Quote from: Madman Mordo on May 23, 2015, 07:28:33 AM

Quote from: Flee on May 23, 2015, 07:17:30 AM

Quote from: Madman Mordo on May 23, 2015, 06:45:20 AM

Quote from: Flee on May 23, 2015, 05:59:14 AM

This doesn't seem to have much to do with racism at all. They're just going against the established "lore".

Not that I care about superheroes and all that, but to me this would be no different than comic book fans getting worked up over Captain America all of sudden being a female in the next movie for absolutely no reason. You would hardly call these people "sexist" for complaining about a character that has been a certain way for 65 years suddenly having something changed for no reason.

According to wiki, The Fantastic Four have been around for 55 years. All of a sudden deciding to make one of the lead characters black seems like a strange thing to do, then. If the Hulk would randomly become red instead of green in the next movie, fans would complain about that just the same and for the exact same reason too; not because they somehow have an issue with a certain race / color.

To be fair, that's not really an apt comparison. The Human Torch is nowhere near as iconic as Captain America and the Hulk at this point.

Like Meta said, this is a very subjective thing. Hulk might be more mainstream, but I'm sure that there are tens of thousands of Fantastic Four fans out there who genuinely care about this. Besides, it's almost always the vocal minority that gets heard.

Besides, I wouldn't be surprised if more superhero fans pick up on this. Even when they don't particularly care about The Human Torch, I can see many worrying that this might happen to their own heroes too, or just being concerned about the principle of superheroes' established characters and lore.

Movies and adaptations diverge from the main source material all the time, as was pointed out by Turkey in regards to Nick Fury. I could maybe see you're point if you were arguing against tokenism, but that wasn't what you were positing. The fact of the matter is that "lore deviation" really doesn't hold any truck with me, because movie iterations of graphic novels/books or any kind of artistic material for that matter don't always 100% adhere to the main continuity they base it off of. In fact 99% of the time I'd wager they never do.

I'd say it's a case-by-case thing, though. Like Cheat said, Fury apparently was black in the "Ultimate" universe that the MCU movies are modeled on. In this case, you have a member that has always been portrayed as white. Plus, it really doesn't make any sense. Both Johnny and Susan have the same parents and backstory, yet one of them is now extremely pale and white, while the other is completely black for absolutely no reason?

Either way, I don't really care about this. I'm not much of a comic book or superhero fan anyways. Just saying that I understand where the upset fans come from, as it does completely go against 55 years of established lore and a pretty fundamental characteristic of the person, all potentially in the name of tokenism and forced diversity.

I agree, it definitely comes off as shameless tokenism, but the point you were making about canon divergence is a tenuous argument, because movie adaptations disregard artistic integrity all the time. Not to mention controversy seems to be tied to how iconic a character is, given that no one threw a hissy fit when they decided to change Nicky Fury's race who was a predominately white character in the comics.

Quote from: Madman Mordo on May 23, 2015, 07:17:17 AM

I really don't care if it's "inflammatory." It's the truth, and I'm going to continue to reverberate it in this forum. I place the truth of higher value than harming some delicate sensibilities any day of the week.

You're missing the point; it's not that it's inflammatory, per se, it's that inflammatory without good justification. You yourself have acknowledged that this is everything to do with culture, and practically nothing to do with any inherent characteristics of different racial groups. So I'm still entirely unsure why you thought the use of the term "racist facts" was appropriate. It's not that it's just bound to cause trouble--I couldn't care less about that--it's that it has no bearing on the facts, nor even the perspective your trying to operate from.

I purposefully used the term "racist" to make a mockery of the classic retorts people resort to when we talk about African Americans and the crimes they commit as a demographic. I probably should've implemented quote marks around the term in hindsight though.

Quote from: Madman Mordo on May 22, 2015, 10:32:09 PM

Is it racist to say that whites are the most prevalent in regards to sexualised crime? No. So why establish this double standard?

But that's exactly the point. The information in this thread isn't racist, it's to do with culture. The black people disproportionately committing crime aren't doing it because of the colour of their skin; if you raise a white guy in the same circumstances then he'd probably turn out the same.

I don't really see what's racist about pointing out which demographics commit the most crimes. I can see your point if I said "black people commit these crimes because they're black" but I didn't. I've been very adamant to make a distinction between culture and race ITT.

This doesn't seem to have much to do with racism at all. They're just going against the established "lore".

