Herochat

What has Aaron done?

Gree

  • ********
  • 8660
  • +43/-6
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #30 on: August 09, 2018, 05:22:57 PM »
I'm an atheist and a feminist too, but I think everything after the second or third Thor arc sucks - I don't approve of anything he's done with the character or his mythology. If anything, wouldn't atheists enjoy seeing the pagan "gods" being written prominently and powerfully? Each active pantheon waters down the notion of a true God and lets us know that we're dealing with a wide-open, non-Christian/Muslim/etc world in which powerful beings are fallible and flawed rather than untouchable in moral and power terms.

Aaron's own lazy hack-ery is at the core of his shitty writing the last handful of years. I'm sure that Marvel did put out a directive or request for more female & minority characters, but Thor has survived replacements before without being broken down into a drunk loser piece of shit who can't win fights. A good writer would have taken the company directive in stride and made it work. Aaron just isn't a good writer at this point.
I'm an atheist and a feminist too, but I think everything after the second or third Thor arc sucks - I don't approve of anything he's done with the character or his mythology. If anything, wouldn't atheists enjoy seeing the pagan "gods" being written prominently and powerfully? Each active pantheon waters down the notion of a true God and lets us know that we're dealing with a wide-open, non-Christian/Muslim/etc world in which powerful beings are fallible and flawed rather than untouchable in moral and power terms.

Aaron's own lazy hack-ery is at the core of his shitty writing the last handful of years. I'm sure that Marvel did put out a directive or request for more female & minority characters, but Thor has survived replacements before without being broken down into a drunk loser piece of shit who can't win fights. A good writer would have taken the company directive in stride and made it work. Aaron just isn't a good writer at this point.

Yeah, it's understandable to think the criticism is unfounded when you see the strange areas guys like Upper Krust fixate on, but my politics line up with Aaron's and I still feel his book is terribly written and extremely heavy-handed. 



Killed it here

Upper_Krust

  • *****
  • 1364
  • +22/-55
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #31 on: August 09, 2018, 07:30:01 PM »
Yeah, it's understandable to think the criticism is unfounded when you see the strange areas guys like Upper Krust fixate on,


I don't think its that strange to point out the Left's (culture) war on masculinity* and how it manifests in media - in particular contemporary comics.

*in addition to attractiveness, Conservatism/Republicanism, Christianity, history, nationalism and (the elephant in the room) 'whiteness'.

Quote
but my politics line up with Aaron's and I still feel his book is terribly written and extremely heavy-handed.

As unlikely as you might think, I'm actually left leaning (according to Politico; although I consider myself Conservative), an atheist and egalitarian (I draw the line at calling myself a feminist because I see that 'movement' being corrupted by the Far Left).

But whether or not anyone agrees with any of my specific points, the reality is that the criticism of Aaron's writing is coming from multiple people with different perspectives.

He is inconsistent even within the same arc, writes everyone out of character and has committed some of the most nonsensical retcons in the title's history. He reverses a major death within one issue, destroys Mjolnir cheaply and milked Jane's 'terminal' cancer like a Farmer with one cow.

Visitor-Q

  • *
  • 219
  • +15/-0
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #32 on: August 09, 2018, 09:56:02 PM »
I'm talking specifically about what he has done and is still doing on Thor.

But you can't use a single title he's written to claim that he's a man-hating feminist loon who's true motives are emasculating male role models,  that he's part of what's basicslly a conspiracy to do so, etc.--especially when almost all of his other work contradicts that.

He apparently hacked out a bad book for a few years. His deconstructuon failed and he got lazy. It happens. There's no need to justify thst opinion with outlandish conspiracy theories, man.


If he alienates the largest demographic of his audience then a creator owned book will fail.

If he alienates the largest demographic of Thor fans then the sales start to slowly decline (because comic fans are slow to drop a book out of loyalty).

Except creator-owned titles can be financially worthwhile at significantly lower numbers than Thor, especially as mini series. Aaron could easily "risk" a shot at a man hating title if he truly felt strongly about that.

When you combine that with the rest of his writing pre and post Thor, your argument about his views and motives doesn't make much sense without veering into caricature and conspiracies.


I agree with you on that, although the comics industry is almost totally controlled by the far left* and under their watchful gaze anyone who doesn't support them is considered 'Far Right' even if politically Liberal (in the classical sense).

*Hence the number of Republicans being forced out of the Industry.

