I don't really appreciate that line of reasoning. Also, not for female superheroes, of which Kitty Pryde is a prominent Jewish female superhero, who could be a much bigger star in the future X-Men films than how she's been utilized in the past.
Dude, again, all for inclusion of Kitty and more women heroes and more Jewish heroes, and yes, here's to her as a much bigger star in the MCU X-Men.
But unless you would call it racebending if a White actress was cast as her, then you kinda agree with the reasoning, even if you don't appreciate it.
Just because she's White doesn't mean her inclusion isn't more important than other more milquetoast/WASPy folks. Racial diversity isn't the only important diversity.
It seems like a hair splitting argument. To me there's no verifiable proof on the amount of jimmies rustled for one change vs. the other.
Not to mention, if you keep Wolverine as a white male and one of the top heroes, that will also ruffle a lot of feathers as well if you think about it. The problem is that there is lack of inclusion, gender and racial diversity.
Well, if we really want to fix that. Then we have X-23/Laura, who became Wolverine the comics. Make her the new Wolverine of the MCU, just like Marvel Studios is using the current version of Captain Marvel, Carol Danvers, which started fairly recently in 2012. They picked the latest female iteration fo Captain Marvel over Mar-Vell and Genus-Vell; two white male versions of Captain Marvel.
There's no verifiable proof of something that hasn't happened, sure, but do you think that getting gender inclusion ruffling fewer feathers is better than getting the same amount of inclusion ruffling a lot of feathers? Is the principle sound?
And we can confirm that people like Wolverine more than they like, say Beast, right? Like, I don't have a list of polls on hand, but you've gathered that, too, right? They have more emotional investment in the "bigger" character? Is that splitting hairs?
I don't get how including Wolverine, alone, will ruffle feathers. Describe the person who would be upset at lack of gender inclusion for a majority female team that includes Wolverine, because the only people that could be upset are hardcore Laura fans, who don't care about how much gender inclusion there is if she's not there.
Captain Marvel is a poor example because not only is Mar-Vell not the most popular version of the character, but unlike with Logan/Laura it's a solo property so it's either/or. You can make the CM movie female-centric OR you can have Mar-Vell as CM, but not both. Because the X-Men aren't and should never have been the Wolverine movies, you can have a female centric X-Men AND include Logan. You can have your cake and eat it too, so why are you acting like they can only eat cake?