WHITE GUY DEFENSE FORCE GO!

[Hat Man]

"If race doesn't matter then why not make the character black"

If race doesn't matter then why not make the character white?

That simplistic logic works both ways.

 

[jamesbrown]

I have no idea what anyone said in this forum, but I am sure this wont be read and there are some essay long fights going on about -isms; so as a light-hearted individual I am going to lighten the mood a bit.
And many more at [link]http://www.reddit.com/r/aww/[/link]

 

[Kei Kaemon]

"If race doesn't matter then why not make the character black"

If race doesn't matter then why not make the character white?

That simplistic logic works both ways.

Don't tell them that, they need their strawman argument.

Frankly this whole comic is disgusting, it's meant to take the extreme of something and make it offensive, okay up until they go and make a Zimmerman joke and just blindly kill a guy... Then again what can I expect from these people? They're mildly decent comics at best, if they were actually good they wouldn't be on the escapist.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

For those on either side who claim that race, gender or sexuality don't ever matter when it comes to their preference in media consumption, I'd sure like to have a look in their porn collection so that I can prove them wrong.

If you said that you wanted to change a character to a black character because you think there aren't enough non-white super heroes on the big screen and you're using it to represent a minority then it would make sense, if you say that you're doing it because they were the best candidate for the role then skin colour really wouldn't matter, but changing it for literally no reasoning besides changing it makes no sense, and that's why some people (including me) are confused.

Because the truth is that ultimately it does matter, and in my opinion anyone who claims otherwise is lying, either to you or themselves, or ignorant. I accept no other alternative. Before I go on, it is important here to realise that although smaller films made on a tighter budget offer a better return on investment, the industry itself is perhaps fatally addicted to the work which is generated by massively-budgeted high profile films. While this approach was certainly never efficient it did work well enough when companies had a much easier time accessing capital than they presently do. This hard scrabble for capital means that there is more pressure than ever for the companies behind the US movie industry to minimise loses, and maximise profits. Which leads us back to Heimdall. Whether anyone necessarily likes it or not, casting a black man for the role generates more ticket sales then the few ticket sales it loses. And that is really all there is to it. The same underlying principles also work to make the majority of the protagonists of mega-budget Hollywood films handsome straight white men.

 

[AntiChrist]

"Zimmerman mode activate"?

What does Bob Dylan have to do with any of this?

Tight reference, guy.

Yay, recognition!

 

[Basement Cat]

I have no idea what anyone said in this forum, but I am sure this wont be read and there are some essay long fights going on about -isms; so as a light-hearted individual I am going to lighten the mood a bit.

DITTO!!! I desperately feel the need for DANCING KITTENS!!!

Spoiler: Mod edit: Please add spoilers for images!

Geez, by chance I managed to see this comic when it was first posted and just before going to work and I...

...well..I didn't get the "Zimmerman" reference.

I had 2 minutes before I needed to go to work and chose to pop the Comments (all 12 of them at the time) and noted that everyone was saying that "A Shit Storm Was Coming".

NOW on my first day off in a week and---

35 PAGES?!?!?

It took me several minutes to grasp the "Zimmerman" factor involved in this strip. I'm often slow that way, sure, but...

*shrugs*

...

35 pages, folks...

I DON'T know what's been said since the first dozen comments on this thread but...seriously...35 pages?

*sighs*

On Topic:

I grok the guy's point about racism. I don't know where Grey and Carter were going with the "Bus Card" bit. But "Zimmerman Mode, Activate!!!"? That's poor taste, Grey.

I honestly think I know what I'm doing. I certainly intend well.

I'm talking "Old School". I'm older than you, btw. Whatever your point of view on this polarizing subject...it was in poor taste. I remember watching the L.A. riots LIVE on T.V. in my college years, FYI....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_riots

I grok your perspective and respect your POV and approach, but this was.........and right now I'm trying...

Tacky, and in poor taste Grey.

It's never MERELY about pointing out wrongs. Anyone can do that.

If you want society to do better than it has been doing then you have to step beyond simplistically pointing out wrongs and explain to people why some things are wrong or right rather than willfully dropping raw flame bait into the laps of TENS OF THOUSAND OF KIDS ROAMING THE INTERNET.

