Your Favorite Media Has Always Been Woke
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 чер 2024
- TW: Discussions of historical events. If that bothers you, leave now. If you are laughing about this warning, stick around. You might learn something.
Did you hear the new X-Men cartoon is woke? Shocking, I know. The X-Men, touching upon social issues? Seems pretty absurd to start outrage about that. But let me let you in on another secret: the entertainment you've loved for years has ALWAYS been woke.
Chapters:
0:00 The X-Men Have Always Been Woke
1:19 X-Men, Its History, and Its Messages
4:17 X-Men and the LGBTQA Community
5:44 The X-Men Have Never Been Subtle
6:53 Is New Media More Woke?
7:38 What Does Woke Even Mean?
9:32 Stories Have Always Been Woke
12:24 Paul Verhoven (Starship Troopers and Robocop)
13:57 Let's Talk About Representation
17:50 We're Having the Same Conversation from 1825
19:39 My Obligatory Sailor Moon Reference
20:28 The Actual Point of This Video
Media Discussed:
X-Men
Candyman
Star Wars
Starship Troopers
Robocop
Captain Planet
Philadelphia
Alien
Night of the Living Dead - Фільми й анімація
I was a kid in the 90s -- a girl who read X-Men comic books and played video games obsessively (DOS, too broke for a Nintendo but I did have a Gameboy classic and lived by it til the batteries exploded in a hiss of acid at daycare one day).. a nerd when those things were still pretty niche and geeky, but open to all. to grow up and be gaslit by posers that games weren't always for me and that these franchises we grew up watching weren't always beautifully diverse and full of crucial lessons about being decent to one another, pisses me off on a daily basis now.
those lessons are why I'm not a crap person! it's funny how a lot of people missed the memo or, in bad faith, pretend like they were around to see what it was like when they straight up weren't.
and oh my god of course Ian Miles Cheong doesn't get that Robocop is satire. despite all their urgings to the contrary, the extremely online loser-right are fundamentally incapable of discerning satire from earnestness most of the time, ESPECIALLY if their personal interpretation is cozy for their worldview
@@xXluluchanelXx
What bugs me is that Chong lives in Malaysia, but highlights the worst stereotypes about Black Americans for clicks and cash. I bet he wouldn't like it if Americans did the same to his country.
When people say "These games aren't for you.", they mean "These games aren't for you if you're going to demand they change to suit your needs and issues." That's not what they are there for. If you want to see if something is for you, you'd come on in, and see if it's for you. If it is, you dont' make demands for it to change for you. If it's not, you leave. Not everything needs to be 'beautifully diverse' and 'full of crucial lessons about being decent to each other'. If you want that stuff, find it where it's being offered, but don't expect everything you join to cater to you.
And as for everyone else 'missing that memo', they didn't. They just don't want you coming in and ruining their fun.
@@Rotom0479Games are a young medium that's growing with the times. Nobody is demanding the maturing it's been doing in the past 10-15 years especially. It's just a natural outgrowth of the '90s & early-2000s edgelord devs maturing & starting families & becoming more aware & sensitive to the world around them. Also, there's an inherent wokeness to nearly every work in every medium that doesn't follow a villain protagonist. So maybe you're just an asshole for refusing to grow up like the rest of us, and 99% of pop culture was never really meant for you in the first place.
I like the X-Men. I grew up watching it as a kid. But the X-Men were anti-woke. I guess I was supposed to think Magneto was the good guy at the X-Men who were token mutants.
I just find it hilarious X-Men's politics were never subtle Magneto survived the Holocaust. There's an episode in the X-Men cartoon where Sabertooth "the villain" had an abusive Father who removed his fangs which he would then grow back, aka parental abuse because their child is "born different" and won't be normal.
Magneto also becomes mutant Hitler
Not really a good comparison
@@Goblinhandler It's a great comparison because it shows how fear and ambition can blind someone, he witnessed horrors beyond reason and now believes "By any means necessary" and that sometimes makes him as terrifying as the people who wronged him.
You are what I hate about wokist, you have a very specific understanding of race, gender, sexuality, oppression, power etc and how it interacts with society and whenever questioned you ppl always tell others to get educated by themselves. Yet whenever there is a story or group that has even a single aspect that is slightly tangential, all of a sudden wokism transforms into this ultra general ideology that just means "generally in favour of minorities" . This is why this entire anlysis and argument is complete bullshit. Yet again *woke leftist are lying through their teeth* .
Doesn't change the fact that you're still missing the point about what's really going on with this, illbegotten Leftist PROPAGANDA disguised as an 90s style X-Men cartoon.
You do realize Magneto is an anti-human villain for most of the stories in X-men (him joining the X-men is usually the exception) .. also basic universal themes aren't "woke" ... universal political themes in service of telling a good story =/= unhinged political far-left propaganda being the point of the comic .. if you don't understand the difference maybe you need to take your brain to a repair shop or something.
"It's hard to imagine that backlash now that Miles is such a beloved character"
It's not, or rather, we don't have to imagine, it still happens to this day.
Miles Morales is only a "beloved character" because he has an army of sycophantic consoomers who love him conditionally.
It happens because Miles Morales is a shit character. Beloved, my ass.
@@Rotom0479 Cope harder my guy, we'll keep laughing at you.🤣
@@Rotom0479 you don't even know that the spiderverse exists do you
@@abdulazizmohammed8797 I know those movies exist. It's just that they've done nothing to make Miles any less shit.
Superman's epithet titles him "Champion of the oppressed." He literally tries to stop an unlawful execution and stops a an abuser from hurting his wife in the very first Superman story. He was key to the reason why we know the kkk are the bad guys. This was all before the 1970s.
The fact that people think that he's apolitical is baffling. And that's just Superman. There's plenty of other superheroes that can be cited as being political at the time. Need people bring up the cover of Captain America #1 and the backlash Marvel got for that?
the superman radio serials were about him fighting the klan too.
@@HeroToxiko
I first heard of Superman fighting the Klan in a video posted by Steve Shives:
ua-cam.com/video/hjxsEke8uk4/v-deo.html
He also did follow-up video about a great comic book series based on the serial:
ua-cam.com/video/iel5FyWrSpg/v-deo.htmlsi=oMyif0wz_tF8e0Cp
The fact that I didn't know how political Superman was as a character reinforces Anthony's point that we can't let "offensive" art be erased. We will all be poorer for it.
Right-wingers want Superman to be Homelander. They're total authoritarians.
It’s the mindset that something “isn’t political” if you don’t personally disagree or at least feel conflicted about it. A lot of old political messaging has become accepted, at least to some degree, so that they don’t seem nearly as “political.”
It’s an aspect of life a lot of people don’t want to be reminded of, either because it’s not a priority to them or because most media that will bring it up will be against them.
@@calebmarmon1310
Excellent point.
Oh man people would get pissed at Static Shock. I love him.
What's so funny is a lot of these Chuds will say Static was one of their favorite cartoons.
Wait, what?! You complain about woke and your favorite is a cartoon that literally beat you over the head with wokeness!?
Something I absolutely adore about that show is that characters in it, and the world at large, grow from the lessons they learned dealing with the subjects many of those IRL morons would rage about.
My favourite example is Richie's dad, mr Fowley. First season, he's a rascist, a "fine upstanding bigot" as Static's dad, mr Hawkins calls him. But he decides to make the effort to change.
Season 2. The christmas episode. Mr Fowley is seen sitting NEXT TO THE FOWLEYS, IN A CHURCH WITH A BLACK PASTOR, PRAYING. It's just that not too many people remember it because BLOODY HELL THAT EPISODE TACKLES HOMELESSNESS AND IS GENUINELY A VERY BRUTAL TEARJERKER THAT DIDN'T SHY AWAY FROM THE SUBJECT AND I LOVE IT.
Just like the rest of that show.
@KodachiC If disney started doing STATIC SHOCK cartoons and turned the main character gay,would you think that was okay? Because if you're totally fine with how Disney completely changed Morph, obviously you'd be cool seeing the same thing done to Static Shock, right?✌️😏
@@darthGOLDAR Turning Morph NON-BINARY does not change Morph.
If anything, it makes perfect sense. Wouldn't you be iffy on your gender (different from your sexuality, mind you) if you could shape-shift too?
And sorry, but Morph is a D-list character. He existed solely to motivate Wolverine, came back several seasons later as a bad guy. No one gave a damn about him until you r-words complained about the slight identity change.
As for Static being gay...sure. Why not? I don't remember Static having a consistent love interest (I may be wrong), at least not one that heavily affected the plot. Still doesn't change the core of his character unless you are dead set on who you ship him with.
Also... wasn't his friend Gear gay in the Milestone comics?
@@KodachiC Gear was openly gay in the Milestone comics.
"Wait! [Insert media] is woke!?"
"Always has been" *aims gun*
It hasn't though. Oh, it was always political but it used to be an allegory instead of just out telling you "rasicm iz bad yu gais!!".
Woke isn't just caring about issues, it's being an insufferable little shit about issues.
It amazes me that when someone says STAR TREK was never woke. You have to be ignorant or a dishonest UA-cam grifter to not know this.
Classic Star Trek: "YOU UNDERESTIMATE MY WOKENESS!"
"Always hasn't" aims gun
@@TheVeritas1 Star Trek didn't do it because it was trendy or to appease whining minorities or raise an ESG score.
