Shitty movie choices..

[Biomega]

I also think making characters gay just because someone feels you need a gay guy on the team is fucking bullshit. What they did to Iceman was fucking bullshit. He was my favorite X-man for almost 30 years, and until recently the member I identified the most with. Then they fucking destroyed him, he's not even a shadow of the character he once was. Iceman was the player of the team. He was the "Gambit" before Gambit was introduced. No one seems to remember that Iceman broke up the biggest wedding in X-Men history pre-90s(I know Scott and Jean was bigger) because he was in love with the bride. Or the many times Iceman got the team into trouble over some girl he was in love with. Or the fact that nearly every time Iceman left the team it was to settle down with the love of his life, all women. In fact Iceman left the team more over love with women than any other X-man in team history.

Honestly making Iceman gay made as much sense as making Tony Stark gay would make. Especially when all they had to do was make a new badass gay character.

See, this is an objection I can understand. I'm also firmly in the camp of "if the sexuality/gender/race/whatever isn't a substantial part of the character's story, it can be whatever" - but in this case, it very much seems like it IS a substantial part of the story. If someone is an incorrigible womanizer like Tony Stark, that's not just a random fact about the person, it's a defining element of the character. Changing that is a much, much bigger deal than it would be for characters that aren't defined through such things. Same with, say, Storm being of African heritage - it actually matters for her story. Suddenly making her white or Asian would clash with that fundamentally. For other characters, this is far less relevant - which is why we can e.g. have a black Nick Fury and be entirely happy with him.

We definitely need more diversity. But we need it done in a way that's not distorting, and not ham-fisted. I'll take normalization over "LOOK AT ME I'M GAY AND HOW DO YOU LIKE THAT!" any day. That doesn't serve anyone, least of all marginalized minorities who now only get hated on even more by the already intolerant. I'm no expert in comic book lore, but it seems to me that characters for whom sexual orientation or race is some kind of crucially defining characteristic are a minority. Even among A-list characters, surely there must be room to maneuver.

[WoWGoneBad]

The reverse, however, where you don't ever include LGBTQ characters, is implicitly homophobic.

Implicit does not equal factual.

Just because I create a game or movie with no LGBTQ characters does not in any way mean I am homophobic but rather my story did not have any in it. Same as race. If I create a story in a country where there is little to mo black people in it and the area the story focuses on that I am not racist.

It is that bullshit logic that landed us in the situation we are in today. If you do not have LGBTQ you are homophobic, if there are no black people you are racist, if it is centered on a male character you are misogynist.........

NO stories or game "needs" to have a checkbox list. As a matter of fact, I am currently creating a videogame myself and the story behind it has nothing to do with any form of the inclusionist checklist. My characters are fitting the story I want to tell and will not be focused on 'having' inclusion for the sake of inclusion...

And this is from a man who is Black and White and raised in both communities. I also have 2 children whose godfathers are gay marriage and have been for 15 years. As well as having about 15 different gay friends that I talk to regularly.

Just because society Justice DEMANDS that inclusion for inclusion's sake, does not mean that I HAVE to include them. It is what is called a choice. You know the word that is no longer used or allowed to be had in this social justice world.

- - - Updated - - -

As I pointed out earlier in that post you quoted, if you want a gay character in a movie fine, you can easily create one, develop a story around them, give them meaning and character and include them in a movie. But to turn an already established character gay just to fit a politic narrative all that is doing is telling the LGBTQ community, "rather than give you an authentic gay point of view, we will just give you the scraps of a character that we have already made millions on. Hell, you don't care just as long as you have your representation right??"

They are just pandering to your we want inclusion by giving you something already fleshed and in continuity. They wont bother with creating a character just to make you happy if they can just give you scraps or hand me downs.

- - - Updated - - -

The reason it would be weird for the MCU's Spider-man to be gay is because we already have Homecoming, where Peter seemed to be really into girls. That's it. That's the only prior context that applies. No prior films or comics have any relevance to where the MCU takes the character; it's a whole different universe. They'll likely borrow liberally, of course, but they're not bound by anything.

