully such changes represent a departure from the series’ problematic past. Indeed, a notable segment of the Star Wars fandom has aggressively advocated the (re)centering of white men in the franchise, with some equating recent casting decisions with “white genocide.” Additionally, the franchise’s cultural footprint can be tracked in the saga of United States military-industrial investment and expansion, from debates around Reagan’s “Star Wars” Strategic Defense Initiative to the planned Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (another “JEDI” program), sometimes winkingly framed with Star Wars allusions. Taken together, the controversies surrounding Star Wars make JEDI at best an inappropriate way to brand justice work—a kind of double-edged sword (or better yet, double-bladed “lightsaber”). At worst, this way of branding our initiatives is freighted with the very violence that our justice work seeks to counter.

.....

JEDI connects justice initiatives to corporate capital. JEDI/Jedi is more than just a name: It’s a product. Circulating that product’s name can promote and benefit the corporation that owns it, even if we do not mean to do so. We are, in effect, providing that corporation—Disney—with a form of free advertising, commodifying and cheapening our justice work in the process. Such informal co-branding entangles our initiatives in Disney’s morally messy past and present. It may also serve to rebrand and whitewash Disney by linking one of its signature product lines to social justice. After all, Disney has a long and troubling history of circulating racist, sexist, heterosexist and Orientalist narratives and imagery, which the corporation and its subsidiaries (like Pixar) are publicly reckoning with. Furthermore, Disney is an overtly political entity, critiqued not only for its labor practices but also for its political donations and lobbying. Joining forces with Disney’s multimedia empire is thus a dangerous co-branding strategy for justice advocates and activists. This form of inadvertent woke-washing extracts ethical currency from so-called “JEDI” work, robbing from its moral reserves to further enrich corporate capital.
.....

Aligning justice work with Star Wars risks threatening inclusion and sense of belonging. While an overarching goal of JEDI initiatives is to promote inclusion, the term JEDI might make people feel excluded. Star Wars is popular but divisive. Identifying our initiatives with it may nudge them closer to the realm of fandom, manufacturing in-groups and out-groups. Those unfamiliar or uncomfortable with Star Wars­­—including those hurt by the messages it sends—may feel alienated by the parade of jokes, puns and references surrounding the term JEDI. Consider, as one example, its gender exclusionary potential. Studies suggest that the presence of Star Wars and Star Trek memorabilia (such as posters) in computer science classrooms can reinforce masculinist stereotypes about computer science—contributing to women’s sense that they don’t belong in that field. Relatedly, research indicates that even for self-identified female fans of Star Wars, a sense of belonging within that fandom can be experienced as highly conditional, contingent on performances “proving” their conformity to the preexisting gendered norms of dominant fan culture. At a moment when many professional sectors, including higher education, are seeking to eliminate barriers to inclusion—and to change the narrative about who counts as a scientist, political scientist, STEMM professional or historian—adopting the term JEDI seems like an ironic move backward.

[CrackityJones75]

1. I just fucking can't anymore.

[Silent3]

2. Lighten up, Francis n/t

[LymphocyteLover]

41. LOL, right?

[Celerity]

3. Adopt this claptrap as the core philosophy of our platform & the Rethugs will be pushing 67 Senators

and 300 House members.

The article reads like an Onion caricature of uber faux wokeness.

[NYC Liberal]

6. Perfect example of Poe's law.

[LymphocyteLover]

42. exactly!

[Dorian Gray]

22. Yep

[Elessar Zappa]

35. Agree.

It does almost seem like satire.

[Decoy of Fenris]

5. I thought this was the Onion. Truly sad times we live in.

This article reads like the person who wrote it never actually checked the lore of the Jedi or Star Wars as a whole. It's a damn tragedy that Scientific American has fallen so far away from journalistic integrity.

[PatSeg]

39. And the writer has run out of things to write about

Creating an issue where none exists. I started to read it and it gave me a headache.

[AnyFunctioningAdult]

7. A few years ago this WOULD have been The Onion

All this stuff does is help Republicans get elected.

[Downtown Hound]

8. I think this video sums up my feelings about this article.

https://vimeo.com/276940268

[whathehell]

20. Tracey Ullman..

Hilarious!

[PatSeg]

40. Oh, that is brilliant, thanks for sharing!

[BannonsLiver]

9. LOL

CRINGEWORTHY.

[sakabatou]

10. *facepalm*

[andym]

11. When did Scientific American become a satirical magazine?

The article is ridiculous ammunition for the Right's culture wars. Whats worries me is how the well-educated authors of this piece could have possibly written it and how the editors of Scientific American thought it worthy of publication.

[TreasonousBastard]

12. It took 5 of them to scratch this out? I suspect this was really meant... t...

for the April issue, but got lost on the way

[nolabear]

13. OFFS. This is why we can't have nice things.

I won’t bother to go into it but those arguments could be used against everything from Bugs Bunny to the Kama Sutra.

[vercetti2021]

14. The buttfucking hell is this?

The Jedi and rebellion were the heroes trying to overthrown tyrannical government. Shit that might be happening here soon, we are the fucking rebels and Jedi.