Chuck Dixon was whining about that while people like BIll Willingham and Van Sciver (someone far more trollish about his views) got all the mainstream work they wanted.

There are no classical liberals being "forced" out of the conic industry simply because of their politics.

I'll concede that Trump support in the present causes huge backlashes, but the volatility of the current political climate is unique in the modern age, and Trump's policies, persona, and even a large segment of his followers are far from what was characterized as mainstream conservatism before his rise.


Did they though? What was this bad treatment?

The same bad treatment Thor and Odin were apparently victims of under Aaron, except worse and more widespread.

"The inclusion of females in stories is specifically discouraged. Women, when used in plot structure, should be secondary in importance, and should be drawn realistically, without exaggeration of feminine physical qualities."

That was official editorial policy for DC comics, as presented to Congress during Senate testimonials in the 50's.

http://www.thecomicbooks.com/dybwad.html

That's what an actual, real conspiracy to keep the other sex down in fiction looks like. The overwhelming majority of female portrayals in comics were clearly crappy along the lines sbove for most of the Silver Age, and minorities weren't too much better.

Things improved every decade afterward, but there were plenty of missteps and backslides, and it took a very long time to reach true parity.


Ask yourself this, if girls/women were as historically interested in Western Superhero Comics as boys, wouldn't Wonder Woman have been the biggest selling comic ever since it was the only female lead amongst however many comics were on the stands?

That's not the way marketing or demographic demand necessarily works, and I say that as someone who's been in sales, ops, and marketing for all of my adult life.

If superhero comics at the time had been (rightfully) perceived as hostile to women, and almost exclusively the domain of boys, that would definitely bleed into demand for even a token book like Wonder Woman (which had been defanged and watered down during the 50's anyway).

I should point out that pre-code when comic audiences were broader and more sexually diverse, Wonder Woman was an extremely popular book (especially under Marston).

The harsh truth is that Western Superhero Comics were mainly of interest to boys, just like Romance novels were (and are) mainly of interest to girls. There are multiple reasons for that (such as men being more visually led and women being more language led* )

*Hence the reason men gravitate more to Youtube whereas women gravitate more to Twitter.

At this point in their life cycle, 4 - 4.5 out of every 10 tickets for superhero movies is sold to females (movies being even more visual than comics), while females only make up 25% of comic book purchasers. You can look up the stats on CinemaScore, Box Office Mojo, 538, etc.

Obviously, there's nothing inherent to the genre itself that makes it unattractive to women; it's the culture surrounding it, and its well earned historical reputation.


But my point is that you seem to think abandoning/alienating the core market is a good thing for comics...oblivious that sales are shrinking and comic book stores seem to be going under at a rate of about 1 per week.

From a business perspective, you think comic sales are shrinking because of attempts to branch out, and not because they're being sold to the same aging fanbase that at this point is dying out?

I've got news for you: Print comics are only going to become more niche and boutique if they don't expand their audience ASAP, and they better make sure they can appeal to both sexes (because ignoring half the population is very stupid).

Now, none of this has to do with Aaron's shitty run, but your broader points needed addressing.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2018, 12:05:53 AM by Visitor-Q »

Upper_Krust

  • *****
  • 1364
  • +22/-55
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #33 on: August 10, 2018, 08:03:22 AM »
But you can't use a single title he's written to claim that he's a man-hating feminist loon who's true motives are emasculating male role models,  that he's part of what's basicslly a conspiracy to do so, etc.--especially when almost all of his other work contradicts that.

...except that he did the same thing with Dr Strange (at least from what I saw of it), so the thing with Thor wasn't one isolated case.

Quote
He apparently hacked out a bad book for a few years. His deconstructuon failed and he got lazy. It happens. There's no need to justify thst opinion with outlandish conspiracy theories, man.

If its so outlandish then why have we seen it with MULTIPLE Marvel books from MULTIPLE Marvel creators over the past few years?

I can understand someone who doesn't follow Comicsgate (and I'm going to presume you don't if I may) thinking whats happening to Thor is some isolated case, but the amount of cucked out heroes at Marvel the past few years has been ridiculous. Its a clear and definite trend; that is either some co-ordinated agenda* or simply they hired a bunch of people all with the same (far left) political viewpoint who all of a sudden just happened to want to masculate women and emasculate men.

*and from the Sana Amanat interviews we more or less know its a clear push in that direction.

