# SJWs are ruining everything we love



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

I've become increasingly disappointed and disgusted by the negative influence that social justice warriors have had on society. It makes me feel physically ill, the Man Shaming, the general pussification of any masculine attitudes and ideals, forcing their views upon us, trying to make us accept their insanity and ruining everything we've come to enjoy.

From comic books, and movies to video games, they've left their toxic stench on everything. There doesn't seem to be any limit to what they can find to be "offended" by and they insist on bitching and trying everything they can to align with their demented views. We got people like Anita Sarkeesian sticking their noses into our games where they don't belong, harassing gamers and devs alike, complaining that they are misogynistic woman haters because their protagonists are either macho males or scantily clad females, which is utter garbage. They say the same about other mediums of entertainment as movies and comic, and go on to complain that they aren't black enough, or gay enough, and the sad thing is that creators have started to give in.

We've all experienced characters we've grown up with -*established characters*- suddenly switch races and sexual orientations. This makes me wonder what fate our favorite story telling mediums will suffer in the future if nothing is done. In the comics, Alan Scott (Green Lantern) has been made to be a homosexual, Wally West (Flash) and Nick Fury have pulled a reverse Michael Jackson, changing from white to black, what could be next?

Will we wake up one day to find that Batman now desires to be a woman? Will Beast Boy be caught engaging in acts of beastiality with the local zoo animals? Will we be confronted by a gay love scene between Hulk and Ant Man in the next Avengers movie? I shudder to think of what might happen next in this circus that society is quickly becoming.

~Please do try to have a mature and intelligent discussion instead of flaming and belittling others opinions~


----------



## Chary (May 23, 2018)

I'm all for writers trying new things with their characters, assuming they don't directly contrast their established personalities. The tone of pandering that some franchises have gone through, however, can be kind of irksome. 

Plus, I mean, SJWs have been met with backlash more and more in the past few years. The radical ones are always a minority, anyways. Anita Sarkeesian hasn't been relevant since like, 2013.


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

Chary said:


> I'm all for writers trying new things with their characters, assuming they don't directly contrast their established personalities. The tone of pandering that some franchises have gone through, however, can be kind of irksome.
> 
> Plus, I mean, SJWs have been met with backlash more and more in the past few years. The radical ones are always a minority, anyways. Anita Sarkeesian hasn't been relevant since like, 2013.


She was just a for instance, and the first one that came to mind. Things have escalated much since then.


----------



## kumikochan (May 23, 2018)

Thor turned female, iron man is now iron heart, green lantern is gay, spiderman died and became black, captain marvel was male at the beginning and not talking about the DC one but the Marvel one, America Chavez was bi but suddenly turned lesbian


----------



## comput3rus3r (May 23, 2018)

The SJW's are only a symptom of the problem. Everything you described is included in every single form of media. The agenda behind it is systemic.
It's the battle between good and evil. Also prophesied in the bible. Every soul experiences an "End Times" which is the point where they wake up from the social trance and become aware of the evils of the world.


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

kumikochan said:


> Thor turned female, iron man is now iron heart, green lantern is gay, spiderman died and became black


Well technically Thor was replaced by his girlfriend, and Peter Parker was succeeded by a black kid who was a fan of his, because apparently we needed that >_>


----------



## DBlaze (May 23, 2018)

kumikochan said:


> Thor turned female, iron man is now iron heart, green lantern is gay, spiderman died and became black, captain marvel was male at the beginning and not talking about the DC one but the Marvel one, America Chavez was bi but suddenly turned lesbian


When are we getting Black Widow's counter? White Married Man?


----------



## kumikochan (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Well technically Thor was replaced by his girlfriend, and Peter Parker was succeeded by a black kid who was a fan of his, because apparently we needed that >_>


Ofcourse we need that


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

kumikochan said:


> Ofcourse we need that


I think there's a lack of gay mexicans in comic books. We should force those qualities on Static Shock. How does that make you feel, bro? :I


----------



## kumikochan (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> I think there's a lack of gay mexicans in comic books. We should force those qualities on Static Shock. How does that make you feel, bro? :I


i was being sarcastic btw with ''ofcourse we need that''


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

kumikochan said:


> i was being sarcastic btw with ''ofcourse we need that''


lulz, I know. Just hammering home the ridiculousness


----------



## comput3rus3r (May 23, 2018)

DBlaze said:


> When are we getting Black Widow's counter? White Married Man?


White Married Man is the ultimate villain nowadays


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

DBlaze said:


> When are we getting Black Widow's counter? White Married Man?


Black Widow isn't even black. I'm sure they'll recast her with Beyonce in Infinity War part 2 though


----------



## kumikochan (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Black Widow isn't even black. I'm sure they'll recast her with Beyonce in Infinity War part 2 though


Or she steps in 2 a machine that some transexual black villain created turning everybody in 2 black transexuals


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

DBlaze said:


> When are we getting Black Widow's counter? White Married Man?





kumikochan said:


> Or she steps in 2 a machine that some transexual black villain created turning everybody in 2 black transexuals


Nah, Thanos could just do that with a combination of the reality stone and the SOUL stone


----------



## Viri (May 23, 2018)

I know I always pictured Star Fire as a black lady with a bad pink wig, and Raven as trans. 



Spoiler


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

Oh yeah, that's right. They're doing a live action teen titans and couldn't leave that alone either. This isn't the Starfire I  grew up with


----------



## pustal (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> I've become increasingly disappointed and disgusted by the negative influence that social justice warriors have had on society. It makes me feel physically ill, the Man Shaming, the general pussification of any masculine attitudes and ideals, forcing their views upon us, trying to make us accept their insanity and ruining everything we've come to enjoy.
> 
> From comic books, and movies to video games, they've left their toxic stench on everything. There doesn't seem to be any limit to what they can find to be "offended" by and they insist on bitching and trying everything they can to align with their demented views. We got people like Anita Sarkeesian sticking their noses into our games where they don't belong, harassing gamers and devs alike, complaining that they are misogynistic woman haters because their protagonists are either macho males or scantily clad females, which is utter garbage. They say the same about other mediums of entertainment as movies and comic, and go on to complain that they aren't black enough, or gay enough, and the sad thing is that creators have started to give in.
> 
> ...



While there is exaggeration, I agree there isn't an army of female hating men and people like Sarkeesian are just exploring the situations for their own interest, I like to state there was and still is a problem portraiting women and particular sets of people. In case of women, it is still unbelievable to me how unrealistic most characters portraited in games still are. I do believe this is however for the lack of women and the lack of observation and analysis power of the men in charge (not men in general) in writing the plots and characters.

The problem with people like Sarkeesian is that instead of having a conversation, she exaggerates and puts things in a perspective that helps no one. It creates resentment in the general community by pandering to outrage for things, that for the great part aren't even there. And the repercussions go beyond games - because of people like her many don't take the femenist struggle serious or simply resent it at well. It ends up being exceptionally detrimental, specially in a time of need, where there is a president in place in the US that repeatedly harassed women, a vice president that believes the women role on society should be constraint and a government that's been removing supports for things like family planning, or in other places in the world where women have it much harder.

I do believe character placement for minorities can help, however. Again I don't think it's sexist or racist or whatever not to do it, and it's perfectly alright to have a white male straight set of characters, specially if you already have it, but it doesn't ruin anything to have different sets. The trouble I have with it is again the lack o realism it goes sometimes in creating them. Many of the times, writers seem to fail to understand of what would actually be a motivation or how would a real person react in a certain situation - it doesn't help to accept and normalize others if you fail to portrait them


----------



## kumikochan (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Oh yeah, that's right. They're doing a live action teen titans and couldn't leave that alone either. This isn't the Starfire I  grew up with


Are you kidding me ?


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

kumikochan said:


> Are you kidding me ?


----------



## MaGosT (May 23, 2018)

I can see why purists would feel that all these changes are uncalled for. It's totally awkward seeing things play out differently then they were depicted during the first run via a different media channel.

BUT if you see this from the perspective of their main audiance, young to early-adults who may have psychological problems with their sexual orientation, skin color or what not. These changes can be very welcoming - especially if the films are the first time you experience a given story line.
Sometimes it can feel really forced, but if I know that some individual gets the guts to "come out" or get over their feelings of being worth less due to skin color - then I'm all good with these slight changes that in reality don't really affect the story as a whole. Sure it's weird at times but it doesn't hurt anyone, it just helps to spread awareness and hopefully strenghten individuals.

Also if you are a purist, you may want to stick with the printed media as that can cover so much more than time-limited movies.


----------



## kumikochan (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


>



Yeah def bullshit, she looks more arabian in the comics then she does black


----------



## Viri (May 23, 2018)

kumikochan said:


> Yeah def bullshit, she looks more arabian in the comics then she does black


I always pictured her as having a bit of an orange skin tone, as she is an alien.


----------



## kumikochan (May 23, 2018)

Viri said:


> I always pictured her as having a bit of an orange skin tone, as she is an alien.


Yeah true that but if you look at heroes who are arabian they have a lot of similarities or latino but in no way does she look black


----------



## SimonMKWii (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> I've become increasingly disappointed and disgusted by the negative influence that social justice warriors have had on society. It makes me feel physically ill, the Man Shaming, the general pussification of any masculine attitudes and ideals, forcing their views upon us, trying to make us accept their insanity and ruining everything we've come to enjoy.
> 
> From comic books, and movies to video games, they've left their toxic stench on everything. There doesn't seem to be any limit to what they can find to be "offended" by and they insist on bitching and trying everything they can to align with their demented views. We got people like Anita Sarkeesian sticking their noses into our games where they don't belong, harassing gamers and devs alike, complaining that they are misogynistic woman haters because their protagonists are either macho males or scantily clad females, which is utter garbage. They say the same about other mediums of entertainment as movies and comic, and go on to complain that they aren't black enough, or gay enough, and the sad thing is that creators have started to give in.
> 
> ...


Wow, I never knew that Donald Trump, Milo Yiannopoulos and Alex Jones created a joint account on GBATemp!


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

MaGosT said:


> I can see why purists would feel that all these changes are uncalled for. It's totally awkward seeing things play out differently then they were depicted during the first run via a different media channel.
> 
> BUT if you see this from the perspective of their main audiance, young to early-adults who may have psychological problems with their sexual orientation, skin color or what not. These changes can be very welcoming - especially if the films are the first time you experience a given story line.
> Sometimes it can feel really forced, but if I know that some individual gets the guts to "come out" or get over their feelings of being worth less due to skin color - then I'm all good with these slight changes that in reality don't really affect the story as a whole. Sure it's weird at times but it doesn't hurt anyone, it just helps to spread awareness and hopefully strenghten individuals.
> ...



Starfire is an alien,her skin color is orange. Her hair is red. Her eyes are green. If this ^ is how she looks in the actual movie, MANY fans will be outraged. I really hope they do right by the source material and use the appropriate makeup/effects to make her look like the fans have come to expect.


----------



## The Catboy (May 23, 2018)

So I am just gonna toss out that most of the SJWs I see nowadays are fake tumblr accounts made by trolls. I know there are still a few minority groups out there, but a lot of the ones I've stumbled upon were extremely obvious fakes. Honestly looking through your posts, you are just over blowing the situation because you don't like that they changed a fictional character's race.


----------



## Viri (May 23, 2018)

Check your privilege, you shit lords! Also, this video was paid for by the Australian tax payers. 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwC3v49Xxx8


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

What I object to is changing the defining qualities of *established* characters, making them not at all what the fans know them as. I have no problems with characters like Static and Cyborg, I like them in fact. What I do have a problem with is forcing diversity for diversity's sake. Also, there are plenty others who support that argument. And let's try to keep it civil here.


----------



## Veho (May 23, 2018)

I thought millennials were ruining everything?


----------



## dpad_5678 (May 23, 2018)

"I saw a gay character in something I like so now I'm a victim of oppression."


----------



## The Catboy (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> What I object to is changing the defining qualities of *established* characters, making them not at all what the fans know them as. I have no problems with characters like Static and Cyborg, I like them in fact. What I do have a problem with is forcing diversity for diversity's sake.


You realize that they've done that countless times and you are just letting your nostalgia blind you into being upset over this one character. Have you watched Deadpool 2 yet?


----------



## dpad_5678 (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Nick Fury


Please find one person that isn't yet another triggered righty that opposes this casting choice.


----------



## The Catboy (May 23, 2018)

Veho said:


> I thought millennials were ruining everything?


No, no, no, we are the ones closing down stores because we aren't spending money in them. We are ruining capitalism, which I know feels like everything in the US, but it's only one thing.


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

dpad_5678 said:


> Please find one person that isn't yet another triggered righty that opposes this casting choice.


Just because I don't feel like looking for you, doesn't mean that there weren't a multitude of marvel fans who weren't shocked and confused when Fury was race changed in the comics and when Sam Jackson was cast to play him in the movies. Also, to support that my opinion of Starfire isn't racist, I present a video of a confused black man


----------



## dpad_5678 (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Just because I don't feel like looking for you, doesn't mean that there weren't a multitude of marvel fans who weren't shocked and confused when Fury was race changed in the comics and when Sam Jackson was cast to play him in the movies. Also, to support that my opinion of Starfire isn't racist, I present a video of a confused black man



This may be the most generic libertarian-conservative reply I've ever read, especially


> Also, to support that my opinion of Starfire isn't racist, I present a video of a confused black man



And what's exactly wrong with SLJ's Nick Fury? He's been fan favorite for a decade, or would you perfer Hasselhoff's trashy incarnation?


----------



## The Catboy (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Just because I don't feel like looking for you, doesn't mean that there weren't a multitude of marvel fans who weren't shocked and confused when Fury was race changed in the comics and when Sam Jackson was cast to play him in the movies. Also, to support that my opinion of Starfire isn't racist, I present a video of a confused black man



But have you watched Deadpool 2 yet?
So you are saying it would be fine if they decided to change her race in the comic to match her change this series?
Also citing a random black person doesn't mean anything. That would be like citing me to speak on behave of all LGBT+ members of the Temp.


----------



## DinohScene (May 23, 2018)

People are ruining everything.
Social media ruins everything.


----------



## dpad_5678 (May 23, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> So I am just gonna toss out that most of the SJWs I see nowadays are fake tumblr accounts made by trolls. I know there are still a few minority groups out there, but a lot of the ones I've stumbled upon were extremely obvious fakes. Honestly looking through your posts, you are just over blowing the situation because you don't like that they changed a fictional character's race.


Leave it to people who are actively Anti-SJW to get triggered by every SHRED of diversity that they see, especially when they feel it doesn't belong.


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

dpad_5678 said:


> This may be the most generic libertarian-conservative reply I've ever read, especially
> 
> 
> And what's exactly wrong with SLJ's Nick Fury? He's been fan favorite for a decade, or would you perfer Hasselhoff's trashy incarnation?


Hey man, don't hassle the Hoff. Lol Ok, I admit he wasn't the best


Lilith Valentine said:


> But have you watched Deadpool 2 yet?
> So you are saying it would be fine if they decided to change her race in the comic to match her change this series?
> Also citing a random black person doesn't mean anything. That would be like citing me to speak on behave of all LGBT+ members of the Temp.


