First transgender Marvel superhero coming 'very soon'

[Steezman96]

Crazy how we have anti-"SJW" users getting triggered by the thought of a trans superhero on a forum dedicated to trans porn. I guess jerking off to trans women in porn and wanting them to be represented equally in our media are mutually exclusive.

[Fitzcarraldo]

Love it!!!!!

Audition.

[filghy2]

It will be obnoxious and most of us know it.

Hollywood needs to get away from all the "woke" BS.

It is like they have a list they need to tick off (one lesbian dwarf - check, one hispanic biesexual - check, etc.), and they forget about entertaining the public.

Hollywood needs to focus on stories first and foremost, and leave the social justice warrioring alone.

So your logic is that transgender characters should never appear in mainstream movies? Please explain - in what circumstances do you think it would be appropriate to have a trans character?

It's revealing that you say that what matters is the story, yet you are prepared to write off this movie as obnoxious without knowing anything about the story.

Perhaps you should leave off the culture warrioring.

[filghy2]

Here here!

Or 'Hear, hear' maybe?

[collinswriters]

Crazy how we have anti-"SJW" users getting triggered by the thought of a trans superhero on a forum dedicated to trans porn. I guess jerking off to trans women in porn and wanting them to be represented equally in our media are mutually exclusive.

The idea of equal representation is BS in the first place, the world is not equal in any way. No two people are born equal. Making movies that were once written thoughtfully ridiculous by adding a group of "minorities" just cus of who they are or identify as (which they have no control over) and not what they have to offer is pure stupidity. If you must make a movie, it should make sense and not just coming out and saying the individual is trans. It simply means the person did not get the role based on merit but manipulations at the expense of the person who is better for that role based on merit. Making 007 a black woman will be the biggest mistake they ever made cus it's clear she didn't get it cus she was the best for the role or according to the texts but just because she is a woman and black which is actually demeaning to people because you don't allow them to achieve things on their own, you just give them freely and we know free things are not the best for anyone. You'll know deep down that you did not work to get to where you are but just because of your gender, color or sexual preference which is irrelevant in all ways possible. And a trans character in the MCU is just ridiculous, it'll be a heavily budgeted piece of garbage at the end. People will only see it cus of the reputation Marvel built when they were still making movies to entertain and not to cater to crap.

[Cereal Escapist]

social justice warriors and the media they rode in on can go fuck themselves because they are just as bad and wrong as the people they think they are criticizing.

adding a trans superhero to the MCU should not be done BECAUSE zhe is trans but that is exactly the reason why Disney will do it...all to make a buck and appear woke.

adding a new superhero who happens to be several things such as a human fucking being with extraordinary abiity and/or supernatural powers, that is also trans, where being trans is not the focus of any of their story line, is actually promoting diversity and inclusivity. in trying to focus a storyline on being trans actually is just pandering and I would hate it just as much as if Michael Cera was cast to play a lesbian Rosa Parks or Denzel Washington was cast to play a butch Helen of Troy in biopics. you don't need to force diversity to prove a point.

Forced inclusivity for agenda or profiit is utter trash and anyone who supports it without seeing how they are just a pawn, needs to have their head examined.

I will give you an example. How many of you saw Bookworm? It only grossed $25M worldwide but it is a movie that SJWs should have loved and seen in droves. It was a smart, female centric, well acted and scripted movie of 2 girls coming of age. It didn't make much money because all the SJWs would rather do is break down other tentpoles and franchises instead of coming up with their own and support a movie that was refreshingly awesome. SJWs love to complain then complain more that their initial complaints were not heard. When something is available to them that they can't complain about, they don't even recognize it.

To be clear, if Disney comes up with a trans superhero character and they make a movie like Iron Man, I'll watch it. If they make an agenda movie, I'll pass.

Agenda and identity politics are ruining this country because as the SJWs get entrenched on one side, those who oppose them get entrenched on the other side and both are equally wrong and just victims of the media who are trying to profit off the discourse. get over yourself and remember, YOLO because there is no sequel to this so why go through life so mad at the world.

[broncofan]

It's hard to imagine the combination of self-loathing and bigotry it takes to join a forum for people attracted to transsexuals and then write an idiotic diatribe about how wanting cultural inclusion of transsexuals makes someone a pawn. Or that one bad analogy demonstrating an incompatibility between characters and actors is remedied by a half dozen more. How many posts asking about a Jewish Muslim half Asian female who works at a yada yada Lesbian Samoan themed restaurant do we have to read Cereal box? The idea of a transgender character is not meant to shock people nor should it. It's disappointing and sad to see people show so much resistance to the idea, especially on this forum.

