WHY DOES JAMES BOND STILL HAVE TO BE A WHITE MAN?

BY TONI R.

Few cinematic icons are as enduring (or as controversial) as James Bond. Since his first appearance on screen in 1962, Bond has become synonymous with suave sophistication, dangerous charm and a deeply British identity. But as cultural values evolve, so too do the expectations placed on such legacy characters. And for over 60 years, Bond also been a very specific thing - White and male. Every single time.

Each Bond has reflected a version of masculinity that dominated his era. This consistency has made Bond instantly recognisable, but also inflexible. I recently raised my disappointment that film casting continues to be unimaginative – 007 being case and point. The response?  White men have always played Bond, that’s just the way it should stay. The world has changed so much and the belief that letting anyone but a White man step into Bond’s tailored suit is some sort of cultural crime. Why?

The truth is, White men have always had the privilege of being seen as the default, especially in roles that carry power, elegance and complexity. Whether it’s Bond, Batman, Sherlock Holmes or just about any “hero” archetype, it’s been the White man’s domain. I get it - historically, that’s how it was written. It’s the result of decades (and centuries) of storytelling that puts White masculinity at the centre of what it means to be capable, heroic and desirable.

This kind of representation reinforces a deeper issue; it upholds a racial structure where Whiteness, in particular White maleness, is seen as the standard. Everyone else is treated as “other” or a risk. It subtly tells audiences, repeatedly, that power and complexity belong to White men by default and that others must prove themselves just to be considered. That’s a racial hierarchy baked into pop culture, and honestly, it’s long past time we start breaking it down.

When people say, “But Bond is a White man,” what they’re really saying is, “That’s how I’m used to seeing him and I don’t want that to change.” Its nostalgia dressed up as logic. Bond is a fictional character, not a historical one. He’s been reinvented so many times already - different accents, different styles, different tones - so why is race or gender the hill to die on?

Bond films have long been criticised for their treatment of women. Traditionally, “Bond girls” have existed more as decorative accessories than fully fleshed-out characters, often functioning as romantic conquests or narrative tools to advance Bond’s storyline. Only recently have we seen glimpses of real depth - characters like Vesper Lynd or Nomi showed that women can be more than accessories in Bond’s world.

But it’s still not enough. The franchise keeps dipping its toe into modernity while holding onto outdated tropes with a death grip. Why not go all in? Why not have an Asian Bond? A Black Bond? A woman taking the lead and not as a side character?

And before anyone says, “Just make a new character instead of changing Bond” then sure, that’s an option. But it’s also a bit of a dodge. That logic basically says, “Let us keep the iconic roles, you can have the leftovers.” Why not let underrepresented actors take on the roles that carry cultural weight?

So no, the fact that white men have always had the role doesn’t mean they always should. It’s time to let go of that tired idea and admit that James Bond, like the world around him, can and should evolve. Bond is a fictional character, not a historical figure. Fictional icons, unlike real-life personalities, can and arguably should evolve to remain relevant. Much like how Shakespeare’s plays are now performed with diverse casts to reflect modern societies, Bond, too, could be reinterpreted to speak to a broader audience.

Changing who gets to play Bond isn’t about tokenism. It’s about rebalancing who gets to be at the centre of the story, who gets to be the symbol of cool, confident Britishness. It’s about refusing to accept that the most iconic roles should be forever reserved for one kind of person, simply because that’s how it’s always been. Bond doesn’t have to be White anymore. He doesn’t even have to be a man! The core of the character who is resourceful, stylish, morally grey and emotionally complex has nothing to do with skin colour or gender. That stuff is just packaging. And the world is more than ready for a new package.