On the contrary, a black FAN of the material not in favor of the actress's appearance differing
drastically with the series source material only goes to prove that my opinion isn't motivated by race. I would also have a problem with Cyborg or Static being played by a white guy. Further more, I'm not a fan of Thanos being less purple than he was in the end scene of the previous Marvel movies. So let's just throw the stigma of actual races RIGHT out the window.


----------



## kumikochan (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Hey man, don't hassle the Hoff. Lol Ok, I admit he wasn't the bes
> 
> On the contrary, a black FAN of the material not in favor of the actress's appearance differing
> drastically with the series source material only goes to prove that my opinion isn't motivated by race. I would also have a problem with Cyborg or Static being played by a white guy. Further more, I'm not a fan of Thanos being less purple than he was in the end scene of the previous Marvel movies. So let's just throw the stigma of actual races RIGHT out the window.


Don't bother, people like that will Always throw with the racist card, even if you proof to them that you aren't, they will keep throwing that at you


----------



## The Catboy (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Hey man, don't hassle the Hoff. Lol Ok, I admit he wasn't the bes
> 
> On the contrary, a black FAN of the material not in favor of the actress's appearance differing
> drastically with the series source material only goes to prove that my opinion isn't motivated by race. I would also have a problem with Cyborg or Static being played by a white guy. Further more, I'm not a fan of Thanos being less purple than he was in the end scene of the previous Marvel movies. So let's just throw the stigma of actual races RIGHT out the window.


Previously stated statement, citing one person does not an entire group make. I honestly hate that style of argument because it's the "not racist, but" style of argument. A lot of the actually established black characters often had story arcs that involve the social issues involving their race, thus changing their race often comes off an actual insult to that character's story. Realistically the same can not be said with most white characters, unless they had changed something else established that would actually ruin the character drastically if changed. Changing Starfire from white to black doesn't change anything about her character, hell it might actually add to the personal struggles she has to go through. I am not the best at identifying different shades of blue or purple because I am rather colorblind, so I honestly didn't notice the change in his skin tone...nor did I really care to notice...because I can't notice to begin with...


----------



## notimp (May 23, 2018)

pustal said:


> While there is exaggeration, I agree there isn't an army of female hating men and people like Sarkeesian are just exploring the situations for their own interest, I like to state there was and still is a problem portraiting women and particular sets of people. In case of women, it is still unbelievable to me how unrealistic most characters portraited in games still are. I do believe this is however for the lack of women and the lack of observation and analysis power of the men in charge (not men in general) in writing the plots and characters.
> 
> The problem with people like Sarkeesian is that instead of having a conversation, she exaggerates and puts things in a perspective that helps no one. It creates resentment in the general community by pandering to outrage for things, that for the great part aren't even there. And the repercussions go beyond games - because of people like her many don't take the femenist struggle serious or simply resent it at well. It ends up being exceptionally detrimental, specially in a time of need, where there is a president in place in the US that repeatedly harassed women, a vice president that believes the women role on society should be constraint and a government that's been removing supports for things like family planning, or in other places in the world where women have it much harder.
> 
> I do believe character placement for minorities can help, however. Again I don't think it's sexist or racist or whatever not to do it, and it's perfectly alright to have a white male straight set of characters, specially if you already have it, but it doesn't ruin anything to have different sets. The trouble I have with it is again the lack o realism it goes sometimes in creating them. Many of the times, writers seem to fail to understand of what would actually be a motivation or how would a real person react in a certain situation - it doesn't help to accept and normalize others if you fail to portrait them


I don't think I can say it better than pustal did - but I'd also like to take a look at movements in society.

- The movement thats pushing beyond whats socially acceptable at a certain point.
- The reaction of the general public and when a movements positions become somewhat accepted.
- The commercialization of said ideals.

Its at the - when decisions are made to please a broader audience by using social progressive trends as a backdrop for being relevant, where the "not going with it" might be appropriate. 

In Europe f.e. there was "the girl on page 3" that has been used by newly invented gossip papers as a mode to attract readers - but was "rectified" as them doing their part in the societal struggle of women to become more independent and free. The struggle was real, and a movement at the time as well - the use of barebreasted women to sell newspaper wasnt necessarily related though. 

On the other hand, its entirely ok, even proper - to do race or gender or secondary identity swaps - if the "archtype" demands it to be more relevant. Or at least isn't hurt by it. Thats an argument for artistic integrity.  If the story or alegory you want to tell calls for it, or benefits from it - do it. It might shock a few people - but if they are connected to the archetypal nature of that figure, and thats still present, they'll still remain connected - and to them it might even become a "perspective swap".

If you are doing it, because it is the hip thing to do, or you are going by formula - and might have a certain quota in mind - chances are, that the archetype is hurt, people who liked it will disconnect - and resentments will arise.

Which brings us exactly to the SJW movement - and the backlash they are facing. Even in academia. 

Now - on the movement part. There will always be gurus, and followers, there will always be gifted populists, there will always be power structures within the movement, and there will always be figureheads and also "abuse" in some sense. If and when a "thing" sticks has to do with the argument, the reactions to the argument, and timing.

The saving grace here is, that democratic societies - over the long term, seem to move forward, as a result of social struggle, they deal with it - appropriately. If too many people get caught at the fringe, the fringe moves more to the middle.

Now my comment of the day on the SJW movement:

The principle, that the more "oppressed in different aspects of you life you were - the more valuable to the movement you are" is fundamentally flawed, because it leads to people competing on grounds of "having been more oppressed". Guess what that produces...

Their modus of going after the weakest targets they could find (unprivileged "gamers", white nerds, academics that dont chant slogans...), to pronounce them the cause of their issues and lay the godmother of all guilt trips on them - hasn't been unnoticed. The comic book nerd that meets with his guy friends online - is the least of your issues in your societal struggle.


----------



## Xue (May 23, 2018)

Get bent.



Drak0rex said:


> ...trying to make us accept their insanity and ruining everything...
> ...they've left their toxic stench on everything.
> ...trying everything they can to align with their demented views.
> 
> Please do try to have a mature and intelligent discussion instead of flaming and belittling others opinions.



Seriously get bent.

SimonMKWii, 

A more accurate thread would be "RWNJs have always ruined everything and are now upset they don't control everything or are solely pandered to."


----------



## kevin corms (May 23, 2018)

everything? Heres the thing with media, if they find an easy way to get more free attention they will take advantage of it. If nobody buys it then they will stop.


----------



## gamesquest1 (May 23, 2018)

comply or die​


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

@Xue  Do you prefer Hugh Jackman Wolverine, or the costume from the comics/cartoon? If you say Jackman, I'll know you're lying. One of my major oppositions as stated above, was drastic changes from the source material just for the sake of it, and I stand by it. Chill, bro lol


----------



## The Catboy (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> @Xue  Do you prefer Hugh Jackman Wolverine, or the costume from the comics/cartoon? If you say Jackman, I'll know you're lying. One of my major oppositions as stated above, was drastic changes from the source material just for the sake of it, and I stand by it. Chill, bro lol


The tragic irony of you telling others to chill. Also Hugh > Comic, the costume did not age well and I won't even pretend it's not silly. 
Seriously though, have you seen Deadpool 2 because there's a character they changed.


----------



## Clydefrosch (May 23, 2018)

not gonna read this clearly crazy OP. just go back to your red pill reddit please and blame whomever for your problems there


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

yes, I too was disappointed that Cable's hair wasn't pitch white. I think they could have done better


----------



## lordkaos (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Oh yeah, that's right. They're doing a live action teen titans and couldn't leave that alone either. This isn't the Starfire I  grew up with



WHAT!?, Donald Trump, the people from jersey and all other orange people must be fuming right now.


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> Also Hugh > Comic, the costume did not age well and I won't even pretend it's not silly.


They could have made the classic suit work, just look at the alt ending scene. It looks cool enough. Also consider how well they stuck to the look of alot of the avengers


----------



## kumikochan (May 23, 2018)

lordkaos said:


> WHAT!?, Donald Trump, the people from jersey and all other orange people must be fuming right now.


you do know that she looks more arabian or latino then she does black ?


----------



## The Catboy (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> yes, I too was disappointed that Cable's hair wasn't pitch white. I think they could have done better


You do realize that they changed Domino, yes?


----------



## lordkaos (May 23, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> You do realize that they changed Domino, yes?


they shouldn't have changed her face spot to white.


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> You do realize that they changed Domino, yes?


ya ya. Honestly, wasn't a big fan of how her hair looked in the movie as opposed to the comics. Also ^


----------



## The Catboy (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> ya ya. Honestly, wasn't a big fan of how her hair looked in the movie as opposed to the comics. Also ^


But yet no outrage? I brought that up to follow up my previous statement that you are just allowing your own nostalgia to upset you. You are extremely upset over the change of a character from your childhood, but barely even phased when they did the same to another character. This isn't about SJWs or any of that shit, you are just upset that they changed a character in a manor that now effects how you relate to that character.


lordkaos said:


> they shouldn't have changed her face spot to white.


To be fair, it did make the spot stand out more with either appearing as a large black eye or just a slightly lighter part of her skin. They could have done better, but it's pretty obvious that the intent was more so to make it noticable.


----------



## lordkaos (May 23, 2018)

kumikochan said:


> you do know that she looks more arabian or latino then she does black ?


I'm not criticizing the change, probably she's the actress who fits more the rendition of the character the writers had in mind or had more chemistry with the other cast and that's the reason she got the role.

The thing I don't like when it comes to comics is that marvel and DC have so little faith in new characters and creations that they prefer making the changes to their main heroes only to revert them back a few years later.


----------



## kumikochan (May 23, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> But yet no outrage? I brought that up to follow up my previous statement that you are just allowing your own nostalgia to upset you. You are extremely upset over the change of a character from your childhood, but barely even phased when they did the same to another character. This isn't about SJWs or any of that shit, you are just upset that they changed a character in a manor that now effects how you relate to that character.
> 
> To be fair, it did make the spot stand out more with either appearing as a large black eye or just a slightly lighter part of her skin. They could have done better, but it's pretty obvious that the intent was more so to make it noticable.


It is funny how you try to push his buttons with every comment you make but he does not respond in that manner


----------



## Xue (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> @Xue  Do you prefer Hugh Jackman Wolverine, or the costume from the comics/cartoon? If you say Jackman, I'll know you're lying. One of my major oppositions as stated above, was drastic changes from the source material just for the sake of it, and I stand by it. Chill, bro lol



I like both. Wolverine in the comics is different from Wolverine in the 90's X-Men cartoon is different from X-Men Evolution is different from Hugh Jackman. I happen to like all the portrayals for their own reasons. And they are all similar enough and true to Wolverine as a concept. To address your complaint of Samuel L. Jackson's Nick Fury, he is still acting the role right. They got an actor who fit that role. It's not like they got Reese Witherspoon playing her Legally Blonde role. And if they did make Nick Fury a woman, they'd make her badass and deep, more along the lines of Jessica Jones. And yes, I grew up with the white Nick Fury that showed up in the 90's Spider-Man cartoon. Doesn't make a difference.

Mark Hamill will always be the top Joker for me but that doesn't mean I lose my shit and froth at the mouth at Heath Ledger's quite different portrayal of the character, which was done well in its own way. I don't get frothy like that even at that one rather bad dreadlocked Joker rendition (IMO).

You can't simply claim to know I'm lying because of reasons. Do you logic?
Also... did you just assume my gender, bro?


----------



## The Catboy (May 23, 2018)

Snipped*


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

Honestly it's just a trend that I noticed and I was curious how others felt about favorite well known characters being changed in ways that weren't true to how they were. But do feel free to go on pretending to be all politically correct, and trying to make me rage, it humors me 

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Lilith Valentine said:


> Your lack of observational skills does not equate to me "pushing buttons." I noticed a trend in the OPs posts and I am calling him out on them. It's pretty obvious that this is just about one topic (the change to Starfire) and the rest is just fluff. It's extremely obvious that the Op really just wanted to talk about the changes done specifically to her, but didn't want to make a thread just about that one topic. To prove just that, I brought up another character who was recently changed and very clearly didn't get the same reaction as the OP had with Starfire.


And I'd like to point out that I didn't even bring up Starfire at first, someone else did. So much for them observational skills lol


----------



## SG854 (May 23, 2018)

I have a proposal. Make Spider Man gay. Instead of falling in love with Gwen and Mary Jane, make him fall in love with Ben and Tony Stark. Have a love scene with him and Stark.

Make Wolverine masculine-of-center genderqueer. And have scenes of him struggling and being attacked by Trump supporters. If Black Panther can have real life race issues, and if they are trying to incorporate real life representation in fake super hero movies, then Wolverine can struggle with real life problems too to make him relatable.


----------



## Fugelmir (May 23, 2018)

SJW, feminists, hardcore leftists and mainstream islam are the biggest threat to our society.


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

"Mr. Stark, I don't feel so good.''


----------



## The Catboy (May 23, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Honestly it's just a trend that I noticed and I was curious how others felt about favorite well known characters being changed in ways that weren't true to how they were. But do feel free to go on pretending to be all politically correct, and trying to make me rage, it humors me
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...


It appears as though someone I am ignoring the one who brought up that topic and that's my bad. Sorry about that, it appeared differently until I noticed that. It appears I have been foiled by my ignore list and thus made a bit of a fool of myself without even noticing it. I will admit my mistake


----------



## Priestiality (May 23, 2018)

I literally stopped lurking and made an account just to tell you that Nick Fury has been black for nearly 17 years (August 2001). Starting with the Ultimate (Universe 1610) series of Marvel books. The artist designed his look on Samuel L. Jackson with the actors blessing. Seven years later Samuel L. Jackson debuted as the character in the post credits scene of Iron Man. The original, much smaller scale plan for the MCU was to do The Ultimate Avengers story lines, until they realized they could use the movies to basically print money. They didn't "change" anything because Ultimate Nick Fury has ALWAYS been black. When you complain about Miles Morales, you're again citing one of many series that take place in a different universe than both the main continuity and the movies. Thor is a woman. Thor is also a blonde alien. Thor is also an equine alien (Beta Ray Bill). Thor is also Groot. Thor is also ALL FOUR members of the Fantastic Four (Fantastic Thors). Thor is also a literal frog (Simon Walterson/Throg, Pet Avengers). You're outraged for the sake of being outraged. You are doing _the exact thing you accuse SJWs of doing_.

TL;DR: Find a safe space, snowflake.


----------



## the_randomizer (May 23, 2018)

Ah yes, SJWs, leave it to the pandering and sycophantic behaviors of them to coerce certain media to adapt to their agenda, or get called out. Leave to them to be a bunch of easily offended pantywaists. They even get offended about video games, you know, the media where characters aren't even real humans, but made of up of polygons? Yeah, there's that too. This is why we can't have nice things, can't say something without someone getting offended and salty.


----------



## Andrew Jacobson (May 23, 2018)

I can't agree enough. The cookie monster is Jewish now, Stuart little is anti fa, Bloo from Foster's Home is gay. lmao grow up


----------



## enarky (May 23, 2018)

I have not read this thread, neither do I see any merrit in it.