Quote
Except creator-owned titles can be financially worthwhile at significantly lower numbers than Thor, especially as mini series. Aaron could easily "risk" a shot at a man hating title if he truly felt strongly about that.

He could but any observation of the Comichron sales data will show that:

1. Established characters/titles that turn political haemorrhage sales.
2. Creator owned characters/titles with an obvious political 'bent' don't do well to start with.

Turns out people don't want political/moral preaching in their entertainment.

Quote
When you combine that with the rest of his writing pre and post Thor, your argument about his views and motives doesn't make much sense without veering into caricature and conspiracies.

We can only speculate as to his motives (even though he clearly makes a habit of pointing out he's a feminist and atheist in interviews - so its clearly something that influences his work), but this wasn't just Thor and Aaron is not the only Creator at Marvel doing this sort of thing.

Quote
Chuck Dixon was whining about that while people like BIll Willingham and Van Sciver (someone far more trollish about his views) got all the mainstream work they wanted.

There are two elements to this.

Firstly, those without Company Exclusive deals and secondly those with them already under contract.

As I understand it Van Sciver was signed to DC Exclusively and either run out or ended his contract prematurely due to being hounded for 2 years by the left SIMPLY for voting Republican. So he 'got all the mainstream work he wanted' BECAUSE he was under contract.

I don't know enough about Chuck Dixon's situation but my guess is he was not signed to any Company Exclusive deal and as such had to 'shop around' for work and found that they simply did not want to hire a Republican - hence his 'whining'.

Quote
There are no classical liberals being "forced" out of the conic industry simply because of their politics.


There are, all you need to do to be tarnished as 'Far Right' today is not condemn Republican writers/artists. I've seen it mentioned on occasion that lifetime Democrats in the industry were attacked because they either came out in defense of colleagues under fire or were called out for not condemning them.

Quote
I'll concede that Trump support in the present causes huge backlashes, but the volatility of the current political climate is unique in the modern age, and Trump's policies, persona, and even a large segment of his followers are far from what was characterized as mainstream conservatism before his rise.


Agreed and the key distinction here is that its the Far Left in power within the Comics Industry and the Ostracism it practices is all one way traffic.

Quote
The same bad treatment Thor and Odin were apparently victims of under Aaron, except worse and more widespread.


So does some prejudice in the comics 60 years ago justify the prejudice today?

Quote
"The inclusion of females in stories is specifically discouraged. Women, when used in plot structure, should be secondary in importance, and should be drawn realistically, without exaggeration of feminine physical qualities."

[That was official editorial policy for DC comics, as presented to Congress during Senate testimonials in the 50's.

http://www.thecomicbooks.com/dybwad.html

This was of course back when the average comics reader was likely a 10 year old boy and DC were just pandering to their audience.

Quote
That's what an actual, real conspiracy to keep the other sex down in fiction looks like. The overwhelming majority of female portrayals in comics were clearly crappy along the lines sbove for most of the Silver Age, and minorities weren't too much better.

Things improved every decade afterward, but there were plenty of missteps and backslides, and it took a very long time to reach true parity.


So what you are saying is that if we go back to the 1950s we see some prejudice, but since the 80's (when I started reading, technically 78) we haven't actually seen any of note in 40 years.

We've had female titles and minority led titles as long as I can remember, in addition we have had women and minority characters leading teams of men.

Quote
That's not the way marketing or demographic demand necessarily works, and I say that as someone who's been in sales, ops, and marketing for all of my adult life.

If superhero comics at the time had been (rightfully) perceived as hostile to women, and almost exclusively the domain of boys, that would definitely bleed into demand for even a token book like Wonder Woman (which had been defanged and watered down during the 50's anyway).


So if women were turned off by books in the 40s, 50s etc. being hostile against them, what do you think has been happening since 2014 with books being similarly hostile to men?

Quote
I should point out that pre-code when comic audiences were broader and more sexually diverse, Wonder Woman was an extremely popular book (especially under Marston).

...and even then over 90% of the Wonder Woman audience would have been male and it probably still is today!

Quote
At this point in their life cycle, 4 - 4.5 out of every 10 tickets for superhero movies is sold to females (movies being even more visual than comics), while females only make up 25% of comic book purchasers. You can look up the stats on CinemaScore, Box Office Mojo, 538, etc.

I agree with you on the box office ticket sales although your comic book scores include Manga and are not indicative of Western Superhero Comics where at best its probably 10%...if that.

