goggle_kid: (Pretty Cure WTF?)
goggle_kid ([personal profile] goggle_kid) wrote in [community profile] scans_daily2010-06-07 02:20 am

More DC Race Fail

Dave Brothers Beat Me To This One

More of Ian Sattler at the the Heroes Con DC Nation panel.

"A serious topic came up about how characters who are minorities who happened to be legacy characters like Ryan Choi are killed off so their caucasian counterparts can return and how they feel like they are being cheated or sidelined out of their roles. Sattler took a more serious tone. "It's so hard for me to be on the other side because it's not our intention. There is a reason behind it all. We don't see it that way and strive very hard to have a diverse DCU. I mean, we have green, pink, and blue characters. We have the Great Ten out there and I have counter statistics, but I won't get into that. It's not how we perceived it. We get the same thing about how we treat our female characters."



ext_396524: (Default)

[identity profile] stolisomancer.insanejournal.com 2010-06-07 11:13 am (UTC)(link)
Dude, I never even brought up the relevance of fan anger. I don't give a fuck. That's all you. The closest I came was saying that Marvel hasn't done anything this bad in a while.

[personal profile] theanswer 2010-06-07 11:14 am (UTC)(link)
And they have, they've been doing that for years. It's Quesada's favorite hobby, and I've pointed out several examples.

And your entire discussion has been about fan anger.
ext_396524: (Default)

[identity profile] stolisomancer.insanejournal.com 2010-06-07 11:21 am (UTC)(link)
Quesada likes riling up the fan base over Speedball and saying stupid shit about Spider-Man and marriage. He's not committing well-known logical fallacies in an attempt to combat open accusations of racism.

One's silly shit about fictional dudes. One's cramming your foot down your neck 'til a shoe pops out your groin. There is a difference.

My entire part in this conversation's been about me being entertained that DC can't stop fucking up. I'm not angry; I'm amused, now more than ever.

[personal profile] theanswer 2010-06-07 11:24 am (UTC)(link)
And I countered your argument with the sales point because if Brightest Day sells as well as Blackest Night then they are not fucking up, as far as they are concerned.

And again, your personal bias is showing. Women and gays are well known victims of Marvel policies.

Quesada championed Freedom Ring as Marvel's spotlight gay superhero. He was later killed shortly after in his own series in a very questionable and offensive manner.
ext_396524: (Default)

[identity profile] stolisomancer.insanejournal.com 2010-06-07 11:32 am (UTC)(link)
What they think is irrelevant. They're still fucking up.

I'm really not seeing how "Marvel policies" victimize women or gays, particularly in the last couple of years. They've certainly told some regrettable stories that featured both women and gays, like that time they killed off Northstar three times in one month, but "well known victims"? What crap is this, now?

[personal profile] theanswer 2010-06-07 11:34 am (UTC)(link)
Again, if it sells well they are not going to think they're fucking up. Marvel would feel the same way.

Do you realize you just denied and acknowledged my point as false and fact at the same time?
ext_396524: (Default)

[identity profile] stolisomancer.insanejournal.com 2010-06-07 11:40 am (UTC)(link)
And again: I do not care what they think.

You're making it sound like it's a matter of Marvel editorial policy to write stories where women and gay people wind up as victims. Yeah, bad things have happened to both female and gay characters at Marvel (and at any other company), but not as part of Marvel's Heteronormativity is Awesome story initiative. Your point is poorly phrased at best, particularly now, when Marvel is deliberately trying to do more with its female characters.

[personal profile] theanswer 2010-06-07 11:49 am (UTC)(link)
Doesn't matter if you care or not, it's still fact. And you seemed to care up until the point where you were proven wrong.

Marvel is only just now starting to do more with their female characters AFTER the backlash they received for a long period misogyny. They're still not doing the same thing for their gay characters.

And there was in fact editorial policies that hindered the development of those gay characters. For a while any title with a gay character was instantly deemed mature.

On the subject of Freedom Ring, the treatment of which Marvel received considerable backlash. Here's two quotes on Robert Kirkman concerning FR and gay characters in Marvel.