I am so ashamed to admit I never knew about the Tulsa Massacre until the Watchmen showcased it as a plot point. I felt violated as a history buff that they never taught me this in school.
You're not alone. Plenty of Americans outside of the Black community had never heard of the Tulsa Massacre and similar atrocities committed in America's past.
The good news is that you are willing to acknowledge the Tulsa Massacre happened so that you are vigilant of the resurgence of bigotry which leads to such evil.
Blame the education system, hiding the truth for their own convenience.
@@DARS_04
Correct. If you lived in a majority Black community, you heard of massacres like Tulsa at school or from relatives.
If you didn't live in such communities, such ugly events in American history were covered up.
While I am glad it was brought up, I feel like they way to showcased it was horrible. Like, there were no planes actively shooting civilians, it should have been handled better. Although that show could have done a LOT better. Still, I am glad that there was at least an attempt to show history here, I just wish they actually made it accurate instead of dramatizing it for whatever reason.
If they never taught you about the Tulsa Massacre in school, it's probably because it wasn't important.
First rule of the Rocky Horror Glee Show… we don’t talk about the Rocky Horror Glee Show. It never happened 😵💫
"It's hard to imagine [the backlash to Miles Morales] now."
Are you sure about that?
It happened when he was introduced and still happens to this day, especially now due to him being very successful in the mainstream and being included in a ton of Spider-Man shows, having his own movies, solo game and staring in the sequel to Marvel's Spider-Man 2. So many "fans" are mad that Miles is successful and they keep throwing hate his way. It's unfortunate.
@@windghost2 exactly
@@windghost2 That's because Miles sucks and his success is artificially manufactured.
@@Rotom0479 So AI?😂
@@windghost2 No I mean that Marvel does a lot shit to make Miles seem more popular than he is.
As an X-Men fan, off the top of my head I can think of other issues that the X-Men tackled: Genosha being a commentary on the segregation in South America, Cassandra Nova being used to explore stuff ranging from Terrorism to fake news, The entire “Gifted” arc from Astonishing X-Men being a huge take-that at conversion therapy, I could go on.
It’s obvious to me that the people who are upset with media being “Woke” are people who just take a product at face-value rather than actual engage with the work.
*Africa.
Exactly. It's all performative outrage and they're getting exposed because X-Men at its core is political. Even the terrible Fox movies got that part right.
It's people like you who think that there's no difference between being politically correct and being woke, which is why it's people like me who have to explain to you that, Yes, there is a big difference between being politically correct and being woke. Which is "woke" isn't about being politically Correct at all, it's about pushing a anti-straight agenda.
There's a difference between a story using political elements in it, and a story being explicitly political. That's the problem we have when we call things woke, we hate it when stories are explicitly political, and we want Marvel to stop making them.
Deleted my previous comment because I thought it sounded too snarky:
What do you mean by “Stories that are extremely political”? I’d argue Claremont’s entire X-Men run was extremely political, From stuff like the mutant registration act to using religion as a form a bigotry. How is that not “extremely political?”
Hell, Marvel itself has been political. From stuff like Civil War criticizing post 9/11 America and the patriot act to even its beginnings in the Silver Age tackling The Cold War.
You know that modern audiences would have a cow about Static Shock's gun violence episode
More accurately, the "anti-woke" audience would have a cow. Every else would applaud how well the episode handled the issue.
@@TheVeritas1 I’d edit the comment to better reflect this more correct perspective but accept the mistake by… liking your comment.
Nobody has a problem with that episode.
Nobody has any issue with Static Shock, because it always has handled its messages in an entertaining and tactful way, unlike a lot of modern media. The Boondocks is also universally praised for similar reasons even though it's written very specifically for its intended audience.
@@frustratedsquirrel
Please. We live in an age where right wingers attack Martin Luther King for standing against Jim Crow.
If Static Shock and the Boondocks were released now, the same people who have a fit over the shows denouncing racism.
This X-Men controversy was the breaking point for me. I am sick of people calling things “Woke” nowadays, I hate people, mainly reactionary channels, influencing others to obey and get manipulated by these channel’s ideals and fricked up motivations. People online have abused so many important words to co-allign with their motives and agenda’s that all we can do is to just not listen to them. Media had always been inspired by political stories as well as mythology that tried to say something.
Well said.
What makes it funny is none of them know jack about X-Men and lack the self awareness that they're being exposed because they use the same rhetoric that the -MAGA- Friends of Humanity would be using.
The reason these 'reactionary channels' popped up is because we're all sick of people coming into our favorite hobby spaces and fucking up our favorite franchises beyond belief. And we call them all 'woke' because we're sick of people using them as soapboxes for their progressive politicking. We're like this, because the SJWs started it. You want to blame somebody for all this, blame the SJWs.
But I'm sure you're ok with left-sided idealogues telling you what to think and manipulating you right? Literally everything you complain about here in your post can be applied to either side (but manipulation is far more common in woke circles, the entire thing is a moral fear-mongering tactic similar to organized religion.)
@@frustratedsquirrel
You act like right wing media doesn't manipulate conservatives into thinking all Black people are criminal thugs or diversity hires.
I'm reminded of the scene from Teen Titans where Starfire explains to Cyborg that another alien was calling her a slur. Cyborg empathizes with her and when she ask if he's been judged because of how he looks he says, "Of course I do, I'm part robot."
It's so funny that people on Twitter are talking about the scene like its subtle.
I almost had to laugh at the absurdity of that scene watching Teen Titans for the first time recently, there really were hard limits on what you could say explicitly on TV
Also, you know the fact that cyborg is also black
It's because that scene is a joke.
@@Rotom0479 Dumb take but whatever man
@@Kingcrimson_1456 Dumb take? That's exactly what it was. That exchange was a joke.
Grifters only say X-Men are woke because they're in denial of the fact that they're the ones the franchise portrays as bad guys for their bigotry.
So true.
Projection. We're mad because we hate that our favorite characters are being used as sock puppets for social justice garbage we don't want.
@@Rotom0479garbage such as, all humans should be treated as equals?
@@Ceiling559 No, just any dumb leftist garbage.
@@Ceiling559 Funny that you think they're preaching that, when they sure don't give straight white men that luxury.
Tuckums whining that the green M&M isn't sexy anymore will always be hilarious.
I shake my head in disbelief over that video.
It doesn't even make sense. If you think cowgirl boots are sexy, then you would probably think sneakers are too.
Beau of the Fifth Column does a bunch of the "_______ was always woke!" videos in this vein. He's done them on GI Joe, Star Trek, Star Wars and more. None of them are this deep a cultural dive, just saying, if you wanna see that there are those who get it, he gets it. Great video, enjoyed it!
They're probably shit like this video too.
Those sound like terrible videos.
I find it hilarious that they are complaining that Rogue is no longer thick but yet they tutn around and complain about the sexualization of children's cartoons
That's because this cartoon isn't for children.
@@Rotom0479 Jessica Rabbit, Mary Jane Watson, Catwoman, Wonder Woman, Storm, Emma Frost, Psylocke, Harley Quinn, Poison Ivy, Lola Bunny: “Am I a joke to you.”
@@Silent_Fool Ok, let me ask, how old do you define "children", because I define children as 1 to 9, and all the female characters you listed off are in media I'd say is for kids 10 and up.
@@Rotom0479 So, You’re saying 90s X-Men is for babies.
@@Silent_Fool No I'd say it's for ages 10 and up. Again I ask, what is the age range of "children" for you?
Ive long liked your tweets on twitter but man I had no idea you made video essays. And what an essay, I must commend you for this.
I only started a couple months ago with video essays. I am hoping i only get better from here on out.
@@agramuglia You're not, you're actually getting worse. I've read your CBR shit and I thought that was you at your lowest, but this video was something else.
@@Rotom0479 So you can argue against something i said here?
@@agramuglia Yes, I can argue against your entire bibliography.
Okay. So...do it. @@Rotom0479
I think the confusion from Starship Troopers is because the original novel was probably 100% sincere in its well, not quite fascism, but in its advocacy for a "Garrison State".
Nailed it. I read the novel and expected the Starship Troopers film to play the story straight. Great VFX aside, I was initially disappointed with the film, Over time, I have begun to appreciate the film's satire.
I don't remember who wrote it. He apparently did like a lot of thought experiments. Even wrote about a pacifist society.
@@kylemendoza8860It depended on who he was fucking at the time. Like many nerds he could have many different ideas at different points of his life.
@@WannabeCanadianDev
Yeah that was kind of the point he did a lot of thought experiments.
@@kylemendoza8860Its not thought experiments, he was legitimately fascist-adjacent when he wrote star ship troopers; it isn't in a vacuum those were his actual beliefs.
They are just mad because Homelander and Soldier Boy are villains.
Yep.
The point of the boys is that super heroes suck, like watchmen. So people being mad at that by itself is just so dumb.
@@josesosa3337
Unfortunately, not everyone realizes the point of The Boys and Watchmen. Thus, Homelander and Rorschach have fanboys, who don't realize the characters were created to be warnings, not idols to be emulated.
@@TheVeritas1 I find the discourse around Roshach to be very interesting. Ive seen many people say that the writer accidentally made him VERY endearing and sympathetic. Maybe one day I'll dive into the watchman comic.
@@josesosa3337 Yes, Alan Moore accidentally made Rorschach likeable the same way so many other creators make characters who are accidentally unlikable.
