#racially coded

[odinsblog]

Most critics have failed to consider the full implications of the monster's Otherness, overlooking the fact that the main variable upon which the monster's Otherness rests is his physiology, his dark and grotesque body that locates him firmly as an Other within the racial social hierarchy of the early nineteenth-century. (source)

The Whale Frankenstein films have multiple political connotations, including the queer resonances with which James Whale, an out gay man in homophobic Hollywood, sympathetically suffused them. My interest here is in their relation to U.S. racial politics of the 1930s, specifically the rise in lynchings and the 1931 conviction of nine young Black men known as the “Scottsboro boys.” There are, of course, no visible African-American characters in the Whale films, whose setting is an unspecified Europe and whose director and actors are English. But the films indirectly offer a surprisingly radical intervention into American iconographies of race, rape, and lynching. Within their cinematic fantasy space — or perhaps because of their cinematic fantasy space, given that more realist films of the 1930s were more cautious about racial politics — the Whale films offer an antilynching perspective.

In both Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein, for example, the monster is depicted in flight from a crowd of angry townspeople, whose pursuit of him is represented with the visual markers of a lynch mob, including barking dogs, fiery torches, and angry shouts. At one point in Bride of Frankenstein, the monster is strung up on a tree as a cluster of white people surrounds him, their anger sparked by his perceived violation of a white girl.

The monster is presented sympathetically at this moment, his iconography blended with that of Christian martyrdom. Here the Frankenstein monster meets both Christ on the cross and the victim of lynching. Whale’s monster also seems kin to that other 1930s film figure associated with blackness and violence: King Kong. Like Kong, Whale’s Frankenstein monster is as much sympathetic victim as he is source of horror, while the true location of monstrosity becomes the mob who demonizes him.

(continue reading)

[writingwithcolor]

(Part One) Hi, I am planning this fantasy series all set in a completely fictional world. There are no humans. Looking through your blog I already know some of the do's and don'ts of fantasy species and poc, but my question is, some of my fantasy species do have real skin tones and I wanted to give them features from different real races.

I read all your asks about fantasy races but I there wasn't one that talked about a fantasy world with no humans. My question is: is still othering to have poc in that context? Should I include more humans to balance it out?

Fantasy races with features from real human races

From what I gather, you are saying you are writing a fantasy series with no humans, but a variety of fantasy species, some of which have human-like features, including skin tones. I think this is a simple problem. 

When coding cultures and traditions:

Do not:

Code whole ethnicities/ races for whole species.

This would reinforce the racist pseudoscience notions that differences between groups with different outward appearances connote different intrinsic, biological and behavioral attributes.

Do:

Show ethnicities within species.

Show societal attributes that can all be linked to the circumstances of the environment, even if the outcomes are different for different groups living in the same region. 

Avoid dehumanizing coding Lastly, I advise against creating a [human-like features] = [more human personality] / [animal-like features] = [Less human] dichotomy as this too falls in line with “dehumanizing based on physical appearance” reasoning you are looking to avoid in the event your culture-coding ends up revealing any intrinsic biases.

Marika

(Edited for repeat paragraph Dec. 11, 2023)

[alwaysbewoke]

In 1865, enslaved people in Texas were notified by Union Civil War soldiers about the abolition of slavery. This was 2.5 years after the final Emancipation Proclamation which freed all enslaved Black Americans. But Slavery Continued… In 1866, a year after the amendment was ratified, Alabama, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, Florida, Tennessee, and South Carolina began to lease out convicts for labor. This made the business of arresting black people very lucrative, thus hundreds of white men were hired by these states as police officers. Their primary responsibility being to search out and arrest black peoples who were in violation of ‘Black Codes’ Basically, black codes were a series of laws criminalizing legal activity for black people. Through the enforcement of these laws, they could be imprisoned. Once arrested, these men, women & children would be leased to plantations or they would be leased to work at coal mines, or railroad companies. The owners of these businesses would pay the state for every prisoner who worked for them; prison labor. It’s believed that after the passing of the 13th Amendment, more than 800,000 Black people were part of that system of re-enslavement through the prison system. The 13th Amendment declared that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." Lawmakers used this phrase to make petty offenses crimes. When Blacks were found guilty of committing these crimes, they were imprisoned and then leased out to the same businesses that lost slaves after the passing of the 13th Amendment. The majority of White Southern farmers and business owners hated the 13th Amendment because it took away slave labor. As a way to appease them, the federal government turned a blind eye when southern states used this clause in the 13th Amendment to establish the Black Codes.