"Freedom Ring was always planned as an inexperienced hero who would get beaten up constantly and probably die. I wanted to comment on the fact that most superheroes get their powers and are okay at it... and that's not how life works. During working on the book, I was also noticing that most gay characters... are all about being gay. Straight characters are well-rounded characters who like chicks. So I wanted to do a well-rounded character who just happened to like dudes. Then I decided to combine the two ideas. In hindsight, yeah, killing a gay character is no good when there are so few of them... but I really had only the best of intentions in mind."

A very similar situation to DC's statement here. It was their intention, but it happened anyway.

"Frankly, with the SMALL amount of gay characters in comics in general, and how unfortunate the portrayals have been thus far, whether intentional or not—I completely understand the backlash on the death of Freedom Ring, regardless of my intentions. If I had it to do all over again... I wouldn't kill him. I regret it more and more as time goes on. I got rid of what? 20% of the gay characters at Marvel by killing off this ONE character. I just never took that stuff into consideration while I was writing."
ext_396524: (Default)

[identity profile] stolisomancer.insanejournal.com 2010-06-07 07:03 pm (UTC)(link)
I was never proven wrong, because you're not making a coherent enough argument to prove much of anything. As a general rule, for a debate to be useful, both sides should probably be fairly clear what they're discussing, and you keep flying off into questionable assertions and irrelevant proclamations.

[personal profile] theanswer 2010-06-07 07:05 pm (UTC)(link)
I see my mistake was engaging in a discussion with someone who cannot acknowledge a fact if it means they're wrong.
ext_396524: (Default)

[identity profile] stolisomancer.insanejournal.com 2010-06-07 07:11 pm (UTC)(link)
No, that implies you made just one mistake. Mine was perpetuating this discussion in an attempt to figure out what the hell you were talking about.

[personal profile] theanswer 2010-06-07 07:13 pm (UTC)(link)
Well if you have trouble understanding obvious facts and realities then it's no wonder.
ext_396524: (Default)

[identity profile] stolisomancer.insanejournal.com 2010-06-07 07:20 pm (UTC)(link)
Look, let's just both drop it and walk away. Neither of us seem to have a handle on what the other is trying to say, so any further discussion is truly pointless.

[personal profile] theanswer 2010-06-07 07:21 pm (UTC)(link)
Well no, I have firm handle on what you were saying. You were just wrong and I pointed that out and proved it.
ext_396524: (Default)

[identity profile] stolisomancer.insanejournal.com 2010-06-07 07:38 pm (UTC)(link)
You didn't prove I was wrong the first time, because me saying I'm entertained by DC fucking up is not an argument.

You didn't prove I was wrong, because none of the "gaffes" at Marvel that you mentioned have been a systematic, near-unanimous accusation of racism, myopia, and toxic nostalgia.

You haven't proved anything, except maybe that we both have too much free time.
divi_d: (Default)

[personal profile] divi_d 2010-06-07 08:11 pm (UTC)(link)
Uh, guys? Not to be a butinsky, but I really don't see where this argument is going at this point.

Yes, theanswer, we already know you think you proved his point wrong (and, by extension, that would also mean we already know you think you know what he's talking about). Stating it again doesn't really provide anything new, other than maybe to turn your argument into an ad-nauseum tactic (SP). (For the record, BTW, it does kinda look to me more like you actually did miss the original point rather than actually prove anything wrong, but this argument has gotten so damn long that I admit I may just have lost track of what's what.)

Yes, Stolisomancer, we know you don't feel this way. Havn't you actually tried to withdraw from this conversation twice now (I don't mean this in a patrinising way, mind you. I think I've been down this ally many a time myself, actually XD)?

Yeah, I know, it's really none of my bussiness, but it is kinda getting ridiculous, and while I'm hardly going to pretend I have the right to demand you guys stop arguing, I am kinda getting genuinely curious what, if anything, either of you think you can possibly accomplish at this point...
Edited 2010-06-07 20:15 (UTC)
ext_396524: (Default)

[identity profile] stolisomancer.insanejournal.com 2010-06-07 08:44 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeah, I should've stopped talking a long time ago, but last night I couldn't sleep and this morning I'm trying to avoid a boring project.
divi_d: (Default)

[personal profile] divi_d 2010-06-07 08:53 pm (UTC)(link)
Touche.
autolychus2: (Default)

[personal profile] autolychus2 2010-06-08 12:36 am (UTC)(link)
No, you didn't. Stolis is right.

[personal profile] theanswer 2010-06-08 12:39 am (UTC)(link)
No, he is not.