What I want to say is: people complaining about social justice warriors are even more annyoing than social justice warriors themselves. It's the same with people complaining about vegans or vapers. I rarely see a social justice warrior, a vegan or a vaper in the wild and even more rarely do they even tangent my everyday life. But the complaints about these people I read so far here, on Reddit or anywhere else on the internet fill books. I wish people would finally give up their holier-than-thou attitude and learn to live with each other. Yes, there are people with opinions you don't like. No, I don't want to hear about it. Thank you.


----------



## notimp (May 23, 2018)

Fugelmir said:


> SJW, feminists, hardcore leftists and mainstream islam are the biggest threat to our society.



Ah the good old, use a model anchor, tell people about them danger to their values, and them being left in the dust by migrants taking their jobs - and their jesus is my lord morals, still works...

Give them some catchy trance tunes on top - and you've got them sharing that stuff to - save the world. 

Also on the islam thing... Why are your presidents bestest friends the actual founders of wahabism?

You know - that image.

Why where the mujahedin trained and armed by Americans as stay behind troups against russian influence in the region. The chicago boys liked radical islam way too much, about 20 years ago.. 

I'm just posting this, in case this is tried to be modeled into an alt right recruitment site.  Not escalating.

Also - its always the right that pulls that miracle of "look over here".

"The chinese have already lost too many jobs. We must make a deal with ZTE."  Values!


----------



## Drak0rex (May 23, 2018)

enarky said:


> I have not read this thread, neither do I see any merrit in it.
> 
> What I want to say is: people complaining about social justice warriors are even more annyoing than social justice warriors themselves. It's the same with people complaining about vegans or vapers. I rarely see a social justice warrior, a vegan or a vaper in the wild and even more rarely do they even tangent my everyday life. But the complaints about these people I read so far here, on Reddit or anywhere else on the internet fill books. I wish people would finally give up their holier-than-thou attitude and learn to live with each other. Yes, there are people with opinions you don't like. No, I don't want to hear about it. Thank you.


As a vaper, I take offense to that. If you'll excuse me, I need to go to my safe space now


----------



## KingVamp (May 23, 2018)

Yeah, anti-sjws are just as bad as sjws. 

Yes, getting easily offended and actually censoring and banning everything is a problem, but you can't really blame people for asking for or having more diversity. Even if there are some people that are ... over-passionate about it. 

I don't have a problem with characters being re-imagine and having spinoff characters. Of course, I like new characters altogether too. 
For example, the Superman from the Justice League cartoon, isn't the same Superman that is in Injustice. I still enjoy them both. Really doubt "sjw" are the only reasons, if even a reason, that they decided to re-imagine these characters like they always do.


----------



## the_randomizer (May 23, 2018)

Oh don't get me started on certain vegans who treat you like a war criminal for eating meat, hoo boy.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 23, 2018)

Priestiality said:


> I literally stopped lurking and made an account just to tell you that Nick Fury has been black for nearly 17 years (August 2001). Starting with the Ultimate (Universe 1610) series of Marvel books. The original, much smaller scale plan for the MCU was to do The Ultimate Avengers story lines, until they realized they could use the movies to basically print money. The artist designed his look on Samuel L. Jackson with the actors blessing. Seven years later Samuel L. Jackson debuted as the character in the post credits scene of Iron Man. They didn't "change" anything because Ultimate Nick Fury has ALWAYS been black. When you complain about Miles Morales, you're again citing one of many series that take place in a different universe than both the main continuity and the movies. Thor is a woman. Thor is also a blonde alien. Thor is also an equine alien (Beta Ray Bill). Thor is also Groot. Thor is also ALL FOUR members of the Fantastic Four (Fantastic Thors). Thor is also a literal frog (Simon Walterson/Throg, Pet Avengers). You're outraged for the sake of being outraged. You are doing _the exact thing you accuse SJWs of doing_.
> 
> TL;DR: Find a safe space, snowflake.


Honestly I find that if someone complains about something comic-book related and their reasoning is that it's "not the series I grew up!", it's because they don't know nearly as much about the comics as they think they do

Case in point? Deadpool is canonically pansexual, both in the recent movies and in the comics. Yet gatekeeping fanboys like to pin him as the pinnacle of heterosexual masculinity


----------



## the_randomizer (May 23, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> Honestly I find that if someone complains about something comic-book related and their reasoning is that it's "not the series I grew up!", it's because they don't know nearly as much about the comics as they think they do
> 
> Case in point? Deadpool is canonically pansexual, both in the recent movies and in the comics. Yet gatekeeping fanboys like to pin him as the pinnacle of heterosexual masculinity



That's another thing that irks me, why do fictional characters have to have a certain orientation, or appearance, or anything tied to real attributes? The characters aren't even real people. Same goes with
characters in a video game, or novel. They're not even real, so why is it an issue?


----------



## Fugelmir (May 23, 2018)

notimp said:


> Ah the good old, use a model anchor, tell people about them danger to their values, and them being left in the dust by migrants taking jobs - and their jesus is my lord morals, still works...
> 
> Give them some catchy trance tunes on top - and you've got them sharing that stuff to - save the world.
> 
> ...




The Saudi Wahabbism is okay.  No conflict in an analogous society.  It's batshit crazy and medical schools are not permitted to teach anything that contradicts the quran/hadith.  But it's a relatively safe place.

The president just neutered the Iran deal -- so the most pro Israel and, by consequence, anti islam president ever to take office.  

And using muslims to fight contain Russia was probably the right decision at the time, but the fallout was handled poorly.

Anyway, the point is that SJW, feminists, Leftist Globalists are fighting to remove borders to take unskilled foreigners in and awarding them welfare.  It doesn't turn out well.  And Canada is getting a wry look at what happens without borders.


----------



## the_randomizer (May 23, 2018)

Fugelmir said:


> The Saudi Wahabbism is okay.  No conflict in an analogous society.  It's batshit crazy and medical schools are not permitted to teach anything that contradicts the quran/hadith.  But it's a relatively safe place.
> 
> The president just neutered the Iran deal -- so the most pro Israel and, by consequence, anti islam president ever to take office.
> 
> ...



We should just blame all the SWJ and Feminazis for their emasculation of humankind. And removing borders to let in undocumented people and give them the same rights as legal citizens, bah. No thank you. They should just make the process for citizenship easier for those who come in illegally, problem solved. As for the people being Pro Israel, let them support what they want. And the Iran deal, don't get me started on that, when it was implemented during the Obama administration...never mind.


----------



## JakeTillers (May 23, 2018)

Yup, the SWJ and Feminazis are the undesirables of the earth right now.


----------



## dpad_5678 (May 23, 2018)

Fugelmir said:


> SJW, feminists, hardcore leftists and mainstream islam *and Christianity *are the biggest threat to our society.



Fixed it for ya 



JakeTillers said:


> Yup, the SWJ and Feminazis are the undesirables of the earth right now.


"Feminazis" are bad but actual terrorist Neo-nazis aren't.
Righty logic.


----------



## notimp (May 23, 2018)

Fugelmir said:


> The Saudi Wahabbism is okay.  No conflict in an analogous society.  It's batshit crazy and medical schools are not permitted to teach anything that contradicts the quran/hadith.  But it's a relatively safe place.


You know - except for the state instituted beheadings, that sound a tad "radical" to a western audience.. But then, their airlines are world class.  And I'm sure its good to live in a relatively stable part of that region. *nod*


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 23, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> That's another thing that irks me, why do fictional characters have to have a certain orientation, or appearance, or anything tied to real attributes? The characters aren't even real people. Same goes with
> characters in a video game, or novel. They're not even real, so why is it an issue?


Exactly. I mean, there are obviously situations in which you really CAN'T change, for instance, the race of a character (Black Panther comes to mind), but otherwise writers have pretty broad creative license when it comes to comic book characters, to the point where there are probably hundreds of parallel timelines by now


----------



## SG854 (May 23, 2018)

JakeTillers said:


> Yup, the SWJ and Feminazis are the undesirables of the earth right now.



Femisnist's and Menist's are toxic to society. They kill thousands.

Stupid Toxic Masculinity starts wars and Toxic Femininity causes thousands to starve to death.
We must exterminate Toxic Masculinity and Toxic Femininity.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 23, 2018)

SG854 said:


> Femisnist's and Menist's are toxic to society. They kill thousands.
> 
> Stupid Toxic Masculinity starts wars and Toxic Femininity causes thousands to starve to death.
> We must exterminate Toxic Masculinity and Toxic Femininity.


Curious, but what do you mean by "Toxic Femininity"?


----------



## SG854 (May 23, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> Curious, but what do you mean by "Toxic Femininity"?


Well Masculinity and Femininity are neither exclusive to either gender. And man can be feminine and women can be masculine. 
Extreme Feminists are more on the aggressive masculine side then feminine side. 

Femininity would be more of the motherly protective traits and agreeableness more common in women. Creating a society based on protecting others taken to the extreme can be damaging. Like political policies based equality of outcome. You are making sure everyone gets equal pay, but in the end its damaging, and everyone gets an equal chance to starve to death and societies crumble. The motherly traits of taking care of others taken to the extreme is an example of Toxic Femininity.

There needs to be some wealth inequality to produce wealth. Ceo's needs to obviously needs to make more than the people they hire so they can use the extra money to invest and expand the company. How much inequality there needs to be no one knows. No one can point to a specific amount. And basically people are treated like guinea pigs for wealth distribution policies to see what works or not. Some societies not successful and people starve and die.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 23, 2018)

SG854 said:


> Well Masculinity and Femininity are neither exclusive to either gender. And man can be feminine and women can be masculine.
> Extreme Feminists are more on the aggressive masculine side then feminine side.
> 
> Femininity would be more of the motherly protective traits and agreeableness more common in women. Creating a society based on protecting others taken to the extreme can be damaging. Like political policies based equality of outcome. You are making sure everyone gets equal pay, but in the end its damaging, and everyone gets an equal chance to starve to death and societies crumble. The motherly traits of taking care of others taken to the extreme is an example of Toxic Femininity.
> ...


Okay...? Do you have an example of how that supposedly has caused "thousands to starve to death"?...

Like, don't get me wrong, I absolutely recognize that women are capable of being incredibly abusive towards other people, but I've never seen a valid example of women (or feminine men/nonbinaries) systematically using their femininity to oppress a population


----------



## SG854 (May 23, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> Okay...? Do you have an example of how that supposedly has caused "thousands to starve to death"?...
> 
> Like, don't get me wrong, I absolutely recognize that women are capable of being incredibly abusive towards other people, but I've never seen a valid example of women (or feminine men/nonbinaries) systematically using their femininity to oppress a population


No they are not intending to oppress a population initially, but in the end populations are worse off. Just like how racism people think and convinced themselves they are doing good for society by exterminating said so called "evil race." And men can show feminine traits as well. But motherly traits of taking care of others taken to the extreme making sure everyone has equal pay, causes places to crumble and starve "Soviet Russia" and any other country that followed the same path, is an example of feminine policies applied to a systematic level. So its toxic femininity. Its a mixture of masculine and feminine everyone expresses.


----------



## GomenaSAIKE (May 23, 2018)

Made an account for this; Op I agree that they do ruin everything they touch with very few exceptions - like a hand full-
Sjws and movies: can't really name any since I don't watch movies; Power Rangers, Ghost Busters  Potentially; THE INCREDIBLES 2...Maybe?  Plot will revolve around Helen Par and from what I saw its giving off mad, "Strong independent  woman don't need no man." vibes instead of focusing on the WHOLE family.
Sjws and comics: I don't read em, wanted to start collecting but got wind of all the sjw content on both sides -dc/marvel- so I didn't bother after I did some digging around for myself, funny enough Sjws are in an uproar over a nonpolitical comic out selling all the crap that was made FOR them! and funnier still they keep getting canceled left and right...
Sjws and shows: Cables' dead but the one sjw show I do watch is Steven Universe freakin love it but it does have it problems. Question: Would the show even be on air if all the characters genders were reversed? Or better yet y no gay males yo?  
Sjws and Video Games: Where to even begin? Buttcracks? anita? Mirrors edge? D.O.A Vollyball Ban? Street Fighter V? Destiny 2?
Sjws and Internet: anita and zoe quinn visited the un to give a speech about how people *OVER THE INTERNET* should be fined and or arrested if they hurt muh feelings.
Sjws and Youtube:   Susan Wojcicki ceo of youtube graced us with the current state of that site making it near impossible to be a youtuber with a opinion or god forbid a conservitive channel.
Sjws and Language: Muh Pronouns, various states have flirted with the idea of fining or jailing people for, "Consistently misusing and refusing to "correct" use of pronouns"
Sjws and Californian Law: People no longer have to disclose that they have H.I Mutha effing V! Really? Lets let people in the country that, could commit a murder and can't really be traced, and even if they were trace they more then likely went back already, which we have no jurisdiction to follow even if we know who it is.    
Sjws and guns:  You already know what they want to do; sheep to the slaughter they are trying to prevent.
SJws and Education: Colleges are no longer the forming and clashing of ideas for the advancement of mankind nope go to your safe space. Christianity in schools not okay, but Sharia-law-a-facation a okay
But SJWs DINdu NuFFin...


----------



## Daisy (May 23, 2018)

GomenaSAIKE said:


> Made an account for this; Op I agree that they do ruin everything they touch with very few exceptions - like a hand full-
> Sjws and movies: can't really name any since I don't watch movies; Power Rangers, Ghost Busters  Potentially; THE INCREDIBLES 2...Maybe?  Plot will revolve around Helen Par and from what I saw its giving off mad, "Strong independent  woman don't need no man." vibes instead of focusing on the WHOLE family.
> Sjws and comics: I don't read em, wanted to start collecting but got wind of all the sjw content on both sides -dc/marvel- so I didn't bother after I did some digging around for myself, funny enough Sjws are in an uproar over a nonpolitical comic out selling all the crap that was made FOR them! and funnier still they keep getting canceled left and right...
> Sjws and shows: Cables' dead but the one sjw show I do watch is Steven Universe freakin love it but it does have it problems. Question: Would the show even be on air if all the characters genders were reversed? Or better yet y no gay males yo?
> ...



Unrelated to your post, but god that formatting is the definition of cancer

As for the Incredibles; what? Having a film revolve around a woman is neither 'SJW pandering' or new. We've also seen plenty of the WHOLE family in the trailers, so it just seems like you're looking for things to complain about...

Steven Universe is an alright show, I do agree it goes a little too far, though. I'm all for gay characters, but sometimes SU makes it feel really forced and unlikeable. I don't want any of the gems liking men, don't get me wrong, but do we REALLY need Pearl whining about Rose every other episode? C'mon...

Haven't played any of those video games :/

Guns need to go. Seriously, America has mass shootings like every other day. What the hell? They don't have to take guns from people, just stop selling them to people, unless they have LEGITIMATE reasons for buying one (no, self defense doesn't count). Nowhere else in the world has this big an issue with gun crime.

As for 'Christianity in schools not okay'... What????????????????????????????


----------



## GomenaSAIKE (May 23, 2018)

enarky said:


> I wish people would finally give up their holier-than-thou attitude


"Irony..."


----------



## Deleted member 377734 (May 23, 2018)

Send them all a copy of any book by Stuart Grosse and watch them flip their shit.