I am sorry but the whole "its another universe is just a shitty way of saying we dont want to take time to develop the character as gay, we will just go to Earth(insert number) where we can turn the narrative that they were already gay and BOOM done. That was the basis of the whole multi-verse shit. The character is already established and we just need to do a little backstory to get people up to date.

Why cant the series just keep going forward in time with a different person taking on the mantel of random superhero? Because there is too much work in developing the writing and character development to take such an action.

[Endus]

I am sorry but the whole "its another universe is just a shitty way of saying we dont want to take time to develop the character as gay, we will just go to Earth(insert number) where we can turn the narrative that they were already gay and BOOM done. That was the basis of the whole multi-verse shit. The character is already established and we just need to do a little backstory to get people up to date.

That is how you develop a character as gay. Literally, that's how it's done. "This guy has a boyfriend." Ta-da.

Why cant the series just keep going forward in time with a different person taking on the mantel of random superhero? Because there is too much work in developing the writing and character development to take such an action.

This is flat-out not how Marvel works.

The mantle of "Spider-Man" did not exist in the MCU before Tom Holland's Peter Parker came up with the moniker. He's not "taking on" any pre-existing mantle. Falcon is, with Captain America's retirement, but that's about the only real example in the MCU right now of any such "mantle".

There was nothing for the Spider-Man films to go forward from, in the MCU. He was a new character. And there are pretty significant differences from both the Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield iterations; those aren't prior canon, at all.

He is a new character. They wrote him and developed him through the Avengers films and Homecoming, and now Far From Home.

[unholytestament]

Bad jokes don't always come off as jokes.

I don't know what I did to offend the fun police but once you're done unbunching your panties please take a moment to consider you are also factually wrong.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Be careful not to eat too much dirt as the joke sails clear over your head.

You do realize that Miles' story involves taking up the mantle after Peter Parker dies, right? A large part of his character involved being inspired by him and agonizing over whether or not he was doing a good job of living up to his legacy. Excising that from his story would change too much about him.

I didn't say he took miles story i said he took his life. his freinds him getting a suit from some one else because the one he had was trash, him joining the avengers at the behest of tony in place of nick fury. hell it even looks like hes steeling the alternate universe mystero and working over seas for nick fury, though i haven't seen the new movie yet.

other then aunt may and nick replaced with tony pretty much every thing the MCU peter has got going on isn't from peter its from miles.

[unholytestament]

I didn't say he took miles story i said he took his life. his freinds him getting a suit from some one else because the one he had was trash, him joining the avengers at the behest of tony in place of nick fury. hell it even looks like hes steeling the alternate universe mystero and working over seas for nick fury, though i haven't seen the new movie yet.

other then aunt may and nick replaced with tony pretty much every thing the MCU peter has got going on isn't from peter its from miles.

It's almost like I was pointing out a huge character element that is far more relevant to his development than a few plot beats or something...

None of what you have listed makes Miles who he is. It doesn't drive him as a character. And the vast majority of the MCU characters have elements of different versions of themselves but most of the protagonists can still be boiled down to the same character they're supposed to be. Mostly. Bad guys can and will be changed wholesale but that's done to serve the story of the heroes.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

It's almost like I was pointing out a huge character element that is far more relevant to his development than a few plot beats or something...

Yes they took Peters character and put him in miles place that’s the whole point. We didn’t get the standard marry Jane Gwen Stacy Norman Osborn we got gankie nick fury and hand outs instead.

[Kathranis]

Jennifer Lawrence did First Class before her career took off and after that she didn't want to do the role anymore, made a bunch of demands regarding the hair and makeup, and at the same time they shifted the plot around to revolve more around her to try and capitalize on her fame / appease her.

[unholytestament]

Yes they took Peters character and put him in miles place that’s the whole point. We didn’t get the standard marry Jane Gwen Stacy Norman Osborn we got gankie nick fury and hand outs instead.

No that's not the fucking point. The things you continue to list are not what made Miles Morales who he is. Without Peter Parker serving as Spider-Man before him for him to idolize Miles Morales is a different character. This is like skipping Bruce Wayne and having a Robin be the first Batman.