[worflesbian]

this woman tugging the children out of the way/putting herself in front of them as the klingons walk past.. they're just going somewhere do u think they're gonna attack your kids unprovoked? it's such an interesting detail establishing how klingons are perceived by federation civilians but also worf's served on this ship almost a whole season do you shield your kids from him too? did you used to?

[wiisagi-maiingan]

"If you point out subtle but invasive forms of bigotry then maybe YOU'RE the REAL bigot 🤔" I am biting you and I am killing you.

[sukibenders]

Bridgerton states from season one, through Simon and Lady Danbury, to season two, with the Sharmas, to Queen Charlotte, from the beginning episode to the end spelled out clear as day, that racism exists in this world and many of the characters of colors have been impacted by it in some way. And, supposedly, I'm supposed to believe that Marina, that Kate and Edwina, that they all had more privilege and power than Penelope? No, I don't think so, a lot of things aren't right with that statement.

[somepancakeonline5377]

Quick Rant, I hate people who make Kanaya white because my god. LOOK AT HER. I know she’s white BUT THATS BECAUSE SHES A DAMN VAMPIRE 😭😭

[pinkandpurple360]

i still dont get the racial politics of this show if a character calls another character an imp sometimes is a neutral descriptor (ie “oh that orc” or “my elf friend” in a dnd context) and other times it seems like just saying imp is a slur? and even the imps say stuff like “succubitch” and slut shame the succubi, is that a common thing or is that just bc blitzo is bitter? and thats not even getting into millie being racist against hellhounds?

I know…what is it about?

Millies “dehumanising” of Loona is very under focused, but is stated by Loona and blitz to be bad. “I’m not just his hellhound” “yeah, she’s my daughter” And yeah it seems like Blitz hates succubi because of Verosika. I’m more excited to see their episode than much else. Who gives a shit about stolas story number what, six??? Even Blitzø hasn’t had an episode star entirely on him, maybe Ozzies??isn’t that crazy???

Why code your characters to have races and ethnicities, Black Hispanic Italian Australian French latino etc etc? And almost accurately depict their struggles with racism, but then kiss the monarchies ass? The one you established as being bad? And use your characters of colour to shill that one crying white boy?

The social classes suffer from real in universe racism that is largely based on coded human racism. For example the sloth ring pharmacy conversation. They then play it for laughs half the time but take it seriously the other half of the time.???

And isn’t it funny how for example Moxxie, he kills people as part of his job. He kills other imps if his job requires.

But using a holy weapon to kill demon royalty like Stolas?? Gasp!! Unthinkable. For some reason blitz rejects the idea too. But why? Why are overlords and royals’ lives worth more?

But why? Moxxie has taken lives across the board, he’s an assassin himself. Why is it so bad and evil for striker to be an assassin? Is stolas really that much superior to others in Moxxies eyes?

I stick to stolas because it really seems like Moxxie agrees with the hierarchy now, when before, he said “oh are we so evil for wanting a selfish greedy authoritarian capitalist to keel over dead?” But then, he starts doing what Cherubs did!!! Protecting his life!!

Throughout, he is: cowering to stolas, following his commands, trying to reason with him and talk him down when he’s enraged “they caught us off guard your highness” and has seen him many times attacking Blitz. Screaming at him as if he’s a child so beneath him. He has seen firsthand how terrified Blitzø and arguably more importantly, Millie, are of him. Yet he calls him “your highness” constantly looks after him, is scared when he’s hurt, and basically saves him at the harm and risk to his and Millie’s own lives over and over again, and MnM feel so much sympathy and empathy for this man, but why?

Knowing as well that Moxxie is a victim of abuse by an authoritative figure, and Fizz is as well, yet they’re both so defensive of Stolas, who they don’t know, and who is another abusive authoritative figure, for no reason, It’s just weird.

[blackautmedia]

The Deku Scrubs and Racism in Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask

Content Warning: Depiction of Racism, mention of cannibalism

I briefly touched on this in my Zelda video, but I wanna talk about the way the Deku in Majora's Mask are portrayed.

Zelda utilizes racial coding to depict nearly every group/race in the series. Racial coding if you're not aware is you apply traits associated with our real-world understanding of race, gender, disability and so on to non-human characters. It's neither inherently good nor bad to do and can enrich a story if used consciously and carefully.

It can also be done unintentionally without a storyteller realizing the implications often because they're repeating elements from stories they enjoy without catching these details.

