Unca Cheeks the Toy Wonder's Silver Age Comics Web Site!
. . . or: "When Fanboys Turn To Hate Speech.
. . and Why."
(Part Three; Page One)
It should go without saying, of course, that racism, bigotry and prejudice are -- in all ways; and under every conceivable circumstance -- deplorable and inexcusable mind-sets and/or modes of expression; manifestly worthy of any right-thinking individual's fullest, most unflinching censure and opprobrium.
RACISM (n.) -- 1.) a belief in the superiority of a particular race; prejudice based on this. 2.) antagonism towards other races, esp. as a result of this. 3.) the theory that human abilities or tendencies are determined by race.
BIGOTRY (n.) -- an obstinate and intolerant belief in a religion, political theory, etc.
PREJUDICE (n & v.) -- a preconceived opinion. 2.) (foll. by against, in favor of) bias or partiality. 3.) harm or injury that results or may result from some action or judgement (to the prejudice of).
-- all definitions from THE OXFORD ENCYCLOPEDIC ENGLISH DICTIONARY (1992)
Again: I honestly cannot imagine any of this site's thoughtful and generous regulars holding to (or espousing) any of the odious personal beliefs aforementioned.
Said beliefs -- in "the superiority of a particular race"; "the theory that human [...] tendencies are determined by race"; "bias or partiality (against or in favor of) others," based upon their skin color or ethnicity -- are not only loathsome, in and of themselves; they stand perpetually athwart the very concretized notions and codicils that inform the underlying precepts of the mainstream super-hero comic itself: from the unflinching egalitarianism of a Captain America; to the open and enhanced worldview of a Superman; to the ingrained inclusivity of the (sadly) defunct Milestone line of comics.
As bluntly as possible, then: there simply is not (and never will be) any place whatsoever for the spiteful promulgation or proselytization of any such spiritual rat poison within the greater fannish body politic, overall.
It runs counter to the very notion of "heroism."
It runs counter, ultimately, to the very notion of right.
Most comic fans -- either instinctively, or else by dint of simple, brute repetition of immersal in the four-color storytelling verities and precepts -- understand all of this, certaainly.
Most comics fans.
POSTER ONE (re: the death of grossly insulting [and racially stereotyped] "break dancing super-hero" character "Vibe," in an old issue of JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA): "To top things off, Ivo’s robot proceeds to use a device that transforms dead Paco’s face so that it matches the pre-mutated Ivo’s!! I couldn't believe it … Paco’s Puerto Rican face was transformed into the face of a white guy right there on the illustrated page! This act wouldn't have been half as disturbing if it weren't for the events that proceeded it.
"Vibe’s death seemed like a clear statement to me. A statement that the writer and/or editor thought would be buried in the anti-New JUSTICE LEAGUE sentiment that was going around at the time."
POSTER TWO (in response): "I don't think that is fair. The writer tries to create an emotional catharsis. The tragic death of a hero is one way to do this. That is all it is."
POSTER ONE (ominously): "Oh, it would be so nice to think that's all it was."
POSTER THREE (chiming in): "You got that right, [poster]! When Ivo's robot used his device to transform Vibe's Puerto Rican face into the face of a white man . . . I became faintly sick. [...] That sure as hell seemed like a kind of cryptic message to me!"
POSTER ONE: "I felt it was an insult to the Latino community that perhaps the creative team didn't feel they needed to respect in the first place."
POSTER THREE: "It's sad that, when some people are intent on disrespecting, demeaning or hurting you, the many clever and not-so-clever ways they will see to that their evil is carried out."
-- From one of the more consistently ugly and fractious message boards online
AD HOMINEM AND TU QUOQUE
"Literally 'to the man' and 'you also,' these fallacies redirect the focus from thinking about the idea to thinking about the person holding the idea. The goal of an ad hominem attack is to discredit the claimant in hopes that it will discredit the claim.
"Calling someone an atheist, a communist, a child abuser, a racist or a Neo-Nazi does not in any way disprove that person's statement. It might be helpful to know whether someone is of a particular religion or holds a particular ideology, in case this has in some way biased the research; but refuting the claims must be done directly, not indirectly.
