Audience’s Rights Reform #10: Discrimination should always be defeated
Fiction is a powerful force that shapes the way people think about the world. Stories that depict discrimination without overturning it send a dangerous message: that discrimination is natural, inevitable, or even justified. However, fiction also has the power to challenge and reject discrimination, showing that justice can — and always should — triumph over prejudice.
In any story where racism, sexism, or another form of discrimination is a central conflict, it should always be defeated. Characters who begin as prejudiced should always change for the better, whether that means facing consequences for their views or simply being convinced to change their ways. It should be illegal to portray discrimination in a positive or victorious light. No exceptions.
“That’s just the way it is” is quitter talk. “Destiny” is a myth. Fiction should reflect the truth that discrimination is not an immovable force, but something that can and must be dismantled. We are decades, perhaps centuries, overdue for a world with absolutely zero discrimination of any kind! Therefore, it is hypocritical for works of fiction to portray discrimination as anything other than the gross injustice it is.
Example A: Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry by Mildred D. Taylor
This novel ends in victory for racists. Despite their moral strength and unity, the Logan family cannot overcome the entrenched racism around them. The story ends on a somber note of injustice still in power. A revised ending could show the beginning of real legal or social consequences for the white perpetrators, rather than ending with the family’s helpless anger.
Example B: American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis
This novel critiques consumerism and toxic masculinity, but simultaneously portrays misogynistic violence in a positive light. It ends with Patrick Bateman’s confessions being dismissed, thereby leaving his violence against women unpunished and effectively normalizing the culture that enables him. Many critics argue that the ending is unacceptable, in that sexism is left standing. It must be edited.
Example C: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J.K. Rowling
Besides real-life forms of discrimination, this reform should apply to fantasy racism, such as that of the Harry Potter series. The “blood purity” racism metaphor ends with Voldemort defeated, but house-elf slavery, goblin exploitation, and systemic prejudice against “Muggle-borns” are never dismantled. Racism is superficially addressed but structurally unchanged. The epilogue should be edited to add, at the very least, a footnote that racism is gradually being overturned.
Example D: Disney’s The Fox and the Hound
Perhaps the most famous example of all. There is a reason it has seen thousands of alternate-ending fanfics. The film presents Todd and Copper’s separation as inevitable because they were “born to be enemies.” Amos Slade raises Copper to view foxes as nothing more than prey, enforcing a kind of species-based racism. The movie ends with them parting ways rather than proving that friendship can transcend societal expectations.
This is unacceptable. When a story presents discrimination (including species-based racism) as an unchangeable force, it should be revised to show that love, loyalty, and justice are more powerful than ingrained discrimination. The film is in dire need of a rewritten ending where Todd and Copper remain friends, showing that learned hatred can be unlearned, and that friendship is more important than tradition ever could be. (And again, a mere alternate ending is not good enough. We have those; they’re called fanfiction. True justice means a total replacement ending!)