Think about it, Grey. You're an adult. We're both adults.

Spoiler: Mod edit: Please add spoilers for images!

The fact that you're addressing these points in comic strip form--which is inherently limited--should only focus your approach rather than excuse them.

At least in my eyes.

For what it's worth I'll understand if you disagree with me. Bad taste, Grey. This wasn't good.

-_-

 

[furai47]

Perhaps not by the legal definition, but by the definition of a predator following his prey, I think he did, and I use the word with a clean conscience. He decided that young boy was his prey, and my proof is, rather than leaving the supposed criminal to the police as he was instructed to do, he followed Martin and forced a confrontation.

A dispatcher cannot order or instruct you to do anything as their authority extends only as far as suggesting a course of action. Say that five times fast.

I have faith in my memory. If you think it's inaccurate, I invite you to link me to evidence, but as it stands, I am quite positive I've heard trial coverage explaining that the forensics do not bear out Zimmerman's story.

Given what's coming up, I don't think you remember the trial quite that clearly.

I don't think that bears up. Let's ask ourselves what could have been done differently to avoid this conflict.

Trayvon Martin could have not attacked George Zimmerman. That's fine, but it doesn't hold up, because if Zimmerman is justified for shooting Martin on some "stand your ground" principle, then Martin is equally (and probably more, since he didn't use a lethal weapon) justified for standing his own ground.

SYG was never invoked in the trial, because this was a simple case of self defense. Martin in this case if he survived could not have invoked SYG or self defense seeing how he assaulted Zimmerman; these two laws only apply when you're not acting illegally which Martin did.

By the way, I'm sorry for bringing in 'that' site but:
>fisticuffs
>not lethal
While not as effective as a handgun at close range or as godlike as they are in COD, fists and feet are not non-lethal.

George Zimmerman could have not shot Trayvon Martin. No, that is apparently off the table because he was smaller than Martin, so it's a wash when it comes to actively participating in the conflict itself. If one person was justified attacking, then the other was as well. Let's go back in time further.

When you're being assaulted, you're justified defending yourself. Zimmerman already lost Martin when he was following him, the latter then came back to initiate the conflict.

Trayvon Martin could have stayed home to not go buy Skittles so George Zimmerman would not have seen him to be suspicious of him. That's fucking ridiculous.

Let me fix that for you: Trayvon Martin could not have come back and initiated assault so George Zimmerman would not have to shoot him for having his face smashed into the concrete. That's actually pretty fucking reasonable.

Actually, I think the ones responsible are the guy who came up with the whole "stand your ground"-law idea, the guy who came up with the idea of neighborhood watches and taking the monopoly on violence away from the police and general gun culture.

Let's also blame the guy who invented guns, gunpowder, and metal. I'm sorry but no, the one responsible for the assault is the one who committed said assault, no one else. We can talk about who or what lead to and slowly escalated towards the conflict; ultimately it's the guy who throws the first punch/kick/bullet.

...Trayvon ran away, and then the officer told Zimmerman not to pursue...

I'm sorry for being such a nit-picker but it was a dispatcher, not an officer. At no point in time did Zimmerman talk to the police prior to the shooting.
Quite a few people still think that he was 'ordered by the police to stop following him' so I'd wager it's quite an important correction to make.

--------------------------------------------------
Shooting for page 36.

 

[Aramis Night]

I love facts and statistics and i do happen to be a white male(through no fault of my own, i assure you). This combination of properties i possess clearly puts me in the comic creators definition of the WMDF. I take no pride in this but i also find it difficult to feel too much shame about it which is generally how i feel about race as well despite clearly being pegged as a racist here. I've never understood the concept of racial pride. How can i take credit for accomplishments i have had no hand in?

I do not expect other people to answer for things they have not themselves done or expressed but it seems obvious that as a white male, i cannot be expected to receive the same treatment from others. By virtue of my skin tone/gender i am expected to not protest when i am treated poorly or mischaracterized or else i am shamed by those around me because somewhere someone has been mistreated worse than me and for possibly worse reasons. I do not deny the reality that yes, others have been treated worse than me. A trip to a graveyard will confirm that. And by such an extreme metric, no one has a right to complain as long as they still live.

