Topic: Polarisation

[jambutty]

Superman's son is bisexual  -------    Boko Haram.

Where and how is the middle ground?

[Schmidt]

Superman's son is bisexual  -------    Boko Haram.

Where and how is the middle ground?

A single character in a huge roster having a non-traditional sexual identity seems like it should be pretty middle ground no?

[CraigDS]

Who cares?

[Snail]

Superman's son is bisexual  -------    Boko Haram.

Where and how is the middle ground?

Bisexual woman here. What are you getting at, please?

[Barneylfc∗]

Superman's son is bisexual

Fair play to him.

[tubby]

I think what jam is getting at is that Boko Haram is one end of the scale (turbo dickhead religious nutjobs) and a Western icon like Superman having a bisexual kid is the other end of that scale (as far removed from their beliefs as possible).

But I agree with Schmidt in that these days that's actually a lot closer to the middle of the imaginary scale.

[jambutty]

Bisexual woman here. What are you getting at, please?

How do those two continuing opposites of the spectrum ever come to accept the other?

[tubby]

How do those two continuing opposites of the spectrum ever come to accept the other?

To be fair, the Boko Haram end of the spectrum can go fuck itself.

[Nobby Reserve]

Superman's son is bisexual

"This is DC, not AC/DC!!"

[says thousands of the usual sad suspects]

[FlashGordon]

There are a multitude of different ways you could have phrased this. The way it comes across is that both sides are different ends of crazy or wrong. Serious false equivalency vibes.

[Nobby Reserve]

To be fair, the Boko Haram end of the spectrum can go fuck itself.

This links to the logical fallacy that is 'conservative' argument.

'conservatives' try to make a direct comparison between their ideals and those of liberals. As in, they both have equal logical merit so it's a case of preference, and therefore why should the liberals' preference be taken over the conservatives'?

Yet the liberal perspective is that people should have the freedom to be who they want - eg, consensually sleep with who they want, marry who they want, etc. If you don't want to be in a gay relationship, nobody is going to force you to be. It's your choice.

The conservative perspective is along the lines of "I don't believe people should be in gay relationships/marriage, so I want to outlaw gay relationships/marriage."

One perspective seeks to allow personal freedoms and choice (a liberal person can live the life they want to, the conservative can live the life they want to); the other aims to impose their own puritanical views on everyone else.

There is no logical equivalence.

[ShatnersBassoon]

how the fuck is murderous fanatical religious extremists comparable to the sexuality of a comic book character?

how can you even present that  as two ends of a spectrum? one murders, rapes and tortures people who think differently to them.... the other is a fucking drawing in a comic book that hurts no one.

there is no meeting pyschopathic murderers halfway. you dont say "oh, we wont talk about who we love.... and then you can just cut off a few limbs. but no murders you hear!"

[Snail]

How do those two continuing opposites of the spectrum ever come to accept the other?

What?

[The G in Gerrard]

Weird thread.

[lobsterboy]

Superman's son is bisexual  -------    Boko Haram.

Where and how is the middle ground?

Surely it should be Kevin Smith's He-Man ----- The Taliban?

Seriously though. One is a made up character in a comic and one is a very real and unpleasant terrorist regime. Its a nonsense statement. You cannot equate the two.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Surely it should be Kevin Smith's He-Man ----- The Taliban?

Seriously though. One is a made up character in a comic and one is a very real and unpleasant terrorist regime. Its a nonsense statement. You cannot equate the two.

And 1 has made US republicans lose their shit more than the other.

[Hedley Lamarr]

If ever a thread needed the Aurelio ‘what is this shit ?’ gif, its this one.

[Nobby Reserve]

To be fair to JamButty, I really doubt their post was intended in any way like it's been interpreted as. This place can be brutally unforgiving of a poorly articulated but innocent post at times.

[Sheer Magnetism]

While this is obviously not the correct equivalent to Boko Haram, the obvious answer is social media has caused what would have otherwise been fringe social communities to interact more significantly with the mainstream. Those communities are often louder because their members have had to be louder to get attention, and they tend to take an 'If you're not with us, you're against us' stance which is inherently polarising.

The internet has also made it much easier for authoritarian regimes to track and eliminate dissent which necessarily reduces the scope of discussion, and you can see that mirrored to a lesser extent with social media in the west. It's hard to equate 'cancel culture doesn't exist' with 'free speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences' when those consequences involve people messaging death threats and emailing your workplace en masse to demand you be fired.

But since it's a topic, I don't understand why companies continue to do that with established characters. It upsets the conservative side of the audience immediately while anyone who actually shares that ethnic/sexuality/gender identity seems to end up being continually angry the character is representative in the wrong way, or isn't representative enough, or is being 'sidelined', etc. It's also noticeable that in these cases the standard of writing usually goes rapidly downhill because the characters are Flanderised. Marvel in particular has bad form with making characters gay and then having that be their entire personality.

[Fromola]

Why do people keep watching the franchise crap anyway? I watched the first one, no desire to watch Superman 19 or Superman versus Batman versus Rambo or whatever the fuck.

I don't care what they make these characters because i've no desire to watch them.

[CraigDS]

To be fair to JamButty, I really doubt their post was intended in any way like it's been interpreted as. This place can be brutally unforgiving of a poorly articulated but innocent post at times.

I mean there is poorly articulated and then just poorly thought out.

