Superheroes & representation (split from questions thread)

[brennan]

The intersection between those two points is the idea that comic book writers are not very good writers. Or are simply lazy.

We are talking about the period during which main stables of the likes of DC and Marvel were originated - that's roughly the 1940s-1970s. Not now. Talking about this in the present tense is to move the origins of the issue out of the historical context it originates in and therefore to avoid thinking about the points made.

What is more "disgusting" are the MRAs cashing in on the hate wave that Anita has against her, it's literally fashionable at this point, but it's telling you're not disgusting by that, but find the very idea of her doing what she does as an affront to you.

Most of the people hating on Sarkeesian are gamers who are affronted by her blatant misrepresentation of both gamers and the games they play. Which has bugger all to do with sexism or MRA's. Who you are additionally misrepresenting.

In order to tell her audience that Hitman was deeply sexist, Sarkeesian had to present roughly 2% of the game that took place in a strip club - without mentioning that the job of the player was to close the place down. Then to inform her (gullible) audience that the player was 'supposed' to kill half-naked women and was further encouraged to drag their corpses around for kicks. It has been pointed out that it Hitman you are actively discouraged from killing innocent bystanders (which loses you a lotn of points), that there were no 'let's plays' on YouTube that showed such behaviour (because it would be stupid and distasteful) and that most likely the only person to have played it this way was Sarkeesian herself - in order to get the footage she needed.

She's just not honest.

 

[useless]

I understand from your post that you haven't seen Anita Sarkeesian's videos and how full of utter crap and slander they are, and are conveniently ignoring the fact she is a successful con artist due to people like you actually giving her the time of day.

You understand nothing as i've actually watched a few (didn't find them that great, but i think thats mainly because she's not that good at making videos, give her some time), as well as a few videos of her detractors.

Shockingly there's still no evidence, just assertions (with still no evidence) that she's a "con artist". Also i didn't even donate to her, but it seem's she's doing alright regardless. You do realise the reason she's gotten so much money is because of the backlash provided by people such as yourself? You are literally feeding her, you are integral to her success and do you know what's sad? That you don't even realise it.

But do keep going on Salty Mud, this is after all what she's trying to show and you and all the other MRA Sarkeesian-Obsessed "haters" prove what she's saying.

 

[Quackers]

A woman talking about Misogyny and sexist portrayals of characters in games?

How immoral!

What is more "disgusting" are the MRAs cashing in on the hate wave that Anita has against her, it's literally fashionable at this point, but it's telling you're not disgusting by that, but find the very idea of her doing what she does as an affront to you.

Adding to what Salty has to say about it...there are a lot of blackmarks against her.

-She is an unrepentant thief (see copyright infringement),
-She has stated on video she is not a fan of videogames, she calls some of them "gross",
-She makes youtube videos. She wanted $6k from donaters to do this (already too much) and she ended up with $100k. She is a con artist basically. You don't need that much money too make a few youtube videos. Oh and she got that money in 2012 and hasn't even finished the series yet

-and the biggest mark of them all are the videos themselves. They are misrepresented and fabricated in such a way to give Saakasnian her narrative. Brennan has a good example. (Metatron did a take down of Anita ages ago, you should read that).

I do not see a fair critique of the videogame industry. I see an individual who is parasitically siphoning off the videogame industry in order to advance her own brand name. I can almost guarantee she'll be moving into another area of "activism" in the future. Her videos are solely about promoting herself. The videogame industry is also perfect because you get the sycophantic betas to acknowledge and kowtow to her. In another male-domianted industry she would be thrown out of the door and rightfully so.

 

[Tarquelne]

I understand from your post that you haven't seen Anita Sarkeesian's videos and how full of utter crap and slander they are, and are conveniently ignoring the fact she is a successful con artist due to people like you actually giving her the time of day.

I haven't, but I just looked her up:

1) All the "major" sites I came across - Rationalwiki, Wikipedia, newspapers, are controlled by the ********s. Or, at least, they portrayed her completely differently than she has been in this thread.

2) And I found this:

Anita's Adage:
"Online discussion of sexism or misogyny quickly results in disproportionate displays of sexism and misogyny."

That certainly rings true.

