-
[QUOTE=VolcanikTiger86;4580167]
[B]For example its taking the Avengers and saying we need a black character on the avengers so we will add Falcon[/B], it to me detracts from the story.
I think Mia explained it well, the character appears because reasons or why not; this isnt saying more races shouldnt be represneted but its how you do it, if it feels as if its shoe horned then chances are its shoe horned.
[/QUOTE]
Not sure I see what's wrong with that. What defines as shoehorning in fiction of all things? One could say the original concept of The Avengers was just "shoehorning" popular characters as a sales gimmick in the first place.
-
[QUOTE=ed2962;4577403]I have to respectfully disagree. The history of comics is full of minority characters that were either underdeveloped, created to be tokens, or flat out stereotypes. We got say Storm or Black Lightening, but we also had tons of Tyrocs and Ebony Whites. We got Banshee and Siren but we also had stuff like Shamrock. It's not like we had all this great writing with nothing but rich character then the SJWs moved in 5 years ago and forced all the new minority characters to be boring.[/QUOTE]
It really is a weird situation when I see 1940s comics like the Spirit that feature black characters like Ebony White being treated with respect and shown with competence, yet at the same time is also shown with a minstrel-esque appearance and speech patterns.
And in speaking of which, there was even one comic I came across from 1942, called How Boys and Girls Can Help Win the War, which includes a page that promotes the idea of "no racial intolerance," yet also shows a black person as a stereotyped caricature.
[img]https://box00.comicbookplus.com/viewer/a8/a822f2b2962e76f2fc9d358108bb96c9/42.jpg[/img]
-
[QUOTE=Conch22;4580264]You seem really pressed that I have a black friend and I used him as an example of someone who's self sufficient. Almost like you're threatened by someone like that existing.
I'll also reiterate that the person I responded to also used things black people were going through in his example, but you agree with him so don't feel the need to take the most bad faith interpretation possible of what he said.
I'm standing behind what I said, none of the people going through the cheap black toy epidemic seem to be here outside of possibly the person who brought it up, but you've got no problem with that example, just mine.[/QUOTE]
I have no idea what "toy" post you're talking about. I'm not responding to a post about toys I'm responding to you, thinking it's okay for you to dictate an acceptable use policy regarding implementation of minority characters and more broadly minority representation in general media when you clearly have no idea what you're talking about because it's never effected you.
I don't know your imaginary friend so I don't really care if he's "self sufficient". It sure is telling that your assumption of black people that don't agree with you is that they are somehow financially, or mentally deficient though.
-
[QUOTE=Things Fall Apart;4580376]I have no idea what "toy" post you're talking about. I'm not responding to a post about toys I'm responding to you, thinking it's okay for you to dictate an acceptable use policy regarding implementation of minority characters and more broadly minority representation in general media when you clearly have no idea what you're talking about because it's never effected you.
I don't know your imaginary friend so I don't really care if he's "self sufficient". It sure is telling that your assumption of black people that don't agree with you is that they are somehow financially, or mentally deficient though.[/QUOTE]
This is a lot of drama for I have an OPINION on ways policies do and do not work and seeing as the post you're this displeased with contains the comment I was responding to, it's not hard to find.
Again, bad faith interpretation of what I said. If you care to reread my comments, I did not deny there are situations outside people's control that call for intervention, I stated I have a friend who is self sufficient who hasn't needed that and that shouldn't be an automatic assumption because of race.
You also have no idea what my life's been, but the character assassination shows a real highground. I'm really sick of defending myself to someone who I can't possibly disagree with or I'm racist, so keep trashing me and derailing the thread, I'm gonna peace out and focus on better things. "Oh, what do you mean by things? Are you being racist." Keep going with that, maybe you'll find someone else gullible enough to fall for it
-
[QUOTE=Conch22;4580423]This is a lot of drama for I have an OPINION on ways policies do and do not work and seeing as the post you're this displeased with contains the comment I was responding to, it's not hard to find.
Again, bad faith interpretation of what I said. If you care to reread my comments, I did not deny there are situations outside people's control that call for intervention, I stated I have a friend who is self sufficient who hasn't needed that and that shouldn't be an automatic assumption because of race.
You also have no idea what my life's been, but the character assassination shows a real highground. I'm really sick of defending myself to someone who I can't possibly disagree with or I'm racist, so keep trashing me and derailing the thread, I'm gonna peace out and focus on better things. "Oh, what do you mean by things? Are you being racist." Keep going with that, maybe you'll find someone else gullible enough to fall for it[/QUOTE]
Oh, you out [U]again[/U]? Deuces.
