Superheroes & representation (split from questions thread)

[EgonSpengler]

I agree that these deliberate aspects of the movies exist, but in my opinion they are nothing more than finishing touches, painted on the near-finished product as an afterthought, rather than being an attempt to attempt to revolve the movie around them.

They're all a bit hollow when compared to movies that pull off these things in style, such as say.. oh I don't know. Citizen Kane? Or whatever.

The focus is fights, action, explosions, sex appeal, and other such things that will attract the desired demographic (males, 18-30?) to the theatre. The things you mention are inserted overtop, in an attempt to make the movie a bit less cartoony and a bit more "realistic", perhaps gritty, perhaps relatable to some sort of political controversy or point of interest.

It adds a bit more depth to the movie, but not really that much. It's for the most part, with a couple exceptions, seriously lacking. I mean, it's perfectly appropriate for the sort of movies that they are (action movies), but I don't think we should be trying to convince ourselves that they're anything but.

Yes, anyone who watches these movies and ignores their social commentaries or political subtexts can enjoy them just fine, but I think anyone who did really missed a lot:

In The Winter Soldier, the question of who really serves the interests and upholds the ideals of our country was basically the entire movie. Who was really the true winter soldier? Bucky or Steve? And while the connection between Steve and Sam, that they're both war veterans dealing with readjusting to civilian life, was a subplot, it was pretty important to the characters and their instant friendship.

In Iron Man, Tony's anger and sense of responsibility upon the realization that the terrorists were using Stark Industries weaponry against civilians was a vital part of his character arc, and his disagreement with Obadiah over their role as iron-mongers was the central conflict of the final act.

In X-Men, the allegory about the difficulty of being a persecuted or oppressed minority is in the movie's, ahem, genes and the "Martin and Malcolm" relationship between Prof. X and Magneto is the whole reason they're in conflict. There would be no movie without that allegorical, "frenemy" relationship.

Nolan's Batman movies practically bludgeoned me into submission with their socio-political commentary. My ears are still ringing. (The 2nd and the 3rd movies, at any rate, I don't really remember the first one.)

You could watch any of these movies just for the pretty people and the explosions, but I think you would be really missing out. Maybe I've misunderstood what you think we're trying to convince ourselves of.

 

[useless]

Oh yeah, if you just ignore the fact that it is behaviour that nobody actually displays and that you are actively discouraged from taking such actions, then it's fair criticism.

Need a bigger



Anyone else hear the goalposts screeching as they get dragged across the park?

I explained why it's fallacious. Read my edited post, infact I will copy it here:

And this is a problem how? "Gamer" is a term that one applies to them self. There is no "bar" to be reached to claim to be a gamer, both incredibly dedicated and casual players of games are gamers.

How do you know she hasn't played games in the past? Or that as she played them she didn't enjoy them, in-spite of the messages they portrayed about women? You make alot of assumptions with no evidence.

You don't even have to enjoy games to be considered a gamer, there are numerous people who make a point or have a hobby of Lets Playing terrible games because of exactly that. Are they not gamers? I'm pretty sure if Sarkeesian is playing games, she can confidently describe herself as such.

Also you missed this:

I love playing video games but I’m regularly disappointed in the limited and limiting ways women are represented. This video project will explore, analyze and deconstruct some of the most common tropes and stereotypes of female characters in games. The series will highlight the larger recurring patterns and conventions used within the gaming industry rather than just focusing on the worst offenders. I’m going to need your help to make it happen!

Also let's not forget to mention that what "gamer" can mean depends on the context. I am not a "gamer" when i talk about it being my lifestyle. It is a hobby, but when it comes to playing games, i can assert that i am.

Also stop acting like there is a monopoly on the definition of gamer, it has different meanings in different contexts. It's not akin to someones profession.

 

[brennan]

I'm not acting like anything. You said that she didn't say she was a gamer. She did.

This has precisely nothing to do with fallacies or definitions.

 

[Traitorfish]

They didn't do it consciously but simultaneously they did.

Exactly, yes. They didn't consciously design a line-up that was 95%+ white dudes, but they deliberately wrote each of those individuals in the 95%+ as a white dude. They didn't mean to create a structural bias towards white dudes, but when every character is designed to fit a perceived lowest common demonstrator, that's the result.