Quote
Obviously, there's nothing inherent to the genre itself that makes it unattractive to women; it's the culture surrounding it, and its well earned historical reputation.


I disagree with this. Superhero comics are just not something women are into - in the same way Men are not into Romance novels.

Now you could counter that with saying well some women like Manga, and I agree they do (in fact there was some twenty-something stunner reading Manga sitting next to me in the airport waiting lounge in Heathrow on Wednesday).

But Manga is a lot different to Superhero Comics. They don't generally appeal to the same audience (although some Manga does cross these lines but I'd wager those that do mainly appeal to men anyway: Berserk, Fist of the North Star, One Punch Man etc.)

So the answer may lie in creating more Western Comics specifically FOR women (not necessarily superhero related), which as an endeavour I applaud BUT the BIG problem Marvel have found is that there is not enough of a Market to sustain them! That's why their main strategy is to Diversify Existing Characters. In so doing they alienate current fans and the trade off is never worth it.

Quote
From a business perspective, you think comic sales are shrinking because of attempts to branch out, and not because they're being sold to the same aging fanbase that at this point is dying out?

I think you don't need to alienate men to court women - although since this is a political agenda we see that they DO need to alienate Men to court the Far Left audience.

Comic sales are dwindling for multiple reasons: Politics, Bad Writing, Price, Decompression (writing for the trade), Confusion (renumbering), (Bad) Event Overload, Variant Covers, Shock tactics (OMG They just killed Thanos!! ), Creators insulting fans etc.

Quote
I've got news for you: Print comics are only going to become more niche and boutique if they don't expand their audience ASAP,


I agree and the first thing you don't want to do is alienate your existing hardcore audience that loves you. Unfortunately that is exactly what Marvel have done purely because of politics and that's why the sales are in the toilet.

I would also say that the Comichron data of books shipped are in many cases wildly overstating the number of books being bought - especially Marvel books.

Quote
and they better make sure they can appeal to both sexes (because ignoring half the population is very stupid).

...so what is ignoring half a population that votes Republican then?  ;)

Quote
Now, none of this has to do with Aaron's shitty run, but your broader points needed addressing.

I'm always happy to branch out. Enjoying the discussion Visitor-Q.

I'd be curious to hear how you would solve the sales problem given your marketing background?

HalloweenJack

  • ********
  • 9119
  • +32/-8
  • Rowdy AF
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #34 on: August 10, 2018, 05:10:56 PM »
I would like to see the arguments here converted over to Punch-O-Meter please

NeoGreenLantern

  • ********
  • 16225
  • +91/-21
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #35 on: August 11, 2018, 08:00:05 AM »
UK, you keep saying it's happening over multiple marvel comics but you seem to focus on Jane Thor and and Captain Marvel when questioned deeper. What comics besides those to that you've read yourself do you see it happening in and can you give an example.

Upper_Krust

  • *****
  • 1364
  • +22/-55
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #36 on: August 11, 2018, 12:11:10 PM »
I would like to see the arguments here converted over to Punch-O-Meter please

 ;D

Upper_Krust

  • *****
  • 1364
  • +22/-55
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #37 on: August 11, 2018, 01:01:22 PM »
UK, you keep saying it's happening over multiple marvel comics but you seem to focus on Jane Thor and and Captain Marvel when questioned deeper.


I have a terrible short term memory so unless I am laser-focused on something (like Thor) then I'm the worst person to listing off examples.

Quote
What comics besides those to that you've read yourself do you see it happening in and can you give an example.

I suspect any individual example would seem underwhelming and could easily be hand-waved away as a minor isolated event - and in that context I'd totally agree with you. There is no single 'smoking gun' example; this is the slow Death of the Comics Industry by 1000 Cuts.

But anyone here can easily investigate whats going on vis-a-vis Comicsgate. I understand most of you DON'T want to investigate either for political reasons (you are left leaning, and that's fair enough), social reasons (Comicsgater's smeared as racist/sexist etc. put you off them; which is all nonsense as far as I have seen), time constraints (you have better things to do than go watch 20 videos) or so on.

I've probably watched around a thousand Comicsgate videos over the past 2 years. Not every video makes a scathing point about politics in Comics (some are even complimentary if a particular comic deserves it), so watching one or even a handful isn't going to convey any sense of the 'bigger picture'.

But once you have watched a decent amount you will see CLEAR trends in writing, art and the behaviour of various Industry creators and 'journalists'.

