Miles Morales: Ultimate Spider-Man #1 - A Potential Misstep?

[Baresark]

That said, clearly there are plenty of actual "devils" running around in regard to this. I didn't like Obama as a presidential candidate, but I couldn't be vocal about it because the most vocal was the small group of actual racists out there who didn't want "his kind" to hold the countries highest appointed position.

Yeah, you see, it's not that you "couldn't" be vocal about it, it's that you chose not to be. Either from an inability to vocalize your position without sounding stupid or racist or from a lack of courage to hold an opinion that people may have a knee-jerk reaction to. The same goes for the author of the story, he is just a bad writer. If he can't form an opinion bravely without setting it up forever for morons... but I actually think this writer is bad because he put that stuff in to elicit a racial conversation about Miles Morales because he can't be bothered to write an interesting piece on him. He falls onto race mentioning because he sucks.

I honestly don't know how to respond to that. I wouldn't be because as soon as I said something some idiot was like, "Yeah! We don't want any *N*'s in office". And then I'm all of the suddenly a racist because some idiot racist agreed with me. So, yeah, I couldn't without being lumped in with a bunch of hick racists. I mean, I didn't vote for the guy. But I can't say he is doing a bad job really. My issue was that I didn't think his administration would be different from GWB's. But it turns out hick racist assholes love GWB, so that is a dead end.

I mean, I find hundreds of faults in his Presidency, he is a HUGE disappointment. And I can elequate them without sounding racist and without proving my non-racist ways. And like, i could even throw in that he is a million times better than any GOP candidate, and still be disappointed and not-racist.

All of those are valid points. The issue, as I have said, is not that I could not articulate what I did not like just fine. It's the idiots that chime in on my comments with racist comments that I couldn't stand. I point out that his voting record as a UN Senator shows he is not substantially different from GWB in practice, no matter what he actually says. And someone then agrees with me while saying something incredibly racist. I don't think he is any more disappointing than I was expecting, certainly no better than previous GOP presidents. Certainly not the candidate for "change" as was his original platform.

 

[JimB]

You can call it racism all you want. I don't really care.

Then it's really weird that you'd bring it up, but okay.

Though your example of what is happening in background of the comic is completely irrelevant.

Yes, how the comics industry treats people of color has nothing to do with how fans of the comics industry are viewed.

 

[Thunderous Cacophony]

Why aren't there any great Mexican-American superheroes?

Because here in America, the only races we feel like talking about are white and black.

Anyway, just for the record, Miles Morales is some admittedly nonspecific form of Hispanic. So far as I know, no one ever designated his parents' national history because they are Americans and who cares about which political borders their blood originated in.

Apparently, the authors care: They've said his dad is African-American and his mom is Puerto Rican (he took his mom's last name, can't remember if there's a reason for that).

Anyways, just a bit of clarification. I personally liked the article; I'm a fan of the Ultimate line, but I can understand Shearer's complaints. Now to flee this thread before I get sucked into an argument about racism. Up, up, and away to the safety of R&P!

 

[JimB]

They've said his dad is African-American and his mom is Puerto Rican (he took his mom's last name, can't remember if there's a reason for that).

Oh, well, there ya go, then. I've read all the Spider-Man books he's in, and don't remember that every coming up, but it's been a couple of years on some of them.

 

[Baresark]

I never read comments anywhere that were like, "A non-white Spiderman! ABOMINATION!"

Yes, it really happened. Though I'm not sure the word "abomination" was ever uttered.

Libtard is a pun, not about all liberals, but about people who reduce every single issue down a hot button issue such as race. This literally has nothing to do with my political view. I know racists exist. Hell, I may even know people who I no longer consort with, who are racist.

Then you're redefining the term. It's a derogatory word for liberals. If you want your own definitions, that's fine. But don't be surprised when people challenge you on them. Especially if it's a term coined to slur a group or one whose popular use is to do the same. It sounds like when people try and argue "******" doesn't mean black people, it just means lazy people and that's totes not racist and you should have known that before you complained about me saying it.

The author has to spend the first 4 paragraphs explaining that his issues with the Mile Morales SpiderMan has nothing to do with the fact that he is a multiracial character where there was previously a white character.

And why does he need to do that? Because he doesn't want to be associated with the people who complained specifically about a black/hispanic guy taking over. He's addressing a real issue, not the PC police or "libtards" or whatever word you might choose.

I did not see that happen myself, though the word abomination would have been pretty theatrical. Like I said, I know there are actually racist dick heads out there that let race define everything for them. I did not see it anywhere presented like that myself, but I'm definitely sure it happened. I stand corrected and feel fortunate to have missed that because it pisses me off.

