No

yes

Attached: EZ8n1rXU8AE035M.jpg (489x832, 89.09K)

Pretty sure that the X-Men are about Stan Lee being bored of having to come up with superhero origins, and Black Panther's about Kirby thinking African culture and proto-Afrofuturism was cool and wanting to draw it.

How can the Nazis Captain America fought during his original run be the embodiment of the alt right if they predate it by 70+ years.

I don't keep up with Rob Liefeld or Deadpool, but I'm pretty sure if you asked him in 1991 or now he'd say that he'd only ever intended for Deadpool to be straight.

Attached: 1510683129512.jpg (640x640, 51.65K)

>Social media post about politics loosely connected with Zig Forums
Fuck off.

Of all the oversimplified inaccuracies presented here, why is the only one I'm triggered by that Stan Lee created anything?

Because you're autistic for getting triggered by childrens' media at all.

But muties are literally scum that should be eliminated from the face of the Earth, so their "point" falls kinda flat.

Why are they talking about the punisher being on their side as if it's a good thing?

Can we rangeban the fags that keep making twitter or facebook screencap threads that contain political drivel?
>Yeah but it's loosely related to Zig Forums because yadayadayada!!!! LETS TALK ABOUT POLITICS ON Zig Forums BECAUSE OF THIS!
How about we don't and stick to discussing comics and cartoons and discuss your politics on Zig Forums you fucking idiot?

This is bullcrap of the highest caliber, for two big reasons. The funny thing is, that the type of faggot that posts this actually agrees with the second one.
The first one is simple. Sure, x-men (or any other franchise) could be about civil rights, okay, but that was not the sole thing they were about. They had specific aesthetics, characters, mannerisms, storytelling, framing, and other elements. You could have just as easily be invested in these stories for elements other than the civil rights aspect and be as much of a valid fan of the franchise, as someone who was in it for the civil rights.
The second one is more kinky. Say you were into x-men in the 60s/70s/80s/90s/00s for the civil right element. Okay? Okay. But from that it doesn't flow at all that you'd be into the x-men in the 20s for their civil rights elements. What it means to have pro civil rights elements in the 60s and in the 20s is vastly, vastly different. Proof of that, is that if current comics were like the 60x x-men, faggots like the one in the OP would be crying racism/misogyny/homophobia/transphobia/whatever flavor of the month cause they have. The people who like 60s civil rights comics and 20s civil rights comics have very, very different ideas on civil rights and so do the comics themselves. It's bizarre to say if you liked the one you have to like the other, they don't naturally flow from each other. They are different.

Superheroes are gay and shit.

Comics in general are gay and shit.

X-men became popular instead of a borderline cancelled reprint title when it started to focus more on the civil rights and racism issues. By the 80s it was pretty blatantly about that, addressing apartheid, civil rights legislation, etc.

Black Panther was specifically created as Marvel’s first black superhero which was progressive as fuck for its time, given this was during the height of the civil rights era and how few black characters in general comics had, let alone be a superhero.

Just because fascism wears a slightly different face today doesn’t change the fact that the type of ethno nationalistic bigotry the alt-right embodies is what Cap fought against in WW2.

Is the development of characters a foreign concept to you? No character is 100% rounded and completely finished by their first and early appearances. They evolve with the times. Hence why Liefeld’s entirely generic Dead in the name merc quickly became the sexually ambiguous, 4th wall breaking comedy character he is known as today.

>But user, some media has politics in it, that means we can’t discuss media without also discussing politics

Attached: 47FC92EC-B02F-4279-A868-B375565FCFB6.jpg (356x374, 35.94K)

Except the OP DOESN'T want to discuss comics or cartoons, it's just an excuse to discuss politics on Zig Forums, nothing more.

I want to fuck Duchess.

Same.

>X-men became popular instead of a borderline cancelled reprint title when it started to focus more on the civil rights and racism issues.
This is objectively wrong. Most of the famous X-Men comics are sci fi stories. Dark Phoenix saga, Days of Future Past, Broad Saga. That is what made the line popular.

I am not claiming there isn't politics, of course there is. God Loves, Man Kills, is fantastic. But claiming the focus on civil rights made it popular isn't really a correct narrative.

