| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Too late Tarik it's already been done by another poster. Dont you know we have to accept diversity completely or were noth sexist and racist. Even if it involves poorly told stories and chatacter assassination.
if all one has to hang their hat on is a thin argument of "I didn't like that storyline that one time, therefore remove all characters of any color other than white and any gender other than male and any sexual orientation other than straight", then they probably are.
Edited to avoid sounding accusatory, was speaking in general sense and from personal experience .
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
]
That's really the way you read it? Instead of what it really is, namely a biting political comment about the social and political realities in the U.S. and other parts of the world in 2017?
I think it was more bad writing and hand waving ultimate power than the writers could handle just for the sake of doing it, but I've seen that interpretation bandied about a lot, and it was incredibly explicit in the posted links, casting people that don't like the change in Thor to be a girl as the bad guy by putting the fans words in his mouth.
I don't think that this is about the fans at all. The fact of the matter is that the values of democracy, liberty and freedom are on the defense in a lot of countries, that once held those values high (not to speak of other countries)
*headscratch* not seeing that one. Then again captain america is always under attack.
Because, and that's a point where I don't want to be misunderstood: There is no good reason against diversity, whether it's gender, racial or social diversity. There's only sexist, racial and (i guess associal) reason.
So if you don't want to be called sexist or racist, then you'd better not mix those issues with your dislike of the storyline's quality.
Do you want people to be against diversity? Because this is how you move people from "I don't care" to "you politically correct chinchillas ruin everything. What did this? Diversity? Now i hate diversity with the nerdrage of a thousand one more days!!!! "
Trying to justify a hackneyed story makes someone a bad writer. Trying to justify it with name calling makes YOU the bad guy.
They changed a character. That is going to get backlash. Threatening to call people names, or make fun of them for not liking that doesn't go well with any crowd.. but you're going to get a twofer with the comics crowd there.
So this is just Marvel showing those "fans" the middle finger. And I applaud them for that.
Bad: the middle finger goes both ways.
Worse: A great many discussions of sexism rely on the ability to say 'it really is this bad over here, this is what it's like, this is what's going on..' to people that don't or can't see or live that experience. If ya'll tell someone that they're sexist because they don't like a character change, when they genuinely don't like the character change and it has nothing to do with sexism, they objectively know that allegations of sexism can be malarky. After a while it becomes really hard for genuine allegations to stand out.
One of the reasons I've never cared about comics is the never ending recyclage of old characters. "Superman Died!, but not really..."
For me the X-men are the ones I saw in the animated TV series, all the other ones are, well, the others. So I can empathize totally with people that don't like the "x" white-guy superhero being replaced by a latino-guy superhero just because they were used to the first one.
|
If ya'll tell someone that they're sexist because they don't like a character change, when they genuinely don't like the character change and it has nothing to do with sexism
I know that this happens from my own experience, so I know that this doesn't feel good. The thing is: I didn't see anyone do this in this very thread. And when you brought this up the first time citing a post of mine, I explicitly stated my agreement, that not all fans are *ist jst because they dislike some things. So again, I agree with you, it's just that we aren't talking about the fans who dislike certain changes for other reasons.
Adding to that: When you don't like a character change and it has genuinely nothing to to with any of the -isms, then you should be able to give a different valid reasoning for it. What I see though more often than not, is that as soon as you ask for the reasoning, then suddenly the -isms come into play. If the person in question does this inadvertently, they have to be made aware of that. And if they do this with full intent, they have to be called out for it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Take as an Example DC's Wally West.
Wally West begins as the teen sidekick to the the Flash, teams up with the other teen sidekicks forms the Titans, has many adventures and many problems until
Barry dies in Crisis on Infinite Earths and Wally chooses to take over the mantle.
Wally was the Flash for 20 plus years. There were complaints, there were those who wanted Barry back, but Wally for many was the Flash. He grew into the role, he grew up as a man, he got married he had kids and then
BAM replaced as Barry returns followed shortly there after by being erased from existance as Barry reboots the Universe.
Lot of people were pissed, DC found them selves facing "Where's Wally" at every convention
so along comes New Wally West
a troubled young teen who happens to be a person of color
and people were pissed. You may have seen some of it but New Wally kind of became a target point for a lot of angry fans and everything that was wrong about modern DC. He was not Wall, not the real Wally. He was a thief stealling everything that the Real Wally West had earned, and that is me putting it nicely compaired to some people online.
For my part, I simply didn't give a damn about him and saw no point reading about him. He wasn't Wally to me and never would be.
