Yeah, the guys making a Fallout 4 mod to remove everyone who isn't white are just practicing free speech, but this proves that "Woke" is racism.
Funny Events of the "Woke" world
- Thread starter CriticalGaming
- Start date
Entirely possible.
By what metric are Superhero films uncommon?
They're common enough most people can name at least 1 if not 2 pretty easily.
Also what bunch of assumptions? That Sin City shouldn't count as a superhero film?
Wait you really don't see the Green Lantern image as racist?
Very interesting...........
I’d call it tacky rather than racist. Like having GL form the food and the mythical creature who’s name escapes me while holding the Mexican flag is a touch on the nose but there’s obvious heart to the idea. Just holding a shopping bag of tamales and a generic viva Mexico flag isn’t a scary downgrade, merely a stupid one that makes the cover look tacky rather than cool.
Oh, I'm not saying nothing happened.
It just very obviously wasn't what you said.
Corporations are collections of people. Potentially very large numbers of people. Corporations have internal politics and internal factions which can represent discreet interests. However, corporations are strictly hierarchically arranged, with the bulk of power and decision making capacity concentrated within management positions. Due to various forms of inequality, this corporate hierarchy overwhelming tends to favour certain social groups over others within high level positions.
You are seeing a very normal example of a struggle between creators and management within the corporate system, of a kind that has been going on before you had ever heard the word "woke." An ethnic minority creative wanted to celebrate his culture in a way that felt authentic to him. He wanted to contribute to the creation of a diverse media environment that celebrated his heritage. He has made very clear that he received enormous push-back on this from management who pushed relentlessly for content that was more accessible (to Anglo white people).
And yet your take here is somehow "diversity bad" despite the fact this runs entirely contrary to the expressed wishes of the artist in question and the intent of the work he produced, as well as (in all likelihood) the people within DC as a company who had to push management for an event to celebrate hispanic heritage month and then fight them every step of the way against their fear of alienating the "core demographic."
If you are anti-diversity, you are on the side of management here. You are the one who thinks comics shouldn't attempt to cater to a broader audience, you are the one who thinks everything appearing in them should be created and structured for the benefit of said "core demographic". That shitty sanitized cover wasn't made for me, it was made for you, because a bunch of white managers were worried you might be scared, alienated or confused by the image the artist actually created.
You are seeing how little your own side actually thinks of you, and yet you can't even assign blame properly because your take is so dumb and reactionary you're somehow mad about the mere possibility you might have got anything better. That's truly, truly sad.
You're going to have to point to where I claimed anything about Sin City. Otherwise, like.. whatever.
Here's the metric for you. Across movies and TV shows, is female lead superheroes happening at the same percentage as male?
So planning to enlighten people to what actually happened anytime soon?
I mean you're presenting yourself as having greater knowledge of event than what I posted so I look forward to hearing this different version of events.
The 2nd post I made was from the literal artist for the cover so there will be no alternative version of events posted in all likeliness because even Terminal Blue knows he's wrong and can't actually compete with the literal artist of the piece commenting on the situation but the claim was still made by Terminal to cast aspersions so I'd expect a lot of deflection attempts and sophistry to now happen rather than any actual admission of being wrong on Terminal's part.
Go any evidence of any of what you jus said. Because the artist himself's first comment on the situation was the one I posted lol. But hey I'm sure your psychic mind reading powers are how you got the info right? You didn't just pull it out of your arse based on established biases and beliefs that themselves are increasingly being shown to be based on utter lies right?
Not what I said try again. Or just make up more interesting bullshit and claim I said it, maybe something with Giant man eating insects because that would be more believable than this delusional nonsense.
So to be clear unless your support the rather crude awful stereotype drawing on the right you're saying people are bigots?
Funny how people will happily get behind racist caricatures and still pretend they're being anti-racist and the good guys lol
Oh and on the broader audience schtick.
Comics have catered to a broader audience for decades. Just because some internet blogger site is telling you otherwise doesn't make it so. I'm pretty sure the core audience for Archie comics is very different to the core audience for Spawn.
Oh and Terminal it's not me that the company thinks so little of. It's you and your side that they felt the need to make it so blatant and stereotypical just to make sure you guys didn't miss it. Because DC want's it's back pats from you lot and weird blind defence where anyone objecting their version of the cover hates anyone not white. Nice of you to actually try and pull that line by the way and prove this bit of my argument true. Saves me having to have the argument over how there's no evidence when you yourself just became it.
It was brought up by another poster as evidence of a lack of female Superhero films as part of a list they used to argue about male hero films vs female ones lol
Are they happening at the same percentage? No
Does that make it uncommon? No
Just because it's sunny more than it rains doesn't mean in a year rain is uncommon in a year in many places.
It was brought up by me, tangentially, and I never used the term "superhero films". I used the term "comic book films". As in, films based on comics. Which Sin City was.
So people not willing to accept their own body is usually the body's fault for being wrong? That's what you're going with?!?!
Not even fucking close.
1: Is "Viva Mexic" replacing the Irish flag? Because that's what it looks like.
2: Why's Green Lantern holding the flag of any Earth nation? Isn't GL supposed to watch over an entire sector of space? Isn't holding a flag a bit, I dunno, provincial?
On 1)
yes but probably doesn't stop the being able to represent where they're from in the sector.
And in how many cases of people complaining about their body does a doctor say it's medically necessary?
He said, with no evidence besides his personal feelings
It doesn't matter whether or not a person "accepts" their body. The relationship between a person and their body is not a normal relation of ownership, it's a necessary condition of being a person at all. That's what makes the state of alienation from your own body particularly harmful, because it's inescapable. You seem to be upset that bodies are being blamed or held responsible for some imagined wrongdoing, but those bodies don't have independent existence which can be held to some interpersonal moral standard. They are an indispensable part of a person, who has to live with them.
Thus, the relevant question isn't "who is at fault" or "who is wrong" the question is "how can we (the medical profession) help?" If someone feels a sense of alienation from their own body that is harming their quality of life, the only relevant medical question is what course of action will yield the greatest likelihood of a positive outcome when weighed against the risks and associated cost.
And while there may be cases where providing someone with surgery won't necessarily help them or would be considered too risky to justify the potential benefits, there are far, far more cases when it can help enormously. Even with fully cosmetic (as opposed to reconstructive or therepeutic) procedures, the vast majority of research shows that people who have cosmetic procedures are overwhelmingly satisfied with the results and, in most cases, experience percieved improvement in their quality of life as a result. This puritanical idea we've all been fed that cosmetic surgery is about washed up celebrities trying to look 20 forever doesn't match up with reality at all. Most people's quality of life is heavily tied up with how they feel about their own bodies, and most people who seek surgery to alter their bodies understand what they are doing and have realistic expectations of the outcome.
I’ve heard from a few different people both locally and abroad via online (like Australia) that some kids as young as elementary school age are now identifying as animals (“furries” IIRC) and even trees. Anything from animals calls to even simply grunting are apparently acceptable responses to questions from classmates and teachers.
I had an eighth grade science teacher that used to say, “Believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see.” So I guess seeing it for myself in a restaurant last week would still make it half true. But in the event it is actually a legit thing, then the next step would be addressing, how are these kids going to ever finish school, without a free pass?
I had an eighth grade science teacher that used to say, “Believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see.” So I guess seeing it for myself in a restaurant last week would still make it half true. But in the event it is actually a legit thing, then the next step would be addressing, how are these kids going to ever finish school, without a free pass?