#nazi punching discourse

[isaacsapphire]

After half a decade of "Nazi Punching Discourse" in the US and internationally and a war that was justified by the invader as being "anti Nazi", it needs to be explicitly stated;

Calling any person Nazi is an implicit threat of physical violence.

Labeling a belief or idea Nazi is an implicit argumentum ad baculum.

[shoujoboy-restart]

Is interesting how bent and whiny right wingers and Enlightened Centrists™ get when anyone with common sense and basic instinct of self preservation says "an ideology that wants to eradicate people from certain ethnicities and destroy opposition doesn't deserve public protection, civility and sympathy" and their only response is incessant demands for people need to live by gospel of an specific paragraph of an old ass piece of paper that allows slavery to this day in a random country of the world.

Weird. Bizarre. Irrational even.

[thedreadvampy]

it's been a bleak time, we can all agree, we must find joy where we can. and I simply cannot and will not imagine what it's like to not find it funny when a bunch of Israelis are so used to being coddled about committing genocide that they feel empowered to boast about it publicly, and are sooooo shocked to get the shit kicked out of them.

like awwww did baby get addicted to never seeing any consequences for their vile racist bullshit? did a wickle baby need to go crying to mummy because the nasty foreigners didn't like when they yelled 'WE THINK IT'S FUNNY THAT WE KILLED BABIES! RAPE IS GOOD AND COOL! WE'RE DOING GENOCIDE LOL'? get booted bitch lmao.

[spearxwind]

I believe you have an old image of the old Adri design with "this machine kills facists" or was that the new design? Regardless I love it and wanted to show some friends who also love your art, but can't find it, could you possibly link or repost it?

Wow that's a bit of an oldie, def the older design! But I DID draw that

Funniest thing is he wasnt a machine yet. And now he is. Very topical

[isaacsapphire]

Certainly not everyone going off about how awesome the Ancient Greeks, etc were is not a fascist or right-of-center, but you aren't providing any evidence why simply thinking the Ancient Greeks etc were awesome is, itself, evidence of fascism.

I also literally just said that I've seen a Twitter thread from that particular statue guy going on about how awesome various NON European, non White ancient architecture was, which seems like something an actual fascist would not say.

You're doing the exact thing my jaded self suspects is the actual point here; to equate thinking the Ancient Greeks etc with fascism... And we know what we're supposed to do with fascists.

Perhaps minimalist design is so prevalent because we no longer have anything to say.

The Cultural Tutor

[irradiate-space]

Hot take: Current discourse around who's justified in attacking whom in the Middle East feels like we're getting another round of the "punching up" and "punch Nazis" discourse. Lots of emotion, very few principles, lots of rules that don't generalize, and basically the only people who come out of it without dirtying themselves are the pacifists.

[elspethdixon]

It’s sincerely depressing to see how many people in fandom think murdering civilian hostages is somehow justifiable if people they perceive as the underdogs are doing it.

[mordcore]

[isaacsapphire]

No, this sounds about right.

Also like how the people who were going on about"punch a Nazi" a few years back are joining arms with Nazis while protesting Israel existing today, I expect that to woodchipper fans will be allies to open pedos any time now because the point is to jerk off about the violence you'd totally do trust me bro I would violence those monsters so hard if they were here right now.

"pedos get the woodchipper" is just "punch a nazi" for the right

prove me wrong

[insert-content]

a summar(ule)y of 196 culture

since the tumblr veterans have been kind enough to introduce us newbies to their site and culture, i think it is only fair that we explain the culture of our glorious former home to any tumblr users who might be interested in the #196 tag. keep in mind, all these things are based on my perspective of the situation.

first of all, some general information (that you might’ve already heard):

196 (r/196 on reddit) was a subreddit with only one (official) rule; "post before you leave." it was mainly a meme/shitposting sub, but it cultivated a large queer and left-leaning community. in protest of the recent api chances in reddit, 196 has shut down indefinitely until reddit reverts these changes.

now for some culture/references that you might come across

spronkus kronkus:

spronkus is this yellow, rabbit-like creature.

they were the mascot of our subreddit. their appearance can vary from images to image, but as far as i’m aware, their full outfit consists of a bandanna in the colours of the trans flag around their neck, a gun labelled as such (other wise you obviously wouldn’t know what you’re looking at), and an axe also coloured like the trans flag.

r/place:

this is a rare event on reddit where the entire website gets a huge white canvas and can start creating pixel art on it. 196 participated by collaboratively creating our mascot, spronkus with "196!" written next to them.