This all seems like it should be blindingly obvious, but many people just seem to see what they want to see. So thank you for saying what nobody should have to say, and for articulating it clearly and thoughtfully... Great work.
You mean like how so many SJWs see what they want to see in media that they arbitrarily say was 'woke all along'?
Yes, some people just see what they want to see. Like you and Anthony here only wanting to see the X-Men as woke and nothing but woke.
Funnily enough, people still complain about Miles Morales
That's because Miles is a shit character and nobody wants him.
@@Rotom0479 Miles is a really cool character, and he’s way more than what meets the eye. It’s kinda sad to see some people dissing him for reasons that look a lot like racial bias (Note: I said looks a lot like, not that you actually are). Everyone’s got their own take on characters, especially when they’re people of color, but it seems like the hate for Miles is mostly coming from a not-so-cool place.
@@Rotom0479 Miles is a really cool character, and he’s way more than what meets the eye. It’s kinda sad to see some people dissing him for reasons that look a lot like racial bias (Note: I said looks a lot like, not that you actually are). Everyone’s got their own take on characters, especially when they’re people of color, but it seems like the hate for Miles is mostly coming from a not-so-cool place.
@@thehoodpinch7364 Miles could be white for all I care, and I'd still want him gone. I couldn't care less if he were Afro-Latino, I care more about how he's an inferior replacement for Peter Parker.
@@thehoodpinch7364 Miles could be a one-horned one-eyed flying purple people eater, and I'd still want him gone. I couldn't care less about Miles' race. I only care "is he an alright replacement for Peter Parker?" And every time I ask myself that, I examine his character, and he always comes up lacking. And it doesn't help that Marvel is constantly shilling him.
If these people claim that X-Men 97 is somehow "woke" then I think many of them, Geeks and Gamers and Nerdrotic included completely missed the point of X-Men.
They just always have to have content that's all
What point was that? They have had LOTS of "points." They've been around more than 60 years.
@@batboy9997 They miss almost every point and yet arrogantly believe that they're geniuses.
If you people claim x-men 97 and the OG are the same, than I think many of you never watched the OG.
It was an allegory, now it's just telling us.
@@MaestroGrey Not only that, but the allegories were varied and tried to represent many different ideas, beliefs, and representation. Now I could be wrong, but I have an incredibly strong feeling that in this new X-Men '97 we'll only see two schools of thought, on two subjects, with one POV.
It's just manufactured outrage by guys like Geeks n Gamers and Quartering because crying woke for everything makes them the big bucks. And most of their audience are stuck in 2016.
No, it's not. It's legitimate anger at seeing so many franchises bastardized and ruined in the name of social justice, and we want it to stop.
So then if it's just the audiences of a couple of youtube content creators, then why aren't any of these properties selling?
@@frustratedsquirrel They're not selling because the quality has gone down, and the creators have been openly attacking anyone who doesn't like the changes their making. The UA-camrs are just the most vocal of the critics.
Yes because after 2016 movies games and comics started going to shit because of this push for diversity, inclusivity and a political narrative.
The Last of Us 2 is one example where a strong-female-lead (who's also gay, score some ESG points for that) declares protagonist dominance by brutally murdering the likeable charismatic protag of the first game, but it's justified because he was a straight white male.
@@jekblom123 I agree with what you're saying, but minor fact check: Abby (who killed Joel) isn't gay in TLoU2, Ellie is.
I hope the people complaining about Morph are not attached to Mystique
I hope the people advocating for this change don't fuck with Mystique.
@@Rotom0479 They will (if Morph is Non-binary, there's zero reason why they wouldn't make Mystique Non-binary too)
@@truteal I hope they don't.
My dude, Mystique is already Nightcrawler’s biological father. Take a seat.
@@brotherjustincrowe Yeah and guess what, it's a dumbass retcon and I refuse to accept it.
I found you from your retroblasting EVA response, and I dig your vids so, so, so much. You are a fantastic creator.
He really isn't.
@@Rotom0479Yeah on second thought, screw this guy
One thing that changed with "anti-woke" backlashes is, they were way too irrational to regular people. They more often also complained about hidden hexagrams, pentagrams, trianges, etc, than what we have today. I also remember Alien being called an abortionist propaganda by right wingers, and seen people dismissing Mashiro Shiina's (from Sakurasou no Pet na Kanojo) obvious autism-coding as "just coincidence".
Bro, some of them called Lightyear woke because gay kiss in the background to my understanding
"We only know that Alien had a canonically trans character due to a blurry computer read out, that is easy to miss...."
Funny is that if this movie came out today, THAT BLURRY READOUT THAT IS EASY TO MISS would be the reason they call Alien "woke garbage". For fuck sake, people threw a tamper tantrum when they saw 2 very tiny trans and LGBT pride flags in Madeline's room at the end of the Farewell DLC of Celeste.
Isn't it telling, that you literały need to make shit up nobody said and nobody will, just because you have no argument?
Celeste was a shit game anyway.
People threw a tantrum over a Trans Pride Flag in Across the Spiderverse even though it is in only one scene. A flag that doesn't even mean any character is trans yet but this means the Latino Spiderman of color is woke now.
@@thevikingbear2343Sony snuck that flag in to pander to the LGBT community. Nobody wants shit like that.
@@Rotom0479Thanks for proving The Viking's point, dingus.
Great video, but gonna be the nerd to point out that the cartoon was called Static Shock, but the character and comic was always called just Static.
As a comic book historian, I would like to note this video is 100% correct and its clear everyone complaining about it and the new X-Men never read God Loves, Man KIlls.
The only reason people hate this video is because we're sick and tired of having our favorite IPs be described as "always woke" and being gaslighted for not liking the changes. This video is one of those instances.
@@Rotom0479 you are not being gaslighted but keep crying lol
@@netanelaker4437 How am I not being gaslighted? Because having your favorite things changed for the worse and being told it's good is textbook gaslighting.
@@Rotom0479 your favorite things were always woke. This is a simple truth. This video counts a lot of examples from the past. If you didn't see it when these things became your favorite, well, that's because you became awaken to this reality. Kinda ironic if you ask me.
@@netanelaker4437 And there's another example of textbook gaslighting: "Your favorite things were always woke" (when they most certainly weren't). I've explained to numerous people in this comment section already, but there's a difference between a story having a progressive bend and a story being woke. It's you people who haven't awoken to reality, because you people think everything was woke when it wasn't (and better off not woke). So knock it off with this gaslighting nonsense.
Phenomenal video! Every point is finely made and it's not even scratching the surface of how true art always has something to say and rarely has anything ever been interesting when it says "hey guys, the status quo is good actually."
Glad I found your channel. Definitely subscribing!
Why exactly does 'true art' need 'something to say'. Can't we just have stories that are just pure entertainment? Not every story/piece of media needs to have a message attached to it. And just what's wrong with saying the status quo is good?
@@Rotom0479 You are not the intellectually type, aren't you? Why not combining entertainment with depth and meaning? Look at the Dune novels for example.
I really don't understand your problem: just watch movies or other media for their entertainment and ignore the underlying message(s). I have the slight feeling that it is not about the meaning or message per se, but about these specific ones that you don't like, am I right?
I believe that good art is always reflecting on the zeitgeist, the specific context of their times or indeed timeless themes. Then what entertainment is "pure entertainment"? (Even in media, that is not mainly aiming at a political message, you can easily dissect the background of their times and their social standpoints. Look at comedies and how they reveal their social and cultural background in the depiction of what is considered "funny" in a specific society.)
Again, what is for you "pure entertainment" without any message? I am really excited to hear some examples.
@@christianmayer7432 It's very hard to enjoy entertainment when it's messaging is so damn blunt.
An example of a pure entertainment storyline I can think of is the Brood Saga from X-Men. I dare you to come up with whatever political message is in that.
I have no problem with stories having messages. My problem is when they are so blunt and they beat them over the head of the audience. And it certainly doesn't help that when we raise objections to them out of concern for the IP, we're called istaphobes.
@@Rotom0479 I love the Brood Saga - it is dark and thought provoking - it is clear that it was heavily influenced by Alien and the underlying themes about sexuality, mortality and the human nature. Alien is in itself rich in its themes and its (especially sexually disturbing) interpretations.
You also could interpret the brood as a metaphor for Aids or any other (parasitic) disease (not as in your face like the Legacy Virus - I remember the scene where Storm tried to kill herself to avoid being infected by the brood).
What is your point? It is a rich story with many underlying themes about existential despair while confronting horror. It is among the darkest themes that the X-Men comics explored. I am aghast to consider it as "pure entertainment" without deeper meaning.
Agree to disagree, I guess.
PS: Again, I have the feeling that it is not about deeper meanings, but about meanings that you simply don't like. Your clumsy wording about "political message" is quite revealing.
"I have no problem with stories having messages. My problem is when they are so blunt and they beat them over the head of the audience." - As a German, it is quite interesting to see these culture wars because for many Europeans many Disney movies were always quite blunt with their messages. And don't let me start about US - patriotic movies like The Patriot or Independence Day (I can name so many more - you can include nearly any 80's action flick), in which 'Merica is glorified in absurdly highs. Does this count as a "political message" for you?
These types of media always existed, so I don't see your problem, to be honest.
@@christianmayer7432 1. Alright, define your terms then. What is a deeper meaning and what is a political message? How are they similar and how are they different?
