#people saying the MCU needs to be boycotted

[worstloki]

How would you feel if somehow Thorki becomes canon in mcu (not the subtexts) personally I'd throw up

listen. listen to me carefully. it would be SO funny

[jewishbarbies]

https://www.tumblr.com/jewishbarbies/755194286127054848/good-news-though-the-actor-who-plays-superman-in?source=share

I think it helps that James Gunn is Jewish and Irish (Irish ancestry on his father’s side and Jewish from his mother) so maybe they’ll be a reduction in antisemitism in the comic movie industry, or maybe I’m a little too optimistic lol. But it got me thinking, the contributions that Jewish people have made to entertainment, especially comic books and movies are just so wonderful and immense so I don’t understand why people are so determined to erase their representation in the media. Whether it’s people “boycotting” Sabra (Israeli marvel superhero set to premiere in MCU in Captain America movie), Magneto and Scarlet Witch being portrayed by non Jewish white actors (Quicksilver in the MCU is played by Aaron Taylor Johnson, who is Jewish. However Evan Peters is not Jewish), fans dismissing Peter Parker and Bruce Wayne’s Jewish backgrounds, dismissing the stories of the Jewish immigrants who created the DC/Marvel superheroes and villains that we know of today and how those stories influenced the creation and portrayal of these characters in the comics, etc.

It’s as if they want all the benefits of Jewish cultures and creations, but not the Jewish people themselves. As a black person, I know that feeling all too well. They want everything about us… just not us.

that’s been the case with antisemites for centuries. clear back when the romans decided to adopt their own version of torah, adding jesus and extras, while actively making it illegal for jews to be jewish in OUR land. it happens in everything jews set foot in and improve.

I actually got into a brief argument with some dudebro a while ago because he was saying Bruce was “half jewish”, and I was like “um no, he was just jewish. all you need is one parent.” and he kept arguing with me. like. dude. I’M JEWISH. you’re gonna tell me how MY culture works?? because you don’t want your batman “full jew”? it was……a wild time. even David Mazouz, the jewish child actor who played Bruce in the Gotham series, said an exec at Warner Bros told him he looked “too jewy” to play batman. a jew looks too jewish to play a jew.

now we’ve got chuckle fucks trying to retcon magneto into some antisemitic leftist icon. ironic that they killed off immediately the only quicksilver to be played by an actual jew. oh also, I found out a while ago that superman originally had green eyes and they were changed to blue once they started making him a christ figure instead of a Moses allegory. :) I’m not mad about that at all. :)

we built hollywood, we built the comic industry, and we’re consistently pushed out of both places specifically for being jews.

[sundry-whovengerslocked]

"love the art, hate the artist"

okay y'all. y'all. so like, I say this regularly. I made it up. but I think it should be used by everyone.

like, this is a hot take, but it's okay to enjoy something made by a shitty person.

this isn't to say boycotting and cancel culture should be stopped! like, if someone is a shitty person, they should not be paid to be able to continue to be shitty. so yeah, go ahead and pirate shit. wait until media is free and enjoy it then.

but like, I feel like people go so hard when it comes to shitty people that they're essentially killing the arts, and the people who find peace with them. it's just not fair.

examples under the cut

I mean the first and most obvious example would be j.k. rowling. there's SO MUCH discourse surrounding her. but there shouldn't need to be. she's an awful person and a transphobe, and she should be avoided and boycotted. she doesn't deserve any more money. that being said, we can support things in the franchise she's not a part of. we should support fanart and fanfiction involving these beloved characters. we should encourage trans headcanons and embrace the fact that a lot of what makes the Harry Potter universe so great is the fans, not her.

another one is Michael Jackson. he was a pervert and shouldn't be celebrated the way he was and still is. that being said, he made music inspired by black culture and in turn inspired new types of music. so his music, things like the moonwalk, they should be appreciated.

John Barrowman is another good one. he was inappropriate and people have every right to blacklist him. but Jack Harkness? Jack Harkness is a PHENOMENAL character. he stands for omni rep, embracing queerness, and is a well constructed character that parallels and bounces off The Doctor beautifully. and? he can easily be recast. it's literally sci-fi dude, it's not that big a deal. yes Barrowman made a huge impact on the character, but he's not all he is. the writers contributed, too.

Jonathan Majors is a hot topic right now. yes, he should absolutely be blacklisted and removed from the mcu. but that doesn't meant they have to get rid of Kang. he was going to be (and still can be) a widely used character - characters, really - within the marvel universe. they can just recast him. they did it with Bruce Banner, they did it with Rhodey, two major characters in the mcu. they've done it with more I can't think of at the moment. and again, it's technically sci-fi. not to mention that with No Way Home and the Loki variants, they clearly showed that the same character can have different faces/actors.

notable mention: Tom Cruise. Knight and Day was awesome.

so yeah. hate the artist, love the art. it's really not as big a deal as people make it out to be.

[wenellyb]

To the Sam Wilson fandom. I have a serious question to ask.

How are y'all excited for a film that you are planning to boycott ? It just seems fake to me.

And to the random ppl who is telling everyone to boycott this film, Marvel and Disney are the biggest supporters of Israel and shouldn't you guys be boycotting EVERYTHING from these companies ? But let's boycott the film with the Black leading man.

DareDevil has an Zionist on their cast and no one is saying boycott that show.

Ppl are hyped for Deadpool and Wolverine, Thunderbolts, Agatha All Along and anything Disney related BUT, LET'S BOYCOTT THE FILM WITH A BLACK LEADING MAN.

Let's be real for a second. Marvel has shown a lack of respect and enthusiasm for this film since day one. If this film does not do well in the box office then the media will blame Mackie/Sam instead of calling out Marvel and Disney. If the film does poorly then I can see Marvel no longer using Sam!Cap and he will not be in any Avengers movies.

Marvel went on for three years showing they could care less about Sam. No name drops or cameos in nothing after TFATWS is just wild and now they are trying to play catch-up and try to promote him in media and possibly other projects.

And can we stop with the Mackie vs Stan/ Cap 4 vs Thunderbolts mess. Its beyond frustrating.

