this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
1110 points (97.0% liked)

Comic Strips

12717 readers
1926 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Source: Alzwards Corner

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Because of the principle of it. If your goal is inclusivity how is completely changing the race of an established character inclusive? It's not. It's just pandering.

If you're actually trying to be inclusive then make a new character. Anything else is a pathetic attempt that just shows how disingenuous the attempt is.

[–] magnusrufus@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

This take always seems a bit myopic as it ignores the fact that it cements in the exclusivity that already existed. Not allowed to change an established character's race? Only option is to tack on a new character to the already existing cast and that certainly doesn't seem like pandering. Of course maybe the new inclusive characters should only be in new content that isn't established and has no following.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Its fascinating that you can change age, gender, class, job, good vs evil, city, power origin, family, parents, backstory, goals, romantic relationship, friends, enemies, powers, on and on and thats all fun new twists on the character to revitalize the story.

But race? Woooaaah buddy, slow down! Thats too far!

Its fuckin transparent, is what it is

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

So, yeah, theres a lot of people that dont like it for racist reasons, but what makes it stick out for the non racist reasons when the other changes might not immediately is that its the most likely category for when the intention is pandering. It CAN be done well, but it often is done at the behest of sales/pr board

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

So are all the other changes I listed. All changes are done to shake up the story to bolster new sales. Thats the whole point of changing the story at all.

Pandering is a limp dick excuse for the real reason this change is "too far" of a change when literally any and every other possible change is no big deal.

Its just racist shit hiding behind a mask of dripping wet newspaper.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Dude, one of the most egregious things a piece of media can do is bore you. Bad can be funny, angry can make you think, fun and happy dont need to be explained why we'd want to watch that, but boring just wastes our time. Media that's been overly focus grouped has the highest likelihood of being bland as shit. Like I said, YES, a LOT of the race swap hatred comes from racism, but it also acts as a signal for people who dislike boring media that it might be a focus group tested waste of our time.

edit Tldr: If its race swapping thats the problem itself? Yeah, likely racist. But race swapping is also a red flag for people that their actual problem with media, bland and focus group wastes of time, is present in said piece of media

[–] magnusrufus@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Dude, focus groups? 6 slightly different spider-mans are not boring as long as he stays white but change his race and that's the bland as shit part?

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I havent watched a spiderman I didnt like? Well, maybe the 3rd movie of the Toby Maguire run. Red flags are just flags at the end of the day and can end up being wrong. I didnt say a race swap guaranteed a bland piece of entertainment, just that it can signal one. Also, Miles Morales isnt a race swap, he's an entirely new character, and I actually prefer him to Peter Parker

[–] magnusrufus@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It can signal one just like all the other little changes they make when rehashing a character right? Those changes are just as big of red flags right? They get the same out cry right? Cause if they didn't, well that would seem like a red flag of it's own.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Bud, just because some people using it as a red flag are racist, doesnt mean ALL people who are... are. Theres no denying that racist people care more about this red flag than the others, which all arent the same degree of red flag I might add. I'm merely pointing out that theres non racist reasons to be wary of a race swap

[–] magnusrufus@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Which doesn't seem like a very helpful point. We all have figured out it's a mixed bag. The more interesting question might be what's the mix? Just because a handful of them are using race swap as a lazy filter for what they presume to be bland media we gotta handle the rest with kid gloves just in case?

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Thats what I mean, though. I cant really think of a race swap, that wasnt a fully new character, that added to a story. For me, its a good sign, so far, because if theres ever an era that could change that its right now, that its likely a soulless corporate move, that the piece of entertainment is probably going to waste my time. The mix currently isnt in favour of race swaps. That being said, if the ONLY problem I hear about the piece of media is a race swap, I'm likely still going to watch it. It usually just signals me to wait a bit, and then other more important info, like none of the characters being likable and Scooby Doo not even being IN the newest Scooby Doo, will quickly come out and let me know that it isnt worth watching

[–] magnusrufus@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

So you are one of the handful. The fine point that you are trying to make is lost when it follows up people saying that changing an established character's race is purely pandering. The idea that most readers distinguish the superhero mantle from the alter ego doesn't hold up. When they say established character they mean Spider-Man. You might not but again you are the tiny handful.

So if changing race is a lazy inconsequential element why is it an issue? Why not all the other lazy inconsequential changes?

Why is inclusivity the inevitable obvious outcome of focus groups?

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I'd argue that there are more like me than you think, we're just hidden by how loud the racists are (And others who arent as stupid as me as to get painted like one to argue about a relatively minor point). I guess I should reiterate that race changing in itself isnt a problem, its moreso that in its current most often usecase its signals that bad writing will follow. I'm making great care to point out entirely new characters because THERE where its a moniker that a new character adopts, there is plenty of precedent that it results in a new and interesting spin. But race swaps without character changes havent done so and have usually been done to hide bland writing

[–] magnusrufus@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I'm still not sold that race swapping is any real indicator of bad writing. I think there are fewer like you than there are those who are coming from a racist motivation, whether they realize it or not. You taking care to make the distinction of new characters as you define them, and it's a good take on what constitutes a new character, doesn't change what most people mean. If you're going to use such similar language to convey your take it's kind of on you to make the distinction clear whenever you bring it up.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think we've both explained our points and theres not much further to say, but I do want to point out that Miles Morales is very clearly NOT Peter Parker, Its not a thin line I'm arguing on on that point. They are both Spider Man, but they are different characters. That being said, I think we've reached the point where we understand each other but disagree, so I dont have much further to say if you dont as well.