They didn't introduce non-white-male characters, but simultaneously they deliberately did.

They introduced non-whitedudes, but not as many as they could have done. It was possible, but they lacked the will. No mystery.

..I agree - and I think that the cause for disagreement here is that people have different ideas about where it doesn't matter. Some people can't stomach Thor suddenly being turned into a black dude and Spidey being a hispanic homosexual (probably not real examples but you get the point). Debate then gets derailed by other people accusing them of racism or whatever, when in actual fact what is happening is almost certainly no more than different gut-reactions to ideologically motivated retconning.

It might be. I can certainly imagine that a lot of it is just sheer geek territorialism. But there's also a healthy dose of racism. A lot of people are racist, and a lot of people are sexist, and a lot of people are homophobic. The right-wing politically correct brigade would rather we didn't say that, because being called "racist" or "sexist" is embarrassing. (Being racist or sexist is fine, just don't get caught.) That's why accusations of racism as the nuclear option, as somebody put it, not because of liberal witch-hunters, but precisely because we need to believe that bigots are a fringe minority, rather than a massive, institutionally-entrenched segment of the population, because that the latter would simply be too embarrassing to countenance. Bigotry is depressingly mundane, is the thing, and a lot of that is coming through in the reactions to these changes.

Preposterous strawman anyone?

A joke. They have those in England, don't they? I'm often told that you invented them.

 

[Algeroth]

I explained why it's fallacious. Read my edited post, infact I will copy it here:



Also stop acting like there is a monopoly on the definition of gamer, it has different meanings in different contexts. It's not akin to someones profession.

You bring up the debate, arguing that she doesn't have to be a gamer to write about games and she's nor a gamer but now you are backpedaling as usual.

 

[useless]

I'm not acting like anything. You said that she didn't say she was a gamer. She did.

This has precisely nothing to do with fallacies or definitions.

I'm going by her past statements in which she talks about how she does not consider herself to a part of the culture of "gaming", which doesn't make her claim to be a gamer invalid.

I don't consider myself to be involved in the gaming "scene" or culture, yet i am a gamer.

I will concede i haven't been on her kickstarter for ages (since it was first brought to my attention a year or two ago), so i wasn't aware nor did i remember that she had labelled herself as such, but i was primarily dealing with the allegations and claims that she was a fraud because she had somehow deceived people (which she hasn't).

You bring up the debate, arguing that she doesn't have to be a gamer to write about games and she's nor a gamer but now you are backpedaling as usual.

How could i deal with the allegations of fraud if i didn't bring up the fact that it doesn't matter if you're gamer or not if you're critiquing themes or how people are treated in a game? That was precisely why she was accused of being a con-artist or a fraud.

 

[warpus]

You could watch any of these movies just for the pretty people and the explosions, but I think you would be really missing out. Maybe I've misunderstood what you think we're trying to convince ourselves of.

I don't disagree that these "deeper" social commentary subtexts play minor parts in these movies.

There was a bit of social commentary in the latest Star Trek movie for instance, but the movie revolved around action and violence. Contrast this with any of my favourite TNG episodes, which deal almost exclusively with some sort of a moral quandry.

That's the contrast I'm talking about. It's easy enough to insert this and that into a movie, but when your movie makes no apologies about being a lowest common denominator action movie, it's not going to be easy to insert stuff like that and make the viewer feel like it has nearly as much substance as a movie that was designed to revolve around such issues.

 

[Traitorfish]

Gerard Butler confirmed as Wonder Woman

However fan Tom Booker said: “I hate this sort of gimmicky and deliberately controversial re-imagining of characters.

“It makes the concept of superheroes seem inherently ridiculous and childish, rather than the deadly serious and entirely appropriate obsession of middle-aged men that it so obviously is.

Heh.

 

[Algeroth]

How could i deal with the allegations of fraud if i didn't bring up the fact that it doesn't matter if you're gamer or not if you're critiquing themes or how people are treated in a game? That was precisely why she was accused of being a con-artist or a fraud.

Of course that one doesn't have to be a gamer when critiquing themes in games, just like one doesn't have to be a scientist when reporting about science. However not being a scientist is no excuse when you f-up your reporting just like not being a gamer is not an excuse when you produce such abortion as was her video about "Women as decoration". Not being something is not an excuse for not understanding.