Now however DC has brought back the real Wally West. His personal history intact, at least to him. He still lived those 20+ years and had that family, but it was all taken from him by forces unknown.
Wally West was back and there was much rejoiceing
As for new Wally. He is still there, the story is that the two are cousins, named after the same grandfather.
more importantly new Wally is now someone I'm interested in.
He no longer carries the stigma of "Not the Real Wally" or of being a "replacement here". He's his own person now, the next in line to carry a long legacy of heroes. I want to see what he dose, I want him to become his own hero and I want to see him and his cousin sit down and talk about his future.
Replacement characters will always carry a certain amount of resentment. It dosen't matter what it is but there is always going to be something people will latch onto to justify why they hate the new guy, but to be honest it's simpler then that. You hate the New guy because he took the place of the Guy who should be there. The new guy dosen't have the right to wear that costume or carry that name. He is just some nobody who came out of nowhere and got shoved in your face by the writer or company or whoever.
He never earned it
He shouldn't be there
But if that same new character is part of a legacy it's different. He's the rookie, the one who might one day carry the torch. You become willing to let him have the chance to earn it. He dosen't have to carry that same baggage of being "the replacement". DC has always been great at building thei Legacies and it's a much better way to introduce more diverse characters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This was from Tarik...sorry I don't knw how to make those cool blue boxes around other posters' stuff...
As for bad writing in general...
here
and here
are usually along the lines of what people mean of promoting diversity with appallingly bad writing and starting to get that whole kneejerk against diversity characters if that's the caliber of writing to expect.
My response:
I admit, it was pretty bad, but early on, that was Absorbing Man's personality spot-on. It went off the rails as he kept on talking and when his wife Titania gave that ridiculous explanation. Paizo has done, IMO, a great job of promoting diversity with its iconics and NPCs. Marvel/DC, IMO, consistently miss the point by trying to promote diversity by changing existing characters people have loved (or hated) for decades. Being diverse is introducing new characters that can coexist on the same level as the established rosters. How is that done? It's done with GOOD WRITING!! Thoughtful, detailed writing with a PLAN; which is apparently really difficult for some writers, either because of a lack of imagination or being handcuffed by their superiors. Black Wally West didn't have to be The Flash/Kid Flash; more than likely it was done to coincide with the CW TV show. If DC wanted to introduce a new speedster character, why couldn't it have been a Black guy who got access to the Speed Force, with a name other than "Flash"? No one at Marvel knew what to do with Iceman? So, the answer is "Well...let's make him Gay?" How about do some research into how he was handled through the Lee, Claremont, Byrne, O'Neil years, and update it for now? If you want a gay mutant, introduce a NEW one! Creating diversity through a glorified palette-swap is lazy and unimaginative. At some point, every hero was a new character, and had to be developed some way. They need to pull back a bit, put in some real work, and research and develop REAL, ORIGINAL, DIVERSE characters with real motivations and complex character arcs, not "diverse hero/villain of the month" that fades into obscurity and only shows up years later in one panel of a book so that the company can retain the rights.
I admit, it was pretty bad, but early on, that was Absorbing Man's personality spot-on. It went off the rails as he kept on talking and when his wife Titania gave that ridiculous explanation. Paizo has done, IMO, a great job of promoting diversity with its iconics and NPCs. Marvel/DC, IMO, consistently miss the point by trying to promote diversity by changing existing characters people have loved (or hated) for decades. Being diverse is introducing new characters that can coexist on the same level as the established rosters. How is that done? It's done with GOOD WRITING!! Thoughtful, detailed writing with a PLAN; which is apparently really difficult for some writers, either because of a lack of imagination or being handcuffed by their superiors. Black Wally West didn't have to be The Flash/Kid Flash; more than likely it was done to coincide with the CW TV show. If DC wanted to introduce a new speedster character, why couldn't it have been a Black guy who got access to the Speed Force, with a name other than "Flash"? No one at Marvel knew what to do with Iceman? So, the answer is "Well...let's make him Gay?" How about do some research into how he was handled through the Lee, Claremont, Byrne, O'Neil years, and update it for now? If you want a gay mutant, introduce a NEW one! Creating diversity through a glorified palette-swap is lazy and unimaginative. At some point, every hero was a new character, and had to be developed some way. They need to pull back a bit, put in some real work, and research and develop REAL, ORIGINAL, DIVERSE characters with real motivations and complex character arcs, not "diverse hero/villain of...{QUOTE = "Name here"} Text here {/QUOTE} just replace the {}s with []s is the code for quoting for the record
Anyway, this is basically more or less how I stand on the matter, although I'm fine with legacy characters taking the same name under the caveat that they respect the mantle they're taking. After all, new characters are a hard sell and I...