----------



## SomeKindOfUsername (May 23, 2018)

We should buy an island with no possible Internet connectivity to contain the SJWs. To make it extra triggering for them we should let those brave men and women who oppose them be the ones to fly them over.

Also, only give them enough fuel for a one-way trip so we can solve two (relatively minor) annoyances at once. Plus they'll be happier since they'll be doing what they love best, accusing the other of being literal Nazis "ruining everything" so it's a win-win for everybody.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 23, 2018)

SomeKindOfUsername said:


> We should buy an island with no possible Internet connectivity to contain the SJWs. To make it extra triggering for them we should let those brave men and women who oppose them be the ones to fly them over.
> 
> Also, only give them enough fuel for a one-way trip so we can solve two (relatively minor) annoyances at once. Plus they'll be happier since they'll be doing what they love best, accusing the other of being literal Nazis "ruining everything" so it's a win-win for everybody.


You know... I guess I don't get this mindset


----------



## Clydefrosch (May 23, 2018)

jesus you guys, stop trying to have a normal conversation with these people. 
they're so deep in their cultish 'the world is anti-male and women are literally evil and we need to fight it' fantasy world that little can reach them.
indulging them is about the worst thing anyone can do here cause that gives them some level of legitimization and a platform to push their crazy agenda.


----------



## GomenaSAIKE (May 23, 2018)

Daisies said:


> Unrelated to your post, but god that formatting is the definition of cancer
> 
> As for the Incredibles; what? Having a film revolve around a woman is neither 'SJW pandering' or new. We've also seen plenty of the WHOLE family in the trailers, so it just seems like you're looking for things to complain about...
> 
> ...





Wasn't gonna reply, but since we agreed on a few things, I'll clarify few points, I don't care if the main character is female there have been plenty of female main leads done right. Note I didn't say bad ass or anything of that sort its because she doesn't need to be bad ass to be great, I'm just thrown off by the fact that the main focus is going to be mainly her. I just don't want it to be one of those see; this is how its like to be woman type deals because did they or did they not put Mr. Incredible in the caregiver role? The trailer shows some dude saying the have an interest in all Supers but they just go with just Helen? Oh Hel-en no!

It has been established that state and church is separated in schools because enough atheist whined about a God they don't believe in hurting the mental growth and personal beliefs of their children who will grow up and establish their own beliefs one day anyway... and a couple of words in the pledge of allegiance but suddenly the muslim faith is catered to example: Halloween is no longer called Halloween but a harvest festival.
there are more examples I can give but I've been up since 6pm yesterday and wanna rest. Lastly really? insulting my formatting? I'm a noob ya know! made me kek.


----------



## notimp (May 23, 2018)

If thats the only transformation that you have to deal with - thats commercial. Heck living in Europe, I even remember the days where we didnt have a Halloween, before we imported it from the US. For us those were they days where we visited the resting places of our loved ones, not gave out candy and bought plastic skeletons, or wore costumes to parties. 

If those are the things you remember fondly - no one actually took them away in a big ruse, its just merchants trying to sell the stuff in the least offensive way possible to as many people as possible. 

Also - on the part of the separation of state and church on a very basic level, both are systems that reporduce a certain kind of order. Both clashed in the past, the church didn't win - but was still important enough to be granted huge tax benefits and even the power to take in money through certain state venues. Both systems coexist - and if you look at the benefits of science based temples, in terms of economic growth alone - churches couldnt have even competed - you would have found yourself in one of those second world countries, you are now worried - that would take over your society... :/

And the truth is, especially when we look at the "middle east refugee crisis", the US didn't own up to any responsibility it historically and regionally/politically had. The numbers in the scaremongering Canada video, were laughingly small compared to what Europeans had to deal with, not to even speak of egyptians, turks, or other somewhat stable states in that region.

The US excuse was always "we are afraid of terrorists" - but those people, at large fled because of violent conflict in their regions, that wasn't entirely unrelated to our foreign politics (to put it mildly).

You'll take them in, you deal with it. You close your borders - if your own society rebels against it, because right wing populists make this about "them eating away your tax payers benefits". The truth is, as a large country - you can get money to board them up for a few years, and some of them even for life - for free. Even the relationship you have with those nations, post conflict - when people return (and many of them will) are worth more than feeding and boarding up those people for five or six years. In monetary value.

Also - I might add, that its literally comical, that US citizens are now going through an ultra nationalist phase. I mean, have you looked at your own "ancestry" polls recently? http://www.businessinsider.com/largest-ethnic-groups-in-america-2013-8?IR=T

Your churches and believe systems still don't have to go away. Not in your lifetime, not in your sons lifetime. If you are coming from a believe system - that you are the only true and godloved group the truth is, that those never remained culturally "dominant" for all that long, new cultures always came and went, and if one remained the same for more than 200 years - you have anthropologists studying them as curiosities.

Also there is a thing called cultural assimilation - so over time, cultures mix - especially in the US - so you also will never be "on the outside", if you dont chose to be. If immigration politics are done right - and I can tell you, europeans have just taken in tens of millions of refugees from pridominantly islamic countries and our churches are still standing. 

So is our conservative right.  They just grew stronger on a stance, that "the steady flow of immigrants - at some point has to stop" - which was more of a "instituitions were overwhelmed" issue, than anything else. (Economically motivated migrations are increasing as well, and apparently, also we are building walls and fences on other continents... But thats another unpleasant topic.)


----------



## DarthDub (May 23, 2018)

Yeah.. DC isn't doing so hot with their live action films. They should stick to Animation.


----------



## Plstic (May 23, 2018)

Best thing to do is not give them any money. Do any big or indie western games have any worth anymore? no. 

I might be called a weeb but I don't support western devs anymore.


----------



## DigitalDeviant (May 23, 2018)

kumikochan said:


> Yeah true that but if you look at heroes who are arabian they have a lot of similarities or latino but in no way does she look black


You can be latino and black at the same time as latino isn't a race.


----------



## kumikochan (May 23, 2018)

DigitalDeviant said:


> You can be latino and black at the same time as latino isn't a race.


Facepalm. Well you can also be black and an italian or dutch but that wasn't what i meant. Latino can also be used as a skin colour reference so stop with the pc bullshit please and seeing your comment gives away that you're one of those social justice warriors


----------



## DigitalDeviant (May 23, 2018)

kumikochan said:


> Facepalm. Well you can also be black and an italian or dutch but that wasn't what i meant. Latino can also be used as a skin colour reference so stop with the pc bullshit please and seeing your comment gives away that you're one of those social justice warriors


Thats quite an overreaction, I wish you well but you seem pissed. I just read your comment and simply noted that Latino is not a race. I see your point as well but no need for the accusation which, since you don't actually know me is funny to me because its so off the mark.


----------



## Viri (May 23, 2018)

Anyone else hyped to be a one handed black female Nazi commander, to destroy the Allies in the name of Adolf Hitler?!


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 23, 2018)

Viri said:


> Anyone else hyped to be a one handed black female Nazi commander, to destroy the Allies in the name of Adolf Hitler?!



You see a redhead female amputee with a British accent and from that you glean she's black and fighting for the Axis powers?...


----------



## Viri (May 24, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> You see a redhead female amputee with a British accent and from that you glean she's black and fighting for the Axis powers?...


It's a running joke from BF1.


----------



## nonamejohn (May 24, 2018)

Viri said:


> Anyone else hyped to be a one handed black female Nazi commander, to destroy the Allies in the name of Adolf Hitler?!



Hmm, female lead, and disabled...A person with one hand cannot handle a rifle correctly on a battlefield. Whats next ? A "little person" who can run like Usain Bolt ? A liberal "minor-attracted" school teacher, turned straight and militant ?


----------



## fvig2001 (May 24, 2018)

SJWs have a purpose but sometimes it's just too much or too stupid. It often seems like people do it these days just to seem better than others.

My favorite SJW story is when an SJW writer called out an asian drag queen for being racist by saying "which one are you" to 1 of 4 black persons in the room. She's never met any of the other contestants and this was the first time they saw each other without makeup. Then to top it all off, the writer said Asian said it to Queen A but the Asian was actually talking to Queen C.


----------



## Esjay131 (May 24, 2018)

Wally West exists as both due to Flashpoint. You say they're ruining comics, yet you lack basic knowledge of the main universe for DC (since Flashpoint rebooted for the New 52 that paved the way for the new arcs like No Justice). Nick Fury being black came from the Ultimates universe (which the MCU is heavily based on), because the writers all the way back in 2002 wanted to base their depiction of Nick Fury on Samuel L Jackson.



kumikochan said:


> Thor turned female, iron man is now iron heart, green lantern is gay, spiderman died and became black, captain marvel was male at the beginning and not talking about the DC one but the Marvel one, America Chavez was bi but suddenly turned lesbian



You really have no knowledge of the characters you talk of. The new Thor is Jane Foster, Thor's sometimes wife. She took on the mantle when Thor was deemed unworthy of wielding Mjolnir. Ironheart is basically Ironmans apprentice. The gay Alan Scott isn't even mainline universe so it's pseudo-canon (the point of the multiverse was allowing newer writers to have creative freedom). Peter Parker was only dead temporarily, and coexists with Miles Morales. America Chavez had a one-time relationship with a guy. Captain Marvel is still a woman in the Marvel universe, and the DC one is still male.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 24, 2018)

nonamejohn said:


> Hmm, female lead, and disabled...A person with one hand cannot handle a rifle correctly on a battlefield. Whats next ? A "little person" who can run like Usain Bolt ? A liberal "minor-attracted" school teacher, turned straight and militant ?


It's her left hand, which means she can use her prosthetic to aim and her good hand to pull the trigger, but go off I guess?


Viri said:


> It's a running joke from BF1.


I guess I do recall seeing something along those lines, but you might need to brush me up on context


----------



## nonamejohn (May 24, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> It's her left hand, which means she can use her prosthetic to aim and her good hand to pull the trigger, but go off I guess?
> 
> I guess I do recall seeing something along those lines, but you might need to brush me up on context


would you trust someone with a prosthetic hand to protect you ,or your loved ones with a two-handed weapon ?


----------



## Joe88 (May 24, 2018)

https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...algeria-commonwealth-white-wash-a7874501.html


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 24, 2018)

nonamejohn said:


> would you trust someone with a prosthetic hand to protect you ,or your loved ones with a two-handed weapon ?


Both?... Why make a choice? If someone is brave enough to enlist in the army and is capable of fighting, I fail to see why you don't think they should


----------



## nonamejohn (May 24, 2018)

Joe88 said:


> https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...algeria-commonwealth-white-wash-a7874501.html


Interesting...I think when It comes to historical interpretation, movies are marketed to specific demographics, and white males and war movies go hand-in-hand. I can't speak for the producers, but a little diversity goes a long way towards a broader market. "white-washing" may not have even been the intent, even with the aforementioned guess of the target audience.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



TotalInsanity4 said:


> Both?... Why make a choice? If someone is brave enough to enlist in the army and is capable of fighting, I fail to see why you don't think they should


Well, to be fair, I was only enlisted in the U.S. Army a under a decade ago, and disabled individuals were not accepted for active duty. Has this changed ? I understand this is a work of fiction however.


----------



## Viri (May 24, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I guess I do recall seeing something along those lines, but you might need to brush me up on context


BF1, was a game based on WW1. It allowed players to play as women, black people, etc. So, when people got the central powers team, they picked the most outrageously historically inaccurate thing. So, you'd end up with an entire team of black women on the German team.


----------



## SG854 (May 24, 2018)

nonamejohn said:


> Well, to be fair, I was only enlisted in the U.S. Army a under a decade ago, and disabled individuals were not accepted for active duty. Has this changed ? I understand this is a work of fiction however.


Right now 1/3 of males are disqualified from enlisting in the army because they are overweight/obese or have some mental problem.
They have strict regulations for entering. They don't want you to be a determinate to the whole.


----------



## GhostLatte (May 24, 2018)

The right getting triggered by the nonsense of the left. The left getting triggered by the nonsense of the right. Perfectly balanced as all things should be.


----------



## Esjay131 (May 24, 2018)

SG854 said:


> Right now 1/3 of males are disqualified from enlisting in the army because they are overweight/obese or have some mental problem.
> They have strict regulations for entering. They don't want you to be a determinate to the whole.


Some of the regulations regarding mental problems is shitty. Someone with Narcissistic Personality Disorder won't have a problem, whereas someone with ADHD will be disqualified.


----------



## Viri (May 24, 2018)

Esjay131 said:


> Some of the regulations regarding mental problems is shitty. Someone with Narcissistic Personality Disorder won't have a problem, whereas someone with ADHD will be disqualified.


I got rejected to join the army before, because of a foot problem. 

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



nonamejohn said:


> Hmm, female lead, and disabled...A person with one hand cannot handle a rifle correctly on a battlefield. Whats next ? A "little person" who can run like Usain Bolt ? A liberal "minor-attracted" school teacher, turned straight and militant ?


I mean, if they wanted to try to be at least a little historically accurate, they would at least had the women be Soviet troops. Also, ugh, those really bad British accents are torture on the ears. I doubt the Soviets would have given a shit if you had one arm or no arms, they would have thrown you into the battle field.


----------



## m_babble (May 24, 2018)

Have you maybe considered that new creators are creating things that represent the things they identify with?
Take this fucking garbage to 4chan or something.


----------



## tbb043 (May 24, 2018)

Chary said:


> Anita Sarkeesian hasn't been relevant since like



ever


----------



## SG854 (May 24, 2018)

Esjay131 said:


> Some of the regulations regarding mental problems is shitty. Someone with Narcissistic Personality Disorder won't have a problem, whereas someone with ADHD will be disqualified.


Usually people with narcissistic personalty are good leaders. The main goal of bootcamp is to train people to be disposable cogs in a war machine. All must move forward. One cog that doesn't work properly brings down the whole machine. The less you value your own life and focus on the mission the more successful a killing machine you are. Thats why they strip you of your identity, shave you head, and mental/physically break you down. To train you to value your own life less. A narcissistic person that uses others to accomplish a goal would be best at that.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 24, 2018)

nonamejohn said:


> Well, to be fair, I was only enlisted in the U.S. Army a under a decade ago, and disabled individuals were not accepted for active duty. Has this changed ? I understand this is a work of fiction however.


https://www.quora.com/Can-an-amputee-serve-in-combat

Yeah, amputees can serve in combat situations and have been able to for a little while now. I'm also not exactly going to flaunt EA as the pinnacle of historical accuracy, but I'd imagine that in the thick of WWII they'd probably take just about anybody that could demonstrate capability of shooting a gun and humping their own gear


----------



## blahblah (May 24, 2018)

Yeah, no. Don't post this kind of shit, OP.


----------



## Deleted User (May 24, 2018)

SJWs should get creative and make new characters rather than drastically changing people's idols.
In Japan rather than making 50 different versions of Goku, writers and artists make up new characters and it's great because there is a large variety of different heroes for manga and anime fans can identify with.

I had a lot of issues growing up and I kept them from a friend of mine and when I finally opened up to him he didn't want to talk to me anymore because the person he befriended wasn't real and now I'm this stranger who had been lying to him for years. People don't like it when something they're familiar with is no longer familiar, familiarity gives people a sense of security and when you rob them of that familiarity you are taking away their security.