"If Holocaust deniers, for example, are neo-Nazis or anti-Semites, this would certainly guide this choice of which historical events to emphasize or ignore. But if they are making the claim, for example, that Hitler did not have a master plan for the extermination of European Jewry, the response, 'Oh, he is saying that because he is a neo-Nazi' does not refute the argument.
"Similarly for tu quoque: if anyone accuses you of cheating on your taxes, the answer, 'Well, so do you,' is no proof one way or the other."
-- WHY PEOPLE BELIEVE WEIRD THINGS;
a book by noted skeptic Michael Shermer
about debunking the paranormal and
pseudo science; from the chapter entitled
"HOW THINKING GOES WRONG: Twenty-
Five Fallacies That Lead Us To Believe
Weird Things"
Only a liar; a madman; or a fool would gainsay the ongoing existence of real, true racial/sexual/religious bigotry and repression in this life.
To whatever extent such pernicious and destructive doctrine rears its paleolithic head(s) in the day-to-day affairs of honest men and women (of any race, creed, persuasion or religion) attempting to eke out some small measure of happiness for themselves, or those near and dear to them... the only decent, human response is to eradicate it; by whatever peaceful means necessary, and without losing our own souls in the process.
Nonetheless: there's actual, demonstrable acts of genuine racism...
... and then there's simple, blind and willfully pig-ignorant race-baiting, born out of carefully nursed and cosseted resentment.
A nicely illustrative example of this last would be... oh, say...
... well: shrewdly and intentionally misrepresenting a writer (or a
writer's published work), in order to nudge one's own cherished pinewood
race car in The Great American Racial Divisiveness Soapbox Derby, f'rinstance.
The above-referenced example of same -- as well as the bulk of the truly pitiable and lamentable examples following -- have all been culled from one of the regular online watering holes favored by this unrelentingly sour sort; are all (sadly) all too representative of the hateful stripe of shenanigans favored, thereabouts; and are all (thankfully) every bit as transparent, ultimately, in both their less-than-lovely genesis and purblind purpose.
Here's another one:
POSTER ONE: "Recently I read through a friend's old 1991 JUSTICE LEAGUE QUARTERLY issue (# 5) written by Mark Waid.
"What stands out for me in that issue was Guy's Gardner's reference to the [...] DOOM PATROL hero known as Rebis:
" 'That's that guy from the Doom Patrol, isn't it? What's his name? Remus?' "
"I also notice in this issue that the Justice League take on Professor Ivo again. SOMEHOW this murderer was written as a tragic figure to be pitied. And the fact that he murdered warrior of color and fellow JLAer VIBE was NEVER even mentioned when they flashbacked [sic] on his history of terrorizing the League!
"By the end of the issue, the colorless Justice League are all like congratulating Ivo for having been cured of his disfiguring disease ... this is the man who murdered one of their teammates!!
"I was shocked, but I shouldn't have been though. I mean, Vibe was just a warrior of color after all. Judging from the way poor Paco Ramone was treated in the pages of the JLA, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the handshakes Ivo recieved in this issue was for his having done away with the super-heroing break-dancer.
POSTER TWO: >>What stands out for me in that issue was Guy's Gardner's reference to the [...] Doom Patrol hero known as REBIS:
"That's that guy from the Doom Patrol, isn't it? What's his name? Remus?"<<
"That was guy gardner [sic] at his best, saying and doing what his little fanboy supportes [sic] all wished they could do, revel in the arrogance of dominance. And he often got approval for his facist [sic] ways. In that big crossover event where all the heroes were on the outs with the (fickle) public, it was Guy Gardner, in full facist mode, that was the most effective. Guy Gardner never stood taller in his fans eyes, than when he's bashing a minority back into their place [sic]."
>>I was shocked, but I shouldn't have been though. I mean, Vibe was just a warrior of color after all. Judging from the way poor Paco Ramone was treated in the pages of the JLA<<
"He was also very poorly received by JLA fans as well. And what a surprise that should be, fans of one of the most color deprived titles around, were NOT appreciative of a true nonwhite member. Don't forget for most JLA fans, J'onn J'onzz is all the color they need."
EMOTIVE WORDS AND FALSE ANALOGIES
"Emotive words are used to provoke emotion and sometimes to obscure rationality. They can be positive -- motherhood, America, integrity, honesty. Or they can be negative -- rape, cancer, evil, racist, [nervously].
