Captain America controversy?

[BitParallel]

Hello Friends,

I recently re-started reading comics, and when I first left off there was so much hate on IronMan character (during CW era). In my opinion, as an Ironman fan, I was pro registration and I liked the depth/twist it had on his character.

Fast forward to now, I see many distasteful comments about Captain America. I just started reading Secret Empire, so I’m not sure what’s going to happen. But Captain America being called facist, hypocrite “Mr too perfect” yada yada yada is it because of Secret Empire or its just pure hate like Carols? When did he become so controversial?

I’m just trying to understand the context of the dislike because he is Captain America, we should be SALUTING HIM! instead of dissing.

[OOTCS]

Most of the hate that I see towards Cap is about Avengers vs. X-Men--the way he approached the X-Men during the event and the way he treated Cyclops afterwards.

[Digifiend]

In-universe, Secret Empire caused major damage to his reputation. Until a twist at the end, it was the same in real life too, because he seemed to have turned traitor.

[capandkirby]

It's because, unfortunately, fandom has gotten increasingly immature, entitled, selfish and intolerant as times goes on. If two characters argue in an event, instead of doing the logical thing and saying 'wow, this writer's take was awful, oh, well, maybe the next event will be better' they publicly hate on the character opposing their fave, forgetting or just not caring about the fact that the opposing character has fans, too, and they don't particularly like to see their favorite character bashed anymore than those doing the bashing would want their favorite character bashed. It's a vicious, troubling cycle and the people doing it need to a) learn manners because their behavior is rude and b) grow up.

And the cherry picking is annoying, too, while I'm at it. A lot of people only read the parts of an event that pertain to just the character they like, not getting the whole story, or even ignoring the parts of the event they have read but that doesn't support their bias and leaving it out of the conversation. Which is intellectually dishonest.

As a parent, if I saw my daughter posting non-stop hate towards anything, fictional or otherwise I'd a) revoke her tech privileges, and b) take her to get counseling, because hating on things is just not healthy, especially getting so emotionally invested in liking a fictional character that you prioritize the fictional character over other fans, aka real, live, people, who are just wanting to enjoy their thing. I wonder about the parenting (or lack thereof) being done on today's youth.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

In-universe, Secret Empire caused major damage to his reputation. Until a twist at the end, it was the same in real life too, because he seemed to have turned traitor.

In real-life Captain America is Chris Evans no questions, end of discussion. His reputation has never been higher.

[manymade1]

It's because, unfortunately, fandom has gotten increasingly immature, entitled, selfish and intolerant as times goes on. If two characters argue in an event, instead of doing the logical thing and saying 'wow, this writer's take was awful, oh, well, maybe the next event will be better' they publicly hate on the character opposing their fave, forgetting or just not caring about the fact that the opposing character has fans, too, and they don't particularly like to see their favorite character bashed anymore than those doing the bashing would want their favorite character bashed. It's a vicious, troubling cycle and the people doing it need to a) learn manners because their behavior is rude and b) grow up.

I see what you're saying, but can you really blame people? I mean the whole point of comics is escapism. So for example, with CW, I wouldn't expect people to put the blame on Millar's writing; I would expect them to put it on Iron Man. I mean the whole point of being a consistent comic reader is to get invested in these characters.

[capandkirby]

I see what you're saying, but can you really blame people? I mean the whole point of comics is escapism. So for example, with CW, I wouldn't expect people to put the blame on Millar's writing; I would expect them to put it on Iron Man. I mean the whole point of being a consistent comic reader is to get invested in these characters.

Sure, comics are escapism, but not to the point of forgetting the fact that tastes vary and that there are Cap fans out there, a lot, in fact, as his book is doing very well, and they deserve to come to these boards as much as anybody and enjoy their fave without seeing hate leveled at him 24/7 for an event that is YEARS old by now. People need to be more cognizant that other people, with feelings, exist. I mean, to use an example, I wouldn't go into a Baskin Robbins and remark to a total stranger in line before me that the Butter Pecan they are purchasing sucks. It's rude. It shouldn't be permissible online, either. My general rule of thumb for fandom is the same as it was decades ago when the internet first came to be, if I wouldn't say it to someone's face in real-life if I were to meet them at a con, it shouldn't be said at all.

And I do, actually, blame Millar for Civil War. It was terrible characterization of Iron Man. And Reed Richards. The characters of Iron Man or Mr. Fantastic aren't bad. Because they've been written by brilliant writers who have done a good job with them. It's the writer's interpretation of those characters that is bad. ANY character can be amazing or can be terrible based entirely on who is writing them.