----------



## dAVID_ (May 24, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Oh yeah, that's right. They're doing a live action teen titans and couldn't leave that alone either. This isn't the Starfire I  grew up with


This is the biggest "Fuck you" to the original series.


----------



## SG854 (May 24, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> https://www.quora.com/Can-an-amputee-serve-in-combat
> 
> Yeah, amputees can serve in combat situations and have been able to for a little while now. I'm also not exactly going to flaunt EA as the pinnacle of historical accuracy, but I'd imagine that in the thick of WWII they'd probably take just about anybody that could demonstrate capability of shooting a gun and humping their own gear


Prosthetic's are getting better. And bionic and exo suits will make humans stronger than we currently are. That combined with nano technology will change the war landscape.


----------



## Viri (May 24, 2018)

dAVID_ said:


> This is the biggest "Fuck you" to the original series.


Hey now, that's insulting to Teen Titans Go!  You should see her in her costume 
https://i.imgur.com/XoX1RAQ.jpg
Crack whore. Kpop. Demigender demonkin racefluid

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



tbb043 said:


> ever


She got to speak to the UN!


----------



## nonamejohn (May 24, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> https://www.quora.com/Can-an-amputee-serve-in-combat
> 
> Yeah, amputees can serve in combat situations and have been able to for a little while now. I'm also not exactly going to flaunt EA as the pinnacle of historical accuracy, but I'd imagine that in the thick of WWII they'd probably take just about anybody that could demonstrate capability of shooting a gun and humping their own gear


Interesting. I'm willing to wager some of the enlisted are leery of  someone with a physical disability in live fire, let alone as defense for a squad.


----------



## Esjay131 (May 24, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Oh yeah, that's right. They're doing a live action teen titans and couldn't leave that alone either. This isn't the Starfire I  grew up with


Meanwhile the Starfire I grew up with is this one:


----------



## zfreeman (May 24, 2018)

nonamejohn said:


> Interesting. I'm willing to wager some of the enlisted are leery of  someone with a physical disability in live fire, let alone as defense for a squad.


Infantry is pretty leery of a lot of stuff, but mostly how knowledgeable/ignorant someone is. The ability to return fire is second in importance, followed by physical ability. As long as you don't choke, that you have a good record, they'll rely on you.


----------



## nonamejohn (May 24, 2018)

zfreeman said:


> Infantry is pretty leery of a lot of stuff, but mostly how knowledgeable/ignorant someone is. The ability to return fire is second in importance, followed by physical ability. As long as you don't choke, that you have a good record, they'll rely on you.


Are you implying your a former /current service member ?


----------



## MionissNio (May 24, 2018)

Although I do think changing the race of a character is something a bit too extreme, butwhat I mind more is the OP's hypocrisy here.

People who say women opress men haven't really been in their shoes, Right wing men really haven't experienced true misandry they are just against women speaking out recently. Women on the other hand have been under men's opression for centuries, same for the LGBT. I'd reckon instead of a Women's day we need a misandry month where men should really learn how it feels to be controlled.


----------



## zfreeman (May 24, 2018)

nonamejohn said:


> Are you implying your a former /current service member ?


Just got out, but yes.


----------



## notimp (May 24, 2018)

MionissNio said:


> Although I do think changing the race of a character is something a bit too extreme, butwhat I mind more is the OP's hypocrisy here.
> 
> People who say women opress men haven't really been in their shoes, Right wing men really haven't experienced true misandry they are just against women speaking out recently. Women on the other hand have been under men's opression for centuries, same for the LGBT. I'd reckon instead of a Women's day we need a misandry month where men should really learn how it feels to be controlled.



Then dont let yourself be controlled. It sounds insultingly simple - but thats what it comes down to. Individually, as a movement, both.

Its one thing to point out oppression, structural racism, or misogyny - its another thing to make your outgroup one half of humankind, and demand your own commemoration month for being born one gender or another. The all but too new concept of cisgender aside, because no one will ever be able to change societies perception on the basis of telling others what they selfidentiy as (martian, usually - speaking for myself, ...) - people out there judge others, based on perception. And while you can change norms, you cant change that.

You are then playing into concepts like "inherited debt" witch we hadn't anymore since the 15th century. You are playing into stereotypes of oppression, where there was none. And thats more harmful to peoples goodwill, than catching those fringe cases you may have called out in the process.

Its not that obscure of a concept - when empowerment flips over an becomes structural oppression on your part, based on characteristics the other person you are talking about cant change - guess what you are engaging in.

Its a long hard path to change society, and you dont do it by earmarking half of the population as "something". Thats just too large of a group to attribute anything to.

Its also the freakingly easiest thing to "identify as" you dont even have to develop social concepts like, nationality, political orientation, favorite music genre - all you have to manage is to be born on on side of the "spectrum of gender" or the other. There is no abstraction, this takes no effort - and therefore it doesnt work. People usually (numbers) dont choose to belong to that group, and therefore there is no cohesion you could play off of - if you use it to "get ahead" people will gladly use the shortcut, then shed the allegiance at the next point it doesnt benefit them.

Point being - no one ever makes ingroups based on characteristics as common or universal as gender. It doesnt work.

Even the old boys clubs you are trying to go up agains, have no allegiance to "males" it wouldnt work for them to play on the commonalities with the guy that sells them a club soda.

All the venues are open to you. You can read, vote, study, congregate. If you see a glass ceiling, you can try to break it as well. And if it doesnt work, you have to try again. But be ensured, that the group preventing you from doing so, isnt one half of the worlds population.


----------



## SG854 (May 24, 2018)

MionissNio said:


> Although I do think changing the race of a character is something a bit too extreme, butwhat I mind more is the OP's hypocrisy here.
> 
> People who say women opress men haven't really been in their shoes, Right wing men really haven't experienced true misandry they are just against women speaking out recently. Women on the other hand have been under men's opression for centuries, same for the LGBT. I'd reckon instead of a Women's day we need a misandry month where men should really learn how it feels to be controlled.


Ugly people have also been discriminated for years because they don't get the same job opportunities as good looking people. They earn less, are less likely to be promoted, are less likely to get into political office, and less likely to get many opportunities in life. 

People who are attractive are seen more friendly, sociable, reliable and competent than ugly people. Ugly people are seen as lazy and unproductive. Unlike race and gender, ugly people is not a protected group by law. And is even more of a factor of discrimination than gender or race because of no law protection. Ugly people have been a disadvantaged group for thousands and thousands of years. Even before modern humans walked on this planet. Our ancestors treated attractive people much better, and more likely to breed with them then ugly ones.

Not only that but theres also height, age, weight, genetic intelligence, geography, time period, health, wealth, natural athleticism, family structure, friendship (knowing someone in business), and many other factors. These affect all groups of race. White, black, hispanic, male, female. And hardly any evidence that these factors are less important either. Some of these are even more of a factor then race and gender. Why don't people attack these as much as other variables that can affect job opportunities and status? Why only focus on gender and race? 

What if your black and female? Are you being disadvantaged by the white female? Because the white female has more opportunities than you. 
What if you are gay, black and female? Are you being disadvantaged by the black female and the white female because they have privilege over you? Should you protest them too along with men? What if you are gay, black, female, and ugly? What if you are gay, black, female, old, ugly, short, fat, has poor genetic intelligence and so on. How do you interpret all this?

White males, there are different ranks among them too. Does being a ugly male knock you down on the oppression ladder? 
What about ugly, white, poor athleticism and fat. Does that mean the male higher then you is oppressing you because they have more opportunities? Are they apart of the oppressed group too? Is their a ranking system on how oppressive you are based on all the traits you have and don't have? And how do you rank all this? What is considered line of oppressed and privileged? Different people can have a different mix of all these so how do you rank all this? There are infinite number of ways to interpret the world and interpret why things happen. So this would go on and on. 

Or are people individuals with many complex things going on with them and can't be grouped by only typical narrow traits like race and gender. People respect individuality, but once it comes to topics about race and gender, individuality goes out the door in favor of a narrow marxist ideal of proletariate and bourgeois oppression mindset.


----------



## dpad_5678 (May 24, 2018)

As annoying as hardcore SJW's can be, they don't kill and terroize someone because of their race, heritage or religion like _*actual fucking conservative Christian terrorists aka Neo-nazi's/KKK.*_ So while the right is calling someone a terrorist because they have pink hair and wear a vagina hat, there's ACTUAL domestic terrorists roaming this country spewing their religious and hateful beliefs everywhere.

Oh wait, conservatives support that. Or at least they don't actively oppose it.


----------



## notimp (May 24, 2018)

SG854 said:


> Ugly people have also been discriminated for years because they don't get the same job opportunities as good looking people.



How come Brad Pitt always gets away with being Brad Pitt? 

Even in feminist circles (the posters you had on your bedroom walls, when you were younger)? Answer, because hes in the center of society - where everyone would like to end up at. 

Theres a great anecdote thats entirely inappropriate to tell at this point, so of course I'm doing it  - told by David Spade of all types, where he went to a celebrity auction, for a good cause (afair it was Haity disaster relief) - where "the Khaleesi" was auctioned off ("watch an episode of Game of Thrones with the Khaleesi"). He bid 30k, but was quickly outpaced by other people in the room, where at I think 130k, Brad Pitt - of all males, who also attended the auction, made a bit. Spade describes the situation, as the Khaleesi being very flattered and cheerful, when the auctioneer swiped the room with his glance, and suddenly "some Harvey Weinstein knockoff" from the back of the room goes "160". Spade, then describes what must have happened in the Khaleesi's thought process at the time, considering her facial expression, and trying to haggle with the auctioneer, when Brad Pitt - of course - didn't renew his bit.  I challenge you to find any male that doesnt draw amusement out of this story - or build a society, where this wouldnt catch a laugh. Meaning, you are also up against double standards - and they are also a part of human nature. And in some form always will be.

(Howard Stern Interview with David Spade, on 03.06.2018 - in case you are looking for it..  )


----------



## Stephano (May 24, 2018)

I have nothing to say.


----------



## notimp (May 24, 2018)

Stephano said:


> I have nothing to say.


Aaaannd, safe!


----------



## MionissNio (May 24, 2018)

SG854 said:


> Ugly people have also been discriminated for years because they don't get the same job opportunities as good looking people. They earn less, are less likely to be promoted, are less likely to get into political office, and less likely to get many opportunities in life.
> 
> People who are attractive are seen more friendly, sociable, reliable and competent than ugly people. Ugly people are seen as lazy and unproductive. Unlike race and gender, ugly people is not a protected group by law. And is even more of a factor of discrimination than gender or race because of no law protection. Ugly people have been a disadvantaged group for thousands and thousands of years. Even before modern humans walked on this planet. Our ancestors treated attractive people much better, and more likely to breed with them then ugly ones.
> 
> ...


And what you are saying is exactly what SJW "Terrorists" want to eliminate from society, by making those "ugly" people mainstream and removing the Image of beauty that the media has engraved in our brains throughout the years, hence you see rants on why video game women are so scantily clad in games.

Notice I never said straight white male in my post, because males of all races can be misogynistic and it applies to all countries, Indian African Arabian etc.


----------



## Anfroid (May 24, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> What I object to is changing the defining qualities of *established* characters, making them not at all what the fans know them as. I have no problems with characters like Static and Cyborg, I like them in fact. What I do have a problem with is forcing diversity for diversity's sake. Also, there are plenty others who support that argument. And let's try to keep it civil here.





Esjay131 said:


> Wally West exists as both due to Flashpoint. You say they're ruining comics, yet you lack basic knowledge of the main universe for DC (since Flashpoint rebooted for the New 52 that paved the way for the new arcs like No Justice). Nick Fury being black came from the Ultimates universe (which the MCU is heavily based on), because the writers all the way back in 2002 wanted to base their depiction of Nick Fury on Samuel L Jackson.
> 
> 
> 
> You really have no knowledge of the characters you talk of. The new Thor is Jane Foster, Thor's sometimes wife. She took on the mantle when Thor was deemed unworthy of wielding Mjolnir. Ironheart is basically Ironmans apprentice. The gay Alan Scott isn't even mainline universe so it's pseudo-canon (the point of the multiverse was allowing newer writers to have creative freedom). Peter Parker was only dead temporarily, and coexists with Miles Morales. America Chavez had a one-time relationship with a guy. Captain Marvel is still a woman in the Marvel universe, and the DC one is still male.


This is why I never got into western comics, they have too many different series written by different people. And its pretty hard for people to try to make new heroes/comics cause if they tried to make anything similar they'd probably get sued by the big companies. I'll just stick to the movies.


----------



## SG854 (May 24, 2018)

MionissNio said:


> And what you are saying is exactly what SJW "Terrorists" want to eliminate from society, by making those "ugly" people mainstream and removing the Image of beauty that the media has engraved in our brains throughout the years, hence you see rants on why video game women are so scantily clad in games.
> 
> Notice I never said straight white male in my post, because males of all races can be misogynistic and it applies to all countries, Indian African Arabian etc.


Its not just women its males also on looks. Also does being black give a man oppression status, but being male make him an oppressor and removes that oppression status? How does the oppression rating system work? And how is it rated with all these nuances? Im sure everyone is coming up with their own number system. Which then makes it into a big mess. In order to address issues in society you need a clear goal with a clear definition. Or else everyone will define things on their own terms, and will be all over the place, and not accomplish anything.

And thus comes in intersectional feminism. But it seems like they can't get along with each other themselves, because feminists are further dividing into groups. The black female has more oppression status than the white female, and they argue with each other claiming one has more privilege. And from there even further dividing based on disability, sexual status, educational attainment and so on. Even feminists can't get along with each other. What they are doing is causing divide amongst themselves.

They even don't trust Male Feminists either. There are many articles published by feminists to be weary of male feminists, because they think many male feminists are just using their feminist title to try to get laid. Some even claim that left wing male feminist's are worse than right wing males. It seems like this movement is crumbling from the inside. Most people don't identify as feminist and even hate them. And many polls rates being a feminists to be very unpopular.

So Men dominating. My question is how did this happen? Why throughout history with many different cultures, cultures that never had contact with each other almost all ended up the same? With women being oppressed and men being dominant? Why is this so wide spread? Social construction can't explain this issue. For something so wide spread the only thing that can explain it is biological. People being biological pushed into certain areas. Or interpretation. Interpreting things as bad when in reality are not, or interpreting things as good when they are not. And their are infinite number of ways to interpret things. And many cultures are different.

Or people not understanding how societies were in the past and how they functioned. So they invented a hypothesis, one that has yet to be proven, that explains why this happens in society. All Feminist's believes in conflict theory. Conflict theory itself is a very limited ideology and explains some things in society but not all. It doesn't take into account all the nuances and complications, and is just a black and white approach into solving life issues. They realized this that life is more complicated, and created intersectionality and caused even further divide.


----------



## Soulsilve2010 (May 24, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> I think there's a lack of gay mexicans in comic books. We should force those qualities on Static Shock. How does that make you feel, bro? :I


Yo,Static Shock is my #1 favorite hero.Please don't put that evil on him.


