Season Liberally With Wild Falsehoods

spikeghost:

theultradork:

Okay, I’m getting legitimately pissed off by this topic.

Andrew had a philosophical question with the crew about a what if scenario where Spider-Man was gay and why no one would explore that. He then jokingly added maybe they should and cast Michael B. Jordan. 

He does not want them to make MJ male, he does not want them to do it in this film franchise, he did not ASK them to do it. He tossed out a thought in jest as they discussed the topic. If people would read the full context of what he actually said, maybe they’d stop having a freaking meltdown.

and now EVERY DAMN FANBOY is shitting themselves being all “look, i’m not homophobic but Peter Parker is STRAIGHT STRAIGHT STRAIGHT!!! WAH! WAH! WAH!”.

I shouldn’t be surprised dumbasses are losing it over the simple idea of it MAYBE happening in a future adaptation, i mean people are still shitting themselves over Joan Watson even though Elementary has had a whole 24 episodes season.

*disgusted sigh*

I hate this crap. HATE it. With a burning fiery passion. ‘That which is canon is sacrosanct! Thou must not alter!’ Even though CANON ITSELF has a constant tendency to rewrite itself. Even though, by nature, starting a new form of canon - a new movie series, a new comic series, a new TV show, WHATEVER - means that you are starting from a blank slate and have NO requirements to adhere directly to the original form (see also, why I’m still pissed at the new Star Trek movie on a writing level for going to Wrath of Khan right off the bat). Obviously, in adapting to a new starting point, there are going to be new and updated tellings of old stories, but the advantage is that new and original stories also get told.

Attention all franchise holders: You kill your golden goose by confining it to the proverbial gilded cage and allowing its muscles to atrophy. To stretch my metaphor, we want free range fiction. It’s the same reason why we should WANT comic book heroes to enter the public domain. At that point, the original source material HAS to grow and evolve just to be able to compete with what the people who are indulging the ‘what if’ scenarios are putting out.

When I hear people say things like ‘you can’t do that!’ in regards to the fictional characters, I can’t believe I’m hearing it, because the response that always comes to me is ‘WHY NOT?’ The point of these characters and their lives is to see what could happen if [this] happened, so why can’t we see ‘what if THAT happened to them instead of THIS’? WHAT is so wrong about it?

I DID at one point consider what could happen if the comics version of Peter Parker were to, after the end of the relationship with Carlie Cooper ended, date a guy. I never thought of it as going anywhere serious, and would have probably led to Peter getting back together with Mary Jane, but I thought it would have been interesting - people coming out of serious relationships and the subsequent rebound may want to stop and reconsider some things about who they are, so maybe Peter questions if the problem is that he wasn’t mean to be with women? I also realized that if anyone had suggested it seriously, they would have been eviscerated by the people like this, even though, in my scenario, it would have an expiration date on it from the beginning.

And I HATE it, because it’s in the name of ‘preserving’ the character, but the people saying it, on average, are the ones who wouldn’t bat an eyelash at a gay character being made straight (or a female character made male, or a PoC character made white). It’s not about preservation of the character. It’s about keeping these members of the audience feeling safe and secure, that THEIR hero, the hero they look up to, looks like and acts like them.

It’s a bunch of bullshit. Isn’t it time for us to move past these outdated ideas?