Trailer for The Avengers - first "real" one

[kirke_novak]

We still don't know who the enemy is (my money on Skrulls), I don't believe it's Loki
I already ship Natasha/Loki
Steve has a gun, all is right with the world
Don't like how they just attached Hulk at the end - is he in the film for just 3 seconds?

Comments

[drmcninja]

Okay, i am going over this one more time, because i am doing my best to explain this and you are just not getting, either through your fault or mine.

It is not a gender issue if it applies to both men and women equally. If Tony, Cap, Thor, Clint, and banner were women, but Nat and Jan were both men it would still apply in the exact same way. It's done for a reason. A man and a woman having the same traits are still easier to distinguish from each other than two people of the same sex being identical are. I couldn't tell you why. I am not a psychanalyst. But that's the way things are, and you see it everywhere if you actuallylook for it.

In the comics, Sharon does very little compared to nat. She is beasically an administrator who does some field work, while Nat is actually in the field doing things. At least thats how it was when I last checked at the end of the Mars thing and beginning of the Secret Empire. Same with Jewel and Ms. Marvel. Ever notice how rarely those two are seen on panel fighting together? Each gets the spotlight when the other isn't there. That can work in comic books. in a movie, not so much, not unless you want one of them to neglected and half-characterized.

And two unpowered men who throw things in the secret avengers? Who would that be, Moon Knight and Cap? Because the genetically perfect super soldier and schizophrenic avatar of a lost god don't really have that much in common.

When you put another woman on the team just to have another woman there, what does that make her? That's just trying to fill a quota. When you have a legitimate reason to add her, that's fine. We have nat as a shield agent already who knows how to do her thing. it means nothing and does no good if you just put her there because "Oh no, not enough women." I know that sounds really sexist. I know that makes it sound as if I dont want any more women on the team because one is enough. Thats not what i mean. What I mean is that is has to be done with purpose, or it serves no purpose.

And in the same vein, guess who would be perfectly happy if Hawkeye wasn't in this movie. Me. The reason why I argue he's a better fit right now is because his concept is easier to grasp. The Wasp and her powers, be they science or mutant, requires explanation in the Movieverse. And more than i feel like they could fit into the movie smoothly, especially since they don't even own the X Men licensing. "Guy who's good with a bow" is a much, much easier concept for people to wrap their heads around.

[valtyr]

Your explanation rests entirely on your theory that people can't tell two characters with the same skillset apart unless they're different genders. "I can't explain it," you say. How about you prove it? You've asserted this, now back it up.

Cap and Moon Knight? You said same gender, same powers, same roster. The fact they're completely different characters despite that and no one has difficulty telling them apart proves my point, thanks. Ditto Sharon and Natasha - same skills, doing different things with them, no one gets confused. As for Carol and Jessica, I really don't think artist is carefully separating them because he thinks his audience is too stupid to tell the difference. (In fact, that would be counterproductive. If they're never in the same panel, the poor stupid reader will think they're the same woman from panel to panel!)

When you put another woman on the team just to have another woman on there what does that make her?

It makes her still an improvement over another white guy. A 'token woman' can also be Janet van Dyne, Jean Grey, Storm, or Susan Storm, all the 'token women' (and token POC) on their teams who have become much-loved characters. Token characters can grow into real, three-dimensional characters integrated into the plot in the hands of a competent writer. A character who was never included can't grow into anything.

For about the ninth time, Jan doesn't need to be introduced powered. You keep using that reason you just... made up.

[drmcninja]

Okay yeah, I'm pretty much done with this. I realize I've made some mistakes. i didn't realize you meant actually give her powers in the movie itself. I thought we were saying "give her powers" as in her having them randomly when the movie starts.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on the number of women inserted onto the team. I would prefer them placed in with purpose or meaning after having been fleshed out to keep the characters stable and safe, while you would understandably be happier just having a larger percentage of the team be female and trust that they will come out okay as a character without more time to develop. Those are both opinions, and I don't think we're going to change those, so I'm just going to respectfully disagree now, and leave it at that.

But Cap and Moon Knight aren't similar. One is genetically perfect, stronger and faster than any other human should be and calculating on an inhuman level in combat situations. The other is a normal guy who can fight pretty well except under a full moon, where he gets better. Pretty different to me, even taking away the concepts or any background at all. Its not an image thing, its a character thing. I'm not worried about people literally not being able to tell who is who, I'm worried that when they look back, neither will leave an adequate impression because they are so similar. I still stand by my point that its just the way things are because people work that way, but if you disagree, fine. I do see where youre coming from.

I just want to close in saying, I sincerely, sincerely apologize if I came off as discriminatory in any way. I'm not. I don't think I could handle this blog if I was. If I came off that way, then I apologize. AT the same time, I realize that you're an intelligent person and I could follow nearly all of the logic you used, and we just disagree. Whether or not you could follow all of mine would probably come down to my fault. I've always had a problem getting my thoughts down on paper, and I apologize for that as well.

[valtyr]

I've been pretty consistent from the start of this conversation about talking about an initially unpowered Jan who will later on get powers and perhaps an expanded role, so I'm not sure why you've failed to get that.

Characters can be developed in tight spaces. As I said, movies need supporting characters; Jan is just going to be Pym's (you've made it explicitly clear you will not accept Jan without Pym Being First!) so I think she would be better off being pushed as an Avengers supporting character.