It can also just be used maliciously in making harmful commentary using racial coding as a way to bypass any restrictions or legal issues that would come up in showing something directly. Much like queer coding, it also offers a form of plausible deniability.

A lot of cartoon characters wear gloves for instance because they were designed to embody minstrel caricatures popularized as a way to perpetuate Anti-Blackness. The practice of minstrelsy has never really died out, it's only changed and evolved with time.

Legend of Zelda uses that same coding in its storytelling. The Deku are plant people with a great deal of plant clothing and architecture. Their color also gives them a dark brown appearance which is common with a lot of the savage islander tropes used here.

They're also portrayed as prone to violence and anger, impatient and impulsive in how they wrongfully assume this monkey harmed their princess, and most notably they utilize the trope of boiling their victims alive as a scene of shock for the white explorer:

During the first section in the Southern Swamp, you can't even access the Deku palace as they don't welcome any outsiders except those the same race as them, not realizing that Link is a white boy with magic powers and has taken the form of their bodies (which is a thing all on its own in this context.)

Even then they don't welcome outsiders of any kind but only allow Deku Link entrance to witness a spectacle at a barbaric showing of publicly executing a monkey they believe has kidnapped the princess.

This is a trope commonly used toward several groups of people, many of them often lumped together as vaguely "brown" people, but you see it done with a lot of Native characters, Black people, Pacific Islanders, Asian folks, and many groups in South America. There's real-life overlap of these people--Afro-Indigenous and Latin Indigenous people exist for example--but the point in the eyes of a white gaze is to depict these as some evil and dangerous other to the horror of the white protagonist.

It conflates a lot with race, nationality, and ethnicity and which specific demographic of people will vary, but it's often done by portraying dark-skinned people of some kind in contrast to the civilized, rational white protagonist.

A lot of times this often goes hand in hand with the portrayal of cannibalism and blood rituals which isn't shown in Zelda, but to give an example of what this trope looks like, compare the visuals in Majora's Mask to the 1932 Mickey Mouse episode Trader Mickey:

Note: (you can watch the entire episode here if you'd like.)

There's an entire genre of film that utilizes the savage brown person in with the white explorer protagonist that go into this idea of framing whatever group of people it is weird, uncivilized, dangerous, and thoughtlessly impulsive often utilizing white fears of the "other" to portray them as beings of horror.

Often these films had usually one "good" brown person and often would have a lone woman character, usually the tribe leader's daughter who was objectified for the protagonist and audience and was usually portrayed as the only civilized or "good" ones, often exoticized and hypersexualized. If she wasn't, she was often abused into submission for the white character.

Also adding to this is the...everything about the Woodfall temple and the boss, Odolwa leaning into the same tropes.

I bring this up mostly as a way to provide an educational resource for other Zelda fans so we have a better frame of knowledge to not reproduce these narratives in fanart, fanfics, and so on. Majora's Mask is my favorite Zelda game! But that doesn't mean it's above critique especially in how it utilizes racial coding.

I'm deliberately avoiding showing more graphic imagery of film examples to make this as not triggering as possible, but cannibalism is a common element in these portrayals as well.

This kind of imagery pops up in quite a few Nintendo games and outside the gaming sphere as well. Off the top of my head, there's Kirby Superstar with Wham Bam Rock as portrayed in the SNES version and the Spear guys from the Mario brothers series.

Here's the Zelda Gerudo video if you haven't seen it before.

[pixelatedraindrops]

Omg the sound I just made…

What a lovely thing to wake up to! ✨

Also bonus 💕

YumaGami vibes here :3

[pet-shop-of-horror-fan]

The core issue with Isle of Dogs' use of language is that it was made for a monolingual English-speaking audience.

It's not made of monolingual English-speaking and bilingual (Japanese and English-speaking) audiences. Nor was it made for the general US audience as well as the general Japanese audience.

The Japanese language is not meant to be understood by anyone, either having English speakers translate it or leaving the audience to infer what is being communicated. The spoken English translation often overlays the spoken Japanese. Not even basic Japanese is used for the benefit of English-speaking audiences, only English words from Japanese speakers. Then written Japanese is set dressing. If it's not translated, it goes by so fast that if you understand it, you don't have the time to read it. Then the dogs all have standard English dog names with tags that are written in English. And you know, the whole thing where the dogs, our main characters, speak English.

The movie is designed in such a way that translating to Japanese is impossible without being uniquely awkward.

While there must be much to enjoy if you understand both, the movie does not just favor English, it others Japanese.