There are a handfull of blogs on here that seem genuine when it comes to boycotting the film. It's just everyone else being fake as hell.

Cap 4 is not the issue. The real issue is Kevin approving this mess and adding that character in the film knowing the backlash and secretly turning Sam's movie into a damn Hulk movie.

Nobody would be boycotting this film if Steve was still Cap and Bucky was in it. Ppl need to be honest for once.

Sorry about the long ass rant. Just had so much to get out.

Hi Anon!!!

Rants are always welcome on my blog, don't worry.

I don't read the comics but I've seen enough posts about Sabra's character to know that it's a character that shouldn't be in an MCU movie.

This is all Marvel/ Disney's fault, because they had the chance to listen and remove Sabra's character. The callouts started even before the movie started filming and even after that, there were reshoots so they could have done something.

Why did they listen about the title, but not about the character change? It's because they don't want to or they don't care.

If you ask me, they did it on purpose so they can have an excuse not to have Black leads anymore.

They did it with Phastos' character too, I feel. Set up a movie for failure so they don't have to try anymore... so they can say diversity doesn't work. Unpopular opinion, I also think they tried to do it with both Black Panther movies but it didn't work, people were just too excited.

But it's understandable why people boycotting the movie... This is 100% all on that company. Be sure that most people boycotting the Cap 4 movie are also boycotting anything Disney/MCU related.

As you said, there are some people who were waiting for an excuse not to watch the movie, but they were never seeing it in the 1st place. Some of the call for beoycott had very weird undertones and were hypocritical at best, and really racist at worst. But not the majority.

P.S: I went through the tags and saw that they changed her background and that the character was now Russian? Is that true or are those rumors?

[ixalit]

(1/2) I'll you my personal reasons for not watching tfatws- the directors, writers and everybody involved has said that the show picks up right where endgame ends and honestly speaking, that movie brought me a lot of pain, heartbreak and of course to continue the plot line tfatws will have to acknowledge and to some extent even justify Steve's ending & the decision to go back in time. So yeah, even if it's probably addressed only in the first episode and few minutes, that's what the show's

(2/2) premise is built upon(the assassination of Steve's character arc which breaks my heart every time i'm reminded of it) So I've decided to isolate myself from the current mcu track and filtering all the tags and their new shows (including wv) I'm not discouraging or boycotting anyone who is excited for the new content but for the sake of my own mental health+happiness I'll be curating my own fandom experience which I believe is totally within my right,not something i should feel guilty about

Yes, you’re free and welcome to engage with whatever you want in whatever you ways you want. I’m truly not trying to start an argument here or tell you how to be in fandom, but you made some points that I want to respond to so I’m going to reply to this in pieces.

the show picks up right where endgame ends and honestly speaking, that movie brought me a lot of pain, heartbreak and of course to continue the plot line tfatws will have to acknowledge and to some extent even justify Steve's ending & the decision to go back in time. So yeah, even if it's probably addressed only in the first episode and few minutes, that's what the show's premise is built upon(the assassination of Steve's character arc which breaks my heart every time i'm reminded of it)

Yes, I would assume so, seeing as it’s set in the same universe as MCU canon and takes place after Endg*me. But since when is official canon the end-all be-all? Haven’t we, as Stucky shippers, always taken liberties? Haven’t we always picked and chose specific details so that it fits our narrative better? Haven’t we written countless fics of multi-verses and fix-its and completely ignored everything except the basic premise of canon?

So yes, FATWS will probably mention Steve. And it most likely reference the events of Endg*me. But where does it say you need to like or accept or even believe the events of Endg*me to watch a show that is, quite frankly, not about Steve at all?

I've decided to isolate myself from the current mcu track and filtering all the tags and their new shows (including wv) I'm not discouraging or boycotting anyone who is excited for the new content but for the sake of my own mental health+happiness I'll be curating my own fandom experience which I believe is totally within my right,not something i should feel guilty about

By definition, what you’re doing is boycotting (definition: withdrawing from commercial or social relations with something as a punishment or protest). Maybe not people, but definitely the show. Maybe you’re protesting Endg*me and not a black lead, but that’s still resulting in the show getting less views, being less popular, and resulting in less recognition for said black lead.

I’m sorry that thinking about Endg*me and the assassination of Steve’s character arc brings you so much pain. That sounds really hard. It’s not my intention to make you feel guilty for taking care of your mental health so much as it is to bring attention to the passive racism I’ve seen heavily on tumblr the past few weeks. Obviously please take care of yourself and your mental health first.

I know in previous fandoms I’ve been in, the moment it started invading my mental space and affecting my emotions so much, I’ve benefitted from taking a step back and looking at the big picture - this is a fictional story, with fictional characters, who we absolutely love, but at the end of the day live in our heads.

I bet we all have versions of them in our minds that vary based on what we admire about them, the fics and art we consume, and the canon and fanon we accept. Because of this, we can actually think about them any way we want. Because they are not real people, we have the power to accept or not accept things without letting it affect the rest of the story or characters.

In my view, canon is the skeleton of a house. It provides the basic shape, the structure, it gives everything a stable foundation. But as you build the house and fill in the insulation and drywall, you can change things. You can make additions or remove parts. You can fill it in however you want. And when it’s finally together, you get to choose the details - the lighting and cabinets and flooring - that you want because it’s your home and no one else’s. Hell, you could even sell the house and start over on a different plot.

I’m in fandom to have fun with fictional characters and escape from real life stress. And if I need to bend the rules of canon to what I like so that it continues to be a fun place for me, I damn well will do that.

Anyways. All that to say. I understand what you’re saying about hating Endg*me and not wanting to see that continue. All I’m saying is you can still promote Mackie in his first lead in Marvel. You can still give it clicks, even if you don’t watch the episodes. Or you can have a friend tell you where to skip to avoid any mention of Steve and Endg*me. You can reblog the press tours and gifsets without accepting the narrative it builds off of. You can still support a black lead in an Avengers production.

