Identity Politics and Representation in Comics

Sacrificial Lamb · Post by **Sacrificial Lamb** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:15 am

DSMatticus wrote:Sacrificial Lamb, no one will give a shit about what you have to say until your argument is more than "b-b-but spiderman used to be white!" Again, your argument is "separate drinking fountains for everyone," where for some ridiculous reason it is completely okay to reinvent characters as long as they keep the same gender, skin color, and sexual preference, because those are apparently the parts of the character you consider truly important.

It is blatantly bigoted. Yes, you're a run-of-the-mill shitbag, everyone knows it, move on. If you are not broadly offended by new characters replacing old characters but are specifically offended by new minority characters replacing old straight white male characters, you're the worst kind of asshole.

And you're as disingenuous (and butthurt) as PL is. What a surprise.

Of course, you know that isn't my argument at all, but if you keep painting your philosophical opponents with the same dishonest rhetorical brush.....eventually, you'll be able to con others into actually believing it.

So keep at it, cupcake.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:22 am

Remember when you went to another forum and whined about how we are meanies and you hate us and you would never make the mistaking of posting here again?

Can we go back to that?

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:27 am

I'm like to point out that while Lamb is nominally "on my side" in that he agrees with me about PL being a scumbag, I find pretty much all of what he says obnoxious at best and reprehensible at worst. There are good reasons not to like the new Thor. Lamb's reasons aren't among them.

RedstoneOrc · Post by **RedstoneOrc** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:43 am

PhoneLobster wrote:
Omegonthesane wrote:PL, if your hypothesis were to hold water, it would require that CaptainComics be absolutely fine with the handover of the Captain America title to Bucky Barnes, a white heterosexual American.
It's a post hoc lame excuse, much as his "But my best friend is a Muslim Female Superhero!" justification.

PL you're being a little shit with no argument. Quit it and bow out. Or yell at sacrificial lamb, FaRT, or i don't know Occluded Sun. Wait your nemsis Frank said something on this topic, talk shit to him everyone expects it.

Darth Rabbitt · Post by **Darth Rabbitt** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:51 am

Lamb, everyone who is not Phonelobster will tell you that Phonelobster is a disingenuous asshole. And everyone who is not you will tell you that you are a disingenuous asshole, because you are. You started with "propaganda in comics is bad" and then moved to "propaganda that caters to identity politics is bad but propaganda that contributes to racism and war isn't" and then moved to "propaganda is ok as long as it's about movements I don't think about, so I don't dislike them." Which is basically just shuffling words around slightly, in a way that frankly makes you sound worse.

You also are pretty clear about the fact that you don't want minorities taking up the mantle of other superheroes, and frankly DSM isn't wrong in saying that has a lot of parallels to segregation. You spew bigoted bullshit and refuse to talk about it further, claiming some sort of moral superiority for doing so. In other words, you are a passive-aggressive myopic little shit.

I'll take it a step further: you're a walking piece of propaganda. You're "sjw" propaganda about what the enemy looks like. You're a caricature. You make them look better. And you are whining about the whining about minority representation that you say you hate so much (and about how you feel oppressed as a straight white cis male comics fan), so you're not even ideologically consistent in your passive-aggressive bigoted verbal diarrhea.

Sacrificial Lamb · Post by **Sacrificial Lamb** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 10:10 am

Kaelik wrote:Remember when you went to another forum and whined about how we are meanies and you hate us and you would never make the mistaking of posting here again?

Can we go back to that?

Don't be salty, sweetheart. I'm here for you.

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 10:26 am

You are not Milo Yiannopoulus, SacLamb. Stop trying to be Milo Yiannopoulus. You are bad at it.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 11:18 am

RedstoneOrc wrote:PL you're being a little shit with no argument. Quit it and bow out.

I would rather just wait.

Captain Comics will slip up again. Or he will manage to keep the facade going... but, after thousands upon thousands of words, just you know, "coincidentally" come to the totes justified with a small book conclusion that he just coincidentally hates basically all the current minority character switches for a vast grab bag of really tenuous excuses reasons.

All I really have to do is wait.

