Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

John Carter

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • John Carter

    Does the current series end with issue 14?

    Nothing has been listed since December 2015????

    As I have no intention of collecting the new Dejah Thoris series, this was my last bastion of seeing the characters done correctly.

  • #2
    I'm sure they'll be done "correctly" in the new Dejah Thoris series, though I am more interested in a John Carter-centric series myself.

    Comment


    • #3
      Looks like it is at least for now. Like you I'll be giving PC Deejah a miss but the Tarzan & Sheena title looks like a god ERB fix.

      ta

      Ralph

      Originally posted by The Namer View Post
      Does the current series end with issue 14?

      Nothing has been listed since December 2015????

      As I have no intention of collecting the new Dejah Thoris series, this was my last bastion of seeing the characters done correctly.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
        I'm sure they'll be done "correctly" in the new Dejah Thoris series, though I am more interested in a John Carter-centric series myself.
        Everything I have seen so far does not support that. Once this PC nonsense has dried up, maybe I can come back to the characters I know and love. This new Dejah series looks crap.

        Comment


        • #5
          Ah, the use of "PC" as if it's a bad thing. Whatever.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
            Ah, the use of "PC" as if it's a bad thing. Whatever.
            When used in this way, then yes it is a bad thing. The sweeping want of political correctness should not be used as a broom to rail road all titles in to uniformity. The diversity of comic books is what has made them attractive to readers through the ages. This includes mature aimed titles and all ages titles. I just don't understand that in the new found success of comic book movies, the characters we know and love for many years are suddenly required to conform with the tunnel vision of political correctness.

            Although I respect your point of view and you are welcome to it, I just don't happen to agree with it. Splashing a 'whatever' out of context within your comment suggests a dismissive attitude to my own point of view which I found quite offensive.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by The Namer View Post
              Splashing a 'whatever' out of context within your comment suggests a dismissive attitude to my own point of view which I found quite offensive.
              Sorry you feel that way, but I find the whole "PC = bad" notion to generally be one I do dismiss, yes. I am happy with genuine argument over these points (in the novels, for example, pretty much everyone is just this side of nude), but that's not what using "PC" that way is.
              Last edited by ChastMastr; 01-03-2016, 09:41 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                This may help explain my own position:

                http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0923c12bd4a91

                Related to this:

                http://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/4...jections-oddly

                I was reading a book (about interjections, oddly enough) yesterday which included the phrase “In these days of political correctness…” talking about no longer making jokes that denigrated people for their culture or for the colour of their skin. And I thought, “That’s not actually anything to do with ‘political correctness’. That’s just treating other people with respect.”

                Which made me oddly happy. I started imagining a world in which we replaced the phrase “politically correct” wherever we could with “treating other people with respect”, and it made me smile.

                You should try it. It’s peculiarly enlightening.

                I know what you’re thinking now. You’re thinking “Oh my god, that’s treating other people with respect gone mad!”

                Comment


                • #9
                  G'day,

                  I have previously made my position so I have been reluctant to continue the discussion but probably against my better judgement I'll have another go.

                  respect like contempt, is earned never demanded. My respect or contempt is not for Deejah Thoris , a fictional character, lines on paper, but for the people who draw and write her. If they say feminine beauty is not worth for men to look at. If they turn her into some feminist frightbat (which they did in one of the Swords of Sorrows books) then sorry , respect is not what I feel for them.

                  As I said I'll give the title a miss.

                  Ralph

                  Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by ralphuniverse View Post
                    If they say feminine beauty is not worth for men to look at.
                    They never did this.

                    If they turn her into some feminist frightbat (which they did in one of the Swords of Sorrows books)
                    They didn't in anything I've read, not that "feminist" is a bad thing at all.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Unfortunately, "feminist" has come to mean "unsexy". You can debate the merits of that all you want, but functionally, that is what it means to male heterosexual readers.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by pulphero View Post
                        Unfortunately, "feminist" has come to mean "unsexy". You can debate the merits of that all you want, but functionally, that is what it means to male heterosexual readers.
                        Not anyone I'd voluntarily hang around with. And I think that notion does a great disservice to male heterosexual readers by assuming that they're that ignorant.

                        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bustle...b_4959354.html

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Sorry ChastMastr , I'm with Pulphero , if anything it seems to be getting worse. Increasingly feminist aim seems to be to control male natural behavior including male sexuality. There are exceptions , Camille Paglia is a women I have great respect for, but then she was the arch enemy of that misandrist troll Andrea Dworkin. But thats the thing, Paglia, an art critic seems to enjoy sex and doesn't mind celebrating it in art. The Dworkin types want to control men's erections. And all that is reflected in popular culture including comics. Feminist want to desex the art or make it gender neutral (Captain Marvel's sexless costume and her butch haircut comes to mind). Sorry when it comes to such super hero characters I want to see exciting strong sexy feminine women and strong masculine men.