[mellencampmondays]

Rewriting Wandavision Finale

Skip to the dashes if you don’t want to read my justification/rant. Like everyone else, I was disappointed with the finale. I wasn’t really into all the theorizing and I haven’t read the comics so I wasn’t looking forward to some big reveal and I didn’t even know about the alleged “big cameo” so take all that as you will. I wasn’t disappointed because I expected an Avenger’s level show-down. I was disappointed because they still tried to give us one.  I was disappointed with the finale because it felt like a very disjointed ending for a story that had always been very personal. As numerous people have alreadIy pointed out, this was a show about grief, specifically the grief of Wanda Maximoff, a flawed human being with amazing power. Literally the most powerful being in the universe. This show explored what someone with that kind of power might do when her grief becomes unbearable. That is the central conflict of the story, but the climax had almost nothing to do with it. We had a cartoonish military force and a random witch who wanted that power for herself despite already losing her own family in the pursuit of power. This is the heart of the problem with the finale - it stops becoming Wanda’s story and starts becoming a cheap way to set up other MCU properities. It doesn’t feel like a natural chain of events and ending this show with Wanda yet again alone and isolated seems so wrong and unsatisfying.  So in order to feel satisified, I’m pitching an alternative to the last three episodes and posting it on the internet just in case this will help anyone else get closure. I’m not saying I’m smarter than the showrunners and I’m not going to stop watching MCU properties or start boycotting Disney (though tbh we should definitely do that but that’s another topic for another day). This is just a fun exercise for my peace of mind. --------------------------------------------------

Hayward's concern about Wanda was genuine. Yes, he was lying, but what he was lying in the way governments lie all the time - to keep dangerous information out of the wrong hands. The fact that Wanda can just create another Vision - the most dangerous weapon on the planet - is a very legitimate concern... and a threat, considering her mental state. So Hayward lies to everyone, saying that the Vision in the Hex is the real one, meanwhile, he has a second team secretly working to recreate the original villain as a backup plan to deal with this new threat. When Wanda attacks the SWORD base, he feels the threat has been realized and calls White Vision into action.

While going through Wanda’s past, Agatha reveals her own grief and the loss she suffered because of her pursuit of power. She too has hurt people and is remorseful and warns Wanda that she is going down the same path. Just like in the episode, Agatha momentarily releases the townspeople from their trance to force Wanda to come to terms with the fact that she's hurting everyone. Her powers aren’t strong enough to reverse the spell permanently, but she can do this much. She reveals that the Hex is just that, a spell. An unfinished spell. If the spell is completed, Vision and the twins become real, but so does everything else. The people in town will become the parts that they're meant to play in Wanda's show, but it goes even further than that. Wanda’s spell is ripping apart reality at the seams and rewriting it in the exact same way Thanos had attempted to with the Snap.

Agatha tells Wanda all of this to force her to undo the Hex, but inadvertently reveals that Wanda really can "raise the dead" (so that her out of character “You can do that?” is legit and not just a plothole). Because Wanda can change reality, she can bring people into being who are no longer there. Fietro was just a parlour trick that Agatha was able to mimic. What Wanda doing is real. Realizing this, Wanda starts to bargain with Agatha, trying to get her to help her finish the spell so no one gets hurt but she can keep her family together. She offers to bring back Agatha's mom, desperate not to lose her new family, but Agatha is resolute. These are powers no one should be messing with.

The threat of the new Vision is neutralized like in the show, but Hayward can't just walk away. More soldiers come in, demanding Wanda to stand-down. When they get close to the twins, she starts rewriting them as we.l, inadvertently starting to complete the Hex. Agatha tries to stop her, Monica tries to stop her, Hayward is essentially dying.

Finally, Vision shows up and silently confronts Wanda. She cries that she can't lose him again. He sadly delivers that line she originally says in the finale, "Family is forever" or something like it. Monica's "don't become a villain" speech gets reiterated and eventually Wanda gives in and starts reversing the Hex. As Vision starts to disappear he holds her and the twins, ever calm and reassuring. "We've said goodbye before" and she finishes "we'll say hello again".

In the aftermath, Wanda is alone again and weeping. Hayward, now back in his right mind, starts issuing orders to take her into custody, but Monica stands in his way as Agatha approaches. They wait and watch as Agatha embraces Wanda and helps her up. She looks back at the crowd gathering around them and then she and Wanda disappear in the blink of an eye. Hayward angrily accuses Monica of defying orders, misuse of funds and resources, aiding and abetting a terrorist and a whole other string of legitimate accusations but she calmly stands her ground, continuing to defend Wanda and explain her grief. They share some memories of Monica’s mom to reach common ground and Hayward relents as Jimmy reminds everyone that the real work has just begun.

We see SWORD ship out as the FBI comes in to help the townspeople rebuild their homes and deal with the aftermath of this traumatic experience. Jimmy approaches Agatha’s house and knocks on the door, Fietro opens it with a casual “You took your time” and steps aside to let him in. Back at SWORD, Hayward oversees the decomissioning of White Vision as Monica is escorted to what we assume is a sort of detention center to face repraisals. Instead she meets a skrull who hints about her newfound powers and delivers the “an old friend of your mother wants to see you” line and continues escorting her into what turns out to be a spaceship hanger. 

The end credit scene isn't Wanda alone in a cabin with the book, but Agatha and Wanda together. Agatha is teaching her and helping her heal. We already know that Wanda is the more powerful of the two, but we can see in the look on Agatha’s face as Wanda does the crazy hovering while reading the Book of the Damned thing that she is still very much concerned about the extent of Wanda’s powers and what she will do with them. A kettle whistles on the stove as Wanda hears the cries of Billy and Tommy. Agatha comes back into the room with mugs of tea and depending what the showrunners need to set up for the next with additions to the franchise, she shares a look with Wanda or Wanda and the book are gone and Agatha looks stricken. 