"Likewise, metaphors and analogies can cloud thinking with emotion or steer us onto a side path. (…) Like anecdotes, analogies and metaphors do not constitute proof. They are merely tools of rhetoric."
-- WHY PEOPLE BELIEVE WEIRD THINGS;
a book by noted skeptic Michael Shermer
about debunking the paranormal and
pseudo science; from the chapter entitled
"HOW THINKING GOES WRONG: Twenty-
Five Fallacies That Lead Us To Believe
Weird Things"
It should be noted, at this juncture, that the very same message board from which these (and following) spewings hail is one which -- in its earliest days -- your own racially admixtured Unca Cheeks once patronized, back before the gargoyles had (lamentably) succeeded in taking over the online cathedral.
Unca Cheeks promptly took himself a walk, however, once said board's stated Rule Numero Uno and (putative) raison d'être -- namely, "the discussion of various 'Warriors of Color' in comics" -- quickly degenerated into such cowardly; baseless; and spite-fueled broadsides as above; replete in such questionable rhetorical "finery" as ad hominen attacks; culturally-freighted "special pleading"; rumor mongering; after-
the-fact "reasoning"; and various and sundry shades of ad ignorantium, throughout.
Because...?
Because: " [...] racism, bigotry and prejudice are -- in all ways; and under every conceivable circumstance -- deplorable and inexcusable mind-sets and/or modes of expression; manifestly worthy of any right-thinking individual's fullest, most unflinching censure and opprobrium."
... and: " [...] there simply is not (and never will be) any place whatsoever for the spiteful promulgation or proselytization of any such spiritual rat poison within the greater fannish body politic, overall.
"It runs counter to the very notion of 'heroism.'
"It runs counter, ultimately, to the very notion of right."
In other words: the place was quickly giving your benevolent
and long-suffering Unca Cheeks one massive, unholy pain in the place
where the fanny meets the fabric.
Because: he thinks there may be any number of good and sufficient reasons why (for instance) any given JLA fan might well be excused a gleeful chirrup or three, upon said title's (finally) being well and truly rid of one of the most insultingly (and irredeemably) racial stereotypes in comics since the dim, drear days of THE YOUNG ALLIES' "Whitewash" Jones.
Because: as painfully little use as he (personally) may have for writer J. M. DeMatteis' tenure on various incarnations of DC Comics' JUSTICE LEAGUE OF AMERICA series... not even your irrascible and curmudgeonly Unca Cheeks would ever be so conscienceless (or willfully... ummmmm... selective in his reading) as to label said gentleman as "evil"; or intent upon "disrespecting, demeaning or hurting" others.
(That label, one might more reasonably apply to the benighted author who first conceived of the notion that a racial slur-spouting, break- dancing, cliche-argot'd racial stereotype -- "Whut'chu talkin' 'bout, Batman?"; "Knives are whack, bro!"; etcetera, etcetera -- might actually be a good thing in the first bloody place.)
Because: as little regard as your strict and exacting Unca Cheeks has for the aforementioned Mr. DeMatteis' auctorial abilities, overall... he is (nonetheless) perfectly able to read your standard, dopey four-color super-hero comic book sans any especially egregious socio-political axe-
grinding...
... and: the "Death of Vibe" story in question makes abundantly clear to any but the most (self-)deluded or deceitful of readers that the villain of said piece (one Professor Ivo) is monomaniacally obsessed with the hideousness of his own monstrous facial features (the story's very title, in fact, is "Saving Face"; not exactly the most subtle or difficult of clues, is it...?); that he holds anyone who has ever enjoyed JLA membership personally responsible for same; and that his forcibly applique-ing a frozen replica of his former countenance to the snuffed Vibe is (in his own words, mind; see page reproduction, below) is naught more than his newly-elected means of "leaving my calling card."
"Such a beautiful, beautiful face..."
In a story entitled "Saving Face."
Featuring a villain wholly (self-)defined by the horror of his own facial disfiguration.
This site is presently selling "clues," at five bucks a pop.