----------



## notimp (May 24, 2018)

MionissNio said:


> And what you are saying is exactly what SJW "Terrorists" want to eliminate from society, by making those "ugly" people mainstream and removing the Image of beauty that the media has engraved in our brains throughout the years, hence you see rants on why video game women are so scantily clad in games.


And in the 70s there was a movement to even allow scantily clad women into media, out of an era of oppression that made rules about "how long your skirts had to be", and how much showing shoulder was appropriate. Here is the ultimate "truth", if beauty affects decision making, which it does - beautiful people will always "use" it, even inadvertently.

Its a fact of life you cant regulate it away.

Also - regardless of what you are told I don't think "making ugly mainstream" is a big agenda point for SJW to begin with. But thats how recruiting works, you throw out stories, until one sticks with the person opposite you. Then you tell them, they can fight for that as long as they join you.

You now have a generation out there thats at peak vanity, obsessed with celebrity culture, narcissistic to a T, insulting themselves on social media to gain attention - and you are concerned about "making ugly mainstream"? To get a better catch when choosing a life partner?  Because people usually arent "oppressed" by society - because they are ugly, or because they dont style themselves, or because they arent into fashion.

The thing with women "trying out being blond" at some point in their lives is, that they imagine a reaction - and I'm sure - at some level there is one.

Here is what you tell someone that doesnt want to follow "barbies style school - rules". They dont matter in nearly all aspects of life. If you dont want to follow them, dont follow them - your life will not be worse even in the slightest. You dont need a "social movement" to fight on your behalf for this one.

And when you are out on the prawl and you use any vices to make you feel more confident, or look more attractive - you arent getting slut shamed either. Dont overdo it, but to some extend its fun also.

Also yes, beauty works (different from styling, "beauty thats sold in product form in advertisements" - not so much "tha media" (unless ads are now media, you tell me social media influencers)) - and to some extend always will, and no one will ever change that. Its not the image thats transported by media - or otherwise, all those classical statues of greek goddesses or Michelangelos David wouldnt exist - because media back then, was a guy shouting at people in the middle of a public square.

Also In those cases I always channel a quote that gets attributed to Charles Bukowski, who wasnt a natural beauty in his own right (and also no high fellutant social player), that goes as following: "Feminism exists to integrate ugly women into society", and thats chauvinistic, and belitteling, but when you start to attack beauty in one of those social movements, thats what you get as a conter. And here is the trick, its populistic as well.

If you are fighting against the importance of beauty in peoples lives, you are fighting for a truly lost cause. Imho.

Also, no - I dont need all scantly clothed images of women in my video games - but once in a while - its a kink. Take 80% away if you must, but leave some..


----------



## osaka35 (May 24, 2018)

Let's bring some reality to the situation:

-Social Justice, as a concept, is a good thing. It is about empowering those people or populations who have had their power taken away unfairly. Usually this means things like making sure bob isn't fired just because you find out he's gay and that makes you feel icky. Why does Bob's sexual orientation have anything to do with his performance reviews? stuff like that. usually addressed through education, research, laws, training, etc. It's a wide range and applicable to pretty much anywhere humans go. This is why you see it crop up everywhere. Wherever humans interact, there's some sort of power dynamic. And that power dynamic needs to be equitable. Feminism is a type of social justice, for example, it just focuses more on female identity and related aspects.

-There are people who understand how to do things properly, and there are those who don't know their head from a turnip. It's best to distinguish the two, or else you'll wind up disregarding a concept or movement based on a few turnip heads. Which would be just plain silly. Don't take Anita sarkeesian to be a proper feminist. She's just in it for the money and fame. Look at research, look at those who have tangible plans rather than blanket statements. On games and equitability, instead of Anita sarkeesian, for example, watch Extra Credits.

-Old school people still use social justice warrior to mean those who fight for equity of all humans. Tumblr is full of turnip-heads and turned it into "if you disagree you're a nazi". Disregard tumblr and embrace people who live in reality. There are a lot of social problems out there, and we can only fix them by being able to be being mature enough to embrace harsh realities. Even if some tumblr folk say the "right" things, they could have come to those conclusions for all the wrong reasons. Which makes them wrong. If you can't show me how you got from point A to point B, then I'll assume you don't really know what you're talking about.

-Why do you care if a character changes gender/skin colour? Is it any different than having a different backstory or slightly different heritage? Humans tend to understand a concept and then never change it. It is incredibly difficult to dislodge a false belief, especially if this belief is the first of its kind in regards to the concept (and gets harder the older the belief). This is a maturity thing, though, and is overcome with effort and proper self-reflection (and again, maturity). Seriously, enjoy the fact there's diversity. Who wants to hear the same story over and over again? Let other people be represented, listen to their stories, hear different voices. Especially with created characters, let them explore the human condition from multiple angles. Course, there's also the problem of trying to represent but doing such a terrible job of it you just wind up making things worse.

-Do you honestly believe the influx of diversity is all due to creators being forced to craft stories with multiple cultures, peoples, and perspectives? Is it so difficult to believe there are those professional writers and artist folks who love all the same things you do, but look completely different and have a completely different background than you?

-How we go about it is important and requires discussion and dissection, but a lot of folks in this thread can't even seem to acknowledge that something needs to be done at all XD. Before you talk about methodology, talk about where we are now and what our goals are. THEN you can s̶h̶i̶t̶-t̶a̶l̶k̶  constructively weigh the merits of the methods used/suggested. Horse before the cart, people.



SG854 said:


> So Men dominating. My question is how did this happen? Why throughout history with many different cultures, cultures that never had contact with each other almost all ended up the same? With women being oppressed and men being dominant? Why is this so wide spread? Social construction can't explain this issue. For something so wide spread the only thing that can explain it is biological. People being biological pushed into certain areas. Or interpretation. Interpreting things as bad when in reality are not, or interpreting things as good when they are not. And their are infinite number of ways to interpret things. And many cultures are different.



It's a valid question, and one that's been explored quite a bit. Interestingly enough, it only happens after a culture has changed from hunter/gather to agricultural and settled down. Agriculture produces more and is more consistent, but it's also a lot harder than hunting/gathering.There are a few cultures that were/are female dominated, it's just ours were male, so those are the ones we think of. I thiiiiink the thinking is generally it just starts out as task separation (agriculture takes a lot of effort and variety of task compared to hunter/gatherer), but eventually turns into "that's just the way things are", which leads to people thinking "it's naturally that way and to fight it is ludicrous/evil". It could also be partly about rather than moving from hunting ground to hunting ground, you just stick to one spot. It's 50/50 pretty much, and that initial shift may just favour males because they don't get pregnant and have to slow down for 9 months. Or it could easily be something else minor and not relevant to today's culture. And really, a slight different in biology that snowballed into a lot of complete nonsense isn't much to justify a ton of oppression and baggage on.


----------



## gameboy (May 24, 2018)




----------



## matthi321 (May 24, 2018)

yeah i noticed alot of more females in games the last years


----------



## kumikochan (May 24, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> https://www.quora.com/Can-an-amputee-serve-in-combat
> 
> Yeah, amputees can serve in combat situations and have been able to for a little while now. I'm also not exactly going to flaunt EA as the pinnacle of historical accuracy, but I'd imagine that in the thick of WWII they'd probably take just about anybody that could demonstrate capability of shooting a gun and humping their own gear


There weren't any woman soldiers tho. In the resistance there were female fighters but in the army itself not.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



MionissNio said:


> Although I do think changing the race of a character is something a bit too extreme, butwhat I mind more is the OP's hypocrisy here.
> 
> People who say women opress men haven't really been in their shoes, Right wing men really haven't experienced true misandry they are just against women speaking out recently. Women on the other hand have been under men's opression for centuries, same for the LGBT. I'd reckon instead of a Women's day we need a misandry month where men should really learn how it feels to be controlled.


Oh so you're also ignoring all those instances where women have the advantage ? You ever wondered why more males are homeless then women ? You ever wondered why there are more shelters for women ? Why is it okay for a man to give his life for a woman and he gets to be called a hero when he does and if he doesn't he will get called a coward but when a woman would give her life to protect a man from a gun or a knife attack most would start asking, why did she do that ? I can go on and on with examples where women have it better then men. I'm all for equality and i am not denying women have it worse in situations but that goes both ways okay. Funny when it is international women day they do like to mention how opressed they are and we all have to agree on that and praise them to fucking heaven but when it is international mens day not a single woman praises men online and just use that day to also talk about men opressing women. Here is a good video showing that


----------



## gameboy (May 24, 2018)

and yet they havent added playable asians yet


----------



## SG854 (May 24, 2018)

osaka35 said:


> It's a valid question, and one that's been explored quite a bit. Interestingly enough, it only happens after a culture has changed from hunter/gather to agricultural and settled down. Agriculture produces more and is more consistent, but it's also a lot harder than hunting/gathering.There are a few cultures that were/are female dominated, it's just ours were male, so those are the ones we think of. I thiiiiink the thinking is generally it just starts out as task separation (agriculture takes a lot of effort and variety of task compared to hunter/gatherer), but eventually turns into "that's just the way things are", which leads to people thinking "it's naturally that way and to fight it is ludicrous/evil". It could also be partly about rather than moving from hunting ground to hunting ground, you just stick to one spot. It's 50/50 pretty much, and that initial shift may just favour males because they don't get pregnant and have to slow down for 9 months. Or it could easily be something else minor and not relevant to today's culture. And really, a slight different in biology that snowballed into a lot of complete nonsense isn't much to justify a ton of oppression and baggage on.


The physical strength difference in Men and Women is astounding. Constantly Women professional college and olympic athletes gets slaughtered by high school 15 year old boys. Whether it's in basketball, soccer/football, tennis and many other sports. And its not just a close call either. Its actually a huge embarrassing defeat. I constantly hear stories of 15 year boys defeating grown professional women that have more experience and organization.

Hardly stories on women winning which is once in a blue moon. I saw a game where a male soccer/football team defeated a female basketball team in basketball. They defeated women in their own specialty sport. You can train all you want as a women but the huge biological difference in strength, muscle mass, reflex and bone density is hugely noticeable.

Societies in the past didn't have the technologies and machines we have today to help with farming. So it was all physical labor by own strength. Society divided roles between men and women's best attributes to be more productive. Men had the more physically demanding jobs. And women had the less physically intense jobs, home care. Giving women physically demanding jobs was not smart, and you'll produce less at the end of the day, decreasing survival. This is one aspect I don't think people consider when trying to define the past.

There is also a few historical records of newspaper articles showing that wife beating was not acceptable. And wife beaters were punished. Sometimes the law wasn't quick enough so people took the law into their own hands. How wide spread was wife beating I don't know.
But there are a couple of records that shows there were people against it.

Any man that beat his wife they would send him to jail, put him in chain gangs, sometimes a mob will form dump tar and feathers and chase the man out of town, males were whipped at a whipping post, they put men in pillory's, sometimes a angry mob would kill the man. They were a lot more violent against wife beaters back then.


----------



## Evoc (May 24, 2018)

This thread is dangerous if you haven't watched the new Avengers.


----------



## gameboy (May 24, 2018)

SG854 said:


> The physical strength difference in Men and Women is astounding. Constantly Women professional college and olympic athletes gets slaughtered by high school 15 year old boys. Whether it's in basketball, soccer/football, tennis and many other sports. And its not just a close call either. Its actually a huge embarrassing defeat. I constantly hear stories of 15 year boys defeating grown professional women that have more experience and organization.
> 
> Hardly stories on women winning which is once in a blue moon. I saw a game where a male soccer/football team defeated a female basketball team in basketball. They defeated women in their own specialty sport. You can train all you want as a women but the huge biological difference in strength, muscle mass, reflex and bone density is hugely noticeable.
> 
> ...



ive never understood how theres a regulation size basketball then theres 'womens size' basketball like theyre less than people. Just play with the same regulation sized ball please... and my freshman team blew out the girls state runner up team the first week of freshman practice, they didnt score a point... ive gotten burned in sprints by girls though, and i was a 11.25 100m dash guy, burned in the 400m not the 100m


----------



## notimp (May 24, 2018)

Social engagement is important. And in many western countries a large part of the population is engaged in it, after they leave the active work force - and can get mobilized by communities for that cause.

SJW though is a social movement with certain ideals, certain goals, and certain perspectives. Just because they have "social" in the title - doesnt mean, that you'd know their orientation by default. They are rather radical (not extremist, but...), they acted for large parts unconfronted, they have a very distinct hierarchical structure, they have an issue with free speech, and are not beyond a certain portion of "human intervention" to achieve their goals.

Simply put - as a movement, its not innocent.

If you want to hear the voice of someone (rather centralist, even left leaning) that was on the opposing side of them - you can look at the following lecture:


And here is a video from one of their induction training courses (less reputable source - but the video clip is unfiltered)
h**ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUEgTaM28ls&t=12m30s

And while this might have been unnoticed in public - there is pushback mounting in academia. For many of the (if you can consider me impartial) right reasons.

When I said that prominent branches of them "compete" on grounds of "having been more oppressed than others" to gain rank, or that are outright "racist" in their own right - thats not an exaggeration.

As always with movements - be careful, who you are following.

Also as far as discrimination in the workplace goes "if you can act" - the law in western countries is on you side, if you can document it - and there are institutions you can reach out to, if you require help - you dont necessarily need SJWers for that (might depend on your country).

I've nothing against the feministic cause, in fact I sat in one or two seminars with that orientation during my years in university, to "see what its all about"  - and even when being in "dont say anything, take in the impressions mode" - there was always the notion of the other gender as the "foe" and the respective professor wounldnt like to look at me, from day one.  The self empowerment part is fine - looking at ways to get women into higher places in society is recommendable -- but at the end of the day, their clientel in my experience is specialized, and not representative of a general movement, that most women would identify with. If its ok, to say so.  At least thats the sense I've got.


----------



## Priestiality (May 24, 2018)

kumikochan said:


> There weren't any woman soldiers tho. In the resistance there were female fighters but in the army itself not.



Uh, there were a lot of women soldiers. In fact, there was an entire branch of the British military made up solely of women (Auxiliary Territorial Service). Queen Elizabeth II was an enlisted member. Just because they weren't on the front lines doesn't make them not soldiers. The newbie in basic training, the infantry on the front line, the sergeant, and the mechanic are ALL enlisted members, and therefore all soldiers, so uh, you're wrong.


----------



## kumikochan (May 24, 2018)

gameboy said:


> and yet they havent added playable asians yet


Thank god for all the women who died protecting all our men ! I salute you !!!


Priestiality said:


> Uh, there were a lot of women soldiers. In fact, there was an entire branch of the British military made up solely of women (Auxiliary Territorial Service). Queen Elizabeth II was an enlisted member. Just because they weren't on the front lines doesn't make them not soldiers. The newbie in basic training, the infantry on the front line, the sergeant, and the mechanic are ALL enlisted members, and therefore all soldiers, so uh, you're wrong.