[archivedjuice]

yeah it's very much structured like an mcu show in that it doesn't have any character and feels like a 5 hour movie chopped up into 9 episodes. when i say it doesn't have any character i need you to think of star wars, star trek, the hunger games & james bond despite how generic those examples are. they were (are) very popular pieces of filmic media that have very distinct aspects; star wars has a really noticeable soundtrack and the earlier films have really specific transitions that were highkey alternative for their time. star trek has very peculiar lore and world building to points where people who aren't committed find it very hard to get into because the show (and movies) assume you're very well versed. james bond also has a very particular soundtrack across its films and a very particular formula and costume design. this all isn't even getting into the kinds of cinematography, the very specific kinda of actors that were casted, the kind of special effects they chose and stuck with etc. the pjo show is very bland. like the transitions are literally jump cuts to black shots then they jump cut to the new scene. not even fucking kidding. the scripts do NOT work with the actors. it's like they wrote they script before casting then didn't rework it to fit the actors chemistry because disney is lazy as fuck as usual so there are a lot of moments that feel really awkward. like i know walker is a brilliant actor ive watched his stuff before but his lines literally do NOT flow. they are literally banking so hard on the idea that the person watching knows everything that's already gonna happen because they've read the books which therefore fills in everything that's too sparse (the mcu does something similar but in a reverse way where they pretend the movies aren't based on the comics and it's entire original) but even then it still doesn't work because i can feel the awkwardness of it. my student films literally have the same vibe and my 'casting' is asking my friends who have never acted and are biology majors to read my experimental wanna be ass scripts. AND THESE ARE SKILLED ASS ACTORS IN THE SHOW. anyway adding to the part about them being lazy with the story there is so much characterisation missing to the point where a lot of the characters' motivations literally do not exist and if they do they're explicitly said. which when you're making a fucking film characterisation and the script have to mesh together. having one do all the work is like pushing the characters' personalities into some kind of intangible uncanny valley where the person is doing nothing but saying everything and that's just not how people work so it's freaky in a really awkward way. like for most of the 2nd ep annabeth is kind of just walking around and giving percy one word answers to his questions. in the book this makes sense because there are SEVERAL instances in which annabeth is seen interacting with other people and in these conversations her personality in present. the show explores none of this. i think we need to make show runners understand that a 25 episode season isn't a sin. anyway i also need to add that there aren't many mystical aspects to the show. like they only do what's necessary for plot points then stick everything else in dialogue. like that moment where chiron gets out of his wheelchair to reveal that he's a centaur? not there. sorry. they used the entire cgi budget on location and fucking rain instead. tbh these are all general critiques i have for disney and the way they Create shows ever since they started doing this stuff but it literally ties into the fact that they are a one trick pony when it comes to live action cinema and it makes the pjo show the mcu part 2

i also need to add that this post isn't an invitation to bust open disney+ to pay them so you can take a look. i am boycotting disney. you should be too.

the pjo show is very mcu and idk how to feel about that ☹️

[spilledreality]

Positional leverage, positional pricing

Some exhibits:

1.

“I was in college around the time when the New Criticism, which adores explication de texte and all this close reading, was in decline. I would say it was in its height in its founding in the 30s and 40s; but by the 50s, it had become very derivative. It was practiced by these sort of third-raters, people without the real talent and erudition and prose style of the ones who had founded it in North America. And so I was in revolt, I thought, against it in my college years.” (Camille Paglia)

2.

Q: It’s become de rigueur for trash cinema to get reclaimed. An entire culture has thrived defending, even intellectualizing genre films that don’t get major awards.

A: Actually, the movies that tend to never get rewritten about, never get analyzed deeply or have interesting online writing about them are well-reviewed, upper-middle-brow movies from the ‘80s and ‘90s. (interview on Showgirls)

There are a few discursive habits that will be familiar to anyone who has spent time in critical circles (pop music, film, fiction), or simply hangs out on the Internet (in political communities, shared interest subcultures, fandom). Certain cultural works, or politicians, or people might be labeled “Actually good” or overhyped; individuals on one side of the conflict or another fall into apparent exaggeration—something or someone “is trash,” “is genius,” etc. Users or critics will delight in arguing that some object beloved in a larger or rival subculture is “not worth bothering with,” has no redeeming qualities, etc.—while simultaneously holding up “written-off gems” of their own. When a certain topic or theoretical approach is perceived as being too dominant, or occupying too many discursive resources, it may be boycotted or disparaged. An implicit sense of what is “overrated” or “underrated” seems to characterize individuals’ publicly stated opinions, even as these opinions are typically presented as “in-a-vacuum” preferences, likes or dislikes, etc. I want to talk about these tendencies through two frames: the notion of positional leverage, and the idea of position pricing.

To understand positional leverage, we first need a theory of what public belief is for. My contention is that—to give a “just so” story from our evolutionary history—humans have traditionally lived in relatively small communities, where individual opinion held some sway in group decision-making, if only by exerting tacit pressure on a chieftain or council of elders. (We see this dynamic still: politicians in democratic societies are beholden to their populations, so that even if individual discontents are not registered, widespread discontents are.) Public beliefs, then, are situated, strategic interventions into a communal decision-making discourse. They are responses to the current “temperature” of a discourse, in an attempt to shift the thermostat to a position the belief-espouser believes more optimal. Sometimes a caucus will form, which takes its communal identity from its deviations from its nearest neighbors—hence, indie and alt-rock fans differentiate themselves from the mainstream; cratediggers, genre eclectics, historicists (“indie rock died post-Pavement”) and poptimists differentiate themselves from indie and alt-rock fans; often there is an evolution such that members of some inner, “nested” group previously occupied the “wrapping outer” group before moving inward.

In Jane Austen’s Emma, Mr. Knightley shares suspicions, to his friends, about the character of a Mr. Frank Churchill, with whom he is in a sexual rivalry over Emma Woodhouse’s heart. The reasons for his distaste for Frank are never made explicit; for much of the book, they seem merely to be his honest opinions. But when Emma, in the novel’s final chapters, reveals that her interest lies only in Mr. Knightley, his opinion of Frank Churchill suddenly, dramatically changes—he suddenly wonders why he should have been so suspicious and uncharitable. We, as readers, know: these beliefs are strategic attempts to sway Emma’s mind, and cause reputation damages to Mr. Churchill.