Because: even though your Unca Cheeks' own Guy Gardner tolerance threshhold is a painfully low one -- let the little spandexed jerkweed be messily devoured by blood-crazed killer chihuahuas, for all I freakin' care -- it would never even so much as occur to him to tar any fans of said character as "fascists"; "revel[ing] in the arrogance of dominance"; and/or to claim that "Guy Gardner never stood taller in his fans eyes, than when he's bashing a minority back into their place."
Similarly: it would be more than your resolutely do-unto-others motivated Unca Cheeks could fathomably stomach in himself, to cruelly flick any of the following cyber-loogies in the direction of any other online fan, simply for not liking the same comic book as I did...
... such as (in the following examples) were spat in the direction of the poor unfortunate who dared (dared! O, unhappy ignominy!) to opine that the new BLACK PANTHER series might not be his particular four-color cup o' java:
POSTER ONE: "Let a Black character exhibit anything that remotely indicates an increase in power and it seems to startle certain fans who think the character should know his place."
POSTER TWO: "I think certain parties are a bit miffed that the former token member of the team has proved to be as capable (or more) of holding his weight against the other heavy hitters of his group. Well you'll just have to suck it up, I'm afraid. [...] Quit whining."
POSTER THREE: "Ummm, [poster]? You're about to cross a line here... you just said the big "NO NO."
POSTER FOUR: "This is either woefully ignorant or purposesly stupid. You should take a look at the culture in which you actually live once in awhile.
"See that rock over there ?
"Crawl back under it, please, and let the rest of us get on with intelligent discourse."
POSTER FIVE: "Your constant exmples of your own poor education in real world thinking is a never ending source of amusement to us.
"See, I wait until you post something stupid, and then call you on it. Believe me, I'm usually laughing when I do so."
POSTER SIX: >> I find it offensive when people insult one another, call someone else 'idiot' or some other similar derogatory term.<<
"Very well. I promise not to call you an idiot unless it's to intentionally hurt you. See how simple this is?"
Remember, now: this poor schlemeil's "sin," in this particular instance, was to state that he wasn't enjoying the latest incarnation of a flippin' MARVEL COMIC BOOK.
AFTER-THE-FACT-REASONING
"Also known as post hoc, ergo propter hoc; literally 'after this, therefore because of this.'
"At its basest level, it is a form of superstition. The baseball player does not shave and hits two home runs. The gambler wears his lucky shoes because he has won wearing them in the past. (…) Correlation does not mean causation."
BURDEN OF PROOF
"Who has to prove what to whom? The person making the extraordinary claim has the burden of proving to the experts and proving to the community at large that his or her belief has more validity than the one almost everyone else accepts.
"You have to lobby for your opinion to be heard. Then you have to
marshal experts on your side so that you can convince the majority to support your claim over the one they have already supported.
" [...] Evolutionists had the burden of proof for half a century after Darwin, but now the burden of proof is on the creationists. It is up to creationists to show why the theory of evolution is wrong and creationism is right, and it is not up to the evolutionists to defend evolution. The burden of proof is on the Holocaust deniers to prove the Holocaust did not happen, not the Holocaust historians to prove that it did. The rationale for this is that mountains of evidence prove that both evolution and the Holocaust are facts.
"You must convince others of the validity of your evidence. And when you are an outsider this is the price you pay, regardless of whether you are right or wrong."
-- WHY PEOPLE BELIEVE WEIRD THINGS;
a book by noted skeptic Michael Shermer
about debunking the paranormal and
pseudo science; from the chapter entitled
"HOW THINKING GOES WRONG: Twenty-
Five Fallacies That Lead Us To Believe
Weird Things"
Sometimes...
... just sometimes, mind; every now and again (I've heard the whispered rumors, 'round late night gypsy campfires; oh, I get around, I do) that it is entirely within the realm of human possibility to actively dislike any given comic book's storytelling direction...
... or (watch out! Here come the lightning bolts!) even to think dispargingly of any given comic book CHARACTER...
... without (concomitantly) feeling -- inexplicably; de facto -- that said character "should know his place."
Obversely (let the heresies flow like dime lemonade, then!): your well- traveled Unca Cheeks is of the unswerving belief that -- so secure in sense of self, he; and not being the lifeless sort of fanboy whose very sense of basic human worth revolves around Imaginary Play-Persons -- he might well be able to handle anyone voicing such similarly sentiments, re: any given character he might fancy without referring to the nay-sayer in question as being "woefully ignorant"; "purposesly stupid"; or expressing the adolescent desire to "intentionally hurt" anyone, really.