If anyone here still decides you don't want to bother watching any Comicsgate videos then at the very least I ask you to ponder the answer to these questions:

1. Why does Comicsgate exist?
2. Why is Comicsgate CONTINUALLY growing (both in subscribers and in the number of content creators making these videos)?
3. Where do they get the material to keep making videos? (ie. if this was just an isolated case, such as Aaron's Thor comic, then wouldn't every Comicsgate video be about Aaron's Thor?)

NeoGreenLantern

  • ********
  • 16225
  • +91/-21
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #38 on: August 11, 2018, 02:57:38 PM »
Quote
I suspect any individual example would seem underwhelming and could easily be hand-waved away as a minor isolated event - and in that context I'd totally agree with you. There is no single 'smoking gun' example; this is the slow Death of the Comics Industry by 1000 Cuts.

You shouldn't need a smoking gun. If this is a problem then it shouldn't be hard to illustrate the trajectory. Especially if your watching all these videos doing the leg work for you.

Quote
But anyone here can easily investigate whats going on vis-a-vis Comicsgate. I understand most of you DON'T want to investigate either for political reasons (you are left leaning, and that's fair enough), social reasons (Comicsgater's smeared as racist/sexist etc. put you off them; which is all nonsense as far as I have seen), time constraints (you have better things to do than go watch 20 videos) or so on.

Yeah and I can investigate whats going on in the US by keeping up with Salon, Huffington Post, and Jezebel but I think i'd probably end up with a very skewed opinion on things.

Quote
I've probably watched around a thousand Comicsgate videos over the past 2 years. Not every video makes a scathing point about politics in Comics (some are even complimentary if a particular comic deserves it), so watching one or even a handful isn't going to convey any sense of the 'bigger picture'.

Thats a lot of wasted time you could use just reading comics and forming your own opinion.

Quote
1. Why does Comicsgate exist?
Because people like to bitch and found a way to make money off it. The left does it too. See Anna Sarkanawhatevethefuckhernameis

Edit: I should have said people pandering to the left. The opportunist who do that shit, to the left or right, shouldn't be grouped in with the overall social/political beliefs but with each other.

Quote
2. Why is Comicsgate CONTINUALLY growing (both in subscribers and in the number of content creators making these videos)?

Because people don't like to share their toys. Comics use to be for a select few now its more mainstream.

Quote
3. Where do they get the material to keep making videos? (ie. if this was just an isolated case, such as Aaron's Thor comic, then wouldn't every Comicsgate video be about Aaron's Thor?)

Its easy to come up with material if you nitpick everything and take stuff out of context. See Spider-Man Soyface. One badly drawn picture apparently was a crime against men.


« Last Edit: August 11, 2018, 02:59:45 PM by NeoGreenLantern »

Upper_Krust

  • *****
  • 1364
  • +22/-55
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #39 on: August 11, 2018, 03:36:34 PM »
You shouldn't need a smoking gun. If this is a problem then it shouldn't be hard to illustrate the trajectory. Especially if your watching all these videos doing the leg work for you.

You specifically asked for 'an example' but we both know individual examples will simply be discarded. You started off your previous post saying that I only talk about Thor and Captain Marvel so again its like, lets discard those, what else do you have...and the same will happen each time I post something.

Quote
Yeah and I can investigate whats going on in the US by keeping up with Salon, Huffington Post, and Jezebel but I think i'd probably end up with a very skewed opinion on things.

Depends on whether they made good points or not.

Quote
Thats a lot of wasted time you could use just reading comics and forming your own opinion.

...Except I do read a decent amount of comics. I buy 10 a month plus 1-2 trades.

But naturally I'm not going to buy comics where I see a trend of Political Preaching (as in the case of Thor). So other than watching the videos where people ARE still reading THOSE comics I'm not going to keep up to date with the Political Gamesmanship within them.

Quote
Because people like to bitch and found a way to make money off it. The left does it too. See Anna Sarkanawhatevethefuckhernameis

I'd be interested to hear more of her arguments, though from what I recall she's been thoroughly debunked on every point she ever made.

Quote
Edit: I should have said people pandering to the left. The opportunist who do that shit, to the left or right, shouldn't be grouped in with the overall social/political beliefs but with each other.

I'm sure there are opportunists on both sides, but having seen so many Comicsgate videos they do more often than not have relevant issues to make and outline clear trends over and over again, whether its the emasculation of men, the masculation of women or other points.

