I'm not surprised to see that the "depends" answer is winning out, and no one has the guts to actually come out and say that yes, "whitewashing" as you term it, or taking a character who is a person of color and making that character white, is worse, because they don't actually understand what's so bad about it in the first place.

Allow me to be the first to step up and own this position, because it's one I am also ready to defend.

"Cinders, you're a hypocrite," I hear my hypothetical opponent claiming. "If it's bad to change one's race from POC to white, then it must also be bad to change one's race from white to POC, because EQUALITY."

And to that, allow me to respond with link, which shows the difference between EQUITY and EQUALITY.

Persons of color in the West and by the same token, Western media, are already at a disadvantage. Turn on the TV right now and you are guaranteed to see a white person in the first minute, if not immediately after switching it on. You may have to wait a bit longer to view persons of color. In addition to that, POCs have a huge history of oppression, discrimination, and cultural appropriation -- the last of which is exactly what "whitewashing" is.

Placed into the context of the link, POC are the shortest child, and white people are the tallest child. Give every child the same-sized box to stand on (equality) and it doesn't change or help the problem at all. Give only the kids who need a box to stand on to see, or give the really short one two boxes, and you'll start to understand equity.

Now let's define cultural appropriation -- the theft of another culture's stories, art, clothing or other cultural aspect for the "adoption" and "rebranding" of the dominant culture for their own purposes.

Allow me to illustrate in a metaphor.

Sally sees Amy sewing a dress. Amy has designed the dress herself and added her own flare and style. She has also sewed beads into the dress, with each color having a special meaning and memory for a different time in her life. Sally says, "Gosh, Amy, I love that dress, it's beautiful." Amy says, "Thank you, I worked really hard on it, and it means a lot to me."

Sally has two choices. She could either say, "Could you tell me more about that dress and what it means to you?" and listen to Amy's stories. Afterwards, she might ask, "I would love to borrow that dress sometimes, and share the stories you told me. Is that OK?" Both of these questions is the right choice.

But instead, Sally says, "You know what, Amy, I like your dress so much, I'm going to make one exactly like it and tell everyone what it means to me, which is that it totally expresses my personality. You should take it as a compliment, because something you made is totally perfect for me to wear."

"But it's my dress," Amy says. "I made it for myself, and you don't know what it means."

"It doesn't matter," Sally says, "because it's not about you anymore. It's going to be about me. And there's nothing you can do to stop me."

People in power (mostly white people) have been stealing dresses like this for hundreds of years.

"I get cultural appropriation, Cinders," says my imaginary opponent, "I'm just saying it's a two-way street. White culture is appropriated all the time."

No, it's not, and let me go back to Sally and Amy to explain why.

"But if you where my dress," Amy says, "then what am I going to wear?"

"Don't worry," says Sally, sweetly, kindly. "You can wear my old dresses."

White culture is not appropriated, it's given out willingly. White people want people to be more like them, and are unafraid to point it out when people do it wrong. It's spread through colonialism, through globalization, and through corporations. Everyone wears t-shirts and jeans now, whether you're from Beijing or Capetown.

TL;DR: The only reason people are so upset about making white characters into POCs is because they are realizing that they are not the only story, the only dress, or the only face that matter, and they are finally getting a taste of what POCs have been experiencing for centuries.

Cinders, out.

I am on the it depends side because I think most genderbends are cool so long as they are done in good taste. Like if a person is interesting in seeing how a character would look as a different race. But if the whitewashing is done to degrade POC than it's not okay. In which case I do lean towards the both are just as bad side. My big thing is that it seems hypocritical for a person to make a white character a person of color and then rant at someone and call them trash for whitewashing. I guess another big thing for me is; just because a person is of a majority group doesn't mean it's okay to do something you wouldn't want done to you if that makes sense.

I hope I don't sound like a racist biggot or something. I just have something against people chewing out majority groups and then turning around and doing the thing they just said was 'gross'.

For that I choose to say that it depends on the aim. If that makes sense.

This is meant as a general question and not mean to sound snide, but did you read my comment above explaining why it's not OK for a privileged group to steal characters from an underprivileged group? Maybe I just was not very clear. I do suffer from tl;dr syndrome when I write so much no one listens (and I don't blame them).

So I will try to be briefer here.

Majority groups hold a lot of power on account of their privilege. At the risk of being accused of paraphrasing Spiderman, that privilege comes with a responsibility to recognize it and use it well, not to make things worse. In the same way we scrutinize politicians and other people in power over little indiscretions we would let slide for less powerful people, majority groups in power are also under a greater scrutiny and responsibility for the same reason: they have more power, and are in a greater position to do something about it.