                          As to the article, well I'm a married man and I can assure you my wife is not a feminist harpy. I basically agree with this young lady.

                          Ralph

                          Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
                          Not anyone I'd voluntarily hang around with. And I think that notion does a great disservice to male heterosexual readers by assuming that they're that ignorant.

                          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bustle...b_4959354.html

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by ralphuniverse View Post
                            Sorry ChastMastr , I'm with Pulphero , if anything it seems to be getting worse. Increasingly feminist aim seems to be to control male natural behavior including male sexuality. There are exceptions , Camille Paglia is a women I have great respect for, but then she was the arch enemy of that misandrist troll Andrea Dworkin. But thats the thing, Paglia, an art critic seems to enjoy sex and doesn't mind celebrating it in art. The Dworkin types want to control men's erections. And all that is reflected in popular culture including comics. Feminist want to desex the art or make it gender neutral (Captain Marvel's sexless costume and her butch haircut comes to mind). Sorry when it comes to such super hero characters I want to see exciting strong sexy feminine women and strong masculine men.

                            As to the article, well I'm a married man and I can assure you my wife is not a feminist harpy. I basically agree with this young lady.

                            Ralph
                            I would say that Andrea Dworkin (and her mindset) no more represents most feminists or mainstream feminism (whether during her life or now) than the Nation of Islam era (i.e, before his Meccan pilgrimage) Malcolm X represents the anti-racism movement.

                            I would hope that your wife would not be a harpy, but again, I would point out that being a harpy isn't especially feminist.

                            A good response to that video is here: http://www.thefrisky.com/2016-01-10/...re-just-tired/

                            ... honestly, the badass women I know banding together to create a better future through whatever means they choose — advocating for rape victims, teaching girls to skateboard, creating non-profits that mentor at-risk girls — they’re not mad at you either. What they ARE is damn exhausted from working endlessly for the betterment of themselves and other women, while blatantly privileged women like you throw weak shade in the form of recurrent body-shaming and some deeply confusing narrative about women complaining about who purchases dinner on dates? Really, is this the straw man we are picking apart?
                            ... there are a fuckton of different people who identify as feminist, so yes — some of them are super annoying and awful and some of them are wonderful and most are a complicated combination.

                            Feminists are not a monolith, because feminists include women and men of all backgrounds, different people are affected by different problems. Different people have different passions, and only a small number are afforded a voice or audience to spread their concerns. Do you, Nicole Arbor, think that the current trending forms of feminism are often reductive and short-sighted? If so, we have this in common. In fact, many feminists would agree with you, which is exactly why we’re tired.

                            The difference between our tiredness and your confused anger is that we are messily attempting to chip away at the myriad of inequalities, while you are yelling at us for not being “Chill” enough from a pile of Youtube money. Again, I’m not mad at you: I just want to go to bed and eat Lucky Charms and smoke a bowl and also never be forced to engage in this eternal defense of a movement that encompasses multitudes of voices and histories.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Sorry ChastMastr my opinion of feminist, at least of the SJW types have been formed from my own experiences. I now place SJWs in the same class as Nazis, Islamic fanatics, Communists, the Westbro Baptist Church and the Klu Klax Klan. People that need to be avoided. It was only a few weeks ago I had an encounter with a well known Australian feminist that confirmed my views.

                              However lets get back to comics. Specifically Swords of Sorrow - Dejah Thoris & Irene Adler. A series I loathed. Dejah finds herself on Earth (why she is not crushed by Earth's gravity is never explained)Victorian London . Without any explanation she has a sword at a man's neck, presumably he propositioned her, I expect he may have thought she was a prostitute. She then goes off at the public for not saying anything.

                              Emm right, so a woman dressed completely inappropriately for that culture waving a dangerous weapon, is surprised the public is wary of interfering? Apparently the man just asked her a question , thats it, but thats too much for high and mighty feminist Dejah he must be punished! And we all must agree with her!

                              Basically it was Leah Moore's opportunity for a ridicules BS rape culture rant.

                              But wait, theres more. Lets denigrate the most famous fictional characters of the Victorian era. Sherlock Holmes accidentally bumps into Her Worship, she is helped by Watson who apologies for his absent minded friend. Nose up in the air, the Martian Feminist Supremacist first tells Watson not to trouble Holmes on her account , but on departure reminds him he hasn't apologized.

                              Now Conan Doyle never made Holmes look like an ungracious oaf but that was the 19th Century and we all know Victorian men were like that because Leah Moore told us so.

                              I'm still trying to get the bad taste out of my mouth.


                              Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
                              I would say that Andrea Dworkin (and her mindset) no more represents most feminists or mainstream feminism (whether during her life or now) than the Nation of Islam era (i.e, before his Meccan pilgrimage) Malcolm X represents the anti-racism movement.

                              I would hope that your wife would not be a harpy, but again, I would point out that being a harpy isn't especially feminist.

                              A good response to that video is here: http://www.thefrisky.com/2016-01-10/...re-just-tired/

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X