Have we grown so lacking in empathy that we have to ration it out only to certain groups and not to others? And if so shouldn't the metric be based on suffering or injustice rather than demographic?

The notion of privilege gets thrown around a lot and if it's advocates are to be believed, i am exceedingly well endowed with it. Yet somehow through no irresponsibility of my own, i have been homeless, i have been without employment/income(never been fired), i have been raped/drugged(how i lost my virginity), i have been shot at(drive by), I have had my home destroyed by gang members, my father died last year of a drug overdose, i've been betrayed by numerous supposed best friends and girlfriends, i've been locked up(violated a weapons law while homeless for carrying something i didn't know was illegal to protect myself with), and i have been disowned by all sides of my family because they all think i'm some kind of satanist(spoiler: I'm not).

I don't bring any of that up for the sake of a pity party. My suffering isn't special. But it does exist. To be informed that i have no right to my grief because of aspects of myself i had no choice in, Also denies me my right to empathise with others who have also experienced suffering and grief whether they share my gender/skin tone or not. And this is the objection i have with the subtext that this comic promotes.

 

[Karadalis]

And meanwhile the rest of the world that isnt the USA couldnt give less of a f*ck about this.

I mean this whole white vs black thing is really only an issue within the US of A

You dont see anyone rallying against german game devs because they dont put enough jews as their main characters now do you?

And also theres not that many white hetero sentai members over here too, dispite the fact that theres a sh*t ton of ethnical minorities over here.

The USA should really get over its fascination of white vs black... after all doesnt matter who you cut they all bleed the same red. Whoops.. is that the police im hearing? Gotta run guys... gotta run.

 

[Plunkies]

Zimmerman bears more responsibility for the conflict than does the child he killed.

He was 6'1", 170lbs, and a football player. He was nearly a head and shoulders taller than Zimmerman in height. In all likelihood, he would have been tried as an adult had he survived the conflict. The only question is how many years Trayvon would have spent in jail. It's not even a question whether he would have been guilty or not.

There is only one person that bears responsibility for his actions that night, and it is the man who attacked Zimmerman without provocation.

I don't think that bears up. Let's ask ourselves what could have been done differently to avoid this conflict.

Trayvon Martin could have not attacked George Zimmerman. That's fine, but it doesn't hold up, because if Zimmerman is justified for shooting Martin on some "stand your ground" principle, then Martin is equally (and probably more, since he didn't use a lethal weapon) justified for standing his own ground.

George Zimmerman could have not shot Trayvon Martin. No, that is apparently off the table because he was smaller than Martin, so it's a wash when it comes to actively participating in the conflict itself. If one person was justified attacking, then the other was as well. Let's go back in time further.

George Zimmerman, having alerted the police, could have not followed Trayvon Martin, as the 911 dispatcher said. I think that's fair, but let's see what Martin could have done.

Trayvon Martin could have stayed home to not go buy Skittles so George Zimmerman would not have seen him to be suspicious of him. That's fucking ridiculous.

Viewed purely from the lens of "whom could we reasonably ask to have done something different that would not result in a dead child," George Zimmerman is the one who erred. He bears the responsibility for creating this conflict. It did not exist before George Zimmerman made it exist.

What you're saying is racist. "How can I be racist if I'm defending Trayvon Martin?" you may likely ask. It's the racism of low expectations. You inherently attribute violent behavior to blacks (in this case Martin), and give him zero personal responsibility or self control that a normal human being would have. Your entire argument hinges on the assumption that just being near this "child" (a large athletic 17 year old child, lol), warrants a beating. As though being in the general vicinity of a young black male is the equivalent of poking a bear or jumping into a lion's cage.

Trayvon Martin wasn't a wild animal, despite his behavior. He was a member of society, and as a member of society, you have a personal responsibility to not to try to beat people to death with zero provocation. You place all of the blame on Zimmerman for being nearby, but none of the blame on Martin for initiating and continuing a violent confrontation.

