The problem or difference with acting and playing roles is "where do you draw the line" as far as being true to a character? This is a world of make believe.
Acting is (or should be) the illusion of truth. If the illusion doesn't work well enough, that's one thing. If it works well enough, that's another.
You could start with the race argument and say, "Only Asians should play Asian roles, only Native Americans should play Native American roles," because that's true to the character. Then you could add, if the character is 25 years old, that nobody younger or older than the character should play the part. No 35-year-olds or 20-year-olds, because that would be a lie. Then, if the character is also Jewish, you could say, "No Catholics or Muslims need apply." If the character is also an alcoholic, you can add, "Nobody who hasn't suffered through the disease of alcoholism should be considered for this part, because they would be lying about who they are." Now suppose the character was also a serial killer with five children. Do actors need to have previous experience in those areas to be true to the part?
If you start down the road, where do you stop and say, "I can live with the illusion of truth, rather than the truth itself?"
"Jaws is the Citizen Kane of movies."
blocked: logan2, Diamonds3, Hamilton22