Diversity in Fiction - Question

[Cicada 5]

In regards to the "real life super villain" thing, you don't think that's a tad hyperbolic? Yes, he's a buffoon, but even the worst presidents couldn't be classified as "super villains."

What would you call a man who brags about sexually assaulting women, has done nothing but use his position of power to impede on the civil rights of demographics he hates ever since he was elected and openly endorses bigotry and tyranny?

Besides which, it kind of rips me right out of the experience when I'm literally staring Trump in the face in my comic book about super heroes. It's all just so ham-fisted it's not even funny.

I suppose I can understand this.

As for everything else, I feel it's more about the motives behind these decisions.

Marvel?s been making these decisions for decades.

I think Marvel, like a lot of other media these days, is going through an identity crisis.

I can?t see it in Marvel?s case. Much of what they?re doing doesn?t seem dissimilar from what they?ve always done.

 

[TelosSupreme]

In regards to the "real life super villain" thing, you don't think that's a tad hyperbolic? Yes, he's a buffoon, but even the worst presidents couldn't be classified as "super villains."

What would you call a man who brags about sexually assaulting women, has done nothing but use his position of power to impede on the civil rights of demographics he hates ever since he was elected and openly endorses bigotry and tyranny?

Can you corroborate any of that? Sure, he's made lewd statements, but that wasn't bragging about sexual assault. It's just douche-y locker room talk. Also, who's civil rights is he impeding? How on Earth is he endorsing tyranny? Like, please inform me. I'm genuinely curious what you mean by that because I've seen nothing of the sort. As far as I've seen, he's been pretty all-accepting, he's even the first president to be pro-LGBT upon going into office. It's kind of presumptuous to assume hateful intentions of someone you've never met, unless he's said something truly hateful in which case I really want to know what that was.

 

[kitsunefather]

I don't disagree, and I'm actually a strong supporter of well written Legacy Characters (as I mention earlier, with Miles Moralez).

Personally, my issue with the way Marvel is handling it now is that they aren't writing the characters well, or telling compelling (or heroic) stories, but rather throwing everything they can out there without regards (in the majority of them) to character development or story advancement.

The thing is, Marvel is aware that outrage pushes sales in the short term. A few years ago (2013 or 2014, I think) a Marvel exec made a comment about how much outrage causes people to buy more comics. Which, I think, is why they've moved away from taking submissions from writers and have begun hiring writers who are more inclined to sociology papers and political treatises.

and thats the thing though, physical comics themselves are going the way of the dodo. They have been since the speculative bubble burst and it's been a slow death since.

if you want to blame someone, blame comic books execs who refuse to adapt to internet culture and online distribution.

That's probably why I find myself enjoying webcomics more these days. More creative freedom and definitely more creative ideas. Reminds me of the documentary "Stripped," where they compared and contrasted the mentality of authors for longstanding newspaper strips and online comics. It's very fascinating to see that growing division demonstrate itself in about an hour.

Actually, it'd be more accurate to blame the push to Diamond Distribution, which killed the newsstand sales of comics and began the original push towards the speculator bubble.

There is currently one company to distribute any mass published comic in the US, and that monopoly is why comic prices can go up without any regard, as well as why comic book stores end up having extra copies of dying books shoveled on them to fill up their long boxes.

Diamond Distribution is a fucking cesspool, because it has held a monopoly on comic distribution for over 20 years.

Imagine if EA was the only company that video games could be distributed nationwide through. Where, even other game publishers must pay go through them for distribution; this is essentially what Diamond is.

This is also why the print medium for comics is so swiftly dying, and brick and mortar shops are crumbling, because they've got no means to get stock outside of this predatory bullshit company.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

A slight aside... I'm getting tired of lesbians in fiction.

It's a cheap cop-out to diversity. Women are already written as sexual objects, so we can have a hero now that IS a hot woman GETTING a hot woman! Genius!

If you really want a challenge, write a hero that is a submissive gay guy. Find a way to get this world to back a hero that's not a tough guy all the time. The safe lesbianism angle has gotten old.

Lesbianism is safe storytelling?

Compared to other forms of GBT interaction, hell yeah.

 

[Cicada 5]

Can you corroborate any of that? Sure, he's made lewd statements, but that wasn't bragging about sexual assault.

This is a tape recording of him talking about grabbing women by the crotch that was leaked before the election.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwWux5BAczk

Also, who's civil rights is he impeding?