Oh, and by the way, you don't seem to have watched the trial at all. I'm guessing you're one of those people who were simply told what to think by the media, instead of going to the source and forming your own opinion.

There was no stand your ground. That simply removes the duty to retreat first in a life or death situation. Zimmerman had no retreat since he was on his back, which all witness and forensic evidence verifies. The dispatcher didn't tell Zimmerman to stop following because he's not allowed to do that, he said "we don't need you to do that" to which Zimmerman replied "ok" and then stopped, as you can hear in the 911 tapes and was established in the trial. The reason Zimmerman got out of his car, was because he lost sight of Martin completely. Zimmerman had no knowledge of Martin's location for 4 minutes. In fact, during the trial, the defense put up a clock and had everyone sit there in silence and contemplate on an entire 4 minutes where Martin could have walked less than 100 yards to his house, or even just removed himself from the situation. But he didn't. He went back and ambushed Zimmerman just a few yards from his truck.

Zimmerman did nothing illegal. He did nothing to provoke a physical attack from Martin. If Zimmerman hadn't defended himself and also survived the attack, he wouldn't have been charged for somehow "creating a conflict" by being near another person at some point in time. That's not a law. That's not even common sense. Trayvon Martin would have been charged with at least aggravated battery, if not attempted murder.

Even if Martin hadn't ambushed Zimmerman. Even if Zimmerman got out of his truck, walked directly behind Martin, and insulted him for the next 4 minutes, Martin STILL wouldn't have been justified in escalating it to physical violence, and then further escalating it to deadly violence when the victim tried to escape.

Ironically, most people try to paint Zimmerman as being a racist, yet your apparent argument is that he wasn't racist enough. That he should have been more racist and stayed far away from the black person because they're very likely to attack you, and if you get attacked it's your own fault.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

WHITE GUY DEFENSE FORCE GO!

*Guitar Solo*

Read Full Article

And to think you managed to beat out Coelasquid in the Webcomic competition.

This webcomic has gotten really sad as of late, especially compared to Manly Guys Doing Manly Things.

Spoiler: Coelasquids response to the Harley Quinn committing suicide issue (as well as showing her displesure at the new Lobo)

 

[Lono Shrugged]

Wow, the comic while originally not really funny, unoriginal and misinformed, made the basic point that the "average white male" (a stereotype) is whiney and self absorbed. Considering the views and responses and anger that has been whipped up over a few panels, I think the authors have created their finest work. Here I was chuckling at 'hover hands' without any idea of the hilarity that would ensue in the comments. Man alive...

 

[Strazdas]

This was unexpected. but the references there kinda went all in. hover hand will make them famous! Though you should have tried putting the talk to the hand in there too.

Of all the things that attract attention in this comic, of all the things that draw one's eye, one thing sticks out to me:

.....what exactly is the "Son zone"?

Its when Milf friendzones you.

 

[The Wooster]

Wow, the comic while originally not really funny, unoriginal and misinformed, made the basic point that the "average white male" (a stereotype) is whiney and self absorbed. Considering the views and responses and anger that has been whipped up over a few panels, I think the authors have created their finest work. Here I was chuckling at 'hover hands' without any idea of the hilarity that would ensue in the comments. Man alive...

Show me one other comic that characterizes angry internet white dudes as motherfucking Gorangers. I'll take unfunny and misinformed, but unoriginal? Please.

 

[JimB]

"If his race doesn't matter, why should I go back and redo this modelling/drawing/writing work to make him black?"

Then race does matter after all.

Except you have the starting phrase wrong. It's an obvious reference to the arguments over things like, again, Idris Elba as Heimdall, where one side would say "they shouldn't cast a black actor, because the character has always been white." And the other side says "But the race was never a big part of the character, so why does it matter if he's black now?" Then this comic jumps in halfway through the argument, where the guy with the second position has apparently managed to get the guy with the first position to concede that the race didn't matter.

Which comic are you talking about, and are you talking to me or to Evil Roy? Your quote nesting is very confusing.

I wasn't aware we were fighting about it.

I was using "you" in the generic sense. I thought that was obvious from the context, since neither you nor I have mentioned any specific character of any race.