Not that I care about superheroes and all that, but to me this would be no different than comic book fans getting worked up over Captain America all of sudden being a female in the next movie for absolutely no reason. You would hardly call these people "sexist" for complaining about a character that has been a certain way for 65 years suddenly having something changed for no reason.

According to wiki, The Fantastic Four have been around for 55 years. All of a sudden deciding to make one of the lead characters black seems like a strange thing to do, then. If the Hulk would randomly become red instead of green in the next movie, fans would complain about that just the same and for the exact same reason too; not because they somehow have an issue with a certain race / color.

To be fair, that's not really an apt comparison. The Human Torch is nowhere near as iconic as Captain America and the Hulk at this point.

Just going on record to say I don't agree with the OP.

I think it's naive to totally discount poverty, just as it is naive to assume culture has little to do with it. But stylising your sources as "racist facts", when they have nothing to do with race, is nothing short of close-minded bigotry.

You'll notice ITT that I never disregarded poverty as a factor. I just don't regard it as a champion over culture as an impetus for criminality.

What exactly hasn't it to do with race? Crime is very prominent amongst the black community. Is it racist to say that whites are the most prevalent in regards to sexualised crime? No. So why establish this double standard?

Does it? How?

You only have to look to gangbangers and how they reward and praise each other as "homies". How cannot it not be a culture at this point?

I'm pretty hesitant to believe the white Scottish guy living in Scotland who can only link some bullshit studies.

Nice. Bring up my nationality and heritage when it's completely irrelevant. Who's really the racist here?

How so?

Crips. Bloods. At this point it's practically immoral not to be identified in some sort of gang amongst the black community youth.

We're talking about black people, aren't we? Fancy words like "sociocultural norms" doesn't change the fact that your post simplified down reads as "Black culture rewards and reveres violence, thus making black people more violent than other races, simply based on their culture. This is more prevalent among black skinned people of African descent than others."

Actually it really does mean sociocultural norms. But interpret how you wish, if that's what keeps your preconceived biases afloat.

I would've thought nobody would be stupid enough to say something like "only culture influences violence".

Actually it just means "show me something substantial and empirical that isn't just life experience or some amazing, fantastical personal story." Not that I'd expect you to understand.

Have any of these people conducting these studies lived in a ghetto?

Again, anecdotal.

Have you?

Could ask you the same.

Have you or these so called researchers had any of these experiences? No.

More than likely, seeing as how they published an academic paper about it.

But even then, that shouldn't matter. You should know it's fueled mostly by poverty, as should the researchers.

Funny how you attribute Islam to violence amongst Arabs, but when it comes to the black population, culture is completely off the cards. Hm, weird.

There's no set ideology all blacks follow

Yup, thought this was obvious to everyone at this point.

and violence is prevalent across all of America.

Tell me something I fucking don't know. Violence is prevalent across the world. 1+1 = 2.

It's an American problem.

More like a cultural problem, but I can see you're reluctant to factor this in.

And it stems mostly from poverty when it comes to crime.

I've already refuted the poverty facet when it comes to criminality. As has Meta. Why are we still discussing this?

There are criminals who kill for the fun of it.

And the black population seem to be the biggest culprits for it.

Gangbangers kill "enemies" for "respect".

Which reconciles with my cultural argument.

You don't get paid to shoot the opposition. Is that a culture of violence? Not necessarily.

LOL

These are kids with nothing who are struggling to eat a single meal a day and need a sense of belonging.

Kay, so this is either a non sequitur, or you're pulling the appeals to emotion.

They go shoot somebody and they get treated with respect, and start making fast money.

Once again, C.U.L.T.U.R.E.

But to say gangs formed and that the majority of crimes committed are for the fuck of it and that most criminals aren't fueled by desperation is a perception so removed from reality I doubt having a debate with you is worth it.

You're misinterpreting my position. Gangs aren't committing crime for the "fuck of it." They're doing it because they have incentives and rewards for doing so.

You'll likely keep asking me to link a study, as if these people are the end all be all and have never been wrong,

Actually yes, I will, because at the end of the day, I'm more likely to take the word of experts who have extensively studied criminology, as opposed to some Iranian hothead who happens to post on a backwater spin off of a videogame forum.

or that they haven't written studies with little to no research or experiments and taken statistics then skewed then to give the reader a certain perception.

So you're an expert in criminology now?

I've seen all of this firsthand.

Remember that anecdotal evidence I asked you not to provide?

I'm telling you you're wrong

Because you say so, and I'm just suddenly supposed to take your word for it, right?

and so are these researchers.

