I sometimes wonder if the good intention of accurate representation is going to head down the road of a rebranding of a kind of segregation. Right now some of it feels like needless change for change sake lots of sound and fury but ultimately signifying nothing. Some of it seems to be just a way to sell tickets to the show so to speak.
I have a kind of complex reaction to it.
I think it is a problem with what we had before, where there was just a homogenous group of people controlling narratives or directing them for people outside of their experience and understanding. That's why we got a lot of racist and misogynist things appearing (intentional or otherwise) and some people didn't even know better.
We also had issues where the same stories (some of the flawed) were also being portrayed by people with no understanding of them, which not only could lead to misconceptions and also SHUT OUT people from other diverse backgrounds from being able to portray their own stories.
But this is all subject to change over time. I can't say we're quite in a position where diversity reins and opportunities are the same, but I think we've seen a huge leap in the types of stories being told and stories that are accessible, and opportunities have definitely flowered. It's kind of amazing how foreign films are actually accessible to the general populace of the US now (for example). We can talk about high-quality films like Parasite or just note that Netflix and other streamers actually do include a huge swath of films and shows from other countries. Squid Game (Asian) was a huge success, as was RRR (Indian), and there's so much out there. We have a lot of horror films from other countries. We have a lot of LGBT TV shows. I can go on, but you can just see that it's far more common, acceptable, and accessible.
It might not be in full maturation yet, but at some point our approach can back off a bit to where we can recall that part of being creative is being able to tell stories and portray people who don't necessarily align with our own backgrounds and the militant aspect necessarily to kick start all of this can soften a bit? There is more grey in the mix now, that is for sure.
Based on my background, I can say I really appreciated seeing trans people play their identified genders in films and shows -- and not just as stereotypes but real people. A Fantastic Woman (from Chile) starred Daniela Vega (trans herself, and talented), and the story painful, honest, and passionate. It was really great to see someone representing her own narrative in a well-made film. There's a lot more trans people out there who AREN'T just playing one-note hookers or other silly stereotypes anymore, they are just actual people going about daily business.
Yet at the same time, despite all the crap that is also out there, I have no ill will towards the film "Soldier's Girl" (2003) starring Lee Pace as Calpernia, in a story that actually happened. It was one of Pace's early roles, and despite being male (I think he's come out as queer), he actually evokes the character beautifully. The film itself could have been less melodramatic, but Pace is really great. The same thing goes for "Mr. Robot," where the primary villain Whiterose is played by BD Wong and very clearly revealed as a transwoman over the course of the show (not much of a spoiler). Wong has experience with both male and female roles in his career, and the show "Mr. Robot" actually treats Whiterose with compassion and respect, while also giving her the edge that the show's conspiratorial force needs to possess. He gives her a lot of humanity, and felt very authentic despite him not technically being trans. I don't think I've ever seen her brought up negatively in trans circles either, despite a biological male portraying her. Even Hillary Swank, who says now she shouldn't have played the role that won her an Oscar, really was pretty great as Brandon Teena.
I would like to see some flexibility in how these rules are imposed. We never really want to go back to the period where everyone was shut out of telling their own narratives, or having narratives told by completely clueless people and misrepresenting that perspective. At the same time, stories are art and artists are creative -- they can tell stories and portray people with experiences outside their own. I think works need to be taken on their own terms and whether the stories are told fairly, decently, accurately, and compassionately.
I think those are some of the things involved in the Simpsons' reshifting of voice artists. Trying to be respectful of character's gender (side note: We all know Bart is portrayed by a woman, right?), nationality, racial heritage, etc., and making adjustments as needed over time out of sensitivity, but also (esp for a comedy show) being able to make some droll comments about it too, like Shearer's. It's just kind of ironic, the way he describes.