I'm not sure that it's so much them not caring but still fighting for it, and more that they want to know why anybody cares enough to make the change in the first place if it doesn't matter.

This is an impossible question to answer in a hypothetical, since I don't know what character is being referred to. There probably isn't a specific one at all in mind, but let's say it's Link just for the sake of having a name to use. I would guess that the black dude from Critical Miss is arguing to change Link to a black character because Hyrule is as white as a Saltine dipped in mayo, and he would like to feel as if Nintendo isn't excluding him not out of active hatred but out of passive dismissal, as if black people are beneath being represented as protagonists in video games.

I'm in the same boat as Specter, so maybe you can help me understand why some people change it simply for the sake of changing it.

Who said anything about changing for the sake of change rather than to accomplish a specific goal?

A dispatcher cannot order or instruct you to do anything as their authority extends only as far as suggesting a course of action.

Then why call 911, if you're just going to ignore them anyway?

Stand your ground was never invoked in the trial, because this was a simple case of self defense.

It was by the police when they refused to arrest Zimmerman for the forty-something days between the shooting and his arrest.

Martin, in this case, if he survived, could not have invoked stand your ground or self-defense, seeing how he assaulted Zimmerman; these two laws only apply when you're not acting illegally, which Martin did.

The eyewitness accounts conflict on that, and I think Martin would probably have a different story to tell if he had been left capable of telling it.

While not as effective as a handgun at close range or as godlike as they are in Call if Duty, fists and feet are not non-lethal.

Christ. Nothing on the planet Earth or the reaches beyond is non-lethal.

When you're being assaulted, you're justified defending yourself. Zimmerman already lost Martin when he was following him, the latter then came back to initiate the conflict.

And you have the evidence of this, yes?

What you're saying is racist. "How can I be racist if I'm defending Trayvon Martin?" you may likely ask.

No, my question is, "How is it racist to apply the same justifications to both Martin's and Zimmerman's actions?"

You inherently attribute violent behavior to blacks[...]

Wow. No, you're the one doing that. I never said a word about any black person other than Trayvon Martin, and I never said a word about the motivations behind his behavior. He felt threatened, so he took violent action. This is exactly the same thing George Zimmerman did. To extrapolate from that that I think his actions were motivated by inherent violence rather than the fundamental human instinct of fight or flight, and then to further extrapolate that I think black people are inherently less capable of controlling animal instincts, is completely insupportable and is nothing but you projecting.

[...]and give him zero personal responsibility or self-control that a normal human being would have.

What does self-control have to do with being stalked by an armed man twice your age who is following you with aggressive intent?

Your entire argument hinges on the assumption that just being near this "child" (a large athletic 17 year old child, lol), warrants a beating.

No, my argument hinges on the belief that Zimmerman lied when he said he didn't approach Martin. Remember the testimony of the girl Martin was on the phone with.

Oh, and by the way, you don't seem to have watched the trial at all. I'm guessing you're one of those people who were simply told what to think by the media, instead of going to the source and forming your own opinion.

Guess whatever you want if it helps you sleep better at night, secure in your belief that anyone who disagrees with you is a mindless sheep bleating out the media's spin rather than someone who believes he has a better understanding of the facts than you.

 

[Lono Shrugged]

snip

I have never seen any other film where Mario Van Peebles plays a Battleship captain, but it doesn't mean American Warships is not a Battleship knock off piece of shit.

 

[Xelien]

I just noticed this had over 1000 posts and I just had to laugh, oh you guys.

Anyways, I immediately shared this to a good amount of people when it first came up. It was a crowd pleaser.

 

[Plunkies]

What you're saying is racist. "How can I be racist if I'm defending Trayvon Martin?" you may likely ask.

No, my question is, "How is it racist to apply the same justifications to both Martin's and Zimmerman's actions?"

What justification? There is no justification. That's what makes it illegal. You can't go around violently assaulting people.

You inherently attribute violent behavior to blacks[...]