Also, there comes a point in time when hating onto hate is just not healthy. Especially after years. It takes a physical toll on the body. There have been numerous studies on the subject. Here's an example of an article written on the subject:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/emoti...ness_n_4612392

Why on earth would anyone do this to their body over fiction?! Honestly, it's psychotic.

[Lee Stone]

It's because, unfortunately, fandom has gotten increasingly immature, entitled, selfish and intolerant as times goes on. If two characters argue in an event, instead of doing the logical thing and saying 'wow, this writer's take was awful, oh, well, maybe the next event will be better' they publicly hate on the character opposing their fave, forgetting or just not caring about the fact that the opposing character has fans, too, and they don't particularly like to see their favorite character bashed anymore than those doing the bashing would want their favorite character bashed. It's a vicious, troubling cycle and the people doing it need to a) learn manners because their behavior is rude and b) grow up.

And the cherry picking is annoying, too, while I'm at it. A lot of people only read the parts of an event that pertain to just the character they like, not getting the whole story, or even ignoring the parts of the event they have read but that doesn't support their bias and leaving it out of the conversation. Which is intellectually dishonest.

As a parent, if I saw my daughter posting non-stop hate towards anything, fictional or otherwise I'd a) revoke her tech privileges, and b) take her to get counseling, because hating on things is just not healthy, especially getting so emotionally invested in liking a fictional character that you prioritize the fictional character over other fans, aka real, live, people, who are just wanting to enjoy their thing. I wonder about the parenting (or lack thereof) being done on today's youth.

Kudos!
Well said! I agree completely.

[Personamanx]

In general comics fan are rather over reactionary when it comes to characters they like. With Captain America there also comes a political angle due to American nationalism. When something big happens in a Captain America comic there's always someone getting pissed. Whether it's Republicans denouncing Marvel in 2007 when he "died" towards the end of Civil War because "killing Captain America while the US was at war is unpatriotic" or Democrats being pissed off at Cap last year when Secret Empire was going on because he had become a fascist agent of Hydra. Not saying either story is better or even that they're good at all, but damn people just can't let it go when there's a stupid Captain America story. They more than likely never even read it, they're just reacting to synopsis or pages/panels in isolation.

Just chill out, enjoy it if it's to your liking, ignore it if it isn't. He's a fictional character in a medium that isn't doing very well. It's not worth getting worked up over.

[capandkirby]

In general comics fan are rather over reactionary when it comes to characters they like. With Captain America there also comes a political angle due to American nationalism. When something big happens in a Captain America comic there's always someone getting pissed. Whether it's Republicans denouncing Marvel in 2007 when he "died" towards the end of Civil War because "killing Captain America while the US was at war is unpatriotic" or Democrats being pissed off at Cap last year when Secret Empire was going on because he had become a fascist agent of Hydra. Not saying either story is better or even that they're good at all, but damn people just can't let it go when there's a stupid Captain America story. They more than likely never even read it, they're just reacting to synopsis or pages/panels in isolation.

Just chill out, enjoy it if it's to your liking, ignore it if it isn't. He's a fictional character in a medium that isn't doing very well. It's not worth getting worked up over.

I agree that getting upset over a story you haven't actually read is ALSO intellectually dishonest.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Fact is if there's no pushback on the part of fans and calling out when they do stupid stuff with characters there are risk of characters getting Hank Pym'd or Aquaman'd. The reason writers got away with making Hank Pym almost entirely unusable (to the point that his movie had to use Scott Lang, his legacy character rather than him) is because he didn't have the fame and large enough fanbase in numbers.

If comics creators and editors aren't careful and proper then they risk diminishing their property. Look at what happened to poor Superman. Since the 2000s, DC commissioned a slew of Alternate Universe stories where Superman is an evil dictator, stuff like Red Son (by Mark Millar by the way), and these stories ended up defining and informing Superman more than the prime version. The biggest selling Superman games are these Injustice games where an AU evil murdering Superman is constantly featured in promos, trailers and so on. Then you have the Zack Snyder movies where Superman being a destructive neanderthal is the focus and undercurrent of his movies.

So yeah, Secret Empire didn't upset Captain America's image thanks to Chris Evans. But it can do long-term damage if not resisted sufficiently enough and pushed back strongly enough by fans.

[Personamanx]

I agree that getting upset over a story you haven't actually read is ALSO intellectually dishonest.

I think it's fair enough to hear about the content of a story second hand, and make the call that it isn't for you. I would even say it's fair to actively state why it isn't for you whether that's due to offense or just plain old disinterest. But it's easy to casually say "I'm not interested in X because of Y." and have that escalate into something more passionate when it's commented upon. Especially when there's an audience. It's something folk have to keep in check, or if you have an active audience use responsibly.