Sacrificial Lamb · Post by **Sacrificial Lamb** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 11:26 am

Grek wrote:I'm like to point out that while Lamb is nominally "on my side" in that he agrees with me about PL being a scumbag, I find pretty much all of what he says obnoxious at best and reprehensible at worst. There are good reasons not to like the new Thor. Lamb's reasons aren't among them.

When I read comic books, you know what I don't like? Gimmicks. Cheap-ass, unimaginative gimmicks. They had way too many gimmicks in the 1990's (foil covers, multiple covers, Spiderman Clone Saga, and other such bullshit), and now the gimmicks are much more blatantly politically motivated.

As for the new Thor? The new Thor is poorly written third-wave feminist garbage. In one of these comics, she-Thor and Absorbing Man fight....with Absorbing Man commenting that she should get an identity of her own. In a bizarre twist of POOR CHARACTERIZATION, Absorbing Man's girlfriend/wife, Titania, beats him up, and then DELIBERATELY allows female Thor to beat the living shit out of her.....presumably in the name of "female solidarity" (or some other such bullshit).

That is COMPLETELY out of character for Titania. Her actions have always been motivated by proving that she's the toughest, most bad-ass chick on the planet. But Absorbing Man gets easily pulped by her, and then allows herself to be easily pulped by she-Thor.....all in the name of "muh Feminism".

Now.....it is actually possible to write intelligent satire about masculinity without making a classic male icon into a girl. Shoehorning a female character into a male character's position means that she is still defined by the male character, AND NOT BY HER OWN LEGACY.

Marvel Comics could EASILY write stories about Lady Sif, Valkyrie, Kelda, or whomever other Asgardian goddesses are out there. Are they giving us that? No. Instead, they're giving us cheap marketing gimmicks and an ever-increasing amount of political pandering.

I do not like it when legacy characters are co-opted by political ideologues for the sake of making statements about identity politics, or just politics in general. That was the type of bullshit that initially drove me away from comics during Marvel's "Civil War", "The Death of Captain America", and Spider-Man: One More Day events.

Events like that had characters behaving OUT-OF-CHARACTER for the sake of the story. I hate that shit. Now characters are behaving out-of-character for the sake of identity politics bullshit. For example, have you noticed that when Thor lost his hammer.....he no longer behaved like himself, and with no explanation for it? He stopped behaving like the charming, noble, chivalrous character that he used to be. And they had Malekith easily dismember Thor (severing his arm), even though he should be no match for Thor in either strength or hand-to-hand combat ability. In the Thor comic, it was stressed by Thor's enemies that Thor was HELPLESS without his hammer, WHICH MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE. I don't like it when writers become LAZY, and decide that continuity and proper characterization doesn't matter......all for the sake of a cynical marketing event, a GIMMICK.

Now after all this....does this mean that I spam comic book forums, and have giant psychotically retarded meltdowns about it? No, because I know better. Instead, I just take the wiser course of action, AND VOTE WITH MY WALLET. So if you want to label what I've said as "reprehensible", knock yourself out. But I do not see how you can possibly object to my desire for minority characters TO HAVE THEIR OWN IDENTITIES, without the writers forcibly latching them on to legacy characters.....all for the sake of cynical marketing ploys, and political pandering.

Sacrificial Lamb · Post by **Sacrificial Lamb** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 1:24 pm

Darth Rabbitt wrote:Lamb, everyone who is not Phonelobster will tell you that Phonelobster is a disingenuous asshole. And everyone who is not you will tell you that you are a disingenuous asshole, because you are. You started with "propaganda in comics is bad" and then moved to "propaganda that caters to identity politics is bad but propaganda that contributes to racism and war isn't" and then moved to "propaganda is ok as long as it's about movements I don't think about, so I don't dislike them." Which is basically just shuffling words around slightly, in a way that frankly makes you sound worse.

Nope. Never said that. What I didn't and don't give a shit about is comic book propaganda from World War II, BECAUSE IT WAS FROM A DIFFERENT ERA OF HUMAN HISTORY. And thus, not particularly relevant to the dogmatic progressive horseshit that is so prevalent in mainstream comic books today. But if you have a direct quote from me saying what you claim I said, then I'm all ears.

Darth Rabbitt wrote:You also are pretty clear about the fact that you don't want minorities taking up the mantle of other superheroes, and frankly DSM isn't wrong in saying that has a lot of parallels to segregation. You spew bigoted bullshit and refuse to talk about it further, claiming some sort of moral superiority for doing so. In other words, you are a passive-aggressive myopic little shit.