Cap and Moon Knight have, functionally the same skillset. Cap is not faster and stronger and more quick thinking than any human should be, he is explicitly peak human levels at all these things. Moon Knight is also highly skilled in the physical arena; he's certainly not wildly outmatched by Cap. From a narrative point of view, they're unpowered guys who are really good in a fight and at throwing stuff. You're just trying to create a difference so you can justify your frankly ridiculous assertion that you can't have two people with the same powers of the same gender on the same roster. Seriously, it's horseshit. Leave it alone.

I'm also interested that you've valiantly argued the individuality of Cap and Moon Knight while cheerfully allowing those two chicks are virtually identical, sure, whatever. Blonde, black-costumed, masked ex-fighter pilot Colonel with Kree powers and brunette white-costumed private investigator journalist powered by chemical spill and married with kid? Sure, you'll acknowledge they're practically the same, lol! Look, the artist thinks so too, he's not putting them in the same panel!

Which brings me to my final point, that a person can be sexist without meaning to. They can believe sexist things (like 'two girls would be confusing') without realising they're sexist. They can passionately defend their sexist opinions as correct and even progressive (adding a woman just to have a woman is worse than NO women! Better to wait for the days when they give female superheroes PROPER treatment!). It's not enough to be passively well-meaning; we have all been raised in the patriarchy, and internalised many of its beliefs as 'normal'. (For instance! When presented with a group that is equal numbers of men and women, most people will believe it to be female-dominated. Fascinating.) To not be sexist, those beliefs have to be found and rooted out; but some of them are 'normal' at such a bonedeep level it can be very difficult.

I think you've been behaving in a sexist fashion, arguing in defence of discriminatory policies, and expressing sexist opinions. You can, of course, ignore my opinion; after all, you *know* you're not a sexist, right?

[drmcninja]

And I've been pretty consistent in noting that looks are not the issue here, but you seem to love the idea that I'm saying that audiences will literally not be able to tell them apart because they look exactly the same. But nope. done arguing about that. Neither of us are moving in any direction on that front anymore. But if you're going to call me sexist, fine, go for it. But then I'm going to call you ignorant and working counter what you claim to uphold. If you value the idea of a token woman at all, it means you don't care if they should be put in because they could further the narrative or actually be well developed characters. By saying that you don't really care how its done, you would just be happy having another woman on the team is just saying, "No, its okay, they don't need any depth or character. As long as they're there and recognizable I'll be satisfied, please go on." Way to support the cause for enlightened, valuable, and promising female characters, because they don't have to be any of those things, they just have to be there.

[valtyr]

Oh, good! A man has come to tell me how I'm doing feminism wrong. *slow hand-clap* That is a totally appropriate response to a woman telling a man he's being sexist . Not a fucking second's self-examination there, was there?

It's funny! Your last comment, you realised I was an intelligent person and could follow almost all of my logic! But now I've dared call your behaviour sexist, suddenly you realise I'm ignorant and setting back the cause of feminism.

You're hilarious, in the depressing black comedy way.

Mod Note

[salinea]

Thread frozen while it is being under review by the Mod team.

Mod Warning

[salinea]

Because scans_daily is a feminist community, I would like to remind you, as well as others on this post really, to consider their words carefully when arguing against people who are complaining of the lack of female characters, because you may easily fall down into patterns of silencing or derailing feminist discussions. It is important to be personally alert for this because unintentional sexism can be very upsetting to discover in one's own actions. It happens to many of us - what matters is how we react when it is pointed out to us or we notice it. Perhaps you might find a walk through our anti-oppression resources quick list helpful to know better how to avoid it.

Also because scans_daily is a feminist community, being told that you have male privilege, that you said something offensive or sexist or acted in a sexist fashion is NOT considered an insult. Calling a fellow member ignorant in response on the other hand, is. For this reason, here is your FIRST OFFICIAL WARNING. Please note that if you receive two further warnings you will lose the ability to post on this community.

Re: Mod Warning

[drmcninja]

Well, if it was bad enough to get me a warning, I am clearly in the wrong here. I have clearly made some mistakes, at the very least in wording and delivery. I would just like to reiterate that however it may seem, and even if it is indeed unintentional sexism, I did not intentionally make any sexist comments with that purpose. I apologize again to valtyr and any other member that might have been offended reading my arguments, but I would like to point out the irony in a woman who is arguing for equality saying that men can't believe in the feminist cause or interperit in different ways than women could.

Either way, I apologize.

Re: Mod Warning

[salinea]

While we appreciate the apology and that this was unintentional; I'd like to stress that we really do not believe that valtyr was saying that men can't be feminist or interpret it different. For the most part, valtyr emphasized that men see things from a position of privilege. I know many men whose opinion I respect a great deal on feminism; and all of them know to check their privilege in some situations, such as when discussing about women about issues related to gender. If you really care about such issues, I sincerely urge you to try to educate yourself on that topic if you weren't aware of it up until now.


And if you'll allow me a personal asides *takes mod hat off*
Token characters are bad. But lack of representation is worse.

Re: Mod Warning

[drmcninja]

Understood. i think I will look into it further, because clearly I don't really know quite enough about it. Otherwise none of this would have happened to begin with.

And I would disagree. A token character with no character is nothing but a token to pay the toll.

Re: Mod Warning

[valtyr]

A token character with no character is nothing but a token to pay the toll.

Then you would have chosen no Jean Grey, no Susan Storm, no Janet van Dyne, and no Storm. And we would be immeasurably poorer.