Thanks for the tip!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In many ways I think blaming "diversity" or "political correctness" or "company agendas" is simply people latching onto to an excuse for how they feel. I think what it really comes down to is something more simple and primal
"You took what was mine, and gave me a fake"
Fans are possesive of their characters, in ways that are often difficult to articulate. Having a convenient excuse for the anger is helpful because saying the truth is ...well it sounds greedy and selfish dosen't it, and often a bit silly.
I can personally vouch for it from my own experiences
Spider-Man OMD. They replaced my Spider-Man with Spider-Man.
For those few people not in the know. In order to save Aunt May's life SPider-man sold his marriage to the Devil and rewrote years of comic book history. Spider-man was replaced by himself, just a version of himself that had never been married, become a school teacher, lost a child, etc...
and I stopped reading Marvel comics in disgust.
I still don't collect anything Marvel. I keep track of what's going on through Newsarama and threads on forums. I enjoy their various movies and tv shows, even the animated series. In the last few years I started picking up the occasional book just out of curiousity's sake but I still don't have a single Marvel title on my pull list.
I probably never will
They took MY Spider-man and repaced him with a fake.
and deep down I am clearly still angry about it.
It's irrational and silly but it is true.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Take as an Example DC's Wally West.
Wally West begins as the teen sidekick to the the Flash, teams up with the other teen sidekicks forms the Titans, has many adventures and many problems until
Barry dies in Crisis on Infinite Earths and Wally chooses to take over the mantle.
Wally was the Flash for 20 plus years. There were complaints, there were those who wanted Barry back, but Wally for many was the Flash. He grew into the role, he grew up as a man, he got married he had kids and then
BAM replaced as Barry returns followed shortly there after by being erased from existance as Barry reboots the Universe.
Lot of people were pissed, DC found them selves facing "Where's Wally" at every convention
so along comes New Wally West
a troubled young teen who happens to be a person of colorand people were pissed. You may have seen some of it but New Wally kind of became a target point for a lot of angry fans and everything that was wrong about modern DC. He was not Wall, not the real Wally. He was a thief stealling everything that the Real Wally West had earned, and that is me putting it nicely compaired to some people online.
For my part, I simply didn't give a damn about him and saw no point reading about him. He wasn't Wally to me and never would be.Now however DC has brought back the real Wally West. His personal history intact, at least to him. He still lived those 20+ years and had that family, but it was all taken from him by forces unknown.
Wally West was back and there was much rejoiceing
As for new Wally. He is still there, the story is that the two are cousins, named after the same grandfather.
more importantly new Wally is now someone I'm interested in.
He no longer carries the stigma of "Not the Real Wally" or of being a "replacement here". He's his own person now, the next in line to carry a long legacy of heroes. I want to see what he dose, I want him to become his own hero and I want to see him and his cousin sit down and talk about his future....
I mostly grew up with Wally Flash. The first time they got rid of him, I collected Bart Flash. When that proved unpopular, they brought Wally back, then Barry. I collected Barry for a bit, but it seemed poor writing to me, so I stopped.
I missed out on the Other Wally. I did hear about it. I did think, at first, that he wasn't the Real Wally. Since I wasn't collecting it, though, I just said "F#+@ it. I don't really give a s+#+."
Since rebirth, though, I've been collecting Flash again. While I'm still not crazy they brought Barry back and gave us Other Wally (I'd have preferred keeping Bart around with better writing for another decade or two), I've been enjoying the book.
|
The problem seems to be less about diversity and more badly thought out poorly executed attempts at diversity. I mean big shocker right the company thats been terrible at writing stories the last little while (I give both civil wars and one more day as exhibit A) would be terrible at writing in diverse characters.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Diversity is never bad. Lots of diversity is never bad. Bad representation is what is bad. Lack of representation is also bad.
Cries of "cramming it down our throats" does put the speaker in a negative light, as they are effectively complaining that diversity exists, or that there's somehow too much of it for them to handle, or that the characters aren't completely awesome and perfect, that they have to pass a certain bar or they shouldn't be allowed to be shown.
That's a completely toxic mindset and set of standards.
Diversity is never bad, bad representation is. If a diverse yet poorly/boringly written character is introduced it does not make diversity bad, it does not make the character necessarily bad, it just means the writers f&#$ed up in introducing the character.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's one thing about diversity: I've seen a tendency (not just in comics) to try to make characters belonging to minorities too perfect to avoid those minorities complaining.