Well in that regard medics were also soldiers but you knew what i meant. No need to be difficult about it. Then they should add female soldiers at a base camp in the game and not open in the field right in the frontlines with wehrmacht clothes on and a british accent


----------



## Priestiality (May 24, 2018)

kumikochan said:


> Thank god for all the women who died protecting all our men ! I salute you !!!
> 
> Well in that regard medics were also soldiers but you knew what i meant. No need to be difficult about it. Then they should add female soldiers at a base camp in the game and not open in the field right in the frontlines with wehrmacht clothes on and a british accent


Maybe you should try asking an actual enlisted member of the service whether medics and mechanics are "real" soldiers.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 24, 2018)

Priestiality said:


> Uh, there were a lot of women soldiers. In fact, there was an entire branch of the British military made up solely of women (Auxiliary Territorial Service). Queen Elizabeth II was an enlisted member. Just because they weren't on the front lines doesn't make them not soldiers. The newbie in basic training, the infantry on the front line, the sergeant, and the mechanic are ALL enlisted members, and therefore all soldiers, so uh, you're wrong.


As we all know, though, men only invented female soldiers in the early 1990s, so it's completely historically inaccurate to show them on the battlefield before then


----------



## osaka35 (May 24, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> As we all know, though, men only invented female soldiers in the early 1990s, so it's completely historically inaccurate to show them on the battlefield before then


For which culture? Like, US culture? We haven't been around that long, historically speaking  I want to say a lot of cultures had female warriors, though men tend to be on the forefront because of muscles.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 24, 2018)

osaka35 said:


> For which culture? Like, US culture? We haven't been around that long, historically speaking


All of them (except Japan, Disney made a 1:1 historical documentary about some gal named Mulan)

Although, snark aside, people seem to be under the impression that the Civil War, for instance, was 100% male, and completely disregard both the females that fought in male uniforms and the thousands of battlefield nurses who also risked their lives to save others'


----------



## osaka35 (May 24, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> All of them (except Japan, Disney made a 1:1 historical documentary about some gal named Mulan)
> 
> Although, snark aside, people seem to be under the impression that the Civil War, for instance, was 100% male, and completely disregard both the females that fought in male uniforms and the thousands of battlefield nurses who also risked their lives to save others'


Oh, no I agree, I thought you were arguing in the other direction X'D I was confused. I know there are a lot of cultures in the past that have had women on the front line. though I can't think of any off the top of my head.


----------



## mituzora (May 24, 2018)

I've seen a few people complain about the fact that they're going to focus on elasti-girl potentially in the next incredibles movie.  I just stopped by to point out that if you go by American history,  about the time this movie happens, is about the same time the feminist movements began to happen.  So if you want, get mad at it, but you'd be getting mad at chronologically accurate themes.

That and, SJWs are annoying yes, but only the radical vocal minority.  Most of the "SJWs" I have met are honestly not that bad, and can usually take a joke better than most of your radical right male anti-SJW snowflakes.  You just take the vocal minority and apply that rule to a whole group, which is in my opinion, just as bad as a SJW attacking a specific media for portraying women scantily clad, but ignoring the fact that men in the same media have similar, if not identical problems.

Both radical sides are annoying as hell, most of the rest of us just want to enjoy our media the way it is.  if changes get made, fine.  I'd rather take my opinion on something and judge if it's a good decision based off of this little elusive thing in today as the actual content, and not a few characters/concepts changed.  sure it may suck, but if the media is still good, then it's good, who cares if the characters change.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 24, 2018)

mituzora said:


> I've seen a few people complain about the fact that they're going to focus on elasti-girl potentially in the next incredibles movie.  I just stopped by to point out that if you go by American history,  about the time this movie happens, is about the same time the feminist movements began to happen.  So if you want, get mad at it, but you'd be getting mad at chronologically accurate themes.
> 
> That and, SJWs are annoying yes, but only the radical vocal minority.  Most of the "SJWs" I have met are honestly not that bad, and can usually take a joke better than most of your radical right male anti-SJW snowflakes.  You just take the vocal minority and apply that rule to a whole group, which is in my opinion, just as bad as a SJW attacking a specific media for portraying women scantily clad, but ignoring the fact that men in the same media have similar, if not identical problems.
> 
> Both radical sides are annoying as hell, most of the rest of us just want to enjoy our media the way it is.  if changes get made, fine.  I'd rather take my opinion on something and judge if it's a good decision based off of this little elusive thing in today as the actual content, and not a few characters/concepts changed.  sure it may suck, but if the media is still good, then it's good, who cares if the characters change.


The thing that gets on my nerves is that people use the term "SJW" as a buzzword to associate otherwise reasonable people with legitimate concerns being voiced with an extreme minority of people who will never be happy


----------



## mituzora (May 24, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> The thing that gets on my nerves is that people use the term "SJW" as a buzzword to associate otherwise reasonable people with legitimate concerns being voiced with an extreme minority of people who will never be happy


Oh absolutely.  using the phrase Social Justice Warrior is just about as bad as calling someone a libtard or snowflake, or whatever else.  its a stupid nickname given to people who feel the need to raise concern to the inequality in mass media, in the extreme fashion;  the populous in turn, used it as a blanketing term giving a bad name to ANYONE who believes that inequality is a huge problem(which it really is, but I'm not going to complain about mass media portraying either side of things.


----------



## SirNapkin1334 (May 24, 2018)

Wait, what is an SJW?


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 24, 2018)

SirNapkin1334 said:


> Wait, what is an SJW?


"Social Justice Warrior"


----------



## Keyqueen (May 24, 2018)

Basically from what I understand extreme liberals who like to wine about everything being racist,sexist,homophobic and every other form of discrimination under the sun, all the while saying any one who is white male and straight is the embodiment of evil. Oh and if you disagree with them even slightly your scum of some sort and need to "check your privilege".

I fully get being for equal rights for everyone. However SJW to me often come off just as racist and prejudices againsts groups they view as "oppressors" as the far write are to minority's.

When it comes to media their seems to be no pleasing them. Either there is not enough representation of minority's or its done in a grossly insensitive way.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 24, 2018)

Keyqueen said:


> Basically from what I understand extreme liberals who like to wine about everything being racist,sexist,homophobic and every other form of discrimination under the sun, all the while saying any one who is white male and straight is the embodiment of evil. Oh and if you disagree with them even slightly your scum of some sort and need to "check your privilege".
> 
> I fully get being for equal rights for everyone. However SJW to me often come off just as racist and prejudices againsts groups they view as "oppressors" as the far write are to minority's.
> 
> When it comes to media their seems to be no pleasing them. Either there is not enough representation of minority's or its done in a grossly insensitive way.


Please read the posts above yours


----------



## leonmagnus99 (May 24, 2018)

i think those sjws are prolly just lonely deep inside and just want attention.


----------



## emigre (May 24, 2018)

The whining in this thread made me laugh. Cheers for that lads.


----------



## Drak0rex (May 27, 2018)

This video speaks for itself. Just further proof that franchises are being ruined by the inclusion of inappropriate ideas that don't need to be in there.


----------



## emigre (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> This video speaks for itself. Just further proof that franchises are being ruined by the inclusion of inappropriate ideas that don't need to be in there.




Are you putting out a spoiler about the Solo movie?


----------



## The Catboy (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> This video speaks for itself. Just further proof that franchises are being ruined by the inclusion of inappropriate ideas that don't need to be in there.



Just wondering, but do you ever have an original thought of your own? You seem to really only resort to videos and talk about the fan's reactions. Watching this thread over it seems more like you are reacting to stuff based on what others have said about it before even watching it


----------



## emigre (May 27, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> Just wondering, but do you ever have an original thought of your own? You seem to really only resort to videos and talk about the fan's reactions. Watching this thread over it seems more like you are reacting to stuff based on what others have said about it before even watching it



In fairness, one incredible thing about this anti-insert here is the general collective herd mentality or almost singular conscience.


----------



## Drak0rex (May 27, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> Just wondering, but do you ever have an original thought of your own? You seem to really only resort to videos and talk about the fan's reactions. Watching this thread over it seems more like you are reacting to stuff based on what others have said about it before even watching it


I know, how dare I reference other people's opinions to back up my own? You act like there aren't others who are also affected by the changes that political BS are having on what used to be something that were meant to be enjoyed by all ages. LOL


----------



## The Catboy (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> I know, how dare I reference other people's opinions to back up my own? You act like there aren't others who are also affected by the changes that political BS are having on what used to be something that were meant to be enjoyed by all ages. LOL


But that's most of what I've seen you do in this thread. Over react and then post over reactions from others.


----------



## Drak0rex (May 27, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> But that's most of what I've seen you do in this thread. Over react and then post over reactions from others.


AND? If it bothers you that much, you don't have to be here. If you don't care what I have to say, then prove it by saying nothing.


----------



## emigre (May 27, 2018)

Can someone tell me what media has been ruined by 'SJWs?' I've heard this a lot and I've gotta be honest, I can't think of a thing which has been ruined. I've enjoyed the new Star Wars Movie though I still don't know how I feel about The Last Jedi.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> AND? If it bothers you that much, you don't have to be here. If you don't care what I have to say, then prove it by saying nothing.


*Snicker* you sure showed her that you're capable of rational reactions, dude


----------



## emigre (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> AND? If it bothers you that much, you don't have to be here. If you don't care what I have to say, then prove it by saying nothing.



What's wrong with lilith expressing her freedom of speech?


----------



## Drak0rex (May 27, 2018)

emigre said:


> What's wrong with lilith expressing her freedom of speech?


Absolutely nothing


----------



## The Catboy (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> AND? If it bothers you that much, you don't have to be here. If you don't care what I have to say, then prove it by saying nothing.


You opened this thread and you opened yourself up for others to comment on. I get that you are upset about "SJWs," but yet you seem to only be upset by what you've heard and what others think about these issues. You are the other half of the coin.


----------



## Jockel (May 27, 2018)

ITT: loads of uninformed right wing "opinions". If diversity is a problem for you, or If you think "SJWs" or "the feminists" are out to destroy everything you love, I don't know what to tell you.
don't @ me.

Sincerely, a cultural marxist SJW Feminazi <3


----------



## emigre (May 27, 2018)

Jockel said:


> ITT: loads of uninformed right wing "opinions". If diversity is a problem for you, or If you think "SJWs" or "the feminists" are out to destroy everything you love, I don't know what to tell you.
> don't @ me.
> 
> Sincerely, a cultural marxist SJW Feminazi <3



Marx was German and you're German. It all makes sense now!


----------



## Drak0rex (May 27, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> You opened this thread and you opened yourself up for others to comment on. I get that you are upset about "SJWs," but yet you seem to only be upset by what you've heard and what others think about these issues. You are the other half of the coin.


You are correct. No matter what opinion one person may have, there will always be someone else that has an opposing view that conflicts with it, no matter how illogical it may seem. It's just disappointing to see beloved franchises of all mediums suffer because fringe groups "demand representation" to further their political agenda. Remember when comics were just about amazing people doing extraordinary things to defeat evil in the name of good? It was so much better without some people worrying about what their favorite hero stuck their dick (or in some cases, vagina) into, and other people worrying that their favorite hero would be changed in a way that they would find them less relatable. :/ Same goes with movies, etc.


----------



## emigre (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> You are correct. No matter what opinion one person may have, there will always be someone else that has an opposing view that conflicts with it, no matter how illogical it may seem. It's just disappointing to see beloved franchises of all mediums suffer because fringe groups "demand representation" to further their political agenda. Remember when comics were just about amazing people doing extraordinary things to defeat evil in the name of good? It was so much better without some people worrying about what their favorite hero stuck their dick (or in some cased, vagina) into, and other people worrying that their favorite hero would be changed in a way that they would find them less relatable. :/ Same goes with movies, etc.



Seriously what has been ruined?


----------



## Drak0rex (May 27, 2018)

emigre said:


> Seriously what has been ruined?


Established. Characters.


----------



## emigre (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Established. Characters.



What established characters? I genuinely asking what media has been ruined. I hear this a lot but you're not giving me any meat on the bone. I'm a huge nerd so trust me when it comes to bitching , I've done my fair share of bitching.


----------



## The Catboy (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Established. Characters.


You realize that they change characters all the time. Superman used to shape shift and sneeze out a galaxy, those were established traits for his character. Spiderman has literally had so many reboots and changes to his character that only his basic personality is what has been carried over.
Established character are literally always being changed in both small and major ways and most of the time people don't even notice it.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Established. Characters.


Such as? I have yet to see an established character change to the point that they're unenjoyable, and with the exclusion of maybe Ghostbusters (which I thoroughly enjoyed, btw) I haven't seen too many movies that even wandered outside the plausible boundaries of the established character, period


----------



## Jockel (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> It's just disappointing to see beloved franchises of all mediums suffer because fringe groups "demand representation" to further their political agenda.


Since I'm in on this conspiracy, I'll let you know that you are completely correct. While I can't discuss our secret SJW council meetings in detail, we know about every movie, comic & videogame currently in production. If we see that there's a heterosexual white male character involved, we immediately use our zionist connections to get it changed. We used to work with the NWO, but they've gotten kind of weird recently (long story). It's definitely not because artists want to tell stories involving different people, I can promise you that much. It's only us. _I mean, who would voluntarily write a story with black people in the lead?_


----------



## Flame (May 27, 2018)

@Drak0rex are you an unsocial unjust barbarian who does not know how to write? all you seem to do is post pics and videos?


----------



## Drak0rex (May 27, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> Such as? I have yet to see an established character change to the point that they're unenjoyable, and with the exclusion of maybe Ghostbusters (which I thoroughly enjoyed, btw) I haven't seen too many movies that even wandered outside the plausible boundaries of the established character, period


Just for the sake of example, X-Men's Ice Man, Since he was originally introduced, has always been known as quite the ladies man. Until recently when it was decided that he needed to be gay because that's a current hot button issue, politically. Many fans of his were shocked by this recent alteration to who this character is, and don't understand why this change needed to be made instead of say, just introducing a new, unknown character who happens to be gay. 

And before anyone accuses me of being racist, or anti gay or what have you, just think about some of your favorite characters from whatever form of media you like, and consider how you would feel if they were changed in ways that were contrary to how that character has been portrayed to you up until that point.


----------



## Subtle Demise (May 27, 2018)

Jockel said:


> Since I'm in on this conspiracy, I'll let you know that you are completely correct. While I can't discuss our secret SJW council meetings in detail, we know about every movie, comic & videogame currently in production. If we see that there's a heterosexual white male character involved, we immediately use our zionist connections to get it changed. We used to work with the NWO, but they've gotten kind of weird recently (long story). It's definitely not because artists want to tell stories involving different people, I can promise you that much. It's only us. _I mean, who would voluntarily write a story with black people in the lead?_


The complaint was about changing established characters, and actually encouraged creating new ones, but thay was a cute attempt at some kind of back-handed insult. Anyone who agrees with the sentiment must be some kind of right-wing, homophobe, hillbilly conspiracy theorist. 

I think the problem is a lack of creativity in Hollywood. Most people wouldn't have a problem with an original character that happened to be trans or whatever. But the writers are just not creative enough to write original characters, so they just try to make changes to existing ones.


----------



## emigre (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> And before anyone accuses me of being racist, or anti gay or what have you, just think about some of your favorite characters from whatever form of media you like, and consider how you would feel if they were changed in ways that were contrary to how that character has been portrayed to you up until that point.



I would honestly prefer a James Bond who wasn't a sexual predator.