Just as a f'rinstance, here: as long-time regulars to this site all doubtless
well know... the Black Panther is
my second all-time favorite Marvel Comics character. Period.
(Coming in behind only Jack "King" Kirby's and Joe Simon's
immortal Captain America, natch.)
F'rinstance Continued: I, too, think the present Marvel Comics BLACK PANTHER series is...
... well... is a whole lot of silly, self-indulgant hooey, in all honesty.
Maybe it's because your suffragette-leaning Unca Cheeks gets this disagreeably creepy-crawly feeling allllllllll up and down his back, whenever he sees the two pneumatic, sluttily-attired fanboy wish-
fulfillment underage "hotties" with which writer Christopher Priest has (regrettably) saddled the (formerly) wholly self-sufficient T'challa of Wakanda. (... and, say: isn't there something at least vaguely... odd in a group of self-imposed, self-satisfied online "champions of equality" winking and hooting at women being objectified as pretty, high-kicking mini-skirted pieces of meat, anyway...?)
" [...] the King's concubines [...] wives-in-training..."
Is "Christopher Priest" really a pen name for disgraced former Senator Bob
Packwood, mebbe...?
Maybe it's because your dewey-eyed and pacifistic Unca Cheeks prefers his... whaddyacallem... hero types to err a little more on the side of the proverbial angels when it comes to the ages-old question of To Kill Or Not To Kill than he does watching them tear a few dog-eared and yellowing pages from (say) the Punisher's illiterate, Crayola-scrawled notebook.
Maybe it's because he's juuuuussssssst old and crotchety enough to remember a Prince T'Challa who held all life so fundamentally sacred, he even objected strenuously when fellow Avenger Iron Man threatened to "kill" villainous Ultron's unliving "bride," Jocasta; and even refused to do more than stun a ravening polar bear, after the latter had taken it into his furry little noggin to nosh on something spandexed for a leisurely hour or three.
Maybe he (and anyone else finding themselves increasingly dissatisfied with Marvel's "new and improved" BLACK PANTHER series) just naturally and legitimately prefers a different "take" on this venerable and fascinating character, is all.
Maybe we just genuinely believe that "his place" is something just a wee little bit closer to what his eminent creator -- one Jack "King" Kirby, if memory serves -- had in mind, back in the day.
... and: speaking of spitting disdainfully upon the work (and original intent) of the illustrious and aforementioned Mr. Kirby...
... there's that recent (and manifestly unpleasant) "spying on the Avengers" business that has all of the pro-Priest apologists so up in arms, of late.
For those of you out there fortunate enough to have missed out on this (already) legendary and spectacular auctorial miscue: series scrivener Christopher Priest -- having decided for himself, apparently, that some dried-up old hack bastard like Jack Kirby couldn't possibly be anywhere as clever or innovative as he, himself -- coughed up a creative hairball and opted, willy-nilly, to completely reverse the good T'challa's reasons for initially joining the legendary Avengers.
He didn't do it (you see) out of his prodigious respect for newfound friend and ally Captain America.
He didn't do it because the Avengers -- whose team roster was comprised of such long-time, world-renowned and undisputed good guys as the aforementioned Cap (whom the Black Panther already knew, mind); Iron Man; and Thor, among others -- enjoyed a long-established (and richly deserved) reputation for altruism; heroism; and decency.
He didn't do it (in brief) for anything like the pro-brotherhood, pro-
inclusivity reasons which rendered his acceptance of said membership -- the first black super-hero ever to join the august ranks, remember -- so spectacularly pivotal and joyous for so many of us amongst the readership, way back when.
No, and no:
He did it (sayeth the modern-day separatist cant) so that he might spy upon his "good friend" Captain America, and the sort of folks for whom the Captain might freely and willingly vouchsafe.
Y'know: there's missing the point...
... and then there's Missing The Bloody POINT.
A la certified genius nonpareil Kirby: T'Challa's accepting membership within the ranks of Earth's Mightiest Heroes was a signal event within the greater context of the Marvel Universe, overall; the first canonical instance whereby one of Marvel's true "flagship" titles became racially integrated (SGT. FURY AND HIS HOWLING COMMANDOS being a perennial "second tier" entry, in all honesty)... in a spirit of mutual trust and acceptance.