Just recently he attempted to ban transgender soldiers from the military. There?s also his xenophobia aganst immigrants particularly Mexicans and Muslims. Many of these comments can be seen during the presidential race.

How on Earth is he endorsing tyranny?

His open admiration of Vladmir Putin comes to mind.

 

[TelosSupreme]

This is a tape recording of him talking about grabbing women by the crotch that was leaked before the election.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwWux5BAczk

Like I said; factitious locker room talk. Yes, it's not very classy, but really who gives a shit? Besides which it was over a decade ago and he even apologized for it. Obama said something similar once before but we don't judge him on that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKYmiWiNqOw

Just recently he attempted to ban transgender soldiers from the military. There's also his xenophobia against immigrants particularly Mexicans and Muslims. Many of these comments can be seen during the presidential race.

If that's an outright ban, then I don't really agree with that. I don't know what his intentions are, but the way I would imagine it is that there are many controversial points surrounding gender dysphoria and the treatments used for it. If a transgender individual is not in a totally stable state of mind, or requires drugs or hormones on a regular basis to properly function in life, I can't see them as being fit for the military, which requires peak physical and mental condition from everyone involved. It would be suicide otherwise. Unlike the job market, the army has to discriminate because it is a war machine.

Also he's explicitly stated contention with ILLEGAL immigrants. Even then, he's stated that his priority is to deport or arrest those who have extended criminal history so they can then help the rest go through the proper means of becoming citizens. As for Muslims, I've only heard him talk about those who commit terrorist acts. His controversial travel ban, which I don't particularly agree with, was the same ban previously constructed by Obama.

His open admiration of Vladmir Putin comes to mind.

I don't know much about Russian politics, so how is Putin tyrannical?

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

If that's an outright ban, then I don't really agree with that. I don't know what his intentions are, but the way I would imagine it is that there are many controversial points surrounding gender dysphoria and the treatments used for it.

Pray tell, what controversial points about gender dysphoria and it's treatment?

Would this be controversial because certain types of scientifically illiterate people find it controversial due to said scientific illiteracy, or the fact that the medical consensus of ethical treatment involves giving people access to resources and medication that certain scientifically illiterate people don't like in general?

After all, for a scientifically literate person they'd point to the fact that HRT and gender affirming surgery when sought is better at treating gender dysphoria than Tylenol is at treating a headache. That it's one of the most successful complex medical regimen at treating a complex medical condition.

Treating depression with the latest drugs and psychotherapy still yields far poorer results. And yet I doubt people can call antidepressants and proven psychotherapy 'controversial'. If anything, psychotherapy like CBT or IPT is considered the miracle treatment for roughly 90% of depressive disorders, as well as latent anxiety disorder stressors that might be at the root ofcyclical low moods or the reinforcement of low moods.

If a transgender individual is not in a totally stable state of mind, or requires drugs or hormones on a regular basis to properly function in life, I can't see them as being fit for the military, which requires peak physical and mental condition from everyone involved.

Why? Care to elabourate? It's less obstructive than asthmatics, yet they let asthmatics into the army.

The biggest ticket of what they want from things like general infantry groups is things like being accepting of the near permanent taste of vomit in your mouth from acid reflux from ceaseless physical activity, and the capacity of ignoring it. That is not something normal brains deal with, nor something that you can simply tough it out.

There is no 'template' for a soldier because soldiers aren't born, they're made. Any good training program understands this fully.

Moreover the military has never wanted ordinary, they've always wanted extraordinary. To put it bluntly, your ordinary person will not kill another human being. They will not continue to follow orders when sufficiently endangered. They will not meaningfully involve themselves in combat even if it would contribute to their total capacity to survive.

They realized full well even back to Napoleon's days that ordinary people are a liability. Your ordinary human is skittish and unpredictable. Regardless of their personal fitness or their mental state.

A good military doesn't remove abnormal people, they keep the abnormal people. It's ordinary people they want to dispose themselves of. The abnormals are precisely the people who they want the most, trans or otherwise. Plenty of physically fit, psychologically sound people will drop out of the military. They will quickly realize that they are not up to task themselves.

Assuming a relatively tough, a relatively extensive selection process of soldiery, plenty of 'ordinary people' will be found wanting. Yet, regardless of their gender identity or sexual orientation, a few people will shine and become desirable soldiers.