this version of the pixel art was recreated by me as i couldn't find a nice image of it. there were some changes between the first version and the end result, so this might not be exactly how it looked in the end

post titles/"rule":

reddit forces it's users to title every post they make. as most of the posts on 196 spoke for themselves, many user instead titled their posts "rule", to indicate that they followed the subreddit's only rule. some people also tried to make puns with the word or tried to include it in words that shared some letters (example: wor(ule)d).

anarcho-stripperism:

as the amount of cropped porn jokingly posted to the subreddit increased, the moderators decided that porn would be banned from the sub, with one exception: anarcho-stripperism. she made food fucking videos, in which she jokingly tested the fuckability of different food items (fruits, pasta, etc.)

bigotry showcase:

bigotry showcase was a post flair (basically the reddit equivalent of tags) on the subreddit and was later restricted to only be used on saturdays. under this flair people posted instances of different forms of bigotry to make fun it.

eating babies/hungryposting:

at some point, the subreddit started to pretend to like eating babies, which started a variety of memes regarding the subject. even a post flair called "hungrypost" was added because of this

goblinhog:

goblinhog is the most prominent and well-known member of the 196 moderation team. besides this, on 196 he was mostly known for changing people’s flair if you enjoyed him enough about it.

flairs:

flairs are little tags that are displayed under your name in posts or comments, they are also subreddit specific. most subreddits give their users a palette of preset flairs and the option to make your own custom flair. however, in 196 you only had the option to customize your flair during special events. if you wanted to customize your flair outside of those events (which was basically the entire time), you had to ask a mod to do it for you.

punching nazis:

from time to time, the same gif of a person with a nazi armband getting punched in the face, and promptly falling to the ground, was reposted to the subreddit. this became a sort of tradition.

discourse/drama

wasp discourse:

the wasp discourse was a one to two weeks long heated discussion that generally divided the subreddit into two factions. one side said that they were justified in killing wasps if they were attacked by them, while the other claimed that since wasps are just animals, they aren't aware of what they're doing in the same way humans are, and therefore should be spared.

drama about the british:

there was a time when jokes along the lines of "ew, british" became pretty frequent on the subreddit. as a response, some user claimed that this was akin to racism and tried to get others to stop with the jokes. a debate over whether or not it was important or necessary to stop followed afterwards.

pillar discourse:

this was a debate over which type of pillar should be considered the best (ionic; doric; corinthian). i have seen the question "which pillar is the best?" being used as a sort of greeting between 196 refugees on here.

related subreddits

195:

195 was the predecessor to 196, and also was a social experiment with the same premise as 196 (one rule, post before you leave). as the creators of 195 ended the experiment, the community wanted something with the same vibe to continue posting, and thus 196 was born.

197:

197 is another part of the 196 ecosystem and is commonly understood to be the more politically right-leaning and bigoted as 196, as some people who were banned from 196 continued posting there. besides that, the subreddits were essentially the same in terms of how they functioned.

19684:

this subreddit adds a second rule which banned all mentions of sex (that’s why it’s name is a pun on 1984). some people took this as banning all discussion of sexuality, which resulted in a community that was slightly less accepting of queer people. it is currently still up and running as the 196 moderation team wants a way to stay in contact with the community.

amendments to the posts:

u/femboy_expert:

another well-known 196 user. as the name suggests they're an expert on the subject of femboys, with their flair on 196 reading "phd in feminine boys". as the subreddit was somewhat obsessed with femboys, it's no wonder that they became popular.

u/shitcum_backup:

this was the main account of a pretty popular shitposter on the subreddit. although i didn't see them as much in the last few months, i remember them sometimes having a unique speaking pattern, in which they referred to themself in the third person.

u/monko74:

this user commented "Every day I thank god for not making me a r/196 celebrity," which led to many users of the subreddit treating them like a micro celebrity. there are even a few subreddits solely dedicated to u/monko74.

691:

a sister subreddit that inverts the rule of 196, here you would be (temporarily) banned for posting. some time ago the members of this sub initiated a rebellion/revolution against the bot who performed all the bans (roomba).

u/Smart_Calendar1874:

this wasn’t necessarily part of the subreddit, but it was a pretty popular meme. and since it’s getting posted on here again, and i know enough about it, i’ll add it to the post. this user made a post to r/AskReddit titled "How would you get a small cylinder (5.1in length, ~4.5in girth) unstuck from a mini M&Ms tube filled with butter and microwaved mashed banana? [sic]" it was pretty clear that they were referring to their penis, yet they continued to claim "it’s a cylinder," in the comment section. this lead to comments like "it is imperative that the cylinder […] remains unharmed," in response to people’s advice of cutting the m&m tube.

it's going to be very interesting to see which aspects of 196 culture are going to survive the tumblr migration, and which aspects won't be applicable on this site.

i'm obviously not the ultimate scholar on 196 lore. if i’ve missed or left out anything, or said something wrong, please comment it.