If you make a white straight male be an idiot, you have a character who is an idiot, if you make a lesbian asian woman an idiot, you risk to be accused of being sexist, racist and homophobic. (Solution: instead of removing that character for fear of pissing people, include more people from those collectives who aren't to show that the character is just an idiot because she is, not because of her ethnicity/sex/sexual orientation).
So as a solution they try to make the characters that represent minorities as less polemic as they can, therefore not making them special or interesting either.
To me the solution is not that. If you represent minorities in a realistic way (some might be idiots, some might be awesome, most are just regular people with a lot of flaws and merits) you can get much more interesting characters and most people will stop rejecting them.
I take as an example of what Paizo does, because I think they do it right. Minorities get to be represented in a variety of roles: they are heroes, they are villains, they are good and bad people. And when I look at them and at their stories I think their stories are more relevant than their ethnicity, sex or sexual orientation. They are much more than that, and that's what makes them believable as characters. Real integration and diversity is only attained when you stop focusing too much on irrelevant things that don't define a person and start focusing on what kind of person he/she is disregarding of ethnicity/sex/ etc.
Diversity is never bad, bad representation is. If a diverse yet poorly/boringly written character is introduced it does not make diversity bad, it does not make the character necessarily bad, it just means the writers f@&#ed up in introducing the character.
The writers don't need to not #($*$ up. They need to hit it out of the park. Having a good character happens at roughly the same rate as hitting ga home run, its just that in comics once that happens that character is there forever, and you'll remember them for 50 years, whereas the strike outs, singles, and doubles fade away into obscurity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I admit, it was pretty bad, but early on, that was Absorbing Man's personality spot-on. It went off the rails as he kept on talking and when his wife Titania gave that ridiculous explanation. Paizo has done, IMO, a great job of promoting diversity with its iconics and NPCs. Marvel/DC, IMO, consistently miss the point by trying to promote diversity by changing existing characters people have loved (or hated) for decades. Being diverse is introducing new characters that can coexist on the same level as the established rosters. How is that done? It's done with GOOD WRITING!! Thoughtful, detailed writing with a PLAN; which is apparently really difficult for some writers, either because of a lack of imagination or being handcuffed by their superiors. Black Wally West didn't have to be The Flash/Kid Flash; more than likely it was done to coincide with the CW TV show. If DC wanted to introduce a new speedster character, why couldn't it have been a Black guy who got access to the Speed Force, with a name other than "Flash"? No one at Marvel knew what to do with Iceman? So, the answer is "Well...let's make him Gay?" How about do some research into how he was handled through the Lee, Claremont, Byrne, O'Neil years, and update it for now? If you want a gay mutant, introduce a NEW one! Creating diversity through a glorified palette-swap is lazy and unimaginative. At some point, every hero was a new character, and had to be developed some way. They need to pull back a bit, put in some real work, and research and develop REAL, ORIGINAL, DIVERSE characters with real motivations and complex character arcs, not "diverse hero/villain of...{QUOTE = "Name here"} Text here {/QUOTE} just replace the {}s with []s is the code for quoting for the record
Anyway, this is basically more or less how I stand on the matter, although I'm fine with legacy characters taking the same name under the caveat that they respect the mantle they're taking. After all, new characters are a hard sell and I...
when "respecting the legacy" means "keep the characters as white as possible" there's a problem. The 80s captain america storyline pointed that out in the comic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Exhibit A: Marvel's Sleepwalker......whereas the strike outs, singles, and doubles fade away into obscurity.
big big fan of sleepwalker. Love him.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
when "respecting the legacy" means "keep the characters as white as possible" there's a problem. The 80s captain america storyline pointed that out in the comic.Where in the name of Jack Kirby's ghost did that come from? I mean, it's not like there's been different skinned legacy characters that are well liked because they treated their predecessors with respect... (Sam Wilson (Captain America), Jaime Reyes (Blue Beetle), John Stewart (Green Lantern), Miles Morales (Ultimate Spider Man))
1. The vast, vast majority of those characters were created post 2000. You don't want to know what nonsense fans of John Stewart specifically had to deal with in the 70s. Sam and Miles fans have to deal with less overt racism, but there's still a lot to cut through.
2. If you think Jaime Reyes is an example of treating a predecessor with respect, you didn't go through Ted's death and the hate mail campaign surrounding it. He split the fanbase more so than Sam Wilson, and that's saying something.
3. Please read the Captain America storyline I am referring to with respect to Battlestar. Lots of interesting, if now dated, points made there, and touched on overmuch in Sam Wilson captain America.