This is especially noticeable given that trans people are by capita two to three times more representative in the U.S. military than their cisgender counterparts. And the big reason why there seems an inordinate number of trans people that seemingly come out after time served, is precisely because of the transphobic attitudes that were expressed within the armed services to begin with while serving.

Yet all of them passed the psych screenings and physical tests while serving, despite as such.

I can attest to that well enough. When I was in the army, plenty of LGBTQ people. Whether closeted or otherwise. Also back then given the still ridiculously high LGBTQ youth homelessness rate, many of us had nowhere else to go. Which brings on itself an unusually high determination to succeed and often a history of personal hardship that is well suited to dealing with the training regimen.

Ordinary people with ordinary brains and ordinary reasons for wanting to potentially risk themselves make for shitty soldiers.

 

[TelosSupreme]

(snip)

Okay, a good portion of that was a whole load of what, so I'd appreciate it if you'd give me some resources to show how you came to a majority of those conclusions. What I can tell you however is that statistically, the suicide rate of trans people is far higher than the normal population for what amounts to less than a tenth of a percent of it, and that rate seems to increase even after transitioning.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

That sounds like a huge liability for a system wanting to produce steel-minded soldiers. Thing is, this isn't meant to belittle the trans population. What I feel is happening is that society at large is ignoring a massive problem of mental illness within that demographic for the sake of appearing tolerant. Some trans people fare far better through sex-reassignment and that is great. But for the rest of those facing emotional and physical distress, we need to find better ways of helping them. Especially since hormone therapy often sterilizes the patient and that leads to a whole other host of issues, even more so when you bring children into the mix.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

(snip)

Okay, a good portion of that was a whole load of what, so I'd appreciate it if you'd give me some resources to show how you came to a majority of those conclusions. What I can tell you however is that statistically, the suicide rate of trans people is far higher than the normal population for what amounts to less than a tenth of a percent of it, and that rate seems to increase even after transitioning.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

And anybody with a shred of intellectual honesty will point to the fact that people have no choice but to come out and be public about bring trans when they start transitioning. Moreover, anybody with a shred of understanding basic psychology will also note that most forms of depressive disorders and latent anxiety stressors or disorders require psychotherapy and other support structures that are most often lacking when trans people come out.

Blaming depressive and anxiety disorders on trans people as if an inherent condition ignores psychosocial aspects of transitioning. Which is like saying surgery is pointless when someone then suffers from a golden staph infection. It's more accurate to say the surgery is necessary, just the environment is not conducive to wellness. It's almost as if people should leave the psychology to those that understand psychology. After all, PTSD in soldiers causes ridiculously high levels of suicide. Not as if that the people who become soldiers are inherently PTSD-prone.

More over, most forms of depressive and anxiety disorders requires psychotherapy to treat. Which, depending on the conditions that trans people find themselves, is often impossible to treat given public health initiatives do not cover extensive CBT or IPT. Nor would numerous psychotherapies be even remotely likely to succeed given familial rejection, homelessness, entrenched poverty and un(der)employment.

That sounds like a huge liability for a system wanting to produce steel-minded soldiers. Thing is, this isn't meant to belittle the trans population. What I feel is happening is that society at large is ignoring a massive problem of mental illness within that demographic for the sake of appearing tolerant. Some trans people fare far better through sex-reassignment and that is great. But for the rest of those facing emotional and physical distress, we need to find better ways of helping them. Especially since hormone therapy often sterilizes the patient and that leads to a whole other host of issues, even more so when you bring children into the mix.

And if you really gave a shit, you'd realise firing thousands of people and making it impossible to come out of the closet for fear of losing perhaps the only job they know with little lateral movement with their skills to find employment in the private sector, is more likely to spike suicide rates.

That's assuming you actually care. Not pretend to care.

I mean, many of them could become mercenaries, I suppose... it is a growth industry.

 

[TelosSupreme]

(snip)

Okay, a good portion of that was a whole load of what, so I'd appreciate it if you'd give me some resources to show how you came to a majority of those conclusions. What I can tell you however is that statistically, the suicide rate of trans people is far higher than the normal population for what amounts to less than a tenth of a percent of it, and that rate seems to increase even after transitioning.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

And anybody with a shred of intellectual honesty will point to the fact that people have no choice but to come out and be public about bring trans when they start transitioning. Moreover, anybody with a shred of understanding basic psychology will also note that most forms of depressive disorders and latent anxiety stressors or disorders require psychotherapy and other support structures that are most often lacking when trans people come out.