[etz-ashashiyot]

You know how sometimes arguing a point is losing?

Like if you engage the argument at all you are inherently putting up for debate things that should never be up for debate and the argument itself is degrading?

You see this with interpersonal gaslighting:

A gaslighter doesn’t simply need to be right. They also need for you to believe that they are right. In stage one, you know that they’re being ridiculous, but you argue anyways. You argue for hours, without resolution. You argue over things that shouldn’t be up for debate  – your feelings, your opinions, your experience of the world. You argue because you need to be right, you need to be understood, or you need to get their approval. In stage one, you still believe yourself, but you also unwittingly put that belief up for debate. In stage two, you consider your gaslighter’s point of view first and try desperately to get them to see your point of view as well. You continue to engage because you’re afraid of what their perspective of you says about you. Winning the argument now has one objective :  proving that you’re still good, kind, and worthwhile. In stage three, when you’re hurt, you first ask, “What’s wrong with me?” You consider their point of view as normal. You start to lose your ability to make your own judgements. You become consumed with understanding them and seeing their perspective. You live with and obsess over every criticism, trying to solve it.

[Source]

But you also see this on a broader societal level, with people asking unfathomably awful questions about minority groups, such as:

[Source]

It should go without saying, but no group of people should be forced to explain that yes, they really are real people, dickheads. The question doesn't deserve an answer; it deserves at best a disgusted eyeroll + "Are you a Nazi?" and at worst a punch to the face.

There is also the related phenomenon of the "when did you stop beating your wife?" type questions. The question is framed as a yes or no question, but the real answer for the innocent is: "I've never beaten my wife and never would." But even that answer still dignifies the question with a real response and puts the idea in the mind of the listener that hey maybe that's a real possibility and this guy is lying because of course he wouldn't just admit that. Now I don't know what to believe, but I'm skeptical.

Even if he answers, doubt has been cast on his character and many people (maybe even most people) neither have the attention span to listen to his full counter argument and supporting evidence nor are invested enough in strangers' lives to take the time to dig for facts on their own. Critically, it comes from a good impulse that shouldn't be repressed or taken too far in the opposite direction; namely, that we want to believe survivors and make it socially acceptable to speak out about abuse.

This leaves us with the uncomfortable reality that balancing believing survivors and whistle-blowers against not automatically believing allegations that very well may be false and/or in bad faith is a very tricky balancing act indeed. Because of this, people tend to struggle with taking survivors seriously and with presuming innocence until guilt has actually been proven, both. And as for the latter, this is at least partially due to the same psychological factors underlying the Don't Think of an Elephant problem.

Why am I discussing this?

See the thing is that these types of discourse have all been used, heavily, against the Jewish community, especially since Oct 7th, but really going back hundreds of years.

If you want to be our ally, you need to be on guard for how people use this rhetoric to accuse Jews of absolutely batshit cookoo bananas allegations (like being lizard people or having horns, or secretly running the world, or killing Christian babies to use their blood in our matzah, etc. etc.) and get away with it. Now obviously if so many people weren't already racist towards Jews as a people and had a vested interest in maintaining their supercessionist cultural worldview from Christianity and Islam, it would be a lot harder for this to work. Alas, the past 2000 years has created a bit of a snowballing effect.

This culminates in the effect described so well by Sartre:

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

— Jean-Paul Sartre

Right now, Jews are facing extreme levels of these types of rhetorical abuse, and are receiving very little help in the way of pushback.

We have to stop trying to explain ourselves and start just naming these tactics instead.

[shoujoboy-restart]

is so bizarre how right wingers and conservatives complain they are called and compared to nazis and fascists, and before ua normal people can agree it's a unnecessary and unproductive slander towards them in most of the times, you blink and they already shaved their head, posted swastikas and said their own movement is filled with nazis and their ideology is compatible with them.

[womendeservehumanity]

Posting these memes because left leaning political twitter is having the most mind numbing discourse on whether rapists deserve to die (yes) and can they be rehabilitated (no). And leftists are treating rapists as some type of persecuted class who need their defense when if you look at the stats most rapists are free. They were never even reported for their crimes. They get lenient sentences and are able to be reintegrated into society. And that’s if they’re sentenced at all. You’d think they’re being experimented on and being sent to the gulag the way any person gets dogpiled onto for saying something bad should happen to rapists right now.

