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.