[ShatnersBassoon]

But since it's a topic, I don't understand why companies continue to do that with established characters. It upsets the conservative side of the audience immediately while anyone who actually shares that ethnic/sexuality/gender identity seems to end up being continually angry the character is representative in the wrong way, or isn't representative enough, or is being 'sidelined', etc. It's also noticeable that in these cases the standard of writing usually goes rapidly downhill because the characters are Flanderised. Marvel in particular has bad form with making characters gay and then having that be their entire personality.

if you have multiple films with straight white guys. be in bond, ghostbusters, whatever. or thousands of copies of a comic book with straight white guy. what is the harm in mixing it up for a few variants? its not a painting on a single canvas where you have to erase the others and replace it. they are still there and people can still enjoy them. nobody is forcing anyone to consume the new versions. it just gives more variety for more kids of different backgrounds to have some role models or characters they can identify with.


you cant worry about what will upset conservative people. you will never progress any artforms without taking some risks and pushing boundaries. there will always be people who "want it like the good old days" . but the good old days in their time, were progressive scary days for the conservatives of that era

[Max_powers]

if you have multiple films with straight white guys. be in bond, ghostbusters, whatever. or thousands of copies of a comic book with straight white guy. what is the harm in mixing it up for a few variants? its not a painting on a single canvas where you have to erase the others and replace it. they are still there and people can still enjoy them. nobody is forcing anyone to consume the new versions. it just gives more variety for more kids of different backgrounds to have some role models or characters they can identify with.

I agree mostly. I don't get the outrage. I think the bigger problem is that these attempts usually really feel inauthentic and are kinda crap. This happens more in bigger franchises. For me most of these films feel kinda meh regardless of who the lead is.

There are some really good movies and stories that have female, LGBTQ or POC in lead roles. They are kinda rare and never as heavily promoted though. Something like Moonlight or Fargo are great examples. I don't think these films received much backlash because the characters are someone you can connect with.

[Barneylfc∗]

Why do people keep watching the franchise crap anyway? I watched the first one, no desire to watch Superman 19 or Superman versus Batman versus Rambo or whatever the fuck.

I don't care what they make these characters because i've no desire to watch them.

Because they are entertained by it? Should we all live our lives being as miserable as you?

No one is forcing you to watch them, so don't.

[Sheer Magnetism]

if you have multiple films with straight white guys. be in bond, ghostbusters, whatever. or thousands of copies of a comic book with straight white guy. what is the harm in mixing it up for a few variants? its not a painting on a single canvas where you have to erase the others and replace it. they are still there and people can still enjoy them. nobody is forcing anyone to consume the new versions. it just gives more variety for more kids of different backgrounds to have some role models or characters they can identify with.

Because they don't have to be the same character. No one, even conservatives, are saying they don't want diverse characters in fiction. But when you leech onto something people already like, you're cheapening the character by reducing them to a name and costume, suggesting their fans should have some kind of responsibility to swallow anything with that name on it or else they're hatemongers. That obviously rubs people the wrong way.

I'd actually really like to see more diversity in this realm, but there's really no reason why it shouldn't be through original characters. When people claim they need to glom onto existing IP for the character to appeal to the mainstream, they're essentially admitting the new version of the character/property sucks and wouldn't interest anyone if it wasn't taking over from different characters people actually like. I'd also extend that to cheap remakes and prequels where the 'new' versions of characters have nothing in common with the originals. It's lazy and deserves no respect.

Or to put it another way, it's the difference between Mad Max Fury Road introducing an excellent three-dimensional character in Furiosa and a hypothetical remake where Mad Max was female and spent the whole film talking about fighting the patriarchy.

[Max_powers]

So when will the bisexual superbaby accept Boko Haram for who they are?

[Sangria]

To be fair, the Boko Haram end of the spectrum can go fuck itself.

AFAIK that's against their religion.

[Sangria]

Surely it should be Kevin Smith's He-Man ----- The Taliban?

Seriously though. One is a made up character in a comic and one is a very real and unpleasant terrorist regime. Its a nonsense statement. You cannot equate the two.

Boko Haram are like an extreme version of the Taliban.

[Elmo!]

Superman's son is bisexual  -------    Boko Haram.

Where and how is the middle ground?

I'm not sure we want to find the middle ground between those 2 examples.

[Sangria]

I'm not sure we want to find the middle ground between those 2 examples.

I'm sure we can find somewhere in between the two extremes that most of us can agree on. We can agree that Superman's sprog is not a real character, thus moving a little from his position. And we can agree that Boko Haram is a real organisation, thus moving a little towards their position. And we can agree that accepting the bisexuality should be our ethical position on the one hand, and that Boko Haram should be exterminated should be our ethical position on the other hand.

There. I've managed to find middle ground.

[wampa1]

Why do people keep watching the franchise crap anyway? I watched the first one, no desire to watch Superman 19 or Superman versus Batman versus Rambo or whatever the fuck.

I don't care what they make these characters because i've no desire to watch them.

[Mumm-Ra]

Because they are entertained by it? Should we all live our lives being as miserable as you?

No one is forcing you to watch them, so don't.

That was oddly aggressive. Why assume he's miserable because he doesn't have any interest in endless rehashes of superhero stories? I agree with him

I swear I always see you on here slating people's entire existence based off a few words they've just posted.

[Max_powers]

That was oddly aggressive. Why assume he's miserable because he doesn't have any interest in endless rehashes of superhero stories? I agree with him

I swear I always see you on here slating people's entire existence based off a few words they've just posted.

 

[Barneylfc∗]

That was oddly aggressive. Why assume he's miserable because he doesn't have any interest in endless rehashes of superhero stories? I agree with him

I swear I always see you on here slating people's entire existence based off a few words they've just posted.

It's based on more than a post about Superman and Batman. His post is basically "People shouldn't watch this shit because it doesn't entertain me"

Pretty sure I don't do that.

[lobsterboy]

Why do people keep watching the franchise crap anyway? I watched the first one, no desire to watch Superman 19 or Superman versus Batman versus Rambo or whatever the fuck.

I don't care what they make these characters because i've no desire to watch them.

I'd deffo watch Batman vs Rambo