My whole point was that he has to spend 4 paragraphs doing that because people will just assume he has a race issue with the character. That is the thing that is screwed up about it. Of course he does not want to grouped with a bunch racist assholes, no one does unless you are a racist asshole. But you can't be critical of something because race just happens to be involved without being called a racist, unless you make yourself specifically clear that race has nothing to do with it first. That is some backwards ass shit when you live in a world where people just assume racism despite not having the mark of colorful language or any other indicator of racism. People see it everywhere when they are looking for it. And the belief seems to be that there is some underpinning of racial tension or jealousy or just some form of narcissistic superiority behind it. I don't buy it. People are allowed to have a preference of Peter Parker over Miles Morales without being racist. In this case, race just happens to be involved, but people hated Ben Reilly as Spiderman and he was another white guy. He just wasn't Peter Parker.

I don't buy your definition of "libtard". Yours is just as made up as mine is. If you Google the definition of "libtard", the first thing you are greeted with is an alternate word for "libertarian". And as a libertarian, I can safely say that I have not ever been called that. So there is another made up definition for you. In Urban dictionary (the best internet dictionary around, or at least the most fun), you then see "Portmanteu of "liberal" and "retard"". In my circle of friends (the few that politics come up in), that is usually a funny go to word for people who are typically liberal but use liberal ideas to a fault, using them to justify stupid things.

In this case, my position was simply one of questioning whether widespread racism actually existed about the issue, or if the assumption was just racism all the time. Pretty much everyone told me that the ladder half was true. Makes it witch hunt, which is not a positive thing. Once again, we all know that there are racists out there (a good friend once told me that the most racist people out there were Puerto Ricans. I don't really believe that, but I am inclined to believe my Puerto Rican friend about the issue). Racism exists in every culture. But that does not make it the strongest or central part of any of them. And comic culture is no different than that.

In response to your comment about being critical of Obama: It literally happened all over the internet. The main difference seems to be that in the end, you voted for him and I did not. We may have been equally critical with a different outcome, but since I don't identify as a Democrat/Liberal, I was called a racist. You can sit there and deny that it happened to people a lot, but it did. You could not comment on a news article without being accused of hating Obama because of his skin color at least a handful of times. I'm over it, but it still happened and still shows the inherent issues with constant playing of the "race card" in all the mediums it comes up in.

 

[Baresark]

snip

I mean, I find hundreds of faults in his Presidency, he is a HUGE disappointment. And I can elequate them without sounding racist and without proving my non-racist ways. And like, i could even throw in that he is a million times better than any GOP candidate, and still be disappointed and not-racist.[/quote]

Lol, this is weird. You keep turning this on me. I didn't use skin tone as part of any of my discussions when Obama was first running. For example: I used his Senate voting record and his rhetoric as evidence that he may not be the hot political candidate for "change" that everyone claimed he was. Then some racist agrees with me using colorful racist language, and then I would get lumped in with that guy/girl. It's not rocket science. You actually are sitting there and blaming me for something I had not control over or you are sitting there and denying that I was ever called racist because I was critical of Obama. Your assertions constantly seem to be that I did something wrong, but you are literally just choosing to forget how every single news article about his winning the Noble Peace Prize (for example) was lined with criticism and then people calling the critics racist. You are fooling yourself, if you say you are disappointed in Obama and some corner of the internet IS calling you racist. It's because people who are looking for racism everywhere, see racism everywhere.

 

[Something Amyss]

I don't buy your definition of "libtard". Yours is just as made up as mine is. If you Google the definition of "libtard", the first thing you are greeted with is an alternate word for "libertarian".

I'll be honest, this is as far as I got. So I looked, and this is what I got:

Libtard n. Portmanteu of "liberal" and "retard".

Unless you're saying libertarians are "retarded" liberals, then no, the first thing I was greeted with was not an alternate word for libertarian.

However, if I did a little tap dancing to get your definition, I was greeted with a Wiktionary page. If you click on the Wiktionary link, the second definition, surprise surprise, says more or less what I posted above: it's a slur regarding liberals. So even if Wiktionary was your source, that doesn't help much. Mine isn't "made up." It's the second definition.

I'd say a larger point is if you use a word used by Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, don't be surprised if you're lumped in with Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh.

But that's all the energy I have to deal with this.