[filghy2]

social justice warriors and the media they rode in on can go fuck themselves because they are just as bad and wrong as the people they think they are criticizing.

adding a trans superhero to the MCU should not be done BECAUSE zhe is trans but that is exactly the reason why Disney will do it...all to make a buck and appear woke.

adding a new superhero who happens to be several things such as a human fucking being with extraordinary abiity and/or supernatural powers, that is also trans, where being trans is not the focus of any of their story line, is actually promoting diversity and inclusivity. in trying to focus a storyline on being trans actually is just pandering and I would hate it just as much as if Michael Cera was cast to play a lesbian Rosa Parks or Denzel Washington was cast to play a butch Helen of Troy in biopics. you don't need to force diversity to prove a point.

I think someone's been eating too many fruit loops. Your over-the-top reaction says far more about you than it does about the movie business.

Don't tell me Hollywood is putting out movies to make money! Surely the superhero genre has some higher purpose than tawdry commerce - art for art's sake?

I'm wondering what your view is on Black Panther. The logic of your argument seems to be that black people should only be in these movies if their blackness is de-emphasised. I seem to recall that you have form on that issue - weren't you the guy who complained about the black-only thread? Your implicit assumption seems to be that being a white heterosexual is the norm and any departure from that needs to be strictly limited and justified.

You also seem to be contradicting yourself. You complained earlier about one-dimensional characters but now you say that trans characters are only okay if their transsexuality is kept out of the storyline. Given that's a key determinant of who they are wouldn't that tend to make them more one-dimensional?

[Cereal Escapist]

hey bronco fan....reading is fundamental. you clearly can't do it well as you retorted without realizing you agree with me!!!

It's hard to imagine the combination of self-loathing and bigotry it takes to join a forum for people attracted to transsexuals and then write an idiotic diatribe about how wanting cultural inclusion of transsexuals makes someone a pawn. Or that one bad analogy demonstrating an incompatibility between characters and actors is remedied by a half dozen more. How many posts asking about a Jewish Muslim half Asian female who works at a yada yada Lesbian Samoan themed restaurant do we have to read Cereal box? The idea of a transgender character is not meant to shock people nor should it. It's disappointing and sad to see people show so much resistance to the idea, especially on this forum.

you did what every SJW does and goes right for pigeonholing anyone that doesn't agree with you as a bigot. the hypocrisy of the modern SJW is on full display.

I will repeat:

if Disney includes a trans character just BECAUSE they are trans, they are part of the problem and just pandering to SJW morons. That is exactly what they are likely to do. They want to appear woke and will be celebrated by SJWs for being that, even though that is the same studio that just went out of their way to show Finn and Poe were heterosexual in Episode 9.

If Disney wrote and effective character where one of their traits was they they were trans, that is moving the needle forward on acceptance and inclusivity because they would not make an example of that character for a single trait. I simply don't trust Disney; they will not do this because they need the agenda media to celebrate them as woke.

SJWs want shock and awe and that is what Disney will give them in droves.

If reading comprehension was your strong suit, you would have realized that we actually agree as the inclusion of a trans character should never be to shock or impress especially in something like a superhero movie.

Finally, conflating my utter disdain for agenda and identity politics with any other point of view when it comes to trans people or anything else, is also something only a simple person would do. It is possible to be an advocate for trans people and never agree with any SJWs, whether they are mild mannered or a vigilante. Perhaps you should think about that instead of being so judgmental.

[broncofan]

Just because the phrase Social Justice Warrior is used 99% of the time to demonize people who want to promote inclusion doesn't mean there's not a germ of an idea there. If it's coherent it might mean gratuitous offense taker or someone whose protests are entirely symbolic.

And yet, here you are, writing these 15 one and a half sentence paragraphs trying to create a faux-distinction between forced inclusion and inclusion that you're okay with. While you vainly try to articulate this micro-distinction you fail to distinguish between biographical works and fiction. Most people can see why making an ahistorical biopic about Rosa Parks would be offensive in a country that has discriminated against black people and why this is different from making a fictional character black. Historically there have been social and institutional barriers that kept black people and women out of certain professions. It might be interesting to see a black female 007 if it challenges some people's expectations.

On the other hand, a movie that changes the history of the U.S. Civil Rights movement or whitewashes atrocities is probably going to be viewed differently to one that adapts a fictional character to a different cultural context.

I read just fine and simply wasn't impressed with your excuse-making.