Faunus and the White Fang: The Portrayal of Racism

RWBY is adored by the progressive community due to the portrayal of 4 strong young women, at least 2 of whom are LGBTQ+. Not to mention the inclusion of other LGBTQ+ minor characters.

Despite this, the show is far from flawless, and it’s time to address what is probably its biggest problem: the portrayal of racism. I suspect this may end up being my most controversial post yet, but, like someone said, “It’s both possible, and even necessary, to simultaneously enjoy media while also being critical of its more problematic or pernicious aspects”.

Before I start, I think it’s important to clarify that unlike in conversations about being a woman and LGBTQ+, in this one, I come from a place of no experience, since I am a white European. I do not intend to speak over POC, nor do I claim that my knowledge on the subject is flawless (far from it). Hopefully, this is only the start of a conversation and not the entirety of it.

To be clear: I am not a part of RWBY hatedom. While it’s flawed, I like it, I wouldn’t be doing it if I didn’t. I am criticizing this aspect because racism exists in real life, so how the subject is handled is important and I don’t want the edgelords controlling this entire conversation because their stance on racism in real life is: it doesn’t exist.

Lazy worldbuilding

Like Bright and Crash, RWBY, for the most part, frames individuals as the main culprits of racism instead of the systems which favor certain groups over others. We see this with Cardin, Cordovin, V1 Weiss, Roman and the village people (not those, the ones in the Adam short). Yes, those racist individuals exist, sometimes like caricatures however, they are far from being the only or even the most relevant type of prejudice.

By putting the blame on very specific characters, racism is presented as something easily identifiable and fixable when it’s neither of those things for a significant portion of the population. People often ignore that though laws have changed, biases didn’t magically disappear, segregated neighborhoods didn’t desegregate themselves and the wealth accumulated before wasn’t redistributed. The racist policies of the past created the now and will affect the future unless we try to fix the system.

Keep in mind that the Faunus Rights Revolution happened after the Great War, so… less than 80 years ago. Considering this timeline, it’s just unlikely the Faunus would be equal anywhere, let alone in 2 kingdoms (Vacuo and Vale) and the only thing we see in Mistral is the possibility of discriminating with the ramen shop owner.

The mere fact this sign exists shows discrimination is possible but that shouldn’t be the only thing shown.

Atlas is the exception. In “Tipping Point”, we can hear a conversation about the Faunus, which mentions economic disparity and lack of opportunity, but it quickly fades into the background.

In terms of race issues, Remnant is wildly unexplored, even the renowned for its racism, Mistral. Maybe the writers just thought digging into politic could make for a boring story or maybe they didn’t want to risk alienating the portion of the audience that listens to edgelords. In either case, it makes no sense to have racism as a major theme.

Justifying racism

“Early men were scared to death of the Faunus, and honestly, it’s not too hard to sympathize with that. Seeing something that looks like you and acts like you walk out of the forest and reveal a pair of fangs, can be a little… upsetting.”

Qrow, World of Remnant about Faunus

This does sound a bit like justifying racism and trying to present as understandable. This is an idea that I see a lot. In a review of a book that had a new species and racism as a theme, one of the complaints was that there was no justification given for the treatment like welfare and gangs. Those aren’t causes of racism – they’re just excuses. If anything, they have a lot more to do with stereotypes and wealth disparity caused by racism.

RWBY does make this mistake with Blake’s speech in True Colors, which is reminiscent of when people hold all Muslims accountable for an attack done by one, judging them all for that person’s actions, even though we’d never do that for our own race.

“We’re just as capable of hate and violence as the humans, but I don’t think any of us would jump at the chance to point that out. So why are we letting Adam do it for us? By doing nothing and staying silent, we let others speak and act in our place. And if we’re not proud of the choices they make, then we have no one to blame but ourselves.”

Ghira does the same in the Adam character short, claiming Adam’s violence is the reason why people attack them. If you judge an entire race based on the actions of a few – that’s on you.

Um, actually Antifa is the problem

While the White Fang is not the only group of people fighting for Faunus rights (in the first episode, we learn they interrupted a peaceful protest), they are definitely the ones who are given the spotlight and it’s very unfortunate how they’re portrayed. With the exception of Ilia (and arguably Sienna), they are shown to be so radical that they are not only OK with destroying cities, but also mass murder. They are terrorists and don’t even deserve a face.

In contrast, the racists both deal with their shortcomings fast (Weiss and Cordovin), they all are worthy of sympathy and redemption (even Cardin and the ramen shop owner). I think the writers were going for “racists are people too”, which is a troublesome stance to take when you frame the ones fighting racism as flat out evil.

I imagine that Atlas is going to be shown to be more unforgivably racist and the Faunus will be more sympathetic, but… even so, it kind of feels like trying to make a case for “both sides”. Yikes!

Menagerie

I’m not entirely sure Menagerie was meant to be a paradise. It looks like it, Sun expresses loving it, but Blake quickly claims it’s overcrowded. I’ll give it that it seems a lot less developed than the other kingdoms judging by its constructions, but that’s about it. I think that if they were not going for a positive perspective on it, we should have been made more aware of Menagerie’s drawbacks. 

To be clear, it’s wrong to force someone to live somewhere they don’t want to live, but I think it’s a bit problematic to present it as a paradise when in the real world, white supremacists are increasing and their way of speaking is by defending a white ethnostate, claiming homogenized societies are better.

Due to the lack of good characterization of the rest of Remnant, it makes it harder to believe Faunus really went to Menagerie due to being too jaded to be somewhere else because of racism or how living in Menagerie is bad.

Adam’s scar

I have written about Adam before and just so we’re clear, I stand by my post – I’m OK with him being there to be Blake’s cruel obsessive ex-boyfriend who wants to harm her and that he basically represents the last obstacle to close Blake and Yang’s arcs of running away and facing abandonment issues, respectively.