Blaming depressive and anxiety disorders on trans people as if an inherent condition ignores psychosocial aspects of transitioning. Which is like saying surgery is pointless when someone then suffers from a golden staph infection. It's more accurate to say the surgery is necessary, just the environment is not conducive to wellness. It's almost as if people should leave the psychology to those that understand psychology. After all, PTSD in soldiers causes ridiculously high levels of suicide. Not as if that the people who become soldiers are inherently PTSD-prone.

More over, most forms of depressive and anxiety disorders requires psychotherapy to treat. Which, depending on the conditions that trans people find themselves, is often impossible to treat given public health initiatives do not cover extensive CBT or IPT. Nor would numerous psychotherapies be even remotely likely to succeed given familial rejection, homelessness, entrenched poverty and un(der)employment.

That sounds like a huge liability for a system wanting to produce steel-minded soldiers. Thing is, this isn't meant to belittle the trans population. What I feel is happening is that society at large is ignoring a massive problem of mental illness within that demographic for the sake of appearing tolerant. Some trans people fare far better through sex-reassignment and that is great. But for the rest of those facing emotional and physical distress, we need to find better ways of helping them. Especially since hormone therapy often sterilizes the patient and that leads to a whole other host of issues, even more so when you bring children into the mix.

And if you really gave a shit, you'd realise firing thousands of people and making it impossible to come out of the closet for fear of losing perhaps the only job they know with little lateral movement with their skills to find employment in the private sector, is more likely to spike suicide rates.

That's assuming you actually care. Not pretend to care.

You don't really know a damn thing about me. If I didn't care on some level, then it would make far more sense to just ignore the issue and let trans people keep killing themselves. I specifically said that it would behoove us to find new solutions to helping that demographic deal with their problems and feel comfortable with themselves. If a perfectly qualified trans soldier is fired just for being trans, that is something I completely disagree with. I mentioned in an earlier post that I did not agree with Trump's ban if it broadly included all trans people. What I don't want are people who are physically and mentally lacking to serve in a physically and mentally demanding job that is centered around helping and defending other people, regardless of age, sex, race, orientation, and gender identity.

Maybe you should address the arguments I actually made instead of just lazily constructing a strawman.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

You don't really know a damn thing about me. If I didn't care on some level, then it would make far more sense to just ignore the issue and let trans people keep killing themselves. I specifically said that it would behoove us to find new solutions to helping that demographic deal with their problems and feel comfortable with themselves.

There are. It's called 'not firing people for coming out of the closet'.

Also maybe listening to medical and psychological consensus and recognizing that the rates of suicide fall the longer and happier one is with their transitioning/having transitioned. Like how children who actually get to live as their gender identity and given sufficient support structures show increased happiness. And face reduced stigmatizing than if transitioning later in life.

If a perfectly qualified trans soldier is fired just for being trans, that is something I completely disagree with. I mentioned in an earlier post that I did not agree with Trump's ban if it broadly included all trans people. What I don't want are people who are physically and mentally lacking to serve in a physically and mentally demanding job that is centered around helping and defending other people, regardless of age, sex, race, orientation, and gender identity.

Maybe you should address the arguments I actually made instead of just lazily constructing a strawman.

That's great, because as I said before... plenty of LGBTQ people in the army when I was serving in the ADF.

I wouldn't have been in the ADF if I didn't pass basic. I wouldn't be there if I wasn't psychologically screened and found to be the 'right stuff', which contrary to popular belief doesn't mean 'averagely healthy' or merely 'psychologically sound'. A lot of the time it also means 'interesting quirks', and 'emotional resilience', and 'heightened capacity for useful dissociation'.

As I said before, military is no place for average headspaces except during a catastrophe and they start looking at conscripts. And we know how well they usually turn out. In Syria, Western gunrunners weren't giving guns to protestors of Assad. They were giving guns to fighters. There is a reason why this inevitably backfired but also why no other 'moderate' groups would have been the least bit successful any other way.