2. Which Disney movies are you talking about?
3. That's just standard behavior for every country to glorify themselves in media they've made. There's nothing really wrong if a country does it. I guarantee you that if the Patriot or Independence Day were made in any other country, like Burkina Faso, for example, they would've been "Hoo-rah! We're Burkina Faso, and we're here to save the world!"
X-Men being about oppression is why I love it so much.
You are missing the forest for the trees, sir.
@@Rotom0479 I am not doing either sir. I am legit just saying why I love it. Like I want to root for them and have them overcome this.
@@KazeShikamaru If why you love the franchise is based around a small part of a larger picture, then yes, you are missing the forest of the trees.
Also, get ready to keep hoping for something that isn't gonna happen, because in comics, Status Quo is God.
@@Rotom0479 not really a small aspect when it's the crux of the series.
@@fightingmedialounge519 YMMV on whether it's the main crux, but I've always considered that secondary to other stuff.
They're just mad they can't jack it to Rogue
This coming from the type of people that turned Wolverine, Cyclops, and Jean Grey into a throuple...
@@MaestroGrey was the love triangle story really much better?
@@zacharybosley1935 Than them becoming a freakin' polycule? Fuck yes.
@@MaestroGrey why?
Even though they still can, as it's probably not hard to find Rogue hentai out there...
Inb4 someone be like "X-Men fighting for equality is not woke!" or "There's a differnce between Woke and Ploticial"
It's not "woke." Ironically, the people who coined the term are now the ones who use it the least. It's completely meaningless now.
There's equality and forced inclusion.
Except there is.
@@jekblom123 says the bot
@@Rotom0479 Says the bot
The people who don’t understand this are the people who couldn’t see Homelander was obviously the villain right from the beginning, and think Starship Troopers made a totally cool society. They also would have thought early 2000’s Stephen Colbert was being legit and not playing a satirical character.
Edit: I saw someone point out that Ant-Man and Doctor Strange were super obscure characters, and when the MCU gave them movies, the anti-wokes didn’t freak out. But when female and poc characters get movies, the anti-wokes cry about how the mcu is “propping up unpopular characters.” The hypocrisy is amazing. I also love when they claim modern media is more preachy than media has ever been… as if it could possibly be as preachy as He-Man or Captain Planet.
They did think The Colbert Report was legit news....sad, really.
People do not have a problem with women and POC characters getting the spotlight in movies. We have a problem when those films suck and/or they shit on white men. And considering most people who go to see those types of movies are white men, I think you can imagine why it's not a good idea to piss those people off. And as for 'modern media being more preachy than ever', that's because they current crop of writers don't know how to handle nuance, and tell their stories as blunt as they get. And He-Man and Captain Planet (the latter especially) get made fun of and mocked A LOT for being too on the nose with their messages.
@@Rotom0479 well it's a good thing those films aren't shitting on white men then, and you'd have to be incredibly media illiterate, or deliberate disingenuous, in order to think they were.
@@JeremyGlenesk Which films are you talking about?
@@Rotom0479 I don't really need to be specific, because you aren't. These films you're handwaving at generally are not there to shit on white men. If you feel they were, you probably need to try being a bit more secure in yourself. Female characters existing while being strong, intelligent, and powerful are not a threat to you.
Nice video appreciate all the shows and movies you referenced. Especially the Watchman tv show that show doesn’t get enough talk.
Probably because the Watchmen show sucks a golf ball through a garden hose.
@@Rotom0479 I disagree
@@Infinite_Repeat i mean, you can say you like it and it was good, you just can't say it was OBJECTIVELY good.
@@Rotom0479 I didn’t and it’s not objectively bad either
@@Infinite_Repeat it is objectively bad.
I hate how people ignores Stan Lee and Jack Kirby’s words on why X Men is made. Especially Eric July and Nerdrotic. But thank you for explaining why X Men exists.
I wonder if July and Nerdrotic are just grifters who prey on the fear, hatred, and ignorance of others to get lots of clicks and cash.
@@TheVeritas1 they are.
@@TheVeritas1 Nerdrotic was a meth dealer so he may have some experience. 🤔
@@yungmuney5903
I've heard that Twitter. Did Nerdrotic ever go to jail for his crimes?
@@TheVeritas1 They're not.
Great video. I especially appreciate the examination of such ideas through the historic lens, how history repeats, why it repeats, and the importance of learning about it, and putting our own individual perspectives into context inclusive of others' experiences, for our benefits, and theirs.
I think that a lot of people in general aren't good at putting their own perspectives, understanding, and awareness, in context to external perspectives and ideas, outside their own bubble. I'd even say that's most people, just because that's sort of the default human experience. It's not like people are born with expansive libraries or internet search engines in our brains. We learn to navigate through reality by first hand experience. There are a lot of tools we can access though, to help us understand others' experiences better, even those whose experiences, perspectives and world views greatly differ... Education, media exposure, news, even travel. It's also an established pattern and idea, that often many individuals who are a minority in some way, often come to have certain wider understandings beyond their own bubble, because of how certain aforementioned variables (media for example) are filtered and used. Why some will come to believe in a "default" experience, and then thus anything outside that is diversity, and possibly forced diversity. Then some people also get mighty defensive when people critique or deconstruct or examine the merits of their views from their "bubble", even when it's not meant so personally either.
Like another reason why a lot of media, creative stories, ventures are "woke" that the video did touch on a little, is because traditionally a lot of creative and artistic ventures, especially in their formative years, were often "woke" or "progressive" by nature. Not practical, not realistic, immature hobbies for the youths to indulge in, possibly get addicted to, encourage violence, radical ideologies, promote laziness, etc, have been thrown at many creative hobbies, including novels in the 18th century. Also comics, magazines, television, computers, the internet, board games, video games... Its only usually when such avenues for creativity potential for profit/money becomes more realised, and many of the first adopters of such mediums, get older, potentially get into positions of power, start having their own children who grow up with the art from birth, and a few generations pass, do they start to become more and more socially acceptable, to the point they become ubiquitous and also eventually celebrated with prestige.
There are certain reasons why this process is getting faster thankfully. Consider the relative speed that video games shed its negative stigma of being for antisocial nerdy teenage boys, to the stigma comics book had, for quite a few decades (at least as far as outside of children's reading of).
Its funny though, because a lot of grifters like to employ binary based thinking around such topics. Tribalism, pick your side and defend it to the bitter end. Woke, and Anti-Woke, SJW, and Anti-SJW, PC and Non PC, (political correctness as a term, has an even more storied history than woke!), and it's kind of smart, in the sense that playing to the most basic urges and whims of people, and playing that up, is probably a decent way for many of them to make relatively easy money, it's just that it's nor so accurate a way to understand such systems and processes. In the sense that, it's more of a relative sliding scale. Many people who consider themselves Anti-Woke, Anti-SJW, Anti PC, if displaced and put in the past, would be Woke, and SJW, and politically correct. It's just that the concept of perspective shifts and the gradual development and fluctuations with perceptions and trends, around them, that they are subject to, and influenced by either passively or actively, it's not something they will tend to be conscious of, unless they acquire the skill and knowledge to be able to learn and reflect on such context from outside their bubble. Especially if they can do so in a neutral way, as opposed to being defensive or feeling persecuted. The language they use, the way they dress, the amount of time they spend in "virtual" and digital spaces, as opposed to in "reality" in an actual respectable profession. Attitudes and views on sex, would make so many of them, the progressive woke types, which radical and dangerous ideology, if they were actually in the past. Can sort of apply the other way as well, because generally, in certain ways, because of the way science, pop science, society/culture as a generalisation, and then splits between those who are fast to adapt and accommodate new ideas, and those that are resistant, regressive, "traditional" future generations, will often generally look back at past generations with a lot of concern, and scrutiny. Of course many will also understand to apply nuance, the same way many of us do, when examining the past, and past generations... Such things after all can be quite complicated... My point is, ideas around sex, race, mental health, professions, children's rights, civil rights, suffrage, physical health... it all generally trends one way. There is some fluctuation, and push back, since many in power can capitalise on certain regressive ideas/appeals to "tradition", but like... Again, a lot of this basically comes down to individuals ability to contextualise history and their own place in it.
As if their brains take screenshots of the world as a kid, and young teen, and that's the status quo, and even if all of it is the result of progressive development that past generations consider deviations from what is good, fair and traditional... all of them were wrong... but then also everyone else after who keeps moving that dial, well, they are whiny, political people with agendas trying to ruin everything and going mad, with political correctness, aka being a social justice warrior aka going woke, aka whatever the next term is going to be.