Public belief broadly, I believe, is driven by similar impulse toward strategic intervention. Our expressed opinions, in addition to being expressions of group loyalty and caucus, are also attempts to sway mean opinion. And through rhetorical overleans, by the taking of more radical positions, we can more effectively drag or weight the discursive “center” toward the direction we wish it to be. As Bourdieu writes of Marx, in The Field of Cultural Production:

This explains why writers’ efforts to control the reception of their own works are always partially doomed to failure (one thinks of Marx’s ‘I am not a Marxist’); if only because the very effect of their work may transform the conditions of its reception and because they would not have had to write many of the things they did write and write them as they did—e.g. resorting to rhetorical strategies intended to ‘twist the stick in the other direction”—if they’d been granted from the outset what they are granted retrospectively.

This metaphor of “twisting the stick” gave way to an earlier metaphorical frame, “torque epistemology” and “discursive games.” But I believe a simpler analogy may be at-hand: a lever.

If the fulcrum, here—the discursive “center”—is the purple triangle on the left-hand side, then we can see how much disproportionate influence the 5kg weight has merely through its positioning far-from-fulcrum. (The force an object exerts downward, on a lever, is proportional to how far it is from fulcrum.) Often, when we take a public stance, I believe that we size up the consensus within our enveloping subculture—if we are contrarians, seeking to distinguish ourselves—or a set of beliefs advocated prominently by a rival outgroup, seeking to bond and ally ourselves—and then take a situated, strategic stance which we believe will help nudge that consensus “center” in a certain direction. It is not really that we believe Paul Verhoeven’s Showgirls is the postmodern masterpiece par excellence—but we do believe it has been unfairly written off, and that our re-evaluation may one day be validated, become its own orthodoxy.

Which brings us to a similar but distinct mechanism, that of “priced” position-taking. If positional leverage is a way to intervene in coordinative decision-making, and to sway group opinion, the strategic buying and selling of positions is a more opportunistic, decentralized-competitive than persuasive approach to discourse. One metaphor is of the ecological niche—certain niches become “saturated” and over-exploited, eventually leading to exhaustion; others are relatively underexploited. By avoiding overexploited niches, and seeking out underexploited ones, we continually find new ways to distinguish ourselves (to use another Bourdieu term). Those who avoid culture war topics, or dissent from a newly reigning ideological hegemony, are avoiding overexploited niches.

But the analogy I prefer is a stock market: certain stocks are priced too high, and are liable to drop or plummet in the future; other stocks are priced too low, and will rise. When someone argues that a movie is “Actually good,” or dismisses trauma discourse (the kind that saturates contemporary culture, from wokeism to the MCU universe) as trash, they are responding to the perceived under- or over-valuation of their subject. At the same time, there is an element of discovery—because ideas, unlike companies, can survive for decades or centuries without active upkeep, much of the value put forward by Game-B thinkers consists in their continually dredging up, and arguing for the value of, lost, abandoned, or niche ideas—be they ethnomethodology or strategic interaction.

With positional leverage, when individuals from different social groups and subcultures collide, be it in-person or on the Internet, the “situation” they are responding to—the perceived consensus or aggregate opinion they are counter-balancing—is forgotten. When we lose sight of the positions these strategic stances are reactions to, or hold in our minds a different hegemonic order than our interlocutor (perhaps because we are enveloped by a different wrapping subculture), the positions appear merely radical, irrational, or absurd. Perhaps their in-a-vacuum radicalism, irrationality, and absurdity become the very basis for our own rebellion, our own extremisms or our own “shortings” of the stock price.

[ted-curtis-art]

PSA to the Romanogers Community (SPOILERS)

DO NOT READ ON IF YOU HAVEN’T SEEN ENDGAME OR DON’T WANT TO BE SPOILED ABOUT THE ENDING. THIS IS YOUR LAST CHANCE.

So, we didn’t get the ending we wanted. Romanogers will not be canon, Steve will stay in the past with Peggy, and Natasha is now dead, sacrificing herself to get the soul stone. The worst scenario possible for us fans of the Soldier and the Spy, right? WRONG.

Sure, it didn’t end up as definitively canon, but we have never, EVER needed the direct blessing of canon to let this ship sail. This changes nothing, not to us. We will still create art, still write fanfics, still celebrate what could have been, just as usual. We have to accept that, as much as our desires were somewhat catered to, we were in the minority. The ending we got is what most people would have wanted, and that’s fine. We can accept that, and move on and as a community and as fans. 

We simply bet on the wrong horse and lost, but that does not mean we were wrong. We were never wrong in seeing the potential of these two, never wrong to want more from them. Canon doesn’t diminish the passion we have for these characters, and at the same time, our specific, admittedly unpopular scenario not happening doesn’t diminish the effort of the Russo brothers, Stephen McFeely, Christopher Markus, Kevin Feige and - most importantly - Chris Evans and Scarlett Johansson for their efforts in making these films.

Natasha went out as a hero, sacrificing herself to save the universe. She was most heroic of them all, an honour that she fought for her entire life at SHIELD, a cause that was strengthened by her time spent with Steve. Steve mourned for her. That tear may not seem a lot but think about it. We have rarely, RARELY seen Steve cry. The last time I could think of was Peggy’s funeral. Natasha was just as important to him as Peggy was, THE LOVE OF HIS LIFE. All he could, whilst the others were arguing, standing up and throwing chairs, was crumple into a seat and cry. Utterly defeated. These choices were deliberate, the people behind this film knew how important Nat was to Steve.  They KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING.

Think about it this way, perhaps - just maybe - the screenwriters knew that if Natasha were still around, Steve would have stayed in the present. Natasha, his rock in the modern world, was gone. That’s why Steve was so ready to go back and be with Peggy, the other most important woman in his life because there was little left in the present for him to live for.  Of course, he would want to have a little bit of happiness with the life he missed out on. And I’m sure that Natasha would have wanted that too, for him to finally find a place where he could just be, a place to call home, even if she can’t have that with him. That was the sacrifice she made in the end, and she did it for him. Just as he said he trusted her to do. She gave him more than anyone else ever could, SHE GAVE HIM HIS LIFE BACK. If that’s not romantic, I don’t know what is.  Besides, we can always have our satisfaction that Steggy’s happy ending will always be reliant on Natasha, and by extension Romanogers. Yeah, if it weren’t for those two bringing out the best in each other, helping each other, staying by each other’s sides until the very end, then every post-Endgame Steggy fic will have that little undercurrent of Romanogers to thank. And I think that’s delightfully satisfying.