-
[QUOTE=VolcanikTiger86;4580167]You may think i am but this was one of if not the only thing Ned wanted after learning Peter was Spider-Man, he wanted to be Spider-Mans overwatch don't believe me watch homecoming again plus my point is and this applys to Stark to when has Peter ever need help being spider-man.
[B]I'm not offended, i'm angry because i want to understand the creative process so that when i do it in my stories i'm not poing PC stuff but what i believe to be true progression but when i question any change to race, sexual orientition all i get is why not
Here is a thought why can't i write a bisexual batwoman because supposedly thats digusting or a bisexual Karolina Dean because thats digusting too but a gay Steve Rogers with bucky thats adorable why, the only reason i can think of is that gay characters can't be changed but straight ones can and its because of implications regardless of how its done it has implications
So long as the implications are againist white, male and/or straight people then its of no concern but if it impacts a minority then nope it needs change. [/B]
Who are you to say what is and isnt revelant, i think it is very revelant, what i am saying is that Peter is not meant to have friends but Disney made a decision which was a political decison to represent all these minorities however they gave them roles to me they shouldnt have.
Ned Leeds can be Asian without a issue however to me should not have been Peters BFF
Says who
I'm sorry but what kind of bully was he, for me purposly Flash is meant to be imposing physically and the effect of that is the impact it has on peter,
He hates Flash and would like nothing but to kick the crap out of him however a) it would out him as spidey and b)it would make him as bad as flash with this MCU one that is lost.
I disagree i think it was a bad change
Again says you, for me the journey of Flash wither he be Latino, South Asian or Black should be the same because of the impact to Peter's story impact that we have lost because i'm not scared of Flash, don't even think he is that bad because there is no conflict between them
The issue is that Peter beats Flash - Flash is jealous - Peter has no reason to fear Flash matter of fact he has no reason to care about Flash other than being you know a human being.
[B]Plus correct me if i'm wrong but they were organically introduced[/B]
[B]I will disagree because i dont think that is PC, its just introducing a new character and doing it well for creatvie reasons. Maybe thats the answer Political Correctness is done right when you dont force it and arent trying. [/B]
I know you more than likely dont care but i agree thank you
That is my stance to tell a story if a black character can be or needs to be fine do it otherwise just tell a story and sometimes I don't think that happens because people are worried about how it will seem instead of letting it stand by itself.
[B]For example its taking the Avengers and saying we need a black character on the avengers so we will add Falcon, it to me detracts from the story.
I think Mia explained it well, the character appears because reasons or why not; this isnt saying more races shouldnt be represneted but its how you do it, if it feels as if its shoe horned then chances are its shoe horned. [/B]
No it depends on why you do it , for example i do the same for some of my stories, ensuring i know how many male female characters and obviously i will add race in as well however i look at makiing sure everyone gets representated but also that i can defend it without going because i want to.
I could be mistake but i thought he wanted an example of political correctness done right not that minorities shouldnt get representation.
Quoted in Agreement
Those people will be defeated when the film exceeded expectation.[/QUOTE]
If you believe in your story just do it. There's going to be people who like it or hate it and some who juts don't get it. But stand by your story, don't retreat into "Oh, I can't do something cuz PC."
If we're taking about Marvel/DC superhero very little is "organic". [B]Tons[/B] of beloved characters exist because of editorial mandates.
But Falcon being forced into the Avengers didn't take away from the story, it [I]was[/I] the story. The writer wanted to make point about Affirmative Action ( he just wasn't allowed to finish it).
-
[QUOTE=The Negative Zone;4580271]Not sure I see what's wrong with that. What defines as shoehorning in fiction of all things? One could say the original concept of The Avengers was just "shoehorning" popular characters as a sales gimmick in the first place.[/QUOTE]
The Marvel and DC universes are [B]built[/B] on contrivances.
-
[QUOTE=ed2962;4580465]If you believe in your story just do it. There's going to be people who like it or hate it and some who juts don't get it. But stand by your story, don't retreat into "Oh, I can't do something cuz PC."
If we're taking about Marvel/DC superhero very little is "organic". [B]Tons[/B] of beloved characters exist because of editorial mandates.