When it comes to the movie's use of language, every related issue branches from this and every potential praise has to contend with it.

And yes, there are movies made for both domestic and international audiences as well as ones for both monolingual and bilingual audiences. It can be done.

[gumheel]

i do like bg3 i do love getting to play out my 5e fantasies in a single player rpg and i think it's pretty polished for how huge it is but i cannot empathize with people treating the mains tory or the companions as masterworks of storytelling. the main story i can give a pass for needing to be massive to accommodate the size of the game and i do genuinely think the main three villains there are fun and i like them but for a game that identifies one of its draws as the unique companions and quests it is like... heartwrenching to see just from the volume of content which characters they liked and which they didn't care about

[patron-minette]

Gueulemer as a "Créole"; Race in Les Misérables

When Gueulemer is first introduced to readers in Les Misérables, Hugo is quick to announce that the character was thought to be a “créole”; or “creole” in English translations of the text.

With this “creole” status, it is probable that Gueulemer is not a wholly white, European character— unlike the majority of the other figures that feature in the novel. This raises questions about his attributes and whether they reflect the racist stereotypes and opinions widely held by European society during the nineteenth-century.

Examining Gueulemer's characteristics within the context of race and racist "racial science" in the nineteenth-century contributes to important questions about racial stereotypes and prejudices in Les Misérables. As such, this character serves as a compelling case study to explore how the pervasive racism collectively integrated into European society at this time may have (knowingly or unknowingly) influenced certain aspects of the novel.

Below, I have attempted to analyse Gueulemer’s character traits within the relevant historical contexts to illustrate how his attributes likely originate from a series of racist stereotypes.

*Please be aware that the following post includes sources originating from the nineteenth-century that contain discriminatory and racist language. While I do not condone the use of such language, I have chosen not to alter the sources in order to present them accurately in their original form. All discriminatory language mentioned in the below post is written with quotation marks to highlight that these phrases appear directly in Les Misérables itself.*

“Creole”; A Complex Term

It should first be noted that the term “creole” encompasses a wide range of different ethnic groups. In the footnotes of Julie Rose’s Les Misérables translation, “creole” is defined as “a European born in the tropics, usually in the Caribbean”. However, this definition overlooks many of the other groups that also were considered “creole”. Moreover, it conveniently ignores the fact that “creole” individuals are not necessarily white. In fact, during the eighteenth and nineteenth-centuries, “creole” people were often understood/stereotyped as mixed-race immigrants.

Many creoles were thought to be the offspring of the plaçage custom, wherein white men were permitted to form relationships with women of colour in French and Spanish slave colonies in North America and the Caribbean.

Thus, it is entirely plausible that Gueulemer is mixed-race. Although, it should be noted that Hugo writes that the character was "thought to be a creole”— it is never formally confirmed in the novel. Nonetheless, Gueulemer's physical appearance and personality traits align with numerous racist stereotypes of the time that were commonly held by white, European society towards black and mixed-race individuals.

With Hugo insinuating that Gueulemer is mixed-race and has Caribbean ancestry, he (intentionally or unintentionally) applies a set of preconceived racial notions onto the character. To put it another way— even if Gueulemer is not actually a “creole”, his appearance and personality align with society's racist preconceptions of how a “creole” looks and acts. This is a critical factor to consider when analysing Gueulemer's character in the context of racism and racial perceptions in the nineteenth-century.

The Stereotyped “Creole” Appearance

As previously mentioned, one of the most prominent stereotypes surrounding "creoles" was that they were mixed-race and that they possessed physical characteristics that differed from those of white Europeans. Not only did these include realistic differences such as darker skin and different hair textures, but also numerous stereotyped features that were rooted in racist ideology— which will be discussed further below.

Gueulemer, as originally described by Hugo, possesses many of these physical characteristics— thus indicating that he probably is a mixed-race “creole”:

Gueulemer, bâti de cette façon sculpturale, aurait pu dompter les monstres; il avait trouvé plus court d'en être un. Front bas, tempes larges, moins de quarante ans et la patte d'oie, le poil rude et court, la joue en brosse, une barbe sanglière; on voit d'ici l'homme. Ses muscles sollicitaient le travail, sa stupidité n'en voulait pas. C'était une grosse force paresseuse. Il était assassin par nonchalance. On le croyait créole. [Built along such sculptural lines, Gueulemer could have broken monsters; he had found it easier to become one. With a low forehead, broad temples, a mass of crow’s-feet though not yet forty years old, wiry short hair, bushy cheeks, the beard of a wild boar- you can see the man from here. His muscles cried out for work, his stupidity wouldn’t hear of it. He was a huge lazy force. He was a killer out of nonchalance. He was thought to be a Creole. Julie Rose translation]

Identifiers such as Gueulemer’s “wiry short hair” arguably imply that he is mixed-race. However, it is the shape of Gueulemer's head that would have stood out most prominently as an indicator that the character has black ancestry to the novel's original readership. This can be realised by analysing the racist ideologies held within nineteenth-century Phrenology studies, wherein the shape of an individual’s skull is examined to determine their race and moral character.