[Kokolums]

Jennifer Lawrence kinds screwed herself when she signed a multi picture deal before First Class. She because a mega star shortly thereafter but she was still locked in for the series. It really feels like by the time of Dark Phoenix she was able to use her clout to really get out of sitting in the makeup chair for hours. They came up with was simpler makeup instead.

Of course that is just my assumption.

I'm not gonna feel bad for her. She got a starring role in a major motion picture that made her insanely rich and the "bad part" is that she is locked in to making a few more and even making more money. I'd trade my problems for that problem in a heartbeat.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

No that's not the fucking point. The things you continue to list are not what made Miles Morales who he is. Without Peter Parker serving as Spider-Man before him for him to idolize Miles Morales is a different character. This is like skipping Bruce Wayne and having a Robin be the first Batman.

It’s the point I was making which you replied to so ya it kinda is. as I already said he got miles life not his character.

[unholytestament]

It’s the point I was making which you replied to so ya it kinda is. as I already said he got miles life not his character.

Except this was your reasoning for why Miles Morales should have been used instead of Peter Parker. You are getting hung up on a weird word distinction that means nothing.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Except this was your reasoning for why Miles Morales should have been used instead of Peter Parker. You are getting hung up on a weird word distinction that means nothing.

actually no its not. this is me pointing out that they took alot from miles.

the reason i think they should have used him instead is because instead of keeping in the normal spiderman stuff there making him a little iron man with spider powers. they could have taken all of that stuff from miles and still done peter right but they didn't, id rather have a different spiderman or no spiderman then a poorly down peter.

[unholytestament]

actually no its not. this is me pointing out that they took alot from miles.

It really should have been, only reason I can think they didn’t use miles is because of the backlash they would have gotten I mean they stole most of miles life for the mcu.

Actually yes it totally is.

the reason i think they should have used him instead is because instead of keeping in the normal spiderman stuff there making him a little iron man with spider powers. they could have taken all of that stuff from miles and still done peter right but they didn't, id rather have a different spiderman or no spiderman then a poorly down peter.

You do realize the Iron-Spider is actually from the comics, right? Tony gives him the suit for going pro-registration during the Civil War just like how in the MCU Tony recruits Peter to help apprehend the heroes that stood against the Sakovia Accords in Civil War. And that's from comics (Civil War 2006) that predate Miles Morales (2011).

[Biomega]

Implicit does not equal factual.

Just because I create a game or movie with no LGBTQ characters does not in any way mean I am homophobic but rather my story did not have any in it. Same as race. If I create a story in a country where there is little to mo black people in it and the area the story focuses on that I am not racist.

This isn't entirely right.

The problem is marginalization, not existence. If you make a story about, say, the vikings, then chances are there were barely if any black people around. Okay, understandable. But if you make a story about 1990s USA and everyone you ever meet just "happens" to be white, that's not understandable. And, similarly, having a group of people that all just "happen" to be completely straight is likely to not be representative of an actual cross-section of most societies. Such biases require an explanation - and if there's not some plausible diegetic reason, then that explanation is very often just the above-mentioned implicit homophobia. This doesn't necessarily mean active HATRED of homosexuality (and there's still plenty of that around the world), but marginalization is also part of the problem. We know that a fairly significant part of the population is not simply straight and cis-gendered; ignoring those people or making them invisible is effectively discrimination.

Now, that doesn't mean you HAVE to put in diversity at all cost, like some people would like to portrait it; or that you HAVE to follow diversity distribution percentages of the overall average down to the last percentage point. But it also means you can't just brush off representation as "well it just so happens nobody is gay here" - after all, this is a fictional world. The authors make all the choices. And that includes the implicit choices, and what they assume to be "normal". People don't "happen" to be ANYTHING in a world you create. It's ALL your choice.

Also - and this is often overlooked - we are not necessarily slaves to realism. There's a whole lot of things in the "real" world that aren't pretty. And that includes the marginalization of minorities. Is it so hard to understand that people might perhaps look to works of fiction with a little more idealism? That's why for example most video games reduce the choice of gender to a purely aesthetic one; female characters you create usually don't come with lower strength in RPGs, say (though there are exceptions). That's not entirely realistic in many scenarios, but it's fine if it isn't. Realism, too, is relative. I find it utterly laughable when people readily accept dragons and magic and faerie unicorns, but you try and make gender or sexual orientation more equitable and suddenly they cry foul and demand that you adhere to "the real world" more.