One thing about the video that... At first it might seem like I am disagreeing, but I actually think I am supporting the overall video's message. Well, its about Stan Lee. I want to be super blunt and transparent in that I do not hate or dislike Stan Lee. Also discussing him, has gotten a bit more complicated since his death, can feel a bit awkward in some ways. Thing is, there is a lot of controversy for many over Stan Lee's relationships and interactions with many many other comic book artists and writers, as far as credit. Their misgivings. It can get pretty complicated, partially because of what I already described, about tribalism. If you don't love someone, then you must hate them right? I am also conscious that there are many many people, who are more general about comics, often only know a few creators, and they will often just associate a few names, with the say a company, and thus such figures can hold a lot of sentimental weight and value. I would never want to clumsily trample on peoples cherished ideas around such figures. Though also, are there many many creative contributors to the comics medium that are under appreciated, overlooked, and unrecognised by a larger majority? Totally. We are all often guilty of this in some way. I love animation for example, but if you asked me to name some of the pioneers of early animation as an art form... I don't know. I am ignorant. Its one of those things I tell myself I can learn later, because I am too busy now. I know many of the creators of my favourite modern animations... but very ignorant about the start of the medium. That being said, I do know a bit more about comics, Marvel, Timely Stan Lee and quite a few other writers, artists, editors... Stan Lee was definitely relatively woke... but ehh. I think if anyone is curious about this, it's really easy to find a lot of different online pieces, books, articles, interviews on various different other creators, peers to Stan Lee, and their thoughts and feelings on him. Stan as well. Like as a hype man, and promoter? Stan Les is incredible, and I am not sure Marvel would have succeeded as well without him. Creatively speaking, as a writer, and those contributions? Ehhh... I think it kind of overlooks a lot of talent, and hard work many other writers and artists contributed.
I bring all this up, because many people just didn't really care for those other creators. They weren't anyway near the kind of self promoter, and hype mechanics Stan was, and many of them, did often benefit from that, as far as a company, but a lot of us, are often quite critical of figures like Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates for how sometimes they would get more credit for things, they maybe shouldn't get credit for. For maybe having a bit of an ego, and for sort of developing a cult of personality around them. Were they also brilliant minds, who hyped up their respective companies, and made themselves and people around them rich, whilst also becoming household names, that many people look up to, and products that are everywhere and used by everyone...
Then I also bring all this up, because Stan Lee had a habit in interviews, for well, basically was great at just using his charisma to sell himself and retroactively take credit for others ideas and work. Again, you could argue his self promotion was basically Marvel promotion, and thus many benefitted, but, and I am not exaggerating here, he would sometimes openly acknowledge and admit in interviews, for taking credit for others work. Also many of his interviews would contradict and be inconsistent. Some interviews were light and fluffy, and some were more hard hitting and pressing, but many of his answers and tone would change. His interview with Dennis Miller comes to mind. He also has like three different explanations for how he envisioned Spiderman from different interviews and times, one that was completely spontaneous, after he saw a fly on the wall, and the other with references to past comics that inspired him. Its... Jonathon Ross's interview regarding Lee and Ditko also comes to mind. Also often, depending on who he was talking to, or addressing, his answers would change as well. People who questioned him and would bring up other creators and tension, would get different answers than if he was talking more generally to people less familiar.
Then I bring all this up, because I am really skeptical of the idea that Stan Lee intended X-Men to have the allusions to, or anything deeper or layered to them as far as minority politics, struggles and so on. It was pretty much everyone else... but especially Chris Claremont, Len Wein, Roy Thomas, Dave Cockrum, John Byrne.. and the reason I wanted to mention this is because... the original X-Men book struggled and was cancelled. It was decent... but contrary to the "Go woke, go broke" idea some people have... It was going "woke" which made X-Men popular, relevant and gave it the staying power that has lasted until now. By virtue of being a comic book by relatively and pretty progressive writers of the time, it was already a little inherently "woke", so I am not claiming it didn't start off woke, but it faltered and struggled, and then with Giant-Size X-Men #1, by Len Wein and Dave Cockrum, where you had Storm, a black woman, a blue German man, a Indigenous American Apache, and a large Russian man (during the Cold War), bursting through the cover. Oh and some Canadian bub, but that character didn't really do much...
I actually think that's a more powerful message. Also, its not like the original X-Men were cast away, they were integrated, and it was great. They took on greater characterisation, and stories, with their new interactions, with new teammates. Like it was covered in this video, the books continued to get more and more progressive and "woke". Like Northstar was intended to be gay when it came to fleshing out the character (originally Alpha Flight weren't that fleshed out according to Bryne), but yeah, as mentioned in the video, Bryne read a Scientific American article and wanted to make one. It's also worth noting around the same time, Yukio, another X-Men character was also created by Claremont and was intended to be gay, and a lover for Storm, effectively making Storm a bisexual black woman in 1982! Don't worry though, there were some pretty unsubtle hints and subtext... Just Jim Shooter was a dick, a dinosaur and EIC at the time...
So to reemphasis, not really disagreeing, but I did want to elaborate, and I also think there is something that can be said, about Stan Lee adapting to embrace such ideas, with hindsight, because he did go on to say some very very "woke" things in editorials, and letters pages, and interviews. Even if I think his actual creative writing wasn't as sophisticated or designed to be progressive, he embraced it, adapted and promoted it. Which is far superior to the sort of divisive grifting that many modern individuals engage in, because it literally leads to stuff like pandemic misinformation which results in killing, and climate change denial and downplaying, which is also going to lead to needless deaths. All to stoke the fires of a cultural war.
(Its also crazy to me, this channel only has 2 something k subs. Deserves much more.)
@@seanfortes7156 Did you smoke when wrote this shit?
@@Rotom0479 Yeah, do you want a hit? How's life anyway? You doing okay?
@@Rotom0479 Sure, if thats how you'd like to frame it as such. Take care.
The video is actually way better then I expect, at least it's not another lazy bashing on social topics, which I seen too many time. Keep it up dude.
This video was WORSE than what I expected.
The “subscribe” sticker over The Word on that God Loves page cracked me up
I like how the detractors of this video basically boils down to 'NUH UHHH'.
More like “you people are morons and here’s why.”
@tylerleach8796 *doesn't say why
@@yungmuney5903 except he does. The X-Men animated series has always been “woke,” and you just need to watch it to find out why.
I shared the video to as much places as I can. I followed you on Twitter for years. People need to know that we were always surrounded by Woke media.
If anything, people need to be surrounded by LESS woke media.
Something like having diversity isn't what makes things "woke".
Forcing it and changing characters (rather than just introducing new characters) just for the sake of diversity itself is.
@@jekblom123 I agree.
Lol Paul Verhoeven straight up predicted ppl missing the message of starship troopers. I quote from him in 1996: I want to make a movie so painfully obvious in its satire that everyone who understands it lives in perpetual psychological torment inflicted on them by all the people who dont.
What would've been icing on the cake is the Simpsons being green, as a nod to the absolute madman, Emplemon, for bringing the themes of the Matrix to light. Hell, Digital Circus may be very much a critique of fandom due to how insanely self-aware it is.
On top of that, the recent DuckTales series (2017), did NOT shy away from mocking billionaires. New or old. Newer billionares (Mark Beaks) are portrayed as dumb and childish, while the classic Glumgolds were more arrogant and selfish. This of course, creates a link to what we now know as generational trauma.
@@Gaia_BentosZX5 how the hell does portraying two businessman in different ways link to generational trauma? The hell are you smoking?
For anyone who is aware of their favorite media that educates through fiction whether subtle or overtly and checked a rage bait video, I’ll wonder you comment that one media and ask “… you just now noticing? Your (time) late buddy.” Not as a request, just to remind anyone that there should be no reason to rage out to something that’s always there or a change that doesn’t disregard what was admired, otherwise they wouldn’t have any sense of appreciation or proven they care very little about it and just want to be part of something they could make things worse.
If they are set for representation , that’s fine and more power to them as long there’s no malice, I just so happened to like some of them that made think and appreciate the moments that help me to avoid the worst as possible or a sense of relatability.
Tucker whining about how M&M's aren't sexy enough anymore will never not be funny.
Great video! The effort put in and use of sources was awesome!
Mostly people gonna end up like Ronnie from Boondocks,
Have no clue who is Martin Luther King is. XD
I'm pretty sure every American will continue to know who MLK is.
@@Rotom0479 Yeah but would they 100 percent care? or just "heard" about him like clips notes and humors abouts him?
@@bobbynick5358 Probably the cliff notes version, but I'm sure they're would be some kids who would care to learn more about him.
@@Rotom0479 People are forgetting how the old and new ways works together.
it's mostly they forget their old culture
or mixed it up or they stay one sided.
and only care for the new. they don't care for their origin anymore. Example what is common stereotypical white or black culture ? and seems still we don't learn from our mistakes?
@@bobbynick5358 The fuck does all that have to do with people forgetting who MLK is?
A good thing to bring up is when Jim shooter was editor in chief he actually did not allow for gay characters.
Yes, because he was trying to have Marvel avoid getting into a future controversy. It wasn't because he was a raging homophobe.
It's funny - and a little sad - that Nier Automata got so much critical praise and adulation while SO MANY people seem to miss the point of a lot of the characters in the series. Like, there's the obviously gay Operator that talks at length about how she tries to date some of her fellow Operators who are all girls, but then there's stuff like Emil who is a gay man, but that doesn't become explicit if you've not played Replicant/Gestalt. Or hell the prejudicial stigma attached to Devola and Popola because somewhere another set of Devola and Popola units "went crazy", when in reality they did their jobs as best they could but the system they were overseeing was flawed. Hell the majority of people who *have* played Replicant/Gestalt don't seem to realize that Kaine - one of the most popular characters in the DrakenNier series - is herself intersex, and uses her wardrobe of risque lingerie as a method of self determining how people see her as she uses she/her pronouns, has very visible boobs, and with the outfit people assume she's female and being treated as a "hussy" is preferential to the treatment she endured as a child for being intersex.
I guess what I'm saying is that everyone needs to play the Nier games.