Quote
Because people don't like to share their toys. Comics use to be for a select few now its more mainstream.

For the mainstream...unless you are Republican it seems.

Quote
Its easy to come up with material if you nitpick everything and take stuff out of context.

As I mention in my previous post this is the Death of 1000 Cuts, not a Bullet to the Head.

A handful of nitpicks I agree would be irrelevant but when its trends spanning hundreds of issues there is clearly something more at work.

Quote
See Spider-Man Soyface. One badly drawn picture apparently was a crime against men.

Obviously you never read the comic in question - there was more to it than the Soyface image.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2018, 03:38:35 PM by Upper_Krust »

XerxesTWD

  • ************
  • 6624
  • +98/-26
  • You can't park here, buddy. Earth is closed today.
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #40 on: August 11, 2018, 04:49:58 PM »
Our opinions were formed by reading the actual comics themselves. You were told what opinion to have by somebody else presenting a skewed set of evidence. You don't see a problem with that?

XerxesTWD

  • ************
  • 6624
  • +98/-26
  • You can't park here, buddy. Earth is closed today.
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #41 on: August 11, 2018, 04:54:20 PM »
And how can something "span hundreds of issues" but you can't think of more examples than Jane Thor, Carol not always being drawn by Cho or the Dodsons, and the dumbass soyboy stuff?

Visitor-Q

  • *
  • 219
  • +15/-0
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #42 on: August 11, 2018, 05:17:22 PM »
...except that he did the same thing with Dr Strange (at least from what I saw of it), so the thing with Thor wasn't one isolated case.

I've read his Strange, and "emasculating the main male hero while simultaneously elevating a Mary Sue over him " is definitely not a trope in the title.

The run did deal with Strange being depowered, but that was already a recurrent cliche for the character for decades before Aaron ever thought about writing him, and is in no way evidence of some kind of man hating conspiracy. Aaron's narration reiterated variations of "Strange is the best sorcerer" so many times you'd think Jim Shooter was writing the captions, and he repeatrdly overcame challenges despite his current limitations (which is the point of the trope, of course, lazy or not).

Now, if you want to talk about its continuity problems and lazy plotting, I'll be more than sympathetic.


If its so outlandish then why have we seen it with MULTIPLE Marvel books from MULTIPLE Marvel creators over the past few years?

Marvel publishes about 75 ongoing titles on a monthly basis. While I'm behind on Thor, I've managed to read a hell of a lot of titles without encountering this supposedly pervasive phenomenon. The only other example I can think of that comes close is Falcon/Cap, but that was clearly meant to be a temporary Bucky style story, and Steve certainly wasn't disrespected.

If your concrete examples don't amount to more than a handful of titles (or, worse, just storylines), than this theory comes off as seriously lacking credibility.

And, it certainly pales in comparison to the much more egregious, widespread, editorially enshrined sexism and racism faced during the nadir of female/minority representation.


He could but any observation of the Comichron sales data will show that:

1. Established characters/titles that turn political haemorrhage sales.
2. Creator owned characters/titles with an obvious political 'bent' don't do well to start with.

Turns out people don't want political/moral preaching in their entertainment.


Er, sometimes that's true, and sometimes it isn't. All of the ultra left wing, hotshot British writers over the last few decades made their bones in American comics injecting plenty of politics into their work right through the present (*especially* their creator owned work, but even in mainstream titles--see Ennis, Ellis, Morrison, Moore, etc.).


Firstly, those without Company Exclusive deals and secondly those with them already under contract.

As I understand it Van Sciver was signed to DC Exclusively and either run out or ended his contract prematurely due to being hounded for 2 years by the left SIMPLY for voting Republican. So he 'got all the mainstream work he wanted' BECAUSE he was under contract.

I don't know enough about Chuck Dixon's situation but my guess is he was not signed to any Company Exclusive deal and as such had to 'shop around' for work and found that they simply did not want to hire a Republican - hence his 'whining'.

That seems like a logicial explanation, except the dry up of Big Two work Dixon has been whining about for the last decade happened in 2007/2008, and there's no way in hell Van Sciver signed a *10 year* exclusive contract that sustained him until last month--he had to have had at least 1 to 2 renewals in the meantime.

What's more, even that long ago, Van Sciver was far more trollish and provocative about his politics than Dixon ever was, so if that's how Big Two editorial operated, he'd've been let go long ago.


There are, all you need to do to be tarnished as 'Far Right' today is not condemn Republican writers/artists.