As always, though, don't construe this as me demanding agenda-driven storytelling. I see no problem in both being for more diverse representation, and being against forcing such representation through ham-fisted activist design. I'll be the first in line to protest against all those characters you see of late whose only apparent function is "LOOK AT ME I'M GAY!" - but I'll also be first in line to demand more gay people, more trans people, more people of all colors, creeds, and convictions in all forms of media. It has to be done RIGHT, but it does also definitely have to be done. That's the only way we can arrive at a new normal. Because the old normal sucks.

[WoWGoneBad]

@Biomega, I am in complete agreement with your thoughts.

For me the representation fitting the story is more important than the story fitting the representation. The game I am working on is set in a future setting of human civilization, yes there will be minorities gender types and such, but I do not want to take stock from the story just to fit representation for representation sake. I think myself a decent world maker(why I am making the game lol) and can include representation as part of the story, not the story being designed just to fit representation.

[Kyphael]

Yeah, Jennifer Lawrence was always an awful Mystique anyway. Rebecca Romjin set the bar too high. Jennifer Lawrence only cared in First Class and phoned it in every time after.

[RobertoCarlos]

Casting no talent jocks like jai Courtney or Sam Worthington in any film. Casting that weird dude as lead in valyrian who had 0 chemistry with an ex model female cast mate.

Making Chris pratt a selfish pervert in passengers

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Actually yes it totally is.

You do realize the Iron-Spider is actually from the comics, right? Tony gives him the suit for going pro-registration during the Civil War just like how in the MCU Tony recruits Peter to help apprehend the heroes that stood against the Sakovia Accords in Civil War. And that's from comics (Civil War 2006) that predate Miles Morales (2011).

I said they should have used miles i never said why me pointing out that they stole most of miles life was never the reason, your jumping to conclusions.

and yes peter got the iron spider suit from tony in civil war but peter's first interaction with tony wasn't him being recruited , peter didn't get a high tech suit from tony to start out, tony didn't scold peter and take the suit away leaving peter to whine that hes nothing without it, peters story's haven't just been about the aftermath of tony's and peter never tried to replace tony.

The MCU peter has more or less just been a side character to tony stark instead of being his own main character with the story's being about him even home coming only happens because of tony and damage.

I want spiderman movies i don't want movies about tony starks side kick and id rather have no spiderman then what we are getting.

[Endus]

I said they should have used miles i never said why me pointing out that they stole most of miles life was never the reason, your jumping to conclusions.

and yes peter got the iron spider suit from tony in civil war but peter's first interaction with tony wasn't him being recruited , peter didn't get a high tech suit from tony to start out, tony didn't scold peter and take the suit away leaving peter to whine that hes nothing without it, peters story's haven't just been about the aftermath of tony's and peter never tried to replace tony.

The MCU peter has more or less just been a side character to tony stark instead of being his own main character with the story's being about him even home coming only happens because of tony and damage.

I want spiderman movies i don't want movies about tony starks side kick and id rather have no spiderman then what we are getting.

I'm guessing you haven't seen Far From Home, then.

Yes, the MCU is different. It's expected to be. These characters are starting now, not 50 years ago. They don't have that history behind them; we're seeing their origination.

And before anyone says "But Mysterio said the MCU universe is Earth-616", you need to realize he was ALSO claiming to be a refugee from Earth-833 and had magical powers, none of which was in any way true; it's an easter egg reference that's part of Mysterio's bag of lies.

If you don't like the MCU, you don't have to follow it. But nothing it's doing is "wrong". It isn't the Earth-616 standard timeline. It's a different timeline. The same way the Ultimate Universe was, before it got slammed together with 616. If you don't like it, feel free to not watch it. Most of the rest of the viewing audience loudly disagrees with you, and your voice doesn't overrule theirs.