 

[useless]

Most of the people hating on Sarkeesian are gamers who are affronted by her blatant misrepresentation of both gamers and the games they play. Which has bugger all to do with sexism or MRA's. Who you are additionally misrepresenting.

Oh no, im sure it's just a coincidence that MRA's have latched onto Sarkeesian as a hate figure. Totally.

Also if you could post a link to that video where she mentions/talks about hitman i'd appreciate it. I haven't watched her stuff for some time.

 

[warpus]

There is controversy about too many white anglo-saxon straight male superheroes?

Uhhh.. Maybe it's just me, but you could easily rephrase this entire thread, taking "superheroes" out and putting "heroes in general" or "hollywood" in instead.

White guys get the lead roles (unless it's a niche movie directed at a certain minority), women become secondary characters/objects, and there will be random token minorities throughout, at times for comedic effect.

If there's going to be outrage, why not make it about the more general issue? Why focus on just superhero movies?

I'll repeat myself, because none of this seems to take what I said into account:

"White, male writers and artists created white, male heroes because they were white and male.

It's more like they created those characters to be white, because at the time of creation, most heroes in popular media in the U.S. were white, and the creative powers that be likely expected white superheroes in the writers' stories, and not anyone of colour.

Has anyone ever seen that DS9 episode where Sisko goes back in time and tries to write DS9 as a sci-fi story in the 40s (or something like that)? His boss tells him to make the character white, because "the general public wouldn't accept a hero of colour".

The general public was the main reason, not the skin colour of the authors. The social forces in the country dictated what sort of things people were writing about.

 

[Tarquelne]

We are talking about the period during which main stables of the likes of DC and Marvel were originated - that's roughly the 1940s-1970s. Not now. Talking about this in the present tense is to move the origins of the issue out of the historical context it originates in and therefore to avoid thinking about the points made.

I amend my comment to "weren't" very good writers and "were" lazy.

And what warpus says above is certainly true: It's possible the writers actually went so far as to look up the demographics and try presenting an accurate cross-section of the country with their characters ... and were squelched by their editor or publisher. In which case, they'd be the source of the bad/lazy writing.

Anyway ... is your accusation, then, that TF wants comic authors to go back in time and suddenly make their heroes more diverse? Or is maybe a little bit of the discussion, at least for one of you, about the present?

That fits with TF speaking of the change in commercial viability. I assumed he was thinking about the natural progression in time toward the present but perhaps it, too, was a reference to time travel. Or a threat.

A.S.

...
She's just not honest.

And that I can easily believe. It also doesn't contradict the reactions to her being disproportionate, or the depiction of her being quite distorted.

 

[useless]

Adding to what Salty has to say about it...there are a lot of blackmarks against her.

-She is an unrepentant thief (see copyright infringement),
-She has stated on video she is not a fan of videogames, she calls some of them "gross",
-She makes youtube videos. She wanted $6k from donaters to do this (already too much) and she ended up with $100k. She is a con artist basically. You don't need that much money too make a few youtube videos. Oh and she got that money in 2012 and hasn't even finished the series yet

-and the biggest mark of them all are the videos themselves. They are misrepresented and fabricated in such a way to give Saakasnian her narrative. Brennan has a good example. (Metatron did a take down of Anita ages ago, you should read that).

I do not see a fair critique of the videogame industry. I see an individual who is parasitically siphoning off the videogame industry in order to advance her own brand name. I can almost guarantee she'll be moving into another area of "activism" in the future. Her videos are solely about promoting herself. The videogame industry is also perfect because you get the sycophantic betas to acknowledge and kowtow to her. In another male-domianted industry she would be thrown out of the door and rightfully so.

Not sure how using LPs (If she did) is a copyright issue, infact i am pretty sure that LPS in the first place are on shaky ground so...

So what? What's your goddamn point? OH NO SHE'S NOT A PROGAMER MLG LIKE ME HOW DARE SHE CRITIQUE GAMES

So what again? Are you seriously blaming her for getting more donations than she originally anticipated? Are you aware that there are Kickstarter campaigns that get vastly more money than they anticipate? Are they all con artists?

So what if she hasn't finished it? Do you even know how long the series might last? Are you seriously blaming her for not having finished?