Based on how you talked about the games, I wouldn't want to.
@@Rotom0479 So the presence of LGBT characters IS the problem, good to know.
@@sjstronghold9238 If it's forced into the story just to check a box and informs nothing about the characters or setting, then it is a problem. I haven't played Nier but I did look up a story recap of it, and frankly none of this LGBT shit is important to anything. You could have all the characters be non-LGBT and everything would remain the same.
@@sjstronghold9238 I haven't played Nier, but I have seen a playthrough of it, so I have played the game. All of the LGBT stuff could be removed from the game (except for the Kaine stuff) and nothing would be lost.
@@sjstronghold9238 No, having them there is not the problem. The problem rises when they are forced into the game and end up getting an absurd amount of focus just BECAUSE they are LGBT.
I believe a lot of this has to do with religious upbringing. As a child deeper subtext to entertainment wasn't pointed out to us kids by our deeply religious and conservative parents. Gays were villified and aids was discussed as divine punishment for gays. As children we never questioned any of it because why would our parents lie to us.
I think you're right about White evangelicals. By contrast, I grew up in a Black Christian home, in which my parents discussed the themes in movies and TV we watched. I was aware of racism in society since my parents and grandparents faced a lot of it during Jim Crow.
Bro, I don't know what tf you're talking about since less and less people are being raised religious, so I don't know how tf you figured that plays into this. And the parents of today were the progressive leaning youth of 70s and 80s, so the child would more than likely be as progressive if not more so than their parents.
Mr. Sinister was working on the Black Womb Project in the US during WWII.
Oh, God, once Gargoyles gets revived, these idiots will rage about Lexington being gay and having a romance with a deer Gargoyle from the British clan.
These idiots will freak out over the main human protagonist, Eliza Maza, being a Black/Native American woman.
Adding to my last comment, this phenomenon is what I'd like to refer to as a cocktail of childhood/teenhood media viewed through nostalgia goggles. Especially those that have been long running franchises and even cultural touchstones on either side of the pond.
As kids or teens, politics only exist as that boring junk you learn in Social Studies, History or see your folks view on the news. You're more in the fictional characters and stories that grab your imagination by the reigns.
Sure, some of them may be by adults who base this off of their direct life experience and/or aspects of life that often pertain to politics. However, you're only interested in how they tie into your favorite blorbos or your favorite movie/episode of your favorite media. Any good storyteller knows how to weave it all together into a lovely yarn.
And despite what sooooooooo many who trot out the above claims bleat on about, that has not changed at all. Yes, sometimes it doesn't all come together due to a skill issue on the part of the writer ooooor a producer sticking their hands in where they shouldn't.
However, many of today's most acclaimed (or at least polarizing since that at least entails a side who stans it) stories have generally talked about politics be it directly like with explicit leftist talking-points or implicitly such as with... protagonists who aren't the wonderbread variety we've had to endure.
They weave in the journeys we see our characters on with topics such as battling prejudice or concepts such as, well, protagonisting while not white, straight, male or cisgendered. It isn't a flaw but a feature. A feature they've inherited from the generation of writers before them and the generation of writers before that lot.
Bringing us back to the subject of childhood, the reason why Doctor Who seems more politically charged to the usual suspects than ever before comes down to one thing: they grew up. The adult world of news reports that bored them to tears has become their world and it's a world they wish they could opt out of.
So what's a good refuge for such? Whatever made you happen as a kid, of course. Simpler times. Nothing political there. Nothing that really challenged your sensibilities then. However, the newer episodes hit differently than the old ones because their stories revolve around what seems to be relevant then or at least what has stayed relevant in the news cycle.
RTD's New Who run was political with the Slitheen's scheme to sell a destroyed Earth as molten slag due to a recession in space. Van Staton appropriated alien tech as trophies and pays for it in the form of a Dalek he dared to torture. Game Station Five manipulated Earth's media in an age when humanity should've been soaring through the stars.
Oh, and also CAPTAIN JACK HARKNESS!
Hell, Steven Moffat's run was often maligned because of elements that felt less woke or regressive based on the social justice climate way back in the 2010s. Even more bizarre was when Series 9 and 10 became more conscious of this potential flaw.
Everything the Chibnall era was raked over the coals for? You better believe that Moffat laid the foundation for. Clara Oswald has stories where she often stole the show and had many accuse the show of being "Clara Who" now. Bill Potts... well, Council of Geeks put it best.
Additionally, RTD's run also had wokeness for its time which meant that a lot of things like the Slitheen's elements of bodyshaming and the whole slap-happy mother gag slipped through. As such, there was a... dampening effect when it came to Doctor Who being more progressive in certain areas but problematic in others.
Lest we forget good ol' Rusty was a white dude.
Lest we also forget that another aspect was the way Social Media was back then as opposed to right now. And right now, one's opinions on how "forced" or "shoehorned" or shoved down our throats" stories are with politics is a lucaritive business venture.
I'm not a Doctor Who fan, but I seriously doubt that much of that stuff was done because of wokeness. Not everything was done because the showrunners and writers wanted to be woke.
@@Rotom0479 bots shouldn't speak
@@xblade149 What makes you think I'm a bot?
@@Rotom0479you reply to evey comment, saying basically the same thing
@@NeilAumaster Doesn't mean I'm a bot.
Let's be clear here: woke and diverse are 2 wholly separate concepts from each other.
Yep.
Depends on who you fucking ask, cause woke means fuck all anymore
Not to conservatives. Be serious.
I'm still catching up on the old show. I was really little when it was on so I barely remember anything. But I'm excited to get to the new stuff eventually
If the original series came out in today it would be slammed as
"woke" not because of the allegory for the Civil Rights movement, but because of strong female mutants and mutants of color.
Definitely.
No, if the Claremont era of X-books came out today, they'd be lauded as the exception to the norm. They'd be seen as so many other woke comics done right. And nobody would slam them for having women or black people in it, they'd laud them for having actually good characters who aren't just mouthpieces.
@@Rotom0479
The team for Uncanny X-Men during the Lee/Kirby era was all White and had just one woman, Jean Grey.
It wasn't until the Claremont that the team became truly diverse in terms of race, sex, nationality, religion, etc. This along with more overt social commentary and stronger writing caused X-Men to become Marvel's top selling comic for decades.
@@TheVeritas1 Fixed my original comment. My point remains the same.
Honestly the fact that people are up in arms about a character like Morph to begin with proves they are just jumping on a bandwagon. Morph wasn't a main character, he was in a handful of episodes. It's not a big deal.
Bingo.
So what if Morph wasn't a main character and only had a few appearances? He's still a character nobody wants to see changed into something he isn't.
@@Rotom0479 two things.
1: He's a character who had no established sexuality before, it's not like it contradicts pre established things about him. 2: It very much does make a difference, about changing a minor character we don't know all that much about, compared to making changes to a main character who we know virtually everything about. What do we really know about Morph as a character? He was a bit of a joker and he had some PST from nearly getting killed. That's pretty much it.
@@TeamTowers1 1. We're not talking about Morph's sexuality; we're talking about his gender identity. And yes, it does contradict pre-established facts about him; namely that he's male, not non-binary. 2. Again, it doesn't matter how much Morph was or wasn't a minor character. You shouldn't make arbitrary changes to characters like that. You can still flesh Morph out in ways that doesn't involve making him non-binary.
@UsagiTime 1. I don't remember Morph being NB, because I don't remember/know of a single instance in the comics or old show when a Morph was NB. So no, this is not the Morph I remember. 2. No, they simply can't. I know that sounds really harsh to hear, but guess what, biology, the English language and common sense do not care about your feelings. Nobody, be it men, women, or self-proclaimed NB people, have the right to choose their own pronouns. That isn't how reality works. 3. Even when there aren't so many characters on screen, characters on screen, pronouns still get used. Ex. CYCLOPS: Wolverine, have you seen Jean? WOLVERINE: Yeah, SHE has been looking all over for you. CYCLOPS: Thanks. Gambit said HE wants to see you for something, too. 3. No, Morph does not get to be whatever he wants, because Morph has already been pre-established to be a man. End of discussion. 4. It matters because the more you change canon facts like that, the more you undermine the integrity of the story's foundation. 5. Learn to end sentences in periods instead of question marks.
saving this to watch later.
Love this video. You've said just about everything I've been thinking .
Mystique & Destiny (along with Vi & Ayla in the Five Years Later Legion of Super-Heroes) were one of the first times I saw a same-sex couple in any fiction where they weren't a joke. That was when I was reading 80s back issues in Classic X-Men. Y'know, the era that the "oh no, the woke" crowd claims to adore so much? They can't even lie well.
Also, we need to have a talk about how there seems to be as much hostility to a character being bi (or pan or ace or anything that isn't strictly all-straight or all-gay) from our own community as there is from bigots, especially in fan circles. The stringboards come out to explain why a character can't "actually" be any of those identities, and the arguments are indistinguishable between the two except for some word choices. But that's another topic for another day.
The reason we didn't hate it back then is because it was written way better than it would be today.
And it always when people don't know the characters themselves
Yes, those people are what we call "woke".
Hey I just wanted to know if you like to talk about stuff like this on my podcast Comfy Couch. It be a interview style audio only podcast.
Don't invite Anthony on for anything. He's a gigantic piece of shit, with terrible opinions, and he isn't worth gas money.
Amazing episode as always.
Hold on, let me correct you there.