[–] magnusrufus@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I dunno, I didn't get much that was tangible about how race swap was a sign of bad writing. While I agree that Miles and Peter are different a great many don't agree and insist that race swapping spider-man was lazy and pandering.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Its less so the concept, and moreso the consistent execution. Kind of like theoretically a live action version of anime wasnt impossible to do in a good way, but until recently, all attempts to do so in the past were hilariously bad. And the fact that you cant seperate the racist talking points from the non racist ones is why I see a race swap without just creating a new character as a red flag. Studios have noticed if the shoehorn a social issue in that they can hide their bad writing behind the racist and sexists who'll get angry just because a person of colour or a woman took the main role.

[–] magnusrufus@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That kinda strikes me as backfilling a motive for the studios to fit a preferred view rather than being an actual insight. But supposing that's true it seems like it supports the point that all the others changes don't get that kind of response. The other changes aren't considered pointless or lazy or pandering but the ones that do trigger the bigots, those do fall into that category it seems.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

1: Just because I bring up one thing thats a red flag for lazy writing does not mean that there exist no other red flags for lazy writing

And 2: I'm pretty sure I've already brought it up, but the difference between this example and the other ones you brought up is the track record. If we are talking about just changing the characters race, I cant think of a single piece of media that did so in a way that added anything to the story. Its a red flag because all the previous times it happened it was bad.

I really feel like I'm at the point where I'm repeating myself though so I appreciate that this conversation has mostly felt in good faith, and I wish you a good rest of your day. Thank you for your time.

[–] magnusrufus@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

I think examples of the times that a race swap was the only thing that changed would probably have helped. I agree that without that you are kind of repeating yourself.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Oh, so now if he is black its boring for you?

You gonna keep telling on yourself?

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I like Miles Morales MORE than Peter Parker. You gonna keep projecting?

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

"I cant be racist for calling black retellings boring! My favorite fake superhero is black!"

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Lmao, enjoy the block, your ~~opinions~~ projections have proven not worth the time to read

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 0 points 9 months ago

You do not need my consent to block me, there, racist

[–] daltotron@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

I mean I think the problem here is the like, "changing the race of an established character", right. What established character? Black superman, or whatever else, isn't superman, he's black superman. That's it, basically, that's my justification. It's not the same character text to text, even. Is it the same bilbo in every lord of the rings book? Is it the same bilbo sentence to sentence? It's not like girlboss velma and dumb rich white guy fred are the same velma and fred, they just share the same symbols. If you actually dissect the characters and compared them, then you'd find very little in common. The show doesn't even have scooby fucking doo, it's not even called "scooby doo", it's, in my mind, and I think it should be in everyone else's mind, it is tangentially related to scooby doo, at best, you know? I see it as a standalone work, and in that sense it's just kind of a mediocre show that I don't think anyone should really care about, rather than this kind of abomination on the face of scooby-doodom and this thing that we need to all be frothing about because scooby-doo has been done so dirty.

SO, all of that can be true, right, they just share symbols. But this is also true of race as a whole, the symbol of race, here, being like, whether or not somebody is black or white or asian or whatever. If you're race-swapping superman, you know, I think it's kind of more in line with the message of superman, if he's the same guy, regardless of whatever race you decide to cast him as, you know? If you don't change the backstory, if you do change the backstory, whatever, he sort of exists beyond it, as a kind of human ideal for everyone to live up to. For that to be true, superman has to be possible if you put him in basically any circumstance. So, even though superman himself is the same, have we "made a new character", even though we've changed his race, maybe changed his background, and then, in line with that, we've maybe flavored him different in terms of like, say, what music or food he likes? I dunno if we really have or we haven't. Made a new character, I mean. The character has changed, but the core remains the same, the label is the same, the symbols are the same. That's kind of the question I'm asking, where do you draw the line as to what's a "new" character, and what's not? You could just as easily draw it to be where any change in surface level characteristics, from eye color, to hair color, to skin color, results in a "new" character, even if the character, of that character, remains the same. Red shirt shaggy vs green shirt shaggy.

So I dunno, really, like, I've never got this critique of like oh no we're not being inclusive in the right way because we decided to make velma indian, instead of deciding to call the series Shmelma or whatever. What if they did that, what if her name was Shmelma? That's an extremely surface level difference between the two, but now they have a separate set of labels, so are they separate characters now, or what? I think if I'm going to critique the show, it's not really going to be on the basis of indian people not having their own shmelma, or even just their own separate scooby-doo, you know. I'm not going to condemn all indian people to forever only engaging with goobert and the ghost chasers, or whatever. If I'm going to critique the show, I'm gonna critique the show because the show itself is mediocre to bad, and has mediocre to bad writing, and cost too much money, and maybe I will critique it for, for some reason, the most popular multiracial iteration of scooby-doo has to also be the one that has the worst writing, where everyone can easily punch at it for that, and producers can also maybe try to use that as a smokescreen for putting out a mediocre show.

I dunno why I'm even talking about this shit, scooby-doo is bogus gen X bullshit. I'd rather watch like, the muppets. Nobody's ever gonna really complain about kermit being race-swapped, I'll tell you that.