Like why are using this dumb fucking meme because someone made a little jokey joke that rapists should get their dicks cut off? Why does that bother you so much when globally, rape culture DOMINATES? Rapists are enabled and protected. But a tweet showing them vitriol is where you draw the line? Also this person never stated their stance on rehabilitation to begin with. You, again, just got mad because someone said something bad should happen to rapists. But what a shocker that the violent crime that mainly targets women and has been used historically to control and harm them is the hill mainly male leftists wanna die on. They’re not even willing to acknowledge the misogynistic element in most rapes and how those rapists hate women and that largely plays a role in why they rape. The desire to control and hurt a woman. They’ll be like guillotine landlords. Punch a nazi/white supremacist in the face. But saying any harm should be done to rapists is where they draw the line and I’m not supposed to find that insane? 

[smhalltheurlsaretaken]

if you're wondering why I kind of abandoned this blog, there's several reasons (fandom just doesn't feel fun anymore, I'm trying to cut back on screen time, I've been feeling like my faith is in contradiction to what I see/read/interact with on here is for years and years now) but the final straw has been what I see on my dash every day about Israel/Palestine.

I keep seeing people I used to interact with and used to like now peddling conspiracy theories, debunked claims, inflammatory headlines, and even bloodthirsty rhetoric with tens of thousands of notes (when corrections of those posts get ~500 notes at best), and reacting to nuanced conversations like they're calls for hatred, all while turning a blind eye to the very literal vicious hatred or sheer ignorance in many of those big posts. The level of black-and-white thinking is so strong that we are wayyyy past 'us-vs-them,' we're in the kind of discourse where even 'know thy enemy' (being interested in understanding the opposing arguments even just so you can dismantle them) is considered hatred - people can't be bothered to know what they're arguing for or against, nothing short of plugging your ears and screaming for the death of the Bad People is enough. This is a wave of just about the most hypocritical, callous and uninformed 'activism' this website has ever been guilty of and it's too much. I'm done with this.

And yes, this is about antisemitism. You can all shout 'not antisemitic, just anti-zionist' all day long but you have done jack shit to prove you don't hate Jews beside chanting 'punch a nazi' in the same breath you use KKK slurs and cheer for groups that have 'curse the Jews' in their slogan. I trust none of you anymore.

[queerpyracy]

this is punching nazis discourse all over again except you guys can't even handle the thought of just being mean online to stop them i honestly cannot handle this. i don't need to claim the moral high ground in stopping fascists i already have it by virtue of not being a fucking fascist

[ultfreakme]

"It'd make more sense if he was a villain" : Jay Nakamura, The Yellow Peril and Orientalism in the Comics Community

That quote above is speculating the potential of Jay Nakamura as a villain, specifically in the context of arguing for the incompatibility of Jon and Jay as a romantic couple due to the ideological differences that may arise from being a villain. Such speculations about fictional characters aren't uncommon and have been demonstrated in the canon of comics itself with stories like Injustice. But these statements should be regarded with caution, and with consideration for the context of a character.

This quote was said in service of comparing Jay Nakamura and Ash, a character introduced in Lazarus Planet, and to emphasize his potential as a love interest despite him being a villain.

There’s more but the general consensus seemed to be, that there was excitement in the potential for romantic tension between Jon and Ash due to Ash’s villainy, but the same was the reason for separating Jon and Jay. Many others stated Jay had to have manipulated Jon to an extent, which ‘corrupts’ Jon. This argument is not a concern when it comes to Ash although textually, Ash is the ‘homme fatale’ as defined by C.S.Pacat and is thus intentionally manipulating Jon throughout his appearance by looking down on his attitude as a hero, whereas there is no evidence of manipulation between Jon and Jay.

Why would one see a potential for "villainy" in certain characters? Is it story-based? Is it a personal preference for certain themes? Is it for entertainment? Or perhaps, something much deeper than all of this that you may not even be aware of?

What is the difference between Jay and Ash, and why does the villainy of one elicit enthusiasm and the perceived villainy of the other bring out irritation? While there is audience reception, writing quality, and subjective opinion which readers are free to express, these large-scale reactions warrant examination. Jon and Jay’s relationship had caused waves in international news. The story of Superman is inherently political and that of ‘Superman: Son of Kal-El’, ties itself back to these roots. Thus, the immediate aversion to Jay must be addressed and examined, since his character and his relationship with Superman can impact queer representation in media by virtue of carrying the brand of Superman.