Hugo makes a particular point to emphasise that Gueulemer has a low forehead, broad temples, and “the skull of a bird.” While some critics of Les Misérables have analysed the importance of this factor in relation to phrenological studies linking to criminality, the connection to racial phrenology has not been explored to the same extent.

Unfortunately, Gueulemer's head shape aligns with many of the discriminatory, racist stereotypes surrounding the appearance of black people in phrenological studies. An important aspect of Phrenology included the field’s ‘racial studies’, which emphasised the superiority of white, Europeans by comparing their skull shapes to the skull shapes of non-white individuals. In particular, it is the detail of the low forehead that was most prominently associated with multiple ethnic minority groups, including African and Caribbean natives, which supposedly “proved” their inferior minds and “primitive” personalities.

The below excerpt is from a Phrenology book published in the mid nineteenth-century, and it provides further evidence of the similarities between Gueulemer's head shape and the perceived shape of a black person's head in racist Phrenological studies. [source]

It is unclear whether Hugo intentionally or unconsciously aligned the physical appearance of Gueulemer's head shape with these discriminatory stereotypes, but regardless the connections are present and we should acknowledge the racist thought behind them.

The Stereotyped “Creole” personality

Phrenology as a study also fed into the idea that people with certain skull shapes had particular personalities and a pre-determined moral compass. One of the most prevalent phrenological stereotypes was that people with a low or sloping forehead were intellectually inferior and more likely to engage in criminal behaviour. The assumption was that a smaller forehead meant a less developed brain, and consequently, less mental capacity. This stereotype was again applied by white Europeans to individuals with ethnicities different from their own in an attempt to ‘Other’ them.

Unfortunately, Hugo perpetuates this stereotype also within certain parts of the narrative of Les Misérables. We only need to look at Gueulemer’s actions and introductory paragraph to see that he is clearly inferior to the other Patron-Minette members in everything but his brutish strength.

Although it is implied that Gueulemer played an active role in Marshal Brune’s assassination in 1815, for the most part he is explicitly described as being stupid and a “huge, lazy force”— with these characteristics being playing upon for comedic effect in various scenes in the novel. A notable example of this is when Gueulemer randomly takes his mask off and reveals his face to Valjean during the Gorbeau ambush, just so that he “could laugh”. Additionally, Gueulemer’s stupidity is comedically played off in a scene cut from the novel where the Amis and Patron-Minette meet. In this example, Gueulemer entirely misses the mark on the conversation and ends up stating the obvious in a few lines of dialogue after the facts had already been established by other characters:

“Who are you?” asked Enjolras. A voice, in which a police agent could have recognized Babet’s rather proper accent, answered, “We are protestors like you.” “Different from us,” said Combeferre. […] “We are thieves,” cried another voice, that of Gueulemer.

It’s also interesting to pick up on Gueulemer’s general lack of dialogue in the novel compared to some of the other Patron-Minette members, which might even suggest that he is too simple-minded to speak eloquent French fully. In fact, this matter was once commonly felt by French “creole” immigrants, who were often perceived as being unintelligent because they did not speak French fully— but this was because the group tended to speak their own slightly altered version of the language. However, I can only speculate on there being any link here to Gueulemer’s unusual quietness in terms of his dialogue— regardless of the reasons why he does not often speak, he continues to appear as a dim-witted character.

Gueulemer’s stupidity is particularly emphasised with Hugo putting him in "stark contrast" to Babet, not only in physical appearance but also in intelligence, and making a note of it to his readers. The crucial point here being that Babet is described as a learned, ambitious, intelligent man and that he seems to be a white European. Therefore, Hugo inadvertently portrays the same racist ideals that Phrenology sought to demonstrate by comparing Europeans with other races to “prove” their superiority. Gueulemer even appears submissive to Babet, simply carrying out tasks that he wants him to do, he does not even seem to have any ambitions of his own— after all, he is described as being a “killer out of nonchalance” and we do not see him command any orders for the criminal group in the novel.