When I'm passive-aggressive (you little shit), you'll know it. My "salty" comment was my one and only passive-aggressive comment in this entire thread, and it was made in response to Kaelik's passive-aggressive comment made TO ME.

As far as my "bigoted comments" (which were actually not bigoted at all), all I want is for minority (or majority) characters TO HAVE THEIR OWN FUCKING IDENTITIES. How hard is that to understand? You and half the lackwits on this forum are being deliberately obtuse about this. Just stop it already.

If Marvel created their own black, female, "pansexual" superhero with a NEW superhero name and identity, I would not object to it at all. It would still be political pandering, but it would be a million times more acceptable....because it wouldn't be an obnoxious CO-OPTING OF A LEGACY CHARACTER. In fact, it might even be a GREAT CHARACTER....but we may never know, because Marvel isn't currently creating characters like that who are memorable.

Darth Rabbitt wrote:I'll take it a step further: you're a walking piece of propaganda. You're "sjw" propaganda about what the enemy looks like. You're a caricature. You make them look better. And you are whining about the whining about minority representation that you say you hate so much (and about how you feel oppressed as a straight white cis male comics fan), so you're not even ideologically consistent in your passive-aggressive bigoted verbal diarrhea.

I've been more consistent than anyone in this entire thread. If you deny this, then you're either a disingenuous asshole...or you just don't read comic books from DC and Marvel. And if you haven't seen the cultural rot in modern mainstream comics, then it tells me that you're probably sympathetic to the butthurt SJW assholes that I've been talking about in this very thread. But whatever. Say what you wanna say, think what you wanna think. I have clearly explained WHY I VOTE WITH MY WALLET. This is the one and only time that I've ever discussed why I currently do not purchase comics from "the Big Two". Their comics aren't currently marketed towards people like me, so I spend my money on other things. And that's ok.

Explaining why I vote with my wallet doesn't make me a bigot; it makes me an informed consumer who rejects cheap marketing gimmicks, obnoxious political pandering, and outright propaganda. If anything, the obnoxious statements in this thread reminds of how deep the cultural rot truly is.

And before someone like Kaelik makes a snarky comment that I want life to return to the 1950's, when blacks and whites drank from different water fountains (and other such bullshit), the answer is....

....I DON'T want that. So fuck off.

You want some examples of "minority" comic book characters (female, black, etc.) that I like? Here's a few examples:

* Storm (black & female)
* Phoenix (female)
* Blade (black)
* Luke Cage ( black)
* Mary Jane Watson (female)
* Spawn (black)
* Whizzer/The Atlanta Blur/Stanley Stewart (black; from Supreme Power, in a variant Earth-31916 Marvel Universe)
* Nighthawk (black; from Supreme Power, in a variant Earth-31916 Marvel Universe)
* Jubilee (Asian & female)
* Shadowcat/Kitty Pryde (Jewish & female)
* Ben Grimm (Jewish)
* Daken (part Japanese, & either gay or bisexual)
* Lady Sif (female)
* Photon/Captain Marvel (black & female)
* Hogun the Grim (not Aesir like most Asgardians, physically appears to be a Mongolian)
* Dawn (female)

Those are a few examples of interesting minority characters. So seriously, I have to ask....what is your malfunction?

Darth Rabbitt · Post by **Darth Rabbitt** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 5:27 pm

Sacrificial Lamb wrote:Nope. Never said that. What I didn't and don't give a shit about is comic book propaganda from World War II, BECAUSE IT WAS FROM A DIFFERENT ERA OF HUMAN HISTORY. And thus, not particularly relevant to the dogmatic progressive horseshit that is so prevalent in mainstream comic books today.

My point was that actual propaganda--horrible propaganda, even--is something you're OK with because it's "in the past" but making there be a female Thor or whatever is apparently propaganda because you want those damn progressive kids off your lawn.

When I'm passive-aggressive (you little shit), you'll know it. My "salty" comment was my one and only passive-aggressive comment in this entire thread, and it was made in response to Kaelik's passive-aggressive comment made TO ME.