DC Comics and The Depiction of Asian Culture

With characters such as Black Lightning, Steel, and New Super-Man getting new runs, and newer characters such as Xanthe Zhou and Cameron Kim(City Boy) being introduced, recent years have seen a push in diversifying the cast of superheroes. But American Comics as a medium have always idealized the image of the White Man and has been a means to define American Values, thereby alienating people of color(POC). Comics often reflected the anxieties of the Western World, with Captain America from Marvel Comics punching Nazis, and Superman fighting the Ku Klux Klan. While it has pushed for the message of freedom, community and rebellion with an emphasis on righteousness, the reflected anxieties are confined to those of the White Man.

World War 2 had given rise to anti-Chinese and Japanese propaganda, with American-Asian individuals being suspected for treason. Japanese immigrants in the 40s were accused of being spies for Japan. A quote from the article, ‘The "Yellow Peril" Mystique: Origins and Vicissitudes of a Racist Discourse’ states:

“Anyone who accepts an invitation to visit China or to entertain visitors to America from China are to be regarded either as dupes, as potential victims of cleverly trained agents of the People's Republic of China, who, during the course of an ordinary conversation, are able to extract secrets from them, or as spies working for a foreign government.”

Tensions from World War 2 and the perception of China as a Communist hellscape threatening American Capitalistic freedoms has led to such accusations. The idea of those of “the Orient” but specifically East Asians being experts in espionage to gather data, and leak it to the Chinese or Japanese governments has transferred over into fiction. 

Colonialism, and the racial hierarchies proposed by evolutionary theories of the nineteenth century placed the ambiguously Eastward individuals as subservient to the White Man. The concept of evolution had been co-opted by colonizers, upper class Western political circles, to expand upon eugenics to justify that POC fell into a hierarchy, where the white people were always on top. Asian and specifically East Asian people were defined by inferiority and a lack of advancement, but also as a marked threat with their supposed shrewdness as we’ve established.

The most prominent Asian characters in DC have been Ra’s Al Ghul, Talia Al Ghul, Lady Shiva, Cheshire, and Katana. They have long histories within the comics and are deeply influential, but the characters listed are typically in antagonistic roles, primarily using espionage-based techniques, expertise in weaponry, and membership among shadowed organizations to execute their goals. For the sake of brevity, we’ll be examining the portrayal of the Al Ghuls with a focus on Talia Al Ghul. Talia, much like Jay, is introduced first as a love interest and thus relevant for further discussion on the perception of Jay.

The Threat of The Lover from The Orient

The Al Ghuls originate from an undefined part of the Arab world. Talia is Arab and Chinese, but she is not allowed to be fluid, she is not allowed both. Depending on the creative team’s intentions, she is portrayed both as a temptress and a romantic interest, oscillating between these identities depending on her loyalty to her father and her love for Batman. When she is meant to be a victim of her father, imposing stereotypical morals assigned to the Arab world through orientalism, she wears ‘harem’ robes, she is darker, she is distinctly Arab. When she is a sly temptress, she wears a qipao or a kimono, leaning into Asian stereotypes. 

While Orientalism portrays Asian women as sexual beings, who are seen as particularly dangerous because of their influence on the libidos of White Men, it veers towards a lack of desirability in Asian men. The sexual interest of Asian men is portrayed as inherently predatory of white women, a danger from which white women must be rescued.

What would this mean, then, for an Asian Queer Man, who is a romantic interest of Superman?

Jay Nakamura and “The Pink Hair Connundrum”

Talia’s former fluidity in her design and clothing is contrasted starkly by the clear definition of Jay’s design. Much like Lois Lane, whose assigned color is purple, Jay has been assigned a specific set of colors to make him identifiable; these being pink, orange, greens and teals.

Many of the recently introduced Asian characters have strong silhouettes and stylization. Kong Kenan is primarily red with accents of yellow and black, Xanthe Zhou’s is blue and yellow, City Boy is Black and Red. Identifiable and concretized designs are necessary to the superhero genre, where the design is essential towards cementing identity. This is in direct contrast to long-term portrayals of Talia, whose skin tone, color scheme and styling varied with great frequency. 

Jay’s design competes in vibrance with the primary colors of the Superman suit. This raises issues because the Asian Love interest is visually not subservient to the White Hero. The muted colors expected of any romantic interest is not present here, which immediately creates tension.