Also lol at "betas", how dare men be receptive to the idea that women, who make up an increasing size of gamers, as well as the total population, have any sort of input or say in gaming. The temerity these women have, maybe they should go back to where ever they came from Quackers, eh?

Also if you think she's a parasite for critiquing games and their culture, are movie critics parasites? Food critics? Play critics? ...Game critics? Are those all parasites, because after all they don't make the thing they're criticising.

 

[EgonSpengler]

There is controversy about too many white anglo-saxon straight male superheroes?

Uhhh.. Maybe it's just me, but you could easily rephrase this entire thread, taking "superheroes" out and putting "heroes in general" or "hollywood" in instead.

White guys get the lead roles (unless it's a niche movie directed at a certain minority), women become secondary characters/objects, and there will be random token minorities throughout, at times for comedic effect.

If there's going to be outrage, why not make it about the more general issue? Why focus on just superhero movies?

I think this discussion started with Marvel Comics' announcement that the new Thor is going to be a woman. The near-simultaneous announcement that Sam Wilson/The Falcon will be adopting the mantle of Captain America has gotten a lot of news coverage lately too, and it wasn't long ago that the new Captain Marvel was getting some headlines for being Muslim. So superheroes in particular have been a topic lately. But you're right, the problem certainly isn't restricted to superheroes.

 

[useless]

I think this discussion started with Marvel Comics' announcement that the new Thor is going to be a woman. The near-simultaneous announcement that Sam Wilson/The Falcon will be adopting the mantle of Captain America has gotten a lot of news coverage lately too, and it wasn't long ago that the new Captain Marvel was getting some headlines for being Muslim. So superheroes in particular have been a topic lately. But you're right, the problem certainly isn't restricted to superheroes.

I wonder if these people realise white, Cis, Hetero men dominate the media

 

[Quackers]

rage

I don't see any good coming out of further discussion with you. Agree to disagree

 

[EgonSpengler]

I wonder if these people realise white, Cis, Hetero men are overrepresented in the media

Probably not.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Interestingly, the announcement that Johnny Storm/The Human Torch will be played by Michael B. Jordan has received little attention from the hyperventilating, reactionary uber-nerds. At least, I haven't seen any. Maybe I just don't hang out on the right web forums.

Oh, and Jason Momoa as formerly blonde-haired and blue-eyed Aquaman. I haven't heard or read any screeching over that, either.

 

[useless]

I don't see any good coming out of further discussion with you. Agree to disagree

Could it be because i called you out on your disingenuous accusations?

Seriously, accusing someone of getting more money than they intended on Kickstarter, of being a con artist is frankly amazing. Projects routinely go over their goals!

Someone doesn't have to be gamer to recognise the degree of misogyny in games or gaming culture.

Also more on LPs, so what if she used video from someone's lets play/play through?

Your accusations are laughable and how no basis.

Oh btw, i guess charities that go over their goal are scams/con-artists too right? And why is "6k" too much? You claim it is, but that doesn't make it so.

 

[EgonSpengler]

[Kickstarter] Projects routinely go over their goals!

Seriously, what does $50,000 of potato salad even look like?

 

[Kyriakos]

Split from the discussion in the questions-not-worth-their-own-thread thread.



Like 40%? America has never been exclusively white, and it's certainly never been excursively male. (How would that even work?) And in 1938, the latter at least was firmly reflected in the comics industry, as it was well into the postwar period, with a mountain of "girls' comics" sitting on shelves alongside the "boys' comics", as well as plenty of non-gender-specific titles. It's only really in the last few decades, as kids have lost interest in comics and the medium's dominant consumer have instead turned out to be adolescents and adults, that these have died off. And it's not as if girls and women don't read comics, because they're reading them in larger numbers than they have for years, it's just that they're mostly bypassing the lumbering dinosaurs of Marvel and DC and heading for independent and foreign comics, which aren't so committed to the narrative primacy of straight white dudes. Marvel is attempting to keep up by altering the demographics of it rooster, as it has done many times in the past; the only real difference here is that it's extending these revisions to A-listers.

