>and by definition, "Stereotypes" are simplified characters.
>Someone isn't a stereotype just because they fit a profile
>that is common in a cultural group/community.
>
>Vann isn't a stereotype because she's a stressed-out baby mama
>w/ a co-parent that isn't pulling his weight b/c he wants to
>find himself. She is literally half the women I know with
>children right now.
>
>Same w/ Queen Sugar: The Ralph Angel character is angry at the
>world and commits petty crimes. i.e. he is half the young men
>I work with.

>These people exist in our community. It's only a problem if
>they aren't given context, and both Vann and Ralph Angel are.
>Vann not as much yet, but we know 1) she finished her degree
>and Earn didn't (she's a teacher) 2) She's actively dating
>other men. She's not waiting for him to get it together, and
>that's a main source of motivation for him.

Agree all of this, only thing I think Ralph is as thin as paper. At least Vann interacts with the characters/holds her own, all Ralph does is look good while glowering. The story runners want you to see him as a noble but hurt rogue but the way they wrote him is inconsistent. They show him being SUPER protective about his child (which serves the noble part) but he leaves him alone as child kidnap bait while committing an armed robbery? Ain't no babysitters? LOL It feels like something white people wrote trying to sympathize, lol.

Without his foils (the child/ the 'evil' baby mother) he falls apart as a character, at least with Vann if you wrote away her kid and Ern you would still have a struggling woman working a job she doesnt like trying to break out into a creative career.

But I don't wanna slag off on Queen Sugar since its so well made and its a strawman to debating if Glover's good with well rounded women in his narratives or not.