Does the whole bringing up Ms. Marvel and complaining about the EVILS OF ISLAM ring any bells, and then deflecting criticism with "not going to take your bait, look at my moral high road" when you were called out on it ring any bells? Because that was pretty goddamn passive-aggressive:

Sacrificial Lamb wrote: I am ideologically opposed to Islam....for many reasons, so even if I like her as a character....I reject giving Muslims unearned legitimacy, considering how cruelly dangerous so many of them are in the modern world)

[people call you out on this]

Sacrificial Lamb wrote:You are not going to bait me with your slanderous bullshit. I refuse to play your game, so you might as well just drop it.

Sacrificial Lamb wrote:You still won't get me to rise to the bait. I refuse to play.

In fact, why haven't you defended your views in Cham's thread? It just makes you look like a coward.

If Marvel created their own black, female, "pansexual" superhero with a NEW superhero name and identity, I would not object to it at all. It would still be political pandering

And this is part of why you sound like a fucking bigot. If minority characters existing at all is "political pandering" then you are basically saying that only straight white cismales are really legitimate superheroes. That's really fucked up.

And if you haven't seen the cultural rot in modern mainstream comics, then it tells me that you're probably sympathetic to the butthurt sjw assholes that I've been talking about in this very thread.

Define "cultural rot," because you've been saying it a lot. With no other context it sounds a lot like a bigot buzzword, so actually defining your terms here might help you sound reasonable.

And frankly I consider "sjw" to be to social liberalism as "feminazis" are to feminism: it's a group of useful idiots that are blown out of proportion by social conservatives in an attempt to delegitimize the movements at large. I'll admit that I have slightly more sympathy for (all other things being equal) quixotic assholes than reactionary assholes but not a lot.

Explaining why I vote with my wallet doesn't make me a bigot; it makes me an informed consumer who rejects cheap marketing gimmicks, obnoxious political pandering, and outright propaganda. If anything, the obnoxious statements in this thread reminds of how deep the cultural rot truly is.

Now "cheap marketing gimmicks" are an actual thing. As is pandering. (And in corporate culture typically go hand in hand.) And feeling that either of those are cheap wouldn't actually get you called a bigot by anyone other than PhoneLobster. But "propaganda" in this element literally seems to mean "person who is a minority takes up the mantle of another hero." Which can easily fall into the first two categories but doesn't fall into the third. Which again is very strange when there has been actual propaganda in comics since like the very beginning of the medium.

It gets doubly weird when you complain that characters in adaptations are different. That's not really "usurping" anything by any stretch of the imagination. There are a million reasons Daredevil was a terrible movie but a black Kingpin was not one of them.

You want some examples of "minority" comic book characters (female, black, etc.) that I like? Here's a few examples:

You never gave what you considered positive examples in the past. Had you started with that I'd probably have been a lot less hostile. So I'll commend you for giving actual examples this time around. Do more of that and less "progressives have infiltrated the media" and people here might take you more seriously.

RedstoneOrc · Post by **RedstoneOrc** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 6:42 pm

PhoneLobster wrote:
RedstoneOrc wrote:PL you're being a little shit with no argument. Quit it and bow out.
I would rather just wait.

Captain Comics will slip up again. Or he will manage to keep the facade going... but, after thousands upon thousands of words, just you know, "coincidentally" come to the totes justified with a small book conclusion that he just coincidentally hates basically all the current minority character switches for a vast grab bag of really tenuous excuses reasons.

All I really have to do is wait.

So your plan is to wait for captn to slip and say something that triggers you and then whine about it the claim victory? Except you fucked last time and said cap was racist because he explained how captain America's powers where stolen. You don't seem to understand that people can not like something and also not be some colossal racist, bigot.
I bet YOU hated the new fantastic four movie you fucking racist.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 7:49 pm

RedstoneOrc wrote:I bet YOU hated the new fantastic four movie you fucking racist.

True story, PL has no opinion on the new fantastic four movie, because just like everyone else in the world, he didn't watch it.