His design adheres to typical fashion choices in queer culture. The stereotype of a ‘pronoun haver with dyed’ hair has run rampant in recent years. While queerphobic individuals denigrate these features as something lesser, the queer community gravitates towards alternative design choices which turn eyes for a purpose. The LGBTQIA+ community uses alternate clothing, colors, and fashion pieces to mark themselves and their identity within the community, mainly to signal to other LGBTQIA+ individuals of their presence (Flags and Fashion: Expressions of Solidarity through Lesbian Clothing, Eleanor Medhurst). It is a form of solidarity.

Heteronormativity is defined by a set of social rules imposed on varying aspects of culture, from language to clothes, and the replication of these enforces what is ‘normal’. The fashion choices of the LGBTQIA+ community defy these rules despite efforts by these imposed social norms to police them. The heteronormative majority see it as their duty to correct these transgressions in hair color, clothing, speech, etc.

But, following these normative rules means the marginalized individual would have to put in extra labour to conform– to not be judged and refused. The queer person is expected to do this additional labour, and it falls to the marginalized people to negotiate within themselves the extent of compromise they must make for their own identity to fit into their environment (A gay reflection on microaggressions, symbolic normativities, and pink hair Aleksi Soini). The normative people are never challenged.

It is up to the LGBTQIA+ individual to prove themselves as ‘normal’. 

Solini’s article recounts a moment where a coworker of his stated, “‘You're okay; you're not one of those over-the-top faggots with bleached hair”. Heteronormativity functions in binaries. You are male or female. Similarly, you are straight or gay. There is of course, in the name of inclusion, a “normal” gay, and an “abnormal” gay.

Jay Nakamura would be considered the latter, because his character design is a representation of someone who takes no efforts to conform to heteronormativity. 

In the context of Superman: Son of Kal-El, he is a reporter who wants attention so that he may redirect it to protect refugees. He purposefully stands out with his chosen orange and green hoodies. His ability to stand out is a direct attack against the narrative created by the colonizer of his country, Henry Bendix.

Henry Bendix kidnapped Jay and his mother, Sara, to silence them. Sara was the former president of Gamorra, and ran against Henry Bendix in the previous elections. Bendix abducts these two in an effort to silence the call for the freedom of Gamorra. Jay is one among hundreds who are experimented on, essentially enslaved under Bendix’s command— a clear effort to erase their identities. It is implied his hair turned pink due to the experiments, since he has black hair in an alternate universe where Bendix did not colonize Gamorra.

His hair is a symbol of resistance within the story itself, since he gained it after surviving long periods of experimentation. On a metatextual level as a queer character, he represents the LGBTQIA+ tendency to transgress heternormativity. Subversion is an act of resistance. 

The aesthetic of “Superman and Lois Lane” appeals to conservative values, and this is often used to push the image of a perfect American Nuclear Family, leaning towards the stereotypes of yesteryears where ‘traditional values’ reigned supreme. Superman 2016 leans into this, the setting is an idyllic countryside village known as Hamilton. Lois Lane, defined as a career woman and intrepid journalist is confined to the home, and Clark is seen primarily around the farm. They are both removed from their profession meant to symbolize the protection and distribution of truth. Their clothing abides by these as well. Lois wears athleisure, tight tops and leggings, found in muted pinks and purples, as opposed to her rumpled office formals. Clark is often seen in flannel tops, jeans, and jackets, primarily in reds and muted blues and browns. Visually, they are meant to conform to the binary established by heteronormativity. The primary colors of the Superman suit are shown in tandem with the American Flag. There is space made for color, but only as long as it conforms.

Jon and Jay’s story is firmly set in the city of Metropolis and constantly circles the idea of truth, journalistic integrity, and propaganda. His unnatural hair and bright clothing stand in stark contrast to Superman 2016, disrupting the aesthetic rules of heteronormativity in the fabric of the Superman story.

The clear definition of his color story, as an Asian man, a queer man, and a love interest, creates tension within the world of comics.

Espionage and Distrust of Asian Characters.

As established previously, the World Wars, colonialism and the eugenicist taken on evolution embraced by the Western world in the 19th century led to a deep suspicion of anyone of East Asian descent. 

The belief in the shrewdness of Asian characters is reflected in the characterization of those like Talia. Talia is portrayed as having deeper meaning in all her actions. She leaks information to the heroes in ‘Tower of Babel’. In her time as the CEO of LexCorp, she sold all the assets to Bruce Wayne though she was portrayed as a villain. Her character is frequently presented as untrustworthy, and readers are made to question her every move. This is further reinforced by these double-crosses and information sharing. Similarly, Cheshire and Catman’s relationship in Secret Six is defined by deep distrust, Cheshire toys with Catman by hiding information and shifting loyalties depending on what is advantageous to her. Simone often comments on her sexual appeal being dangerous, and the ways in which she uses a character’s unwillingness to trust her to further intrigue and disseminate information.

