Interesting perspective. Not sure about the causes, but I def agree with the results.

I read this the other day, and I agree.

i agree and disagree but im about to watch orphan black sO I WILL COME BACK TO EXPLAIN WHY

communism: plz do

Another, linked in original, by AVClub: Ghostbusters, Frozen, and the strange entitlement of fan culture

I think it's a good piece and pretty accurate. /retweets it for finding things later

... i'm still stuck on the 'Captain America is secretly HYDRA' part tbh XD

but my feelings about that are slightly tangential to the topic i think

agreeing with follow up: "You can - and should! - let the higher ups know the kinds of stories you want told. You should not demand that storytellers tell their stories in the ways that you want."

thiiiis

the AVclub one is hitting my pings for sure though. not that i completely disagree with the first, but it didn't really acknowledge that artists do create to some degree for other people

"I see that the voices of the fans have been heard, and that things are changing. That's positive."

^ yes that

"But throwing a fit if a storyteller doesn't tell the story you want told, featuring the kinds of people you want included, is not positive" Although I think whitewashing is different, personally.

And yeah, I think the AV Club one is a little more balanced/well detailed, though more narrow in its specifics.

"You don't have to like every story. You don't have to quietly take the bad story. But you shouldn't be a total asshole to the creators about it either."
^ this

The number of death threats creators get blows my mind.

oh, that second article was a good follow-up to the first, though. yes, good.

I feel like even if you're in the "right" you automatically lose an argument the second you wish physical bodily harm on the person you're arguing with

redconfession: Agreed. If only everyone viewed it that way. :c It worries me how much people incorporate other peoples' handling of fictional characters into their psyche

agreed

escapism is good, but internalizing fiction to that extent is... not

ok basically i agree with the addendums here, because fandom IS way more entitled and vocal than it used to be

the divide is basically gone, thanks to stuff like twitter, and that can be...a bad thing

the death threats are so. stupid. and gross??? like. if media does something you don't like, you're allowed to be mad, but don't threaten real life actual people - that i agree with too

what i don't agree with, moreso in the first article, is like... idk it feels like it's implying we can't SHOW how mad we get about things, and i don't like how it seems to disregard all the hydra!cap backlash

bc that shit is anti-Semitic; should there have been death threats??? abso-fucking-lutely not!

i think as consumers we ARE allowed on some level to demand better when the media doesn't go how we like, but not bc of plot points we hate so much as harmful tropes and stuff

^ yeah that's the part that irked me. when you have a pop culture icon as huge as Cap America and you apparently take the character in the opposite direction he's been in for the last 70 years, there's still

a responsibility there toward the character.

(which i think you mentioned before too with the whitewashing as one thing)

yes, exactly! like. i don't even comics, and i know that shit was awful all around

a sudden reversal of a major pop cultural icon isn't just about the story the creators want to tell. it's about destroying an icon which many people enjoyed as it was.

yes! agreed 100%

like. they could have told that story using loads of other characters. why use Cap unless you were deliberately spitting in someone's face? which is in itself a dick move.

there's a difference between people getting angry about cap and people getting angry about ghostbusters?

i don't think a lot of fandom knows how to be constructive in their anger anymore

bc anger IS justified sometimes, but how you respond is important

definite yes on that.

yes x2 on that, i think that is fandom's problem... not knowing how to respond constructively to the anger

there's a thin line between a creator's responsibility to a larger work to which they're contributing, and fans holding them accountable. it's a line that's very easily lost, and i do agree that social media

contributed to that

the fourth wall has been shattered, in a very negative way sometimes

which is where my tangential feelings came in; because an issue i've had with a lot of modern pop culture stuff is how 'gritty' is viewed as 'realistic' now

punch grimdark and gritty in the face tbh

so hearing that NOPE HAH CAP IS SECRETLY NOT A STUPID IDEALISTIC GUY LIKE YOU THOUGHT feels to me like someone trying to preach that everything is terrible how dare you think otherwise

ugh i hadn't even thought about that element of it, but yeah ia

and i completely understand people rejecting that idea on an emotionally violent level.

(i don't understand people sending death threats to the people who did it, because what)

(like others have said above, that's a dick move on so many levels)

but when you deliberately break something that gave people hope, when so much of media is unhopeful, it's a justified fan reaction to be angry, i think.

(that being said, i really do hope that there is a twist involved where Cap isn't actually a betrayal of every ideal he's been for hte last 70 years. because it is really hard to tell the truth of a plot

(when the plot is still in the middle.)

(and i don't know enough of the comics to know the details. but it sounds like that plot isn't over yet? or that's the impression i got in the article.)

i might have got a bit soapboxy there, sorry. <.<;

i'll admit my emotions are really high about the cap thing because cap is my favorite superhero but yeah it was a super dick move on a lot of levels and it really was a story that should not have been done

yeah i'm. i can't imagine why you'd do that to such a huge character. i think using it as an example in the article demeaned the article's point though

because massively pop cultural characters like Cap, who have been written by myriads of people, really aren't just owned by the person who happens to be writing them at the time

so it doesn't really fit the point the rest of the article was gearing to.

and i think, too, in a situation like that, the original creators/intent do matter, as well as this entire 75-year legacy, so people are right to be angry about that being spat on

yeah. there's a difference between veering slightly in a new direction, or doing a new take, and then completely undermining the whole character.

female ghostbusters don't undermine the state of 'people busting ghosts'.

exactly

My biggest problem is that people jump to. Something is teased or allowed and peeps flip out without knowing the full story/arc, like Cap might be a clone or whatever idk

And +1 people don't know how to use/direct their anger

purple_drake: I disagree about it being a thin line, but I agree think there's def a difference

Also big difference between "justified anger" which I agree with and "violent anger" which I don't think is justified, personally

(catching up on phone)

ngl i was looking at that reply and thinking 'that was probably a bad choice of words', so i'm with you. there is a difference and it can be easily lost, but it's maybe not a thing one. XD

yeah, when i use 'violent' i mean ... emotions can be violent to the person feeling them, esp when we're invested. but turning it into violence against other people is a wrong no matter what.

There's a legacy there, yes. And it was shitty when Babs had the rape cover and Watchmen was shoehorned into DC and other things I forget because I'm not a big comics person generally

And it's justified to be angry and to express that anger. But I think blaming an individual is often misguided (since it's usually multiple people involved), threats aside.

And especially when it's not a complete work that's set to be judged.

Like they could have had a cool arc with someone impersonating Cap or something, but now it's lost to anger and their arc will read as "fixing Cap for the angry fans" regardless of what it was like initially

That's not the best example cause I get it's an icon etc. But it's the same thing with Ghostbusters being judged without being seen. (In this specific concern of mine)

that's a good point, about it being judged retroactively. even if they meant for it to be something else entirely from the beginning, it's not going to be construed as that.

That said, I also agree they're very different in terms of legacy etc. Ghostbusters is stand alone and Cap is ongoing, one is feminist, for lack of a better word, and the other is undermining.

Thanks for clarifying on the violence thing. agreed

(plurk hiding replies, sorry)

(np, it's been a bit drunk)