Leress · Post by **Leress** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 8:33 pm

I watch the new fantastic four movie and it was bad, but me and my friends went in to it knowing that is wasn't going to be good. We were not disappointed. Well we were, since it was bad for slightly different reasons then we initially predicted.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 9:19 pm

i never watched the new fantastic four movie because i'd guessed it'd be about as bad as the ones that came before this one no matter what . .
did they ever offer an in movie explanation for why the torch, who is canonically a blue eyed blonde and white brother of the blue eyed blonde and white sue storm, to suddenly be black?
is he adopted or something in the movie?
or is he still her brother but she is still white and he is suddenly black?

name_here · Post by **name_here** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 9:30 pm

Wikipedia says that movie Sue is adopted.

Stahlseele · Post by **Stahlseele** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 9:31 pm

Ah, thank you.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 9:52 pm

Kaelik wrote:True story, PL has no opinion on the new fantastic four movie, because just like everyone else in the world, he didn't watch it.

100% correct.

Leress · Post by **Leress** » Sat Nov 07, 2015 10:39 pm

Stahlseele wrote:i never watched the new fantastic four movie because i'd guessed it'd be about as bad as the ones that came before this one no matter what . .
did they ever offer an in movie explanation for why the torch, who is canonically a blue eyed blonde and white brother of the blue eyed blonde and white sue storm, to suddenly be black?
is he adopted or something in the movie?
or is he still her brother but she is still white and he is suddenly black?

Sue is adopted. Which now has the question: Since Sue is the elder sibling, was she adopted before, after, or while Mrs. Storm had Johnny? It is never explained in the movie.

RedstoneOrc · Post by **RedstoneOrc** » Sun Nov 08, 2015 12:05 am

Kaelik is their a reason you stopped PL from putting his foot in his mouth? Cuz he totally would have, and I'd would have had a giggle.

Leress how dare you hate the new black human torch movie.You racist.

Leress · Post by **Leress** » Sun Nov 08, 2015 12:37 am

RedstoneOrc wrote:
Leress how dare you hate the new black human torch movie.You racist.

Must be that internal racism.

But on a serious note: I am glad they didn't do the whole: The adopted black teen that has a bad attitude and the white savior family to turn him around trope.

Sacrificial Lamb · Post by **Sacrificial Lamb** » Sun Nov 08, 2015 12:45 am

Darth Rabbitt wrote:
Sacrificial Lamb wrote:Nope. Never said that. What I didn't and don't give a shit about is comic book propaganda from World War II, BECAUSE IT WAS FROM A DIFFERENT ERA OF HUMAN HISTORY. And thus, not particularly relevant to the dogmatic progressive horseshit that is so prevalent in mainstream comic books today.
My point was that actual propaganda--horrible propaganda, even--is something you're OK with because it's "in the past" but making there be a female Thor or whatever is apparently propaganda because you want those damn progressive kids off your lawn.

You're being deliberately obtuse. Don't do that. I never said I was "ok" with propaganda from WW II....but of course, you know that. I specifically said that any propaganda from ANOTHER ERA IN HUMAN HISTORY is not relevant to the cultural war influencing comic books and other forms of entertainment that is happening TODAY. And you know why? BECAUSE IT'S NOT FUCKING RELEVANT, AND YOU KNOW IT. How do stupid or bigoted anti-Japanese comic books or cartoons from over 70 years ago affect what's happening in the comic book industry today? The answer is: THEY DON'T. When you bring this up, you deliberately try to hijack the dialogue, and move off-topic. STOP FUCKING DOING THAT.

You and some others here are engaging in a seriously disingenuous style of debate.

Darth Rabbitt wrote:
When I'm passive-aggressive (you little shit), you'll know it. My "salty" comment was my one and only passive-aggressive comment in this entire thread, and it was made in response to Kaelik's passive-aggressive comment made TO ME.
Does the whole bringing up Ms. Marvel and complaining about the EVILS OF ISLAM ring any bells, and then deflecting criticism with "not going to take your bait, look at my moral high road" when you were called out on it ring any bells? Because that was pretty goddamn passive-aggressive:

Of course it rings a bell. I wrote it, didn't I? And you know DAMN WELL why I did not and will not elaborate on my issues with Islam. BECAUSE I KNOW HOW THE PEOPLE ON THIS WEBSITE DEBATE. I know exactly what a clusterfuck of a thread this would become, because the thread would turn into a total tangent about ISLAM, and not about the subject of this thread. That isn't passive-aggressiveness; it's just practicality....because I refuse to go off on a tangent, and make this into a toxic thread about Islam. In other words, I still refuse to take the bait. Nice try though.