Which is a shame. I watched the first part of her series about damsels in distress and it was pretty solid. And it bring up (iirc) very interesting thing that is relevant to this thread - there wasn't a interesting female protagonist since early 00s, the last one I can remember is Jade from BGE. But after seeing the aforementioned episode, I'm not so sure that I want to watch the next parts.

And I think that she was accused of being a fraud and con-artist (which accusations I find pretty hilarious) not because she is not a gamer, but because she abuse people sympathies and "tricked" them out of their money.

 

[Quackers]

Noticing a game portrays women, LGBT people, people of colour, people of religion and atheists isn't "Cherrypicking".

What?

Fraud IS a legal term. Accusing her of fraud is accusing someone of a crime. Again, I will repeat this Ad Nausea; NO ONE FORCED THE DONATORS TO DONATE. Morals have nothing to do with whether a Kick-Starter is over or under funded.

I didn't say she commited fraud? I said she was guilty of massive douschbaggery by profiting off a Kickstarter. Morals apply everywhere whether you like it or not. There is no "off" button when it comes to your favourite feminist critic...

But you aren't a donator, so why the hell would you even care? How do you know she hasn't got a raft of videos to follow? It's her right to dictate how fast or how slow she produces the videos and unless you have evidence of her saying she will no longer make videos, your point is moot. Deal with it.

I care because her actions affect an industry which I am deeply interested in. I also care because the front she has opened up is another in a culture war.
I am not against her because she is a woman or a feminist; i'm against her for attacking an industry, completely unfairly, to promote the brand of Anita. She has no honest intentions to change things in a good way; she wants to demonise and destroy it all with the intentions of raising her profile.

Oh no, you just believe she should have her "Comeuppance". Whatever that means.

Yup, hopefully something bites her on the arse and sinks the charlatan.

Again it doesn't matter if she's a gamer or not. Has no inkling on it, I don't need to a be a goddamn film director to point out the racist ideology espoused in a film such as The Eternal Jew.

Again, you can critique anything you like. If you aren't up to your eyes in knowledge of that industry than I can also take great care when reading your opinion because it might be all bollocks and in Anita "have to kill all the strippers on Hitman" Saaky's case it is.

 

[useless]

What?

What i meant is that noticing how games portray women, LGBT people, people of colour, people of religion and atheists isn't "Cherrypicking".

I didn't say she commited fraud? I said she was guilty of massive douschbaggery by profiting off a Kickstarter. Morals apply everywhere whether you like it or not. There is no "off" button when it comes to your favourite feminist critic...

Uh, plenty of people profit from Kickstarter? Companies do it? Do you even know what Kickstarter is?

Again, your complaint is that it's Anita's fault that people donated more money to it than she anticipated, which is nonsensical.

Just because she got more support and money than you wanted, as well as actually getting it funded, doesn't mean it's immoral. It would be immoral if she took the money and then delivered no content, but she continues to do so.

I care because her actions affect an industry which I am deeply interested in. I also care because the front she has opened up is another in a culture war.
I am not against her because she is a woman or a feminist; i'm against her for attacking an industry, completely unfairly, to promote the brand of Anita. She has no honest intentions to change things in a good way; she wants to demonise and destroy it all with the intentions of raising her profile.

The game industry is under no threat from Sarkeesian. Even if it was, it would adapt as games are beginning to do. The sales figures of GTA 5 alone prove this. I don't know how you can even comment on her intentions and given your personal dislike or "Political correctness" i doubt you would want the situation to even change.

Again, you can critique anything you like. If you aren't up to your eyes in knowledge of that industry than I can also take great care when reading your opinion because it might be all bollocks and in Anita "have to kill all the strippers on Hitman" Saaky's case it is.

She doesn't say that, nor does she imply it. She mentions that players can do it, but she in no way says it is instrumental to the game, that it is a possibility.

 

[Tarquelne]

...and maybe it was martians. I see no point in discussing pure speculation, which is all this is.

The example was put that way to underline how speculative it is. The point was that whatever the reason for the focus on S/W/M, it was there, and narrative and now, commercially, it's lazy and/or not good. (I'm not going to go so far as "poor" writing or "bad" writing. I'm quite comfortable with "not good," and lazy, though.)