As an Asian journalist, a refugee, and a recently-introduced love interest, Jay is in a position which raises anxieties in the common American comic reader who has been trained to distrust the idea of information in the hands of such an individual. The established tension arising from his character design motivates readers to uphold such suspicion.

The text of the story makes it explicit that he admires Lois Lane, and his position as the journalist love interest of Superman calls for parallels with Lois. His monicker, The Truth, is directly derived from the Superman slogan, ‘Truth, Justice, and a Better Tomorrow’. Yet, there is fear that he is manipulating Jon.

The fight between the Axis and Allied powers led to a deep mistrust from the American against Japanese immigrants and American-Japanese citizens. General John L. DeWitt’s statement regarding the Japanese immigrant population summarizes the sentiments in this time:

Sinophobia continued to flourish, and was worsened with the accusation and trial of Wen Ho Lee, a naturalized American Citizen from Taiwan, who confessed to reporting classified information regarding nuclear weapons in America to Chinese scientists while visiting Beijing. The truth of this accusation remains contested, but the confession and sentencing led to the intensification of distrust in Chinese people.

The country of Gamorra is located in Asia, and is located south of Japan. It was created initially by Korean writers Brandon Choi and Jim Lee. Gamorra was colonized by those of Japanese descent, and it can be surmised it is an allegory for the colonization of Korea by the Japanese Empire. This history is not reflected in Superman: Son of Kal-El, and readers would identify Gamorra as vaguely Asian.

Though the Yellow Peril targeted various countries in different manners, xenohpobia and orientalism affected Asian populations on a similar scale. It was specifically, “the Whites” against “the Others”. The ambiguity of Jay’s Asian origin makes him a potential target for a combined imposition of stereotypes from varying Asian cultures.

The overall effect, is that in fiction, the Asian Lover cannot be trusted with information.

Seduction, Hypnotization and the threat of Sexuality

Morality Panic around the sexuality of Asian bodies has existed for centuries. The British population characterized Chinese immigrants as morally depraved, defining them as opium smoking individuals who indulged in gambling and prostitution. Setting aside the fact that the cause of the opium distribution in China was due to the British, and the first of the Opium Wars were fought because the Chinese government took measures to get rid of opium, the presence of Chinese populations in Britian was in defiance of the colonial mindset.

An increase in immigration occurred during the World Wars, and White Women grew more independent through the job opportunities created during this period. The reluctance of White Women to conform to the patriarchy and the increase in immigration, led to rumours of helpless white women being lost in the Limehouse streets, victim to the “moral depravity” of the Asian Man.

Sexuality has always been a source of control in the heteronormative patriarchy. The binary of male and female is defined by the subservience of women, sexually, to men. Specifically, white men. A loss of control in this sexuality for the White Man is a threat.

Cheshire, Lady Shiva, and Talia are portrayed as using their sexuality to weaken their White Male opponents. She is a threat because she results in a loss of control over libido, she weaponizes it against the White Hero. He falls victim to his sexuality, and is seen as helpless to these ‘charms’ and a hapless victim. Grant Morrison takes this much farther with Talia and Bruce, wherein she is implied to have sexually assaulted Bruce Wayne. The metaphor of sexuality as a weapon becomes that of overt assault, the stereotype stretched to its extreme. Cheshire’s seduction is shown as dangerous, and Thomas Blake is weakened drastically around her purely due to his attraction towards her. It seems her mere existence is a devastating blow. 

While the Asian Woman is a sexual object, one who seduces, a temptation which cannot be refuted, the Asian Man is portrayed as deeply undesirable and sexless. Anti-immigration laws, exclusion, and the deep history of Orientalism and Xenophobia ostracizes the Asian Man from American Masculinity, creating the “American male” and the “other”, thus stripping Asian Men of their masculinity. Due to masculinity being defined by sexuality, the othering of the Asian Man leads to an assignation of sexlessness (Park, M. (2012). Asian American masculinity eclipsed: A legal and historical perspective of emasculation through US immigration practices. Mod. Am., 8, 5).