It may seem like there's a blame game going on, or that people who call foul on cultural appropriation are trying to shame the (usually white) guilty parties, but that's not the intention or the point. While there are stupid people who just like to feel superior, the heart of the movement is making privileged groups aware of that privilege and how it effects them and the world around them. It's about providing a perspective, and having the privilege to steal aspects of another culture and make them your own is, believe it or not, a privilege. Being able to sit here on the internet and talk openly about this is a privilege.

I'm gonna be honest, this was one of those times where I didn't read the above comment. I just left my opinion and left. Don't worry about it, I can be a bit of a long commenter depending on the topic.

That's a fair point. Makes enough sense.

That's the only thing I really don't like; the shaming. I think it's totally okay if a person of color politely asks a person not to whitewash it's when the person starts calling the artist scum or trash that makes me...weary. However if the whitewasher is doing it to be a biggot then by all means shaming is fair game. That's also very true, I try to keep an open mind when people make racebend art. I do think that a lot of them are really neat.
I guess my point is that it bugs me when the person just starts screaming at another person. Like sometimes people are simply ignorant and unaware. In which case isn't it better to try to explain nicely and bring awareness rather than making them feel bad for what was probably a mistake? I think it comes down to how both parties handle the issue.

Well, it takes guts either way to come out on one side or the other definitively on any opinion, because there are so many shades of gray in this world. So yes, I stand by my original statement, because taking a definite side means I'm more likely to be challenged. I feel I can stand up to that challenge (and gladly will). Like now :)

I wanna start with your comment about "demonizing white people." (But I choose not to use the pejorative "SJW" as I'm only half-sure about what that means anyway). I totally can see why you feel that's happening. As I mentioned to zanhar1, it can certainly come off that way, and the internet is great at righteous bullying. For the record, I strongly discourage singling any individual person out for their actions. Rather, I would rather use individual poor judgement as a means of leading to a wider conversation. For example, in the case of link. She made a mistake about 120 characters, and was absolutely crucified for it. That didn't change anything. It was just a bunch of people getting off on making someone else look bad.

But talking about where that comment comes from, and what makes it funny to certain people, that's where discussion comes from.

Whoopi Goldberg of all people did this beautifully well. She told a joke, and it made people laugh. It was an offensive joke, and she knew it. So at the end, she asked her audience, "Why did you laugh? Think about that." She wasn't mad at them for laughing -- she wanted them to laugh. She wasn't surprised to see that many were trying hard not to laugh because they knew it was offensive. But she was asking them why they thought it was funny. If you're interested, you can see the clip link. I'll probably post it to the spot later, too. That's how you have discussions like this. Not by shaming, or individual crucifixion. That's just ego sport. No, you have to get at the root of what caused it, and why it effects us the way it does.

BUT I DIGRESS (Sorry).

I don't know what you mean about European cultures not being rep'ed in Disney. Anything from the Brothers Grim or Hans Christian Anderson is all about Europe. The Little Mermaid (Denmark), Beauty and the Beast (France), Snow White (Germany), etc, etc. So... not sure what you're talking about there. Branching out to tell tales beyond Europe is not something they really thought of doing before 1995. Decades of Disney, and they only started that now. It's not very surprising, when you think about it. Most common American fairy tales are European in origin, and those that aren't are exotic and unfamiliar, and it's that quality about them that I think interests people so much.

As to your direct address to me -- I don't call it "whitewashing." Every time I used the term, it was in quotes. I was only using the term that zanhar1 was choosing to use. And there are repercussions, as I said. I knew that by taking that stance, I would be challenged (as well I should be! It's the debate spot, for goodness sake!).

Nonwhite cultures are not seen as more beautiful, simply more exotic. They are different and fun, like going out for Ethiopian food instead of hamburgers. The latter is delicious, and all-American, but predictable. The former is strange and spicy and unusual. But at the end of the day, we always go back to the hamburgers. We like to try other cultures for a night without really bothering to learn anything about them or understand them, and then call ourselves "cultured" because "I ate that spongey Ethiopian bread thing that one time." Just because Disney made movies that take place in exotic locales doesn't meant they have celebrated those places. They were just supplying the variety we crave. We had been eating burgers and fries and Disney gave us foreign food. We liked the taste, we even commended the chefs... but in the end, we still prefer our burgers. AND THAT IS FINE! But it's not glorifying other cultures. If anything, it's reassuring us that "Aren't you glad you live in AMERICA?"