Besides, as I said, pleading demographics tends to hit the stumbling block that mainstream comics have historically been pretty bad at representing their own white male readership even in the United States. How many white male superheroes are Jewish, Polish, Cuban, Serbian? So far as the A-listers go, you've pretty much just got a Jewish Magneto and an informed Irish Steve Rogers/Captain America. So this is about lowest common denominators, not demographics, and it has traditionally been assumed that white, straight, Anglo-Celtic Protestant males, preferably Midwestern in origin, have been the lowest common denominators of American life. From a narrative standpoint, that's sixteen flavours of dumb, and it seems that it's becoming equally questionable from a commercial standpoint.


I'm not claiming "rampant discrimination". I don't even know what that would mean, in this context. What I'm saying is that mainstream comics have traditionally been very bad at representing American society (let alone humanity-in-general), and that could stand to change. If it doesn't, the decline of superhero comics to a niche will just happen a littler quicker. I'm not terribly invested in either outcome, I'd just prefer the former for the sake of fans (or potential fans) who are quite happy to see a bit more diversity, and maybe don't deserve to lose the series they enjoy because manbabies don't know how to share.

You are talking about Comix. Most of them (maybe all, i never really liked Comix) are not really supposed to be high art or to create any serious thinking or self-reflection. You might as well try to examine the 60s tv Batman series as a mirror of culture in the western world. One needs a clean and elegant mirror or lens if he is to examine delicate patterns. Comix are the equivelant of a dirty and cheap piece of thick glass..

(Manga, on the other hand, have a different tradition. While there are inherent issues with the same artist making drawings AND dialogue/text, some Manga artists are -in my view rightfully- seen as high-level artists in contemporary Japan).

 

[salty mud]

You understand nothing as i've actually watched a few (didn't find them that great, but i think thats mainly because she's not that good at making videos, give her some time), as well as a few videos of her detractors.

Shockingly there's still no evidence, just assertions (with still no evidence) that she's a "con artist". Also i didn't even donate to her, but it seem's she's doing alright regardless. You do realise the reason she's gotten so much money is because of the backlash provided by people such as yourself? You are literally feeding her, you are integral to her success and do you know what's sad? That you don't even realise it.

But do keep going on Salty Mud, this is after all what she's trying to show and you and all the other MRA Sarkeesian-Obsessed "haters" prove what she's saying.

So you just ignore the bucket loads of evidence proving she's a con-artist. This is a very left wing tactic I find. Ignore the evidence that proves you wrong, but treat your own 'evidence' and personal experiences as the word of god.

What exactly is she trying to show? I'm saying she's a fraud. She wants people to expose her as a fraud?

And what exactly is an 'MRA' that you seem to have labelled me as?

 

[salty mud]

Could it be because i called you out on your disingenuous accusations?

Seriously, accusing someone of getting more money than they intended on Kickstarter, of being a con artist is frankly amazing. Projects routinely go over their goals!

Someone doesn't have to be gamer to recognise the degree of misogyny in games or gaming culture.

Also more on LPs, so what if she used video from someone's lets play/play through?

Your accusations are laughable and how no basis.

Oh btw, i guess charities that go over their goal are scams/con-artists too right? And why is "6k" too much? You claim it is, but that doesn't make it so.

Oh lordy, did you really just compare Anita Sarkeesian with a charity?

 

[useless]

So where's the evidence that she's a con-artist? Did she mislead her audience? She's making videos like she claimed she would. Was it because she got loads of donations? If so, I've already shown how absurd that claim is with Quackers.

How is she a fraud? Is it because she isn't a "Gamer"? You do realise being a "gamer" is a purely personal description of oneself? That there is a very loose definition of what is and what isn't a gamer?

Oh lordy, did you really just compare Anita Sarkeesian with a charity?

Did i say she was literally a charity? I merely said that if Charities or Kick starters go over their funding goal, it doesn't make them con-artists.

 

[EgonSpengler]

So you just ignore the bucket loads of evidence proving she's a con-artist. This is a very left wing tactic I find. Ignore the evidence that proves you wrong, but treat your own 'evidence' and personal experiences as the word of god.

Political ideology has nothing to do with it. It's called confirmation bias, and is pretty common. I think there was a study that found that people were more likely to forget - not overlook or dismiss or cover up, but literally and genuinely forget - facts that refuted previously-held beliefs.