"I'm not fond of cornbread because of the texture."

"Screw you, cornbread is god food!"

"God, I friggin' hate anybody who eats cornbread. It's disgusting."

[capandkirby]

I think it's fair enough to hear about the content of a story second hand, and make the call that it isn't for you. I would even say it's fair to actively state why it isn't for you whether that's due to offense or just plain old disinterest. But it's easy to casually say "I'm not interested in X because of Y." and have that escalate into something more passionate when it's commented upon. Especially when there's an audience. It's something folk have to keep in check, or if you have an active audience use responsibly.

Exactly. Basic Common Courtesy 101.

[BitParallel]

Interesting responses. Thank You, Guys!

I usually focus more on the story and the execution than the characters. If the story is new, gravitating with well written plot twists then I would enjoy the ride and the book.

With that being said, I definitely enjoy character driven stories and I dislike it when a character is written out of character but I am cool with any form of character development even if it’s controversial or disliked by the majority. As long as the story and the character compliment one another with good execution, gradually showing how the character got into the other side of the spectrum.

I am currently reading Secret Empire, and with it’s controversial portrayal of CA, I am enjoying the book immensely and the character twist. I am well aware of how the story ends, I was somewhat spoiled but for now I am enjoying it.

Similarly with Ironman during Civil War, I liked the development of his character. I know I’m the odd one out and most folks hated him but I viewed it as a development because no one is perfect and Tony is definitely a flawed human being.

I agree with most of you, don’t show too much toxicity over fictional characters. It ain’t healthy, bois.

[capandkirby]

I see what you're saying, but can you really blame people? I mean the whole point of comics is escapism. So for example, with CW, I wouldn't expect people to put the blame on Millar's writing; I would expect them to put it on Iron Man. I mean the whole point of being a consistent comic reader is to get invested in these characters.

Characters have no agency. They are totally and completely at the discretion of those writing them. ANY character can be amazing or terrible based entirely on who is writing and/or drawing them and how. Even with my favorite character, Cap, I can admit that there are fantastic runs and there are not-so-fantastic runs. Waid, Stern, Gruenwald, Brubaker and Coates have my undying devotion. But if Liefeld ever gets near Steve again I'm taking out a retraining order. That's the kind of thing I mean. Moreover, Marvel's characters are so old now that almost every single one of them have a fanbase. It is selfish to character bash, point-blank, there is just no justification for that type of behavior. None. We need to take into account the feelings/tastes/preferences of others when in a community. The people bashing one character to prop up another are committing a form of tribalism. The Marvel universe is a shared one, and as such, multiple characters belong to it. We need to be mindful of that. If you are bashing characters you are not a good fan and you are not showing that you can get along with others. Period. No excuses. Be accountable for your behavior.

And for the last time, Millar was COMPLETELY responsible for Civil War. Tony Stark had no agency. He is a fictional character. Millar took what was going on in real-life, re: the Patriot Act, and decided to make an event out of it. The problem? He had to alter the characters to fit the plot. Which is NOT what you do when you're handling a character half a century old with a long established history. The character must come first. The character is what readers care about. You change the plot to fit the character, you do NOT change the character to fit the plot. Millar can be a good writer when he's handling his own ideas. But Tony Stark was NOT his creation. He tried to make him thus by reinventing him, but it didn't work. You know, I like Tony as a character. I've always had a fondness for him, even though I was appalled by what Millar had him doing in Civil War. In fact, you want to know the only reason I'm not buying his book right now? I started Slott's run, I had a subscription for it. But I cancelled it... because I saw a huge slew of Iron Man fans attacking Steve and was so disgusted by their behavior I started to have a Pavlovian response of 'ugh' towards anything associated with the character. So in other words I stopped buying the character not because of anything the character had done, but based purely on the behavior of his fans.

Comics are a suffering industry. I make a point out of buying floppies, subscribing to them. I make a point out of making a weekly trip to my local CBS to pick them up because I'm grateful to have the means to do what I can to help this industry I love. In fact, for the titles I really love I'll sometimes buy out the store and donate the additional copies. Because I know how the numbers are counted and I want the books I love to do well. I know that the sale numbers of floppies carry the most weight. But I'm not going to reward a the fandom of a character by adding my sales to their numbers if they treat my favorite character like shit. Not going to happen. So people should keep that in mind before they push send on that post bashing a character. Think of the people you are alienating by doing it. Hardly anyone buys just one title, most people buy multiple titles. You want Cap fans to be interested in your character of choice as well as their own? Then don't attack Steve. This SHOULD be a simple concept for people to grasp.