Darth Rabbitt wrote:
Sacrificial Lamb wrote: I am ideologically opposed to Islam....for many reasons, so even if I like her as a character....I reject giving Muslims unearned legitimacy, considering how cruelly dangerous so many of them are in the modern world)
[people call you out on this]

Yeah, I've noticed. See that bait? I did too, so I wisely avoided it.

Darth Rabbitt wrote:
Sacrificial Lamb wrote:You are not going to bait me with your slanderous bullshit. I refuse to play your game, so you might as well just drop it.

Sacrificial Lamb wrote:You still won't get me to rise to the bait. I refuse to play.

In fact, why haven't you defended your views in Cham's thread? It just makes you look like a coward.

If posters on this site think that I look like a coward, that's ok. I'm at peace with it. I shared with this forum what I thought about this issue, while (trying) to keep the thread on topic. A clusterfuck of a toxic thread about Islam is NOT on topic.

Darth Rabbitt wrote:
If Marvel created their own black, female, "pansexual" superhero with a NEW superhero name and identity, I would not object to it at all. It would still be political pandering
And this is part of why you sound like a fucking bigot. If minority characters existing at all is "political pandering" then you are basically saying that only straight white cismales are really legitimate superheroes. That's really fucked up.

Remember how I said that I wouldn't object to such a minority hero at all, but then you deliberately ignored that part of my post.....in order to win "Internet Rhetoric Points"?

Yeah, I remember that too.

And did you notice the relevancy about that theoretical minority superhero I mentioned being "pansexual"? You might have missed it. "Pansexual" is such an obnoxiously bullshit pseudo-intellectual term for sexuality that was invented by, and is currently parroted by...."political "progressives". THAT is why I said such a character would be the result of "political pandering".

Do you now understand the nuance of that statement? Because I was hoping that you would catch it, but you not-so-surprisingly didn't.

Darth Rabbitt wrote:
And if you haven't seen the cultural rot in modern mainstream comics, then it tells me that you're probably sympathetic to the butthurt sjw assholes that I've been talking about in this very thread.
Define "cultural rot," because you've been saying it a lot. With no other context it sounds a lot like a bigot buzzword, so actually defining your terms here might help you sound reasonable.

And frankly I consider "sjw" to be to social liberalism as "feminazis" are to feminism: it's a group of useful idiots that are blown out of proportion by social conservatives in an attempt to delegitimize the movements at large. I'll admit that I have slightly more sympathy for (all other things being equal) quixotic assholes than reactionary assholes but not a lot.

I am not going to define "cultural rot", because I strongly suspect that you (and every other poster on this board) already know exactly what it means. I am not going to define well-known terms for you, so that you can then play a version of rhetorical aikido.

Fuck that shit.

Darth Rabbitt wrote:
Explaining why I vote with my wallet doesn't make me a bigot; it makes me an informed consumer who rejects cheap marketing gimmicks, obnoxious political pandering, and outright propaganda. If anything, the obnoxious statements in this thread reminds of how deep the cultural rot truly is.
Now "cheap marketing gimmicks" are an actual thing. As is pandering. (And in corporate culture typically go hand in hand.) And feeling that either of those are cheap wouldn't actually get you called a bigot by anyone other than PhoneLobster. But "propaganda" in this element literally seems to mean "person who is a minority takes up the mantle of another hero." Which can easily fall into the first two categories but doesn't fall into the third. Which again is very strange when there has been actual propaganda in comics since like the very beginning of the medium.

It gets doubly weird when you complain that characters in adaptations are different. That's not really "usurping" anything by any stretch of the imagination. There are a million reasons Daredevil was a terrible movie but a black Kingpin was not one of them.

I only saw limited segments of the Daredevil movie from 2003, but it looked awful. Afleck's acting was wooden and terrible, and the Michael Clarke Duncan's version of the Kingpin was absolutely nothing like the comic book version of the Kingpin. It really looked like a giant pile of fail.

Darth Rabbitt wrote:
You want some examples of "minority" comic book characters (female, black, etc.) that I like? Here's a few examples:
You never gave what you considered positive examples in the past. Had you started with that I'd probably have been a lot less hostile. So I'll commend you for giving actual examples this time around. Do more of that and less "progressives have infiltrated the media" and people here might take you more seriously.