Regarding Ice Man, I can't say I care mainly because I don't care about the X men. 



Subtle Demise said:


> I think the problem is a lack of creativity in Hollywood. Most people wouldn't have a problem with an original character that happened to be trans or whatever. But the writers are just not creative enough to write original characters, so they just try to make changes to existing ones.



Boom, agree with this completely.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Just for the sake of example, X-Men's Ice Man, Since he was originally introduced, has always been known as quite the ladies man. Until recently when it was decided that he needed to be gay because that's a current hot button issue, politically. Many fans of his were shocked by this recent alteration to who this character is, and don't understand why this change needed to be made instead of say, just introducing a new, unknown character who happens to be gay.
> 
> And before anyone accuses me of being racist, or anti gay or what have you, just think about some of your favorite characters from whatever form of media you like, and consider how you would feel if they were changed in ways that were contrary to how that character has been portrayed to you up until that point.


Wasn't Bobby dating Rogue in the original X Men movies?


----------



## lordkaos (May 27, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> Wasn't Bobby dating Rogue in the original X Men movies?


he means in the comics.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 27, 2018)

lordkaos said:


> he means in the comics.


Oh

I guess I don't see what the problem is, then, considering character traits change if you blink in the comics, especially depending on who's currently writing


----------



## Jockel (May 27, 2018)

emigre said:


> I would honestly prefer a James Bond who wasn't a sexual predator.
> 
> Regarding Ice Man, I can't say I care mainly because I don't care about the X men.


Agreed on both accounts. 
And I mean, why is it a problem if characters change? People change and re-evaluate their perspectives and values (well, most people do ). In stories, I'd expect characters to have some growth and an ark to them. How is a character switching sexual preferences a problem? Lots of people change their sexual orientation over the course of their life. Is the complaint that changing his sexual orientation is unrealistic? This dude is shooting ice and riding it.


----------



## lordkaos (May 27, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> Oh
> 
> I guess I don't see what the problem is, then, considering character traits change if you blink in the comics, especially depending on who's currently writing


yeah, that's the reason why I stopped reading comics, there's no definitive progression in the story, everything can be changed or undone by another writer. not that i care about ice man though, he's just the same character who just happens to like dudes now.


----------



## Subtle Demise (May 27, 2018)

Jockel said:


> Agreed on both accounts.
> And I mean, why is it a problem if characters change? People change and re-evaluate their perspectives and values (well, most people do ). In stories, I'd expect characters to have some growth and an ark to them. How is a character switching sexual preferences a problem? Lots of people change their sexual orientation over the course of their life. Is the complaint that changing his sexual orientation is unrealistic? This dude is shooting ice and riding it.


It can be an interesting plot point if it was ever done correctly. Like the character slowly realizing they're attracted to whatever instead of whatever they thought they were before. But it's usually so abrubt and out of nowhere. Anyway, for a lot of this stuff, a character's sexuality and gender don't really have much bearing on anything. Like why even bring it up in the context if a superhero comic? It only causes issues like this


----------



## Clydefrosch (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Just for the sake of example, X-Men's Ice Man, Since he was originally introduced, has always been known as quite the ladies man. Until recently when it was decided that he needed to be gay because that's a current hot button issue, politically. Many fans of his were shocked by this recent alteration to who this character is, and don't understand why this change needed to be made instead of say, just introducing a new, unknown character who happens to be gay.
> 
> And before anyone accuses me of being racist, or anti gay or what have you, just think about some of your favorite characters from whatever form of media you like, and consider how you would feel if they were changed in ways that were contrary to how that character has been portrayed to you up until that point.


because the same people would've whined about a gay character being shoehorned into the xmen story.
and if you're having the same people whine anyways, why not use a character who hasn't had an interesting story development in decades

as for your 'think about that for a second' holy shit are you grasping at straws here.
characters have always changed. sometimes i liked it more, sometimes i liked it less. but never was it actually a big deal. 4 years from now, a reboot will make iceman hetero again.
maybe it'll be cocksucking gambits turn then.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Subtle Demise said:


> It can be an interesting plot point if it was ever done correctly. Like the character slowly realizing they're attracted to whatever instead of whatever they thought they were before. But it's usually so abrubt and out of nowhere. Anyway, for a lot of this stuff, a character's sexuality and gender don't really have much bearing on anything. Like why even bring it up in the context if a superhero comic? It only causes issues like this



because comics have always brought up current or semicurrent (because lets be honest xmen was about 20 years too late with that) issues like that
first it was patriotism and allegiance to the nazis or the us, then it was russians and the us, then they ran out of wars and brought the nazis back and now they're moving on to social issues because those are the important things shaping todays and tomorrows world.


----------



## Viri (May 27, 2018)

emigre said:


> Can someone tell me what media has been ruined by 'SJWs?' I've heard this a lot and I've gotta be honest, I can't think of a thing which has been ruined. I've enjoyed the new Star Wars Movie though I still don't know how I feel about The Last Jedi.


I personally didn't enjoy any of the new Star Wars movies. Then again, I didn't even enjoy Return of the Jedi.


----------



## KingVamp (May 27, 2018)

"Companies are afraid to do something different". Does something different, outside of comfort zone.  "Those meddling SJWs. All of Marvel is ruined!"


----------



## HamBone41801 (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> Established. Characters.


Do you _really _want them to give iron man his nips back? Some changes are for the greater good.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 27, 2018)

Clydefrosch said:


> because comics have always brought up current or semicurrent (because lets be honest xmen was about 20 years too late with that) issues like that
> first it was patriotism and allegiance to the nazis or the us, then it was russians and the us, then they ran out of wars and brought the nazis back and now they're moving on to social issues because those are the important things shaping todays and tomorrows world.


Captain America was depicted punching Hitler in the face multiple times during the thick of WWII. Superman from the start has been about showing how immigrants make America what it is. Wonder Woman has in numerous issues comforted women who were victims of abuse and circumstance by telling them they don't need to have powers to be as strong as she is. The version of Iron Man that the MCU version is based on quite literally has his origins in discovering how corrupt the US military is and how much they are negatively affecting the world.

So yeah, I get a little irritated when people say that politics are ruining comics and movies, because it's been the foundation of them since quite literally the beginning


----------



## Deleted member 420418 (May 27, 2018)

In my opinion, we should all calm down.


----------



## kuwanger (May 27, 2018)

Drak0rex said:


> I've become increasingly disappointed and disgusted by the negative influence that social justice warriors have had on society. ...
> From comic books, and movies to video games, they've left their toxic stench on everything.



This just in:  most comic books, movies, and video games are pulp trash designed to appeal to the audience of today, even if that appeal is the [mock] outrage.  Look no further than Blaxplotation flicks, 50s Sci-Fi, most Westerns, etc.  Today it's yet another rehash of a rehash of a rehash of a comic book.  Let Superman die (for good this time) already.



Lilith Valentine said:


> This isn't about SJWs or any of that shit, you are just upset that they changed a character in a manor that now effects how you relate to that character.



Nerd!  Seriously, though, it's like hearing people argue over whether the manga, drama CD, or anime are the best adaption instead of anyone realizing the problem is you're consuming the same thing three times and arguing about it. 



the_randomizer said:


> Ah yes, SJWs, leave it to the pandering and sycophantic behaviors of them to coerce certain media to adapt to their agenda, or get called out.



If it bleeds, it leads.  Me?  I don't watch Comic Book movies.  I watched/read enough and have had my fill.  Now, point me to something that's not DC/Marvel where the objective isn't to just reuse character X/Y/Z in yet another permutation for which I could actually feel some sort of outrage that they're mutilating or spindling the character in some fashion that I have any concern left about, and we can talk.



the_randomizer said:


> That's another thing that irks me, why do fictional characters have to have a certain orientation, or appearance, or anything tied to real attributes? The characters aren't even real people. Same goes with
> characters in a video game, or novel. They're not even real, so why is it an issue?



People get upset about "naked" polygon boobs or "blood" polygons.  Without anthropomorphizing--*cough*your avatar*cough*--people have a difficult time relating.  Real people have a certain orientation (usually), appearance, etc.  I think at some level people who spend more than just a passing time thinking about characters instinctively go "Fuck, Marry, or Kill"?  There are exceptions--I don't think I've thought about those things with Mario, although I have killed him plenty of times--, but then I don't have any emotional or lasting attachment with Mario.

I guess that reduces the point to:  if you want to have a character where you have no real emotional attachment to, you can do basically anything you want with them so long as you keep them recognizable by their attributes.  So, if Nintendo had changed Mario's appearance substantially on his second/third outing, we'd all tolerate Mario as some tall blond in one game and some short Arabian in another.  Instead, we're left to only accept him as a plumber, doctor, melee fighter, painter, etc.

PS - Seriously, the one thing I would definitely agree with is that without a consistent appearance, we wouldn't know who the character is.  In the case of comic books, that's 90% the uniform.


----------



## Viri (May 27, 2018)

KingVamp said:


> All of Marvel is ruined


Well, to be fair, they did do some stuff like this. So, Marvel did deserve some criticism.



Spoiler


----------



## mituzora (May 28, 2018)

You keep saying that "SJWs"  keep ruining your pop culture, well how about all the straight white evangelists in this country ruining pro-LGBT agendas in same said media?  Tomodachi life anyone?  or what about Poison?  or how about the character Vivian,in the thousand year door which is described as a transgender male in the japanese translation, but a woman in the english translation.  Can't argue one without the other.  Just sayin'


----------



## Ritsuki (May 30, 2018)

Priestiality said:


> I literally stopped lurking and made an account just to tell you that Nick Fury has been black for nearly 17 years (August 2001). Starting with the Ultimate (Universe 1610) series of Marvel books. The artist designed his look on Samuel L. Jackson with the actors blessing. Seven years later Samuel L. Jackson debuted as the character in the post credits scene of Iron Man. The original, much smaller scale plan for the MCU was to do The Ultimate Avengers story lines, until they realized they could use the movies to basically print money. They didn't "change" anything because Ultimate Nick Fury has ALWAYS been black. When you complain about Miles Morales, you're again citing one of many series that take place in a different universe than both the main continuity and the movies. Thor is a woman. Thor is also a blonde alien. Thor is also an equine alien (Beta Ray Bill). Thor is also Groot. Thor is also ALL FOUR members of the Fantastic Four (Fantastic Thors). Thor is also a literal frog (Simon Walterson/Throg, Pet Avengers). You're outraged for the sake of being outraged. You are doing _the exact thing you accuse SJWs of doing_.
> 
> TL;DR: Find a safe space, snowflake.



Damn, you should stop lurking and post some more, we need people like you here.

I'll be honest, most of the time I don't care when they add or change ethnicity of characters or sexual orientation. My only concern is that this practice shows how narrow minded we can be. Why can't a black guy identify himself to a white hero or vice-versa? I'm hetero, black, and male, so I should identify only to male heterosexual African heroes? It's a bit sad to reduce people to a color and sexual preferences, I like to think people are a bit more complex than that...


----------



## Subtle Demise (May 30, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> Captain America was depicted punching Hitler in the face multiple times during the thick of WWII. Superman from the start has been about showing how immigrants make America what it is. Wonder Woman has in numerous issues comforted women who were victims of abuse and circumstance by telling them they don't need to have powers to be as strong as she is. The version of Iron Man that the MCU version is based on quite literally has his origins in discovering how corrupt the US military is and how much they are negatively affecting the world.
> 
> So yeah, I get a little irritated when people say that politics are ruining comics and movies, because it's been the foundation of them since quite literally the beginning


I don't know who's arguing about politics, but I get irritated when sexuality gets brought up about things that never had sexuality in them at all. Like Star Wars for instance, there is nothing there that is truly sexual. Same for Harry Potter. Granted, these things happen outside their respective universes, on social media mostly, but it still boggles the mind as to why it gets brought up at all. Makes much more sense for adult-oriented entertainment, where questions about if a certain character is struggling with discovering their sexual orientation are actually appropriate. Telling people Lando is sexually attracted to droids and other shit is just too far out there to even consider defending it at this point.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (May 30, 2018)

Subtle Demise said:


> Like Star Wars for instance, there is nothing there that is truly sexual.


I'm chortling lol there's no sexual undertones in Star Wars? First of all, something doesn't need to be inherently sexual to introduce sexuality (since one is an act while the other is an attraction), but secondly, Han/Leia/Luke in the original trilogy? Leia's "slave garb" in episode 5? Anakin and Padme in the second and third movies (as much as we try to forget that abysmal performance)? Literally anything ever implied by Lando as a character?...


----------



## Subtle Demise (May 31, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I'm chortling lol there's no sexual undertones in Star Wars? First of all, something doesn't need to be inherently sexual to introduce sexuality (since one is an act while the other is an attraction), but secondly, Han/Leia/Luke in the original trilogy? Leia's "slave garb" in episode 5? Anakin and Padme in the second and third movies (as much as we try to forget that abysmal performance)? Literally anything ever implied by Lando as a character?...


I think you know what I meant. There is a big difference between some romantic interest between characters (which, excluding the prequels, in the scope of the entire series is hardly ever the focus of the story) and something like Shameless that explores the facets of human sexuality, even getting into some transgender issues at one point. In all the movies there is a singular sexual act, and it's merely implied by Padme becoming pregnant. As for Lando's character: yes, he attempted to charm Leia a few times, but he wasn't trying to jerk off C-3PO or caresse Chewbacca's fur.


----------



## SG854 (May 31, 2018)

HamBone41801 said:


> Do you _really _want them to give iron man his nips back? Some changes are for the greater good.


I like the Western Adaptation of Megaman. Because robots with muscles was a necessary change.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



TotalInsanity4 said:


> I'm chortling lol there's no sexual undertones in Star Wars? First of all, something doesn't need to be inherently sexual to introduce sexuality (since one is an act while the other is an attraction), but secondly, Han/Leia/Luke in the original trilogy? Leia's "slave garb" in episode 5? Anakin and Padme in the second and third movies (as much as we try to forget that abysmal performance)? Literally anything ever implied by Lando as a character?...


Never heard the word chortling before. It sounds disgusting. Like eggplant. Its a word i'll probably avoid using in the future.


----------



## Old (May 31, 2018)

Ritsuki said:


> *Damn, you should stop lurking and post some more, we need people like you here.*



Truth!   Save GBAT from devolving (further) into a '4chan'-like cesspool!  Far too many gaming & pop culture communities have been being steadily poisoned/destroyed by a combination of ignorance, indoctrination (breitbart, Vladdy's trolls, alex jones, and other assorted cancerous filth), and abject *fear* -- fear of the 'scary others', fear of two guys screwing, fear of anything with a vagina, and fear of _change_. 
When disdain and toxicity have become the norm, it's always nice to see at least a _few_ forward thinkers willing to be on the *right* side of history.

Those that toss around the term 'SJW' do so out of personal insecurities, and are oftentimes easily discernible based on their cookie cutter traits:  Typically white rural males, gun-worshipping, poorly educated, angry, racist, fearful of gay men (often repression-based), angry, intimidated by women, angry, ignorant of reality, easily manipulated by propaganda that fits their narrative, and *angry*.   Avoidance is best in most cases.


----------