A la latter-day parvenu Priest: there was no "trust" on the Panther's part. Because the America-based Avengers were...
... different from him, you see.
Such a lovely, affirmative sentiment, that.
I suppose there may well even be those who'd elect to regard such a wholsesale metamorphosis of original auctorial intent as "progress" of a sort.
God help us all.
The balsa-like "rebuttal" on the part of the pro-Priest apologists, at this juncture, is (generally) something along the likes of:
"Well... what about the way Wonder Man initially joined the Avengers, in order to destroy them at Baron Zemo's behest? And the same thing with the Swordsman? And -- hey! Didn't the Black Widow used to be a Russian spy? Huh? Huh? Howzabout dat? HUH -- ?!?"
Using Very Small Words, then (because -- migawd -- this should all pretty much go without saying, after all):
1.) Simon [WONDER MAN] Williams was a criminal, when he joined the Avengers (unlike T'Challa). One who promptly died, as a direct result of his having fallen in with the likes of the verminous Zemo. And then stayed dead, for many, many years.
In brief: He Profited Not from his base treachery...
... and, of course: his joining the team didn't have the same ground-
breaking interracial significance as that of the non-criminal Panther. Obviously.
2.) Likewise: the Swordsman was a criminal, when he joined the Avengers (unlike T'Challa); one who was working in the shadowy employ of the manipulative Mandarin, no less. And fled from the team in disgrace, one scant issue later. And REMAINED marred by said disgrace, for many, many years.
In brief: He Profited Not from his base treachery...
... and, of course: his joining the team didn't have the same ground-
breaking interracial significance as that of the non-criminal Panther. Obviously.
3.) Finally: the Black Widow didn't join the Avengers until more than a full decade had passed, since her final mission on behalf of her former Soviet masters. Her previous career as a Russian espionage agent impacted about as much on her Avengers tenure as did (say) the Falcon's as a former street pimp.
In brief: there was no "treachery" involved in the matter of her membership. At. All.
... and, of course: her joining the team didn't have the same ground- breaking interracial significance as that of the Panther. Obviously.
From very small children, perhaps: one might reasonably be expected to make due concession for such slipshod and self-serving reading of the published canon.
From (ostensible) adults, on the other hand --
-- "adults" (it must be remembered) so desperate and quick to seek out racial offense in even the most studiedly innocent of offerings; yes, and to plaster epithets such as "racist" and "fascist" across the reputations of any writer (or fellow poster) with whom they churlishly disagree --
-- again: God help us all.
(The other knock-kneed "dodge" sometimes offered up in defense of all this folderol, incidentally -- to the palsied effect that" "... welllll... T'Challa had to 'check out' whether or not the Avengers were actually... y'know... for-real good guys or not; he didn't know anything about 'em, at that point" -- is no more credible or defensible a one. Captain America's world- wide celebrity stretches all the way back to World War Bloody Two, f'cryin' out loud! And the assembled Avengers had only saved the entire planet -- what? -- eighteen or twenty freakin' times, by the time Cap gave the Panther the big, cheery "okey-dokey"? Isn't T'Challa supposed to be one of the most intelligent and well-informed fellahs on the face of the globe... period?
(One of the world's most highly-developed ubertechnological wonderlands, Our Wakanda...
(... and -- apparently -- they don't have anything remotely analogous to television; radio; or even newspapers...?)
(Pull the other one, people.
(It's got... y'know... bells on it.)
Let us proceed, then, to Page Two of "Cop-outs,
Dodges, Lame Excuses, Lies and Racism,"
gentle readers.
We haven't quite finished a-hangin' these rhetorical hoss thieves with the knoted
hemp of their own words, just yet.
"Cop-Outs, Dodges, Lame Excuses, Lies and Racism": When Fanboys Turn To Hate Speech (PAGE TWO)
"MORE COMIC BOOKS," YOU SAY...?
The DC Comics Sub-Directory
The Marvel Comics Sub-Directory
The Miscellaneous Comics Sub-Directory
The "Gotta Find That DC Character" Menu
The "Gotta Find That Marvel/Miscellaneous
Character" Menu