[jg10003]

15. this is the type of thing that gives political correctness a bad name

[GulfCoast66]

16. Always suspected Yoda secretly hate people of color. Who weren't green.

I’ve read a lot of crazy bullshit on DU. This may take the case.

And it ends with a subtle attack on science majors.

Perhaps a group frustrated humanities major writing this dribble?

That a person could write this and keep a paying job is not encouraging.

[Hav]

17. I'm relieved seeing the other replies in this thread

This is a typical case of believing to have recognized one fact in a movie/book and then you bend reality to make everything else fit to what you want to be true.
What a waste of resources but I'm sure the authors feel good about themselves and they must believe they figured out something really important.

[catsudon]

18. i agree

it is like d&d making people worship devils again.

[Sgent]

19. Can someone explain

why this is published in SciAm? I'm a subscriber but this is so far out from their usual that it seems like the editor in chief is paying a ransom.

[fishwax]

38. because it's specifically about using JEDI for diversity initiatives in STEMM

It's not cancel culture coming for our space operas or woke culture trying to ruin some fun fantasy, it's just: "hey, diversity and inclusion initiaves are important in our fields,, but maybe we shouldn't use JEDI to brand them."

[WhiskeyGrinder]

21. "An attack" lmaoooooo

[Dorian Gray]

23. This is literally a gift to the

anti-woke brigade.

[Takket]

24. This isn't a satirical piece meant to mock cancel culture?

Because it sure reads like one.

One person’s silly opinion. As of told my wife many times, if you look hard enough you can find a group of people in this country that want to ban chocolate and puppy dogs. Doesn’t mean they deserve any attention.

Can’t believe scientific American would publish something that absurd. The rethugs are ripping our country to pieces and their idea of journalism and science is to go after a fantasy movie series. Not helpful.

[d_r]

25. Not only stupid

But this is just wrong, like innacurate.

[Patton French]

26. Good grief..

..this can’t be serious.

[cinematicdiversions]

27. Glad to see onion writers branching out to other publications.

I know this technically isn't a parody. A lot of things like this are technically not a parody. But it's effin hilarious.

[Buns_of_Fire]

28. "This is not the conclusion you're looking for," said Obi-Q Kenobi. nt

[Dial H For Hero]

30. Per the article, Obi-Wan was being toxically masculine and gaslighting those poor stormtroopers

when he used Force Suggestion on them.

[edbermac]

29. Off the scale

[ProfessorGAC]

31. A Preposterous Stretch

How did this overreaching, and over thought nonsense end up in Scientific American?
Was it a slow month for science?
The thing is full of "bad thing, even though there are good things". And, bringing up the Leia costume while neglected that she kills Jabba without a weapon & becomes a leading general in the rebellion is cherry-picking. She's a strong character from the very beginning. Geez, she's involved in a rebellion in the first movie!
I feel sorry for the author who seems incapable of suspending disbelief & just enjoying a story, rather than go through torturous stretches to find faults existing only in their mind.
Too clever by 3/4ths.

[Marcuse]

32. Next: Snow White and the Seven Little People.

[Coventina]

33. Pieces like this is why the Right is proudly anti-intellectual.

[Johnny2X2X]

34. Idiotic Article

It's a fantasy, it's not required to be inoffensive to all people all the time.

[Jedi Guy]

36. I feel attacked... N/T

[fishwax]

37. context is everything, and it isn't really an attack

The argument of the article is not that star wars or Disney are bad, but that the JEDI allusion is not a productive label for justice/diversity committees or initiatives within STEMM, and the movement for advancing such values as justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion might be better served by using a different acronym.

Big fucking deal. Nobody's saying you(/we) can't enjoy your(/our) star wars.

[Dial H For Hero]

44. If this isn't an attack, I'd hate to see what one looks like.

The argument of the article is not that star wars or Disney are bad

They describe the Jedi as prone to (white) saviorism, toxically masculine, using "phallic" lisghtsabers, ablest, practicing eugenics, and dangerously reactionary,.

Star Wars itself is said to be problematic, sexist, racist, ablest, and at least in small part responsible for US military-industrial expansion.

Disney is described as racist, sexist, heterosexist, Orientalist, and then mentioned as having troubling labor practices, political donations, and lobbying.

Regardless of the validity (or not) of any of the above, describing this as an attack is certainly fair.

Nobody's saying you(/we) can't enjoy your(/our) star wars.

I agree, no such assertion was made. And....?

[fishwax]

45. yeah, but specifically within the context of *advancing diversity and inclusion*

It's a critique, sure, but specifically within that context. Within that context, I don't really see the observation that Disney "has a long and troubling history of circulating racist, sexist, heterosexist and Orientalist narratives and imagery" as an attack. (Nor is it the same simply describing Disney as racist, etc.)

Nobody's saying you(/we) can't enjoy your(/our) star wars.


I agree, no such assertion was made. And....?

If that was the point of the article, then I'd buy it as an attack.