 

[crazygameguy4ever]

I don't think this is a good idea.. Peter Parker has always been Spider-man(usually, not always). I don't care that the kid is black, but it would be the same as replacing War Machine's Jim Rhodes with a skinny,goth chick.. it's not cool either way( for the record I like goth chicks, jut not as the replacement for War Machine). I guarantee that Marvel is bringing this Miles kid back as Spider-man II is the same reason they changed Electro from white to black for the Amazing Spider-man 2 film... it's because Samuel L. Jackson has done such a great job as Nick Fury.. and Marvel has been hoping to repeat the success.. they've failed of course, but they don't understand that yet.. Just because changing Nick Fury to a black guy in the Ultimate universe worked so well, doesn't mean replacing Spider-man with a black kid will work... Peter Parker has been Spider-man for over 50 years now and changing him, is not what fans wanted. If they wanna have Miles around as a second character with similar powers to spider-man,but with a different costume identity then fine, I'm all for that but replacing Peter Parker with him? I don't see how this is a good thing.. oh and no i'm not racist.. I've have black friends, Puerto Rican friends, Asian friends and so forth.. i'm not against the character of Miles Morels.. i'm just against him replacing Spider-man

 

[JimB]

I don't care that the kid is black, but it would be the same as replacing War Machine's Jim Rhodes with a skinny, Goth chick.

What would be the same as that, and why?

I guarantee that Marvel is bringing this Miles kid back as Spider-Man II for the same reason they changed Electro from white to black for the Amazing Spider-Man 2: it's because Samuel L. Jackson has done such a great job as Nick Fury, and Marvel has been hoping to repeat the success.

Your guarantee contradicts explicitly made statements from Miles Morales's creator. Do you have any evidence to back up your assertion?

Just because changing Nick Fury to a black guy in the Ultimate universe worked so well, doesn't mean replacing Spider-Man with a black kid will work.

What do you mean, will work? Miles Morales has been wearing the spider-themed pajamas for more than two years now.

Peter Parker has been Spider-Man for over 50 years now and changing him is not what fans wanted.

Provide proof of this, please.

I'm not racist. I have black friends, Puerto Rican friends, Asian friends and so forth.

For future reference, "I'm not a racist, I have black friends" is a sentiment so synonymous with racism that it has become a joke. If you insist on trying to prove to the audience you're not racist, that is not the way to go about it.

 

[Baresark]

I don't buy your definition of "libtard". Yours is just as made up as mine is. If you Google the definition of "libtard", the first thing you are greeted with is an alternate word for "libertarian".

I'll be honest, this is as far as I got. So I looked, and this is what I got:

Libtard n. Portmanteu of "liberal" and "retard".

Unless you're saying libertarians are "retarded" liberals, then no, the first thing I was greeted with was not an alternate word for libertarian.

However, if I did a little tap dancing to get your definition, I was greeted with a Wiktionary page. If you click on the Wiktionary link, the second definition, surprise surprise, says more or less what I posted above: it's a slur regarding liberals. So even if Wiktionary was your source, that doesn't help much. Mine isn't "made up." It's the second definition.

I'd say a larger point is if you use a word used by Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, don't be surprised if you're lumped in with Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh.

But that's all the energy I have to deal with this.

That is incredibly short sighted. If you could bring yourself to have the courage to read all the way through my post you would see that your post proves my point. The term has no hard definition, which supports what I said, not what you said. To outline, the term is not definitive and has no one meaning.

I would never mention either of those people in a post regarding the president, they are among the most despicable of TV personalities. But you are probably assuming that I am somehow supportive of the Republican party, which would put you among the people who seem to think there are only 2 thoughts in politics. It's true, mine are not the most popular and people like me don't have the support of places like the inner city or the "bible belt", but you would be wrong in thinking that I don't consider ideas over party politics.

But you are right, it is best to stop this on a note that we are not enemies but just people with different ideas. I do not consider myself the most knowledgeable about just about anything, and that leaves me with lots to learn and lots of other ideas to listen to.

 

[Something Amyss]

If you could bring yourself to have the courage

Please, no more strawmen. No more lies, no more attacks on my character. It has nothing to do with courage and everything to do with the fact that I don't have the will to keep refuting dishonest and/or inane statements. I doubt you even bothered to address the fact (yes, fact) that I was absolutely correct in my definition of Libtard as a slur regarding liberals.

You played the same game racists play with the word "******" and you wonder why you're lumped in with an unsavoury group. And then you call me short-sighted for not wanting to deal with it anymore.

 

[JimB]

The term has no hard definition, which supports what I said, not what you said. To outline, the term is not definitive and has no one meaning.

Then you have deliberately left the door open for people to assume the word is being used in a pejorative way, since a pejorative definition is among those the reader can choose from. I really don't understand why you're fighting so hard to be declared right, if the only way you can do so is to say the word has so many definitions as to be meaningless such that the only possible way to know what you actually mean is to start asking you what you think the word means. It seems like it would be a lot simpler to just choose a word that does not have an insulting meaning if you don't want to actually levy an insult at someone.

 

[Wizardly-K9]

Spider-man being black is actually really believable. I mean think about it: a poor kid with no parents who lives in the Bronx with his aunt after his uncle gets shot in the street. That sounds like an episode of the Wire.