Give me examples of classical liberal or centrist creators being chased out of the industry, unfairly, specifically because of their views.


Agreed and the key distinction here is that its the Far Left in power within the Comics Industry and the Ostracism it practices is all one way traffic.

There's definitely not a comfortable home for enthusiastic Trump supporters in the Big Two, but even you concede that Trumpism is an extreme movement within American politics that is only loosely related to what was the conservative norm.


So does some prejudice in the comics 60 years ago justify the prejudice today?

***

This was of course back when the average comics reader was likely a 10 year old boy and DC were just pandering to their audience.

***

So what you are saying is that if we go back to the 1950s we see some prejudice, but since the 80's (when I started reading, technically 78) we haven't actually seen any of note in 40 years.

Sorry, but characterizing an explicit editorial mandate to either exclude female characters, or write them as inferior to men, as "some prejudice" is an absurd understatement, especially when it's part of Senate testimony where absolutely none of the 100+ people on the floor raised any concerns about how cartoonishly sexist this was.

That's how screwed up things were at the time--that situation is virtually impossible to imagine now in either direction, and right-wing conspiracists would absolutely lose their minds with glee if there was such an explicitly clear-cut, extreme, and company-wide decree in the public record that was anti-man/anti-white.

Slowly, in the late 60's with the coming of young writers like Englehart, the tides startes to shift, but that was on a case by case basis depending on the writer, though every decade was better than the last (except for maybe the pornification of female characters in the early 90's, which was pretty bad). 

But, even in the 80's, Roger Stern--the platonic ideal for apolitical amd centrist A-list writers--was virtually blacklisted from Marvel because he didn't want to be forced to write the black female version of Captain Marvel as incompetent, which was completely out of character.

I repeat, he didn't just object to her being replaced as leader of the Avengers, but that they wanted him to specifically portray her badly. When he pointed out that, even by his apolitical standards, such a sudden out of character de-evolution of one of like 3 major female black characters they had would be sexist at best, and probably worse than just sexist, he was immediately fired from Avengers without a single discussion, and given no new work by almost every other editor despite his exclusive contract.

Roger f$^#^g Stern.

So, yeah, compared to stuff like that and the rest of comics history, the current complaints about comparatively minor SJW trends in comics comes off as pretty whiny and, quite frankly, weak. It doesn't really amount to too much when all's said and done.

Most of the rest of the thread is addressed by most of the above, and this is already getting really long, so I'll cut off here for now. I'll address the demographic stuff later on. 
« Last Edit: August 11, 2018, 06:56:28 PM by Visitor-Q »

Mightily Oats

  • *******
  • 6203
  • +77/-582
  • Master of Fagnetism
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #43 on: August 11, 2018, 06:52:26 PM »
Quote
If your concrete examples don't amount to more than a handful of titles (or, worse, just storylines), than this theory comes off as seriously lacking credibility.
Yeah, Upper Krust sure is a dumb sack of shit, alright

Upper_Krust

  • *****
  • 1364
  • +22/-55
    • View Profile
Re: What has Aaron done?
« Reply #44 on: August 12, 2018, 12:05:53 PM »
Our opinions were formed by reading the actual comics themselves. You were told what opinion to have by somebody else presenting a skewed set of evidence. You don't see a problem with that?

You don't quite seem to fathom how most Youtuber Comic Reviews work, the majority show you 90%+ of the comic (some actually show 100% - though I think those vids get demonitized).

Ergo the viewer ALSO gets to read those comics and can:

1. Make up their own mind on it.
2. Clearly see IF the points the reviewer is trying to make are legit or not.

So to clarify, yes YOU may make up your own mind on whatever comics you read, BUT (and I'm only guessing) its likely not enough comics to get a broader view of trends within the industry. Thus you (and others) see any evidence as nitpicks; which I agree for the most part it is - the point I am making is that its thousands of nitpicks and this is leading to a sort of Death By a Thousand Cuts for the books themselves.

I on the other hand buy a decent amount of comics AND also watch multiple such reviews (where people are specifically pointing out Industry trends), hence I'd like to think I have a broader view on such matters. But again, you don't even need to take my word on any of this (and I'm sure many of you don't) - all you need to do is ask why Comicsgate exists and is steadily growing.

(Youtube) Opinion pieces that are NOT supported by evidence just come across as fluff rants and those channels tend not to grow. But those that can outline their points (often in an entertaining way) do gain a following.