Besides, do you know how easy it would be for us to change this? The fanfiction writes itself. Who says we can't write a scene where Steve wakes up in the middle of the night and just breaks down in Peggy’s arms, his grief for his fallen lover finally catching up to him? Or how about a fix-it where Steve rejects the past and brings her back (we know the soul stone can be bargained with, Gamora came back, so why not her)? Or how about a fic where Thanos kills Steve in battle, only to have him and Nat reunite in the soul stone, together for the rest of time, in peace? The possibilities are endless, so get writing, get drawing, get animating, get editing. We are far from done with these two, nay, we are only just beginning. The story is over, yes, but that means we can construct our AUs from start to finish, our new timelines will be more complete than ever.

And don’t let anyone tell you that we can’t divulge in our pairing, after all, it’s fiction, in the same capacity as the MCU itself, the same as the comics. It’s just as valid to diverge from canon as it is to follow IF YOU’RE HAVING FUN WHILST DOING IT. So please, no shipping wars, no blasting the people responsible on twitter, no boycotting the MCU. Let’s enjoy what was, and what can be. Let us sail the good ship Romanogers to greater horizons, the best non-canon MCU pairing ever made. A pairing so close to canon, it should have been ENDGAME.

Oh, yeah, and - besides my disappointment that that ONE aspect of the film - this movie KICK ASS AND EVERYONE SHOULD SEE IT, MY GOD IT IS AWESOME!

EDIT: BTW I’m writing a post-Endgame, canon-compliant Romanogers fic where Steve and Nat end up happily married and live out their lives in peace. How could they possibly end up together after Endgame, you ask? Impossible, surely? You’ll have to read and see. I’ll post a link when it’s up. Treat it as a free therapy session.

EDIT 2: @romanogersnowbarry94 especially wanted to be notified when I started posting my fix-it story (mentioned above), so here it is: https://archiveofourown.org/works/18603754/chapters/44106034

It’s still in progress but updates are quick. Welcome to therapy.

[northlandian]

On my mind...

So, as we are all aware, Captain Marvel comes out next week. I've had my tickets for over a month, and am genuinely very excited to see it, regardless of the fact that the duel-marketing for both that and Endgame kind of lowers the hype of it. Following Infinity War, when Marvel fans were once again reminded of its presence, I instantly knew there would be more hate than usual for this one, and it was for one of the reasons I personally happen to be excited about it, and it's the fact that it's the first major female lead in a Marvel movie. We obviously don't live in a perfect world, and I get that there are sexist people out there. That's no surprise.

But what IS surprising is the fact that not only has the hate grown and spread in these coming months, but it's just gotten nastier.

These aren't just one-off sexist people anymore. These are Marvel fans, both casual and die-hard who are literally boycotting this movie because of its lead.

Now listen. I have no problem with valid criticism. I agree with the fact that Marvel has been promoting the sh*t out of this movie, and yeah, to a point where it's kind of getting annoying. But like a normal human being, if I see a promotional video for the third time today, I just ignore it and keep scrolling.

But then there are the arguments that are just absolutely ridiculous, and I'm gonna call them out. These are actual quotes under Captain Marvel posts on Instagram:

"SJW feminist movie with no good plot"

Wow, first of all, I'm jealous of the fact that this guy got an early viewing of the movie, considering he knows the entire plot.

But in all seriousness, you're telling me that because Marvel made their TWENTY-FIRST movie in the MCU with a female lead for the first time, it makes it a SJW political move?

Like, how did we reach a point where casting a female lead, specifically in an action movie, results in backlash because it's somehow "pressing an agenda"? "Oh no, a woman plays a major role in this movie and isn't overshadowed??!!!11" God forbid it doesn't star a male superhero. God forbid she isn't sexualized, and she's treated like a normal person.

In an alternate universe, where everything the same except Captain Marvel is a guy, no one is batting an eye.

"This movie will ruin the MCU"

Yeah, cause the MCU has a history of just BOMBING their movies, amirite?

Like, get real. Even regardless of my last point, in the highly unlikely chance the movie turns out the be that bad just on its own, do you really think that with Endgame right around the corner, everyone's suddenly going to turn around and not want to see it?

Look, I get it. If you think a couple lines from the trailer are "cringey" or whatever, you don't have to like it. But to make the claim that this movie is going to "ruin the MCU" is a bit of an overstatement.

And tbh...if this movie results in sexist Marvel fanboys leaving the franchise...all the power to them.

"I'm a white dude, so Brie Larson probably doesn't want me seeing this"

There are tons of comments like these, all along the lines of "I hate Brie Larson", and "Brie Larson is sexist and racist cause she hates white men". This all originates from comments she made regarding the diversity of movie critics, which I'll link here. To summarize it, she had told the interviewer that she wanted to strive for more diverse inclusivity in the press, as it was confirmed it a study that about 61% of critics were, in fact, white and male.  She referenced the movie A Wrinkle in Time saying, “I don’t need a 40-year-old white dude to tell me what didn’t work about A Wrinkle in Time. It wasn’t made for him! I want to know what it meant to women of colour, biracial women, to teen women of colour, to teens that are biracial.”, due to the movies prominent diversity.

Following this, box office projections for Captain Marvel declined 28%.

I'm not sure how, but it seems that the word "diversity" has become taboo. Because the same men who were bitching about a female lead are now bitching about these "attacks on men". Suddenly the same guys who are "tired of this snowflake SJW BS" are throwing a fit over the need to be the majority. They are making these claims while missing the point that it's not about people not wanting white guys; it's about people wanting minorities, too. It's about POC wanting to feel represented in industries that, for centuries, have been dominated by the white men. It's not saying, "Well, there should be less white men!". It's saying there should be equal opportunity for everyone.