There's a conflation going on here. That being pragmatic about the reason stables of white, male superheroes were created white and male in decades past and then expressing a distaste for revisionism is inherently racist. It isn't.

So far as I know, no one is making that conflation.
Note, please, that the above doesn't mean someone isn't racist. I'm pretty sure TF was calling Quakers racist well before this thread. Yes, despite Quackers thinking the Rock is cool.

If people want more ethinic/religious/sexual/other minority characters then I think it perfectly reasonable to suggest that they need to create new ones rather than wreck their fans' sense of verisimilitude in favour of political correctness.

Sure. And it's perfectly reasonable for them to come back with "not good enough."

Remember, these are people who think stuff like "social justice" is more important than 20-something+ comix fandom.

They're just warped.

I also think it is poor form of people who take a different view to throw accusations of racism firstly in retrospect at people like Stan Lee across several decades and secondly at anyone who dares contradict them in the present.

Me too. Well, I try to confine my approbation to unjustified accusations of racism. Some don't seem to be, some do.

Disproportionate reactions?!?!? On the Internet?!?!?!?!?

Affirming they happen...?

It is a common tactic of feminists to bleat that they are being disproportionately targeted with threats (by elements of the Patriarchy). Such claims should not be credible to anyone who has spent significant time online - who should be aware that everyone gets abuse regardless of their gender or the issues they cover.

Denying they happen...?

From what I've gathered reading about this, we're not just talking about the normal background level of abuse.

then people like Anita Sarkeesian should not be allowed to get away with saying that only women and particularly feminists get such abuse, such claims are not remotely credible.

Oh! Now we're talking about her claiming that? Well ... sure, that's wrong.

OTOH, given the apparent demographics of the internet, it should be expected a feminist critical of games would get an extra large helping of abuse. Then there's the whole MRA thing, which may be the poster-child for a group that's over-represented online.

Though I guess I'm just so naive that I think threats of rape and death are beyond the normal.

I would highlight the recent case in the UK where the woman campaigning for Jane Austen's picture on the £5 note (a cause I would endorse incidentally) claimed that elements of the patriarchy - men with an agenda to silence women - were harassing her online because they though women should not have a public voice.

Two people went to jail. Neither was an agent of the patriarchy

So ... you're not arguing that there isn't an abnormal amount of abuse, just denying the crazy conspiracy theory?



(Final post.)

 

[Tahuti]

Why are there no Jewish superheroes? All of them are Aryan supermen!

NAZIS! NAZIS! NAZIS!

Oh wait

 

[useless]

Why are there no Jewish superheroes? All of them are Aryan supermen!

NAZIS! NAZIS! NAZIS!

Oh wait

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty_Pryde

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batwoman

 

[Tahuti]

Also, this Zionist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_(comics)

Notice how many of them are women! The Jewish mother stereotype is alive and well!

 

[warpus]

Why no Scientologist or trans superheroes? Or Mormon? Polish?

Us minorities always get the shaft..

 

[Tahuti]

Polish?

 

[Traitorfish]

The thing to consider here, is: if Steve Rogers and Thor had been replaced by other characters, but those characters were also white males, would anyone outside of the Marvel fandom have discussed it? I don't think they would. It would be seen as another example of the superhero genre's penchant for convoluted plot-lines. The only reason we're taking about this is because the people who actually did step into those roles, a black man and a woman, are the Wrong Sort Of People to fill those roles.

You might make a coherent case for why Thor should be a man, given the mythological background, etc. I'm not sure it would be particularly robust, but I'd be willing to accept that it was merely pedantic rather than prejudiced. But can anyone make a serious case for why Captain America must be white?

And if anyone has an answer, by all means, share it. I'm sincerely curious to know what the overlap is between "reasons I don't want a black Captain America" and "things I can say in public", because I'm drawing a blank.

 

[Tahuti]

But can anyone make a serious case for why Captain America must be white?

Link to video.

 

[Traitorfish]

Actually, I've thought of a reason why Captain America shouldn't be African-American: Captain America embodies the American spirit, and nothing is so American as immigration. That's why Steve Rogers was explicitly (if inconsequentially) identified as Irish-American. So rather than a native-born African-American, Cap should instead be an Afro-Latino immigrant.

But, somehow, I doubt that's going to be any more palatable to the Keep Australia Captain America White crowd.