This been said, tying him with the racism storyline a mistake and the scar was a massive lapse in judgment. I have no idea why someone thought it was a good idea. We’re not supposed to feel sorry for him, it doesn’t make us empathize with him – he’s clearly beyond redemption when it’s revealed and it doesn’t tie to his main motivation, his obsession with Blake, which is the cause of him being in the story. The scar would only make sense if he was an anti-villain, someone with a good cause, but evil methods (Black Panther’s Killmonger). That has never been his story though. He’s always put Blake above his cause and ultimately, he meets his end because of his obsession with her, not because she decides to confront him about his methods. Not to mention that if the scar was tied to his motivation, we should have seen it a lot earlier, not 2 minutes before he died.

Giving him a scar that reveals a cruel treatment of Faunus by humans for no other reason than to show racism is going to have a spotlight in the next volume is incredibly cheap and an awful idea, especially when it basically means nothing for Adam himself and doesn’t humanize him at all – he is literally trying to kill 2 main characters at that point!

(Note: one of the comments brought to my attention that the scar is there so Adam can make Blake feel bad for causing him so much pain that he considers even worse than the one inflicted by the humans, to which I say: it’s still pretty shitty to add a scar that is basically the result of slavery for a reason that has nothing to do with it really. That is one hell of a thing to use so carelessly. Seriously, imagine painting a former slave as a villain and using his scars from being whipped to show just how petty they are).

“Remnant can’t be racist, because…”

I also want to counter a few bad arguments against the idea there can’t be any systemic racism in Remnant.  The examples usually given are Leo being the headmaster of Haven Academy and Neon representing Atlas in the Vytal Festival.

Leo

• Thanks to Raven, we learned Ozpin chose the headmasters in other academies, therefore it’s possible to infer Leo was Ozpin’s attempt at fixing Mistral’s racism.

Neon

• Yes, she studies in Atlas, but the headmaster is Ironwood, chosen by Ozpin and probably is also fighting against racism as far as the academy goes.
• “They wouldn’t allow a Faunus to represent their kingdom”.
  • The equivalent of “I can’t be racist, I have a black friend”. Allowing a Faunus to go helps with the “we’re not racists, we even have a Faunus representing us”.
  • Other than Ironwood, I see no one else who could even have a say in that decision.
• “She wouldn’t accept to represent a racist kingdom”
  • This either reveals an incredibly dishonest take or an almost child-like naivety. I am sorry to burst your bubble, but often people do go against their own interests provided the salesmen know how to sell it (there are Muslims who voted for Trump, women who fought against women’s voting rights, etc.). We can have prejudices against groups we’re part of.
  • Many will gladly go against their groups’ interests, provided they have something to gain (more than a few people spring to mind).
  • In this case, her decision doesn’t even hurt Faunus as far as we know – it just advances her fame.

“The townspeople weren’t racist since they were wearing masks and had weapons and we never see what’s inside of the truck”

I cannot believe I have to dignify this with a response… First, the inside of the truck is irrelevant. We had no reason to believe it was anything bad and one certainly can’t start shooting someone else just because they find them “suspicious”. Murders have happened because of racist jackasses who wanted to play hero by attacking a black “suspicious” person. Second, it’s Remnant, a place so full of monsters, teenagers are allowed to have weapons. They are clearly needed to go from one town to another. Sure, they could have dropped their weapons, but that still doesn’t change they weren’t attacking, not even in self-defense. Third, Ghira was still in charge of the White Fang and we know that during this time, the methods of the group were mostly peaceful, even if they were already wearing masks.

“They allowed an army of Faunus to go to Mistral”

OK, this is by far the most difficult one to justify, but not because of race – it’s just the authorities should have handled it all by themselves and I highly doubt they would allow civilians to fight against a terrorist attack. As for the racism point, the Faunus clearly warned the authorities, so I think it’s very unlikely they were bad guys and their weapons were awfully rudimentary. It’s not a great explanation, but I don’t think it’s more of a hit on verisimilitude than letting civilians fight.

Conclusion

I think the problems in the portrayal of race is due to a lack of understanding of racism, insufficient worldbuilding which should have been done before beginning to write RWBY and, probably, trying to avoid alienating any groups in the audience, which is not likely when the subject is racism and should not be the goal. This resulted in a mess where it feels like there is a need to frame racism as wrong, yet understandable (WoR), easy to fix, and too worried about holding the audience to task, hence sticking to cartoonish racism. While all of that is already pretty bad, it’s impossible to deny that it isn’t made worse by the rise of white supremacist groups.

I wish the writers will be more careful during the Atlas arc, but I fear we might be entering a white savior’s narrative as Weiss will probably be the focus of it. I tend to give credit to RWBY for putting the minority character at the center of their struggle, but ultimately Blake was there to fight her own and I suspect they will do the same with Weiss – she will fight her father for the rights of the Faunus (at least partially) and she will be the one who ultimately fixes racism… yeah, we might be heading to a white savior narrative.

I am hoping for the best while preparing for the worst. Still, no matter how well the next arc is handled, it cannot fix the past volumes retroactively.

One last note, I think the election of Trump should be more than enough to reveal that racism is alive and well, but if you want to understand systemic racism and the portrayal of racism in media, here are a few links:

• 7 Ways We Know Systemic Racism Is Real;
• Adam Ruins Everything (it’s a video);
• NCSC Implicit Bias;
• ContraPoints – America: Still Racist (also a video);
• Bright: the Apotheosis of Lazy Worldbuilding (video about the portrayal of racism in Bright);
• Renegate Cut – Green Book – A Symphony of Lies (also a video).

My other blog post about RWBY:

Filmmaking and Bumbleby