[Dial H For Hero]

54. Unless I'm mistaken, their article actually spends more time discussing what they perceive as the

faults of the Star Wars universe, its characters, its fans, and Disney than they do the JEDI diversity program itself. The article begins and ends discussing the program, granted...but after reading the entire article, I now know more a obout why these people don't like Star Wars, Disney, and fandom (Star Trek is mentioned negatively in passing as well) than I do the JEDI program.

[fishwax]

58. you are mistaken, in the sense that everything mentioned about star wars and disney is

specifically with respect to whether JEDI is an apt label for initiatives and committees promoting diversity. They don't talk about "the JEDI diversity program itself" because it isn't a specific program in question ... rather, JEDI has become an increasingly common label at various schools, companies, and organizations for such diversity initiatives.

The whole point of the article is that the authors don't think this is a good label for such programs, and everything that they say about star wars and disney is specifically with respect to that question/claim. (They say at the end that at least some of the authors are fans. And of course there isn't anything inherently inconsistent with (a) suggesting that Disney has produced some pretty problematic stuff over the years and (b) still finding interest/enjoyment/quality in disney/pixar movies.

The point is not "star wars sucks because of these things and we don't enjoy it and people shouldn't enjoy it," but rather "because of these things a star wars reference may not be the most appropriate frame for this specific purpose."

For the purpose of analogy, one might, for instance, really like the music of Led Zeppelin, and yet still argue that, because of Jimmy Page's history with underage girls and recurring potentially misogynistic themes (viewing women consistently/exclusively as sex objects) in their lyrics, a Led Zeppelin song wouldn't be a good choice as a theme song for a women's empowerment seminar.

[Silent3]

43. What's funny is that most people here on DU are reacting as I do, with an eye-roll to this article..

...but on other occasions, when someone has tried to make the point that someone can be too woke, they were largely met with fierce opposition claiming that even saying "too woke" was to be guilty of repeating right-wing talking points, and/or met with claims that "woke" was unalloyed goodness, so that it was impossible to be too woke.

For those who may have resisted any such criticism in the past, from the likes of James Carville and even Barack Obama, I offer you Exhibit A in how it's possible to be way, way too woke, and end up hurting the cause of the kind of righteous wokeness we really need.

[ismnotwasm]

46. Ah yes. And the typical responses reminding me of gamergate.

This isn’t the first time this observation has made.

[CrackityJones75]

47. Its a franchise that has spanned 5 decades

Its a franchise that has spanned 5 decades. Of course you are bound to find some things wrong in there (think Phantom Menace). But holy hell does this piece make some amazing stretches and gets a lot of things flat out wrong.

[Jedi Guy]

48. There were so many inaccuracies it was hard to pick a favorite.

Were I forced to make a choice, the accusation that Vader is ableist would be it, though. The whole point wasn't that he was evil because he was more machine than man. He was more machine than man because he turned evil. He wasn't born that way, he ended up in the armor because he went rogue and was wildly overconfident in his power. Had he remained a Jedi, he'd have kept his original equipment (excepting the forearm he lost in Episode 2, of course).

It's like the writer(s) had only the vaguest idea about a lot of things in Star Wars. It calls to mind a writer from some conservative rag who wrote an article about Mass Effect when it first came out. He accused it of essentially being a sex simulator because of the romantic subplot... despite the fact that only bare ass was shown, and that for maybe two seconds during a single scene. The article made it very plain that he'd never even seen the game, let alone played it.

[CrackityJones75]

51. Exactly!

That was the part that really threw me. Like it was just lazy writing a d they had no idea what the story was about at all.

[cinematicdiversions]

62. I can assure you gamergate deserved scorn and confusion.

This article deserves an eye roll and a loud not helping.

[Bucky]

49. That "white saviorism" really bothered me with both Mace Windu and Yoda.

[CrackityJones75]

52. Not to mention all the other non-human jedi.

[Dr. Strange]

59. That seems to be a theme with that particular actor.

The actor that played Mace Windu? He's in multiple videos throwing around the n-word. As in, the hard-r version.

[LanternWaste]

50. Still at it, eh?

I get it... sometimes it's fun to pretend one opinion is worth looking at in our desire to force a narrative. As long as you realize it does no one any real credit.

[Zeitghost]

53. It's no so much that someone had this opinion

It's that this article passed editorial review at a major, well established science magazine. The lengths the author had to go to in order to twist, misrepresent and outright lie about the Star Wars franchise in order to form their opinion is embarrassing, especially in a publication that has featured the writings of some of the most brilliant minds of the last 150 years.

[The Revolution]

55. Utter garbage

Why would you publish this nonsense? Started off thinking it was satire, then gave up on it part way through.

This won't accomplish anything but piss people off. Then we on the Democratic/Progressive side get saddled with this shit and it drives voters away. Fuck, just reading that I can feel my own "chance of voting for a Republican" needle moving from 0% to 1%.

[OhioBlue]

56. OMG. just no.

[Shellback Squid]

57. it's a story for that era's minds, dissect Odysseus with current American human values

[Mad_Machine76]

60. I don't even know where to go with this

I can’t even read much of this without my eyes rolling out of their sockets.

[Ace Rothstein]

61. LOL

Being outraged about everything has to be exhausting.