To get real personal for a sec, I have my own story of feeling unrepresented. For over 8 years, I went to my public school that was predominantly Asian and Middle Eastern. There was nothing wrong with that - I had great friends there, as well as wonderful teachers. But being the only Jewish girl there sometimes got to me. I was the only one in my grade that didn't celebrate Christmas, and I had to explain to my teachers time and time again why I would be away on certain holiday's. (Side tangent: On one particular Jewish holiday, we - my sister and I - didn't get our parents to call in to report our absence. They ended up calling THE POLICE because they couldn't reach our parents, as their phones were turned off in synagogue, and couldn't think of one good reason as to why we would be away. This was after years of attending that school, being absent on the same days each year, and having identifiable Jewish surnames. That was peak level of ignorance). Again - it wasn't that I wanted there to be less Asian or Middle Eastern kids. It was just the fact that I wished there was someone else like me. So you can imagine the culture shock when I went to high school for the first time, where the school was thrice the size, and everyone came from a different background. It was crazy to me, but in a good way.

To make a long story short, this is the point that people seem to miss. Brie Larson never said she hates white dudes. She never said she doesn't think they should support the movie, or become a critic. She just is promoting the idea of minorities getting those chances, too.

Anyways, that's my rant and two-cents on this whole thing. I personally can't wait for Captain Marvel.

[idkicantthinkofanything]

I'd like to note that Bruce's childhood trauma is NOT canon in the MCU. Their entire argument is based in unreality to further perpetuate their hatred of women. They're literally just looking for reasons to hate women, and then they cling to them regardless of if you point out to them obvious flaws in their logic OR obvious misinformation. Look at even the way they frame Bruce's experience v Jen's. They just dismiss the abuse women put up with on a daily basis because they think they're entitled to to abuse them,,, because they're women so obviously any complaint about their experience is just. Men-hating women looking for a reason to hate men.

They'll never understand that feminism is about knowing how the patriarchy abuses men, women, and nonbinary people. Pro-feminism is about realizing oftentimes men need more help dealing with their feelings because they're taught from early on that anything other than anger isn't manly. Crying isn't manly, feeling wounded isn't manly, being a pacifist isn't manly. Apologizing or admitting wrong-doing, especially to a woman that they only view as sensitive and overdramatic? Definitely not manly.

They'll never understand how upholding the patriarchy hurts them too. They're too scared to imagine a better world for everyone... That's why they get so defensive when women speak up for themselves. Male fragility. Bring up sexism and you're attacking them head on, they feel like. And because you're also not talking specifically about their issues, when every other conversation is MADE for them and they own the stage, definitely pisses them off. It's entitlement. That's why they only bring up men's issues when women are talking about women's issues. They can't have a conversation that isn't about them.

Just like how they feel about the MeToo movement. All men are innocent until proven guilty and women don't count at real witnesses because they're all evil money-grubbing bitches out to steal from men. It's a double standard and nothing more. They've had so much for so long that of course trying to pull other identities up to their level is stealing from them. The same can be said about race, sexuality, socioeconomic class, so on and so forth. Members of the privileged group will look down on members of the underprivileged groups with dismay, especially when they try to change their standing in life. There's definitely some narcissism involved too, with people believing they're better than others for whatever reason. They then assign weird and arbitrary and oftentimes just plain wrong justifications for why that is.

Poor people? They're just lazy and dirty.

Men in dresses? That's obviously for women, what the fuck is wrong with you for wanting to identify with that?

Women with body hair? That's not very feminine (even though all women have body hair except for babies and children) and therefore it's gross. Those women don't take care of themselves.

Black people? They have all those programs that white people can't use so obviously they're not suppressed! They have MORE opportunities than us white people! And they're more likely to get help from the government so they don't get sued for racism!

It's all kinda just uneducated opinions that people think they have the right to cling to, regardless of whatever facts you may bring up. It's their opinion and they have the freedom of speech, therefore they can spread hate and misinformation because their experience is obviously the only one that matters and must be how the rest of the world functions and of course they don't have any biases even though they say right out that it's "their experience" and NOT the collective experience.

They've never bothered to read up on or research anything that might not support their own views (like the She-Hulk show, which people are boycotting rather than actually watching or listening or letting it sink in because their opinions are already formed and they're entitled to them). Racists don't pick up books on critical race theory, sexists don't pick up books on why the patriarchy is harmful. They just avoid and damn it as propaganda and misinformation. If they actually took the time to look through different lenses and try to understand things from other people's perspectives (narcissism again), they'd probably understand. But they don't, simply because they refuse to. It's willful ignorance at best and outright hate at worst; usually it's hate justified by willful ignorance and confirmation biases.

And both the left and the right are capable of this. Veganism, for example, is not affordable or reasonable to most people. That doesn't stop the "MEAT IS MURDER" written on all the sidewalks downtown where I'm from. Being anti-meat is oftentimes being anti-poor, anti-working class, and anti-disability. People who hate people who don't vote (another thing I see on the left) is oftentimes classist and ableist as well, because there are so many laws put in place or not in place that prevent voting. Some people can't get out of work, some can't afford a babysitter, some people forget to request a mail-in ballot or are too late in doing so because of disabilities like ADHD. And then they get shamed for it because the world isn't set up to help people like them and people more privileged than them also shame them.

Anyway, this is mostly just a rant for myself, but yeah, a lot of She-Hulk haters are haters for reasons that are just. Not real or true in the slightest.

Man, this show is a joke. The next Batwoman.

[goodluckdetective]

How does Marvel's latest fuckery with its comics factor into its MCU holdings? How much would a boycott on the next Cap movie hurt the company vs. boycotting the X-Men comic? And would the execs / board of direcs be able to understand that they're losing money because of the fuckery?

Oh wow. Well, that’s a complicated question, that I would generally take to an economist rather than little old me. But I got my group of comics pals together and we talked about this at length, so here’s what answer I can give you solely from a comic books perspective.