No. The hostility on this thread would still have been here. It's possible that it might have been more muted, but that's all.

And I still completely stand by the statement that cultural and political "progressives" are tainting social media and popular entertainment. Look at the gaming media (for example), with "Gamergate" and all that shit. The rot is very deep.

The makers of comic books MAY OR MAY NOT believe in the "identity politics" that is carried aloft like a Holy Grail by politically "progressive" SJW assholes, but they certainly don't refrain from using cynical marketing ploys to APPEAL to those very same "progressive" SJW pricks. Quickly condemning the other side of the philosophical debate as a racist or bigot is rhetorically easy (as well as dishonest and lazy).

And I think I've made my point-of-view abundantly clear by now. Let minority (or majority) superheroes create interesting identities of their own, without co-opting the identities of "cisgendered" white male characters who are LEGACY CHARACTERS in comic books. Heck; don't co-opt the identities of legacy characters (whatever their race, gender, or sexual orientation is); period. Stop creating cheap-ass GIMMICKS (that often cause superheroes to behave out-of-character)....simply for the sake of political pandering, political propaganda, and cynical marketing ploys. Focus on great art, writing, proper characterization, and continuity instead. This is a very simple concept to understand.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sun Nov 08, 2015 12:59 am

Sac Lamb wrote:Of course it rings a bell. I wrote it, didn't I? And you know DAMN WELL why I did not and will not elaborate on my issues with Islam. BECAUSE I KNOW HOW THE PEOPLE ON THIS WEBSITE DEBATE. I know exactly what a clusterfuck of a thread this would become, because the thread would turn into a total tangent about ISLAM, and not about the subject of this thread. That isn't passive-aggressiveness; it's just practicality....because I refuse to go off on a tangent, and make this into a toxic thread about Islam. In other words, I still refuse to take the bait.

You already said you were bigoted against Muslim people, and when people called you on it, you shrank back like a coward and refused to back your bullshit up at all. You are scum. You have no moral high ground, you said bigoted, anti-Semitic things and then claimed you didn't have to justify your reprehensible stances. Well guess what? You fucking do.

-Username17

hyzmarca · Post by **hyzmarca** » Sun Nov 08, 2015 2:15 am

Leress wrote:I watch the new fantastic four movie and it was bad, but me and my friends went in to it knowing that is wasn't going to be good. We were not disappointed. Well we were, since it was bad for slightly different reasons then we initially predicted.

The worst thing about the New Fantastic Four movie is that the Thing doesn't have a thing.

There's a reason why Ben Grimm wears pants in the comics. That reason is giant, orange, rocky, and circumcised.

Of all the bad things about the movie, that's the worst.

Sacrificial Lamb · Post by **Sacrificial Lamb** » Sun Nov 08, 2015 2:49 am

FrankTrollman wrote:
Sac Lamb wrote:Of course it rings a bell. I wrote it, didn't I? And you know DAMN WELL why I did not and will not elaborate on my issues with Islam. BECAUSE I KNOW HOW THE PEOPLE ON THIS WEBSITE DEBATE. I know exactly what a clusterfuck of a thread this would become, because the thread would turn into a total tangent about ISLAM, and not about the subject of this thread. That isn't passive-aggressiveness; it's just practicality....because I refuse to go off on a tangent, and make this into a toxic thread about Islam. In other words, I still refuse to take the bait.
You already said you were bigoted against Muslim people, and when people called you on it, you shrank back like a coward and refused to back your bullshit up at all. You are scum. You have no moral high ground, you said bigoted, anti-Semitic things and then claimed you didn't have to justify your reprehensible stances. Well guess what? You fucking do.

-Username17

Your statement right here was the slickest, most effective, and most morally and disgustingly disingenuous attempt to con me into taking the bait in this entire thread.

Well fucking done, you disingenuous scumbag.

I'm still not taking the bait though, so if you want to make this into A CLUSTERFUCK OF A TOXIC THREAD ABOUT ISLAM, then you can do it without me. Some of us actually like staying on topic. So if you have something to say about identity politics in comic books, then why don't you fucking stay on topic....AND ACTUALLY SAY SOMETHING ABOUT IT?