>The people who like 60s civil rights comics and 20s civil rights comics have very, very different ideas on civil rights and so do the comics themselves

Almost as if we progress instead as a society instead of stagnate by refusing to evolve and improve. In the year 2020 we don’t have to worry about not being able to marry whom we want due to their color of skin or if they’re of the same sex as those are considered basic rights today and we can instead look at other injustices to mend

As a general thematic direction stories began focusing on more civil rights after Claremont was in charge and it shows.
>But my sci-fi stories!
Isn’t an argument, it’s a pedantic obsession on genre. Stan Lee’s X-men was pretty sci-fi focused and the title never took off particularly well. So it’s pretty dumb to claim it’s because of sci-fi that made X-men popular. Literally next to nobody is going to list that as their primary attraction to the title.

Sure, but OP's argument is [if you liked x-men, which was about civil rights-60s, but don't like x-men now, which is about civil rights-20s-version, you're a hypocrite, or an idiot who didn't get the message of the 60s-x-men you enjoyed], which is incorrect, since as you explained civil rights then and now are different. Liking one doesn't mean liking the other, why would it? They represent different preferences/desires on how society runs, it doesn't flow at all that because you liked the one you'd like the other.

>cap literally fought nazis
yeah, back when nazis were actually more common and an actual threat
how does someone read this much into a piece of media, but is still too autistic to look arund them in modern day and realize that the reason its unbefitting for him to be fighting nazis today isnt just because, among other things, nazis dont exist as much as they used to anymore. but also because the word 'nazi' has completely changed and lost its meaning and people are naturally more sensitive to its new meaning than the old one

saying "its not sjw crap, he ALWAYS fought nazis" is daft because it completely ignores how times have changed. it like saying "well whats wrong with fighting the japanese? america has ALWAYS fought japs

X-Men became well known because of the "feared and hated by a world they're sworn to protect" angle. It wasn't 100% of the narrative, but to say the general direction of X Men was apolitical is nonsense.

Bullshit the x Gene was a metaphor the aids epidemic, the creator was gay

Attached: 5df832e2b1256.image.jpg (400x267, 16.46K)

Oh my God, are you autistic? Civil rights is bit more broader and dominant thematic direction in art than just “these specific issues from this specific era”

Paid Actors don't help your point.

yes whats your point

Nazis are just short hand for fascism.

Obviously, but since it covers many different issues, it's moronic to say "Well, you liked one issue, you have to like all, or you're a hypocrite.".

nazis are still not nearly as common as people who go on about them would like you to believe, and they often dont call themselves nazis which is a BIG factor- the actual nazis did. if THESE neo-nazis want to they can pick up literally any other name, as they often do, and at that point calling em nazis is gonna be null and pointless because unless youre literally pointing at a man wearing a swastika going "seig heil cook the juice" youre not doing yourself any favors. ultimately the word has little to no meaning anymore

The only superhero with political leaning that isn't shit is Anarky.

I think you're confused. I know that the focus changed under Claremont. But you were explicitly stating that is the reason for the X-Men's growing popularity. When that isn't true.
>Isn’t an argument, it’s a pedantic obsession on genre
You're completely strawmanning me. I am not saying one genre magically made the comics popular, rather that those are great arcs that really boosted the comics up. Great stories like those stories.

The fact that you've completely misrepresented what I am saying is really telling.

I never once said X-Men is apolitical. In fact I said the complete opposite. The thing I was arguing against was this:
>>X-men became popular instead of a borderline cancelled reprint title when it started to focus more on the civil rights and racism issues.
The idea that X-Men became popular on the basis of those specific things is objectively wrong.

I've been reading all of Claremont's X-Men and letter pages. People aren't backing up what that user said.

You are a hypocrite if you were okay with it when X-men was doing metaphorical civil rights stories about things like apartheid but now complain when the X-men handle civil rights issues involving gay and trans characters.

>A few thousand marching with torches vs an entire nation buying into extreme nationalism and authoritarianism
Get some perspective, you naive fuckwit

>Deadpool is queer
Aaand opinion invalidated.

Hey, how about you fuck off?