"Terrible episode as always"
There we go.
I don't really have much to add because you are right on all of this but I think me being a big X-men fan as a small kid may explain shit about my own political leaning
Gramuglia is wrong about everything he mentioned.
@@Rotom0479 please go into details. I'm sure you have those
@@Rotom0479you're still commenting two months later?
@@NeilAumaster what can I say? There's still idiots here two months later.
@@dannydumlet Gramuglia keeps peddling that "Stan Lee made it to comment on the Civil Rights Movement/Mutants are Black People/Xavier and Magneto are MLK and Malcom X" myth for one.
Honestly ever since I watched Spiderman and his amazing friends, I knew iceman was gay! I mean he was hitting on Peter more than he was hitting on both Harry's cousin & the fire girl who by the way was created purely because they couldn't get the rights to Johnny the human torch. Yeah Gloria is made purely because they did not want to sit down and bring in Johnny! Speaking of for those who remember the episode of the threes company where Jack meets his new girlfriend of the week who comes out with the fact that she's been also pretending to be gay living with two men basically mirroring it and having the two men also dating Jack's roommates, considering that I constantly missed their names at the beginning of that episode my brain automatically adjusted it to make me think wait is this Spiderman is amazing friends without the superpowers? To be fair one of them is named Bobby so that is slightly an honest mistake sadly Peter is not in the group!
Firestar is her name, right?
honestly, I would have laughed like hell at a Spider-Man, Iceman & the Human Torch living in a shitty New York Apartment story. that sounds like a recipe for delights.
Would you have been offended and angry if they affirmed that he wasn't gay?
You thought wrong about Iceman being gay back then. Iceman was never envisioned to be gay ever. You are correct in that Firestar was created to because they didn't have the rights to the Human Torch. But even if they did, I can guarantee you that Bobby would not be hitting on Johnny. And as for him "hitting on Peter more than girls", I want to know which scenes you're referring to, because I can also guarantee you it was nothing more than banter, no sexual tension at all. And that Three's Company example does not help your case at all.
@@jekblom123 No then I wouldn't be surprised that he would be ib considering in the comics early on he was dating literally Ranma in the sense because this there was a mutant that had the power to turn into steam and whenever they transformed they switched to the opposite gender body.
@@seanfulldark Who tf is Ranma? Or are you literally talking about Ranma one-half now? Tf are you on about?
Great video!
Yeah, when someone throws around the word “woke”, I refer to them as “reverse woke”. Because the original meaning meant becoming aware of a systemic injustice, and they view anything as a threat towards that injustice as an injustice towards them and their beliefs.
Basically: reverse woke is about watching out for any and all threats to the status quo
Correct. Maj Toure posted a great video on the original meaning of "woke" and why it is a GOOD thing:
ua-cam.com/video/bffPbd2PXYQ/v-deo.html
Part of the reason we hate wokeness because we're sick of being reminded of (supposedly) how bad the status quo is, and just want some good entertainment for an hour and a half.
And I've asked other people this, but what is wrong with defending the status quo exactly?
@@Rotom0479 when the status quo involves treating gay couples like something icky and the disabled as nothing more than inspiration p04n, it doesn’t seem like something worth defending
@@Rotom0479 when the status quo involves villainizing minorities and such, it’s not worth defending
@@Rotom0479 what about it is worth defending?
You fucking nailed this one too. Great work my friend.
Gramuglia can't nail anything to save his life.
This has got to be the best video I have seen on this subject yet. The level of detail, information, and sophistication on display is truly gratifying. I applaud you, sir.
This is objectively one of the worst videos on it. Shame you can't see that.
well done!
1.) The political subtext wasn't introduced until Claremont started writing.
2.) Stan Lee admitted he created "mutants" so he wouldn't have to invent origins of super powers.
3.) "Woke" doesn't just mean "political", it means putting your ideology before everything, including story, characters and basic logic.
So how do you explain the Sentinels?
@@agramuglia **blink blink**
What?
@@lordshell BRO DOESN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE SENTINELS ARE LMFAO
@@agramugliaHuh?
@@agramugliathe Sentinels also killed other supes not just mutants
That was amazing video! Comics books, much like films, cartoons and anything in pop culture, are form of art, a way for someone to express themselves, which also includes adressing social/political issues of the world they were living. They may have fun adventure and fantasy/sci-fy concepts, but their story is an expression of the writer. Everything comes from a real place, that's what makes the stories and characters so relatable. These stories aren't a way for people to escape from reality and ignore it like most of this haters claim, they are way for writers and artists to adress this issues through this fantasy elements and make the readers reflect about them.
@@alexandrefrauches132 Well back then the political messaging wasn't as bad or as frequent as it is now. If the audience wants them to stop, regardless of if you've been doing it for a long time, then you should stop, or they'll stop giving you their money.
True, but if most (if not all) of your audience hate it, then maybe it's best you, I don't know, STOP with the political messaging?
@@Rotom0479 Wow everything you said is the definiton of pure fan self-entitlement at it''s worse
By this logic writers just replace character like Superman and Batman for anti heroes like Azarel and the 4 Supermen, bc anti heroes were popular in the 90's. Stan Lee and Dennis O'Neil should'nt have go against the Comic Authority Code and make stories adressing issues like the battle against drugs and guys like Lee and Julius Schwartz shouldn't try to bring super heroes comics back when people thought they were the source of inspiring deliquence.
Comics had never being control by you nor me or anyone else except the writers and creators. It's their form of expression, their message they want to say to others, not what readers like you want to express to yourself. If you want that, go writer your own stories.
@@alexandrefrauches132 Well at the end of the day, the customer is always right. All of those trends you listed off (except for the third one) are just examples of the publishers giving their customers what they want in exchange for their money. If they stop giving us what we want, while outright telling us these books aren't made for us, then we'll take our money and go elsewhere. The market is absolutely dictated by customer taste, so it makes sense that we get the final say in the products they put out. If the writers and artists only cared about making art for the sake of art, they'd just post their comics online for free and everyone to view. They would not be slapping price tags onto them, because that's a monetary transaction. The customer is not going to hand over their hard earned money for a book that doesn't appeal to them. And if the publisher isn't making books that don't appeal to their audience, then they'll go out of business real fast. So again, if the publishers, writers, and artists don't like the fact that the customers don't like the product they're putting out, that's their fault and they'll pay for it by going out of business.
@@Rotom0479you act like they wouldn't just be able to sell to a different audience who does like progressive messaging. There's more of us out there than you'd think
10k views is too small for this video my, dude. This video needs more views and fast...
FANTASTIC video!
11:11 that cop definitely wanted a piece of Sylvester Stallone. If you know what I mean
Damn man
This was an amazing video 👏🏽
It really wasn't.
I've seen people complaining that a problem with X-Men 97 is that it's taking material from outside the timeframe the original cartoon adapted. But even inside that timeframe we had stuff like chapter 1 of the X-ecutioner's song, in which Professor X is speaking at a Mutant Rights rally that was explicitly patterned after pride and gay rights rallies. And he explicitly called out other forms of prejudice in his speech.
Previously on X Men...
Minor thing, but Milestone wasn't just focused on publishing black superheroes. They published characters from pretty much all marginalized groups. Also, it's Static not Static Shock.
You are technically correct sir the best kind of correct.
X-Men is woke? What's next? Rage Against the Machine is political?
11:01 oh yeah I saw the first Rambo movie and it was NOT the image that was given to me. It’s almost heartbreaking in a way.
Well done. I hope people take the right lessons away from this video and appreciate all the work that goes into collecting, organizing, and contextualizing all the source material reference here.
Think you
We watched these things back in the day, child. We know they weren't woke and your gaslighting will not convince us otherwise.
Watch 'em again.
@@agramuglia You watch 'em again, kid.
You won't but you'll still insist to know better than the writers and creators of these characters and assume authority anyway because of your ego.
@@jekblom123you are so cute when you are angry
@@misterboxhead3045 Bitch I'm adorable.
The only gaslighting is you, as you people are gaslighting yourselves thinking the original show wasn’t “woke.”
FW Muranu (Sunrise, Nosferatu, The Last Laugh) was one of the most famous gay filmmakers.
X-men always touhed in stories about being a minority and how they suffer in this world just for being different, wtf are people even talking about?
Look at that, he also said it in the video
Say what you will about the AIDS episode of Captain Planet , at the very least it recognizes that it could be spread through blood transfusions. That’s pretty huge all things considered
The finale of the original X-Men animated series was literally a US Senator killing a pacifist rich white guy in the UN on live TV seconds after outing him as a mutant. This is obviously Quuer allegory and whoever denies it doesnt get X-Men.
🙄 no it wasn't dude. It was literally just the assassination of MLK with Chuck being in the role of MLK
Newer nerd media is LESS "woke" than the past.
The original Star Trek in the 60s was in your face progressive. It was never subtle
Every week you could tune in and hear another social issue discussed.
Jack kirby was so political that he got threats from people
TRUTH, especially about Trek! They'd be infuriated about the kiss between Kirk & Uhura or the episode about the black & white split-colored aliens.
So true.
It's like the people who say Classic Doctor Who wasn't woke or political, as if the show didn't have an episode ending with the 3rd doctor literally giving a speech about how pollution is caused by capitalistic greed and it will destroy the planet, or how that same doctor once literally asked Sarah Jane to introduce feminism to the queen of Peladon.