First off, X-Men isn’t a comic as much as it is a line. Don’t get me wrong, there is an X-Men comic, but there are quite a few of them (All New X-Men, Extraordinary X-Men, Uncanny X-Men, and just plain X-Men, and this is just books that have X-Men in the title, not including books where Magento may show up). As a result, there’s not one X-Men book and even if there was, the X-Men titles aren’t directly related to the issue at hand. The book/event that features this cover is “Secret Empires” not the X-Men line itself (as of yet). But I guess to explain that, I should explain a bit about comics continuity and events in general.

So events are what they sound like: they’re big sort of storylines that involve a large cast over a long span. They can be anywhere from a month or two to six or more, depending on scope. For example, the original series of Civil War was an event.

Events take two forms, generally. Sometimes events are their own thing in their own book. The storyline of the event is, for the most part, solely contained in it’s own comic run, and while events from it can impact other books, you don’t need to read things outside the event title to get the story.

Then there are events that are more crossovers: these might have their own book as well, but what separates these from the former is that the storyline is in MULTIPLE books and to follow it you have to read a few different titles. A recent example of this was a tiny event from DC called “Monster Men” which linked into Detective Comics, Nightwing, and I want to say Batman. To follow this story, you had to pick up ALL these books or read recaps online.

Does this sound like a ploy for money? It is! (To be fair to Monster Men, it was a short crossover that was easily skipped by those not interested, and the books involved are usually ones people already pick up in a grouping). Welcome to comics!

Long story short, for events that take place in their own book, you just boycott the book to show your displeasure. For events that take place across other books, then you need to boycott individual issues that tie in as well.

I know this sounds complicated, but unfortunately, it gets worse. When events happen, while only some books are officially tied into an event, the changes from that event can impact the whole line. For example, when Captain America died in Civil War, Cap had to be dead in all the books being made. So if Spencer does make Magneto Hydra, that can pop up in other books across the line if he appears to keep cross book continuity. And since those wouldn’t be labeled with the event, you might not have any idea you’re picking it up until it does.

Now you might ask in response: if this is going to take place across all of Marvel for Cross Continuity then shouldn’t I boycott Marvel as a whole? But that also doesn’t work, because of creator control. In short, sometimes writers can just outright avoid events and what happens in them in their own comics. A “I hate this and so it’s not happening here, officially it’s before/after this nonsense, unofficially fuck that noise.” So if you boycott all of Marvel, you might be punishing books that are either not a part of this nonsense or are made by creators who actively hate this nonsense.

It also should be noted that comic book boycotts aren’t always effective. The big two are an industry that really likes to cater to older, white, straight fans, and while they’re getting better in diversifying their line, sometimes the desire to cater to the original base (aka the base most of our executives belong to) wins out over market practicality. While white, straight, older men are no longer dominating the market, they are still dominating those who decide events and greenlight storylines, and that means the logical financial choice can be thrown aside in favor of personal taste.

TLDR: In short, boycotting events wholeheartedly is a complicated business. The things that I would recommend are boycotting the event book if there is one, and all official tie ins for the event (which are almost always labeled as such). You risk picking up books that may cover the event or feature plot from the event, but directly boycotting the event itself and all tie ins shows directly what you’re mad about instead of lowering sales across the board. I’d also put money into books that support things you want to see in comics, as your buck is the best way to boycott market trends.

As for Captain America movies, I wouldn’t boycott those unless they decide to do Hydra Cap as a plot (unlikely). The MCU is a different universe from the comics, so boycotting the movies won’t really send the message you want as well as boycotting Nick Spencer’s Cap run directly.

[so-many-sad-duck]

Honestly? Yes. I haven’t seen a live action remake/version of any of the Disney animated films I grew up on. Unless you count Cinderella back in the 90s starring Brandy. I grew out of Disney and learned to look at the company critically for it flaws. While the animated films will always have that nostalgia I can’t stomach watching new content to be honest. I haven’t seen a majority of MCU films nor the Star Wars film. So don’t @ me about the other Disney content I must have not boycotted.

My biggest problem with is film isn’t any of the following I’ve seen people being upset over such as the lack of Mushu, the songs, the actress being problematic. Although none of those helps and adds to cementing the fact that I will not watch this film. The $30 price ticket is ridiculous as if Disney isn’t a huge corporation who treats their employees poorly. I’ve had so many friends talk about their work expriences at Disneyland. The fact that they had a Chinese cast, and yet somehow behind the scene it was a white crew with no Chinese or even Asian advisors? Yes this was made for a western audience with no regards or respect for Chinese culture. They did the bare minimum and that’s not enough.

There’s also the fact that there’s the 2009 Chinese version of Mulan that exist as well as older versions I’m sure. It’s not like it’s a new story. Why watch a butcher American version.

I’m not particularly proud that I have Netflix. I suppose I could pirate and not subscribe to any streaming services. But I’ll take Netflix as the evil I’ll pay into over Hulu/Disney or Amazon.

I’m not saying I boycott everything that’s problematic but some things reach a certain threshold of problematic that I refuse to interact with. That can vary from person to person. All media and people are problematic to some extent. I know I am. But that doesn’t mean we can’t be selective and pick our poison. What things can we handle. I don’t need disrespect of Asian culture and fake attempts at trying to be diverse and show female empowerment that is anything but that.

I am not Chinese. But I am Asian and I deserve to be angry. As for the lack of Asian representation in media I rather there be few to none than it being butcher to hell and back. But it has to start somewhere arguement is BS. Accepting mediocre and poor writing and content like isn’t helping anything.

Getting tired of the boycott Mulan post. Honestly it’s already hurt by not having a theatrical release during the pandemic and Disney hurt itself by making it worth $30. If you don’t want to pay it, don’t. And if you have a family and it’s cheaper, then pay it.

Boycott all of Disney if you want. Get rid of your Disney Plus and Hulu and everything related to Disney.

Aladdin and Lion King weren’t that great. No one was boycotting it. Are y’all going to boycott all live action movies? Including the one of Little Mermaid with a lead black actress?

I get that it’s different and no Mushu. And I don’t have much to say about the lead actress except for, different country different rules, maybe keep that in mind? Are you boycotting every single problematic person to exist? That’s a long list.

I’m just annoyed that with what little representation there is, people want to boycott it.