"durr, my preconceived biases > empirical evidence."

You're not going to accept that

Because it's bullshit.

and I'm not going to be able to link a study

Because there is none.

because what I'm talking about there's nobody with the balls to really highlight just how fucking terrible the living conditions in some American cities are.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+terrible+are+living+conditions+in+the+us

They'd rather blame it on a "culture of violence"

Because it is the culprit.

and act like poverty isn't a real issue.

It's an issue, but not in the way you're positing.

That these people should just "get a job" and "be normal" when they live in warzones.

Created by their culture no doubt.

securing a banter future without anime

That qt backing singer on the right during Dinklage's song could use a good railing.

Quote from: Arthur's 666 Vagina Memes on May 22, 2015, 02:53:00 PM

Quote from: Azumarill on May 22, 2015, 02:47:17 PM

Quote from: Arthur's 666 Vagina Memes on May 22, 2015, 05:12:27 AM

Quote from: Azumarill on May 21, 2015, 08:56:31 PM

Quote from: Arthur's 666 Vagina Memes on May 21, 2015, 08:10:41 PM

Quote from: Azumarill on May 21, 2015, 07:51:24 PM

Quote from: Arthur's 666 Vagina Memes on May 21, 2015, 07:40:13 PM

Anyone that thinks overpopulation is a problem (at least in regards to resources) needs to stop watching Mad Max and Soylent Green.

it may not be an issue right now, but we're making way too many fucking people. the problems caused by overpopulation (especially when it outpaces slow bureaucracies'/ineffective governments' ability to keep up) are only going to continue to get much worse.

Of course, which is why I made sure to clarify the resources facet. I don't deny overpopulation's effects in regards to climate change, deforestation and air quality.

What about oil?

http://www.imeche.org/knowledge/themes/energy/energy-supply/fossil-energy/when-will-oil-run-out

The next viable energy alternative seems to be nuclear, given its essentially unlimited, cheap to produce and emits zero kinds of emissions. The only real problems are the unnecessary, and quite frankly, irrational stigma attached to it and the fact that we haven't quite established effective restorative methods for waste yet (which I have no doubt we'll be able to achieve in the next 10-20 years once we start feeling the pang of oil shortages).

In fact, construction of nuclear power plants is already at a record high.

You don't have to tell me about nuclear energy, but the question is: are we going to wean ourselves off of oil fast enough to alleviate the problems that extreme scarcity will present (will the oil industry and the governments in its pockets even let us)?

As oil scarcity increases, the prospect of cheap nuclear energy will increase in demand, incentivising energy companies to invest in nuclear powerplants. I'm sure Meta could explain it more eloquently, but that's the general gist of how things will probably pan out.

Logically, it's easy to see how these companies would be economically incentivized to switch to cleaner energy. i'm not so sure they will, but I certainly hope so.

Edit: misinterpreted your post.

Quote from: Arthur's 666 Vagina Memes on May 22, 2015, 05:51:40 AM

Quote from: challengerX on May 21, 2015, 06:44:46 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on May 21, 2015, 06:43:05 PM

Quote from: SecondClass on May 21, 2015, 06:40:18 PM

He was murdered by a cop.

Yes, murdered by a man who was struggling with him inside a cop car, who probably thought he was trying to steal his gun and killed him as he turned and began approaching him after the gun had already been fired.

Brown wasn't murdered, he was shot because he tried to take on an officer and he fucking lost.

Bro

The autopsy said there were no signs of a struggle and that he was shot in the back.

What the fuck are you talking about? Both the county, federal and independent autopsies confirmed he was shot in the head, not the back. It helps if you actually read up on the case and remove your biases for a solitary second.

I've read up on it plenty. It helps if you don't believe everything you read in the news.

I didn't read it from the news. I read it from the DOD report funnily enough.

Disgusting. Why are we venerating thugs now?

Mirrors and eyes.

Quote from: Arthur's 666 Vagina Memes on May 21, 2015, 07:40:13 PM

Anyone that thinks overpopulation is a problem (at least in regards to resources) needs to stop watching Mad Max and Soylent Green.

it may not be an issue right now, but we're making way too many fucking people. the problems caused by overpopulation (especially when it outpaces slow bureaucracies'/ineffective governments' ability to keep up) are only going to continue to get much worse.

Of course, which is why I made sure to clarify the resources facet. I don't deny overpopulation's effects in regards to climate change, deforestation and air quality.

u got cucked or something?

Are all black people, niggers?

>people