@@melasn9836 Let's not forget about Nichele Nichols literally getting a visit by MARTHIN LUTHER KING!
@@costelinha1867 Yeah! Didn't he talk her out of quitting?
Newer woke media is EVEN MORE progressive than what came before. Learn the difference between using your story to beat your audience over the head with a message and telling a story. There's a big difference there.
Just wait until we get them into the MCU properly. People are going to complain like crazy because they have women on the team
lol
There still is a Miles Morales backlash
I’d argue the 90s series handled its politics better than most shows do today. I feel like many shows either slap a label onto characters just for the sake of having an immediate appeal, or they cover important issues point blank, to a fault. But that’s just me
I'd agree, but I think it has a lot to do with the fact that media literacy is virtually non-existent today so general audiences need things more spelled out for them now. Or it could just be that writers are more comfortable being explicit with their messages now because society as a whole has become more accepting of different people and orientations
I agree, it seems that there's not very much quality control when it comes to exploring politics in media.
Really, X-Men has Always Been Queer. Like, Really.....Like, Really, Rogue for Example is Heavily Queer Themed. Like, Really, Heavily, Not Only with Two Queer Mothers, But, Also Has a Great Theme of Sexuality. Being Close to People and Being Intimate. Really, The Gal is Basically More Pansexual. Really.......
How the hell is Rogue "queer themed" when she's straight and has dated Magneto and Gambit? The fact she was raised by Mystique and Destiny doesn't make her queer herself. The themes of being close to another person and intimacy is not exclusive to the "queer experience". How is Rogue pansexual and where is your evidence?
@@Rotom0479 Dude, Rogue is Heavily Queer Themed. Through Everything. And, Really, Her Actually Being Married to Gambit Doesn't Really Effect Anything to Her. And, Really, The Two could Actually be Queer. Both of Them Pan Really.....
Also, Her and Mags, Not A Fan. But, Really, there were Only Two Males she was Actually Involved With. Really, That's Actually It. Really.....
Rogue is Definitely More Queer Themed. In Background, History, Subtext, Context, Traits, Thoughts, Themes, Etc. All That Stuff. Really......
@@sonicdihedgehog1 If you think Rogue is "queer themed" you are delusional. Being married to Gambit is a big deal because she loves him and gets to spend time with him, a luxury she never had before then. And how the hell is Gambit queer? And while I agree with you that her relationship with Magneto wasn't all that great, the fact she's dated two men is proof that she isn't queer. If you're so confident that Rogue is queer in her background, history, subtext, context, traits, thoughts, themes, and whatnot, show me some evidence because I do not believe you one bit.
@@Rotom0479 Dude, Her and Gambit were Definitely Queer. Really, Flirted with People of their Own Genders. Heck, Gambit was Actually Suppose to be Queer Himself in his Own Mini Series in The 90s. Also, Really, Most Characters have Actually Been Involved with People of Different Genders Before they were Revealed as Queer even While they Were. Really......
As for The Two, Really, They Seem to be The Kind of Couple that just Screw Around with People of Their Own Genders. So, Really......
@@sonicdihedgehog1 Bro, you can't just be saying all this shit without backing it up with evidence. Where is the evidence that Rogue and Gambit are queer, that either of them were planned to be queer, or that they've both been in same sex couples in the past? Until you do so, every word out of your mouth is nothing but hot air.
Holy shit that Eastwood clip at the 73 Oscars… my god. Still a huge fan of his, but sheesh, that was… nasty work Eastwood.
This was beautiful. Thank you. I have subscribed and I will spread this where I can.
The thing about Starship Troopers though is that every time the movie has an opportunity to offer a critique of the humans and their government, the critique is always undercut by another detail in the film.
We’re meant to view the denial of voting rights to civilians as oppressive, but the only civilian characters we see, Rico’s parents, are shown to be living a happy prosperous life.
We’re meant to understand humans’ view of the bugs as unfair demonization, but when the movie starts showing combat between humans and bugs, the bugs are shown tearing people in half, sucking out brains, and generally acting like the very monsters they’re portrayed as.
We’re meant to view the humans as the initiators of the conflict by colonizing one of the bugs’ planets, but the only colony we’re shown is an unauthorized settlement by Mormon extremists - from the point of view of the Earth government, that planet was not under active colonization.
We’re meant to understand the media as propaganda in service of the government, but - while there definitely are instances of that - we also see the media working against the government by openly reporting on the war’s first major military defeat, resulting in the removal of the leaders responsible.
We’re meant to view the humans’ militarism as extreme and unjustified, but we’re shown humanity’s enemy destroying a whole city and generally being incredibly dangerous. (Some people read the Buenos Aires attack as a false flag operation, but it’s very easy read it as genuine - the movie doesn’t do much to communicate one or the other.)
I think people who describe the film as “overt” satire are missing a lot of the nuance in the film - just like the people interpreting the film as straightforwardly positive about the humans and their government. To me, the film’s depiction of authoritarianism seems pretty conflicted - not really overt or one-sided. I don’t know if this was the intention of the filmmakers, but that’s what comes across.
8:31 Anyone who complains about "wokeism" (and by anyone I mean bigots) is just trying to avoid saying the quiet part out loud but it was obvious what those bigots meant from the start.
when they complain that something is woke they are complaining that marginlized and oppressed groups are speaking up and getting representation, and they don't like that, they complain that the world isn't like the 1950's in outdated thinking. This needs to be said more cause it isn't new for bigots to villianize marginlized groups by doing this and we need to stand against said bigotry.
Also can you chill with the Q-slur please? And yes I'm LGBT and not cool with he Q-slur (and yes it's a slur that's been normalized not "reclaimed" there's proof in history and online)
some LGBT people really hate that word for valid reasons and all I ask if that you please remember that, it isn't just me who doesn't like that word. I understand many people wrongfully find that awful word as a simbol of positivity and pride but many of us do not and the people who don't are often talked over and ignored
well that entirely is based on the definition of woke that you use. It is very ambiguous to define as there are big differences from both political sides, which makes it prone to misunderstand the oppositions point.
Most right leaning people consider radical stuff like:
sexually explicit drag shows for kids, irreversible hormone treatments for minors, overrepresentation of certain minority groups, encouraging obesity and unhealthy lifestyles, defaming traditional family values that don't harm anyone else, equality for people regardless of their personal efforts, the invention of insane sexualities or neopronouns, acceptance of "maps", everyone having to eat bugs, overusing and in turn devaluing slurs by labeling everyone as such, etc.
Spouted by mainly left wing propaganda and large companies.
The average person on the right supports or is indifferent to less controversial more surface level issues like the unequal treatment of people solely based on their race, status, sexuality, acknowledgement of climate change etc., such as the issues covered in the old examples of media in the video.
Although due to the overrepresentation of radicalists on the left and right on social media and amplified by the two party system in the US, reasonably thinking average people who would be defined as centrists on both sides start only seeing all of the people on the other side as radicals, which creates a spiral of everyone becoming more and more radicalized, causing massive division in the population.
The left sees the opposition as people who want to destroy and discriminate anyone who isnt a straight white christian male, blow as much co2 as possible into the atmosphere etc., which is simply only true of the far right radicals which are always present and overrepresented just like on the other side.
You here are using the definition of woke as the left wing one encompassing things very obviously positive while ignoring the ridiculous part that the other side is complaining about. With your comment all you accomplish is feeding the leftist echochamber while turning people on the other side even more against you by, in their eyes, completely misinterpreting their point and labeling them as "bigots".
My point being that, this type of deflection is in no way accomplishing any goal, no matter if it is done by people on the left or the right, and to exit this type of spiraling echochamber you simply need to try and understand the other side and go outside, because the average human being is not truely evil, even if they are not on your side of the argument.
Not sure if this is coherent enough to understand as I am not a native speaker nor good with words, but my point should still be somewhat understandable if you try reading it.
@@user-gp3qv8jn3g The invention of insane sexualities? you know the sexualities used now existed for a while now, right.
@@user-gp3qv8jn3g
Actually, a lot of the Right does use "woke" as a slur against minorities and women as explained by writer Darvio Morrow:
"This isn’t a new revelation but I’ve realized that my critiques of wokeism as an ideology is very different than some of yours. My criticism has always been that it’s performative, extreme, and counterproductive. Its core is Marxist in nature and it reinforces the idea of White progressives being in power over us in order to “protect” us. It’s paternalistic, not empowering. My criticism has never been at any time that “too many minorities are getting opportunities” or “too many damn White folks care about helping minorities”.
Some of yall are habitual line steppers, always going too far. You go extreme to respond to an extreme and you end up alienating those of us who don’t like either extreme.
Some of yall are incapable of having a conversation about this without making an ass out of yourselves. This is what happens when you’re reactionary and not thoughtful. This is what happens when your true criticism is that *those people* are getting a seat at the table instead of wanting us to all eat together.
I reject the ideology that says all White people are the devil, but if you think I’m going to stand by and watch some of you demean the accomplishments of all minorities and women because you’re too stupid to understand nuance, you’re sadly mistaken. I will oppose you with the same vigor that I oppose every blue haired radical that contributed to this environment on the other side."
(x.com/DTheKingpin/status/1735014846737854525?s=03)
@@user-gp3qv8jn3g
For someone allegedly not good with words, you sure did nail it. lol
Another banger as always, sirrah!