They are feminized, portrayed as undesirable. Which leads to the stereotype of The Seducer, a byproduct of the Yellow Peril. Due to the perceived lack of desirability in Asian Men, their sexuality is instead portrayed as inherently predatory. Shanghai Express(1936) and The Cheat(1915) portray Asian Men as sexual predators victimizing white women, who must be rescued by the White Heroes. The Limehouse district of London were fear mongered as places where the Triad Gangsters would kidnap White Women and force them into sexual slavery (Witchard, Anne (4 February 2015). "Yellow Peril: Sinophobia and the Great War: a Q&A with Dr. Anne Witchard".).

Jay is a queer man, desired by a white man. On many occasions, Jon has initiated physical intimacy with Jay. White men, as we’ve seen before, are seen as victims of their libidos. But Asian men are sexless. A white man could not possibly truly desire for the Asian body, especially not for the Asian male body. The impositions of the aforementioned stereotypes in fiction have led to a disbelief in the existence of such a relationship configuration. Jay does not conform to the aesthetic of the Asian seductress, or of a feminization of any sort. Rather, he has glasses, fitting more into the Asian Nerd stereotype, which emerged from the demasculinization of Asian Men.

It is difficult for a comic reader, who has been hammered down with the idea of seduction, temptation and subterfuge around the Asian sexuality, to see Superman fall for an Asian boy with glasses, free of external manipulation. Jay with pink hair and a distinct lack of revealing outfits or overt sexual advances must then, therefore, be using some unseen and undetectable force, more sinister than can be imagined, shifting into the realm of the magical.

Whatever the explanation, it surely cannot be an honest desire.

And so it veers into speculations of seduction. Many had hilariously proposed that he had used pink kryptonite with sincerity. Plenty had examined the swirl-like pattern behind Jay in a singular panel to mean that he had used hypnosis. His joke about working with Lex Luthor to tease Jon was used as a confession of his crimes, and his plans were always to expose Jon's vulnerabilities. On and on they went

The label of ‘terrorist’, journalism, and the perception of refugees

This, is sensitive. I have often hesitated to speak about this to anyone due to how fresh the topic is, how real the violence of this can be. It is no secret, that the United States labels the populations it wishes to exploit or eradicate with the label of ‘terrorist’. The invasion of Iraq, the current unchecked occupation of Palestine, Syria and Lebanon, and the dismissal of Yemeni efforts to support the aforementioned countries is due to the labelling of a fight for liberation, for freedom, as ‘terrorist activity’. Heradstveit and Pugh put it best;

One of the primary ways in which a government increases its legitimacy and induces its population to support it above and beyond what their own interests dictate is by assimilating the concepts of ‘opposition’ and ‘crime’. It goes without saying that governments are meant to act against ‘crime’, at any rate crime committed by their less powerful subjects, as this is part of the definition of a government.

They propose that the label of ‘terrorism’ can cover anything from guerilla warfare, armed resistance, any form of political opposition, even those which are non-violent and can be classified as vandalism. Any action in opposition to the locus of control, is classified as terrorist activity.

Comics reflect reality, as mentioned at the beginning. Jay does the same in his journalism. The second issue of Superman: Son of Kal-El, portrays Jay reporting on a Gamorran refugee boat, which was sinking on its way to Metropolis. These are the first bits of dialogue we hear from Jay. He is aligned with an anarachist group called ‘The Revolutionaries’, who undertake armed violence in a fight for liberation. Batman puts the label of criminality and specifically, of terrorism, into the reader’s minds.

This is meant to be refuted, and it is within a single issue. But the readership saw it as confirmation of their suspicions arising from the previously mentioned points, while ignoring the critique on the US government. Jay’s position as a disenfranchised refugee is entirely forgotten, despite the text repeating his position at varying points. 

The seeming confirmation of the Asian seductress, of subterfuge, always takes precedence.

Superman comics have often been used to empower people. Superman’s story is inspired by Jewish myths and lived experiences. His status as an illegal immigrant has been covered across multiple mediums. He has smashed the Klan, he has helped free an enslaved world, he has helped people through their trauma, he has defended immigrants trying to find safety, assured queer children that they are loved and accepted, he fights corrupt billionaires who exploit the common folk. 

Jay’s story contributes to the same values, but he is dismissed purely on aesthetics and race. 

It is important to evaluate why certain characters make us uncomfortable. What elicits this reaction? What is the source? I would never urge someone to like a character, this is subjective but it is important to analyze where our biases can come from. Sometimes it is as harmless as being unable to relate to a story. On other occasions, it can be rooted in something as insidious as this. 

If you would like to make Jay a villain, or any hero into a villain for that matter, ask why.