There is one final “creole” personality stereotype that I feel is relevant to this discussion. Many white Europeans perceived “creoles” (and in general a lot of ethnic minority groups) as being more immoral and prone to corruption. Of course, this stereotype is extremely important when we consider Gueulemer’s place as one of the four heads of the infamous Patron-Minette gang.

It doesn’t end with Gueulemer...

Gueulemer is not the only character of colour in Les Misérables. In fact, Gueulemer is one of three figures in the novel [to the best of my knowledge] who are described in ways that suggest they may not be white. The other two characters I refer to are Javert, who may have Romani heritage (described as “race bohème”), and Homère Hogu, a minor character who is explicitly labelled as black (referred to as a “nègre”) and only appears once in the novel.

Unlike with Gueulemer and Javert, where their race is only implied and ultimately left up to speculation, Hugo's description of Homère Hogu explicitly identifies him by his race— and the character is reduced to a single, racist descriptor only: “nègre”. It is important to note that despite Hugo only using one word to describe this minor character— white European readers would immediately have been able to form a stereotyped idea of Homère Hogu's appearance and personality, thanks to the existing racist perceptions of the “nègre” phrase and character.

I find it significant to mention here how Homère Hogu, like Gueulemer, is also affiliated with the Patron-Minette. Thus, two of the very few non-white characters in the novel are portrayed as criminals (and let us not forget that in Javert's case there is still a criminal history present. After all, his mother gave birth to him in prison and his father was also locked up in the galleys). It should additionally be acknowledged that both Gueulemer and Homère Hogu are connected to African or Caribbean ancestry specifically. This differs from Javert, who is implied to have a different kind of heritage— being described with terms that suggest he has Romani blood. Hence, there is perhaps a necessity to closer examine nineteenth-century attitudes towards race and criminality specifically concerning black individuals, as well as all ethnic minority groups.

The racial labels and stereotypes applied to these two Patron-Minette characters can reveal a lot about the historical attitudes to ethnic minorities that were widely held by white, European society. Even if the stereotyped status of Gueulemer as a “creole” was unintentional on Hugo’s part, it identifies the existence of an unconscious form of cultural racism that pervaded society at the time the novel was written, and which unfortunately still persists today.

[alwaysbewoke]

Imagine how many people JUST LIKE HER are in ICU, TRAUMA, BIRTH AND DELIVERY, NICU, STEP-DOWN UNITS, PYSCH WARDS, ELDERLY CARE, OBGYN, CARDIOLOGY, POST OP CARE, etc…

[cringefaecompilation]

like. idk man. this is what happens when the fandom favorite character is one that is unmistakably a man of color both in series and is portrayed by one but it gets ignored by both his "fans" and haters because nobody knows how to be fucking normal about any character they can't "relate" to so it's either ship him with a white dude or complain about the ship with a white dude he's in

[mydeardoxy]

Black/Racial Coding Doesn't Equal Racial Stereotypes

I can not believe we live in a society that genuinely believes racial coding = 'stereotypes but woke'...

Y'all, racial stereotypes are overexaggerated and meant to generalize a group as a whole....

Yes, racial stereotypes are technically coding, but that doesn't mean racial coding itself is based on stereotypes. [Think square = rectangle but rectangle =/= square.]

If it was all the same, you can not create any characters with a race because anything can be a stereotype by their POV.

Gave your white oc straight hair? "Racist. Not all white people have straight hair."

Gave your black oc dark skin? "Racist. Not all black people have darker skin."

Your character comes from a place with a language other than English, and they dare speak in that language? "Racist. Not every person knows their home language."

All of these rebuttals in isolation are correct, but context is extremely important. Yes, if someone claims an entire group of people have to look like XYZ to be a certain race, that's stereotyping. Making characters who happen to have very common traits among certain races, specifically the one they're meant to represent, is not.

You can literally spin anything into being racist if you view characters with this amount of malicious intent.

Getting so butthurt over someone simply calling a character X-coded (especially when it's confirmed and extremely obvious) is so incredibly dumb.

Getting mad at people critical of an X-coded character because there's no traits for people to actually connect the dots (without reading an outside source) is also extremely dumb.

TLDR: Racial coding is simply giving characters traits to represent a certain race. Racial stereotypes are still coding, but that doesn't mean racial coding itself is inherently stereotypical. Otherwise, every depiction of race is a stereotype and/or racist.