Which is part and parcel why I give a funny eye towards all those Americans I hear of saying they have the tantamount of a small arsenal as a means of 'fighting government tyranny'. Because rebels require a certain level of being unhinged. Kind of involves improvised explosives in cars, and a whole lot of 'acceptable' collateral damage in public places. Basically somewhere ranging from Basque Nationalist/IRA bombings and Salafist militia level-activity.

Regardless of that fact, so many of the service personnel I knew didn't come out until after their service ... which is a greater cause of concern. As basically what happens is you end up in a situation where anxiety is higher for such soldiers who are serving, but also that they'll simply leave once they access a sufficient degree of financial security, if ever. Which creates problems on its own because training a soldier is fucking expensive and no Western military can afford that every soldier only does their 4-5 years. They want lifers in a lot of their positions, and often make extended service a condition of further education eithin them. And it's a shame that a military should make that harder for no reason. It's cruel in terms of basic decency, it's wrong in terms of the taxpayers, and it's deleterious in terms of preparedness.

Those last two issues exponentially compounded upon by the fact that LGBTQ people are over-represented in the armed services.

If people actually want solutions, they need only talk to LGBTQ people themselves. Not pretend like they somehow know more.

 

[TelosSupreme]

(snip)

I'm sorry man, you're just not convincing me here. It really sounds like a lot of anecdotal conjecture. Could you at the very least link me any resources that corroborate what you're saying? Specifically the claims about LGBT representation in the military as well as rates of reported happiness compared to mortality among those who fully transitioned. That second one seems like the polar opposite of what every report and study has said from both sides of the isle.

Even regardless of that, I just can't agree with the idea of letting children undergo treatment for transitioning. That can have permanent health effects and their minds and bodies are still developing during that period of their lives. We don't let them drive, smoke, drink, marry, vote, or join the army, but we're going to let them make this choice about themselves?

I mean it's not like children have limited experience and understanding about the world and don't always know what they're talking about. /s

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I'm sorry man, you're just not convincing me here. It really sounds like a lot of anecdotal conjecture.

Clearly a failure on your part, 'man'.

After all, you presented information without even bothering to understand context or the reasons why medical and psychological consensus is set against your opinion.

Could you at the very least link me any resources that corroborate what you're saying? Specifically the claims about LGBT representation in the military as well as rates of reported happiness compared to mortality among those who fully transitioned. That second one seems like the polar opposite of what every report and study has said from both sides of the isle.

I can do better than that. I can provide you an explanation by experts running through the hows and whys they do what they do, who will also explain why you're wrong. Who have written up a model of care that they prescribe that I think conforms to ethical servicing of transgender youth. Also refencing particular studies and relevant findings as to inform their decisions as to ethical treatment policy.

You know. Like researchers.

That's assuming you're interested in learning, not misrepresenting information to suit your particular political bent.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4719579/

As for LGBTQ representation in the military...

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Harrison-Quintana-Herman-LGBTQ-Policy-Journal-2013.pdf

In 2016 it is estimated that 20% of all out trans people in the U.S. have served in the U.S. military. Double that of the cisgender populace. And that's out transgender ex-service personnel. Not including currently serving. Not including closeted trans people fearing coming out.

All of them passed basic, all of them (presumably) got screened. If we were living in an equitable world of fairer life expectations and greater equality of opportunity, then the only explanation for that staggering differential would be trans people seem to be uniquely qualified for military service and not washing out.

Of course only an idiot would make that claim which neglects all other informed resources and social considerations ... more so, the reality is the military is typically the place many people go when they have limited options.

Even regardless of that, I just can't agree with the idea of letting children undergo treatment for transitioning. That can have permanent health effects and their minds and bodies are still developing during that period of their lives. We don't let them drive, smoke, drink, marry, vote, or join the army, but we're going to let them make this choice about themselves?

As opposed to letting them suffer needlessly? For starters, clearly you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about. When we speak of 'transitioning' it's not merely medical. Rather it involves living and presenting as per their gender identity. Moreover, there's very good reasons why in particularly appropriate situations medical intervention reduces total anxiety and dysphoria particularly at puberty.

I mean it's not like children have limited experience and understanding about the world and don't always know what they're talking about. /s

Children are thoroughly capable of expressing themselves. When a child presents credible symptoms of illness or distress, a responsible health care professional performs an inspection of those symptoms and determines their veracity and (hopefully) their cause.

What is worse is ignoring a clear problem, simply because it doesn't suit one's political bent or their lack of knowledge.