But Falcon being forced into the Avengers didn't take away from the story, it [I]was[/I] the story. The writer wanted to make point about Affirmative Action ( he just wasn't allowed to finish it).[/QUOTE]
There is no such thing as an "organic" insert of any character. They are ALL invented and inserted at the whim of the writer.
One of Marvel's greatest friendships is Luke Cage and Iron Fist, they were quite literally just tossed together. They had absolutely no reason to be in each others stories.
The Avengers came together "for reasons", the modern X-Men originally got together because Professor X screwed up and said "Well, guess I'll throw together an international team, to rescue the old one."
None of those were the result of years of intricate plotting and build up.
-
[QUOTE=ed2962;4580466]The Marvel and DC universes are [B]built[/B] on contrivances.[/QUOTE]
Yep. Exactly.
-
Going back to Luke Cage, the whole Iron Fist thing is the reason I don't get why some fans are mad about Jess Jones just getting tossed in the mix, seemingly out of the blue.
That's pretty much how Luke has met all of his best friends.
-
Political correctness is a broad subject with a changing definition, and what you and most here are talking about is the narrowed down idea of diversity and inclusion. This started out a "tokenism", basically adding a character as some kind of artistic affirmative action to "show" how they are not racist and helps the creator feel a little better about using a scary minority suspect in every other case, the "I have a black friend" method of writing. Most of the tokens added were stereotypical and pushed in the backgrounds when the story didn't call for their trope. A single black character, for example, is forced to be exemplary of his entire race in small segments. This also even brought about the "Positive Discrimination" the wise Native American character that dispenses sage advice, or the Asian martial artist that can fight 20 men at the same time but, only when needed, then back to the background they went. Minorities were a plot device. And that is what passed for "[I]Politically correct[/I]" for a time.....but
It is still being practiced today in many forms of media. It fulfills the executives' desire to [I]show[/I] they are more ethnically respectful to draw in a minority audience, avoid criticism from minority groups as twitter has become the court room of "[I]Politically correct[/I]". And sadly it allows the creators to make race jokes related to a minority in the medium of their work without any shame [I]cough, cough [/I] Quentin Tarantino. The Token has been moved up to the main character in some cases but is still filled with tropes and stereotypical characteristics. They are still plot devices just more sugar coated to please a "socially aware" (now know as [I]woke[/I]) audience.
So when is "political correctness" done well in comics or any other medium? When it's not part of the creative process, to not fill in a check list. To be a thought out idea without outside pressure that it "needs" to be included rather than it should be there. I would agree that the idea of a check list during the creative process is a weight added that should not be there.
There was a Marvel comic in 2005 from Marvel called Wha...Huh? a play on What If? In it is a story of "What if the Black Panther was white". To shorten the story he was only hired on the Avengers because they thought he was black and that Black Widow was there because she is a woman. Makes on wonder on how much of that parody of tokenism is true.
There are some that believe that forced diversity is a good thing, so, to each his own. The end of the day it is all the choice of the owner and writer of the material to do with it how they see fit, be it from a feeling of social pressure to add certain aspect or to only follow ones creative self. The choice we have as consumers is to buy what we want to see and read, our vocal opinions be they in the majority or minority really mean nothing if a company is making bottom line profit from the material.
-
[QUOTE=Tendrin;4580263]Mandril is one of the very few characters I honestly don't believe is salvageable. Most of the time, I'm all about the 'no bad characters', but the amount of work you'd need to make him even slightly less offensive just isn't worth it, IMO, not when there are far better characters languishing for lack of it.[/QUOTE]
Hes literally a black monkey man with rape powers who hates women. Kill him and never use him again.
-
[QUOTE=jetengine;4580764]Hes literally a black monkey man with rape powers. Kill him and never use him again.[/QUOTE]
When is the last time he was used? Was he in Hunted? I think they might only bring him back to kill him.
-
[QUOTE=Things Fall Apart;4580783]When is the last time he was used? Was he in Hunted? I think they might only bring him back to kill him.[/QUOTE]
I think he was in it, but I dont think he was killed
EDIT: Yeah they killed him
-
[QUOTE=jetengine;4580792]I think he was in it, but I dont think he was killed
EDIT: Yeah they killed him[/QUOTE]
Hopefully it sticks. I get the desire to want to get rid of a character like that, but it seems like they keep forgetting they killed him off and then someone else brings him back. I can't imagine that's an IP that anyone really wants to hold on to.