Wow. No, you're the one doing that. I never said a word about any black person other than Trayvon Martin, and I never said a word about the motivations behind his behavior. He felt threatened, so he took violent action. This is exactly the same thing George Zimmerman did. To extrapolate from that that I think his actions were motivated by inherent violence rather than the fundamental human instinct of fight or flight, and then to further extrapolate that I think black people are inherently less capable of controlling animal instincts, is completely insupportable and is nothing but you projecting.

Fight or flight? He felt threatened? Once again you give Trayvon Martin no control over whether or not he chooses to act like a violent thug. He didn't feel threatened or he wouldn't have gone back to confront Zimmerman, and there's no fight or flight instinct when you GO BACK and attack someone. Fight or flight is a defensive mechanism, not an offensive one.

[...]and give him zero personal responsibility or self-control that a normal human being would have.

What does self-control have to do with being stalked by an armed man twice your age who is following you with aggressive intent?

Again, he wasn't stalked. You're using charged and biased words instead of relying on facts. Zimmerman could not have followed or stalked martin because he lost sight of Martin, as indicated by the 911 call. Martin had 4 minutes to go home and instead chose to wait for Zimmerman near his truck at the T intersection. And based on where Martin sprinted away while Zimmerman was still in his truck, Martin would have had to double back to initiate a confrontation at that intersection, in the opposite direction of the house he was staying at.

So, once again, self control has everything to do with not attacking people for no reason.

Your entire argument hinges on the assumption that just being near this "child" (a large athletic 17 year old child, lol), warrants a beating.

No, my argument hinges on the belief that Zimmerman lied when he said he didn't approach Martin. Remember the testimony of the girl Martin was on the phone with.

Yes, I clearly remember the embarrassing and perjury filled testimony of Rachel Jeantel. She placed Trayvon Martin as instigating the confrontation, despite changing the words of said confrontation (lying under oath). But in both stories, the thing that remained constant was Trayvon Martin initiating the confrontation by saying "Why you following me?" to which Zimmerman in her first story said "What are you talking about?" and in the second story said "Why are you in my neighborhood?" or something to that effect.

Neither the location of the fight, nor witness testimony, nor Zimmerman's story immediately after the incident, would indicate that Zimmerman approached Martin. If you have evidence of this, you should present it, because the prosecution had no evidence of this either and I'm sure they'd be happy for your expertise.

Oh, and by the way, you don't seem to have watched the trial at all. I'm guessing you're one of those people who were simply told what to think by the media, instead of going to the source and forming your own opinion.

Guess whatever you want if it helps you sleep better at night, secure in your belief that anyone who disagrees with you is a mindless sheep bleating out the media's spin rather than someone who believes he has a better understanding of the facts than you.

But you clearly don't have a better understanding of the facts. You seem to have few facts at all. You rely on emotion, charged words, lies, misrepresentations, but I've yet to hear many facts from you. You insist Zimmerman is the cause of the incident but fail entirely to provide evidence for that claim just as the prosecution failed during the trial.

You say you don't "bleat out the media's spin" and yet on multiple occasions you claim the dispatcher told Zimmerman to stop following, which is in fact media spin. You say stand your ground was why he wasn't arrested, but stand your ground never came into play. He wasn't arrested because it was an open and shut self-defense case and there was nothing to charge. You claim Zimmerman stalked Martin which is also impossible based on Zimmerman losing track of Martin for at least 4 minutes prior to the incident. And even if you could somehow prove both of these to be true despite all the evidence to the contrary, they still wouldn't amount to a single crime committed by Zimmerman.

 

[Irridium]

*White Hetero dudes after telling an offensive joke*: "It's just a joke, you guys have no sense of humor. Get a thicker skin and quit trying to kill comedy and censor free speech"

*Oppressed person (or anyone, really) tells joke about white hetero males*

White hetero dude after hearing said joke* "I AM SUDDENLY INCAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING IRONY OR SATIRE AND YOU ARE THE NEXT HITLER QUIT OPPRESSING STRAIGHT WHITE MALES YOU FUCKING *racist/sexist comment here*"

Well done, Grey and Cory. Comic was great. And as a straight hetero male, I can actually take a joke and laugh because the comic isn't referring to me specifically

 

[Sejborg]

This many comments for a comic that isn't even funny?

Serious business the internet.